Article in Harvard Law Journal concludes: The preborn child is a constitutional person
By Calvin Freiburger | June 1, 2017
Pro-lifers and honest pro-abortion legal scholars agree that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided. But just how wrong is it? Is it bad law solely because it declares a right to something the Constitution is silent about, or does its judicial malpractice run deeper?
I have long argued that legal abortion violates not only the spirit of the Constitution, but the text itself – specifically, that the Fourteenth Amendment’s guaranteed equal protection of all people’s right to life has always applied to the preborn. Now, The Stream reports that the “Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy” has published an article written by Harvard law student (and former Live Action contributor) Josh Craddock that lays out the case in perhaps the most depth it’s ever received.
The first key point of Craddock’s work, critiquing the late, great Justice Antonin Scaliafrom the right, is an audacious undertaking, but here it’s warranted. You see, while Scalia was a committed originalist and clear opponent of Roe, he was also of the opinion that the Constitution is neutral toward abortion – that its use of the word “persons” “clearly means walking-around persons,” and therefore, states should be left free to set whatever abortion laws they want. Craddock notes several other pro-life judicial originalists who hold (or held) this view, though Scalia is the most recent and most revered modernly.
Craddock concedes that there is some basis for this thinking because “natural rights were not exhaustively enshrined in the federal Constitution” and “states have traditionally decided the question of personhood.” However, he rightfully maintains that a truly originalist answer to the question has to consider what the word “persons” was understood to mean when the Fourteenth Amendment was written and ratified.
He proceeds to explain that layman’s dictionaries treated the concepts of humanity and personhood interchangeably, and so did legal terminology – more explicitly so, in fact. As we’ve discussed in the past, Craddock notes that Blackstone expressly recognized that personhood and the right to life existed before birth with a simple and clear legal standard: “where life can be shown to exist, legal personhood exists” (emphasis added). This also perfectly explains why it’s irrelevant that past laws didn’t protect the preborn prior to quickening.
Craddock next shows that many of the states that voted to ratify the Fourteenth Amendment had also criminalized abortion, meaning they understood personhood then in much the same way that pro-lifers understand it now:
By the time of the Fourteenth Amendment’s adoption, “nearly every state had criminal legislation proscribing abortion,” and most of these statutes were classified among “offenses against the person.” The original public meaning of the term “person” thus incontestably included prenatal life. Indeed, “there can be no doubt whatsoever that the word ‘person’ referred to the fetus.” In twenty‐three states and six territories, laws referred to the preborn individual as a “child.” Is it reasonable to presume that these legislatures would have used this terminology if “they had not considered the fetus to be a ‘person’”?
The adoption of strict anti‐abortion measures in the mid‐nineteenth century was the natural development of a long common‐law history proscribing abortion. Beginning in the mid‐thirteenth century, the common law codified abortion as homicide as soon as the child came to life (animation) and appeared recognizably human (formation), which occurred approximately 40 days after fertilization. Lord Coke later cited the “formed and animated standard,” rearticulating it as “quick with childe.”
From there, Craddock explains how the quickening standard was little more than a practical evidentiary standard, not a meaningful commentary on prenatal life (or lack thereof). But interestingly, he points out that even by the mid-nineteenth century, courts and states alike were increasingly rejecting it as scientifically obsolete, and replacing it with – surprise! – fertilization.
When the Amendment was adopted in 1868, the states widely recognized children in utero as persons. Twenty‐three states and six territories referred to the fetus as a “child” in their statutes proscribing abortion. At least twenty‐eight jurisdictions labeled abortion as an “offense against the person” or an equivalent criminal classification. Nine of the ratifying states explicitly valued the lives of the preborn and their pregnant mothers equally by providing the same range of punishment for killing either during the commission of an abortion. The “only plausible explanation” for this phenomenon is that “the legislatures considered the mother and child to be equal in their personhood.” Furthermore, ten states (nine of which had ratified the Fourteenth Amendment) considered abortion to be either manslaughter, assault with intent to murder, or murder.
Next, and perhaps most importantly, Craddock examines the thinking of the Fourteenth Amendment’s drafters. There’s an understandable assumption that because the amendment’s primary purpose was extending citizenship to freed blacks after the Civil War, its effects shouldn’t be construed to extend beyond that purpose. But under the originalist principle of authorial intent, the first word is often the last word in resolving such confusion:
Senator Jacob Howard, who sponsored the Amendment in the Senate, declared the Amendment’s purpose to “disable a state from depriving not merely a citizen of the United States, but any person, whoever he may be, of life, liberty and property without due process.” Even the lowest and “most despised of the [human] race” were guaranteed equal protection. Representative Thaddeus Stevens called the Amendment “a superstructure of perfect equality of every human being before the law; of impartial protection to everyone in whose breast God had placed an immortal soul” […] The primary Framer of the Fourteenth Amendment, Representative John Bingham, intended it to ensure that “no state in the Union should deny to any human being . . . the equal protection of the laws.”
In light of this evidence and reasoning (as well as rebuttals to possible objections I have skipped, but which you should take the time to read), Craddock concludes that there is only one proper constitutional approach to abortion:
If prenatal life is to be protected under the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress or the courts must intervene in states that do not guarantee equal protection and due process to preborn human beings. After all, “the [Fourteenth] amendment was designed to limit state power and authorize Congress to enforce such limitations.” Should a state refuse to protect prenatal life, it would be a violation of equal protection[.]
Exactly, and it’s not “statist” or “big government” or “judicial activism” to say so. The principle of limited government means the government mustn’t exceed its constitutional purposes, but protecting the right to life is its most basic purpose – and a national-level responsibility. While the Founding Fathers wanted federalism to leave states free to decide a wide range of policy decisions for themselves (so America’s large, diverse, spread out population could live in harmony under a single flag while expressing different secondary values and experimenting with different ideas), they also believed that a select few principles, like our most fundamental rights, require a uniform standard.
Craddock concludes on a pessimistic note, predicting that the Supreme Court is unlikely to abandon Roe anytime soon, making a human life amendment to the Constitution politically necessary even though it’s not legally necessary. That’s true for the time being…but it doesn’t have to be.
The past four decades’ worth of abortion jurisprudence has nothing to do with legal merit and almost everything to do with the partisan politics of the presidents who nominated judges and the senators who reviewed them. So while this rot has been allowed to fester for a long time, there are no legal barriers keeping us from challenging it – we need only the will and imagination to change our tactics.
We can demand that our presidents select bolder, more proven judges. We can push Congress to assert its coequal right and duty to protect individual rights by enacting the Life at Conception Act. And we can call on our lawmakers to exercise their constitutional powers to rein in and punish judges who refuse to protect the constitutional rights of every American.
This is where national-level pro-life activism needs to go…and fortunately, Josh Craddock has given that effort an unassailable foundation.
Editor’s Note, 10/17/18: The original headline of this article read ‘Harvard Law Journal concludes: The preborn child is a constitutional person,’ reflecting The Stream’s reporting of the title of Harvard’s press release with the same headline. We attempted to locate the original press release and cannot find it to verify its contents, so the title has been changed to: “Article in Harvard Law Journal concludes: The preborn child is a constitutional person.”
Overrule Roe v. Wade
Oct 19, 2018
Today, in a fetal-homicide case decided by the Alabama Supreme Court, Justice Tom Parker urged the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the Roe v. Wade abortion decision as it is a “constitutional aberration” that hinders ‘the states’ ability to protect the God-given respect and dignity of unborn human life.”
In Jessie Phillips v. State of Alabama, the Alabama Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the death penalty sentence for Jessie Phillips, a man convicted of capital murder for killing his wife and their unborn child, Baby Doe. Phillips had argued that he should not get the death penalty for killing his unborn child because he said the child was not a “person” under Alabama law. The Court rejected Phillips’ arguments and held that, under Alabama law, Baby Doe was a full “person” and that “the value of the life of an unborn child is no less than the value of the lives of other persons.”
Referring to the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court abortion decision in Roe v. Wade, Justice Parker in his special concurrence wrote, “I urge the United States Supreme Court to overrule this increasingly isolated exception to the rights of unborn children.”
Justice Parker wrote separately to emphasize how broadly and consistently the law and judicial decisions in Alabama and around the country protect the rights of unborn children. This, Justice Parker said, contrasts with “the continued legal anomaly and logical fallacy that is Roe v. Wade.”
In his opinion, Justice Parker calls on the Supreme Court to act: “It is my hope and prayer that the United States Supreme Court will take note of the crescendoing chorus of the laws of the states in which unborn children are given full legal protection and allow the states to recognize and defend the inalienable right to life possessed by every unborn child, even when that right must trump the ‘right’ of a woman to obtain an abortion.” By ensuring broad legal protections for unborn children, including under Alabama’s capital murder statutes, Justice Parker writes that “we affirm once again that unborn children are persons with value and dignity equal to that of all persons.”
Recently, the federal Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit similarly criticized the U.S. Supreme Court’s abortion decisions. On August 22, 2018, in West Alabama Women’s Center v. Williamson, the federal appeals court began its decision with these words: “Some Supreme Court Justices have been of the view that there is constitutional law and then there is the aberration of constitutional law relating to abortion.” In that case, federal Judge Dubina, also wrote separately to emphasize that the U.S. Supreme Court’s “abortion jurisprudence … has no basis in the Constitution.”
“There is a growing chorus of voices urging the Supreme Court to overrule its abortion decisions,” said Mat Staver. “We applaud Justice Tom Parker in calling on the Supreme Court to overturn the Roe v. Wade decision and once again protect precious children, women, and families.”
Liberty Counsel represented Justice Parker when an Alabama federal district court entered a permanent injunction in his favor and against the Judicial Inquiry Commission barring the use of judicial ethics canons to censor judges’ public comments. The JIC has been ordered to pay $100,000.00 compensation to Liberty Counsel for legal fees.
Read the Press Release and join the conversation on Facebook!
ROE V. WADE the Movie
ROE V. WADE is the untold story of how people lied, how the media lied, and how the courts were manipulated to pass a law that has since killed over 60 Million Americans.
Many documentaries have been made, but no one has had the courage to make an actual feature film, a theatrical movie about the true story.
Roe v. Wade stars JON VOIGHT, STEPHEN BALDWIN & STACEY DASH.
Supreme Court Justice Kennedy is retiring this summer and our movie could have influence on who is picked as the new Justice. This could overturn the decision on Roe v. Wade which can save the lives of millions.
This is the most important movie to be made in our generation.
“Designed to inspire the viewer to engage in the movement to restore respect for human life.” Cardinal Burke
We started this campaign on another crowdfunding website and raised over $134,000 in 60 days. However, because of the political agenda on that site and other social media outlets, are campaign was blocked and shadow banned in an attempt to stop our efforts. That’s why we are relaunching here on Freestartr.
This campaign is for the most important pro-life movie in history. This will be the first movie ever about the true story of ROE v. WADE, the most famous court case in America that legalized Abortion. We need your help to fight for the lives of the unborn, because Hollywood refuses to.
Hollywood only wants you to hear their version of the story – in fact, there are 3 movies currently in development that take a pro-abortion stance. But you shouldn’t be surprised. Hollywood has always had an agenda to influence Americans to accept abortion, even if they have to re-write history to do it.
FACEBOOK BANS SHARES
We need your support now more than ever. Facebook has banned us from inviting friends to “Like” our page and from “Sharing” our PAID ads. Breitbart even published an article on our campaign.
Check the article out here:
Thank you for your continued support!
A Portion of Net Proceeds will be Donated to Prolife Organizations
We have gotten such an overwhelming amount of support from the Prolife Community that we have decided to donate a portion of the Net Proceeds from the Movie to Prolife Organizations!
Executive Producers: Dr. Alveda King & Nick Loeb
**** Dr. Alveda King will also be making a cameo in the film as Dr. Mildred Jefferson’s Mother!!!
Co Executive Producers: Greg Swan, Brian Brown, Jalesia McQueen, Larry Cirignano, Mary Anne Urlakis, Rebecca Kiessling, Walter B. Hoye II
Co-Producer: Mindy Robinson
Producers: Cathy Allyn & Nick Byassee
STARRING: STEPHEN BALDWIN, JON VOIGHT & STACEY DASH
This is the true untold story of ROE v. WADE:
We open the movie with the story of how it all began. It all started with a woman named Margaret Sanger. She was the founder of Planned Parenthood. Her initiative was called the Negro project, and as she gives a speech in the movie at a KKK rally, she describes her intentions to reduce the growth of African American population in our country.
In the movie, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, the most famous abortionist of those times, then joins the cause.
They all then recruit feminist Betty Friedan to join their team.
Bernard and Betty, along with the team at Planned Parenthood, search the country to find a pregnant girl they can use to sue the government for her right to have an abortion.
Our characters find the perfect pawn: a broke girl with a 10th grade education named Norma McCorvey. She is now famously known as “Jane Roe.” They all convince Norma that she can have an abortion if she sues, knowing full well that her case will never get to the courts in time.
Our characters succeed, and we watch on as Norma sues Henry Wade, the district attorney of Dallas County. Roe v. Wade is born.
Now that they finally had it in the courts, they had to get the Justices to vote their way, so they fed fake polls and fake statistics to the media.
This is when Bernard and Betty with Planned Parenthood even brought Hollywood on board getting them to do TV shows and movies about abortion.
This was all done to influence public opinion and manipulate the courts.
But there were a few people willing to step up to fight them. This fight is led by the film’s protagonist Mildred Jefferson, the first African American woman to graduate from Harvard Medical School. She believed that she became a doctor to protect life, not destroy it. Not only was she trying to save lives, she was trying to save her race.
She joined the Catholics, other men, and other women, to try to educate Americans on the truth, but they were up against the most well-funded revolution in 20th century America.
Mildred and her team marched, held up signs, got the police to raid illegal abortion clinics, adopted the unborn and most importantly, prayed to God for help.
Although they did everything they could possible do, the ban on abortion was overturned.
What most people don’t know is that the very people who spent their lives fighting to legalize abortion, were faced with the harsh consequences soon after. At the end of the movie Bernard through the help of new sonogram technology, realizes he is killing babies, confesses to all the lies and becomes a leading activist in the pro life movement. Even Norma, our Jane Roe, realizes she was manipulated and becomes a leading activist to protect life.
Our movie will not only shed a light on that truth but will also change hearts and minds. We have distribution on 1000 screens so even if just one person changes as a result of this movie, we will have saved a life.
Please pledge now, and share this campaign with your friends so we can bring ROE v. WADE to life.
A sensational new report, the first of its kind, documents the number of abortions in the world, since the Russian Communist revolution legalized abortion, at 1 billion. This makes abortion the greatest genocide ever. Thomas Jacobson of the Global Life Campaign discusses the new report, which is co-authored with Dr. Wm. Robert Johnston and now available to the public, and the role of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s infamous population control document, “National Security Study Memorandum 200. ” Jacobson and host Cliff Kincaid also examine how the United Nations has become a leading proponent of abortion worldwide as a “human right.” Globally, the Chinese Communist dictatorship is now the leader in death by abortion, with 381 million abortions and Russia at 256 million, while the U.S. has destroyed 60 million of the unborn since the infamous Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision of 1973.
What Conservative Women Can Learn About Liberals From the Way They Treat Dana Loesch
Posted: Mar 10, 2018 12:01 AM
I have known Dana Loesch for a long time and I’ve been pleased to see her work her way up the food chain on the Right. She didn’t get to where she is because of a publicity stunt, because her whole gig is to offend people or because she mindlessly shills for the Republican Party. Instead, she’s someone with talent who was out there working her butt off for years.
Is Dana Loesch a mainstream grassroots conservative? Absolutely. Is she someone who should be considered a feminist role model? You bet. Having met her and her husband on numerous occasions, I can tell you that they seem to be a great couple with a great marriage; they’ve got kids; she’s topped the 20 hottest conservative women in the new media AND she’s respected for her mind. On top of that, Dana has had a successful career. That’s probably as close to the “You can have it all” feminist ideal as you can get.
That is why the liberal reaction to Dana Loesch since she became one of the most prominent women on the Right by becoming an NRA spokeswoman has been so fascinating. Granted, Dana does occasionally say something controversial, but that’s not a regular thing for her. She’s not a fascist, a white supremacist or even mean-spirited. She doesn’t advocate gun violence or school shootings. In fact, as a general rule, Dana spends the vast majority of her time expressing mainstream conservative beliefs.
That’s what makes the insane level of abuse she receives from the Left stand out so much. Just to give you an example of what I mean, these are just some of the comments she shared on her Twitter timeline in the last 24 hours and they are very typical:
Islandtime: @POTUSbonespur "Wouldn't it be sad is @DLoesch's children were the victims of gun violence. Thoughts and prayers..."
Larry: @seffrtnow "Not only are you a terrorist you are a Despicable loathsome vial scumbag who advocates for Mass school shootings for money shame on you you piece of crap @DLoesch"
irreverentmama: @irreverentmama "You're a whore for the NRA."
Jim Cornette @TheJimCornette "OK, Doll, you're quoting that terrorist @NRA c*nt on my Twitter now? Sorry, bye."
