I said earlier today UCLA pro-lifers would be releasing a blockbuster issue of their student newspaper, The Advocate. Lila Rose just called to say its live, and here 'tis. Click cover, right, to enlarge.

Here's the story:

Over the summer, The Advocate... [had] an actor call [Planned Parenthood] clinics across the country and pose as a donor. The actor... communicated... a very racist agenda, the one Margaret Sanger, PP's founder, envisioned.

He... asked to donate money specifically for the abortions of African-American babies... to "lower the number of blacks in America." Despite his bigoted requests, no PP employee (or director of development, in one case) declined the tainted money.... In fact, some even went as far as agreeing with the antiblack agenda....

PP's 800 clinics receive more than $200 million of taxpayer money annually. It is unacceptable for a nonprofit to accept donations that target specific races....

The Advocate's investigation discovered this is official policy. The calls unearthed a PP program that poses a threat to minority communities. Many centers set up "women in need" or "justice" funds designating money specifically for minority abortions.

With more than 79% of clinics in minority neighborhoods, and more than 1400 black abortions daily, these programs are doing precisely what our actor asked them to do. PP is (intentionally or not) exterminating the black community.

The Advocate is calling on UCLA to sever ties with PP. Here's an excellent video on the sting.

Earlier this month NARAL Pro-Choice Washington breathlessly reported 10% of Washington state pharmacies don't stock or refuse to dispense the morning-after pill, thereby creating a crisis.

It is irrelevant but fun to note that, according to the Abortion in Washington blog, the Washington State Pharmacy Association, although pro-MAP, promptly released a statement that it was "appalled by [NARAL's] sloppy data collection process and inaccurate conclusions... littered with errors, out-of-date information and inaccuracies." These included marking 30 pharmacies as both stocking and not stocking the MAP, etc.

But what could NARAL do about it anyway, even if the number was truly scary, say 12%? In November a district court judge enjoined a new rule that would have forced pharmacists to stock and dispense the MAP, in violation of their 1st Amendment rights.

I said all that to get to this....

Somehow the peeps at AIW got the head of NARAL Pro-Choice Washington, Karen Cooper, to do a triple-gotcha phone interview. Great questions (underlined). Some cuts:

Some have argued that it is hypocritical for an organization calling itself "Pro-Choice Washington" to be actively trying to coerce pharmacists, to take away their freedom to choose.

Ms. Cooper described such views as "ridiculous."

"We don't see that as a contradiction at all. There's no analogy there whatsoever. One is a personal choice, the other is a retail choice."

And...

But what interest does an abortion organization have in reducing the number of unintended pregnancies? Ms. Cooper laughed loudly (and somewhat nervously) at the question.

While hearing the question repeated, Ms. Cooper interrupted after the word 'abortion': "Listen, this isn't an abortion pill, it's a birth control pill," she asserted....

When asked if the medication works sometimes by preventing implantation of a human embryo... Ms. Cooper claimed that "nobody knows'.... "It might work that way," she admitted when pushed.

And...

AIW pressed for... why an abortion group would be so determined to prevent unplanned pregnancies... especially... a group which believes abortion should be legal through all 9 months of pregnancy, by any procedure, for any reason, at any age, without delay, at taxpayers' expense, and without apology.

This was met with a long silence, followed by a nervous confession that "abortion is a very hard thing for women emotionally... a very hard decision."...

After responding to this last question, clearly uncomfortable, she hung up.

[HT: Pharmacists for Life International]

About this year's Academy Awards Moviefone reported, "Baby-on-board is the new black in Hollywood," a pretty funny line.

Enjoying Tinsel Town's swell of pregnancy pride while it lasts, here were the baby bumps spotted at the Oscars:

Jessica Alba (left) and Cate Blanchett (right)...

Nicole Kidman...

For bauble fans, Kidman's necklace contained 7645 diamonds including rough, faceted, and polished diamonds, totalling ~1400 carats, according to Fox Business, adding:

Each diamond was individually selected... to fit together into an overall design. The intricate design required in excess of 6200 man hours to handcraft.

[Alba photo courtesy of the Associated Press; Blanchett photo also courtesy of the AP; Kidman photo courtesy of the Academy Awards]

This morning the US Senate voted 52-42 to ban Indian Health Service funds from being used for abortions except to save a mother's life, or for rape or incest of a minor.

This has been long-standing US policy since 1982, when President Reagan closed a loophole and Congress later agreed, in conjunction with the Hyde Amendment for Medicaid funding.

But the fix has never been permanent. The House must also pass the measure, although a DC insider noted, "I doubt the House will take up this measure anytime soon."

Democrats voting yes...

Landrieu
Bayh
Reid
Casey
Salazar
Byrd
Johnson
Nelson (NE)

Republicans voting no...

Snowe
Specter
Collins

Clinton, McCain, and Obama were absent. See how your senator voted here.

Later today UCLA campus pro-lifers will release the winter issue of their student newspaper, The Advocate. It will be a blockbuster.

Readers may recall Lila Rose, who spearheads The Advocate. Last spring The Advocate broke the story and released video secretly filmed inside CA Planned Parenthoods showing PPs would have helped Lila, posing as a 15-year-old girl statutorily raped by her 23-year-old boyfriend, sidestep laws and abort. Lila even appeared on The O'Reilly Factor, and PP threatened to sue.

Well, hold on, because this issue of The Advocate will knell PP another - perhaps worse - body blow. When Lila lifts the embargo I will post.

Meanwhile, Lila has okd going with this story from The Advocate, about the UCLA Ashe Center and the Center for Women and Men helping a student prepare for his orgy. Here's another secretly filmed video:

Reported The Advocate....

In an awkwardly entertaining Live Action Films YouTube video, a student amasses over a hundred condoms from the... Ashe Center....

He gets them by detailing his plans for an orgy to the front desk attendants. The receptionists tell him to take just three, but the condom man smirks and explains he'll need a lot more for his weekend plans. "We’re going to Catalina on a boat-ride," he says enthusiasticaly. Ashe Center staff giggle off camera.

It's understandable they might laugh. Less understandable is their encouragement. "Can I come?" Ashe staff workers ask. "Are you going to have fun on the boat?" Sex with multiple partners?

As our student leaves, clutching his condoms, Ashe staff tell him to "raise the roof!"

However, as health professionals, Ashe's staff ought to know some sobering facts. Condoms have about a 12% failure rate, according to the Sexuality Information and Education Council.... Having made off with 105 condoms in one run, the student can expect at least 12 rips and slips at his “orgy.” Failure could mean pregnancy or STDs.

The health center staff mentioned none of these consequences. UCLA health services has failed to fulfill a basic responsibility. The Ashe Center hands out fists full of condoms but offers no warnings and provides no real help if its condoms fail....

In an interview... in National Review Online (12/6/06) [UCLA psychiatrist Dr. Miriam Grossman] says:

College health centers do a great job educating students about all sorts of health issues. These professionals expect that, given accurate information, students will make smart choices. They recommend, "have the salad instead of the pizza." They assume that young people are capable of self-discipline - and expect it of them. There's only one exception: sexual health.

Here students are told: limit your partners and use latex. Well, it's not working.... We are losing
the war on STDs and depression on campus; we all need to discuss the consequences of risky behavior.

The Advocate posted this compelling graphic showing the true cost of condoms - and this is only financial (click to enlarge):

Oh, please.

Pro-abort, pro-gay Drury University professor Teresa Hornsby has been handed a grant by the Wabash Center for Teaching and Learning in Theology and Religion to develop a "historic" college teaching program on abortion "that takes into consideration many different viewpoints."

Hornsby is an expert on the pro-abort viewpoint, that's for sure.

She sits on the board of the Abortion Conversation Project, where they "envision a world in which abortion is affirmed as a moral decision without stigma."...

In 2005 Hornsby was the faculty contact for the talk, "Why abortion rights should be preserved."

In 2007 Hornsby authored the book, Sex Texts from the Bible, about which a reviewer wrote:

The Bible sends no message, or mixed messages, about divorce, adultery, masturbation, abortion, celibacy, sexual abstinence, homosexual relations and even sex with slaves, says Hornsby, who could be described as a moderate-to-liberal Bible scholar....

Abortion? The issue that makes or breaks political elections in dozens of countries? There is no specific word for abortion in the Bible, Hornsby says.

It is equally difficult, she maintains, to determine any clearcut message from the Bible about the touchy subject of birth control....

[T]he first book of Samuel... describes an intimate, loving and sometimes physical relationship between two men, Jonathan and David, the latter of whom became the King of Israel.

Hornsby is listed in the Lesbian and Gay Archives and Libraries Life for the United States as the holder of the Tennessee Lesbian Archive.

When at Vanderbilt Hornsby headed the Department of Religion's Office of Gay, Bisexual and Lesbian Concerns.

Hornsby did say she wants to "invite insiders from both sides of the issue" to her workshops when she develops her curriculum, the one from our side being an official from the local crisis pregnancy care center.

She has got to be kidding. That will be her pro-life apologist? I mean, let's at least feign fairness, Professor. Email me. I'll give you a name or 2.

Tough love works. And another evidence doctors aren't God.

From the the Daily Telegraph, February 23:

A mother who fell into a coma after losing her baby son during a difficult labour came back from the brink of death after her husband gave her "a bloody good rollicking".

Yvonne Sullivan, 28, lost consciousness suffering from severe blood poisoning moments after being told that baby Clinton had died....

Despite grieving for their lost son, her husband Dominic, 37, kept a round-the-clock vigil at her bedside for two weeks as she lay in intensive care.

But when doctors told him they could have to switch off her life support machine, Mr Sullivan took drastic action - by giving his wife a firm telling-off.

He held his wife's hand and demanded: "You start fighting. Don't you dare give up on me now. I've had enough, stop mucking around and start breathing. Come back to me."

Two hours later she started to breathe steadily again.

Within five days doctors were able to switch off her ventilator, and she regained consciousness to see her husband standing beside her.

She even remembers hearing her husband yelling at her as she lay in a coma and says it gave her the strength to pull through.

She said: "I can't remember exactly what he said but I never liked getting told off by Dom. Something inside me just clicked and I began to fight again. When I came round I thought he'd been gone a few minutes, then he told me I'd been out for two weeks. It's a miracle. I owe him so much."

[HT: Dr. Frank]

You may have read a February 23 Associated Press story about Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Missouri's epiphany....

Suddenly late last week PP decided it wanted to cooperate with a grand jury investigation it had stone-walled from the get-go.

Suddenly its attorney said, according to the AP, "We want to turn over the information," that being medical records the grand jury had subpoenaed 6 weeks prior to determine whether PP broke several laws. At that time PP immediately filed a motion to halt the subpoena.

Smell a rat? Here's one: the grand jury's ill-advising special counsel, Larry McClain, who okd terms with PP by which it would honor the subpoena.

And here's another, the Democrat judge overseeing the case, Kevin Moriarty, who asked McClain (who he appointed) to work with PP on a "compromise" on the subpoena dilemma in the 1st place.

Apparently the terms sucked, because DA Phill Kline nixed them. I'd be interested to laugh at those terms.

In the real legal world, when a grand jury issues subpoenas the entity being investigated either complies or gets thrown in the slammer and its records seized.

In the real world, there are ways to determine if laws are broken.

There are laws in KS against aborting late-term mothers not in the throes of death, against not reporting child rape, against selling aborted baby parts, against falsifying records, against aborting minors without parents knowing, and against ignoring the 24-hour waiting period.

But abortion brings with it super duper legal exceptions. There is no right to investigate higher than the right to abort. An abortionist has the right to break the law if s/he’s committing an abortion, as does the mother. The abortionist's attorney has the right to agree to terms of the abortionist's subpoena if anyone dares to snoop.

Predictions

Prediction #1: The 90-day KS grand jury investigating for illegal activity will expire March 9 having gotten nowhere because PP simply refused to cooperate. That's the plan, to beat off the clock.

Prediction #2: Moriarty will not extend the grand jury's time.

Prediction #3: PP will issue a statement that it has been exonerated.

[HT: American Papist]

Even liberals are suspicious of an infusion of female steroids that blocks all but 1 period a year. Here's a spoof from SNL this past weekend.

WARNING: PG-13 for language and simply being SNL gross:

[HT: natb33]

The Political Voices of Women blog has amassed a list of ~350 women blogging on politics, and I'm happy to be included.

This is something to me, especially considering Technorati counted 112 million blogs worldwide as of December.

The women listed cover the political spectrum, from Feminist Fire, Citizen Jane Politics, and Washington Woman, to Mary Katherine Ham, Michelle Malkin, and... me!

PVW accumulated the growing list in response to New York Times columnist Katharine Seelye's question, "Are more men engaged in politics online than women?" She said....

We know that women slightly outnumber men online. But at least anecdotally, it seems as if more men are on the political blogs, writing specifically about politics, reading about politics and putting in their two cents in the comments sections. Did you notice how many more men compared to women submitted videos for the Democratic YouTube debate in July?

Seelye informally polled readers and guessed as many as 3x the number of men argue politics online than women.

Reasons? Women are too busy; men are more interested in the competition of politics as sport; men are more interested in political braggadocio, showing off how much they know; men are louder; politically opining women are attacked more and may not be able to handle typical online rancor.

Seelye contacted a few prominent women bloggers who agreed:

[W]omen were re-defining politics online, away from conventional male-dominated sites that were obsessed with the horse race and toward sites that wove politics into the fabric of women’s lives.

I'm not sure what that means. Is it that women are taking politics from just a debate about who's winning to one of issues? Or is it that we're changing political priorities?

I think the latter is true. The problem for conservatives is, generally speaking, liberal blogs tend to be louder, meaner, and verbal bomb throwers, censoring debate.

I theorize political priorities have not been reshaped based on thoughts of all women but on thoughts of loud women, who even scare conservative politicians from saying much on the life issue.

[HT: Onetenaciousbabymama.com]

I need a new poll question.

Suggestions?

by Lisa Benson for Townhall.com...

Obama's fainted ladies...

Obama talks on water...

Living is hell for me. I should never have had an abortion. I see now I would have been a good mum. I told everyone I didn't want to do it, even at the hospital. I was frightened, now it is too late. I died when my babies died. I want to be with my babies - they need me, no one else does.

So read the suicide note Emma Beck left in February 2007, the night before her 31st birthday when she hanged herself in her UK home, according to the Daily Mail.

My guess is this was near the date her twins would have been born, had she not aborted them in September, 2006.

Emma's live-in rejected his offspring. When she met with her soon-to-be-abortionist, the pre-abort counselor was on vacation, so he gave her the number for a call-in "pregnancy counselling service." Glad to read there's an inquest at least. That wouldn't happen in the U.S.

Pro-aborts acknowledge post-partum depression but say post-abortion depression is nonsense.

[Portrait is by John Millais, 1850, Ophelia drowning in a river (click to enlarge); HT: LifeNews.com;

On one side we have Alliance Defense Fund, American Family Association, Georgia Christian Alliance, Georgia Right to Life, Mike Huckabee, Liberty Counsel, Liberty Univeristy School of Law, ProlifeUnity.com, and Thomas More Law Center.

On the other side we have the Archdiocese of Atlanta, Americans United for Life, Catholic Bishops of Georgia, Georgians for Choice, National Right to Life Committee, and Planned Parenthood of Georgia.

