VIDEO Abortion And Sex-Trafficking Are Undeniably Linked Abuses Against Women

Abortion and sex trafficking have more in common than many people realize. Both exploit women, and both are an affront to human dignity.

Abortion And Sex-Trafficking Are Undeniably Linked Abuses Against Women

January is both Human Trafficking Awareness Month and Sanctity of Human Life Month. These issues have more in common than people may realize. Across numerous global studies of sex-trafficking survivors, abortion is a consistent part of the story. Both abortion and sex-trafficking are businesses that exploit women, sometimes in tandem as organizations such as Planned Parenthood enable the abuse for profit. And both are an affront to human dignity.

Pimps Use Abortion to Maximize Profits

The risk of pregnancy is part of the sex-trafficking industry. Pimps and sex-traffickers are most concerned with profits, so when their victims become pregnant, they often force or pressure them to abort so they can put them right back onto the streets.

It is not unusual for females to be traffickers and to oversee a harem of victims, including taking them to get abortions, according to a 2014 documentary featuring testimony from sex-trafficking survivors. On the other hand, male pimps will sometimes impregnate their victims to keep them under control.

Research shows that, as a whole, women who abort undergo some form of coercion and even violence. In a recent study of women’s abortion experiences, 58.3 percent reported aborting to make others happy, and 73.8 percent said their decision to abort was not free from outside pressure. Homicide due to intimate partner violence is a leading cause of death during pregnancy. Imagine how much greater the coercive pressure to abort is on women who are being sexually exploited for profit.

One sex-trafficking survivor described her experience:

Over the years I had pimps and customers who hit me, punched me, kicked me, beat me, slashed me with a razor. I had forced unprotected sex and got pregnant three times and had two abortions at [a clinic]. Afterward, I was back out on the street again.

Abortion Data Among Trafficking Victims Is Shocking

A ground-breaking study by the Beazley Institute found 66 human-trafficking survivors had a total of 114 abortions — 114 abortions among 66 women. Let that sink in.

While only half of these women specified whether their abortions were voluntary or forced, of those who answered, a majority indicated that coercion played a role in at least one of their abortions. One survivor who endured six abortions recounted, “I was under serious pressure from my pimps to abort the babies.”

Two-thirds of trafficking survivors in the Beazley study had their abortions in clinics; nearly 30 percent said they went to Planned Parenthood. One survivor described her situation:

I got pregnant six times and had six abortions during this time. Several of them were from a doctor who was a client — he did them backdoor. … At least one of my abortions was from Planned Parenthood because they didn’t ask any questions. … You went backdoor where the charge was more like $150.

Several undercover investigations have documented Planned Parenthood’s failure to report rape, as well as its aiding and abetting of sex-trafficking. Planned Parenthood engages in this behavior unchecked, even as its latest financial report reveals a revenue of $1.6 billion.

Traffickers and Abortionists Profit from Human Suffering

Human-trafficking is a $150 billion per year global industry, the second-most profitable form of transnational crime after drug trafficking. It most frequently takes the form of sex-trafficking, which rakes in an estimated $99 billion per year. A study by the Urban Institute that interviewed pimps and traffickers found they can make anywhere from $5,000 to $32,833 a week. Women and girls make up 71 percent of their victims.

The pimps and traffickers interviewed in the Urban Institute study said the commercial sex industry is a low-risk, high-reward enterprise. Part of the reason sex-trafficking is so “low-risk” is due to our society’s lack of awareness, but could it also be due to a lack of intervention — perhaps even aiding and abetting — from those in direct contact with victims and traffickers? Doctors who exploit women for sex and abortion centers that turn a blind eye for profit, such as Planned Parenthood, enable the sex-trafficking industry.

The connection between abortion and sex-trafficking cannot be denied. Both are an affront to human dignity, and both are profiting from human suffering. The survivor of six abortions incurred severe infections from the scar tissue, necessitating a hysterectomy. She could no longer bear children if she wanted. Our message to her and all the other victims of commercialized sex-exploitation is this: We see you.

This January, it’s time for Americans to decide whether we will stand up for millions of women forced to endure trauma upon trauma and the innocent lives snuffed out, or continue to tolerate the abuses of the abortion and sex-trafficking industries.

Patrina Mosley is director of Life, Culture and Women’s Advocacy at Family Research Council.
Photo Kat Jayne/Pexels

https://thefederalist.com/2020/01/31/abortion-and-sex-trafficking-are-undeniably-linked-abuses-against-women/


Senate Democrats Insist Babies Born Alive After Abortions Should Be Left To Die

Why should one baby down the hall be given care while another is left to die? Sen. Joni Ernst asked the Senate Judiciary Committee. Not one Democrat in the room could answer the question.

Senate Democrats Insist Babies Born Alive After Abortions Should Be Left To Die

Feb 14, 2020

The Born-Alive Survivors Protection Act is not about restricting abortions but about giving newborns a chance to survive no matter where they are born, said Sen. Ben Sasse, the bill’s lead co-sponsor, at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday.

During the hearing, called “The Infant Patient: Ensuring Appropriate Medical Care for Children Born Alive,” Republican senators questioned why a baby born in a hospital should be treated differently than a baby born in an abortion facility. Democrats, lacking an answer, changed the subject.

Thirteen committee senators heard from five female witnesses, three who shared powerful testimony and two who expressed concerns about the bill.

Babies Are Just Like Any Other Patients

The first witness was Dr. Robin Pierucci, a neonatologist who has spent her career caring for babies born too early. All babies born alive should be cared for, she said. She referred to the Neonatal Resuscitation Program, which provides guidelines for helping a baby transition from intrauterine to extrauterine life. The program defines the standard of care medical staff is responsible for providing to babies born alive.

Pierucci explained that all doctors should promise to provide this standard of care to all human beings. “There is no ethical reason why this medical standard of care should be abandoned for a subgroup of people because they might be less ‘wanted’ than others; wanted-ness does not determine humanness,” she said.

Pierucci pointed out that treating babies differently just because of who delivered them, where they were delivered, or their condition at birth is wrong. “It would be an abandonment of my medical and ethical duty if I only responded to the need of some babies and not to others.”

“We too should never allow a baby, especially a baby, to die anywhere but in the warmth of our arms, nestled securely against our hearts,” she argued. She finished by clarifying that all babies born alive are real patients, and just like every other patient, medical care should be available and medical professionals should have necessary training to stabilize them.

The Born-Alive Infant Protection Act Is Insufficient

Patrina Mosley, the director of Life, Culture, and Women’s Advocacy at the Family Research Council, was the second witness. Mosley explained that the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act of 2002 — which states that all babies born alive are humans, regardless of their stage of development — was a good starting place, but it wasn’t enough because it does not require health practitioners to actively treat a born-alive infant.