Dar Dixon @dardixon1 "@DLoesch it’s unproductive, disingenuous & non resourceful to claim that you’re anything but a WHORE for the @NRA $$$"
Tim Kassen @tkassen "Also, you are a liar. Your children will hate having to defend you once they are outside of your bubble"
Of course the habitual, vile, sexist abuse from liberals on Twitter is just the tip of the iceberg where Dana is concerned.
National Rifle Association spokeswoman Dana Loesch announced Sunday on Twitter that her family had been forced to move suddenly after she received multiple death threats from gun control advocates.
(From Dana) One guy hunted down my private cell phone number, called when police were here, threatened to shoot me in my front yard. #MeToo…. Another guy created a string of social media accounts, posted photos of my house, threatened to rape me to death. #MeToo…. Another gun control advocate, after threatening to hunt me down and assault me, dragged my kids into it. #MeToo…. I’ve only ever discussed these issues kinda vaguely. More I can’t discuss. I and other 2A women are sexually threatened regularly #MeToo
Maybe it’s just me, but don’t liberals INCESSANTLY complain about the sexual mistreatment of women and shame the men responsible (along with every other man they can find?) Yet, while that’s happening, presumably liberal men have been threatening to rape Dana and murder her children. What do you think the reaction of liberals would be if they found out Rachel Maddow or Michelle Obama had to move for their safety after getting those kind of messages? It would be on the front page of every paper in America and there would be Twitter hashtags for days. So why are the vast majority of liberals indifferent to rape and death threats as long as they’re aimed at someone like Dana?
It reminds me of something Michelle Malkin (who was also harassed until she had to move) told me back in 2008 when she was talking about the similar river of abuse she received from liberals, "There are a lot of double standards, and in particular, that conservative women just aren’t seen in some ways as human beings."
There is the ugly truth about what liberals believe.
If you don’t want liberal men threatening to rape you and hurt your children, then be a liberal. If not, don’t complain because you deserve it. Not every liberal thinks that way, but most of them do. In fact, I would suggest to you that the very reason Dana Loesch receives so much abuse is not because she’s different from other conservative women somehow, but because she is like other conservative women and they like the idea of making an example of her.
What liberals hope is that other conservative women will look at the rape threats, the attacks on her family and the abuse Dana endures daily and go, “I better keep my mouth shut because I don’t want that to happen to me.” You see, if they can make conservative women AFRAID to speak up, they win by default.
Liberalism is no longer about winning arguments. It’s about intimidating people into silence. Shutting people up. De-platforming them. Doing whatever it takes to make sure that only the liberal opinion is considered because liberalism can’t win in a fair fight of ideas. So, liberal colleges allow students to storm the stage or riot to shut up conservative speakers. Social media platforms are finding ways to shut up conservatives. Organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center get paid to falsely brand conservative groups as hate groups. Newspaper and networks other than Fox primarily run squishes and liberals masquerading as people on the Right as their “conservative” voices. Conservatives are treated as pariahs in Hollywood and in schools. Political correctness, cries of “racism” and setting up “safe spaces” are today PRIMARILY about shutting down debates that liberals would rather not have. Along those same lines, going after the children of conservative women, abusing those women and threatening them with rape fits right in with everything else liberals are doing.
The only thing I can tell conservative women (and men for that matter) is for the sake of your children and the sake of your country, don’t ever let them silence you or shut up the people who are saying what you believe. The moment you stop talking about what you believe is the moment the bad guys win and America loses.
Hypocritical Women’s March Says it ‘Loves’ but Actually Spreads ‘Hate’
By Jeff Dunetz
March 7, 2018
Because Sen. Gillibrand’s friend and Women’s March organizer Tamika Mallory was at Louis Farrakhan’s hate-fest last week, the Women’s March organizers were under pressure to condemn Farrakhan.
This is despite the fact that Mallory has been a fan of Farrakhan for a long time:
After a week of pressure, the Women’s March finally released a statement that neither condemns Farrakhan the minister of hate nor does it apologize for the fact that the Women’s March leadership is filled with haters.
The statement is a lie. A year ago the Women’s March organized “A Day Without Women.” Those protests were run a Palestinian Terrorist who killed two students and was deported from the US in 2017, groups who call for the destruction of the State of Israel, and groups who participate in the anti-Semitic BDS movement
Rasmea Yousef Odeh is one of eight women who organized this particular protest. She’s a woman who spent a decade in an Israeli jail for her involvement in two terrorist bombings made while she was a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). One of those attacks, a 1969 bombing of a Jerusalem Super-Sol Market killed two Hebrew University Students Edward Joffe and Leon Kanner while they were shopping for groceries.
On February 6th, Odeh she joined other radicals to write a manifesto for the March 8th protest. Her cohorts included Angela Davis, a self-professed communist professor (now retired), who was a member of the original Black Panthers and a 1960s radical icon. Davis was prosecuted and acquitted in 1972 for an armed takeover of a California courtroom that resulted in the murder of a judge. Other co-authors included Maoism supporter Tithi Bhattacharya (Maoists are considered a terrorist group), as well as Linda Martín Alcoff, Cinzia Arruzza, Nancy Fraser, Barbara Ransby, and Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor
Joining in on the fun was a rogue’s gallery of anti-Semitic organizations as well as ones calling for the destruction of Israel.
Al-Awda The Palestine Right to Return Coalition, American Muslims for Palestine – Upper NY, International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network, Jewish Voice for Peace NYC (JVP was labeled a hate group by the progressive ADL), and Jews for Palestinian Right of Return. Odeh will be appearing on a panel later this month at the Jewish Voice for Peace’s national convention
American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) is perhaps the most troubling of the organizations listed. Jonathan Schanzer, the vice president for research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, testified to Congress last year that AMP was founded former members of the Holy Land Foundation, which was shut down after it was found to have been funding the terrorist group Hamas. Salah Sarsour, a current AMP board member, was once jailed in Israel for sending funds to Hamas. (Ironically, Hamas, the terrorist group that rules the Gaza Strip, announced earlier this week that it was cancelling the International Women’s Day holiday.)
AMP is also a leading promoter of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign targeting Israel, which is both anti-Israel and anti-Semitic. Many leaders of the BDS campaign have publicly affirmed that they seek Israel’s destruction. BDS co-founder Omar Barghouti, an opponent of the two-state solution, said in 2014 that Palestinians have a right to “resistance by any means, including armed resistance,” while leading activist As’ad Abu Khalil acknowledged in 2012 that “the real aim of BDS is to bring down the state of Israel.”
Odeh became a citizen in 2004, but in 2014 she was convicted of lying to the immigration authorities about her Israeli conviction. Odeh checked “no” on immigration and citizenship forms filled out when asked whether she had ever been convicted of a crime. She was also accused of lying in her immigration papers about her prior residency, falsely claiming that she had lived in Jordan from 1948 until she came to America. On 9/20/17 after a three-year very public court battle that her Woman’s March friends had to know about, the woman who killed two boys officially lost the US citizenship was deported from the United States for concealing her murder/conviction of two Israeli college students...(READ MORE...)
Crime Scene Van Spotted at FL Abortion Clinic
Feb 7, 2018
A Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Department Crime Scene unit was parked yesterday at Presidential Women’s Center (PWC), an abortion facility located in West Palm Beach, Florida.
Susan Pine, a pro-life sidewalk counselor who has previously been represented by Liberty Counsel, saw a uniformed officer enter the center with paperwork in hand. Pine reports that the abortion facility’s medical director, Daniel Sacks, was at the clinic during the Crime Scene unit’s visit. Former Attorney General Eric Holder in the Obama administration filed a federal lawsuit against Pine in 2009 under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances law seeking to prevent her from being on a public sidewalk. After a couple years defending against this frivolous lawsuit, the federal court chastised the Obama Department of Justice and ordered it to pay over $100,000 in attorney’s fees to Liberty Counsel. This is the same abortion clinic under investigation.
PWC, which conducts abortions up to 22.5 weeks gestation, was referred to Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi by the House Select Investigative Committee on Infant Lives on November 30, 2016, due to its suspected involvement in the illegal trafficking of aborted baby organs and tissue. Bondi’s office confirmed to Pine that the abortion business was indeed under “criminal review” on February 17, 2017. However, it is unclear if the Crime Scene officer’s visit to PWC had any connection to the baby parts trafficking investigation.
PWC is a member of the National Abortion Federation, an association of abortion businesses that sued members of the Center for Medical Progress to block the release of undercover videos that implicated it and Planned Parenthood in crimes related to the illegal sale of aborted baby remains. Liberty Counsel’s client, Sandra Merritt, is one of the two journalists that produced those undercover videos.
An Appalling Glimpse At Dutch Public Health: Down Syndrome Man Is Told How Much He's Costing Society
Priest Rightly Argues that Pro-Abortion Leaders are Worse than Mafia Bosses
By Onan Coca
November 22, 2017
A Catholic priest in Italy is facing criticism for rightly pointing out that pro-abortion leaders are as vile, murderous, and criminal as leaders of the infamous Italian mafia are.Father Francesco Pieri, of Bologna, Italy, recently argued that there was no moral difference between a famous Italian abortion advocate, Emma Bonino, and the equally infamous mafia boss Totò Riina.
From Il Resto del Carlino
by way of , LifeNews:
The Bologna priest was quoted by local paper Il Resto del Carlino as saying: “Who has more innocent deaths on their conscience, Totò Riina or Emma Bonino?” referring to a mafia ‘boss of bosses’ who died last week and Bonino, a prominent campaigner for abortion rights.
He went on to say “morally, there’s no difference” between the two.
Riina, a mafia killer nicknamed ‘The Beast’ in reference to his cruelty, died of canceron Friday. He had been serving 26 life sentences for ordering an estimated 150 murders, including those of anti-mafia judges Giovanni Falcone and Paolo Borsellino, and a 13-year-old boy.
Former Foreign Minister Emma Bonino is known for her campaigns to legalize divorce and support both religious and sexual freedom. She was jailed for three weeks in 1975 for protesting in favour of abortion rights, and promoted the referendum which led to the legalization of the medical procedure.
The priest is obviously facing some pretty intense pushback as left-leaning voices attack him for saying that advocating for abortion is morally as evil as being a mafia boss.
Here’s the problem… the priest isn’t wrong.
If pro-lifers are right, and abortion is the murder of society’s most innocent citizens, then the abortion advocate is as bad as any mafia hitman, leg-breaker, or capo.
Moreover, someone as influential and important as Emma Bonino faces even more intense scrutiny. If we pro-life advocates are right, then Bonino is to blame for exponentially more murders than Totò Riina is. In fact, Riina could never hope to soak his hands in the amount of blood that Bonino finds dripping from her fingers.
It’s a harsh truth that Father Pieri relates, but it’s a truth nonetheless. If we believe abortion is murder, then the people leading the fight are responsible for more murders than Hitler, Stalin, and Mao combined. Far more than 100 million deaths worldwide in just the last 40 or so years…
It’s time we spoke the truth as plainly as we can, because the world doesn’t seem to understand nuance.
Obama Judges Order Abortion for Illegal Mother’s Baby
Oct 26, 2017
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled Tuesday that the Trump administration cannot prevent an undocumented illegal immigrant teenager under federal custody in Texas from immediately having an abortion at taxpayer expense. This reverses a ruling issued last week by a three-judge panel that blocked the 17-year-old “Jane Doe,” who crossed the border from Mexico, from getting the procedure right away.
On Tuesday, the Court of Appeals ruled 6-3 to reinstate a Oct. 18 district court decision from Obama-appointed U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan that Jane Doe, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, does not need to secure a sponsor or leave the country in order to abort her child at taxpayer expense. Chutkan’s ruling, which the Trump administration appealed, had ordered the federal government to transport Doe to her abortion appointments “promptly and without delay” or allow her to be transported by someone else.
The six judges on the Court of Appeals were named to the court by Democratic presidents, while those dissenting were Republican nominees. Ironically, in disregard for the unborn child, Obama-appointed Judge Patricia Millett said, “Today’s decision rights a grave constitutional wrong by the government. Remember, we are talking about a child here. A child who is alone in a foreign land. A child who, after her arrival here in a search for safety and after the government took her into custody, learned that she is pregnant.”
Millett was nominated by Obama to what is considered the second highest court in the land. Her extreme pro-abortion views were well known from her writings. She said abortion is needed to free “women from historically routine conscription into maternity.” She said those who oppose forced ObamaCare contraception insurance coverage reinforce “broader patterns of discrimination against women as a class of presumptive breeders.” In a 2011 paper entitled “Against the New Maternalism,” Millett said by celebrating motherhood society is creating a “self-fulfilling cycle of discrimination.” Millett has also criticized ultrasound as “deceptive images of fetus-as-autonomous-being that the anti-choice movement has popularized since the advent of amniocentesis.”
Pro-Life Investment Plan Hits $1 Billion in Assets By Rejecting Pro-Abortion Companies
NATIONAL STEVEN ERTELT AUG 17, 2017 | 5:26PM WASHINGTON, DC
Many Christians choose movies, music and even retailers based on how they impact their faith. Why, asks financial expert and nationally syndicated host Dan Celia, should investing be any different?
Celia leads Financial Issues Stewardship Ministries and focuses on biblical investing and important economic trends during his daily, three-hour program, “Financial Issues,” which is sponsored in part by Timothy Plan.
For more than 20 years, Timothy Plan, which recently hit $1 billion of assets under management, has helped investors achieve their financial goals while investing in a biblically and morally responsible manner. Timothy Plan does not invest in those companies that support pornography, abortion, same-sex marriage or have other agendas contrary to the teachings of scripture, or are actively participating in activities that may prove destructive to our communities at large.
“What this means to me is that there are 1 billion dollars that are not supporting the darkness of this world,” Celia said of the Timothy Plan milestone. “This, of course, does not even take into account the billions of dollars from those who have other areas of investments that are biblically responsible as well. I recently read an article based on a survey that claimed that fewer people are concerned with following a faith-based agenda and feel no need to attend church. This excellent news from Timothy Plan illustrates 1 billion rebukes to that claim.”
PRO-LIFE COLLEGE STUDENT? LifeNews is looking for interns interested in writing, social media, or video creation. Contact us today.
Celia, a foremost authority and one of the most trusted experts on biblically responsible investing, has seen a dramatic increase in the past several years in the growth of the market of investors who want to honor God with the money He has entrusted to them.
Timothy Plan Mutual Funds give testimony to this change and dramatic shift in conscience, as they have seen dramatic inflows from evangelical Christians who are dedicated to making sure the money they have been blessed with is not being used to further erode the moral fiber of America.
Timothy Plan offers a biblically responsible family of funds designed to suit the various needs of Christian investors. In 1994, Timothy Plan, founded by Arthur Ally, pioneered the first pro-life, pro-family screening standard and will not invest a single penny into any company that violates these screens. Timothy Plan’s two-page “Know Your Investments” document represents a small portion of companies failing the screens.
Court Asked to Hear Forced Abortion Speech Case
Aug 4, 2017
Today, Liberty Counsel is filing a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of three California faith-based, crisis pregnancy centers that are forced to advertise an offer of “immediate free or low-cost …abortion” to their clients according to state law. This law forces our clients to speak a message that violates their religious beliefs and directly contradicts what they actually want to say.
The National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) co-sponsored the law. It demands unlicensed crisis pregnancy centers post this notice in multiple locations advertising abortions and abortifacients. In some centers, it requires 22 printed pages for different languages. This notice must be included on our clients’ websites, in every promotional material they publish, and posted at their entrance and in their waiting room. The law charges $1,000 fine for each repeated instance that the notice is not given.
This law is like forcing the Sierra Club to advocate for oil spills or demanding St. Jude expose their patients to lead poisoning. However, this law is actually much more repulsive. While those situations might cause unintended harm, abortion is intended – even specifically designed – to kill.
These children deserve life and the opportunity to pursue happiness. It is the deepest overreach of the local government to demand that someone encourage others to, and thus participate in, murder.
Learn more by reading our press release. If you want to help us fight this law, please make a donationand join us in praying for the U.S. Supreme Court to take our case.
Kellyanne Conway Explains Why Conservative Women Need to Speak Up
Video Team / June 23, 2017
White House senior adviser Kellyanne Conway says conservative women should be unafraid to defend their views. (Photo: Cheriss May/NurPhoto/Sipa USA/Newscom)White House senior adviser Kellyanne Conway spoke to The Daily Signal’s Genevieve Wood on Friday. Here’s a transcript of their conversation.
Wood: Hi everyone, I am Genevieve Wood, welcome to Daily Signal’s Facebook live. I don’t think I need to introduce this woman next to me, Kellyanne Conway. Hi Kellyanne.
Conway: It’s good to see you Genevieve.
Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. But this can't be done alone. Find out more >>
Wood: So you just spoke to a group here at The Heritage Foundation, NEW, The Network for Enlightened Women. Why is it important to reach out and talk to these young conservative women?
Conway: I’m so proud of these young conservative women for taking these messages right to the campus and engaging in public policy the way they do. I know it is very difficult sometimes to be a conservative woman nearly anywhere but certainly on our campuses. It’s very important for them to show that diversity comes in all forms.