The two sides are fighting over a proposed Georgia Human Life Amendment, and both sent big guns to Atlanta last week to argue for and against the HLA in a subcommittee.

The Archdiocese went so far as to send a letter to Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life asking him not to come in support as planned. He complied.

The subcommittee chairman, hand-picked by the only GA Republican endorsed by PP the last election, tabled the HLA February 20, citing reasons given by the Archdiocese, AUL, and NRLC....

I'm going to boil this down. Pro-life opponents to the HLA listed a "parade of horribles" along with pro-abort opponents. But there is really only one reason our side opposes the GA HLA: The U.S. Supreme Court is still stacked 5-4 against us.

How do I know? The GA language (see sidebar, right, click to enlarge) is virtually identical to federal HLA language provided by NRLC in 1981 to Jesse Helms for introduction on the federal level. "Designator" means author (click to enlarge):

(Federal language re: the 5th and 14th constitutional amendments is not germane to state language.)

Is the other side simply being pragmatic? No. GARTL has repeatedly demonstrated victories unmatched in any other state except perhaps MI.

GARTL proves the principled approach is the most pragmatic. There is no tension between the two.

But actually, one doesn't really need information other than to know each side's bedfellows.

UPDATE, 3:30p: Here's a link to an open letter HLA proponents sent the bishops (after the bishops had issued 3 public statements, here, here, and here).

Britain's public health minister Dawn Primarolo announced a new teen anti-pregnancy campaign February 6 that will in part fund "long-acting reversible contraceptives," according to the Daily Mail. The options will be, according to DM:

Progesterone injection, effective up to 3 months Intrauterine device (IUD), effective 5+ years Progesterone implant, effective to 3 years Intrauterine system (IUS), effective 5 years

For those unfamiliar with the IUS, it's a cylinder implanted in the uterus containing timed-release progesterone.

Noted UK feminist Fay Weldon thinks this is a good idea. Writing in the DM February 15:

Last week, an intriguing proposition was mooted by Government minister Dawn Primarolo.

Teenage girls, she said, could be steered towards what is described as "long-term contraception."...

In other words, there is a way of effectively sterilising girls for a lengthy period of time.

At what age? Well, doesn't 12 until 17 sound rather sensible?...

This would have the advantage of bringing down the teenage pregnancy rate, so high in this country it makes us a disgrace among the nations - the worst offenders in Europe.

The abortion rate would fall sharply. And silly young girls could get on with the education that is meant to produce serious, responsible taxpayers, not benefit recipients.

Now, many people will see this modest proposal as little short of horrific - nothing less than state interference in our reproductive lives.

But think about it: it might not be such a bad idea....

So, in my view, there is little point any more in feeling shock-horror at the idea of mass sterilisation.

Watch for the "silly young girls" to remain "benefit recipients" for the HIV they contract instead of pregnancy.

Feministe (whose logo, right, always makes me smile, click to enlarge) blogger Jill opposes this proposal, although not for fear of increased deadly or incurable STDs among young feminists. She worries rather about the "deeply racist roots" of [f]orced and coerced sterilizations."

I didn't see the word "forced" anywhere, but how is government-funded long-term contraception any less coercive or have any shorter racist roots, than government-funded short-term contraception?

[HT: Anonymous Me and moderator Bethany; photo courtesy of the Daily Mail]

TMZ wondered February 20 whether Tori Spelling's 2nd pregnancy was a "ploy" to get a repeat contract from NutriSystem:

Tori Spelling probably made a ton of money from NutriSystem. After all, what a great ad - someone famous losing her baby weight.

So what does Tori do? She gets knocked up again and gains it all back. We're thinkin' it's one of the great ploys of 2008.

Here's the scenario. Tori has the kid and then resigns with NutriSystem, which pays her even more money to advertise how women with two kids can dump the weight.

We're guessing Tori could end up in a mansion again, with her own money and more kids than Mia Farrow....

The 34-year-old, married to actor Dean McDermott, delivered Liam Aaron on March 13, 2007.

She then lost 35-40# (reports differ) of baby fat on NutriSystem, going on to become a company spokesperson. According to People magazine, Spelling shot a new ad campaign in November that began appearing in women's magazines in December.

During this time Spelling got pregnant again, with not quite an Irish twin. She just announced her 2nd is due in July, 16 months after her 1st, according to People, where Spelling graces this week's cover.

Back to TMZ. Spelling announced in the October 1 edition of Ok! magazine she wanted to have kids close together. According to my pregnancy wheel, October was the month she conceived. Unless she deliberately withheld info from NutriSystem, the company knew in November she was pregnant again, or Spelling herself did not yet know.

TMZ may be just a gossip rag, but it examples how the calloused pop culture views children. It thinks having children close together or having a big family is abnormal, and no one would do it on purpose without an external, self-serving reason, in this case a get-richer-quicker scheme.

[Top photo credit: TMZ]

Students for Life of America has released a YouTube video from the February 9 CPAC wrap-up in DC.

Incredibly, the Conservative Political Action Conference is trying to squeeze social conservatives out. CPAC is sponsored by the American Conservative Union and presents itself as the largest annual gathering of American conservatives....

Tony Fabrizio of Fabrizio, McLaughlin & Associates, Inc., presented straw poll results gathered during the conference asking, "In your opinion, which of the following is the most and second most important issue for the next Republican nominee to focus on?"

After the presentation, Fabrizio and David Keene, president of ACU, took questions. Someone asked why "social values" was not an option.

Fabrizio first said illegal immigration was a social value, then said "social values" was an option but got too low a response to post. He then spun: "When we ask them to divide up and say ok, what was more important to you, economic issues and reducing the size of government versus moral issues, it was better than a three to one margin."

According to SFL, he was referring to another slide and question, which showed at least 22% of CPAC respondents said they considered traditional values like marriage and the life of the unborn most closely in line with their core beliefs and ideology, the 2nd highest response.  This showed, contrary to Fabrizio's claim, many attendees would likely have picked "social values" as most important for a presidential nominee to focus on - if allowed.

A KS House hearing on late-term abortion legislation yesterday went as I would have it go. Bravo to House members who took on this paternal psychopath. Gloves off. From the Topeka Capital-Journal, today:

The abortion hearing began matter-of-factly. A man testified Wednesday about how he and his wife came to the decision to have her undergo the procedure.

But anti-abortion legislators, taken aback by the man's explanation, minced few words in their response.

Speaking to members of the House Federal and State Affairs Committee, Tim Mosher recounted how he and his wife came to Wichita from metropolitan St. Louis to abort their 19-week-old fetus after learning the fetus had a severe case of spina bifida.... Mosher described the fetus' lemon-shaped brain "pushed so far back in her skull she would not have survived."

Tensions quickly rose when legislators began their questioning.

Rep. Steve Brunk (left), R-Bel Aire, whose own 30-year-old daughter has spina bifida, asked how Mosher had determined what sort of quality of life the child would have. Mosher replied that his family's decision was based on the medical diagnosis they received.

"What if the doctors might have been wrong about that?" Brunk asked.

"Then that's between God and myself," Mosher answered....

Rep. Forrest Knox (right), R-Altoona, said many people live with pain and suffering.

"If your daughter had been born and faced a life surrounded by pain and suffering with a conclusion that leads to death, would you have killed your daughter?" Knox asked.

Mosher, with hands fidgeting behind his back, paused for 10 seconds before answering.

"What one person may see as horrific and demonic, I view what I did to my daughter as out of love and respect," he said.

"What I did to my daughter," very telling.

Loved the question on postnatal abortion for pain and suffering.

Last month I spoke at a pro-life conference in OR and mentioned that a large west coast Catholic health care system, Providence Health & Services, was committing induced labor abortion.

I received the following letter via email while on vacation and didn't spot it until yesterday (click to enlarge):

This issue goes back to 2004 when I received a call from Catholic news reporter Tom Szyszkiewicz, who had published an article in Our Sunday Visitor in March 2004. There he wrote....

An Our Sunday Visitor investigation has revealed that some Catholic hospitals perform a procedure called "early induction for fetuses with anomalies incompatible with life"... or simply as "early induction." This procedure induces a woman into labor after her unborn child reaches viability around 23 to 26 weeks in cases when the child is known to have a condition that makes death inevitable soon after even a full-term birth. The child born in this way is made comfortable and often held by the mother until death.

The two most common conditions for which this procedure is performed are anencephaly, in which the child's brain and skull fail to develop beyond the brain stem, and renal agenesis, in which the kidneys and lungs are underdeveloped....

Neither presents an immediate danger to the mother....

Those Catholic hospitals that OSV found using the... procedure are Providence Alaska Medical Center in Anchorage, Alaska, part of the 10th-largest Catholic health system in the country, and Loyola University Health System in Chicago.

After I spoke with Tom I called both Loyola and Providence and confirmed what he was saying was true. Both systems admitted they committed, "early induction of labor" for fatally ill babies but insisted these were ethical. Providence stated not all its hospitals were involved, but the system approved the policy. Loyola even sent me its position paper (verbiage below). I wrote a total of 3 columns on Loyola/Providence: here, here, and here.

Reporter Maria Kennedy of the California Catholic newspaper San Francisco Faith read my columns and conducted an investigation of the entire Providence system. She wrote in November 2004:

Dan Boyle, communications director for Providence Saint Joseph in Burbank... said he had called Providence's corporate headquarters in Seattle for directions on how to respond to any media calls regarding the story. Providence Health Systems issued a statement, which even Boyle called "vague." The statement says that Providence Health System:

"follow[s] the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, approved by the Vatican in Rome for use in the United States. In individual cases where difficult decisions regarding such issues as early induction during pregnancy occur in a Providence hospital, an ethical review process is undertaken at the institutional level to assure that practices are consistent with the Ethical and Religious Directives. As concerned providers of care we realize that women and families in this situation are suffering greatly. We strive to extend to them respectful, compassionate care throughout a very difficult decision-making process."

When this reporter pressed Boyle on whether or not late term abortions were performed at Providence hospitals in the San Fernando Valley, he said, "I did check with our corporate headquarters, and I'm very limited in what I can say." According to Boyle, "this procedure is done rarely; it's a private procedure. If this procedure is necessary, we conduct an ethical review to make sure we are in compliance with the Ethical and Religious Directives."

Clearly, Providence was involved in induced labor abortion. I also contacted the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which was already aware that some Catholic hospitals were twisting the Catholic Church's sanction of full-term or crisis induction of labor so as to induce premature labor before a baby was viable for the express purpose of provoking unnatural death of the baby, i.e., killing the baby.

The USCCB sent me 2 documents clearly stating the Catholic position, "National Council of Catholic Bishops Statement on Early Induction of Labor," which it issued 4 days after Tom's article was published, and "Moral Principles Concerning Infants with Anencephaly."

If Providence has since changed its position, it can clear this matter up by sending me its revised policy. Otherwise, the system still sanctions induced labor abortion.

Loyola's "early induction of labor" policy, sent to me in September 2004:

Early induction is performed at LUHS only if the fetus has reached 24 weeks of gestation - currently accepted as the stage of viability - which is consistent with the Ethical and Religious Directives for Health Care Services. In addition, early induction for fetuses with anomalies is only performed at Loyola if the fetus has anencephaly or Potter's disease (underdevelopment of the brain and kidneys, respectively). Both of these conditions are fatal to the fetus.

UPDATE, 2/22, 12:10p: Tom Szyszkiewicz has sent me the link to a Catholic Anchor article indicating Providence Alaska Medical Center has mended its ways. But why is it refusing to release its new policy? Still not convinced.

Meanwhile, both Maria Kennedy and I confirmed the Providence system condones the practice and has 3 other hospitals in AK as well as 20 hospitals in CA, OR, MT, and WA. Until it produces a revised policy it is condemned.

A few years ago I visited Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun's grave at Arlington National Cemetery and seriously got chills. He's credited with twisting the law and Constitution into a pretzel (a statement scholars on both sides of the abortion debate agree upon) to legalize abortion in 1973.

I expect to get the same chills if someday walking past the grave of Sarah Weddington, the attorney who successfully argued Roe v. Wade before the Supremes, unless she recants.

She may see that future:

Weddington told The Vancouver Sun in an interview in advance of her visit here that such a big win so early in life posed a bit of a personal dilemma.

"There were some years when I thought, 'How will I trump Roe vs. Wade?' I have finally made peace with the fact that I will never trump it."

She knows exactly how the first line of her obituary will read... "Sarah Weddington, the woman who won Roe vs. Wade.... "

Obviously, at least to the world, Weddington considers Roe the high point of her life. Now in her mid-60s, she also considers it her earthly legacy. I can't imagine the load of her thoughts, if she ever examines all facets.

Supreme death watch

Weddington can credit herself with pronouncing 50 million people dead. Ironically, there is one or two she doesn't want to die....

The bond is that these deaths and lives are self-serving to Weddington. She must be in a morbid mood. Also from the Sun:

The court has four judges against legal abortion and four in favour. One of those four in favour is 87 years old [John Paul Stevens] and another is a rail-thin survivor of colon cancer [Ruth Bader Ginsburg]....

Weddington is so concerned, she recently made a point of attending an American Bar Association meeting because she heard the 87-year-old judge was speaking.

"I wanted to shake his hand to see if he was vigorous and sharp. I was very reassured that he had a really good strong handshake."

Weddington is hopeful, however, that either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama will become U.S. president....

"I do think we really do have a good chance but between now and November, a lot of different things can happen."

Apparently, Weddington is always on a death watch of some sort.

[HT: LifeNews.com; current photo of Weddington courtesy of the Vancouver Sun]

So far I am keeping up with my New Year's resolution to read the Bible in a year. I'm now in Leviticus and read relevant commentary to our topic this morning. Specifically, I was reading Leviticus 11, about which animals, marine life, fowl, and insects God considered clean and unclean for eating. From the Baker Commentary:

While hygiene was important for a people dedicated to God, the primary reason for dietary regulations in Leviticus was theological.

The only flesh of animals Israelites could eat was of those which fed on various kinds of grasses. They could not eat carnivorous predators. Blood and life are synonymous (Lev. 17:11), and the Israelite had to be very careful of what he ate so he exercised respect for life. Even acceptable animals had to be slaughtered in a specific manner so their blood could be drained out in the proper way....

The only marine life permitted for food were creatures with fins and scales. Any other marine life was forbidden because they were carnivores, eating flesh and blood together.

The list of prohibited fowl in this chapter includes birds which prey on other forms of life....

Of all flying insects, only the grasshopper and various kinds of locust were allowed for food since these creatures were also herbivorous.

Warning: Bearing I Corinthians 2:14 in mind ("But people who aren't Christians can't understand these truths from God's Spirit. It all sounds foolish to them because only those who have the Spirit can understand what the Spirit means."), we will remove any comments considered mocking or blasphemous from this post, and the threshold will be low.

BTW, as I've previously explained, I've come to believe our bodies are much better off if we follow God's food guidelines for the Jews. It makes sense.

On February 8 ABC News and 20/20 ran the story of 2'9" Christianne Ray, 6'4" Jeremy Bowden, and their baby Krysten Elise. According to ABC, Christianne is likely the shortest mother in the world. Here's a video clip taken when Christianne was pregnant:

According to ABC, Christianne considered abortion and was counseled strongly to abort:

When Ray found out she was pregnant, she felt conflicted, and scared.