Earlier in the hearing, Sassse made two important clarifications. He explained that although some states do punish doctors for post-abortion killings, there is no federal statute doing the same. Mosley pointed out 35 states don’t protect infants’ rights. Sasse, a Nebraska Republican, also addressed active killing versus passive killing, saying he believes both leaving a baby to die by neglecting its medical needs and actively killing it are immoral, and therefore, both should be prohibited.

In her testimony, Mosley told the story of Melissa Ohden, who survived a saline abortion and was thrown into a trash bin. Two nurses who heard her gasping for breath rescued her and took her to a hospital. At the hospital, she became a patient.

“We must decide as a country to be morally and logically consistent with ourselves in that if any infant born alive is a full person under federal law, then they are worthy of humane care and protection under federal law,” Mosley said. Ohden was born in 1977, and today she is thriving. She earned a master’s degree in social work and in 2012 founded the Abortion Survivors Network.

The Horrors of Wrongful ‘Comfort Care’

Jill Stanek, a former registered nurse at Christ Hospital, also testified about how babies born alive were treated in the hospital where she worked. She said her hospital often used the labor induction abortion method. While many abortionists kill the baby prior to delivery, Christ Hospital did not. According to the hospital, this resulted in 10-20 percent of babies destined for abortion being born alive.

When this happened, the hospital did no medical assessment of the baby’s condition, instead leaving the infant to die. Stanek described one of these instances.

One night, a co-worker was taking an abortion survivor to a utility room to die because she didn’t have the time to hold him. Stanek said she retrieved the infant and cradled and rocked him for the 45 minutes he lived. “He was the size of my hand,” she said. “I couldn’t tell if he was still alive toward the end, so I’d hold him up to the light to see through his thin skin if his heart was still beating.”

Stanek then painted an eerie picture of the way Christ Hospital decided to start handling “comfort care” for infants born alive. In 2000, Christ Hospital unveiled a comfort room where nurses could take babies to die. In the room was a first-photo machine, baptismal supplies, and a footprint maker in case parents want a keepsake of their aborted baby. There was also a wooden rocker to rock babies to death, she said. “How far will doctors go to comfort themselves by letting abortion survivors die?” she asked.

Where Are We Drawing the Line on Equality?

Fatima Goss Graves, president and CEO of National Women’s Law Center, argued instead that, “Access to reproductive health care, including abortion, is a key part to an individual’s liberty, equality, and economic security.” Since 2010, state lawmakers have passed more than 450 abortion restrictions designed to block access to abortion, she said.

Sasse tried to clarify numerous times that this legislation was not about abortion but about what happens after an abortion. Neither Graves nor the Democratic senators in the room agreed. Graves said she believes the bill is on a continuum of restrictive abortion measures. Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, agreed, saying that women’s health is under attack every day, especially under Trump, and that this bill is the latest in a decades-long threat against abortion.

Instead of arguing for or against protecting infants born alive, Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., argued U.S. health care is biased against African-American women. Instead of fighting for legislation that protects infants born alive, Harris argued we should make taxpayers provide better housing and food for pregnant women.

While Harris might be right that pregnant women need more support, this is not the question at hand. Right now, if a doctor neglected to provide a pregnant woman needed care, he would be prosecuted. This is not true for the child in her womb. Instead of addressing this disparity, Harris simply changed the subject.

One of Graves’ primary arguments against the legislation is that it would take away a family’s right to decide how to spend their last moments with their dying baby. It is noticeable that Graves admits a fetus out of the womb is a baby — even eliciting the image of a mother who just decided to abort her baby and suggesting she may want to hold that baby she didn’t want as it dies in her arms — and then simultaneously says that baby’s life and health should be left up for debate. Shouldn’t there be requirements that prohibit a living baby from being thrown into a trash can or left to die alone on a cold, steel table?

As Pierucci made clear, some of these aborted babies have a chance at life. She said physicians can get fetal diagnoses wrong, so every baby should be evaluated once he or she comes out of the womb to determine if he or she has a chance at life. She said the bill does not require invasive care if a physician makes the assessment that the baby will not survive, but it does require that a physician make an assessment instead of assuming the baby has no hope of life.

Where are we drawing the line on equality? Why should one baby down the hall be given care while another is left to die? Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, asked the committee. Not one Democrat in the room could answer this question.

 

Krystina Skurk is a research assistant at Hillsdale College in D.C. She received a Master’s degree in politics from the Van Andel School of Statesmanship at Hillsdale College. She is a former fellow of the John Jay Institute, a graduate of Regent University, and a former teacher at Archway Cicero, a Great Hearts charter school.
Photo Peter K Burian/Wikimedia Commons

https://thefederalist.com/2020/02/14/senate-democrats-insist-babies-born-alive-after-abortions-should-be-left-to-die/

VIDEO Rep. Lesko: ERA ‘Would Be Used by Pro-Abortion Groups to Undo Pro-Life Laws’

By Susan Jones | February 13, 2020

 

(CNSNews.com) – The House of Representatives on Thursday debated a resolution that would remove the deadline for ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment, which simply reads: “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.”

But Republicans argue the amendment has nothing to do with equal rights: it’s all about protecting abortion.

During the floor debate, Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.) argued that the ERA is “not necessary” since women’s equality of rights under the law is already recognized in the 5th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution.

And she had another major objection:

If ratified, the ERA would be used by pro-abortion groups to undo pro-life legislation and lead to more abortions and taxpayer funding of abortions. But don’t take my word for it. Let’s look at what pro-abortion groups have done and what they say:

In 1998, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the state’s ERA required the state to fund abortions. NARAL Pro-Choice America which supports abortions, asserted that the ERA would reinforce the constitutional right to abortion and require judges to strike down anti-abortion laws. In a 2019 letter to the House Judiciary Committee, the ACLU stated the Equal Rights Amendment could provide an additional layer of protection against restrictions on abortion.

In conclusion, this bill is unconstitutional; the ERA is unnecessary since constitutional federal, state and local laws already guarantee equal protections; and the ERA, if ratified, would be used by pro-abortion groups to undo pro-life laws.

Congress passed the proposed constitutional amendment in 1972, but it wasn’t until Democrats took control of the Virginia Legislature this year that the ERA received the required support of three-quarters of the states.

However, the 1972 congressional resolution contained a seven-year deadline, later extended to 1982, for getting the necessary 38 states to ratify the amendment.

Meanwhile, five states have “unratified” the amendment in the intervening years.