There is diversity of thought, ideological and political diversity, and that they, whether they are fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, national security types, they should go and recognize the best way to bring in new ambassadors to this movement if you will, is for people to see them and say, “you know,” that peer to peer interaction is incredibly important.
Wood: You talked about just the importance of really speaking up because there is such pressure now to shut down, not just young people, but anybody who has a voice that says I’m a conservative, they want to be shut down.
Conway: And it’s too bad because as we saw in the election results, we saw in the special elections, there is a great market for conservative ideas obviously. And if people can stay focused on that and not give in to what I call this culture of sameness, it’s unbelievable how much people sound and talk and are the same these days politically and ideologically, in a way where just a different viewpoint getting into the conversation proves what a thriving democracy and what individual thought and self-governance truly is Genevieve.
So I encourage these women, even when it’s difficult, there are more of them than they realize. You know, about a year ago I came up with the term “undercover” Trump voter. The undercover Trump supporter is still out there. It’s not that they are ashamed to say so, what they are is they just don’t want to argue with people on college campuses or within their own families, but if we can get them to feel more free to go out and speak and just to explain why they feel as they do, particularly on conservative issues, that’s a plus for everyone.
Wood: You talked about sameness, I don’t want to ask you all the same questions that you get day after day, by the same old same olds in the media, so what are you not being asked? What is the administration not being asked to talk about, that they should be being asked about?
Conway: That is the key question, I even said on a network this morning, that we are not, you are not covering all the great things that are happening that impact peoples’ lives. And so I think the media have a responsibility to be fair, but they also have a role to be complete.
The media can be the connective tissue between this White House and administration, Genevieve and the people. In other words, let’s tell the veterans that under Donald Trump’s leadership they already have a brand new, first of its kind, hotline right into the White House, for anything they want to discuss or lodge as a grievance. They as of today will have the Veterans Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act. They very recently got the medical records modernization so that our veterans are seen seamlessly as the same patient, the same individual at the Department of Defense and VA, only the federal government would struggle for decades to do something as simple as just having technology speak to each other.
We are tackling the opioid addiction which, is the scourge of our time, no state has been spared, no demographic group has been untouched. There is a White House commission, there is Secretary [Kathleen] Sebelius of HHS. The president has leaned all the way into this and we are making great strides. The job creation, the regulatory rollback.
The fact that just last week this president and his administration announced a one-hundred-million-dollar program to support apprenticeships. And we are working with bipartisan governors all across this country, and employers, asking “what counts as a skilled laborer who’s employable in 2017?” And that we are working with them so that we are dignifying all types of career choices, all types of jobs. You wouldn’t graduate high school and have a skills certificate along with your high school diploma to be a hair dresser, a plumber, a welder, a carpenter, terrific. That job will be waiting for you in most states.
Wood: You have been working in the conservative movement for a long time, Kellyanne and I have both been, (Conway: decades now for you and I) and we both look so young, but let, see this is the second time you’ve been over to The Heritage Foundation this week, speaking to different groups. How do you use the resources of Heritage, for people out there who aren’t familiar, how would you describe The Heritage Foundation?
Conway: Well The Heritage Foundation has for decades been the gold standard. I really appreciate the research. I think having the facts and figures and having the information, the data, and even the anecdotes, the examples Genevieve, is so key to connecting ourselves to the policy solutions and I know Heritage is a great resource to the men and women on Capitol Hill and has been for decades.
I think now with technology, our native tongue in this country, it is important that Heritage be the virtual if you will, the digital connective tissue as well to people and information so that they can access it immediately and say, “gosh everyone is talking about this same thing today, could it really be true?” and going and getting that, the truth, the facts as they are seen through the conservative lens.
I also think Heritage has produced really peerless and fearless scholars over the years who are willing to take that out on the road, and work with our state-based think tanks and work with our state-based legislators and governors, that’s the key, because we as conservatives believe that a federal government that does less and that empowers the states to do more, is a federal government that serves its people and it becomes less expansive and expensive, and intrusive and invasive.
So Heritage has been a great resource over any number of years and I like the fact that Heritage has stuck to its knitting, and not tried to do a million different things over the years, because those core skills, even as you have expanded your issue sets, and the many different ways you deliver the message and the facts and figures to Americans has expanded, it’s really important to all of us that you’ve stuck to national security, and economics, and education, and healthcare, and issues like that.
Wood: Kellyanne, final question for you, I know you have recently moved back to D.C. do you have any fun summer plans?
Conway: I do. My fun summer plans revolve around assimilating my children into the D.C. neighborhood and culture. Watching them enjoy their summer, I think that we will take, we are going to take a trip as a family, probably in August as many families do. There are two states left in the country that I’ve never visited, South Dakota and Montana, so we may actually take a family trip to those two great states and I’ll have, I turned 50 this year so it will be my fifty states at the age of fifty. I think Heritage is more than fifty at this point, so we’re about that. So it’s all good, thank you.
Wood: Kellyanne thank you very much. I know our audience loved hearing from you, thank you for talking with us.
Conway: Appreciate it.
Rasmea Odeh’s Exit, Stage Left
by Ruthie Blum
Convicted Palestinian terrorist Rasmea Odeh received a standing ovation this weekend in Chicago from an enthusiastic crowd at the national conference of the organization Jewish Voice for Peace.
Luckily for Odeh — who took part in the bombing of a Jerusalem supermarket in 1969, which killed Hebrew University students Leon Kanner and Eddie Joffe — the Jewish state she and her radical leftist buddies in the US Jewish community would see eradicated let her out of jail as part of a prisoner exchange. Still, she has expressed no gratitude to the liberal society that set her free in 1980, or to the one that has enabled her since then to roam around freely, spewing her vitriol and inciting violence. On the contrary, the proud member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, who feels no remorse for the innocent boys she killed, also defied the country that took her in as in immigrant – concealing her terrorist past in order to enter the United States.
Not only that. Last month, Odeh’s three-year battle with the US government, which was sparked by her being convicted of immigration fraud, came to a happy end with a plea bargain according to which she would be stripped of her American citizenship and deported, but serve no jail time.
The Rasmea Defense Committee, a vocal group of avid supporters, had the nerve to respond to this piece of luck and ill-deserved generosity by saying that her decision to accept the deal was difficult, but it was the best she could hope for under the “current racist political climate” of President Donald Trump, in which her “prospects for a fair trial are slimmer than ever.”
It is bad enough that Odeh only spent 10 years in an Israeli prison. Worse still that she is getting off the hook for her subsequent crime. But the fact that she has been elevated to some kind of sainthood, lauded by feminist, black and other self-described human rights activists is as shocking as it is shameful.
To add insult to injury, Jewish Voice for Peace pressured the management of the Hyatt Regency Hotel, the venue rented for the hate-filled conference, not to allow a pro-Israel group to rent a separate room in which to hold a memorial service for Odeh’s victims. This is a classic case of what renowned law professor Alan Dershowitz calls “free speech for me and not for thee.”
Yes, as long as Jewish Voice for Peace and its non-Jewish counterparts — such as Students for Justice in Palestine and Black Lives Matter, which use it as a cover for their antisemitism – have the microphone, anything goes. Even glorifying cold-blooded murder. But when an organization like StandWithUs wants to present an opposing viewpoint, any underhanded tactics to prevent it from doing so are kosher.
Ultimately, StandWithUs prevailed and conducted a vigil for Kanner and Joffe during the conference, albeit in a different building of the Hyatt complex. But it was a quiet ceremony, unlike that of Jewish Voice for Peace, which cheered Odeh when she said, “We need you to continue resisting Trump’s agenda and to continue challenging the Zionists and to continue providing your solidarity and support to the Palestinian and Arab national movement.”
Odeh, who was 21 when she played a key role in the terrorist attack, failed to mention that if not for Israeli policy, she would have spent the rest of her life behind bars. Instead, she has been a liberated woman since the age of 32. The now 69-year-old also left out the fact that the U.S. justice system – yes, in Trump’s America – can take credit for her ability to trade jail for Jordan, where she will undoubtedly be hailed as a heroine.
Good riddance, Rasmea; too bad you can’t take your sycophants with you. But, as you surely know, Jordanian law forbids Jews from becoming citizens.
Ruthie Blum is the managing editor of The Algemeiner.
Moms Defy Opinions And The Odds To Choose Life
In our increasingly liberal culture, many American women find themselves under attack by feminists for standing for life.
The new feminist movement has focused on a “me first” agenda in which pro-life women are criticized for daring to put the rights of the unborn before their own.
In a society where women are pushed to be equal to men, and where children are often viewed as a “nuisance” on a woman’s path to power and success, several women are coming forward with testimonies that give hope in the fight against the liberal anti-life culture in America today.
The modern feminist would never consider putting a child ahead of their career and self-involved life goals, let alone making the decision to put their life in danger to save their unborn child.
LifeSite News reported on an awe-inspiring story of one woman who did just that.
Becky Anderson was two months into her pregnancy when she was diagnosed with cervical cancer.
LifeSite News reported:
Her doctors gave Becky a terrifying ultimatum — end the pregnancy and start treatment straight away, or risk the cancer spreading.
Becky said: “They wanted to give me a hysterectomy the following week but I was adamant I would not have an abortion.”
It is not clear from the story whether “abortion”means here a hysterectomy for cancer treatment with the unintended side-effect that the twins would die, or whether a genuinely abortive procedure with the aim of lethally attacking the twins was proposed.
Becky said: “I’d gone from being on top of the world to being in the depths of despair, worrying whether I was going to actually survive…I knew I needed to survive for the sake of my children. There was no way I was leaving them.”
“I kept thinking that their lives were just starting while mine could be ending, but it was a risk I was willing to take.”
Becky chose to risk her own life so that her twins could live, a decision criticized by liberal feminists, but that made her a powerful witness for choosing life.
Becky’s twins were born healthy, and she was able to start treatment to treat her cancer.
And in another stunning case of a woman fighting against the anti-life culture that often pervades modern medicine, Ashley Caughey put off her cancer treatment to give her daughter a chance at life also.
Live Action reported:
An X-ray revealed the news Ashley Caughey dreaded to her. A doctor told her she had a bone cancer known as osteosarcoma. During this same time, Ashley found out she was 10 weeks pregnant. The doctors wanted her to begin chemotherapy as soon as possible, but Ashley knew that that would harm her child.
They told me what would likely happen to Paisley, that you know, she most likely wouldn’t make it and I just knew. It wasn’t a choice to me. It was like this is what needs to be done. She’s first. I’m not going to kill a healthy baby because I’m sick. There’s nothing wrong with her. Her life is just as important as mine if not more important. I mean as a mother my job is to protect my kids.
These testimonials enrage feminists who could never understand putting anyone ahead of their own needs and goals.
And they give hope that our increasingly liberal society will eventually turn against the anti-life culture that has risen up out of the early feminist movements.
The Atlantic reported on the feminist notion that a woman must place her own needs before those of her child.
Pro-choice arguments, the author says, reflect the ambitions, hypocrisies, and contradictions of contemporary feminism.
In feminists’ view, a woman is not permitted to put the needs of other people first, because “self-sacrifice” is the linchpin of female oppression. Instead, she is expected to ascend to a higher level of enlightened self-regard, where the act of putting her own needs first is tantamount to striking a blow for women’s freedom.
The chief goal of feminists is to restructure the family as a totally contractual arrangement from which anyone, but especially any woman, may withdraw at will.
We can give thanks and praise that there are still women in America today who not only choose life for their children, but choose the sanctity of their child’s life above their own.
The stories of these brave women, and those of many others, give hope that a culture of life will eventually overcome the feminist hypocrisy so readily accepted in America, and so heavily covered by the liberal media.
Should Bill Nye Have his Penis Forcefully Removed to make sure he doesn't have extra kids? Should Nye's gene pool be eliminated?Opinion. What is the policy or penalty for this kind of evil.
Bill Nye Has Had Enough Of Your ‘Extra Kids’
On his Netflix series, Bill Nye asks, bluntly, ‘Should we have policies that penalize people for having extra kids in the developed world?’
By Bosworth W. Hollingsworth, IV
APRIL 26, 2017
The Internet is rightly mocking the complete disaster that is the Rachel Bloom “My Sex Junk” video that is part of the new Netflix series, “Bill Nye Saves the World.” As bad as that is (it is BAD), another portion of the series is even worse. The 13th and final installment is titled “Earth’s People Problem,” and with a name like that, you know we could be in for some ideas that border on eugenics.
The 26-minute episode starts off in fairly inoffensive fashion. Following an intro that demonstrates how human consumption is like sponges soaking up water, Nye explains how women who have access to educational and professional opportunities tend to have fewer children. This is true, and he illustrates his point by telling the story of his mother, who developed technology for the United States during World War II and went on to earn her master’s degree and doctorate. Inspiring!
Nye says when women are in power, they have fewer children, and more resources can be devoted to those children. “It’s not rocket surgery. It’s science!” he coyly explains. Sure, it’s not science in the same way that a Punnett square is science, but there is certainly a correlation there and the overall goal of providing equal opportunity to women is noble enough. So let’s just indulge him and call his observation “science.” Close enough.
Noting that the population density is highest in India, Nye’s correspondent Emily Calandrelli went off to India to deliver a report on population growth in the country. It is followed by a brief chat between Nye and Calandrelli that quickly devolves into a lecture on how America’s maternity leave policy is an example of our patriarchal society or whatever.
She says women in India get 16 weeks of paid maternity leave, which is “unheard of in the United States.” Never mind that here in California (home to roughly 20 percent of Americans), we have 16 weeks of guaranteed maternity leave as well. Also disregard the fact that the absence of a federal requirement for maternity leave does not mean maternity leave is nonexistent in the United States. Calandrelli is rolling, so let’s leave her alone. Instructively, she approvingly lists China when she rattles off some of the countries that do have required paid maternity leave policies.
Dose Those Ladies Up, Ya’llThen we get to the rancid meat and soggy potatoes of this whole spectacle: the panel segment. On the panel are: Dr. Rachel Snow, chief of population development at the United Nations Population Fund, Dr. Travis Rieder, ethicist at the Berman Institute at Johns Hopkins University, and finally Dr. Nerys Benfield, director of Family Planning Montefiore Medical Center. Benfield is an abortionist, so you may know where we are headed here.
Nye starts off the panel by asking “What should we be doing?” Benfield immediately jumps in and says that as a physician, she feels access to health care and family planning is important. She avoids the A-word. Repeating the observation that women’s education levels and fertility rates are inversely related, Benfield says the reason is either women are having less sex (Nye, redblooded horndog that he is, howls “I hope that’s not true!” with a quasi-sheepish grin), or that women are using contraception.
The panel notes the importance of contraceptive access. Snow jumps in and says “We need justice and we need education.” What “justice” means in this context is anybody’s guess. My personal guess is that she is referring to abortion. But, again, the panel dances around the word.
How do we create and export this justice? Nye asks. Snow responds with vague concepts like “excellent education systems” (You heard her, everyone! Make them excellent!) and “family planning,” as she nods in the direction of the abortion doctor two seats to her left. Family planning, meaning abortion, a word that is again avoided.
Let’s Reconsider…Forced Sterilization?The fight against climate change, Nye’s most passionate cause, is brought up by Rieder, who notes that children in developed countries use 160 times more resources than children in the developing world. This is where the creepy totalitarianism of the environmental movement starts to show itself. Nye asks, bluntly, “Should we have policies that penalize people for having extra kids in the developed world?”
Extra kids. These d-mn people and their existence, am I right? Nye (who, again, decided we all needed to see that abomination from Bloom) is wise enough to set limits on humanity. This whole concept and the ease with which he discusses it is so frightening and evil that I am genuinely appalled at Netflix’s decision to air it.
Rieder says we should “at least consider” a form of punishment for people who have these Extra Kids (TM). Nye impatiently responds that “consider means do it.” Snow, to her credit, jumps in and takes issue with the idea that “we do anything to incentivize fewer children or more children.” Benfield notes the history of compulsory sterilization in America, a practice that was in place as recently as the 1970s. The issue was not come at from a position of justice in the past, she adds. But this time will be different, I guess?
So, if you’re scoring at home, that leaves China’s maternity laws and their recently ended one-child policy as the key points from this half hour of science televangelism. As Calandrelli says, it’s time for America to “catch up.” With China.
Yeesh. The program had eight minutes left that I couldn’t watch even if I tried.
Bosworth W. Hollingsworth, IV is a pen name.
Photo Ryan and Sarah Deeds / Flickr
WOMEN’S MARCH CONVICTED TERRORIST AGREES TO BE DEPORTED IN EXCHANGE FOR NO JAIL TIME
March 29, 2017 by Debra Heine
Convicted terrorist and Women’s March organizer Rasmea Yousef Odeh is scheduled to be deported after lying on her citizenship application, The Washington Times reported. Odeh, a Palestinian, agreed to be deported in exchange for no jail time after it emerged that she lied about having been convicted of Islamic terrorism.