"I kinda was like, 'Oh, I should get an abortion, I don't know what I should do, I'm too young for this, I'm too short for this. I don't know if I can carry this baby. I don't know what Jeremy's gonna think, I don't know if Jeremy's gonna leave me.' Well, actually, I didn't think Jeremy would leave me but I didn't know what Jeremy was gonna think," she said....

The first obstetrician Ray visited strongly recommended an abortion, and said that carrying the baby could kill her.

Ray said she and Bowden cried for about an hour. Eventually, she decided that if there was any question as to whether or not she truly wanted an abortion she wouldn't go through with it.

Ray found a new doctor....

The pregnancy went well, and they planned a C-section one month early.

On April 24, Krysten Elise was born. Bowden was elated upon seeing his daughter for the first time....

"I've never seen his face lit up so much," Ray said.

We now know Krysten is also a dwarf. At 9 months old, she "is only the length of a newborn."

This little girl is truly lucky to be alive. Other parents would have aborted her for that. How awkward it would have been had Krysten been diagnosed as a dwarf en utero with the ensuing suggestion to her mother that she abort for the imperfection.

Christianne and Jeremy plan to marry this summer.

[HT: moderator Bethany]

Do voters take a candidate's spouse into consideration when electing a president? Some say not, but I think so, even subliminally. Swift boater John Kerry sank on his own, for instance, but did Teresa add weight? And on Monday Michelle Obama certainly didn't help Barack with her "for the first time I'm proud of my country" gaffe.

I think Hillary Clinton's candidacy legitimizes the discussion. And so I ask it in a round-about way in my new poll:

Which presidential candidate's spouse do you think would make the best First Lady or First Gentleman?

My last poll question was for conservatives, but tsk tsk, liberals couldn't help but add their opinion....

Hence 20+% said they planned to vote for Barack or Hillary over likely Republican nominee John McCain. Otherwise, a majority of us are resigned to vote for McCain over a Democrat alternative that makes us shudder.

Did you vote? Find your own brightly waving flag. Click to enlarge:

Comment to either poll here, not on the Vizu website.

This just in from the mother of Laura Hope Smith, who was killed by abortionist Rapin Osathanondh at Women's Health Center in Hyannis, MA, on September 13, 2007, as I previously reported....

Eileen Smith is reporting in an email that she just received a call from the Boston Medical Board of Registration telling her it pulled Osathanondh's medical license today, "because they view him as a risk to public safety."...

Osathanondh's license revocation will remain in place until the Board tries his case, at which time we hope it will be permanently ripped up.

Laura was 22 years old and 13 weeks pregnant when the one-man chop shop bottom feeder administered anesthesia alone while aborting her. Laura died on the table.

Eileen also reports the Boston Medical Examiner's Office finally released Laura's cause of death two days ago, five months after she was killed: "cardiac pulmonary arrest during anesthesia during a voluntary termination of pregnancy." Eileen agrees with the cause of death.

Eileen says the Board plans to issue a press release, so we'll soon be reading about this in the news.

"I can finally feel that my 5 months of efforts of pushing to be heard has reaped some justice for Laura," wrote Eileen in an email. "Please continue in your prayers and letting people know about what happened to my precious daughter and your wonderful friend."

UPDATE, 4:00p: The Medical Board just called Eileen to say Osathanondh has voluntarily resigned his license permanently and will never practice in MA nor any another state. By this, he avoids a Board hearing but still faces disciplinary action and, hopefully, a grand jury indictment.

In response to my Down trodding post, about the controversy stirred earlier this week when University of North Carolina professor Albert Harris told his embryology class that babies with Down syndrome should be aborted, documentary film maker Bonnie Burt emailed him an offer:

I have recently completed a film about a couple, both born with Down syndrome... [and] would like to offer your university a free screening of.... Strong Love....

Please let me know if you are interested in previewing this film. I think it will help along the discussion that Professor Harris started. It might be of interest to your students.

Synopsis of the movie, from its website:

Strong Love is the story of world-class weight lifter Jon Shapiro and his childhood sweetheart Holly James, both of whom were born with Down syndrome. This documentary follows the couple over the course of three years, starting with their decision to get married. Their challenges, their triumphs, and their complex, sometimes surprising relationships with family and friends are at the heart of this inspiring film.

Bonnie has just posted an excerpt from Strong Love on YouTube. I just watched it a second time and cried a second time. I pity people who view those with Down syndrome as a liability on this earth rather than a much needed ambassadors of pure and unconditional love.

It's interesting to watch pro-aborts fight. They confine themselves to a war of words when picking on someone their own size. No dismembering, no decapitating, how refreshing.

Right now they're engaged in a rarely seen public snarl over which Democrat presidential candidate to support. This will likely stop after they pick a nominee, so the pack can resume attacking the Republican.

Meanwhile, the rift is revealing....

The grumpy old feminists, who for half a century have been decrying sexism, are herding around Hillary because she's a woman, the epitome of chauvinism.

There are reports lesbians are also flocking to Hillary, but I've thought for some time grumpy old feminists and lesbians were one and the same. The president and vice president of NOW in my state are live-in lesbian lovers, for instance. So that may not be news.

On Obama's side we have....

Continue reading my column today, "Divine secrets of the political yo-yo sisterhood," on WorldNetDaily.com.

Below is a listing of then-state Senator Barack Obama's votes and state senate floor speeches on IL's Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

(At right is a political cartoon by Jack Higgins, printed in the Chicago Sun-Times on August 25, 2004, during his U.S. Senate campaign.)

A package of Born Alive bills was introduced three times during Obama's tenure.

The cornerstone bill was the Born Alive Infants Protection Act, aka "Born Alive Infant Defined," which defined legal personhood to include born alive infants any time the words "person," "human being," "child," or "individual" was stated in IL law.

This definition was identical to the federal BAIPA which was drafted from the definition of "live birth" created by the World Health Organization in 1950 and adopted by the United Nations in 1955.

Following are Obama's actions and votes on Born Alive. The bill number changed every year it was reintroduced.

2001

Senate Bill 1095, Born Alive Infant Protection Act

Obama's "no" vote in the IL Senate Judiciary Committeehere, March 28, 2001

Transcript of Obama's verbal opposition to Born Alive on the IL Senate floor, March 30, 2001, pages 84-90

Obama's "present" vote on the IL Senate floor, March 30, 2001

2002

Senate Bill 1662, Born Alive Infant Protection Act

Obama's "no" vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee, March 6, 2002

Transcript of Obama's verbal opposition to Born Alive on the IL Senate floor, April 4, 2002, pages 28-35

Obama's "no" vote on the IL Senate floor, April 4, 2002

Listen to audio from Obama's 2002 IL Senate floor debate wherein he argued that while babies might be aborted alive, it would be a "burden" to a mother's "original decision" to assess and treat them.

Meanwhile, the federal Born Alive Infants Protection Act with a "neutrality clause" added passed the U.S. Senate 98-0, the U.S. House overwhelmingly, and was signed into law August 5, 2002. The pro-abortion group NARAL expressed neutrality on the bill.

2003

Senate Bill 1082, Born Alive Infant Protection Act

Democrats took control of the IL Senate with the 2002 elections. This year Born Alive was sent to the Health & Human Services Committee, chaired by Barack Obama.

As can be seen on the vote docket, Obama first voted to amend SB1082 to add the "neutrality clause" from the federal version of Born Alive to the IL version to make them absolutely identical. (DP#1 means "Do Pass Amendment #1.)

Then Obama voted against the identical version. (DPA means, "Do Pass as Amended.)

Additional corroboration of Obama's vote: IL State Senate Republican Staff Analysis of SB 1082, March 12-13, 2003, bottom of page 2

For 4 years following his 2003 vote Obama misrepresented it, stating the wording of the IL version of Born Alive was not the same as the federal version, and he would have voted for it if so. As recently as August 16, 2008 Obama made this false assertion.

But when evidence presented was irrefutable, Obama's campaign on August 18, 2008, admitted the truth to the New York Sun.

The nonpartison group FactCheck.org has since corroborated Obama voted against identical legislation as passed overwhelmingly on the federal level and then misrepresented his vote.

I didn't originally intend to post about Gianna Jessen, below. I just spotted her picture and was reminded of her story when looking up something Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life wrote January 28, "Will women go to jail for abortions?"

Bill Clinton has made this topic more timely than ever. Fr. Pavone has good thoughts:

Question: "When abortion becomes illegal again, are we going to start throwing all the women who have abortions into jail?"

Answer: No. The people who should go to jail in that case are the abortionists.

This particular question will be raised more and more as we to come closer to restoring protection to the unborn. The question is actually part of the well-planned public relations attack that abortion advocates always try to make on us in the pro-life movement. We are anti-woman, after all. Isn't that the only logical reason why we would oppose abortion in the first place? That's what they want the public to believe....

Yet the fact is that to be pro-life is to be pro-woman. We don't say love the baby and forget about the mother. Rather, we ask, Why can't we love them both? This is not just true when abortion is legal. It's also true when it's illegal.

The pro-life movement is not out to punish women. Our goal, instead, is to stop child-killing. What would throwing women in jail do to accomplish that goal? Their children have already died, yet the abortionist goes on killing hundreds and thousands of others. It makes far more sense to put the abortionist in jail, so that he or she can no longer kill children.

Moreover, the woman who gets an illegal abortion is the best source of information and evidence needed to convict the abortionist. If she feared prosecution, she would never admit to the abortion, which would make it harder to find the abortionist.

This doesn't excuse the woman's wrongdoing; rather, it is the same principle by which the state grants immunity to a small-time drug user in exchange for information leading to a big-time drug dealer.

This approach takes nothing away from the biological fact that abortion destroys a human life, nor from the moral fact that the life taken is of the same value as any born person. But consider how the law approaches the killing of born people. Murder is not the same as homicide, which is not the same as manslaughter. Factors of premeditation, heat of passion, ignorance, negligence, and cooperation in the action of someone else are all taken into account in order to assess as fairly as possible how much responsibility the individual actually had.

Consider these words from someone who had an abortion: "I really had no idea of what I was doing. I was completely ignorant about fetal development. I just wanted to get out of the crisis I was in." More than any other form of killing, abortion is accompanied by pressure and ignorance. If we were going to start prosecuting women, we would actually end up prosecuting more boyfriends and parents.

But in fact, we conduct a ministry of healing, not of punishment. We want to bring those who have been involved in abortions to the freedom, forgiveness, and peace of Christ. That's how we answer what will be a more and more common question.

The photo, right, is of Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life and Gianna Jessen at the West Coast Walk for Life in CA on January 19.

Ever heard of Gianna? She was aborted alive. Her story in brief:

Gianna's biological mother was 17 when she had a saline abortion in her third trimester....After being burned alive for ~18 hours in the womb from the saline solution, Gianna was delivered alive in a Los Angeles County abortion clinic. Her medical records state, "born during saline abortion"... caus[ing] her Cerebral Palsy.... She weighed a mere 2 lbs. at birth.

Gianna was transferred by ambulance to a hospital, grew into a beautiful young woman with an excellent singing voice who now travels the world singing and telling her story.

I met Gianna in 2000. She testified with me at the Born Alive Infant Protection Act hearings. We both were invited to witness President Bush sign BAIPA into law in August 2001. Here's a photo, with Gianna standing next to me....

Left to right: Wanda Franz, president, National Right to Life; Archbishop Donald Wuerl; Hadley Arkes, crafter of BAIPA; Steve Chabot, House sponsor of BAIPA; President Bush; Rick Santorum, Senate sponsor of BAIPA; me; Gianna; Dr. Watson Bowes, ob/gyn who testified with us.

UPDATE, 4:45p: I forgot this great story about Gianna. This happened in 2006, as relayed by Jon Sanders of Townhall.com:

Last year Jessen made a memorable appearance before the Colorado House of Representatives. She was invited to sing the national anthem there by Rep. Ted Harvey, R-Highlands Ranch. Her affliction caused her to lose her balance, and her nerves caused her to falter, and everyone present joined with her to encourage her.

When she was done, Harvey introduced her to the chamber. He spoke of her cerebral palsy from a traumatic birth, her life in foster homes before being adopted, how she struggled even to lift her head, then crawl and walk, and how she now runs in marathons to raise awareness of cerebral palsy. Harvey called her a modern day hero, and Jessen received a standing ovation.

Harvey wasn't done....

On the docket that day was a resolution to honor the 90th anniversary of the Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood clinic. Harvey then revealed the cause of Jessen's cerebral palsy: the failed abortion at a Planned Parenthood clinic. He was gaveled down, of course, but he told the Speaker, "I just wanted to put a face to what we are celebrating today."

House Democrats fumed. Majority Leader Alice Madden told the Denver Post that Harvey had been "amazingly rude to use a human being as an example of his personal politics."

Jessen, who presumably would have known she had been used, told the Post, "We need to discuss the humanity of it [abortion]. I'm glad to be able to speak up for children in the womb. If abortion is about women's rights, where were my rights?"

The news yesterday was all about Bill Clinton's outburst against pro-lifers at a campaign stop in Steubenville, OH, February 18.

I agree with Tom at American Papist that...

Most of the attention, I'm sure, has to do with the ongoing prurient interest that folks have in watching Bill Clinton embarrass himself, but I'm sure the subject matter is also gaining a share of the attention.

... if only by osmosis.

Our message went out on every video clip.

Thank goodness David Vogel and friend had the wherewithal to turn their signs toward the audience - and camera.

Also, terminology "choice" or "pro-choice" was never used. Clinton called us "pro-life" twice and said the words "murder" and "abortion" in context together.

Even some newscasters called us "pro-life." View just one example here....

Phat Catholic also spotted news reel of pro-lifers turning their backs to Clinton to say the Rosary.

I was surprised no reporter targeted the pro-lifers for disrupting Clinton's speech, but they didn't. The only angle presented was anti-Clinton: angry, off-message, hurting his wife's campaign.

The only down side was having Clinton's untrue "pro-lifers really want to throw aborting women in jail" mantra go out over and over.

Despite that wee complaint, our message went out very well.

Never thought I'd say this but, thank you, Bill Clinton.

I had to ponder the double negative in the first sentence of this blog post on Juno by pro-abort Revolution Newspaper. "[N]ot anti-choice"? What, they don't even want to be called pro-choice anymore?

How is it that audiences who are not anti-choice are walking out of a movie like Juno without even realizing what hit them?

For many years now, Christian fascists have been hammering a message that what America needs is a return to the oppressive values of the 1950s (and in many ways, the 1850s), including a return to traditional woman's role as mother. They have been setting terms very broadly, to the point that any Democrat who wants to run for president has to declare that abortion is morally wrong and tragic, while the movement to ban all abortion grows and shuts down clinics....

And through all this, a morality has spread that accepts that we "all" supposedly abhor abortion as a tragedy. The fact that so many people have been taken in by Juno should serve as a wake-up call on how ominously far things have gone in that direction.

I do wonder what alternative Rev thinks we have to a "woman's role as mother." I know they're working on uterine facsimiles, but until then, I must enlighten Rev that there is only one conduit to propagate the species. What, didn't you have comprehensive sex ed, my friend?