On Thursday, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) noted that the deadline imposed by Congress was not part of the actual amendment but was contained in the resolution passing the amendment. “If Congress can set a deadline, it can remove a deadline,” Nadler said.

But ranking member of the Judiciary Committee Doug Collins (R-Ga.) said the current resolution is an “end-run” to get around the fact that the ERA’s ratification deadline has come and gone.

The chief sponsor of the resolution removing the deadline for ERA ratification is Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), who told her colleagues on Thursday that “women are fed up.”

“I rise today because the women of America are done being second class citizens. We are done being paid less for our work; done being violated with impunity; done being discriminated against for our pregnancies; done being discriminated against simply because we are women,” Speier said.

“The ERA is about equality. The ERA is about sisterhood, motherhood, survival, dignity, and respect.”

Speier said the “outrage” expressed by The Women’s March, the Me-Too Movement, and the Pink Wave “is because we have been disrespected, devalued and diminished in our society. And we are fed up.”

https://cnsnews.com/article/washington/susan-jones/rep-lesko-era-would-be-used-pro-abortion-groups-undo-pro-life-laws


Abortion Survivors

By Jerry Newcombe, D.Min.

The anniversary of the infamous Supreme Court abortion decision, Roe v. Wade, is upon us again. And here we are, 61 million abortions later.

Some of the most powerful spokespersons against Roe are those who survived an attempted abortion. At least 300 Americans alive today are in that category. Here we will highlight three such survivors.

A couple of months ago, I heard a dramatic talk from Gianna Jessen of Tennessee. Born in 1977, Gianna survived a saline abortion, and her story has been told in a Focus on the Family book, Gianna: Aborted, and Lived to Tell about It.

Gianna has even run two marathons, despite the cerebral palsy caused by the abortion-attempt. It took her several hours longer than the average runner to complete the 26.2 miles. But she made it. Twice.

Some say she lacks a “quality of life,” but she says in effect, “Who are you to judge my ‘quality of life’?” Thanks to the faithfulness of the Lord, she has a high “quality of life,” thank you very much.

Another survivor is Melissa Ohden of Missouri. I had the privilege to interview her for Christian TV recently. As a child she knew she had been adopted. But not until she was 14 did she learn the back story.

Melissa told me, “I am 42 years old; and it was in 1977 that my birth mother, as a college student, actually had a saline infusion abortion forced upon her, against her will….So that type of procedure actually involved injecting a toxic salt solution into the amniotic fluid surrounding me in the womb. And the intent of that toxic salt solution was to poison and scald me to death. So typically the procedure lasted about 72 hours. The child would soak in that toxic salt solution, their life would be ended by it when it was successful; and they would induce labor believing that that deceased child would be expelled from the womb.”

In reviewing her medical records, Melissa discovered she had soaked for five days, not three days, yet she still didn’t die. “But instead of being delivered as a successful abortion, I was accidentally born alive.” And then a compassionate nurse was able to rush her to a hospital to help her recover and eventually be adopted.

When you meet Melissa, you would have no idea any of this had happened to her. Today, she is one of the leading networker of abortion survivors.

The third abortion survivor I met recently is Claire Culwell of Texas. As a child she had always known she was adopted, so about a decade ago she was thrilled to finally get to meet—and to thank in person—the mother who gave birth to her and had given her up for adoption. But little did she know the back story about her birth mother.

When her birth mother was 13, she got pregnant. Her mother beat her and called her “worthless” and “horrible.” Then she brought her to an abortion clinic.

The 13-year-old felt terrible for having had her baby aborted. But a few days later she realized that somehow she was still pregnant. It turns out that the abortionist had missed the fact that she was carrying twins. By the time they realized this, Claire’s mother was too far along to have another abortion.

Claire told me, “I was delivered at 30 weeks, and I weighed 3 lbs. 2 oz., I was ten weeks premature, and I had a dislocated hip, club feet. My visible signs are my everyday reminder of being a twin. But miraculously the abortion instruments never touched my body.”

Amazingly, there are people who use various platforms, including social media, to somehow deny the validity of Claire’s story. And that is true of other abortion survivors as well.

Claire observes, “There are absolutely people opposing what we do because my presence, and people like me who have survived an abortion—our presence—shuts down their entire argument because they are saying that we are not human; and they are saying we are imaginary and that this doesn’t happen, and abortion is not taking the life of a child.”

As another anniversary of Roe comes and goes, it is good to remember the many victims of abortion… beginning with the tens of millions of unborn babies killed. Also, millions of would-be mothers have been victimized. Studies show that more than half of them feel forced to abort. And at least 300 abortion survivors amongst us also bear witness to the inhumanity of abortion.

And of those 300, the three I spoke with are so grateful to God for the gift of life—despite their rocky start in life. As Melissa puts it, “I owe my life to Jesus, that’s the only reason why I am alive.”

https://www.djameskennedy.org/article-detail/abortion-survivors

VIDEO Fox Says ‘Yes’ to Drag Queens, ‘No’ to Abortion Survivors in Super Bowl Ads

Jan 30, 2020  Steve Warren

After Fox Sports declined to air a pro-life advocacy group’s television commercial during the Super Bowl this Sunday, Dr. James Dobson, the founder and president of the James Dobson Family Institute, asked the network, “Why are you saying ‘yes’ to drag queens and ‘no’ to abortion survivors?”

As CBN News reported, Lyric Gillett, director of Faces of Choice and producer of the ad, claimed earlier this week that Fox is essentially censoring their commercial after stringing her group along since last July.

According to the Washington Times, Fox said they did not accept the commercial because their ad spaces sold out early. Yet just six days ago, the network announced it had additional ad slots available, according to Variety.

“Fox’s response would have been acceptable in November but we have been working with their legal team since July, so executives claiming ad space was not available is intentionally deceptive. And it’s such an uninventive excuse to say they ran out of space, which is easily disprovable,” Gillet said in a statement. “Faces of Choice provided every answer and documentation the legal team requested, and though the network has every right to decide which advertisers to accept, stringing along an eager advertiser who met every demand is professionally shady.”

“The ad features several people who survived abortions, a part of the population whose voices are rarely heard, so what bigger stage to allow them to speak than on a Super Bowl commercial?” Gillet continued. “In an era where voices that have previously been silenced are allowed to be heard, this particular rejection by Fox Sports seems like a more calculated decision to deem abortion survivors worthy of being ignored.”

She also announced her group has already started discussions with CBS for airing a commercial in the network’s presentation of the Super Bowl in 2021.

Watch Faces of Choice’s television commercial below: 

Dr. Dobson, the founder of Focus on the Family, weighed in on the issue, warning families they might want to have their remote control ready.  A commercial for Sabra hummus will feature a pair of drag queens from RuPaul’s Drag Race.