Odeh is scheduled to appear in court April 25 in Detroit, where she plans to plead guilty to “unlawful procurement of naturalization” in a deal that will allow her to leave the United States to avoid up to 18 months in prison.
She had been scheduled to undergo another trial after a U.S. appeals court vacated her 2014 conviction, saying an expert witness should have been allowed to testify that she suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder from allegedly being tortured in prison when she gave the false answers.
The 69-year-old Palestinian activist was convicted in the 1969 supermarket bombing in Israel that killed two Hebrew University students.
She served 10 years before being released in a prisoner exchange.
Her supporters said it would be “impossible for Rasmea to expect a fair trial in U.S. courts.”
According to the UK Daily Mail, Odeh was also one of several authors who penned an open letter in The Guardian calling on women across the U.S. to take part in “striking, marching, blocking roads” and other activities in a day of “grassroots, anti-capitalist feminism.”
Soon after the letter was published, the New York Post reported that Odeh had been convicted for her role in the two terrorist bombings. Here is a brief summary of the case against Odeh courtesy of Legal Insurrection’s Professor Jacobson:
Rasmea claims she was not involved in the supermarket bombing, and was convicted only because she gave a false confession after 25 days of sexual torture. Previously, we have explored the factual conflicts in Rasmea’s story, including that she confessed the day after arrest, not 25 days later; bomb-making material was found in her room; she received an open trial observed by a representative of the International Red Cross who described the trial as fair; and perhaps most important, Rasmea’s co-conspirator, Ayesha Odeh (not related), described in a 2004 interview for a pro-Palestinian filmmaker how Rasmea was the mastermind behind the supermarket bombing.
After serving nearly a decade in prison, Rasmea was released in a prisoner release for an Israel soldier captured in Lebanon.
While she was imprisoned, the PFLP formed the “Rasmea Odeh Brigade” to try to free her and others by taking hostages, and Rasmea was on the list of prisoners whose release was sought by the Black September terrorists who took Israeli athletes hostage (and killed them) at the 1972 Olympics. Yet Rasmea claims she was not involved in terror organizations and was just an innocent political activist when arrested by the Israelis.Rasmea eventually made her way to the U.S. in the mid-1990s.
Rasmea gave false answers on her visa application, and in 2004 on her naturalization application, by denying (among other lies) that she EVER (bold and CAPS in original) was convicted or imprisoned.Rasmieh was convicted of immigration fraud in November 2014.
Jacobson told The Washington Times that Odeh’s decision to cop a plea deal was “no surprise.”
“She was convicted of immigration fraud in the first trial, and would have been convicted in the re-trial,” Mr. Jacobson said in an email. “Her new defense that PTSD caused her to falsely answer simple questions on her naturalization papers about past convictions and imprisonment was laughable. Rasmea and her supporters invented an alternate universe based on hatred of Israel, but alternate universes tend not to do very well in court when faced with real world evidence.”
Odeh was one of the organizers of the Women’s Strike on March 8, hailed as a day for women to “strike, walk out, march and demonstrate” in favor of a new “feminism for the 99%, a grassroots, anti-capitalist feminism.” The anti-Trump convicted terrorist has also been invited to speak at a Jewish conference being held in Chicago from March 31 to April 2.
Jewish Voice for Peace is honored to feature deeply respected Palestinian organizer Rasmea Odeh at our upcoming National Membership Meeting. The meeting will be a critical place for 1,000 JVP members to craft strategies to resist the right-wing extremism emboldened by the leadership of President Trump and his mirror in Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and to build community for the long haul.
In both Israel and the U.S. the accusation of terrorism is used to stoke fear, dehumanize whole communities, and violently repress, incarcerate, bomb, deport, spy on, invade and occupy those communities and their homelands. Trump’s Muslim Ban comes out of the context of decades of this Islamophobic “war-on-terror” rhetoric which mirrors Israel’s decades of demonizing Palestinians.
We are eager to hear from Odeh, a feminist leader in the Palestinian and Arab-American community in Chicago, precisely because she has survived decades of Israeli and US government persecution and oppression, and also because she lives and breathes the essential work of community organizing–having spent her life as both a lawyer and organizer for the empowerment of Arab women.
American-Israeli Adena Mark registered her disgust with the “perversely” named JVP for inviting the murderer of two young Jewish students to speak at their conference.
Life Choices Women's Center
600 E. Altamonte Drive, Suite 1200
Altamonte Springs, FL 32701
Be a voice for the voiceless,
In the cause of all who are appointed to die.
Open your mouth, judge righteously,
And plead the cause of the poor and needy.
Tech Support in Relationships
The young woman who submitted the tech support message below (about her relationship with her husband) presumably did it as a joke.
Then she got a reply which was way too good to keep to herself.
The tech support people's love advice was hilarious and genius!
Dear Tech Support,
Last year I upgraded from Boyfriend 5.0 to Husband 1.0 and noticed a distinct slowdown in overall system performance, particularly in the flower and jewelry applications, which operated flawlessly under Boyfriend 5.0. In addition, Husband 1.0 uninstalled many other valuable programs, such as Romance 9.5 and Personal Attention 6.5, and then installed undesirable programs such as: NBA 5.0, NFL 3.0 and Golf Clubs 4.1.
Conversation 8.0 no longer runs and House cleaning 2.6 simply crashes the system. Please note that I have tried running Nagging 5.3 to fix these problems, but to no avail.
What can I do?
The response (that came weeks later out of the blue):
First keep in mind, Boyfriend 5.0 is an Entertainment Package, while Husband 1.0 is an operating system. Please enter command: I thought you loved me.html and try to download Tears 6.2. Do not forget to install the Guilt 3.0 update. If that application works as designed, Husband 1.0 should then automatically run the applications Jewelry 2.0 and Flowers 3.5.
However, remember, overuse of the above application can cause Husband 1.0 to default to Grumpy Silence 2.5, Happy Hour 7.0, or Beer 6.1. Please note that Beer 6.1 is a very bad program that will download the Farting and Snoring Loudly Beta version. Whatever you do, DO NOT, under any circumstances, install Mother-In-Law 1.0 as it runs a virus in the background that will eventually seize control of all your system resources.
In addition, please, do not attempt to re-install the Boyfriend 5.0 program. These are unsupported applications and will crash Husband 1.0. In summary, Husband 1.0 is a great program, but it does have limited memory and cannot learn new applications quickly. You might consider buying additional software to improve memory and performance. We recommend: Cooking 3.0.
For a easy self-defense use a long key. For those that live in The Villages it's usually your car key or mailbox key. Put the bulk of your keys in your palm and let the key stick out between your pointer and middle finger. Walk normally with it in your hand. Then if attacked you can use the stick to hit them in their weakest parts - eyes, cheeks, throat, and of course always, always hit them in the groin.
For a easy self-defense use a lollipop stick. Put the lollipop in your palm and let the stick stick out between your pointer and middle finger. Walk normally with it in your hand. Then if attacked you can use the stick to hit them in their weakest parts - eyes, cheeks, throat, and of course always, always hit them in the groin. When you walk down ANY street look for escape routes, between houses, in stores/restaurants, always know your surroundings. The bulk of women who get mugged are busy doing other things, talking on their cell phone/friends, dragging too many shopping bags around, not paying attention to their surroundings.
Remember that if you react to an attacker using a weapon of any kind be prepared to have it used on you.
by: Barb's Bulletins
Her Right to Know
Make an instant cultural impact:
Please watch and share Carrie's Story with your social media contacts today and let women know there are other (and better) choices than abortion?
What comes to mind when you hear the word "abortion"?
The one-million preborn babies who die each year in the U.S.?
The ongoing cultural debate between a preborn baby's right to life and his mother's right to end his life?
Or perhaps it's the abortion industry that makes money selling abortion to women who often feel desperate and out of options?
This month marks 41 years of legal abortion in the U.S.—a milestone worthy of sober reflection. During that time, the views of Americans on abortion have not moved toward its support (as some predicted); rather, views have held steady in opposition, even growing in disapproval. Still, an estimated one million women will subject their bodies—and the lives of their preborn babies—to abortion in the coming year.
For many women, abortion feels like their only choice. Surveys of women seeking abortion reveal their leading concern centers around a lack of support for her and her preborn child. The most frequently cited fears involve continuing the pregnancy while keeping her place in the workforce or at school and having sufficient financial and emotional support to raise a child.
An abortion also puts women at risk for emotional and physical complications—some even life threatening. Too often, women report they were not aware of the risks of abortion and discovered problems only after the fact. That's why providing women medically accurate information and access to ultrasound images of their preborn baby before an abortion decision is so critical.
Focus on the Family exists to herald the pro-life message, as well as to educate and equip Christians to impact the culture for Jesus Christ. In short, we want your biblical values to thrive! To that end, we've created a series of complimentary resources on this sensitive, yet important topic; resources including national statistics on abortion, information on how abortion impacts women, the status of important state laws and why the sanctity of human life is a foundational truth in the Christian faith.
We hope these resources will help you, as together we proclaim the value of life in our families and culture in 2014!
I think this is one of the neatest things I have ever read. To the women I'm sending this to: Thank you for being you.
God doesn't give you the people you want; He gives you the people you NEED... to help you, to hurt you, to leave you, to love you and to make you into the person you were meant to be.
One Flaw In Women
Women have strengths that amaze men...
They bare hardships and they carry burdens, but they hold happiness, love and joy.
They smile when they want to scream.
They sing when they want to cry.
They cry when they are happy and laugh when they are nervous.
They fight for what they believe in..
They stand up to injustice.
They don't take "no" for an answer when they believe there is a better solution.
They go without so their family can have.
They go to the doctor with a frightened friend.
They love unconditionally.
They cry when their children excel and cheer when their friends get awards.
They are happy when they hear about a birth or a wedding.
Their hearts break when a friend dies.
They grieve at the loss of a family member, yet they are strong when they think there is no strength left.
They know that a hug and a kiss can heal a broken heart.
Women come in all shapes, sizes and colors.
They'll drive, fly, walk, run or e-mail you to show how much they care about you.
The heart of a woman is what makes the world keep turning.
They bring joy, hope and love.
They have compassion and ideas.
They give moral support to their family and friends.
Women have vital things to say and everything to give..
HOWEVER, IF THERE IS ONE FLAW IN WOMEN,
IT IS THAT THEY FORGET THEIR WORTH.
Please pass this along to all your women friends and relatives to remind them just how amazing they are.
DNC LOSING WOMEN IN DROVES
Exclusive: Gina Loudon reveals why party's popularity with ladies has done an about-facePublished: 2 days ago GINA LOUDON
Debbie Wasserman Schultz must have seen the attention that the Ray Rice story was receiving and decided she wanted that attention for herself. She took to the airwaves to assert that Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has “given women the back of his hand.”
It isn’t the first time. A video emerged showing Wasserman Schultz making the same remark about Gov. Rick Scott just last month.
Even a spokesperson for the DNC said her comment was “dumb” – and she said it at least twice!
Fox News Channel host Neil Cavuto asked if accusing Republican governors of violence was going a bit too far. I would like to know if Wasserman Schultz can make an intellectual policy point, or if she is just going to go all Britney Spears and simply say, “Oops, I did it again …”
This is yet another example of how completely out of touch the DNC is with its message to women.
Get “What Women Really Want,” a call to women across this great land to wake up and take a stand against the cultural forces that are fighting tooth-and-nail to destroy their spirit and their families – at the WND Superstore!
Ann Marie Murrell, Morgan Brittany and I have spent the entire last year talking to women about what they really want from their government.
It comes down to essentially three things (though women are a bit complicated, so it took us a whole book to break it down):
1) National security – Real women want secure homes and families, and this is the polar opposite of what those in this administration have offered. Under the watch of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and others like Pelosi, Wasserman Schultz and Elizabeth Warren, women around the world are being serially raped, stoned to death and eradicated under Islam.
2) Economic security – Real women want job security. In the video, the Democrat strategist talked about women wanting “more government funding for rape and legal defense for victims.” The problem is that the Democrat machine has made all women victims, and most women strive for more. Women also balance checkbooks, and they know that no matter how many great causes are out there, you can’t give more until you pay your bills. This concept seems to be lost on the Democratic Party.
3) Real freedom – Pay parity is one the Democrats have successfully sold, but it does not match up with what women really want. A recent Forbes study says that more than 85 percent of women agree that they would like to be able to live on one income – something that 50 years of bra-burning feminism has destroyed in their union-hugging, equal-pay tirade.
The Democrats have lied to women for decades, and now that women realize that there is more to their political significance than free birth control and abortion on demand, those who have peddled those lies all this time are in a panic.
But don’t take my word for it. A recent Washington Post/ABC poll said that this administration’s popularity with women has done an exact about-face. Wasserman Schultz knows that, and that is why she is desperate to scare women back by any means necessary – even resorting to these low-brow, classless attacks.
Why isn’t she looking in her own backyard (politically speaking) for abuse of women (Filner, Spitzer, Weiner, Kennedy, Clinton, Clinton)?
John Hawkins of Right Wing News said we have a higher moral standard for the NFL than we do for our elected officials in Washington, D.C. He also said, “We love victims so much that people actually fake hate crimes to claim victim status.” That is by Democrat design. They trade victims for votes! And they will take ‘em anywhere they can get ‘em!
As we gear up for the culmination of the 2014 elections and launch into the 2016 campaign, I have a few questions for any Democrats who have the guts to respond:
1) Can you run a campaign that doesn’t focus on division through identity politics?
2) Can you talk about what is good about America, or just its faults?
3) Can you campaign without lying and treating your voting groups like useful idiots?
Even the DNC consultant, who in the Cavuto interview admitted that Wasserman Schultz’s comments were dumb, skewed birth-control statistics so desperately that she must think all women are dumb. She said that “98 percent of women are on birth control.”
That number is laughable on its face.
What about post-menopausal/sterilized women? Virgins? That group alone would prove her numbers in error. Planned Parenthood’s own numbers dispute her ridiculous claim. The CDC says the term “birth control” can mean things like “withdrawal” and “periodic abstinence,” which accounts for about one-fifth of all women reporting to use some form of birth control. DNC wakeup call: This does not mean that women are willing to sell their votes for $15/month in free birth control!
Democrat and independent women are reflecting on promises made before and jumping ship. Women will have to decide. Would they rather be empowered by true constitutional freedoms, and a party that trusts them with their own strengths, ability to compete and risk management via liberty? Or are they so lost in their Stockholm Syndrome that they will again be led like lambs to slaughter by a party that is all too happy to manipulate them and relegate them back victimhood status of (at best) walking uteruses, or (at worst) useful idiots?
Order Gina Loudon’s book, “Ladies and Gentlemen: Why the Survival of Our Republic Depends on the Revival of Honor” – how atheism, liberalism and radical feminism have harmed the nation.
Read more at
Ohio House Passes Bill to Ban All Abortions After an Unborn Baby’s Heartbeat Begins STATE
2nd Trimester Abortion Procedure | Dr. Anthony Levatino - Former Abortionist Turns Pro-Life
Published on Feb 24, 2016 In this video, Dr. Anthony Levatino describes how he used to perform 2nd Trimester abortions. He has performed over 1,200 abortions in his career. He doesn't do them anymore and is now pro-life.
1st Trimester Abortion Procedure Dr. Anthony Levatino - Former Abortionist Turns Pro-Life.
In this video, Dr. Anthony Levatino describes how a 1st Trimester Abortion works, using Abortion Pills. Dr. Levatino has performed over 1,200 abortions in his career. He doesn't do them anymore and is now pro-life.
Woman Becomes Pro-Life After Watching Gosnell Movie: “I Finally Understand the Horror of Abortion” NATIONAL MICAIAH BILGER OCT 22, 2018 | 5:36PM WASHINGTON, DC
A college student who watched the new “Gosnell” movie said she became pro-life because of the film.
Kathy Zhu, a student at the University of Central Florida, has a huge following on social media. She first entered the spotlight two years ago when she began questioning her liberal beliefs. Zhu said she used to be a Democrat and initially supported pro-abortion candidate Hillary Clinton, but she decided to support President Donald Trump after researching their positions on national security in depth, according to Fusion.
On Sunday, she promoted “Gosnell: The Trial of America’s Biggest Serial Killer” to her nearly 50,000 Twitter followers, saying it changed her perspective on abortion.
“Yesterday, I was pro-choice. I believed that women should have a say & the gov shouldn’t be interfering w/ our lives,” she wrote. “Today, I’m pro-life.”
“Gosnell,” which opened Oct. 12, follows the true story of Kermit Gosnell, a Philadelphia abortionist who murdered newborn babies and committed numerous other crimes inside his “house of horrors” abortion facility. It stars Dean Cain (“Lois & Clark”) and is directed by Nick Searcy (“The Shape of Water,” “Justified”). It broke into the top 10 films in its first weekend.
Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and the latest pro-life news.
Many said they felt encouraged by Zhu’s response.
At least one other person told Zhu that they also changed their mind after hearing about Gosnell.
In 2013, a jury convicted Gosnell of murdering three newborn babies and contributing to the death of a female patient, along with numerous other crimes. He was sentenced to three consecutive life terms in prison. The grand jury report indicates abortion activists ignored Gosnell, allowing his horrific business to continue for decades.