I also must note the "morality [that] has spread that accepts that we 'all' supposedly abhor abortion as a tragedy" was started by Rev's very own Bill Clinton, now perpetuated by Hillary. "Safe, legal, and rare," Rev? Never heard that phrase?

I agree this presents a problem. As recently as two days ago, Bill called abortion a "tragedy." The next question is, why?

I agree with Rev that their situation is ominous.

On a related note, a young reporter named Brianna, writing for a school newspaper in CA, emailed me last week with questions about my thoughts on Juno. One was, "What message or impact do you feel this movie sends to teens?" I responded I would be interested in her answering that for my blog, which she did:

Well... most of my friends and I thought that it wasn't realistic. Although none of us have even come close to getting pregnant, we still felt that the decision would be much harder to make and that our parents would have been much more upset than Juno's were.

It was extremely unrealistic that she would find adoptive parents that quickly, and I thought the movie stereotyped your typical planned parenthood.

I personally thought that the movie glorified teen pregnancy and that people who saw this movie would think of pregnancy in a greater light. I think that the movies and media have an easier way to get into teens heads and they sometimes give unspoken lessons that teens listen to instead of their parents. Therefore, some of my friends and I think that this movie is a propaganda for the teen.

Despite some of my friends and I's opinion, many people believe that it was good for teens to see the consequences of their actions. I think for many people the movie was a reality check and it really made people think of what could happen.

Well I just watched an undercover video shot by the Humane Society of a California beef plant where cows were supposedly tortured and killed, and I must say I'm disgusted.

The 5 o'clock news last night showed clips of the video - with no warning of its graphic nature. I'm glad my seven-year-old grandson wasn't around, or I might have had to explain where hamburger comes from.

What's wrong with these Humane Society people? Don't they have better things to do with their time? They would adopt their own cow herd if they really cared.

At any rate, this video is a fake, I'm sure.

And even if not, I don't believe cows feel pain when being plowed by forklifts. No one can prove to me that they do.

Many cows in the video were maimed anyway. Slaughtering them was best for all. What else would we do with them? No one wants them. We're just putting them out of their misery. I'm sure this is what they would tell us they want if they could talk.

These Humane Society people are obsessed. They should get a life. They may not like how meat plants slaughter cows, but that's their choice. If we regulate cattle-killing, the next thing you know there will be no more steaks. Or slaughter houses may resort to underground illegal cattle killing.

I'm thrilled this incident created flak and made the news, indicating more sensitivity to the issue of eugenic abortions. From the Associated Press, today:

Comments by a University of North Carolina professor about Down syndrome has angered several students in his class.

Albert Harris told his embryology class on Monday he thinks fetuses with Down syndrome should be aborted. He says he's made the comment many times before.

But senior Lara Frame of Charlotte said the classroom was no place for Harris to express his opinion. Frame's brother has Down syndrome and she said Harris' comments made her physically ill....

Several students in the class said they didn't think the professor's comments were inappropriate.

Harris said he wouldn't follow his own moral position. His wife, then 34, was pregnant with their third child when she suffered major bleeding. Doctors told the couple to prepare for the worst. He said if the child had been born with Down syndrome, he and his wife would have cherished it.

Sounds like major back-peddling to me. Harris thinks Down's babies should be hunted down and aborted, yet he wouldn't?

Email Professor Harris your thoughts on his eugenic beliefs at akharris@bio.unc.edu.

[HT: moderator Valerie]

AFP reports the French Supreme Court has ruled that parents have the right to name their miscarried or stillborn baby no matter what gestational age.

Before 3 mothers of earlier-term babies filed the winning lawsuit, French officials "insisted," according to the story, that preborns be 22-weeks-old or 1.1 pounds to merit a name.

The ruling will also allow mothers to bury their babies rather than be forced to let hospitals incinerate them and let moms take maternity leave....

Abortion proponents are afraid the ruling may "raise[] potential conflicts about abortion and embryo research," according to AFP.

The American feminist Women's e-news fears, "[t]he ruling raises questions on the issue of 'personhood' for unborn fetuses and provides anti-choice forces a platform to challenge French laws on birth control and abortion."

Yes, that certainly does reveal yet another abortion inconsistency. It's getting harder and harder to carve out (pardon the pun) that abortion nonperson nook.

Reader Sandy is an expert on miscarriage law and reported in an email of her group's failed attempt to pass a federal law that would simply mandate mothers be given disposal choice of their babies after a D&C; or miscarriage. Wrote Sandy:

So much for women's "choice" when it comes to giving grieving women "choices" how to respectfully bury or bless their much wanted babies. It is their body, their baby; it should be their "choice." I am so tired of the pro-abort agenda dictating to women and their families the right to what, why, when, where, and how based on their whacked sense of entitlement about pregnancy loss. They continue to throw women under the bus to save their "choice."

[HT: LifeSiteNews.com via moderator Bethany; photos are of Bethany's 6-week-old miscarried baby, who she and her husband named Blessing.]

Everyone agrees we have a right to our own feelings. It is well documented that Bill Clinton thinks he has a right to his own facts, which he attempted to spout last night during his temper tantrum against a pro-lifer in Steubenville, OH. I posted that video here. Clinton's misinformation was this:

I reduced abortion... [Y]ou can't name me anybody presently in politics that did more to introduce policies that reduce the number of real abortions....

The number of U. S. abortions may have gone down during Clinton's presidency, but it was certainly not for his lack of trying to raise them. In fact, Bill Clinton availed the worldwide abortion industry and mothers greater access to abort during his tenure. I've chronicled Clinton's actions as president in a powerpoint presentation, to make it easier on the eye. Click on any slide to enlarge. I begin with Clinton's alleged but credible personal history with abortion, his flip flop, and then his actions as president:

See remaining slides on page 2.

[The bulk of my information was gleaned from National Right to Life here and here, Concerned Women for America, and The Alan Guttmacher Institute.]

This :50 commercial, made for a class project and just posted on YouTube, indicates accidental pregnancies result in jerk men abandoning women. The pregnancies culminate in abusive mothers who raise criminals. All this makes abortion "a good thing."

So women who abort are stupid for having ok'd sex with pigs and are preempted child abusers. That's the message I get.

WARNING:Video contains sexual content and adult language.

At a Steubenville, OH, campaign stop for his wife earlier this afternoon, Bill Clinton "snapped hard" at a pro-lifer in the audience, according to MSNBC.

I just spoke with another pro-lifer who attended the event, Billy Valentine, a student at Franciscan University in Steubenville. Here's the backdrop.

Over 100 pro-lifers, mostly university students, were awaiting Clinton's arrival with a protest before he spoke at Steubenville High School. They were on Clinton's side of the car when he stepped out, so he saw them. Organizers wouldn't let the protesters in, saying the event was full. But a few hid their signs and were allowed in. That's when the fun began.

See transcript on page 2.

UPDATE, 2/18, 10:45a: Quoting ABC News about Clinton's tirade: "He was so angry, we, in the press, couldn't keep up with what he was saying."

UPDATE, 2/18, 12:45p: The pro-lifer having the exchange with Clinton last night, David Vogel, has emailed me with further details:

I... confronted Bill Clinton last night... after he misled people... about child protection laws, child health care and no child left behind. The question I asked Bill Clinton that he never did answer, was this:

What about abortion? What about the 4000+ children scheduled for abortion today in America, what about their lives, what about their right to life?...

While he pointed his finger at me... I... point[ed] to the sign,"ABORTION KILLS CHILDREN."

UPDATE, 2/18, 1:40p: Drudge is carrying this story near the top of the page [HT: American Papist, which links to additional media coverage, and reader Phil]. News coverage is slanted against Clinton for losing his temper, not the protester. Fox News brought up a good point, that Clinton's response was all about his administration, which is "off-message" and creating a "distraction" to his wife's campaign.

I gave you the answer. We disagree with you. You wanna criminalize women and their doctors and we disagree... I reduced abortion... Tell the truth, tell the truth... If you were really pro-life, if you were really pro-life, you would want to put every doctor and every mother as an accessory to murder in prison. And you won't say you wanna do that because you know that because you know that you wouldn't have a lick of political support. Now, the issue is who... the issue is, you can't name me anybody presently in politics that did more to introduce policies that reduce the number of real abortions instead of the hot air putting out to tear people up and make votes by dividing America.

This is not your rally. I heard you. That's another thing you need is a president, somebody who will stick up for individual rights and not be pushed around, and she won't.

Bill Clinton telling pro-lifers how to be pro-life? Ha. Why is it pro-aborts are always pushing to criminalize aborting mothers?

And he says we're the ones who "tear people up"? Ha again.

by Bob Gorrell for the Creator's Syndidate...

by Steve Kelley for the Times Biscayne...

The new poll question is up:

This question is for conservatives. There is widespread talk among our tribe that "we're not gonna take it anymore," re: likely GOP presidential nominee John McCain, whom many consider a RINO (Republican in Name Only). If McCain's name appears on the November ballot, what will you do?

Answers to the previous poll question intrigued me....

16+% have had abortions, 68+% know someone who has had an abortion, and 35+% know a father whose child has been aborted. Yet only 3.2% of men said their child had been aborted. Not sure how to account for the disparity. I think as many men traffic this blog as women. Denial?

If you answered this poll question, click on the map to find your very own flapping flag.

Please make comments about the new or old poll here, not on the Vizu website.

Granny Grump at the Real Choice blog has listed "The Top Ten Signs Your Boyfriend is an Abortionist." Witty:

10. You've seen him run medical instruments through the dishwasher.

9. The top three numbers on his speed-dial are a lawyer, a bookie, and a bail bondsman....

8. His neighbors are always wondering who puts the red biohazard bags in the dumpster.

7. He deducts his [child] pornography collection from his income tax as an educational expense.

6. Every hooker in town knows him on a first-name basis.

5. He says he went to Harvard, but gets the alumni newsletter from the Autonomous University of Guadalajara Medical School.

4. He keeps a stock of blue exam pads in the back seat of his car.

3. He's always ducking out the back door to avoid process servers.

2. He gives you chocolate-covered Percocet for Valentine's Day.

And the number one sign your boyfriend is an abortionist:

1. He has sex with you first, then slips you a mickey.

Can you think of any other signs one's boyfriend is an abortionist?

[HT: reader Janet]

On the heels of its victory over YouTube censorship, American Life League today released a new video, "Planned Parenthood kills for profit." PP has energized its streamlined enterprise to become a more lean, mean, killing machine.

A month ago I posted American Life League's new video, which it had posted on YouTube, spotlighting Planned Parenthood's new "Mile High" ad as well as other PP best of's.

On February 11, ALL got notice YouTube had yanked its video for its "inappropriate nature."

But get this. YouTube did not yank PP's original "Mile High" ad.

Now, thanks to the pro-life community's outrage about YouTube's obvious viewpoint discrimination, it reinstated ALL's video yesterday, apologizing in an email there had been a "technical malfunction."

Not true. YouTube's guidelines state, "If we remove your video after reviewing it, you can assume that we removed it purposefully, and you should take our warning notification seriously."

So YouTube was unfairly censoring and just got caught.

And now, back by demands for fairness, ALL's Planned Parenthood Sells Sex video:

"Mahalo" means "thank you" in Hawaiian. And that's what I'd like to say to my moderators for ably filling in the gap while Rich and I vacationed there.

I enjoyed great peace of mind knowing Bethany, Jacque, Jasper, MK, and Valerie were at the blog helm.

I'd like to particularly thank Bethany and MK for being the glue and primary contributors.

Site stats didn't suffer in the least during the past 1.5 weeks, meaning everyone still tuned in during my absence for pro-life news and commentary. Mahalo to you readers and commenters for that as well.

Whoops.

Yesterday was supposed to celebrate V-Day, devised 10 years ago by activist Eve Ensler to combat violence against women.

In that decade V-Day has raised over $50 million, according to Fundraising Success magazine, largely by allowing groups to produce Ensler's play, The Vagina Monologues, as a benefit. Groups must apply, and V-Day must approve donation plans as well as receive 10% of proceeds.

Sometimes star power helps sell VM tickets. Enter Jane Fonda, who has performed the play and yesterday appeared with Ensler on The Today Show to promote V-Day.

The ever judgment-challenged Fonda decided to utter a word on morning network television from the VM that will never be ready for prime time and is, in fact, the most despicably sexist word in the English language: the c-word....

They say any publicity is good publicity, and it may be Ensler and Fonda are giggling between themselves today about all the adverse attention Fonda brought V-Day, although in actuality Fonda's indiscretion overshadowed it. This will inspire liberals, though, who will certain rally and produce VM with even wilder abandon.

BTW, some of V-Day's goals are laudable. It fights rape, incest, female genital mutliation, and sex slavery around the world.

But Ensler is an outspoken pro-abort, and one of VM's producers and V-Day supporters is Planned Parenthood.

It is simply illogical to decry violence against women while promoting abortion, of which well over half its victims are female.

See Jane run (her mouth off) here.

[Photo courtesy of Fundaising Success magazine]

by Mary Kay Hastings

Last month the City of Aurora dismissed motions pro-life attorneys filed to reverse permit decisions allowing Planned Parenthood to build.

Now, pro-life advocates have filed suit against officials for the City's inexplicable contention that PP's permit approvals did not violate City zoning rules.

The plaintiffs, including residents and Fox Valley Families Against Planned Parenthood, say the clinic misrepresented itself to the city and to the public, using a fictitious name, the Gemini Office Development corporation, to hide behind during the zoning approval process....

Because of this, neighbors and residents were denied the right to oppose the abortion mill.

The lawsuit seeks to revoke the clinic's occupancy permit.

Says Tom Brechja, lead pro-life attorney at the Thomas More Society:

By concealing the true planned use of the property, Planned Parenthood evaded the process that would have provided local residents and city officials with the opportunity to question how their neighborhood and community would be changed.

Democracy can't work for people if they are denied an opportunity to impact even their own neighborhoods, he added. It simply isn’t fair to allow any entity, including Planned Parenthood, to operate outside the law .

by Mary Kay Hastings and Bethany Kerr

Skip the candy, skip the flowers, and skip the card. Give 'em what they really want. Condoms!...

View the NYC "Get some" tv ads by clicking on this graphic:

by Mary Kay Hastings

Thirty years ago today, the Chicago Sun-Times conducted an undercover investigative report on abortion clinics with horrifying findings.

Today the paper reprinted it.

You've got to ask, what has changed?

This week alone brought us these stories:

by Bethany and Mary Kay

And now for something completely different....

Fetal Scooby-Doo?

There is a message in this cartoon somewhere....

by Jill Stanek

Rich and I are returning home from our Hawaiian vacation today, which has sensitized me more than ever to the devastation of population decline.

One elderly half-Hawaiian told me she thinks there are no pure blooded Hawaiians left; Encyclopedia Britannica puts the number at less than 10,000.

It is politically correct to blame Westerners for the Hawaiian demise. Numbering anywhere from 300k-500k or more when Captain James Cook arrived in 1778, it is true their numbers spiraled downward due to the introduction of our diseases, like chicken pox, measles, and STDs.

But omitted from discussion is the ancient Hawaiian penchant for human sacrifice, numbering in the tens to hundreds of thousands to angry gods, as well as a strict penal code with capital punishment for breaking numerous taboos that included crossing one's shadow over a chief's shadow.