“This year, families may want to rethink their plans, or at least keep the remote close at hand. I’ve learned that on Sunday, Fox plans to broadcast a commercial featuring drag queens. I hope I don’t need to explain to parents why their young children might be troubled or confused at the sight of men dressed up as women,” he said in a statement.

“It amazes me that Fox would choose to transform the Super Bowl from a family-friendly event into an opportunity to promote a gender ideology that goes against the most basic biological realities, as well as the sincerely held religious beliefs of millions of Americans. To say I’m disappointed would be a huge understatement,” Dobson added.

“What’s worse, news reports suggest that Fox has refused to approve a pro-life commercial produced by Faces of Choice for Super Bowl Sunday, one in which abortion survivors tell the world that they are precious human beings who deserve a chance to participate in the ultimate contest – life,” he continued. “So there you have it. Fox has said ‘yes’ to drag queens and ‘no’ to abortion survivors. Celebrating sexual fantasy while denying the value of every life… could the soul of America be any more lost?”

“I urge you to make your voices heard. Contact Fox and demand that they prioritize family entertainment and the value of life over harmful gender ideology and sexual fantasy. Also, please consider signing the My Faith Votes petition in support of Faces of Choice,” Dobson noted.

“There is such a thing as truth. Let’s stand for it,” he concluded.

The last time a commercial with a pro-life message aired in the Super Bowl was ten years ago. The commercial featured then-college quarterback Tim Tebow, whose mother rejected a doctor’s advice to have an abortion after she contracted amoebic dysentery. The ad sponsored by Focus on the Family did not include the words “abortion or pro-life” in it. However, CBS received furious responses from pro-choice groups over its decision to air the commercial.

Did you know?

God is everywhere—even in the news. That’s why we view every news story through the lens of faith. We are committed to delivering quality independent Christian journalism you can trust.

https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/entertainment/2020/january/dr-dobson-asks-why-fox-says-yes-to-drag-queens-no-to-abortion-survivors-in-super-bowl-ads/


VIDEO March for Life – ‘National Sanctity of Human Life Day’ Proclaimed

 

Dr Susan Berry

 

President Donald Trump declared January 22, 2020, “National Sanctity of Human Life Day,” a day when the nation “proudly and strongly reaffirms our commitment to protect the precious gift of life at every stage, from conception to natural death.”

January 22 is the anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade, when the Court created a right to abortion, though none existed in the Constitution.

Trump urged in his proclamation:

Today, I call on the Congress to join me in protecting and defending the dignity of every human life, including those not yet born. I call on the American people to continue to care for women in unexpected pregnancies and to support adoption and foster care in a more meaningful way, so every child can have a loving home.

The president’s proclamation is released as thousands of Americans from across the country are traveling to Washington, DC, for the 47th annual March for Life on the National Mall on Friday.

Trump said:

Every person — the born and unborn, the poor, the downcast, the disabled, the infirm, and the elderly — has inherent value. Although each journey is different, no life is without worth or is inconsequential; the rights of all people must be defended. On National Sanctity of Human Life Day, our Nation proudly and strongly reaffirms our commitment to protect the precious gift of life at every stage, from conception to natural death.

While Trump honored “the precious gift of life at every stage,” however, Hollywood elites promoted Planned Parenthood’s “Ours to Tell” abortion story campaign to celebrate the Roe v. Wade decision and the ability of women to seek self-interests — which the abortion lobby attributes to the right to abortion.

In his proclamation, however, the president urged Americans to “celebrate” the actual “decline in the number and rate of abortions, which represents lives saved.”

Still, Trump said there is “more to be done, and, as President, I will continue to fight to protect the lives of the unborn.”

The president pointed to his administration’s efforts to separate abortion from family planning, to protect the conscience rights of healthcare workers and organizations with faith beliefs or moral convictions that provide health insurance to employees.

In addition, Trump said he has called upon Congress to pass legislation that would prohibit abortions once unborn babies can feel pain, so that he can sign it into law.

The president added:

My Administration is also building an international coalition to dispel the concept of abortion as a fundamental human right.  So far, 24 nations representing more than a billion people have joined this important cause. We oppose any projects that attempt to assert a global right to taxpayer‑funded abortion on demand, up to the moment of delivery. And we will never tire of defending innocent life — at home or abroad.

Trump said that, as a nation, “we must remain steadfastly dedicated to the profound truth that all life is a gift from God, who endows every person with immeasurable worth and potential.”

“We are grateful for those who support women experiencing unexpected pregnancies, those who provide healing to women who have had abortions, and those who welcome children into their homes through foster care and adoption,” he continued. “On National Sanctity of Human Life Day, we celebrate the wonderful gift of life and renew our resolve to build a culture where life is always revered.”

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/22/trump-proclaims-national-sanctity-of-human-life-day/


2020 March for Life, Washington, DC and Walk for Life, San Francisco

47th Commemoration of Roe vs. Wade

Priests for Life organizes and helps to lead a number of events associated with the annual March for Life in Washington and Walk for Life West Coast — including the Planned Parenthood Protest, the National Prayer Service, the Youth Rally and the Silent No More Gatherings. Below, you will find information about those and similar events and how you can connect with us! Please spread the word!

If you will be leading a bus group to the March for Life in DC, please request your free bus kit which includes two videos we’ve made especially for the buses – one for the ride to DC and one for the ride going back, as well as prayer cards for all the travelers, and other items as well. Order at www.PriestsForLife.org/buskit.

Let us know you will attend these events on the facebook event pages at www.facebook.com/fatherfrankpavone/events.

For those who cannot attend the events, follow the events live at www.EndAbortion.TV and on the various social media platforms linked from there!

2020 March for Life, Washington, DC

Wednesday, January 22

(Actual Anniversary of Roe vs. Wade)

5:00–7:00 PM:Priests for Life will have our exhibit booth, including materials from our Stand True Youth Outreach, Silent No More Awareness Campaign, Civil Rights for the Unborn, and other branches of our ministry at the March for Life Exhibit Hall at the Renaissance Washington DC Downtown Hotel (999 9th ST. NW, (between K St and I Street) Washington, DC 20001). We will be booth numbers 118, 120 and 122.

7:00-8:00 PM  – Pro-life Candle Light Prayer Vigil at Supreme Court on Anniversary of Roe vs Wade Please join national pro-life leaders on January 22nd for a interdenominational prayer vigil from 7-8 PM at the steps of the Supreme Court in Washington DC where the tragic Roe vs Wade decision was handed down on January 22, 1973. Everyone is welcome to join the Priests for Life family of ministries as well as many other pro-life leaders and organizations for an hour of candlelight prayer. The Supreme Court is located at 1 First St NE in Washington DC. The Nearest Metro stops are Union Station and Capitol South.