The film is rated PG-13. Hundreds of theaters across the U.S. are showing the film. For more details, visit gosnellmovie.com.
“Gosnell” Director Nick Searcy Slams Hollywood as Even More Theaters Stop Showing Movie NATIONAL STEVEN ERTELT OCT 24, 2018 | 10:30AM WASHINGTON, DC
Despite its strong performance on its opening weekend, where it ranked in the top 10 of all movies nationwide, theaters are now censoring the “Gosnell” movie profiling murderous abortionist Kermit Gosnell — who was sent to prison after killing babies in live-birth abortions.
Actor Dean Cain complained about how over 200 movie theaters stopped showing the moving — including theaters where it was performed well.
Now, “Gosnell” director Nick Searcy is upset with Hollywood as dozens more theaters have dropped the movie from their roster this week.
“This movie really exposes something that the Left does not want to report about,” Nick Searcy, the film’s director, told PJ Media in an interview Tuesday. “They’re basically trying to ignore this movie. They’re trying to say that it doesn’t exist because they don’t want to have a discussion about abortion.”
Here’s more from PJ Media about the 253 movie theaters total that have already abandoned “Gosnell:”
Searcy argued that abortion is tantamount to a “sacrament” on the Left, so any story that paints it in a bad light must be silenced. “Gosnell” tells the story of Kermit Gosnell, an abortionist in Philadelphia who was sentenced to life in prison for first degree murder of three babies he killed after birth and involuntary manslaughter of one of his patients. His disgusting clinic has been dubbed a “house of horror.”
Last week, the Daily Wire’s Paul Bois reported that 188 theaters had dropped the film in the first week since it opened. On Tuesday, the “Gosnell” team told PJ Media that number has climbed to 253.
“Gosnell” opened in 668 theaters on October 12, raking in more than $1.1 million, according to Box Office Mojo. On Friday October 19, it was only running in 480 theaters. On Tuesday, the team reported that 415 theaters are still screening the film.
John Sullivan, the film’s marketing director, told the Daily Wire “we’re in uncharted territories. … The fact that we’ve been dropped from theaters where the movie is the number 6 or number 9 movie is just something you don’t see.”
Sullivan recalled hearing that some theaters actively prevented customers from buying a ticket by declaring a screening “sold out” before capacity is reached.
“It’s hard not to believe it isn’t about the content of the movie,” he said.
The movie has already changed hearts and minds, with one woman’s tweet going viral after she admitted she became pro-life.
But when it comes to the censorship, actor Dean Cain is not happy about it.
“I have never experienced anything like this before, but perhaps it’s a sign of the times. So many folks have become so polarized these days here in the United States that they instantly demonize anyone with whom they have any disagreement. It happens on both sides, and I find it ridiculous,” he told LifeZette about the censorship.
The actor continued, “I contend that there are 10 percent on the far Right, and 10 percent on the far Left, and they are responsible for 90 percent of the noise. The remaining 80 percent of us live somewhere in the middle, and we should be promoting dialogue and understanding, not division and identity politics.”
“There’s no denying that this controversy is stemming from the film’s content,” Townhall reported. “Gosnell executives aren’t surprised by the move – especially after the up-hill battle they’ve faced producing and placing the film.”
Despite the censorship, the movie’s producers told LifeNews they remain upbeat and indicated the movie is performing well in the theaters that continue showing it.
“The Gosnell Movie is doing incredibly well despite attacks from all sides. Industry veterans say they have never seen such campaign by the establishment to shut down a successful movie but we’re happy to report that so far none of it is working,” they told LifeNews today.
“You might have seen some reports over the weekend that the film has been dropped from movie theaters despite over-performing. Yes that’s right – even though we have been attracting huge audiences – theaters have been removing us from their roster,” the said. “But it didn’t matter – we have had a great weekend. We are having sold out houses across the country. For the list of theaters please visit our website.”
They requested that pro-life people help the movie via social media.
U.S. Pro-lifers Respond to Ireland’s Abortion Referendum: “A Profound Tragedy for the Irish People and the Entire World”
May 26, 2018
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 26, 2018
CONTACT: Mallory Quigley
email@example.com | 202-223-8073SBA List Expresses Sorrow Over “Ireland’s Roe,” Encourages Pro-life Advocates Not to Give Up
Washington, D.C. – Today the national pro-life group Susan B. Anthony List (SBA List) released the following statement in response to the legalization of abortion in Ireland:
“The result of today’s referendum is a profound tragedy for the Irish people and the entire world,” said SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. “While other Western nations including the United States acquiesced to the extreme abortion lobby, Ireland has been a shining beacon of hope for its strong defense of unborn children and their mothers. Irish pro-life advocates have correctly warned that repealing legal protections for the unborn opens the door to abortion on demand, just as Roe v. Wade did in the United States, which has some of the world’s most permissive abortion laws. We are one of only seven nations that allow abortion for any reason up to the moment of birth. We had dearly hoped the children of Ireland would be spared a similar fate.
“While we are filled with sorrow at this outcome, we are impressed and inspired by the diverse coalition of grassroots pro-life activists who worked so hard to educate voters and save the Eighth Amendment. Their message of ‘Love Both’ resonated with millions of people worldwide. This is only the beginning and we encourage our counterparts in Ireland not to give up. As long as there is a vitally active pro-life movement fighting to protect mothers and save babies’ lives, we believe Ireland’s Roe will one day be overturned and its deep pro-life roots reflected in its laws once again.”
Susan B. Anthony List and its partner super PAC, Women Speak Out spent more than $18 million in the 2016 election cycle, visiting more than 1.1 million homes in battleground states to defeat Hillary Clinton and maintain a pro-life Senate. SBA List is dedicated to pursuing policies and electing candidates who will reduce and ultimately end abortion. To that end, SBA List emphasizes the education, promotion, mobilization, and election of pro-life women. SBA List is a network of more than 630,000 pro-life Americans nationwide.
KrisAnne Hall: Supreme Court Opinion on California Abortion Notice Law May Have Unintended Consequences
By KrisAnne Hall
June 28, 2018 at 3:58pm
Share on Facebook Tweet Email PrintIn a case titled NIFLA, et al. v. Becerra, the Supreme Court is asked to opine on whether Beccera’s injunction to stop enforcement of California’s FACT Act should be granted.
California’s FACT Act requires pro-life clinics to inform their clients on how and where to get abortions. This government-forced message, Beccera claimed, is unquestionably contrary to their practices and beliefs and is therefore a violation of their freedom of speech.
The Supreme Court rightly agreed with Beccera and granted the injunction and sends the case to the lower courts to finish its legal process.
This is truly a victory for freedom of speech and also for the unborn’s right to life; however, it may have some unintended consequences for pro-life supporters.
Justice Clarence Thomas wrotes in the majority opinion:
“Content-based regulations ‘target speech based on its communicative content.’ As a general matter, such laws ‘are presumptively unconstitutional and may be justified only if the government proves that they are narrowly tailored to serve compelling state interests.'”
Thomas remarks that California’s licensed notice is a content-based regulation of speech. And since this particular notice is forced upon clinics like Beccera’s, who are morally opposed to abortion, this particular notice only serves to “alte(r) the content of (their) speech.”
Justice Breyer, writing for the dissent, claims that the government has traditionally held the power to regulate speech through professional licensing and this case should be no different. However, Justice Thomas reasons that speech is not unprotected merely because it is uttered by “professionals,” therefore the California law cannot force pro-life clinics to include government-scripted instructions about abortion.
Breyer remarks in the dissent that this opinion, depending upon how it is applied, could have widespread ramifications on many laws currently in place requiring certain businesses to supply clients with government-scripted notices.
Many states have laws on the books that require abortion clinics, both public and private, to provide brochures on alternatives to abortion. Many states have laws forcing these abortion clinics to provide ultrasound services along with instruction about the developmental stages of the baby in the womb. These are also government-scripted notices forced upon these clinics contrary to their practices and beliefs.
If these abortion clinics were to challenge these laws forcing the pro-life message, under this precedent the high court would also have to overturn those pro-life message laws.
This judicial tit for tat is what happens when people use the force of government to promote personal messages. As Thomas so clearly points out in the majority opinion, the pro-abortion proponents could easily inform the women about its services “without burdening a speaker with unwanted speech,” most obviously through a public-information campaigns.
To be consistent in their opinions, the majority would have to say the same thing about government forced pro-life practices and messages. This means that both parties will have to use non-governmental methods to inform the public about their services rather than relying on the force of government to promote their message.
The irony is that the Supreme Court seems unanimous to a certain degree that freedom of speech deserves the highest level of protection; however, the life of an unborn child does not.
KrisAnne Hall is a national speaker and consultant on the Constitution, founder of Liberty First University, former Russian linguist for the U.S. Army, and former prosecutor for the State of Florida. She also practiced First Amendment law for a prominent national nonprofit law firm. KrisAnne now travels the country teaching the foundational principles of liberty and our constitutional republic. KrisAnne Hall is the author of six books on the Constitution and Bill of Rights and has an internationally popular radio presence. Her books and classes have been featured on C-SPAN TV. KrisAnne Hall can be found at www.KrisAnneHall.com.
Observations of an Irishman: Lessons from the abortion referrendum
JUNE 29, 2018
ARTUR WIDAK/AFP/GETTY IMAGES
A couple of weeks ago, the Irish people held a referendum to legalize abortion and unless you have been living under a rock, you know the abortion side won in a landslide gaining over 66 percent of the vote. Regardless of your feelings and opinions on abortion (I am an Irishman and I am proud to have voted to say all life matters and should be defended), there are several lessons we can learn from this referendum and specifically from the abortion side.
Winning the ArgumentToday's political climate around the world is all about winning elections and gaining power — based on no actual substance other than the "fact" we are better than the other party. America will experience this over the coming months where the discussion seems to be about whether there will be a blue wave or if the GOP will hold onto the House and Senate. But how many issues will actually be discussed regarding the future of the nation? Will the Constitution be discussed? Will liberty and what makes America different even be considered? Or will it be based merely on not letting the other side have power?
The sad truth about the Irish abortion referendum is that the result was never really in doubt and was always seen as more of a formality. The only questions were how many people would actually vote and the margin of victory. Why? Because whether they knew it or not, the abortion side followed the advice Margaret Thatcher gave several decades ago:
First you win the argument, then you win the vote.The proof of this is the exit poll conducted on the day when 75 percent of people said they always knew how they were going to vote.
Over the years, the people of Ireland (as in many parts of the world) have accepted abortion as part of our everyday lives. We think of abortion as a choice and we know life is filled with choices. Should I go out with my friends next Saturday night? Should I order dessert? Should I leave my job or not? Should I keep my baby or not?
The ironic part of those who are pro-choice is that so few realize their own double standard, as 99 percent of them love telling people how much money they are allowed to keep, what car they can drive, how fast they can drive it — dictating what they can buy and when they can buy it, deciding their employment terms, etc.
No Science, no Emotion The second successful step to acceptance of abortion was the complete removal of both science and emotion from the subject. If you read any literature about abortion, you will rarely (if ever) see the word baby. A baby is gorgeous, sweet, needs a name, requires lots of love and attention and is totally defenseless. The pro-choice side successfully changed it to a fetus, which is a group of cells that could turn into anything. Is a group of cells gorgeous or sweet, do you name it, and does it require any love?
The third step has been the successful creation of the narrative around abortion. It is a choice, it is the caring and compassionate choice for women — after all, it is her body and she can do whatever she wants with her body. If you dare disagree with this narrative, you are deemed anti-choice, a hater and oppressor of women.
Chosen IgnoranceThe last step to winning this argument has been chosen ignorance. Have you ever watched an abortion? Did you watch until the end or did you switch it off? Have you ever tried showing or explaining what happens during an abortion to people? If you have, how far did you get?
CredibilityThe second thing everyone can learn from the Irish referendum is how critical your credibility is in society. Ireland has historically been a Catholic country but over the last few decades that has been changing. It is easy to blame the media and the spread of secularism for this change. The truth is the Catholic Church is also directly responsible for losing its credibility to many people because of their own actions or inactions.
When priests do inhumane and barbaric things to young boys, when the Church covers that evil up, and never really comes out in the strongest possible terms to condemn those actions and fire each of those priests, how is it possible to have any credibility in society. Why would anyone ever listen to you?
Now, if you add in the media, which flat-out hate religion, and declining numbers of those who are actually Catholic, you find a perfect storm of why the Church has so little impact in Ireland today.
Impact of ChurchesOne of the biggest differences, historically, between the Church in America and the rest of the world has been the role of America's pulpits. When the Church is at its best, its pulpits are alive, filled with passion and inspiring a generation to be better. The American Revolution may have officially started in 1776, but the truth is it started 20, 30 or even 40 years prior with preachers on their pulpits spreading the laws of nature that were self-evident for all to see.
The sad truth is the pulpits in Ireland are either silent or are spreading modern-day talking points. I grew up a Catholic and I do not remember a time when they were alive. I grew up in a Church where the sermon was not judged by its content or topic, but rather by the length. I have seen first-hand people go crazy when a priest talks for more than 10 minutes during a sermon. I have seen first-hand people switch off during sermons and treat it as an opportunity to read the newsletter.
(Full disclosure, I have done this many times myself as I have sat through sermons explaining was Jesus was a socialist, how Israel is the problem and how global warming is going to kill us all. I even started a discussion a few years ago as I walked out of church on Christmas Day three words into a sermon. Those three words were "Jesus the Palestinian.")
Churches in Ireland have major problems with attendance. In the same exit poll I mentioned before, only 30 percent said they attended church every week, 14 percent once a month and 27 percent a couple of times a year. Of those questioned, 74 percent were Catholics.
PrinciplesSince the vote on abortion, there has been much analysis in Ireland about what this means, and a popular conclusion is that Ireland has filed for divorce from the Catholic Church. For many living in society today, they see life as a religious issue. It is not. Religion does not own life. It is not even a Left vs. Right issue. Life is a human issue.
In a world of partisan politics, life should be the one issue we can all come together on — that life has meaning and is valuable. Does it really matter if God, religion, Allah, logic or common sense got you to that point of view? Would it matter if someone said a rock told them that? No, because life is a self-evident truth — at least it used to be
ConclusionOur actions or inactions right now will determine the world we live in and the one we pass onto the next generation. I know many want to think this world is doomed and that freedom is dead. While true for nations like Ireland and Europe — we know nothing but the tyranny of man's law — that is not the case for America. The track record of America is making the impossible possible. America has the map that leads to success, we just need to follow it again. So what is that map?
It is through churches, families, communities and schools sharing the message that America's founders shared over 250 years ago based around the laws of nature and nature's God — and those principles are the same for everyone. While elections hold an important place in society, it is critical to focus our time on winning the argument explaining why America is different from the rest of the world — why it is exceptional, why it has prospered like no other nation in the history of the world and why simply leaving people alone and not taking their stuff is such a wonderful and simple idea.
We also must do everything we can to be people of good character and do nothing that can damage our credibility. This is true for everyone in society and not just those in power. We must understand that America's founders were ahead of their time and remember the principles they placed special emphasis on as they pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor as they signed the Declaration of Independence.
If we follow that roadmap, combined with the advancements of society including technology, we really can live in a society that enjoys more freedom than even America's founders could have envisioned.
Trump’s New Abortion Regulation Continues Jack Kemp’s Pro-Life Legacy
Posted: May 19, 2018 12:01 AM
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent the views of Townhall.com.
On Friday, President Trump’s Department of Health and Human Services announced it would be updating the Title X regulation framework to better enforce the letter of the law, which outlaws federal funding for abortion, and to ensure that federal family planning dollars do not go to facilities that perform abortion. This new framework is based largely on President Reagan’s similar Title X regulation in 1988, which was challenged in court but eventually upheld by the Supreme Court in Rust v. Sullivan.
However, up to now, the framework has never truly been enforced. President Clinton quickly ditched it as soon as he took office, allowing abortion providers to play a shell game which gave them access to federal funds. President George W. Bush, despite his supposed pro-life bonafides, allowed the illegality to continue. And President Obama actually worsened matters by stripping states of their ability to defund abortion providers, a radical move which Congress overturned last year.
But now, President Trump is returning to the Reagan playbook. The federal government will finally enforce the law as written and prevent federal funds from going directly to abortion providers -- instead, this money will go to family planning facilities that do not perform abortions. This is a significant moment for the pro-life movement.
The effort to prevent Title X family planning funds from going to abortion predates the 1988 Reagan regulation. It began with an amendment to a 1985 appropriations bill, introduced by Rep. Jack Kemp and Sen. Orrin Hatch, that outlined the policy Reagan would later use in his executive order to restrict these funds from going toward abortion.
Now, 33 years after he first introduced his amendment, Jack Kemp’s pro-life dream will finally be realized. Its fulfilment is another testament to the lasting impact that Kemp has had on the Republican Party.