Speaking of chiefs, also omitted from popular discussion is the ancient Hawaiian class system with the belief that inbreeding between siblings and other immediate family members was good, certainly also weakening the Hawaiian strain.

How many millions of their progeny did Hawaiians themselves snuff?

All of that was actually an aside. Troy Newman of Operation Rescue alerted me to this trailer about the soon-to-be-released documentary, Demographic Winter. Click on this image to watch it at its link....

From the Demographic Winter website:

Everyone knows all this. By "everyone" I mean the UN, statisticians, government leaders, and population experts. They just won't discuss it above whispers, if at all, because the facts either betray their established political agenda, or, would be too politically damaging to spotlight.

by Jacqueline Harvey

As a pro-life activist, I've heard my fair share of the mantra, "How many unwanted children are you going to adopt?" As a woman who desires to adopt and knows countless families created or supplemented by adoption, this is easy to retort: "As many as I can."

But at my most recent trip to the pound, I had a thought that has made me think of this a different way.

Walking through the cages of the animals doomed to death in 72 hours if no one claimed them, my heart shattered. I wished I could save them all, but was fettered by the reality that I am simply not equipped to care for dozens upon dozens of dogs.

Then, I became angry. There was nothing wrong with those dogs that condemned them, but their owners. Irresponsible owners who failed to spay/neuter, failed to feed their animals, failed to properly restrain them, just flat failed them. Even the aggressive dogs were only such because of abuse or neglect.

The bottom line was that I can't force people to spay/neuter. I can't force them to properly vaccinate or feed their dependent animals- but moreover, I can't do this for them. As much as I would LOVE to save and adopt the innocent animals who face the consequences of their irresponsibility, I can not....

Likewise, I can't force people to practice sexual morality. I can't force women to save sex only for individuals who will not abandon them when the line turns blue. I can't force men to stick around and raise the children they create. I can't force either gender to save sex for a time and circumstance where the natural consequences (children) are wanted. And as much as I would give anything to save and adopt the innocent children who face the consequences of this irresponsibility, I can not.

While 10 million couples do wait to adopt, over 3,000 children are killed each day by people who refuse to accept the obligation to simply birth them.To promote responsibility for the dependent, must one take other's responsibility in order to not be a hypocrite? No. Even if I weren't the mother of two rescued dogs, even if I hadn't hand fed over a dozen birds, three kittens and one squirrel, I still have the right to express concern for animal welfare. I can still be indignant about the neglect and euthanasia of animals because humans fail to care for them. I can still oppose animal cruelty.

Even if I never adopt a child, I can still oppose the killing of them before their birth. I can still oppose people creating children only to dismember them and have them thrown in the trash. I do this not so much because I'm pro-personal responsibility, but because I'm pro-child. By that same token, I support animal welfare because I'm pro-animals. It's about the innocent and dependent and our obligation to care for them.

In conclusion, I oppose the idea that pro-choicers aren't responsible for their own children and further oppose the idea that somehow pro-lifers are responsible for everyone's children: "So I'm expected to adopt all of the children you abandon, yet I can't expect you not to abandon your children?" And no -- killing your children is not an acceptable alternative to abandonment.

It breaks my heart when you remind me about kids in foster care due to abuse, neglect and abandonment that I simply can't adopt: but the correct response is to stop abuse, neglect and abandonment rather than kill the potentially abused, neglected and abandoned. It also breaks my heart that animals are abused -- but the responsibility lies with the abuser, not those that would rescue the animal if he/she could. Since I oppose irresponsible pet ownership, I'm not obligated to adopt every pet abandoned by an irresponsible owner. I only wish I could. Likewise, since I oppose killing unborn children, that doesn't make me responsible for every child that is born and abused or abandoned. The only way to stop abuse is to punish abusers, not the victims.

Pro-choicers: When you use this argument, it sounds like you're pro-child abuse. You're essentially saying, "It's dismemberment or abuse" when you should heartily oppose both. Do you somehow believe that supporting abortion exempts you from adoption yourself because if you had your way, these abused children wouldn't even be alive? Please leave your thoughts in the comment section.

By: Mary Kay Hastings

I found this quote and thought it was rather interesting, considering the posts that we have put up over the last week and a half.

Not only have I continued to follow your work with loving admiration and expect ever greater results from your beneficence, I have also known of Nehru's statesmanlike interest in birth-control, and now I behold you and him and Lady Rama Rau working together -- a triple Hercules -- for the deliverance of a land long-cursed with excess of population. I cannot imagine anything more blessed happening on earth. As you teach, mankind has, through ignorance, often destroyed the sweet joy of childhood. Now a tide of enlightenment, slow but sure, shall lift its healing waves from one end of the world to the other until every child has a chance to be well born, well fed and fairly started in life -- and that is woman's natural work as the creator of the human race. Affectionately I salute you, Margaret Sanger, as the prophet and the woman Prometheus of humanity's highest physical and mental welfare....

We had a mother and father fighting over "putting their daughter down like a dog" because she couldn't feed herself,a husband shooting his wife to put her out of his misery, a mother aborting her child because it had down's syndrome and was "contaminating" her body, 66 babies born alive in England where they attempted, but failed, to abort them for things as horrifying as *gasp* cleft palettes and clubbed feet, ending with a mother who tried to abort her baby at 24 weeks because it was blind.

These were all stories about people with handicaps. And the family members they tried to kill.

How many people is too many? What criteria is required to get a "pass" and be allowed to be born? Who is "worthy"? Who is not? Who gets to decide?

Reminds me of a Christmas song I used to know about a doll that was dropped, broken and in for repair:

Are my ears on straight?
Is my nose in place?
Do I have a cute expression on my face?
Are my blue eyes bright?
Do I look alright?
To be taken home Christmas day.

Perhaps we should make the contents of a womens' uterus take a test before allowing them to be born. You know, questions like, Are you now or have you ever been deaf? Are you now or are you planning on becoming bi-polar? Do you have all ten toes and do your feet point the right way? Can you carry a tune?

". . . Margaret Sanger, as the prophet and the woman Prometheus of humanity's highest physical and mental welfare."

The person quoted above seems to have felt very strongly that only the highest of physical and mental standards should be met when "gestating fetuses".

Who is it that uttered these words of adulation for a woman that believes, "We are failing to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying . . . a dead weight of human waste . . .an ever-increasing spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all.”?

None other than, former fetus, Helen Keller.

Even though she was a deaf blind woman who was a role model for millions, Helen Keller supported euthanasia of babies with severe disabilities.

by Mary Kay Hastings

Short people got no reason to live?

Sure, everybody make mistakes sometimes. But we ain't talkin' spilled milk here! From Operation Rescue, "Healthy baby narrowly escapes late abortion at Tiller's clinic," February 12:

Last September, a 22-year old woman and her mother arrived at George Tiller's Women's Health Care Services in Wichita, Kansas, for an abortion. She had been told by her Reno doctor that her baby suffered from dwarfism, water on the brain, and a number of other fetal abnormalities. He also told her that if she attempted to deliver the baby at term, she could die. Fearful for her life, the woman made the trip to Wichita, KS.

CPC volunteer, Judi Weldy, convinced her to get another ultrasound....

The new ultrasound showed that the baby might indeed have dwarfism, but had none of the other conditions the woman had been told. The physician on duty at Choices Medical Center examined the woman and told her he saw no medical reason why she could not have a normal, safe delivery.

She was told she was in her fifth month of pregnancy. Her abortion would cost $7,000. The new ultrasound revealed that she was actually 24 weeks along. This put her over the legal limit for a late-term abortion in Kansas.

Last week the young woman gave birth to a perfectly healthy baby. The baby had no signs of dwarfism at all! Both mother and baby are happy and well.

Kansas law prohibits abortions after 22 weeks of pregnancy on viable babies. Exceptions include saving the mother's life or preventing a "substantial and irreversible impairment" to the mother's physical or mental health. Clearly this pregnancy did not meet any of those exceptions. Didn't matter to Tiller. Nothing much without $$$ does.

"How many more women has this happened to? Fetal anomaly is not a legal reason to abort a viable baby in Kansas, yet it appears these kinds of abortion take place on a routine basis", asked Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. This is why a full investigation into Tillers' late-term abortion operation is so vitally important.

Georgie Porgie
puddin' and pie
Kissed the girls
and made them cry;
when the boys
came out to play,
Georgie Porgie
ran away

Tiller currently faces 19 criminal charges of illegal late-term abortions and is the subject of an ongoing grand jury investigation.

I inadvertently used a picture without the artists permission and after emailing him about my mistake, have been asked to remove the picture. He was very gracious. I am publicly apologizing to him, and have learned a valuable lesson. Thanks to Sally for pointing out that permission is actually needed. Should have realized that, but I was overwhelmed by the responsibility of getting the posts up. I apologize to Charlie Ledbetter. I would like to add that the painting he did was in response to a bombing in the underground tube in England. I chose it because it spoke to me. He is quite talented.

Abortion-Survivor Finds a Home: John XXIII Community Welcomes Baby Girl

Rome, February 8, Zenit.org: A 15-month-old girl whose parents tried to abort her because she is blind, but survived the procedure, has been adopted by a John XXIII Community household in Rome.

The community announced in a Feb. 2 press conference that the baby was diagnosed with an eye condition that blinded her, and her parents opted for abortion. But the pregnancy was already in the 22nd week, and the baby was born alive. Doctors, following Italian law, thus tried to save her and succeeded....

She weighed only 562 grams (1.2 pounds) and had to have a heart operation when she was ten days old. She had a brain hemorrhage, various infections and respiratory problems.

Her birth parents chose to give her up for adoption.

Now she is 15 months old and weighs 13 pounds; she has been with her new family for eight months.

The mother of the community calls her a splendid child and says she is full of life. Though she was expected to be in the "vegetative state" after her experience, her new family affirms that she sucks her thumb, laughs and interacts with those who come to visit her.

Her desire to live is contagious, her new mother said, and everyone who meets her wants to return to see her again.

During the press conference, other mothers shared stories about the pressure to abort and the decision to carry to term children prenatally diagnosed with an infirmity.

The John XXIII Community also announced that it is preparing a legislative proposal on the protection of life and maternity, "to give the pregnant woman the possibility of finding protection and reporting those who propose to kill their children, or induce them to abort with blackmail or deceit."

HatTip: Jasper

By: Valerie Ryan

magine that.  According to a January Guttmatcher Institute report for
2006 Public Funding for Family Planning, Sterilization and abortion
services, the term "family planning" does not include having a family.

It does include, however:

[C]lient counseling and education, contraceptive drugs and devices, related diagnostic tests (e.g., pregnancy, Pap, HIV, other STIs) and treatment after diagnosis (e.g., urinary tract infections and STIs other than HIV). Whenever possible, we separated out services that are not part of the standard package provided to clients seeking contraceptives, such as outreach and education activities, sterilization services (both of which we report separately), and administrative expenses....

What was this report about? It was about our tax money going toward "family planning" for low income people.

Now, I have no problems helping low income people get needed reproductive health care such as PAPs, STD testing, other diagnostic tests and treatments if needed, prenatal and postnatal care.

However, this report indicated we are spending a good deal of money for non-medical reasons.

Here are a few highlights:

• Public expenditures for "family planning" client services totaled $1.85 Billion in 2006.
• Medicaid accounted for 71% of the total spending;  The rest from other government programs such as Title X and different state appropriations.
•  6 states (CA, KY, NY, OR, PA and WA) accounted for half of all Medicaid expenditures, yet Medicaid was the single largest source of funding for 41 states.
• By the middle of 2006, 14 states had initiated income-based expansion programs providing family planning services under Medicaid to individuals with incomes well above the cut-off for Medicaid eligibility overall.
• From 2001-2006 Medicaid spending in 8 of the states with income-based expansion programs increased by 57%, compared to 18% among states without expansions.
• During 1994-2006 Medicaid spending in the 14 states with expansion programs tripled.  Spending went from $252 Million to $759 Million.
• For 2006 $43 million was spent for outreach and education activities.
• In 2006 $116 million was spent of sterilization services, 97% were spent through Medicaid.  Eight states account for half of all reported spending.
• The federal and state governments funded over 177,000 abortion procedures which cost $89 Million dollars.  191 procedures were paid for by the federal government the rest by the individual states.  (This means the government spent appx $500 for each abortion.  Guttmatcher 2007 abortion costs report said that the average cost of an abortion is $372; also appx 21% of abortions are paid for by the government.)
• Over 99% of publicly funded abortion procedures occurred in 17 states that have nonrestrictive policies.
• Medicaid agencies in some states dedicate their own funds to provide services to groups of people, such as many immigrants, who are barred from federally reimbursed Medicaid.  (Medicaid pays for Immigrants who are here legally.)
• 53,381 abortions were from 4 states that have nonrestrictive policies on government funding for abortions
• 123,272 abortions were from 13 states that are court ordered to pay for "medically necessary abortions." (Life/health of mother; gross fetal deformity; rape and incest make up 7% of abortions according to Guttmatcher. However, this number represents appx 14% of abortions.)
• 54 abortions were from 27 states that provide funding for abortion in cases of rape, incest and life of mother.
• 697 abortions were from 6 states that provide funding for abortion in cases of rape, incest and life/health of mother.

by Mary Kay Hastings

From the New York Times, February 10:

... [W]hen Kanwaljeet Anand was a medical resident in a neonatal intensive care unit, his tiny patients, many of them preterm infants, were often wheeled out of the ward and into an operating room. He soon learned what to expect on their return. The babies came back in terrible shape: their skin was gray, their breathing shallow, their pulses weak.

That is when I discovered that the babies were not getting anesthesia, he recalled recently.

Doctors were convinced that newborns nervous systems were too immature to sense pain, and that the dangers of anesthesia exceeded any potential benefits.

In a series of clinical trials, Anand demonstrated that operations performed under minimal or no anesthesia produced a massive stress response in newborn babies, releasing a flood of fight-or-flight hormones like adrenaline and cortisol....

The fetus is not a little adult, Anand says, and we should not expect it to look or act like one. Rather, it is a singular being with a life of the senses that is different, but no less real, than our own.

If the notion that newborns are incapable of feeling pain was once widespread among doctors, a comparable assumption about fetuses was even more entrenched:

Nicholas Fisk is a fetal-medicine specialist and director of the University of Queensland Center for Clinical Research in Australia, carried out a study that closely resembled Anands' pioneering research, using fetuses rather than newborns as his subjects. He selected 45 fetuses that required a potentially painful blood transfusion, giving one-third of them an injection of the potent painkiller fentanyl. As with Anands' experiments, the results were striking: in fetuses that received the analgesic, the production of stress hormones was halved, and the pattern of blood flow remained normal.

THE SAME MIGHT be said of the five children who were captured on video by a Swedish neuroscientist named Bjorn Merker on a trip to Disney World a few years ago:

The youngsters, ages 1 to 5, are shown smiling, laughing, fussing, crying; they appear alert and aware of what is going on around them. Yet each of these children was born essentially without a cerebral cortex. The condition is called hydranencephaly, in which the brain stem is preserved but the upper hemispheres are largely missing and replaced by fluid.