Thursday, January 23

9-11 am: Priests for life will lead an interdenominational prayerful protest at Planned Parenthood killing center in DC at 1225 Fourth Street NE. Prayers and speeches, led by Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, Janet Morana, Bryan Kemper, and other pro-life leaders and activists.

Priests for Life will have our exhibit booth, including materials from our Stand True Youth Outreach, Silent No More Awareness Campaign, Civil Rights for the Unborn, and other branches of our ministry at the March for Life Exhibit Hall at the Renaissance Washington DC Downtown Hotel (999 9th ST. NW, (between K St and I Street) Washington, DC 20001) on Thursday, January 23. We will be booth numbers 118, 120 and 122.

In that same hotel, the official March for Life Youth Rally will take place in the afternoon, and Bryan Kemper, Youth Outreach Director for Priests for Life, will be the emcee for the event and will share some remarks.

Friday, January 24

8:30 AM -10:30 AM – National Prayer Service at DAR Constitution Hall, 1776 D St., NW (18th and D St). For more information, see www.NationalPrayerService.com. This event is organized by Priests for Life, the National Pro-life Religious Council, and Faith & Liberty DC. Mass will be offered at 7:30 am at the same location. Fr. Frank Pavone will deliver the sermon at this interdenominational event. Evangelist Alveda King will give an exhortation and Kristan Hawkins, President, Students for Life will receive the pro-life recognition award and will also speak at the service.

12:00-1:00 pm – March for Life Rally

1:00 pm – March for Life: Members of the Silent No More Awareness Campaign (a joint project of Priests for Life and Anglicans for Life) march together, holding their signs showing regret for their abortions.

2:30 pm (approx.) – Once the marchers begin to reach the Supreme Court, the Gathering of the Silent No More Awareness Campaign begins there at the steps of the Supreme Court. Testimonies are given by mothers and fathers who have lost children to abortion, as well as by other family members who have been impacted by abortion. The public is asked to come and support these brave women and men who give their testimonies, and to spread those testimonies which can be found at www.AbortionTestimonies.com.

3:30pm-7pm: Priests for Life will have our exhibit booth at the March for Life exhibit hall.

Saturday, January 25th

8:00 AM – 7:00 PM: Priests for Life/Stand True Booth at National Pro-life Summit Marriott Marquis, 901 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington, DC 20001
8:00 AM – 5:00 PM: Priests for Life Booth at Cardinal O’Connor Conference Georgetown University, Washington, DC

Voter Registration
Given the supreme importance of the 2020 elections for the pro-life cause, Priests for Life will conduct a non-partisan voter registration drive at our exhibit table at the March for Life Conference throughout the times that the exhibit area is open. Come by our booth; learn how to check and update your voter registration or how to register for the first time. We will utilize the National Voter Registration Form. We will have state-specific information about registration and voting, and about how and when you can register even if you are not yet of voting age today, but will be by Election Day (November 3, 2020).

2020 West Coast Walk for Life, San Francisco, CA

Saturday, January 25 – San Francisco, CA

8:00-9:30 am: Planned Parenthood Protest, 1650 Valencia St., San Francisco. Fr. Frank Pavone, Bryan Kemper and other leaders will speak.

8:30-9:30 am: Fr. Frank will be on the steps of St. Mary’s Cathedral greeting people before the 9:30 am Mass. 1111 Gough Street, San Francisco, CA.

10:45 am-12:15 pm – – Civic Center Plaza — Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life and Georgette Forney of Anglicans for Life will lead the men and women of the Silent No More Awareness Campaign who will give their testimonies. Fr. Frank and Georgette will address the crowd. Gather at the same location as for the Walk for Life Rally.

12:30 – 1:30 pm- Walk for Life Rally at the Civic Center Plaza, San Francisco. Fr. Frank Pavone will deliver a keynote address during the rally regarding the political responsibility of the pro-life movement.

Priests for Life and its Stand True Youth Outreach will have an exhibit table throughout the Walk for Life Rally.

1:30 pm – West Coast Walk for Life — Members of the Silent No More Awareness Campaign will march together.

Voter Registration Given the supreme importance of the 2020 elections for the pro-life cause, Priests for Life will conduct a non-partisan voter registration drive at the Walk for Life West Coast. A booth will be set up on the plaza for voter registration. Please visit it. Learn how to check and update your voter registration or how to register for the first time. We will utilize the National Voter Registration Form. We will have state-specific information about registration and voting, and about how and when you can register even if you are not yet of voting age today, but will be by Election Day (November 3, 2020).


NATIONAL MARCH FOR LIFE

The right to life is a human right. Our defense of that right is a joyful witness to the beauty and dignity of every human person.

The March for Life is an inspiring, peaceful. Vibrant, and joy-filled rally of women, men, young people, and children from all across the country. Every year, tens of thousands of pro-lifers converge on the National Mall and march on Capitol Hill on the anniversary of the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling which legalized abortion in all 50 states. It’s the largest annual human rights demonstration in the world. But this is not just a protest… TOGETHER, WE GATHER TO CELEBRATE LIFE. We celebrate each and every life, from the moment of conception. We envision a world where every life is celebrated, valued, and protected.

TOGETHER, WE GATHER TO CELEBRATE LIFE

We celebrate life from the moment of conception to the moment of natural death, and every moment in between.

We envision a world where these moments are celebrated, valued, and protected by everybody—both in the private sector and in the public sphere.

2020 THEME:

LIFE EMPOWERS: PRO-LIFE IS PRO-WOMAN.

SCHEDULE

Wednesday, January 22, 2020

  • March for Life Expo: 5:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m.

Thursday, January 23, 2020

  • March for Life Expo: 9:00 a.m. – 8:00 p.m.
  • Conference: 9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.
  • Youth Rally: 2:00 p.m.– 4:00 p.m.

Friday, January 24, 2020

  • March for Life Expo: 8:00 a.m. – 10:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. – 7:00 p.m.
  • Pre-Rally Concert: 11:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.
  • Rally Program and March: 12:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.
  • Rose Dinner Cocktail Hour: 6:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m.
  • Rose Dinner: 7:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.

TRAVEL

Airports

The most convenient way to get to D.C. is by flying here. There are two airports serving the D.C area, both are Metro accessible:

Buses

Tour buses are also a great way to get to D.C. However, they present certain parking problems and do require permits. Tour buses can be parked at the following locations: Union StationRFK Stadium, or the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception.