Most people associate Kemp -- and rightly so -- with the Republican Party’s focus on cutting taxes as a way of spurring the economy, but his vision was much greater than this. The one consistent theme across all of Kemp’s proposed policies was prioritizing the real needs of working families. Kemp sought to cut taxes because he believed that high taxes were preventing these families from achieving prosperity. Kemp rarely, if ever, discussed tax policy in any context without referring to its effect on entrepreneurs and, more importantly, the lives of ordinary people -- particularly how it impacted the livelihood of families, including the additional work hours that robbed children of time with their parents.
Moving forward, the Republican Party needs to understand not only the great legislative legacy of Jack Kemp, but also the context in which he always placed these issues. Kemp was always a great spokesman for the fundamental unity that makes us all Americans. He saw the rights of every individual -- regardless of race, class, or state in life -- as critical, and fought to preserve those rights. He also realized that America’s greatness resides fundamentally in its families, and he fought to ensure every American’s rights were defended within the context of the family. Amid our present era’s political realignment, Kemp’s legacy as a defender of both individual rights and the importance of the family ought to be seen as a model for future Republican policymaking.
Donald Trump has brought back Kemp’s focus on ordinary Americans and mainstreamed it within the Republican Party. His newly announced Title X regulations reflect a strong respect for the importance of the individual and the position of defending life within that context. As the party enters into the 2018 midterms and moves forward toward the 2020 elections, the theme of the dignity of every human life and the importance of the family needs to be front and center. Jack Kemp was a towering figure in conservative politics in the 20th century. His ideas -- and his compassion for people -- are still very much needed today.
Is Abortion actually just Modern Child Sacrifice?
By Dr. Jerry Newcombe
March 8, 2018
Recently a crisis pregnancy center was visited by a church-going girl who was disappointed to find out she was pregnant. The center tried to help the girl, who was set to have twins—offering free medical care and services for her and her babies’ needs—so that she would choose life for her babies. But the problem was her due date. Rather than miss a cruise for which she had booked tickets, she chose to abort.
Not only are church-going women aborting their babies, there are abortionists today who call themselves “Christians.” How can that be? Eric Scheidler of the Pro-Life Action League is mobilizing prayer warriors to pray for three abortionists who claim to be Christians. One of those just spoke at Mississippi State University on March 1 in a speech called, “Abortion and the Christian Case for Choice.” (afanews.com, 3/2/18).
Anyone can claim to be a Christian, but that doesn’t make them so.
The thing about abortion is this: the ancient practice of child sacrifice has resumed in earnest with abortion on demand—only now it’s all hidden from our eyes. The babies are no longer sacrificed on the altars of the ancient gods Moloch and Baal. Instead, they are sacrificed on the altars of convenience or material benefits.
God said through Moses, “Now choose life, so that you and your children may live.”
In the ancient world, child sacrifice was common. For example, in what used to be Carthage (today’s Tunisia), in ancient cemeteries near pagan temples, archaeologists have unearthed bones of babies that were sacrificed. Before the Jewish conquest of the Promised Land, child sacrifice among the Canaanites was commonplace. The Halley Bible Handbook notes “Prophets of Baal and Ashtoreth were official murderers of little children.”
Perhaps the most notorious ancient god of the Ammonites was Moloch. The Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary says of Moloch that he was worshiped by means of child sacrifice in “gruesome orgies”: “At least in some places an image of the god was heated, and the bodies of the slain were placed in its arms.”
Moses specifically warned the Israelites against worshiping this demon: “Do not give any of your children to be sacrificed to Moloch, for you must not profane the name of your God. I am the Lord.”
But as the Old Testament records, the ancient Hebrews were often rebellious against God and His commands. We read in Psalm 106: “They worshiped their idols, which became a snare to them. They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to false gods. They shed innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, and the land was desecrated by their blood. They defiled themselves by what they did.”
One of the worst kings of Judah was Manasseh. In 2 Chronicles 6 we read, “He sacrificed his children in the fire in the Valley of Ben Hinnom, practiced divination and witchcraft, sought omens, and consulted mediums and spiritists. He did much evil in the eyes of the Lord, arousing his anger.”
There’s a link to these child sacrifices and hell. How so? Quoting again from The Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary says of the worship of Moloch: “its principle place of worship in and after Manasseh’s time was the valley of the son of Hinnom . . . a place of such ill repute that ‘Gehenna,’ i.e., ‘the valley of Hinnom’ became a type of hell.” When Jesus spoke of hell, the Greek word is Gehenna—as in the valley of Hinnom—the place of child sacrifice.
Children are a gift from the Lord. But some people would sacrifice their own children for their personal gods.
When I asked Eric Scheidler on my radio show about the parallel between ancient child sacrifice and modern abortion, he answered: “I think it’s extremely pleasing to the devil when an abortion takes place . . . This wickedness happens in the dark. The womb is an invisible place. We don’t see the abortion happening. Even those photographs we have [of aborted babies] are very rare. They are hard to come by. This is a hidden evil. It’s one that digs its roots so deeply in our society because it happens in secret, and so many people are complicit in it, and it gradually wears away people’s sensitivity.”
Thankfully, Christ offers His forgiveness—even for abortion. Many women who have aborted, many men who have forced their wives or daughters to abort, and many abortionists have repented and come to the Lord and have found forgiveness.
Meanwhile, let’s not kid ourselves that one can participate in performing abortions and at the same time walk in good faith with Jesus Christ, the Lord of life. Abortion is the American version of the ancient practice of child sacrifice. Moloch would be pleased.
Court Strikes Baltimore Forced Abortion Speech Law
Jan 5, 2018
Today, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a Baltimore City Ordinance seeking to impose notification requirements on unlicensed pregnancy centers. The ordinance compelled these pregnancy resource centers to post notices that conspicuously state in English and Spanish that they do not provide nor refer women for abortions or birth control services.
The Fourth Circuit found that the ordinance violates the free speech clause of the First Amendment. In contrast to decisions by the Ninth Circuit which validated a similar law in California, the Fourth Circuit found that the Baltimore ordinance was not commercial or professional speech. The court said, “The compelled speech at issue here raises particularly troubling First Amendment concerns. At bottom, the disclaimer portrays abortion as one among a menu of morally equivalent choices. While that may be the city’s view, it is not the center’s.”
The court also found that the ordinance represented an impermissible attempt by the City of Baltimore “to use compelled speech as a weapon to run its ideological foes into the ground,” which risks grave violation of the country's most cherished freedoms.
Similarly, Liberty Counsel represents three pro-life crisis pregnancy centers in Southern California, all of which offer women experiencing crisis pregnancies resources, counseling, advice and alternatives to abortion. The Supreme Court has agreed to hear National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA) v. Becerra, one of four cases brought by crisis pregnancy centers challenging the law as a violation of the First Amendment guarantees of free speech and free exercise of religion. The ruling on the NIFLA case will apply to the other pending cases.
Read the Press Release and join the conversation on Facebook!
Planned Parenthood Hired Fusion GPS to Create Fake Report
Nov 2, 2017
Fusion GPS, the group hired by the Clinton campaign (Hillary) and the Democratic National Committee to prepare the so-called Trump dossier, was also hired by Planned Parenthood to create a false report about the undercover videos produced by Sandra Merritt and David Daleiden of the Center for Medical Progress (CMP).
In the summer of 2015, CMP began releasing undercover videos exposing Planned Parenthood executives regarding the procurement of aborted baby body parts. Planned Parenthood hired Fusion GPS to conduct a “forensic analysis” to discredit the videos. Not surprisingly, the Fusion GPS report falsely declared that the videos had been edited and were fake, even though the “research” organization has no known qualifications in the field of forensic video analysis.
In contrast, the same videos were analyzed by Coalfire Systems, Inc., a company that does have credentials in the field of forensic video analysis and are experts in the field of information technology auditing. Their findings were diametrically opposite from the Fusion GPS report.
The Coalfire Systems analysis of the recorded media files revealed that “the video recordings are authentic and show no evidence of manipulation or editing. This conclusion is supported by the consistency of the video file date and time stamps, the video timecode, as well as the folder and file naming scheme. The uniformity between the footage from the cameras from the two investigators also support the evidence that the video recordings are authentic. These raw audio recordings support the completeness and authenticity of the raw video recordings since they depict the same events within the same duration as captured from the two separate video recorders.”
Read the Press Release and join the conversation on Facebook!
Planned Parenthood Enters Lawsuit To Launch Phase 2 Of Their Abortion Plan As Doctors Refuse
Posted by Anthony Cesario |
Sep 21, 2017
An abortion activist in Maine speaking to reporters about a lawsuit that was recently filed challenging a state law prohibiting everyone except doctors from performing abortions (pictured above).
The authoritarian left is determined to make it as easy as possible to end the life of a fetus, largely because they don’t think there’s anything wrong with killing helpless babies in the womb. They started by giving doctors legal permission to perform abortions. However, they recently realized that there aren’t enough qualified doctors willing to murder babies still in the womb in some states, and as a result, they’re now moving on to the second phase of their abortion plan, which involves giving midwives and nurses the same legal permission that doctors have to slaughter the unborn, using a lawsuit.
For example, in Maine, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit on behalf of Planned Parenthood of Northern New England earlier this week challenging a state law that prohibits everyone except doctors from performing abortions. They want the law to be changed to include midwives and nurses because they claim there’s no medical reason to justify preventing them from terminating a pregnancy.
Earlier this week, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit on behalf of Planned Parenthood of Northern New England challenging a state law that prohibits everyone except doctors from performing abortions.
Specifically, in their lawsuit, they stated, “Maine statutes single out abortion as the only form of healthcare that [advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs)] are expressly prohibited from providing. This restriction is both out of step with the State’s treatment of comparable health care services and medically unjustified.”
To clarify, they added, “despite the proven safety of abortion care and the proven ability of APRNs to provide such care safely and effectively, the State of Maine prohibits, under threat of criminal prosecution, anyone other than a licensed physician from providing abortion services. The State does not single out any other health care services beyond an APRN’s scope of practice—only abortion,” noting, “this restriction, which imposes severe burdens on women seeking abortions, violates federal constitutional guarantees of privacy and equal protection.”
Shortly after the lawsuit was filed, Planned Parenthood released a statement defending their decision to sue. “This law significantly restricts patient access to abortion services in Maine, and prevents some Maine women from receiving an abortion from their regular primary and gynecological care provider,” they explained.
“Today, while medication abortion is available via telemedicine in some cases, there are only three publicly accessible health centers in Maine where a woman can get an in-clinic abortion. If this medically unjustified restriction [in Maine law] is blocked, that number will increase to at least eighteen locations across this large, rural state,” they continued, noting, “some women living in northern Maine [currently] have to make a more than six-hour round-trip to Bangor for an abortion, even though there is a qualified, experienced [nurse-midwife or nurse practitioner] in their community ready to provide this care.”
While speaking with reporters, Amy Cookson, a Planned Parenthood spokeswoman, added, “since the Supreme Court ruled in ‘Whole Woman’s Health’ that laws restricting access to abortion must be grounded in protecting the health and safety of women, there’s now [a] precedent to challenge medically unnecessary abortion restrictions like Maine’s physician-only law.”
Amy Cookson, a Planned Parenthood spokeswoman, speaking with reporters about her support of the lawsuit against the state of Maine that was recently filed by the ACLU.
However, if the restrictions against nurses and midwives are lifted, then it’ll be easier for women to get an abortion, putting the lives of countless unborn people at risk. Because of this, numerous pro-life activists, like Teresa McCann-Tumidajski, the Executive Director of Maine Right to Life, which is an anti-abortion group, oppose the lawsuit.
“We are against violence inside and outside the womb. We don’t want to open up new avenues of access to abortion,” argued McCann-Tumidajski, who added that since abortion is an “elective procedure,” easy access isn’t necessary.
Conservatives must not allow abortion activists in Maine to make it possible for midwives and nurses to slaughter the unborn. This is because, if they’re successful in changing the law, the number of places where a woman could go to terminate her pregnancy would increase drastically, jeopardizing the potential lives of countless unborn humans.
Planned Parenthood Doctor Horrifies Authorities As They Learn Of 13-Year-Old
Posted by Anthony Cesario |
Aug 11, 2017
Just recently, members of the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts were horrified to learn that an abortion doctor in Kansas unwittingly performed an abortion on a 13-year-old girl. As a consequence, he lost his job and may lose his medical license.
According to reports, Allen Palmer, a well-known abortion doctor associated with Planned Parenthood, admitted to performing a first-trimester abortion on the teen, who was impregnated by her 19-year-old boyfriend, at a Planned Parenthood in Kansas while speaking to officials at a medical board hearing earlier this week. Palmer was at the hearing because Planned Parenthood self-reported him to the board for breaking a state law regarding abortions on girls under 14.
Allen Palmer, a well-known abortion doctor, broke a Kansas state law regarding abortions on girls under 14 when he provided a 13-year-old girl an abortion.
Although it is technically legal for a 13-year-old girl to get an abortion in the state of Kansas, there are strict laws about doing so. Specifically, in addition to receiving consent from the child’s parents, abortion facilities are required to submit tissue from the dead fetus to the state Bureau of Investigation if their patient is younger than 14. The purpose of the law is to provide authorities with as much information as possible for cases involving the sexual abuse of minors.
Palmer, however, failed to collect and submit the necessary tissue sample of the 13-year-old girl’s aborted baby. When Planned Parenthood found out about this, they fired him and turned him into officials on the state medical board, who promptly held a hearing to determine whether or not he should be stripped of his medical license.
During his hearing, Palmer claimed that he didn’t follow proper procedures because he didn’t know that the girl was only 13 and pleaded with the board to allow him to keep his license. “I’m telling you that I did not know and I would not have proceeded if I had known,” he testified, noting, “I’m as shocked and awed by this failure as anybody here, but they want to hang it on me, and maybe that’s the way it is.”
Douglas Milfeld, a Wichita physician who’s on the board, struggled to believe that Palmer didn’t know the girl’s age. “It never entered your mind [to ask the patient how old she was],” he asked.
Douglas Milfeld, a Wichita physician on the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts, struggled to believe that Palmer didn’t know the 13-year-old girl’s age at the time of the abortion.
“I really don’t ask them, because teenagers today, the way they dress, I can’t tell how old anybody is,’ retorted Palmer. “They go through counseling. They go through screening. I’m the last person in line for them,” he explained, noting, “if there’s a problem, the staff raised it to me or they notified me somehow.”
Palmer’s attorney, Tom Theis, insists that his client did nothing wrong by relying on other staff members. “It was not unreasonable for him to rely on staff,” he told the board during the hearing.
Interestingly, this is not the first time Palmer has broken the law. Back in 1979, a U.S. District Court in Missouri threw him in jail and gave him a fine after he pleaded guilty to filing a false corporate tax statement. Two years later, he was placed on probation. Instead of taking away his Missouri medical license, the judge suspended it for two years and ordered him to do community service at a local hospital.
Despite being a convicted criminal, which was supposed to prevent him from being licensed in Kansas, when he applied for a medical license back in 2008, the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts unanimously voted to issue him one. The board’s decision, however, was not extremely surprising. This is because, at the time, it was being led by then-Executive Director Larry Buening. Buening, who worked with former Governor Kathleen Sebelius, a well-known supporter of abortion, is considered by many to be extremely unethical. Shortly after the board voted to give Palmer a license, he was accused of corruption and forced to resign.
Given the many risks associated with abortion, negligent doctors like Palmer must not be tolerated. Hopefully, the board members do the right thing and revoke his medical license, which he shouldn’t have had to begin with.
Wednesday, 19 July 2017
Melinda Gates Commits $375 Million for Population Control, Abortion
Written by Dave Bohon
Melinda Gates (shown), the billionaire wife of Microsoft founder Bill Gates, announced at the recent Global Family Planning Summit in London that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation will funnel $375 million to population-control efforts over the next four years — a 60-percent increase above what the couple has so far given to the global abortion and contraception initiative, reports the U.K. women's magazine Marie Claire.
Pointing to President Trump's move early in his administration to cut off funding to health- and family-planning NGOs that include abortion in their “services,” Mrs. Gates told the assembled population-control bureaucrats that “this is a difficult political climate for family planning. I’m deeply troubled, as I’m sure you are, by the Trump administration’s proposed budget cuts.”
As reported by The New American, shortly after taking office in January, President Trump signed an executive order re-implementing President Reagan's 1984 Mexico City Policy that blocks U.S. taxpayer funding to groups that perform and promote abortions overseas (the policy had been rescinded by President Obama, and earlier by President Clinton).
Following up on that signature, on May 15 the Trump administration announced an expansion of that $600 million funding ban to encompass all U.S. international healthcare, which amounts to nearly $9 billion. “The administration said that under the expanded order, called officially the Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance plan, the same amount of funding would still be available globally, but would only go to groups that promise not to perform abortions as part of their 'family planning' strategies,” we reported.