Merker (who has held positions at universities in Sweden and the United States but is currently unaffiliated) became interested in these children as the living embodiment of a scientific puzzle: where consciousness originates.

The tacit consensus concerning the cerebral cortex as the "organ of consciousness", Merker wrote, may have been reached prematurely, and may in fact be seriously in error .

I urge you to please read the rest of the article here.

by Jill Stanek

I have watched the videos Mary Kay posted of John McCain's views of the sanctity of life in his own words, and they made my blood boil.

Then this morning Bobby Schindler emailed me an Esquire article from 2006, wherein he stated, on the isse of Bobby's sister Terri Schiavo:

I understand the frustrations a lot of Republicans feel. We're not representing their hopes and dreams and aspirations. We worry about Ms. Schiavo before we worry about balancing the budget. We're going to take up this Family Marriage Amendment again. Why?.... It's pointless...

I urge my friends who complain about the influence of the religious Right, get out there and get busy. That's what they do! Now, if we believe in the Republican party of Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt, the big-tent party, then we have to get out there and show that. The fact is, some of us have sat idly by while those very active people have basically set the agenda for our party....

As I recall, Abraham Lincoln did not subscribe to the big-tent on slavery, but that's an aside.

By his own words, from the videos Mary Kay posted:

by Bethany Kerr

I never am more disgusted than when I read an article like this.

Katherine Mobey, 38, explains in great detail her eugenic reasoning behind her decision to kill her first child, who through no fault of his/her own, was imperfect, having Down's Syndrome, and exomphalos, which can much of the time be corrected with surgery.

From You Magazine:

Neil and I had been married less than a year when, in 2001, I discovered I was expecting. We were so ecstatic, we immediately went out and bought three more tests - just to be sure. The routine 12-week scan gave us the first sight of our baby and all appeared to be well.

Katherine explains about the day she found that the baby may have Down's Syndrome:

As I walked on to the street, I was physically sick. It had been such a shattering experience. Driving home, I realized my relationship with my baby had changed. Every pregnant woman wants the little person growing inside her to be perfect - but my dreams had turned into a fearful vision.

....We didn't know what its life expectancy would be or what medical treatment it would need, but we did know that we would not be able to cope with a severely disabled child.

Going ahead with the pregnancy wasn't even up for discussion. Neil stayed strong and made all the necessary arrangements.

She explains how the abortion procedure went:

The first step was to take drugs that block the pregnancy hormones and stop the baby's heart beating. I was booked to return a couple of days later for the abortion itself.

I couldn't see what was going on around me, but I was aware of healthy babies being born nearby. A pessary was inserted to bring on contractions and I was moved into a delivery room.

Mum sat on one side of me, knitting, Neil rubbed my feet and I had gas and air and some pethidine to ease the pain. I was told the labour would take up to 16 hours; in the event, it was only six. The midwife had asked me at the outset whether I would want to see the baby< when it was born.

My reaction had been, "Oh God, no."

I know a lot of people name and cuddle their baby.

But I couldn't do it -hold the dead and deformed being that had been inside me. I never even found out the sex, although I have always thought of it as a girl. In the years since, I have struggled hugely with the way I rejected my baby. I know it was a dreadfully unmotherly thing to do.

Well, no kidding. What was her first clue?

Here comes one of the most disturbing statements (to me) from Katherine's story:

Afterwards --and I know this will sound bizarre-- we were elated. Mum and Neil were saying, 'Well done,' and relief flooded over me. For Mum, it had meant losing a grandchild, but she was totally supportive of our decision -- her priority throughout was me.

So far, we have Katherine, her mother, who knits contentedly, her husband rubbing Katherine's feet, while Katherine's lies in envy of others with "healthy babies", all while she is in the process of paying someone to tortuously murder her own baby.

Not only this, but once the deed is done, all of them congratulate themselves on a job "well done". Sickening!

Here are the emotions that Katherine says she had to deal with after killing her child who was not perfect:

There were ... conflicting emotions that I had to deal with.

First, the guilt at having rejected my baby was foremost and overwhelming. Second, I was battling with a massive sense of failure - I am the third of four children, my elder brother and sister each had two healthy children, and my younger sister Pippa had just announced she was pregnant.
....
My third irrational but very real feeling was that my body had been contaminated by having a sickly child in my womb

Of all the despicable things that a mother can say about her own child, this tops them all. The baby "contaminated" her, because he was not "normal".

Oh but never fear! Katherine is able to find great comfort in the fact that her body was able to "decontaminate" itself from the gruesome ugliness that apparently is a Down's Syndrome child, when she delivers a "perfect" baby girl later on.

.... I was pushing and pushing to try for another baby, and after eight months, I fell pregnant with our daughter, Honor.

The pregnancy was fine, and tests showed nothing untoward, but that didn't stop me having panic attacks. My life was consumed by the baby "project".

When Honor was born, I couldn't quite believe my 'contaminated' body had produced a healthy baby.

....'I no longer feel like a failure. Having my daughter proved to me that my body isn't contaminated'....

I no longer feel a failure. I'm proud that I have such a lovely family.

Awww, how touching!

But the guilt, I realise now, I will have for ever. I pass Down's children on the street and think, 'I killed mine.'

I know they can be wonderfully loving. There is no escaping the reality of what I did, or the way I mentally rejected my baby. The hospital took photos, but I have never seen them, and it feels too late to go back there now.

*Cough* ...Mentally rejected? Mentally? *Cough*

Abortion can never be described as an easy option. I still cry as though mine were yesterday.

Why is that? Just a moment ago you were saying how pleased you were with the job "well done!", and how it was such a moment of relief for you! Why would that make you cry?

And yet I remain certain that, for us, it was the right decision.

What other "right decision" does one cry and obsess about every day and night? Really.

By: Mary Kay Hastings

Just a few quotes from y'all about assisted suicide...you know, if the husband/wife/mother/father said their spouse/child/parent didn't want to live, who are we to question it?

Back to your hatefilled fantasies about everyone else - you have to invent the worst and pretend the only reason someone might have is because they are 'terrible' people. I believe people who are suffering and have no hope of recovery should have the right to end their lives. I believe if someone is comatose with no hope of recovery the family should be able to do what they think is best. You imagine youre an authority on everyone elses life and imagine you should have some 'right' to stuff your face into the private lives of strangers and tell them how they 'should' live and what they 'should' do without knowing them or anything about them - ignorance never keeps YOU from being an 'authority' on 'everything'. Texas Red

Her mother is only trying to carry out her wishes. She stated that she didn't want to be kept alive like this. She saw what happened to Terri Schiavo and said it was "gross." She wouldn't want this.
Posted by: reality at February 6, 2008 1:44 PM

The Orignal Story:

An Oregon man has killed his disabled wife in a test of the one-of-a-kind state law that allows assisted suicide there. John Roberts says his wife Virginia was afflicted with ALS, or Lou Gehrig's Disease and he took her life to see if the state would allow him to get away with voluntary euthanasia, or so-called mercy killing.

Roberts' family says John's killing his wife was an act of compassion because she didn't yet qualify for an assisted suicide under the state's guidelines.

"And part of the reason why they chose this method rather than going down the assisted suicide route was that she was so proud that she didn't want to let herself get into the condition she would need to be in before they'd be allowed," Greg Roberts added.

John Roberts says Virginia was afflicted with ALS, or Lou Gehrig's Disease and he took her life to see if the state would allow him to get away with voluntary euthanasia, or so-called mercy killing.

However, court documents show Virginia had never been diagnosed with any terminal or life-threatening disease.

A doctors' report showed Virginia in good health other than having carpal tunnel syndrome and indicated she was never diagnosed with ALS

Wesley J. Smith, a bioethics watchdog and noted author and attorney, commented on the case and said this kind of case leads to the slippery slope from assisted suicide to euthanasia

"This is the kind of case that led to the complete collapse of euthanasia guideline enforcement in the Netherlands," he said.

"This is the tide unleashed when we agree in law that killing is an acceptable answer to human suffering," he added.

By Mary Kay Hastings

I could have sworn I read somewhere that John McCain was Pro-Life!

"Pro-life is a term representing a variety of perspectives and activist movements in bioethics. It can be used to indicate opposition to practices such as euthanasia, human cloning, research involving human embryonic stem cells, and the death penalty, but most commonly (especially in the media and popular discourse) to abortion, and support for fetal rights. The term describes the political and ethical view which maintains that fetuses and embryos are human beings, and therefore have a right to life." Wikipedia

By Valerie Ryan

We have many people from both sides of the abortion debate who consider themselves a feminist. I wonder which group knows more about Womens' history?

I have a short Pop Quiz for us all to take to find out.

Now, I’m sure most of these can be found on a google search so we are going to go by the honor system. We will trust that there will be no cheating.

(these are not necessarily 1st American women to . . . )

1. Who was the first woman U.S. presidential candidate?

2. Who were the the co-founders of the womans suffrage movement?

3 . Who was the first person to be a U.S. flagmaker?

4. Who was the first woman to receive a medical degree?

5. Who was the first woman marine?

6. Who was the first woman whose invention received a patent (which was granted to her husband)?

7. Who was the first woman foreign diplomat?

8. Who was the first African American to win an academy award?

9. Who was the first woman justice to be on the U.S. Supreme Court?

10. Who was the first person to conduct a national survey of sexual attitudes?

Good Luck!

I think in todays world we have to remember where we came from and that pro-choice and pro-life has nothing to do with feminism. All these accomplishments are examples of true feminists.

Bonus Question: Which feminist went to jail for voting?

Answers Tomorrow

By Mary Kay Hastings

Our very own Jill Stanek was presented the Henry Hyde Life Leadership Award at the The 2008 Speak Out Illinois Conference —on February 2 of this year.

Previous winners include Fr. Frank Pavone, Founder and National Director of Priests for Life (2006), The Pro-Life Action League's Joe and Ann Scheidler (2004) and Sandy Rios, Fox News Contributor (2005).

"When the time comes as it surely will, when we face that awesome moment, the final judgment, I've often thought, as Fulton Sheen wrote, that it is a terrible moment of loneliness. You have no advocates, you are there alone standing before God and a terror will rip through your soul like nothing you can imagine. But I really think that those in the pro-life movement will not be alone. I think there will be a chorus of voices that have never been heard in this world but are heard beautifully and clearly in the next world and they will plead for everyone who has been in this movement. They will say to God, "Spare him because he loved us," and God will look at you and say not, "Did you succeed?" but "Did you try?"

Henry Hyde

By Bethany Kerr

I've been thinking a lot about Lauren Richardson's story, and about the comments thrown around about her by people supporting her starvation and death. Comments such as:

"Lauren CAN'T think. Nothin' up there anymore. Lauren has left the building. Breathing doesn't mean life- brain means life. If the right circuits aren't firing, she's got no capacity to think."

"I do think it's selfish of the father to prolong everyone's suffering because he can't handle the fact his daughter has passed on."

One study, among many others, has shown that at least 40 percent of patients diagnosed as PVS were actually conscious of their surroundings.

What makes this even more disturbing is that researchers are unable to identify any predictors of recovery, which would help doctors to determine who might- and who might not- wake up.

So how can one possibly know for sure whether Lauren Richardson, Terri Schiavo, and countless others deemed "PVS", are not actually aware and fighting to live?

Why are we so hasty to kill those who may desperately desire to go on?

There are hundreds upon hundreds of accounts of people who were deemed brain dead, minimally conscious, PVS, or who had been in a coma for dozens of years, but later came out, and lived to tell their stories.

I am posting below some examples of these individuals. Some of these stories you may or may not remember. My point through all of this is: we simply do not know everything there is to know about how the brain functions. If we have to err, we should always err on the side of life, not death!

Boy in So-Called "Persistent Vegetative State" for Two Years Awakens

Jesse Ramirez Wakes From Coma as Terri Schiavo-Type Battle Rages

As Terri Schiavo Begins to Die, Jason Childress Continues to Live

Haleigh Poutre's Family Wants State Officials Punished for Ignoring Abuse

Doctors Able to Stimulate Brain Damaged Man's Speech, Movement

Man woken from virtual coma after six years

Swiss Euthanasia Group Under Fire After Painful Assisted Suicide Death

Comatose Mesa man walks out of hospital-Wife had pulled his feeding tube after a week

Woman's Starvation Stopped in Terri Schaivo-Like Situation

British Researchers See Normal Brain Activity in Another "PVS" Patient

Comatose Woman's Awakening Brings Call for More Brain Disability Study

Sleeping Pills May Wake Up PVS Patients

Woman Details Her 20-Year Coma

I felt trapped inside my body'

By Mary Kay Hastings

I am an Obama supporter. I am also pro-life.

So says Frank Schaeffer, New York Times best selling author of the book Crazy for God: How I Grew Up As One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back.

He is the son of former Evangelical Missionary, Francis Schaeffer, but turned his back on the Evangelicals, saying "I abandoned Protestant Christian fundamentalism many years ago for Greek Orthodoxy. I converted because the Orthodox tradition embraces paradox and mystery. For someone raised in a strict Calvinist home, relief from absolutist certainty was most welcome. "

Sounds like he's abandoning the prolife movement as well.

"Today when I listen to Obama speak (and to his remarkable wife, Michelle) what I hear is a world view that actually nurtures life. Obama is trying to lead this country to a place where the intrinsic worth of each individual is celebrated. A leader who believes in hope, the future, trying to save our planet and providing a just and good life for everyone is someone who is actually pro-life."

Which Obama is he listening to?

From the Washington Times:

Mr. Obama is also one of the most pro-choice presidential contenders in history. His 100 percent rating from the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council as a state senator was just the beginning. Mr. Obama is known in pro-life circles for arguing cold-bloodedly on the Illinois Senate floor that babies who survive botched late-term abortions should not be considered "persons" because this would be tantamount to admitting "that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a -- a child, a 9-month old -- child that was delivered to term."

On the senate floor:

OBAMA: Number one, whenever we define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a -- a child, a nine-month-old -- child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it -- it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an anti-abortion statute. (Gee Barak...they don't call you bright for nuthin'!)

* Voted against banning partial birth abortion. (Oct 2007)
* Stem cells hold promise to cure 70 major diseases. (Aug 2007)
* Trust women to make own decisions on partial-birth abortion. (Apr 2007)
* Extend presumption of good faith to abortion protesters. (Oct 2006)
* Constitution is a living document; no strict constructionism. (Oct 2006)
* Pass the Stem Cell Research Bill. (Jun 2004)
* Protect a woman's right to choose. (May 2004)
* Supports Roe v. Wade. (Jul 1998)
* Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
* Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006)
* Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)
* Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance. (Dec 2006)

Mr. Schaeffer, I don't know if you noticed, but the Greek Orthodox church is pro-life. And in case it escaped your attention . . . Barack Obama is not.

"Today when I listen to Obama speak (and to his remarkable wife, Michelle) what I hear is a world view that actually nurtures life . . ."

I suggest you get your hearing tested. ASAP.

HatTip: Commenter Ray

by Mary Kay Hastings and Bethany Kerr

It was just about a year ago this month that Bethany and I stumbled upon Jill Stanek's blog.

So much has happened since, with so many great posts.

Many of you are new and missed them, so we thought you might like to take a trip with us down memory lane.

Here are 6 of our favorite posts from the past year:

Baby Blessing

The post is, of course, Bethany's original post about her tiny baby, Blessing.