Around D.C.

Whether you want to do some sight-seeing or come straight to the March, the easiest way to get around D.C. is through our extensive Metro system. Gathering with your fellow pro-life marchers in D.C. is easy. On the day of the March itself, simply take the metro to one of the three stops within an easy walking distance from the rallying location: Federal TriangleSmithsonianMetro Center.

LODGING

There are many hotels to choose from in downtown D.C. and the surrounding area. One hotel in particular is the Host Hotel for the March for Life.

*THE HOST HOTEL IS SOLD OUT*

The Renaissance D.C. Downtown Hotel is only 5 miles from Ronald Reagan Washington National airport, and an easy 25-mile drive from Washington Dulles Airport. The March for Life has a guaranteed group rate at the Renaissance and rooms blocked for the nights of January 22—24, 2020.

Renaissance D.C. Downtown Hotel
999 9th St. NW
Washington, D.C. 20001
Main: (202)-898-9000
March for Life Reservations: (202)-682-3364

Additional March for Life Hotels can be found and reserved at this LINK


Mayra Rodríguez and Abby Johnson speaking at the Arizona for Life March and Rally 2020


136 abortion clinics shut down in last 5 years

Attributed to hundreds of state restrictions across nation

Dec 16, 2019

(Image courtesy Pixabay)

At least 136 independent abortion clinics across the nation have been closed since 2014, according to a pro-abortion group.

The Abortion Care Network lamented that since 2010, more than 400 state laws have made operating abortion clinics too expensive or logistically impossible, PJ Media reported.

The group’s executive director, Nikki Madsen, told CBS News that “anti-abortion politicians have long used onerous restrictions to try and shut down independent abortion providers.”

TRENDING: Oops! Hillary forgot to report $1 million donation

PJ Media noted that the 136 independent abortion clinics that closed are unaffiliated with Planned Parenthood.

A report released in November 2018 by the Abortion Care Network said independent abortion facilities conduct 60% of all abortions in the U.S., while Planned Parenthood facilities account for about 35%.

The findings are broadly consistent with a January 2019 report from the pro-life group Operation Rescue that found 40 clinics had shut down in 2018.

Operation Rescue said a total of 697 abortion clinics in the U.S. were in operation by the end of 2018, about 150 fewer than the 844 clinics reported in 2009.

“This represents a massive 79 percent decrease in the number of surgical abortion facilities over the past 27 years,” Operation Rescue said.

Six states have only one abortion clinic remaining.

Nearly 90 percent of counties in the United States had no abortion clinic as of 2017, according to a Guttmacher report.

CBN News reported in September a report by Jessica Arons on the American Civil Liberties Union website said abortion clinics could disappear without the Supreme Court touching Roe v. Wade, largely due to the state regulations and restrictions.

She said that state regulations requiring higher safety standards have had the biggest impact.

Such laws require abortion providers to have admitting privileges at local hospitals or require clinics to meet the standards of ambulatory surgical centers.

 

Original here


Woman Waking Up From Abortion Shrieks in Horror: “Give Me Back My Baby!”

SARAH TERZO DEC 10, 2019 | WASHINGTON, DC

The Abortionist is a book written by an illegal abortionist in 1962. This is the contents of a letter that was written to the abortionist. [1]

“I recall fighting my way out of the black void into which the drug had plunged me to hear myself screaming hysterically, “I want my baby! Give me back my baby!” And as I sobbed away, you tried to console me, telling me it was over and that everything was all right.

But everything wasn’t all right. Lying there, I felt only disgust at myself. I had broken nature’s most sacred code, the propagation of the human race. That was the trust for which I had been placed on earth and I had violated it.

But life is also survival of the fittest and, in some way, I knew I was not fit to bear a baby or to be a mother…

I hated myself, I hated the father of the child and vowed never to see him again.…

But you I do not hate. You have given me a second chance. When everyone else turned their back in scorn, you were willing to allow me the responsibility of deciding whether I wanted my child. You made me feel I still had the dignity due to every human being.”

There is so much self-hatred and post-abortion regret in this testimony, yet she does not blame the abortionist who did the abortion. She seems to be unable to admit that abortion was a horrible mistake, no matter how upset it made her.

[1] Dr. X, Lucy Freeman The Abortionist (London: Victor Gollacz LTD, 1962), pp. 43 – 44.

LifeNews.com Note: Sarah Terzo is a pro-life liberal who runs ClinicQuotes.com, a web site devoted to exposing the abortion industry. She is a member of the pro-life groups Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians and Secular Pro-Life. Follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

Original here

4 Ways To Help Your Kids Fight Assimilation Into Cultural Leftism

Equipping our kids might mean talking to them about difficult and uncomfortable subjects long before we’d like to. But choosing not to have them doesn’t protect our kids. It dooms them to leftist assimilation.

4 Ways To Help Your Kids Fight Assimilation Into Cultural Leftism

Dec 16, 2019

 

“You don’t agree with me that gay marriage should be legal?” All eyes around the lunch table were suddenly trained on my sixth-grade daughter. “But that means you hate gay people!” Morgan exclaimed.

“No it doesn’t,” Faust daughter replied. “My grandma is gay, and I love her. So, what is your argument?”

“Well, if a man and a woman who love each other can get married, then two men who love each other should be able to get married, and two women who love each other should be able to get married. There’s no difference.”

“The difference is that a man and a woman make a baby,” Faust daughter responded again. “A man and a man don’t make a baby, and a woman and a woman don’t make a baby.”

“Oh, I guess that’s true. But the two men or the two women could just adopt if they wanted a baby.”

“No. Adoption is not about giving kids to adults. Adoption is about finding homes for children who don’t have parents. And all children need moms and dads,” Faust daughter insisted.

“Well, I think kids just need adults who love them,” came the response.

“No, dads teach kids certain lessons; moms teach kids other lessons. And kids need both kinds of lessons,” Faust daughter concluded.

Amazingly, No.1 Faust daughter was able to identify three truths about marriage and family that escape most adults: 1) The public purpose of marriage is not about adult feelings, it’s about children. 2) No adult has a right to a child. 3) Men and women offer distinct and complementary benefits to child-rearing.

As she retold this lunch-time drama, I remember thinking, “Wow, it worked!” No. 1 Faust daughter had retained and could explain much of what we had been talking about at home. It was proof that not only can kids handle these big conversations, they thrive on them.

Parenting Is About Training

After our eldest daughter’s relatively sheltered elementary school life, my husband and I decided it was time for the “Great Equipping.” Our philosophy throughout her first decade of life had been focused on filtering out damaging ideas about worldview, gender, sex, etc. We strove to saturate her in truth and beauty during the phase wherein kids unquestioningly absorb everything they see and hear.