Mrs. Gates said that her foundation's funding will be earmarked only for contraception and sex education, but, reported LifeNews.com, “the money also will indirectly fund abortions, too. The billionaire family already gives money to some of the largest abortion chains in the world, including Planned Parenthood and Marie Stopes International.” LifeNews went on to explain that “the fungibility of money makes it easier for pro-abortion organizations to provide abortion internationally. In other words, every dollar the Gates Foundation gives to Planned Parenthood for distributing birth control or building an abortion-friendly clinic frees up a dollar in Planned Parenthood’s budget to spend elsewhere.”
The Gates Foundation grant database reveals that, between 2009 through 2013, the foundation gave Planned Parenthood of America, the International Planned Parenthood Federation, and Planned Parenthood of Western Washington some $71 million. It also funded the British abortion conglomerate Marie Stopes International to the tune of $46.1 million in 2012.
While Mrs. Gates considers herself a practicing Catholic, her position on contraceptives and birth control put her squarely at odds with the Church. In comments earlier this year she called contraceptives “one of the greatest anti-poverty innovations the world has ever known.”
Additionally, she declared that “contraceptives empower women,” arguing that birth control increases economic productivity in developing countries by giving women more freedom to work, and also leads to smaller families so that parents can devote more time and resources to the children they “choose” to bring into this world.
Mrs. Gates has offered her own life as a testament to the “freeing” power of birth control. “It’s no accident that my three kids were born three years apart — or that I didn’t have my first child until I'd finished graduate school and devoted a decade to my career at Microsoft,” she wrote earlier this year in Fortune magazine. “My family, my career, my life as I know it are all the direct result of contraceptives. And now, I realize how lucky that makes me.”
In a recent BBC interview, Mrs. Gates said she felt “optimistic” that the Catholic Church would one day change its position on contraception for the sake of women in developing countries. “We work very extensively with the Catholic Church and I’ve had many discussions with them because we have a shared mission around social justice and anti-poverty,” she said. She added, “I think what this Pope sees is that if you’re going to lift people out of poverty, you have to do the right thing for women.”
But John Grabowski, a professor of moral theology and ethics at Catholic University of America, said that such a change is virtually impossible. “The Church’s teaching on opposing contraception isn’t a recent teaching, it’s not something made up by Pope Paul VI in 1968,” he told the Catholic News Agency, referencing the Pope's encyclical of nearly 50 years ago that clarified the Catholic Church's teaching on family planning and contraception.
Noting that the Church has addressed the issue on several occasions in recent history, Grabowski said that “this has been the teaching of the Church from its beginning, so the Church [including Pope Francis] can’t change constant, universal, authoritative teaching.”
Court Dismisses 14 of the 15 Counts Against Sandra Merritt
Jun 21, 2017
Today, the San Francisco Superior Court dismissed criminal counts 1-14 against Sandra “Susan” Merritt. The court ruled that counts 1-14 were legally insufficient. The state has the opportunity to amend if it can plead a more legally sufficient and specific complaint. The California’s Attorney General filed 15 criminal counts against Merritt, with counts 1-14 for each of the alleged interviews and count 15 for an alleged conspiracy. “This is a huge victory to have 14 criminal counts dismissed,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. “We will now turn our attention to dismissing the final count. Sandra Merritt did nothing wrong. The complaint by the California Attorney General is unprecedented and frankly will threaten every journalist who provides valuable information to the public. This final count will also fall,” said Staver.
Liberty Counsel argued that the criminal complaint for illegally recording supposedly “private” conversations (in restaurants, hotel lobbies and other public places) - the first ever filed against undercover journalists - was legally deficient for numerous reasons, not the least of which was the Attorney General’s decision to prosecute Merritt in secret proceedings, without identifying even the names of her accusers or purported “victims.” The complaint did not provide Merritt with the minimum notice required by the Constitution and California law as to what she supposedly did wrong, so that she can mount a proper and vigorous defense. The complaint was also vague and full of inconsistencies.
“Today we asked the San Francisco Superior Court to dismiss these outrageous and baseless charges against Sandra Merritt, and the court agreed to dismiss 14 of the 15 counts” said Horatio Mihet, Liberty Counsel's Vice President of Legal Affairs and Chief Litigation Counsel, who appeared with Sandra in court today. “Sandra did not break any law and the criminal complaint against her is legally deficient, vague and full of inconsistencies. No other citizen journalist or organization has ever been charged with a crime for undercover recordings,” said Mihet.
ESTABLISHMENT MEDIA HIDES TRUMP’S NEW POLICY TO STOP ‘GENITAL MUTILATION’ OF AMERICAN GIRLS
April 20, 2017 by Neil Munro
The establishment media is hiding the dramatic news that President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice has announced a national campaign to eradicate the imported practice of Female Genital Mutilation.By ignoring the imported FGM practice, the TV networks “are guilty of aiding and abetting violence against women out of a politically correct fueled fear of offending Muslims,” says an April 18 statement by the Media Research Center and ACT for America.
The federal government’s dramatic policy announcement was made April 13 when officials revealed they had charged a Muslim doctor for performing FGM on two American girls from Minnesota. The doctor and the two girls have immigrant parents from Muslim countries, where Islamic leaders endorse the peculiar institution to keep women subordinate to men. Officials also said they had found additional child victims in Michigan.
The establishment media has largely hidden the administration’s new pro-female policy and the shocking crime, which threatens or has already victimized more than 500,000 young American women whose parents are immigrants from countries where FGM is routine.
On April 13, the New York Times just posted a 637-word article on page A14 about a “Michigan doctor” without mentioning “Islam” or “Muslim.” The Washington Post merely ran a 760-word online article on April 13 about a “Detroit emergency room doctor,” and a four-paragraph AP report in the newspaper about a “Detroit-area doctor” on April 14. Neither article mentioned Islam.
TheHill ran a 221-word piece on April 13 about a “Detroit emergency room doctor” which hid the role of imported Islamic ideas. Politico’s website shows no mention of the Muslim doctor’s s name.
The Virginia-based Media Research Council slammed the TV networks on April 18 for ignoring the issue. “Since last Thursday, The New York Times, FoxNews.com, and CNN.com have all posted pieces online about the case and Fox News’ Tucker Carlson ran a segment about it on his show Friday. So far, the morning and evening news shows at the big three networks have been silent, and as of this morning so has CNN,” MRC reported Tuesday, April 18.
“The media’s moral compass is hopelessly broken,” said an April 18 joint statement from MRC President Brent Bozell and Brigitte Gabriel, founder of ACT for America, an anti-terror groups with a reported membership of 500,000 members.
We have the first case of the brutal practice of FGM in the United States, and the networks are AWOL. You would think an extremely brutal practice of violence against women would make TV headlines here at home, but you would be wrong.
Where is the outrage? The hypocrisy is staggering. The networks, which have for years championed the causes of left-wing feminists and women’s rights, are conspicuously silent on this case and their silence is deafening. This is real exploitation of young girls and the usual suspects who ought to care have little to say about this form of torture making its way to America. This practice is illegal and immoral. The networks have an ethical responsibility to report that it’s happening here at home. If they don’t, they are guilty of aiding and abetting violence against women out of a politically correct fueled fear of offending Muslims.
The progressives’ reluctance to name-and-shame Islam — despite copious evidence that Islam endorses and promotes the practice — comes as progressives try to block President Trump’s new immigration policies, which threaten to reduce the immigration of Islamic communities and political groups into the United States.
Also, progressive politicians and activists prefer to cooperate with Islamic governments overseas and with Islamic leaders domestically, instead of challenging Muslim government and communities to discard practices that violate Western-style rights. That preference is described at the website for Equality Now, which the New York Times describe as “an international women’s rights advocacy organization.” According to the group’s website:
Our formula for legal success is focusing on individual cases that are significant to a larger cause. Whether it is petitioning freedom for an Iranian woman sentenced to death by stoning or drawing awareness to the destruction of girls’ schools in Pakistan, Equality Now is on the forefront of the gender equality evolution.
Amid the news about the U.S. case, the group tried to reframe the imported Islamic practice as generic, non-political “child-abuse.” The group’s leader, Shelby Quast, declared that “we know that this is a child abuse issue, and we know that we need to start training our child protection folks better,” according to the New York Times.
“We need better information about exactly where they are,” Quast said about the doctors that perform back-room FGMs, without noting that they are found in Islamic communities around the United States. For example, the Detroit doctor, Jumana Nagarwala, was trained at Johns Hopkins but reportedly is the daughter of two Indian immigrants from the Bohra sect of Shia Muslims. An article in the Hindustan Times reported that the female clitoris is described as “‘’haraam ki boti’ or immoral lump of flesh” by advocates of FGM.
The newspaper said the two victims were from Minnesota and were delivered to the doctor by their immigrant Somali mothers. Various reports say that Somali Muslims practice an extreme form of this FGM practice, while most Muslim practitioners perform a milder version, with some Muslims merely cutting the female genital “hood” without damaging the clitoris.
Quast declined to provide comments to Breitbart News.
Left-wing Groups Attempt Censorship of UN Delegation
Mar 17, 2017
WASHINGTON, D.C. —After Lisa Correnti of the Center for Family and Human Rights and Grace Melton of the Heritage Foundation were appointed to the United States delegation for the United Nation’s Commission on the Status of Women, radical "LGBTQ" groups sent a letter to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson demanding they be removed because they do not support the extreme "LGBTQ" agenda. Incredibly, the Human Rights Campaign relies upon the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which recklessly labels any group that does not toe the LGBTQ line as a "hate group."
The SPLC has been warned about its false, defamatory, and dangerous labeling of people and groups as haters or hate groups merely because it disagrees with them over marriage or LGBTQ issues. In 2012, Floyd Corkins attempted to commit mass murder of staff with the Family Research Council. The FRC security guard was able to stop Corkins and was shot in the process. Corkins confessed to the FBI that he was motivated by the SPLC’s website and its so-called "hate map." Watch the chilling video here.
"The Center for Family and Human Rights and the Heritage Foundation are not hate groups. These organizations are both mainstream and thoughtful. Unlike the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Human Rights Campaign, they do not demean people with whom they disagree. To falsely label people with whom you disagree as 'haters' or 'hate groups' is irresponsible and dangerous," said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel "C-Fam and the Heritage Foundation will come to the table genuinely seeking the best for women across the world. They are better qualified than their detractors because they are not fettered by blind adherence to the LGBTQ talking-points," Staver concluded.
Liberty Counsel is an international nonprofit, litigation, education, and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family since 1989, by providing pro bono assistance and representation on these and related topics.
Voters will reward GOP for defunding Planned Parenthood
BY FRANK CANNON, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 01/10/17
© GettyHouse Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) set off a media firestorm last week by announcing that the reconciliation bill will include defunding Planned Parenthood and redirecting those dollars to better health care centers that do even more for women.
Headed into 2017, we knew that one of two things would be true about the Republican Party: Either they would learn the lesson that going on offense on abortion is a winning issue, or they would capitulate yet again to elite opinion and drive away their own voters.
The Speaker’s announcement is an encouraging sign that the GOP may be finished repeating the mistakes of the past.
The key test for Speaker Ryan and Congressional Republicans is whether or not they will succeed in finally defunding Planned Parenthood.
There is no question, given the reconciliation process, that Republicans have the necessary votes to get this done. The only thing — the one and only thing — that could prevent the House from passing this measure would be a weakness at the heart of GOP leaders in their commitment to life and to delivering on their election promises.
If the GOP fights through the elite backlash — which, as Trump has shown, can be done with great success — this can be a valuable winning issue for Republicans in 2018.
In December 2015, the polling institute at Roger Morris University asked voters whether they would support or oppose a plan by Republicans to shift Planned Parenthood’s taxpayer funding to community health centers that do not perform abortions.
Americans favored shifting health care funding away from abortion providers to community clinics by an impressive margin: 53.3 percent to 31.5 percent. Amazingly, few media outlets bothered to cover the poll, the first and only poll to accurately describe the GOP’s proposal.
Mainstream media outlets like CNN — who, by the way, I happen to hate — continue to report that the GOP plans to defund Planned Parenthood without mentioning that the money would be redirected to actual health care facilities that provide health care services for women.
This week, the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List released the results of a poll, conducted by Kellyanne Conway’s respected polling firm, of 1,650 voters in the 2018 Senate battleground states North Dakota, Montana, Ohio, Missouri, Wisconsin, and Florida.
The results were stunning. A majority of these voters opposed Congress giving dollars to Planned Parenthood over other comprehensive health care providers.
Fifty-six percent opposed taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood (with 47 percent “strongly” opposing) while 60 percent said they would be “less likely” to vote for their Senator if he or she voted to give money to the nation’s largest abortion provider instead of Community Health Centers (with 44 percent saying they would be “much less likely”).
Opposition to taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood is particularly high in pro-Trump states with incumbent Democrat Senators facing re-election:
It also makes political sense for Republicans to defund Planned Parenthood. In 2016, Planned Parenthood spent $30 million trying to elect Hillary Clinton. For years, Planned Parenthood has aggressively allied itself with the Democratic Party, spending millions of dollars in campaign advertising to elect politicians who will, in return, give them hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funding. Defunding the Left should be common sense for Republicans.
But in the more immediate and narrower political sense, GOP leaders need to understand that this represents a tremendous opportunity to build bigger majorities in the 2018 election cycle. Democrats running in Trump-friendly territory are the great bulk of senators up for re-election.
Positioning them on the side of preserving abortion funding, at the expense of providing funding for real women’s health care, is a net political loss for them, but that only matters if Republicans grow a backbone and fight through the inevitable media backlash.
CNN pundits don’t really matter. Voters do. Kudos to Speaker Ryan for figuring this out.
Frank Cannon is the president of American Principles Project, a non-profit dedicated to educating and advocating for public policy solutions that recognize the dignity of the person as the basis of the founding principles of the United States, and serves as a political strategist for the Susan B. Anthony List. He is the co-author of the 2012 Republican autopsy report“Building a Winning GOP Coalition: The Lessons of 2012″ and has worked in the public policy arena for over 30 years.
LOOK AT WHAT PLANNED PARENTHOOD HAS ‘ACHIEVED’ IN 100 YEARS
October 16, 2016 by Rachel Stoltzfoos
In the 100 years since its founding, Planned Parenthood has grown from one small birth control clinic in Brooklyn to a well-oiled abortion machine operating 650 clinics across all 50 states.
On the subject of abortion, Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger wrote: “The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” She was elaborating a point in a chapter of her 1920 book titled “The Wickedness of Creating Large Families.” Although Planned Parenthood tries to downplay its whopping abortion figures, there’s no doubt the organization has done its founder proud.
Planned Parenthood abortionists have pulled apart, crushed, or chemically ended the lives of at least 4,481,195 unborn babies since 1999, according to its own annual reports available online. And Jim Sedlak at American Life League puts the sum total at nearly 7 million based on his review of earlier reports.
On the other hand, Planned Parenthood reports staff referred women to adoption services just 33,532 times since 1999. That’s about 133 lifeless fetuses for every adoption referral
By Sedlak’s count, Planned Parenthood aborted 100 unborn babies in 1970, when New York became the first state to legalize abortion through 24 weeks, and within twenty years, that annual number was well over 100,000. In 2014, Planned Parenthood staff aborted 327,653 unborn babies....(Read More...)
China’s Population-Control Machine Reaches Disastrous Proportions
Human-rights activist Reggie Littlejohn discusses the latest developments in the country’s assault on its own children.
by EDWARD PENTIN 05/23/2016
ROME — Despite the implementation in China of a two-child — rather than one-child — policy at the beginning of the year, forced abortions, mostly of baby girls, will continue on an enormous scale. This is according to Reggie Littlejohn, founder and director of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers. On a visit to Rome this month, she sat down with the Register to discuss the latest on the Chinese government’s population-control policy.
She also explains how her organization’s “Save a Girl” campaign has saved many lives and how International Planned Parenthood Federation is working “hand in hand” with China’s population-control machine. Littlejohn was in Rome to attend the annual Rome Life Forum, a gathering of pro-life leaders from around the world.
You’ve said the statistics on forced abortion in China are much higher than initially thought. Could you explain how much higher?
The U.S. Department of State issued its annual human-rights report last month, and the China report stated that China aborts more than 13 million a year — a figure the Chinese Communist Party has been officially reporting as the number of abortions. It’s just an astonishing number. They have four times the population of the United States, and we have a million abortions a year. They’ve been recording 13.
But actually, it’s 10 million higher — it’s almost double. There was an official statement in the news media that the 13 million abortions were only those occurring in official Chinese clinics and hospitals. It did not include another 10 million abortions that were occurring in unofficial clinics, so actually, it’s 23 million a year. So they have four times the population of the United States and 23 times the number of abortions. That amounts to about 63,000 abortions a day, about 2,600 an hour, 43 a minute. So for every breath you take, a baby’s being aborted in China.
And this is because of the enforced one- (now two-) child policy?
Yes, and this is the thing: The report of the State Department ends on Dec. 31. It’s a 2015 report; the two-child policy started on Jan. 1. So this was not reporting what the two-child policy was reporting in the last year of the so-called one-child policy. But the one-child policy had so many exceptions that a third of the country was already under a two-child policy anyway. Even under the two-child policy, in the areas that had a two-child policy, there was forced and sex-selective abortion. So under the two-child policy, the entire infrastructure of coercion remains intact.