She shared the pain of her miscarriage and the awe she felt at the little life she held in her hand.




The 2nd anniversary of Terry Schiavo's death via dehydration and starvation

Next, we posted on the anniversary of Terry Schiavo's death. This one got a lot of hits and even Terri's brother, Bobby Schindler, dropped by to respond to some of the comments made there.

The day Partial Birth Abortion was banned

And who can forget the day we awoke to find partial birth abortions had been BANNED?!



House Episode

Another one that stirred up a lot of controversy was the House episode that mimicked the real life surgery of little Samuel.




But our all time favorite had to be the 99 Balloons video, featuring Baby Eliot.

If you haven't seen this one, be sure to get the Kleenex out!

So this leads to our weekend question:

What were some of your favorite posts from the last year?

Just scroll down the right hand side of the screen and you'll see all the months listed. If you can't find yours, let us know and we'll dig it up for you.

Update from Bethany, 2/9, 8a: Here are some posts you have requested:

by Mary Kay Hastings

Brent Rooney makes the case that since no studies were ever done of abortions on animals, performing them on people is a clear cut case of "human experimentation." Coincidentally, these "experiments" are being done primarily on black and Hispanic women:

"Suction" abortion (VAA, Vacuum Aspiration Abortion) performed on Black American women and Hispanic-American women is EXPERIMENTAL UNPROVEN surgery, since there are zero published animal studies demonstrating safety from risks of future premature births, mammary (breast) cancer, etc.

On 16 January 2008, Dr. Sharon Camp, President of the research arm of Planned Parenthood (AGI, Alan Guttmacher Institute) admitted in an email to me that AGI could find no published animal 'suction' abortion study.

It is an ethical scandal that "suction" abortions were performed on humans before safety
validation via published animal studies.

Margaret Sanger would be proud. Reading on:

In 2004 Black American Women had 38.2% of all U.S. abortions, according to CDC (Centers for Disease Control) data.

Since Black Women only represent about 13% of the U.S. female population, 38.2% means that Black American Women had 4.1 times the IA (Induced Abortion) rate as the non-black U.S.
population in 2004.

According to a 2007 study of Missouri women, Blacks have 3.7 times the risk of extremely pre-term birth (under 28.0 weeks' gestation).

So where's the harm?

These findings are backed by what Rooney calls "the Polish anti-experiment":

When Poland passed extreme restrictions to IA (induced abortion) access into law in 1989, government officials did not know that they were conducting an "anti-experiment."

Opponents to the new law predicted dire results for women's health. Between 1989 and 1993, Poland's IA rate per 1000 births plummeted by 98%. Between 1995 and 1997, dramatic trends occurred (according to United Nations data):

by Bethany Kerr

You'd think abortion proponents would stop claiming that abortionist "quacks" are the exception and not the rule by now. It seems every month we hear of a new abortionist being caught practicing abortions without a license, butchering women, raping women, falsifying records, etc. The ratio of "bad" abortionists to abortion clinics seems to become closer each time an abortion clinic is investigated.

From Operation Rescue:

The Los Angeles Times is reporting today horrific new details about a chain of Southern California abortion clinics, owned by Bertha Bugarin, that were raided last summer by a special task force of the Los Angeles Police Department. Bugarin was charged with practicing medicine without a license.

Bertha Bugarin's abortion mills are not an anomaly. The only difference between her mills and other deplorable clinics across the nation is that she was caught.

According to the LA Times:

By the time paramedics arrived, the patient was lying in a pool of her own blood, her pulse racing and her blood pressure dangerously low....

The woman, identified only as Angela P. in records of the Medical Board of California, had gone to the Clinica Medica Para la Mujer de Hoy in Santa Ana in the summer of 2004 for an abortion.

Dr. Phillip Rand, then in his early 80's, performed a vaginal suction procedure, despite having determined that Angela was about 20 weeks pregnant, well into her second trimester. She was given no anesthesia or painkillers.

According to the National Abortion Federation, vacuum aspiration procedures are normally performed on women who are up to 14 weeks pregnant. After 14 weeks, a more complicated procedure, known as dilation and evacuation, is standard.

“A suction abortion is not appropriate at 20 weeks,” said Vicki Saporta, president of the federation....

Other doctors who performed abortions at the clinics include:

* Torrance-based Mohamed Dia, who surrendered his license in 1999. He admitted to the medical board that he used a van to bring a bleeding patient to a hospital after perforating her uterus and leaving part of the fetus in her body during a 1996 abortion at Clinica Medica.

* San Diego-based osteopath Laurence Reich, who surrendered his license in 2006 after pleading no contest to misdemeanor criminal charges of sexually exploiting two patients during abortions in 2000 at clinics not associated with Bugarin. His conviction was expunged in 2004 after he completed a yearlong probationary period and paid the court a $100 restitution fine, according to a Van Nuys court file.

One of the patients, Sherman Oaks resident Yvette Chambers, 43, said in a phone interview that Reich groped her breasts and asked explicit questions during an abortion at a Van Nuys clinic.

An earlier board accusation in 1982 had accused Reich of sexual abuse in three cases in 1981 and 1979. Reich asked the women to masturbate and rubbed their genital areas, according to the accusation, which led the board to put Reich on probation for 10 years until 1994. Reich could not be reached for comment, and his attorney, Santwier, declined to comment.

* Santa Monica-based Glenn Edward Miller, an admitted alcoholic whose license was revoked by the medical board in 2005 due to repeated substance abuse relapses. Miller was on probation for performing obstetrical procedures while under the influence of alcohol when he began working in Bugarin clinics in about 2003, according to board records.

That same year, Miller and Rand settled a malpractice lawsuit filed by a woman who said they gave her an abortion at a non-Bugarin clinic in 2002 even though she was not pregnant, rupturing her uterus in the process, court records said. Miller could not be reached for comment.

* George Dalton Flanigan, who was hired as an independent contractor at five Bugarin clinics in 2002, according to court documents. That same year, at an unnamed hospital, he delivered a dead baby using a vacuum procedure after refusing to perform a cesarean section, according to a board accusation that led to a 2007 decision to put him on probation for five years. Both Flanigan and his former attorney Arthur Selesnick declined to comment."

There's much more...please read the entire LA Times article here!

Puke. This is a disgrace. Where is NOW? They should be all over this. Do we see them speaking out against this outrage towards women? As usual, of course not.

Abortion proponents, do you REALLY think this is the exception to the rule? If you do, you're willfully ignorant. It's that simple.

by Jill Stanek

Planned Parenthood Chicago Area recently announced it closed its Naperville PP Express due to the opening of its nearby mega-abortion mill in Aurora.

And IL Family Institute linked to a January 1 State Journal-Register article reporting the PP family planning clinic in Logan, IL, has closed due to "flat" government funding of many years.

Citizen reported yesterday PP also "recently closed four sites in Michigan and merged several in Ohio."

Shortage of funding is a ruse, since PP is almost a $1 billion annual operation with $400 MILLION sitting in the bank, according to Life Decisions International.

PP has also increased its market share of abortions from 5% to 20% over the last decade, reported of IL Right to Life, incidentally made easier by the fact it gets government funding so it can undercut the competition.

I have previously reported it appears PP launched a new marketing plan in the early 2000's to increase its share even more. Part of that plan is obviously to create new regional box stores, such as Aurora (22k sq ft) and Denver (50k sq ft). Graphic design of the latter mill below (sans security fence) is courtesy of PP Rocky Mountains:

This all leads to some great questions posed by reader Eileen in an email, which I'll paraphrase.

Why is PP merging and building bigger regional box mills? If they complain about the shortage of abortion clinics around the country, and that close access is imperative to garnering abortions, what is the benefit to women by merging and building bigger? Wouldn't they want to market smaller stores in more places?

by Jill Stanek

From BBC News, February 5:

Scientists believe they have made a potential breakthrough in the treatment of serious disease by creating a human embryo with three separate parents.

The Newcastle University team believe the technique could help to eradicate a whole class of hereditary diseases, including some forms of epilepsy.

The embryos have been created using DNA from a man and two women in lab tests.

Obviously pro-lifers will have a problem with this on many levels. But supporters of human embryo experimentation shouldn't. Right? The goal is human perfection, after all. Let not the means interfere. Question for supporters, though: What exactly is human perfection?

[Photo courtesy of BBC News]

By Jasper

Tim Graham from NewsBusters summarized the poor news coverage of the March for Life, which drew well over 100,000 people:

ABC, CBS, and NBC had absolutely nothing on the March, and absolutely nothing on the 35th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade. By contrast, Fox News Channel at least had a fair-and-balanced report on the March on Tuesday night's Special Report with Brit Hume....

National Public Radio offered several segments on the Roe anniversary, but no mention of the March for Life (with the asterisk that news breaks on the hour are not loaded into Nexis.)

Morning Edition carried a Kathy Lohr on attempts in some states to pass a Human Life Amendment, with both sides of the debate represented (the labels were "pro-life" and "pro-choice"). The afternoon talk show Talk of the Nation did a long segment on women discussing their abortions with after-abortion counselors Aspen Baker and Teri Reisser, who agreed women shouldn't feel post-abortion guilt. All Things Considered anchor Robert Siegel interviewed Rudy Giuliani about his abortion views. But NPR aired nothing specifically about the protest whatsoever.

CNN barely mentioned the March. One Alina Cho anchor brief on American Morning contained the perfunctory line that "Rallies and protests on both sides of the issue planned in Washington today." That's a strange line, since the Washington Post made no mention whatsoever of any pro-abortion events for that day.

If they were illegal alien activists, they'd get front-page coverage, multimedia packages, and prime time on TV airwaves.

If they were anti-war activists, they'd get front-page coverage, multimedia packages, and prime time on TV airwaves.

The twisted media will give front page coverage to 100 people who are pro-baby killing, or eight illegals with a personal grudge against a radio talkshow host, but they won't cover tens of thousands marching on Washington protesting the passage of Roe v. Wade. They don't even like talking about the fact that the woman at the center of that pitiful case has changed sides, regrets her actions, and says the pro-death side pulled every snarky trick in the book to get her to go along with their program.

by Mary Kay Hastings

The exhibition was that of a human being in a monkey cage. The human being happened to be a Bushman, one of a race that scientists do not rate high in the human scale, but to the average nonscientific person in the crowd of sightseers, there was something about the display that was unpleasant.... It is probably a good thing that Benga doesn't think very deeply. If he did, it isn't likely that he was very proud of himself when he woke in the morning and found himself under the same roof with the orangutans [sic] and monkeys, for that is where he really is.'

Hmmmmmm . . .if it looks like a guinea pig,...?

Aborted embryos have been compared to pomegranates, blueberries, crotch goo, fingernails, skin cells, products of conception...all because they don't "look" like tiny human beings...but things aren't always as they appear to be.

Ota Benga was a man, yet he was believed to be a monkey, based solely on his looks.

Embryos, whether humans or guinea pigs, tend to look alike. But as with Ota Benga, looks can be deceiving. Do you really trust your own perceptions that much? Are you willing to put a life on the line, based on what you do or do not "see"?

by Jasper

With Mitt Romney dropping out of the race, John McCain will most likely be the Republican nominee. Reliable pro-lifer Rick Santorum had some interesting takes on McCain:

And then on social conservative issues, you point to me one time John McCain ever took the floor of the United States Senate to talk about a social conservative issue. It never happened....

I mean, this is a guy who says he believes in these things, but I can tell you, inside the room, when we were in these meetings, there was nobody who fought harder not to have these votes before the United States Senate on some of the most important social conservative issues, whether its marriage or abortion or the like. He always fought against us to even bring them up....

We're looking at the media trying to make Barack Obama the president, and make John McCain the shill for him.... I think they know that John McCain can't win this election.

I think he is exactly on target.

The liberal MSM are so corrupt, look at the way they treated Mitt Romney. The sneaks.

Plus Republicans for Choice is endorsing McCain now that Rudy is out.

With Hillary, Obama and McCain the only ones left - it looks like Mike Huckabee is too far behind - who is the conservative choice?

What are your thoughts?

by Mary Kay Hastings

1:08pm EST, Reuters:

Republican candidate Mitt Romney dropped out of the U.S. presidential race on Thursday, a decision that makes Sen. John McCain the all-but-certain nominee of his party.

"I feel I have to now stand aside, for our party and for our country," he said in a speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference.

Romney lost 14 of 21 states on Super Tuesday, the biggest day of U.S. presidential voting ahead of November's election, while Arizona Sen. McCain savored coast-to-coast wins and cemented his position as front-runner....

The former Massachusetts governor had vowed to fight on after Super Tuesday, but he and his campaign advisers discussed the situation on Wednesday. Romney has been helping to bankroll his campaign using his own personal wealth.

"This is not an easy decision for me. I hate to lose," Romney said.

Many Republicans are eager for an end to the nominating contest between McCain, Romney and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in order to begin what is expected to be a difficult fight against either of the two Democratic candidates, Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.

Romney's decision will raise pressure on Huckabee to do the same.

"If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Sens. Clinton or Obama would win," Romney said.

Romney did not endorse McCain in his speech. The two have engaged in a bitter crossfire in recent weeks over who is the real conservative.

Romney said, "I disagree with Senator McCain on a number of issues, as you know."

But he said he agreed with him "on doing whatever it takes to be successful in Iraq, on finding and executing Osama bin Laden, and on eliminating al Qaeda and terror."

The McCain campaign declined immediate comment. McCain was to address the conference after Romney.

by Mary Kay Hastings

From Catholic News Agency, January 31:

The owner of a California abortion clinic chain faces trial on charges of practicing medicine without a license....

In addition, the accused womans clinics are now directed by a doctor accused of repeated negligence, including causing the death of a child during birth.

Read entire article here.

Americans United for Life has posted the Supreme Court White Papers. See what your state will do after Roe is overturned....

Judie Brown is confused. And who can blame her? Senator Sam Brownback, Senator Mel Martinez and Father Frank Pavone have all endorsed Senator John McCain because "[McCain] has a clear and convincing pro-life record.”

But Republicans for Choice also endorsed John McCain:

Our first choice, Rudy Giuliani, did not win. He ran a campaign with a risky strategy and it didn't work. But our number two choice did win. John McCain. McCain came in second in a survey of our membership.

Then Steve Ertelt of LifeNews.com reported this from NARAL:

NARAL president Nancy Keenan told her supporters, "We can't afford John McCain and we cannot take anything for granted," she said, saying it is wrong for abortion proponents to assume that Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama will win in November.

Dawn Eden from the Dawn Patrol blog posted this video. Seems like I'm not the only one who can't come up with anything concrete Obama has done...

Update: Video is fixed, you have to watch it:

by Jill Stanek

Americans held thousands of Super Bowl parties last Sunday to watch the New York Giants spoil the New England Patriots' perfect record.

But I'll bet none were quite like this one.

Fifty pro-life activists enjoyed the Super Bowl while picketing in front of the home of Lakewood, CO, resident Gary Meggison, senior executive of The Weitz Company, general contractor of Planned Parenthood's new Denver mega-mill....

Weitz was just given "permanent collaborator status" by activists when it refused to pull from the project by January 31. This means Weitz executives can anticipate being picketed as long as the PP Denver chop shop operates.