We limited her exposure to distorted depictions of sex, violence, and competing worldviews whether from media or agenda-driven adults. We encouraged scripture memorization, modeled imperfect-but-healthy relationships, and emphasized the purpose and inherent goodness of sex within marriage. But the time for sheltering was at an end because she was about to enter the ultimate worldview battleground — a woke Seattle public school.

The Great Equipping is the time in a child’s development when critical thinking begins, accompanied by questions like, “How do we know that’s true?” “But what if you’re wrong?” It’s easy for children to catch their parents off guard when they begin challenging core theological concepts that, only a month before, they were happily regurgitating. But fear not, these questions are an indication your kid is ready for more. They are ready to be experts.

We tell every one of our kids upon entering middle school, “We want you to know more about controversial topics than all your friends.” Yes, the Great Equipping means talking about difficult and uncomfortable subjects with our kids way before we’d like to.

But we really don’t have a choice, because the world is messaging to our kids nonstop about sex and transgenderism and every other topic that may make us squeamish. To the world, our discomfort is irrelevant. Having conversations with our kids about abortion or pornography may be discomforting, but choosing not to have them doesn’t protect our kids. It dooms them to leftist assimilation.

Uncomfortable as it is, the goal of parenting is not to keep kids safe or happy. The goal is training.

1. You Are the Primary Educators

Pre-parenthood, my husband and I worked in youth ministry. We witnessed both ends of the parenting spectrum: the laissez-faire, uninvolved-and-unaware-of-what’s-going-on-in-their-child’s-world parents. Those kids were so overwhelmed by the messages and pressures of the world, they were often swallowed whole by the time they graduated high school.

On the other end of the spectrum were the Christian kids smothered with protection. These kids often fell apart when they went to college. Their parents’ extreme sheltering meant they never had a chance to come up against a worldview challenge, whether evolution or sexual morality or the veracity of scripture, which left them woefully outgunned when they encountered the slightest pushback.

My husband and I decided on a middle road: train our children on every question the world would throw at them while they were under our roof. That middle road demanded we take our role of “primary educators” seriously. Not only by laying a solid foundation of truth and beauty when our kids were young, but also by introducing them to competing worldviews in middle school. The summer before our oldest entered sixth grade, we studied abortion, transgenderism, same-sex attraction, socialism, and more.

Being the “primary educators” of our children means being the first to talk with them about difficult subjects. Why? Because the person who introduces your child to a new something, especially a sensitive something, is the person your kid will consider the authority.

For example, if the first time your kid hears about porn is when a fifth grader with a smartphone shoves a video in his face, where do you think he goes for more information? Even if your initial conversation is not exhaustive, the first person to tell your kids about tough issues has to be you. As the mothers who lead the grassroots marriage movement CanaVox often say, “Better a year too early than five minutes too late.”

2. Include Your Kids in What You’re Already Doing

While good programs are helpful, don’t think this training requires formal curriculum. My husband and I have opted for more of a Deuteronomy 6 approach wherein you incorporate worldview conversations as “you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up.”

This brand of training is more of an incremental handoff than a course-completion. I once heard of a discipleship model that encapsulates this slow equipping:

Step 1. I do, you watch.
Step 2. I do, you help.
Step 3. You do, I help.
Step 4. You do, I watch.

By the time your kids exit childhood, you should be done with Step 1. Your kids should already have observed you living it. Our kids have witnessed their parents read about and work through difficult scriptural and worldview questions.

They’ve watched us respond to situations with, “I don’t know. Let me learn more and get back to you.” They’ve listened to us listen to political and worldview-forming podcasts. They’ve seen us survive the real-life fallout of speaking unpopular truth about cultural topics. Your kids should understand healthy marriage, friendship, and conversations because they’ve witnessed you living them. Modeling is a critical part of Step 1. You are “doing,” and they are “watching.”

When they are near the end of the innocent phase, you should introduce Step 2. As a Federalist reader, I assume you are engaged in apologetic or policy discussions online, yes? Invite your 10-year-old or 12-year-old to read your exchanges and discuss your critic’s objections. Ask your daughter to help you with your response.

What part of your argument is the strongest and the weakest? What would she add? When you want to share a powerful pro-life video, watch it with your son and ask him to help you write a few lines about the “rape exception” in abortion. You are “doing.” They are “helping.”

When they hit that phase where the Great Equipping begins, you should be in the midst of Step 2 and moving into Step 3. If they’ve been saturated in truth and beauty and received honest answers to honest questions, the urge to further investigate and defend their worldview comes naturally. They will likely start pushing back in their classrooms, engaging in difficult conversations with friends, or identifying objectionable content in the shows they are watching (preferably with you sitting on the couch next to them).

Step 3 done right looks like this: Your middle-schooler reports that his class discussion was based on the idea that “slaveholders in the South must’ve been Republicans because Republicans are racist.” You stay your fingers from typing an angry email to the teacher and instead ask your son, “Would you like to watch a video on the history of the Democratic Party together?” or “Would you like to read the first Republican Party platform, which denounces slavery as one of the ‘twin relics of barbarism’?” You “help” while they “do.”

Ideally, by the time our kids graduate high school, they regularly dwell in the land of Step 4. You “watch” them from the sidelines responding to objections. They are drafting their own social media comments about the harms of puberty-blockers and writing pro-life essays all on their own.

A precaution: There is no shortcutting this. Do not live in the fantasy that you can skip from Step 1 to Step 4. You arrive at Step 4 only after your kids have had a couple years in Step 2 and Step 3 and have had many opportunities to practice grappling through difficult topics in the safety of your home.

3. Balance Protection and Exposure

I don’t knock any parent who chooses private school or homeschool to protect their children from the world. The only mommy war I fight is the one that really matters — to insist that every child has a right to his or her mommy (and daddy). Whether your child takes a bus to school or just has to come to the kitchen table, Christian parents are responsible for equipping their kids.

Some Christians bristle when I tell them our children are in public school. They ask, “How could you allow them to be subjected to that liberal agenda?” Their concern is justified, of course. This educational path is wrought with daily political and religious friction. We have to evaluate, child by child and year by year, whether this friction is sharpening our kids or grinding them down. If it’s grinding them down, we retreat and regroup. If the friction results in stronger mental and spiritual acumen, then they remain.