All couples in China are now allowed to have two children, which means you have to be part of a couple. Unmarried women are still not allowed to have children; it’s still illegal to have a baby in China if you’re not married, so more than half of the abortions in China, according to the Chinese Communist Party, are of unmarried women — and those are forced abortions. They’re forced because it’s illegal. You’re not even given the option of paying a fine; you have to have an abortion. And then third babies are still aborted.
For example, the activist Chen Guangcheng put it most succinctly when he tweeted about the two-child policy, saying: “This is nothing to celebrate; they used to kill every baby after one. Now they kill every baby after two.” So forced abortion and sex-selective abortion continue.
You have a program to save girls. Can you tell us more about that?
We have a “Save a Girl” campaign through which we’ve saved hundreds of baby girls in China. The vast majority of the girls we’ve saved are second daughters. In the countryside, in the past, when there was a one-child policy, if your first child was a boy, you could have more than one child; if your first child was a girl, you could have a second child — but what we’re finding is that those second children, if daughters, are being routinely aborted and abandoned. And that’s when we go to people’s doors and say, “Please do not abort or abandon your daughter; she’s a precious child, and she’ll bring you much joy — and we’ll give you monthly support to empower you to keep your daughter.”
We’ve saved hundreds of babies that way. Well, the same thing is going to happen under a universal two-child policy, because when the first child is a girl, those second daughters are still at very high risk of abortion, because people will want to have boys.
That’s pretty much inevitable?
Well, when the third comes, it’s going to be forced abortion, unless you’re extremely wealthy and can afford to pay a fine, which could be 10 times your annual salary.
Is there any sign they’re going to let up or show any kind of mercy to their own people?
There’s no such thing as mercy under the Chinese Communist Party. What there is is: They’re being very practical. They’re moving from a one-child policy to a universal two-child policy because they don’t have enough young people to support their ageing population and because of the gender imbalance which they’re trying to rectify through this two-child policy. But I don’t think the sex ratio at birth is going to change much. So they could move to a three-child policy.
But that’s unlikely to happen?
No, it could happen. I predicted the two-child policy was going to happen and went on record to say I think we’re going to very soon have a two-child policy; and actually, a week before it was going to happen, I said we’re going to have a two-child policy.
You see, the point at the center of these policies is coercion. It’s not about the number of kids allowed; it’s the fact that they’re setting a number and enforcing it with forced abortion and forced sterilization. So, like in my village, where we have the “Save a Girl” campaign, women are routinely sterilized after the second child. What happens with a universal two-child policy? Women don’t want to be sterilized because they’re butchered. Sterilizations aren’t carried out by well-trained gynecological surgeons: They’re under-trained people without antiseptic, and people end up with massive infections and horrible complications.
In many villages, they don’t have running water; it’s a woman’s job to pump water out of an aquifer, and it takes a lot of strength. So before women have a sterilization, they are usually pumping multiple bottles of water, however much they need, and then once they’re sterilized, they’re incapacitated; and at most, they can pump one bucket of water, which is catastrophic for their family. So if they’re going to have a boy, I think they’re going to stop there and not have a second child because they don’t want to be sterilized after a second child. If they’re going to have a girl, and they’re pregnant again, if it’s another girl, they’re going to abort or abandon her — because they’re “saving” that second child for a boy. … Maybe they’d be willing to be sterilized for a boy, but they’re certainly not going to be sterilized for a second daughter.
Do you see any hope that this system will start crumbling anytime soon?
No, I actually testified before Congress in April last year saying I don’t believe the Chinese Communist Party will ever relinquish coercive population control. And I said then I think we’re going to see them move to a two-child policy. But they’re not going to relinquish the control.
Just like that they won’t relinquish control of the Church, as a means of controlling the population?
I think, in the beginning, when they instituted the one-child policy, the purpose of the policy was population control, and the terror they instilled because of late-term forced abortion was just a by-product. Now, terror is the purpose of the policy. And they want to keep that grip because even under a two-child policy, they still want to monitor people’s menstrual cycles, carry out pregnancy checks. The whole infrastructure of coercion and control of women is intact. A woman’s womb is in the domain of the state.
Are there any loopholes? Could a mother have her baby in a clandestine way?
Yes, there are loopholes. For example, we have a number of babies who are born clandestinely because they’re officially illegal. And what can happen under the two-child policy? You have a daughter officially for your first child, and then you get pregnant with your second child; and she’s a girl, and you want to abort or abandon her. We go to her and say, “Please don’t do this.” And then what can happen is she can have this baby clandestinely.
The Chinese government gives two “hukous” per family. A hukou is household registration [officially identifies a person as a resident of an area and includes identifying information such as name, parents, spouse, and date of birth. They can also be issued per family, and usually include the births, deaths, marriages, divorces, and moves, of all members in the family]. What it does is the child won’t be entitled to health care, will not be entitled to education, will have no official existence, cannot officially work, marry, have a passport or officially travel. They are non-persons in their country What will happen with that second daughter is that they’ll have her secretly, and she will not get hukou, so they can try for a third child; and if he’s a boy, they’ll be able to get that hukou because they will save the hukou for the boy. So some of our girls are unregistered, but at least they’re alive.
My hope is that the hukou system will pass away, and then those girls will become legal, but we’re just trying to save their lives and, meanwhile, attack the hukou system.
You’ve also mentioned a connection between the Chinese government and International Planned Parenthood.
Yes, we’ve sent out a statement on International Planned Parenthood’s connection with all of this. IPP has been working hand in hand with the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese Family Planning Association ever since the beginning of the one-child policy and has given them awards, etc. … So the fact we are funding IPP [through tax dollars], in some sense, makes us complicit in all of this.
Edward Pentin is the Register’s Rome correspondent.
“Eu-Meh,” saved from sex-selective abortion by WRWF’s “Save a Girl” Campaign
This Mother's Day, let us remember the mothers in China who are not as fortunate as we, who are indeed suffering greatly because of the forced abortion of illegal pregnancies, and also the intense pressure to abort or abandon baby girls, especially second daughters. The United States Congress recently held a hearing on PRENDA, the Pre-Natal Non-Discrimination Act, designed to protect girls from sex-selective abortion in the United States. Reggie Littlejohn submitted the following Statement to be included in the Congressional Record:
According to a U.N. expert, up to 200 million women are missing in the world today due to gendercide, sex-selective abortion. This number is greater than all the casualties of all the wars of the twentieth century combined. This is the true “war on women.”
Sex-selective abortion is the ultimate violence against females. Aborting a baby just because she is a girl is the ultimate act of gender discrimination. It says that females are so worthless we don’t deserve to be born, to draw breath on this earth. Can we credibly say that we stand for women’s rights without standing against the sex-selective abortion of future women?
Sex-selective abortion is strongly related to forced abortion. Some say sex-selective abortion is protected by a woman’s right to choose to terminate a pregnancy for any reason. This view ignores the crushing social, economic, political and personal pressures that trample women carrying girls in cultures with a strong son preference. All too often, women in these cultures do not choose to abort their daughters. They are forced. MORE. YES, I WANT TO HELP END GENDERCIDE AND FORCED ABORTION IN CHINA!
Your donation enables Women’s Rights Without Frontiers to continue to be a voice for the voiceless women and children of China. This huge effort comes at a cost. We need your support. Please give as generously as you can. Every donation makes a difference!
Forced Abortion is Not A Choice
Jan 20, 2016 Presentation by
Reggie Littlejohn, President
Women's Right without Frontiers
A Coalition to Combat Forced Abortion and Sexual Slavery in China
57,762,169 Abortions in America Since Roe vs. Wade in 1973
NATIONAL STEVEN ERTELT JAN 21, 2015 | 4:23PM WASHINGTON, DC
The United States marks 42 years of legalized abortion in all fifty states at any time for any reason throughout pregnancy on January 22nd, the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision.Since that time, there have been approximately 57,762,169 abortions that have destroyed the lives of unborn children.
WWII - Women landing on the beach
Two Sickening Charts Show Explosive Growth Of Fetal Tissue Buyer
4:02 PM 04/30/2016
Cate Dyer founded a fetal tissue procurement company in 2010 with $10,000, hoping to contract with abortion clinics to purchase their aborted fetuses and distribute the parts to medical researchers. Six years later, she had successfully partnered with more than 250 clinics to bring in millions of dollars of revenue.
Two charts released by the House Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives illustrate the explosive growth of Dyer’s for profit company. The panel is investigating the fetal tissue industry after a series of videos released last year exposed Planned Parenthood’s dealings in fetal parts with buyers such as StemExpress.
The first chart shows the number of abortion clinics StemExpress worked with to secure the parts of aborted fetuses. (RELATED: Here’s What A Typical Day Of Fetal Harvesting Looks Like)
(House Select Investigative Panel)
In 2012 StemExpress worked with a few dozen clinics. Two years later that number was between 50 and 100, and then in 2016 the number of partnerships more than doubled to 250.
The second chart shows the revenue grow from a few hundred thousand dollars in 2011 to about $4.5 million in 2014. StemExpress made a list of the 50 fastest-growing private companies led by women in America in 2014 for its impressive three-year growth rate.
(House Select Investigative Panel)
The House panel released a slew of documents detailing how the fetal parts, such as a brain or nose or liver, get from the mother’s womb to medical researchers across the world. Included is a screenshot of an order form researchers can use to place an online request for specific types of parts or tissue. StemExpress then uses its network of clinics to match the orders with women carrying the ideal type of fetus and works to obtain consent from those women to harvest and distribute the parts of their unborn baby.
In undercover footage released by The Center for Medical Progress last year, Dyer discusses the profitability of the partnerships for abortion clinics with someone posing as a potential fetal tissue buyer.
“You feel like there’s clinics out there that have been burned?” Dyer asks. “That feel like they’re doing all this work for research, and it hasn’t been profitable for them?”
“No, I don’t,” the undercover actor posing as a buyer replies.
“Oh okay good,” Dyer says. “Yeah, I was going to say, I don’t see that either.”
It’s a felony to receive “valuable consideration” for aborted baby parts, but it is legal to receive “reasonable payments” for costs associated with the exchange. CMP alleges Planned Parenthood is illegally profiting off of its partnerships with fetal tissue procurement companies. StemExpress cut ties with Planned Parenthood after the videos surfaced.
Follow Rachel on Twitter
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
Women on the Wall
Join the #CanISee Movement
~Women On the Wall Conference Call~Wednesday Night Conference 8:30 pm CST
Florida Becomes the 12th State To De-fund Planned Parenthood
TALLAHASSEE, FL – Today, Gov. Rick Scott signed HB 1411 into law, which significantly cuts taxpayer funding to all abortion clinics in the state of Florida, including Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in America. Florida is now the 12th state to defund Planned Parenthood from accessing state taxpayer dollars after Alabama, Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and Wisconsin.
All of these states have restricted Planned Parenthood from receiving state taxpayer funds since the historic work of David Daleiden who exposed Planned Parenthood this past summer with an extensive undercover sting operation showing the organization negotiating the sale of babies’ body parts, and engaging in other fraud, waste and illegal activity.
The funds currently being sent to Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers in Florida for legitimate woman’s health care, will now be available to hundreds of low-cost federally qualified community health clinics in the state that can provide a more comprehensive and geographically accessible range of women’s health services.
Florida Family Policy Council (FFPC) has been conducting a sustained campaign since October 2015 urging Governor Scott to use his appropriate executive authority to terminate all state contracts with the abortion giant Planned Parenthood. In spite of receiving tens of thousands of communications from Florida voters, the governor has refused to do so, until now providing a variety of excuses, mainly claiming that he could not take action due to federal law. The FFPC publicly refuted his arguments and excuses, insisting the Governor had the legal authority and moral duty to terminate contracts with Planned Parenthood, just as other governors around the country had done.
Since the time the legislature passed the bill HB 1411, Planned Parenthood has run a major ad campaign trying to block the bill's final approval. Part of this effort involved deliberate misrepresentations that the bill required "dentists" to provide women's health care. Articles making this false argument appeared nationally on MSNBC and even in the British Newspaper the Guardian. FFPC set the record straight with a letter sent to Governor Scott regarding the facts of the hundreds of other health care providers that can perform the women's health services instead of abortion providers.
FFPC President John Stemberger issued the following statement regarding the Governor’s signature of HB 1411:
“This is a historic victory and we are thrilled to have been an active part of this effort. We are so grateful to the Republican leadership in the Florida House and Florida Senate for making this happen. They collectively did what the Governor failed to do, namely, provided leadership on this critical issue and made it happen. We are nonetheless pleased that Governor Scott did follow the Florida Legislature’s lead in this matter and signed this important bill into law. The real heroes in this victory are Senator Kelli Stargel(R) and Representative Colleen Burton (R) both of Lakeland. These women are to be commended for their courage and conviction, leading on this issue which voters have been concerned about for decades. Finally, we applaud Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) for their legal expertise and research without which this victory may not have taken place.”
Specifically, the newly signed law:
# # #
CONTACT : Nandi Randolph
Florida Family Policy Council
HACKTIVISTS: ISIS RECRUITERS IN U.S., HUNTING TEEN GIRLS'
They asked her to blow up a major place in her town' and sent 'bomb instructions'
Published: 7 hours ago
ISIS recruiters inside and outside of the U.S. are hunting young American teenagers – mostly non-Muslim girls between 13 and 15 – and trying to convince them to conduct terror attacks on the nation, warns a “hacktivist” group.
BinarySec, a group of self-described “hacktivists, activists, security analysts and outlaws” seeking to eradicate ISIS material from the Internet, says the young teens are requesting help as soon as they realize their lives are at risk.
WND reported in 2014 when ISIS terrorists recruited women from Western countries to fly to the Middle East, marry jihadists and bear their children in a “cash-for-babies” scheme.
Now, BinarySec tells PJ Media the recruiters are using photos of babies or kittens to lure their targets.
“The most disturbing thing, other than the usual gore videos, is the targeting of young teen girls,” BinarySec operative AnonyMissy told PJ Media. “The number of 13 to 15-year-old American non-Muslim girls being targeted for recruitment has gone way up.”
She continued, “I used to have one girl every three weeks or so contact me in a panic when she realizes she’s in over her head; now it’s every week. They seek out the lonely. Invite them to Skype chat. The recruiters are men and women.”
PJ Media also interviewed Binary, the founder and main coder of BinarySec, who said the group has “intel to believe there are recruiters on U.S. soil,” although the majority are “overseas.”
“I’ve seen [the girls] recruited to launch attacks on U.S. soil. I’ve seen them recruited for marriage purposes and even sex slave purposes,” Binary told the site. “ISIS members, when targeting out a female, seek the lonely. They start by sending them little cutesy type of stuff, like messages.”
AnonyMissy said the ISIS recruiters use “very subtle” tactics in the initial stages of contact.
“Depends on the girl, by the time she realizes after a month or so that she has been brought into an ISIS group, she’s been befriended by women and bonds of trust have been built, she has isolated herself from her ‘infidel’ friends and family,” she explained. “Lonely teen girls seeking acceptance, they are easy targets.
“Once they realize it’s real, and in exchange for all of that attention, they need to travel or steal – or worse – they end up in my [Twitter direct message] asking for advice.”
Binary told PJ Media that the girls soon adopt the gang mentality of having a family, and if they try to leave the situation, it can be dangerous.
“The ISIS members start making threats, even death threats.”
Binary added, “I’ve had a girl who told me they asked her to blow up a major place in her town, which I won’t specify for her safety. And they even forwarded her bomb instructions.”
When the girls suddenly realize they’re in trouble, ISIS jihadis know everything about them.
“I’m usually contacted after they cannot get rid of the recruiters,” AnonyMissy explained. “I would be very interested to see how many missing or ‘runaway’ teen girls were chatting, knowingly or not, with ISIS recruiters before they disappeared. And does anyone even know to look?
“… I’ve mostly been told about them being taught to steal to get money to travel. Beyond that, because they are children, I put them in touch with law enforcement to protect them.”
As WND reported, some Western women are recruited through a magazine called al-Shamikha, known as the “Jihad Cosmo.”
“They are selling them this mystical sisterhood of going to the caliphate and being able to be a Muslim in this idealized, utopian society,” warned Mia Bloom, a professor at the center for terrorism and security studies at the University of Massachusetts. “They are targeting these young girls in a very predatory way – the way child sex abusers target young children.”
Bloom said female recruits are promised moving expenses and cash for each baby they produce with an ISIS jihadi. But the women are banned from fighting and typically serve the militants, cooking and cleaning for them.
Bloom also expressed concern that ISIS will use the women as suicide bombers.
She said, while most women would stand out on a military installation, in most other public places, people wouldn’t expect a woman to carry out a suicide attack.
“If you change your tactics and target mosques or schools, that’s when women are really quite ideal,” she explained.
Read more at
Follow your baby's development from a tiny mass of cells through to a fully developed baby. Our illustrations show how your baby is growing inside your uterus, while our Inside pregnancy videos take a 3D animated look at a baby from conception to labour and birth. And see the whole nine months in one timeline!