Now spanning grades four through 11, our kids often share with us the difficult conversations they’ve had with friends or a ridiculous statement from a teacher, or lament some biased curriculum. Such conversations are followed by a heavy does of Step 3 as we conduct joint research into what the Bible says about that subject, as well as supporting natural law and social science arguments. Our two oldest have spent hours investigating the character of Christopher Columbus, whether our Founding Fathers were racist, the sexes wage gap, the truth claims of Islam, and more.

For example, recently, No. 2 Faust daughter stormed in and told me, “Mom, you wouldn’t believe what Jenna said! She said abortion was okay because ‘my body, my choice.’ I was so mad, but I didn’t know what to say.” Three hours later, after an exploration of videos on natal development and some research on pro-choice talking points, No. 2 Faust daughter said confidently, “The next time one of my friends says ‘my body, my choice,’ I’m going to say, ‘If it was your body you’d be the one dead at the end of the abortion.’”

I have seen the fruits of this Great Equipping in my friends’ children as well. One friend’s sixth-grade daughter, championing the pro-life cause while riding the school bus, successfully converted four pro-choice classmates by simply being prepared to have the conversation. Another friend found out during her seventh-grader’s conference that her child had spoken directly to the history teacher himself regarding his obvious political bias in the classroom, which resulted in a humbled, more mindful educator.

Of course, not every conversation will result in such tangible “wins.” Many times our kids will experience the same rejection we adults face when we stand for our convictions. The sure result will be, however, that every oppositional interaction they have will help to sharpen their minds, and that is always a win.

4. Stay Connected

One last thing, and it’s a big thing. These conversations will be impossible or have little effect if we aren’t connected to our kids. Connection comes not only from physical proximity — driving them to school, joint dinner prep, working in the yard together — but also from emotional proximity.

If your kids are going to navigate a hostile world of competing ideas, they must know you are the safe place to put all their questions, feelings, and doubts. You demonstrate this by not freaking out when they tell you their friend came out as bisexual, or when your little girl says she wants to marry Taylor Swift, or when your son wants to know what “trans” is. While your head may say “WTH!” your face needs say, “I’d love to talk with you about that.”

Have my husband and I achieved the right balance of modeling and exposing, sheltering and training? I hope so. But we are only at the virtual half-time in this parenting game. I’ll tell you what the scoreboard says in another decade when the game is over.

What I can say is that my kids can hold their own. They can spot a lie when they hear one. They know that answers to the hardest questions do exist, even if they don’t yet know what those answers are. They know their parents are in the fight with them. And they know that while they may lose friends if they speak up, they earn the respect of their friends who remain.

Katy Faust is the founder and director of the children’s rights organization Them Before Us and the Washington state leader of CanaVox. She is married and the mother of four children, the youngest of whom is adopted from China. You can follow her on Twitter @Advo_Katy.

Over 200 Lawmakers Urge Supreme Court to Revisit Roe v. Wade

 

Over 200 Lawmakers Urge Supreme Court to Revisit Roe v. Wade

More than 200 congressmen and senators have filed an amicus (friend-of-the-court) brief urging the Supreme Court to uphold a pro-life Louisiana law and to reconsider Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that made abortion-on-demand the law of the land.

Americans United for Life filed the brief Thursday in the case Gee v. June Medical Services, LLC. Led by House Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.), Senators John Kennedy (R-La.) and Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), and Representative Mike Johnson (R-La.), 39 senators and 168 representatives, including two Democratic congressmen, endorsed the brief.

According to LifeSiteNews: “June Medical Services is an abortion facility in Shreveport, Louisiana. The abortion business seeks to overturn the provisions of Louisiana’s Unsafe Abortion Protection Act which require abortuaries to have the same safety standards as other outpatient surgical centers. These include the criterion that abortionists must have admitting privileges at one of their local hospitals.”

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law; the Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeal.

Amici (those submitting the brief) are requesting the court to uphold the Fifth Circuit’s ruling on three grounds: June Medical’s lack of standing, the Fifth Circuit’s proper application of Supreme Court precedent, and the jurisprudence surrounding Roe, which they say is “characterized by Delphic confusion and protean change” and should be reconsidered.

Although doctors and other third parties sometimes have standing to challenge laws on their clients’ behalf, amici argue that June Medical does not because “abortion providers’ interests are at odds with their patients’ interests.”

“June Medical,” amici write, “brings the current legal challenge against a backdrop of serious health and safety violations by Louisiana abortion clinics and professional disciplinary actions and substandard medical care by Louisiana abortion doctors” — incidents they detail over the course of 16 pages.

“In fact,” they continue, “the Fifth Circuit found the history of health and safety code violations at June Medical and Delta Clinic as well as ‘generally unsafe conditions and protection of rapists’ to be ‘horrifying.’ This history amply demonstrates that June Medical does not have a ‘close’ relationship with their patients and should not be deemed to possess third-party standing.”

Amici also maintain that the Fifth Circuit correctly decided the case given existing precedents, primarily Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) and Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt (2016). The law, they contend, does not unduly interfere with the alleged right to abortion, the standard set by those cases; it merely requires abortion clinics to submit to the same rules as other ambulatory surgical centers. Furthermore, the law protects women by ensuring that hospitals perform background checks on abortion doctors, something the Fifth Circuit found clinics were not always doing. “No clinics would close as a direct result of” the law, and thus it can hardly be considered invalid under Casey and Hellerstedtamici aver.

Noting the difficulties in making sense of Roe’s jurisprudence, which they claim has been “haphazard from the beginning” and subject to multiple, often contradictory revisions over the years, amici “respectfully suggest that the court’s struggle — similar to dozens of other courts’ herculean struggles in this area — illustrates the unworkability of the ‘right to abortion’ found in Roe and the need for the Court to take up the issue of whether Roe and Casey should be reconsidered and, if appropriate, overruled.”

Unfortunately, amici do not challenge Roe at its most fundamental level, namely that it is unconstitutional because the federal government is nowhere empowered to enact a nationwide abortion policy and therefore, under the 10th Amendment, the states have the right to set their own policies. Some of them, however, clearly understand this to be the case.

“States reserve the right to protect mothers and their children with high standards for health care providers — and abortionists remain subject to such high standards. I hope the Supreme Court will issue a ruling that safeguards women’s health and that is consistent with the Constitution’s guarantee for states’ rights,” Blackburn said in a statement. “In a year where the abortion movement has swept state legislatures to the extreme in states like New York and Virginia, it is important we defend the right of states like Louisiana to pass legislation to do the opposite and do more to protect the life of the unborn.”

Photo: PeopleImages/iStock/Getty Images Plus

Michael Tennant is a freelance writer and regular contributor to The New American.

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/34535-over-200-lawmakers-urge-supreme-court-to-revisit-roe-v-wade


Hands make heart shape