Reported activist Leslie Hanks of Sunday's block party in an email:

The time of food, fun and fellowship was topped off with excellent hot dogs, brats and even buffalo dogs. One pro-lifer, Grandma Connie, brought spinach stromboli and eggplant parmesan. The pro-lifers considered this one of the best Super Bowl parties they have ever attended....

These tenacious pro-life activists plan to expand their pickets to Weitz customers. Reported Rocky Mountain News on February 4:

The group has plans to protest at the grand opening of Hermes, a French fashion house and Weitz Company client, which will open its first Colorado store in the retail component of the new NorthCreek development in Denver's Cherry Creek North shopping district.

Certainly, picketing homes and businesses of abortion participants is disturbing. This is exactly the goal, wrote Leslie: to "increas[e] the social tension that has all but disappeared in this country, despite the slaughter of thousands of innocent babies each day." In fact, the group's motto is, "No child killing in tranquility!"

And don't forget, picketing is the American way. Continued the RMN:

The residential picketing performed by the group has caused considerable controversy and has led several city councils in the Denver Metro area to consider ordinances which would place limitations on the picketers. In general, they would like the residential picketing problem to go away, but they are unwilling to go with an all out ban due to first amendment rights issues and the potential for a long drawn out and expensive battle supporting such a ban.

Gary Meggison... attended a Lakewood City Council meeting recently and requested them to pass an ordinance to eliminate the residential picketers. So far, there is no action planned by the council.

[Top photo courtesy of Leslie Hanks; 3-photo montage courtesy of Rocky Mountain News]

by Bethany Kerr

Mary Kay's post below (about the man who killed his wife because she had Lou Gehrig's disease) reminded me about this incredible video that I saw a few months ago. I think that it should touch every person here.

Click on the picture below to go to the video:

Dr. Melamed-Cohen lacks the functions that most of us take for granted in our daily life. He is completely paralyzed, must be fed through a feeding tube, and cannot even breathe on his own, and yet, he says: "Don't despair. Be optimistic, and work on simchah (joy) in your heart. No matter what you're lacking, think of what's possible to do in your present situation."

Other quotes by Cohen:

"I feel at times that G-d has allowed me to live in order to show the world that even in such a condition one can continue to be creative and contribute to society... Until the last moment, one has to live and rejoice and give thanks to the Creator."

"Before, I didn't believe that I have such inner strength. I learned that every human being has sparks that he can transform into a burning flame."

"If they had let me die, I would have missed the best and most important years of my life."

by Mary Kay Hastings

From LifeNews.com:

An Oregon man has killed his disabled wife in a test of the one-of-a-kind state law that allows assisted suicide there. John Roberts says his wife Virginia was afflicted with ALS, or Lou Gehrig's Disease and he took her life to see if the state would allow him to get away with voluntary euthanasia, or so-called mercy killing.

Roberts' family says John's killing his wife was an act of compassion because she didn't yet qualify for an assisted suicide under the state's guidelines.

"And part of the reason why they chose this method rather than going down the assisted suicide route was that she was so proud that she didn't want to let herself get into the condition she would need to be in before they'd be allowed," Greg Roberts added.

Smith predicted that Oregon wouldn't allow Roberts to get off scott free and turn its assisted suicide law into one allowing euthanasia. At the same time, he said Roberts wouldn't be punished severely.

Don't you just love it? Assisted suicide? Here honey, let me help you with that gun!

by Steven Ertelt

From LifeNews.com, February 4:

A report from Britain shows that 66 babies were born alive on one year alone after abortions done with public money under the nation's health care system

The British National Health Service says women were given drugs to soften their cervix and had labor induced to birth the child so prematurely that there is no way to provide enough care for the child to live.

After birth, the babies received no medical care or attention, the report indicated....

According to the Evening Standard newspaper, the babies in these abortions mostly involved unborn children who suffered from severe physical or mental disabilities, some of which may have been life-threatening.

However, the newspaper said the report showed some of the babies had very minor issues such as a club foot or cleft palate that could easily be repaired with surgery after birth.

Half of the babies survived for an hour or more and one infant breathed without medical help for ten hours before dying.

After nurse Jill Stanek discovered staff at a Chicago hospital left babies to die after such live birth abortions, Congress passed and President Bush signed a bill to ensure that any infant who survives an abortion must be given appropriate medical care.

[HT: Mary Kay Hastings]

We're on Day 3 of our Hawaiian vacation, and I thought I'd say aloha and show some photos.

If you don't watch Lost, you won't understand our photo montage. You may not understand it anyway.

It has been overcast and even rainy, but this development has merely spared us from having to make the tortured decision between bumming on the beach or seeing the sites. We've now travelled from top to bottom of the Big Island and today are scouting its interior. Tomorrow we head to the east side....

Photo 1: Help! We got on the wrong airline, Oceanic, and our plane crashed on a strange island! (Actually this is Jill on the edge of the Kilauea Caldera ("big crater"....)

Photo 2: Smoldering remains of the plane. (Actually, sulfur fumes still smoldering from the site's last volcanic activity in 1982....)

Photo 3: Word to the wise. Don't try looking in volcanic steam vents with your glasses on....

Photo 4: Fortunately, Rich found us an abandoned VW van....

Photo 5: This is a shot just before Rich drove us into the ocean, belatedly discovering nonworking brakes. (Actually, this is a mud road not intended for convertibles that Jill heroically but mistakenly thought we could negotiate on a hunt for an ancient Hawaiian site....)

Aloha! We're off on another big adventure. (It's 10:35a here now. Time to start the day.)

While the pro-life themed movie Juno soared past the $100 million earnings milestone last weekend, its critically acclaimed anti-life counterpart, 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days, opened in just two theaters nationwide.

4 Months is not a "gripping portrayal of life" as review website Rotten Tomatoes described it. It is the blatant promotion of death, in this case a late-term baby in 1987 Romania, when front alley abortions there were illegal.

Four months, three weeks and two days refers to the length of time a promiscuous college student waited after conceiving before deciding to abort, in other words, the gestational age of her baby when killed.

Baby had no lines but merits commendation for giving a dead-on performance on that bathroom floor.

Mainstream media critics all loved 4 Months - giving it 70 positive reviews to three negative - and have been promoting its American opening hard, also pushing for an Academy Award nomination for Best Foreign Language Film.

Both efforts failed. Reviews indicated critics braced for the former, since American moviegoers so lack appreciation for great movies.

But they were completely unprepared for the Academy snub....

Continue reading my column today, "4 months, 3 weeks, and 2 theaters," on WorldNetDaily.com.

by Jill Stanek

I reported last week about a young disabled mother, Lauren Richardson, whose own mother, Edith Towers, is seeking court permission to starve and dehydrate Lauren to death.

I said Towers' attorney was trying to get a video made by Lauren's father, Randy Richardson, taken off the Internet. Randy does not want Lauren killed. He wants to care for her. All she needs is food and water to survive, no machines.

The video showed Lauren responding to family and a pet, proving she is not in a coma or brain dead, as the abused "persistent vegetative state" would have one believe.

Now up on Lauren's website is this:

Due to an Injunction against Lauren's father, by the court appointed lawyer ad litem (allegedly representing the interests of Lauren), we may no longer link to the video which showed Lauren responding to family members. This order, which was signed by Master Samuel Glasscock, asserts the right to privacy of Lauren by the same lawyer who consented to terminating her life.

Fortunately, mlbalan74 captured the video before Randy was forced to remove it and has reposted it on YouTube. Pro-lifers should download and save it asap, as I have on an mpg file here. Then show this video far and wide.

Also see the February 2 Hannity interview with Randy:

Lauren's senior high school photo, above, was prophetic. She's still there inside, behind her reflection.

by Bethany Kerr

Rachel's Park Memorial in Waco, TX, was dedicated in 2000 to help post-abortive families grieve their losses.

On February 1 or 2, Rachel's Park Memorial was vandalized last Friday or Saturday.

Of the 4,000 crosses which stand in memorial to the same number of children aborted each day in the U.S., 200 to 300 were destroyed by a vehicle, most likely a Jeep or an SUV .

Park founder Rev. Rusty Thomas reported, "The crosses were planted into the ground with steel rebar," so the vehicle doing the damage likely sustained its own damage.

Waco Police are investigating whether this was a hate crime or mischief.

See more photos of the damage on page 2.

[HT: Thomas]

by Mary Kay Hastings

From the the Buffalo News, by Jerry Zremski:

On the 35th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision that started a national political battle over abortion, opponents Tuesday declared partial victory. And the head of the nation's main abortion rights group agreed that her side has been losing.

Nancy Keenan, president of the nation's largest abortion rights group, said the declining abortion rate was tied to changes nationwide that made abortions more difficult to obtain.

"Yes, we won 35 years ago --- but women have been losing ground, losing rights, losing options, losing access, losing availability and just plain losing nearly every day since," Keenan, who heads NARAL Pro-Choice America, said in a recent speech....

While clear majorities continue to favor the Supreme Court's Jan. 22, 1973, ruling in Roe v. Wade, which established a constitutional right to abortion, there are signs that public support for abortion is not as strong as it once was. Gallup polling shows that the percentage of Americans who think abortion should be legal under any circumstances fell from 33 percent in 1994 to 26 percent in 2007. And the percentage that wanted to see Roe v. Wade overturned increased from 28 percent to 35 percent between 2005 and 2007.

In other words, Roe's future depends largely on the future of Justice John Paul Stevens, 87, a staunch supporter of abortion rights. Masci said that if a Democrat is elected president this fall, Stevens' eventual successor would be a Roe supporter — but just the opposite would likely happen if a Republican wins.

In the meantime, though, abortion opponents are taking cold comfort in the fact that the abortion rate is declining.

Now why do you suppose, pro-CHOICERS are upset by the decline? Isn't "RARE" one of their battle cries? Why is a decline bad?

by Bethany Kerr

[Source: Rick Kirkman and Jerry Scott]

by Jacqueline Harvey and Valerie Ryan

President Bush's proposed 2009 budget includes an initial $550 million to Title X funding for "family planning," most of which goes to Planned Parenthood.

But the plan also includes a cumulative $3.3 billion cut to Title X over the next 3 years, while increasing funding earmarked for abstinence education.

Meanwhile, the Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood's research arm, says abstinence education has been successful. Yes, you heard that right....

Reports Guttmacher:

From 1995 to 2002, formal instruction about birth control methods declined from 81% to 66% among males and from 87% to 70% among females. This, combined with increases in reports of abstinence education among males (from 74% to 83%), resulted in a higher proportion of teenagers' receiving instruction only about abstinence (males, 9% to 24%; females, 8% to 21%).

A 2006 analysis by Columbia University and Guttmacher Institute researchers found that 86% of the decline in teen pregnancy was due to dramatic improvements in contraceptive use, including more teens using any contraceptive methods at all, more teens using certain highly effective methods and more teens using multiple methods. Approximately 14% of the decline was due to more adolescent girls delaying sexual intercourse.

Yes, according to Guttmatcher, after teens started to receive the abstinence education, teen pregnancy went down with 14% more girls remaining abstinent.

[HT: Jay Sekulow Live (ACLJ), Guttmacher]

by Bethany Kerr

I'm sure some of you will remember Sandi, who I posted about in December.

Sandi was diagnosed with Hodgkin's Lymphoma when she was about 10 weeks pregnant.

A specialist recommended Sandy abort, since she would have to undergo chemo treatments, but she refused.

Sandy delivered a beautiful, healthy baby girl on November 17, 2007, and is now cancer free!

Sandi made a beautifully touching video about her miracle baby, Gabriella, which I want to share with you. Be sure to get a tissue ready:

by Bethany Kerr

I found this op ed in the Student Newspaper at the University of Alberta today by student Jennifer Jones:

I'm writing this in response to the piece of paper taped to the back of my bathroom stall on 28 January. Normally, I'm immune and uncaring to the various forms of propaganda and advertising that grace bathroom walls; however, I was rather incensed at the sight of this particular piece of paper, which was an advertisement for the U of A Pro-Life organization (or so the stamp on the paper reads at the bottom)....

I... take issue with the "facts" that they were promoting.

The paper states: "Jan. 28. On this day in 1988, the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the federal legislation restricting abortion. Since then, the number of abortions has drastically increased. Today in Canada, there are approximately 100,000 abortions per year (Statistics Canada). Today, we remember and mourn the victims of abortion, past and present."

The pro-life organization in question backed up their sources with a legitimate source. Why did Jones put quotes around the word "facts," as if they were not?

Perhaps Jennifer has a problem with the term "victims of abortion," but aren't pro-lifers entitled to their beliefs, as she claims? If pro-lifers believe abortion is an injustice, and if they want to mourn abortion victims, why should they censor their beliefs for her benefit? Continuing on:

I would have much rather have seen a poster advertising an open house or group meeting to discuss the convictions of the pro-life organization. But to do it in this way does a disservice to those that truly believe for rational reasons that abortion is not the only option. Though I may be pro-choice, I still heartily believe in options, which is exactly what the Supreme Court ruling was about.

How about this poster? I thought options were the very definition of pro-choice? Yet, Jennifer says, "though I'm pro-choice, I believe in options." Isn't that an oxymoron? More....

By not having legislation on abortion, it gives us choice. This was a poor showing of getting a message out, an it speaks of bitterness and spite. You should seek to educate people on why abortion isn't the answer and how pro-life is preferable, not to enrage people by the injustice of it all.

Uh, Jennifer, they were seeking to educate people on why abortion isn't the answer. You just didn't learn. And...

You only end up pi**ing people off and reinforcing their determination to stay out of the argument and ignore it.

If that's true, then you, and others like you, should support flyers like this. After all, they should only help your side, not hurt it.

by Mary Kay Hastings

From Fox News, February 4:

Many mothers cherish the first kicks they feel from their unborn babies.

But unknown to one U.K. mother, the kicking she felt from the twins growing inside her actually saved her life, according to a report from Fox News.

Michelle Stepney, 35, said her twins Alice and Harriet, now age 13 months, were a lively pair in the womb.

At the time, however, she had no idea that constant kicking she felt actually dislodged a tumor that had formed on her cervix and, according to doctors, saved her life....

Shortly after becoming pregnant, Stepney of Cheam in South-West London was taken to the hospital after suffering what was believed to be a miscarriage. Soon doctors realized she was still pregnant, but had developed life-threatening cervical cancer. Stepney declined to have an abortion and doctors at the Royal Marsden Hospital in London agreed to give her reduced chemotherapy in the hope of stopping the cancer spreading during the pregnancy.

But it wasn't the chemo that ultimately saved Stepney.

"I couldn't believe it when the doctors told me that the babies had dislodged the tumor," she said. "I'd felt them kicking, but I didn't realize just how important their kicking would turn out to be. I owe my life to my girls, and that's why I could have never agreed with a termination."

Photo courtesy Daily Mail

[HT: commenter Rosie]

by Bethany Kerr

From Guardian Unlimited, February 1:

Survival rates fuel abortion debate

The row over the 24-week abortion limit has intensified after it emerged survival rates for very premature babies have more than doubled at a top hospital.

A study from University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (UCLH) found survival rates for babies born alive between 22 and 25 weeks of gestation rose from 32% in 1981 to 71% in 2000....

The professor behind the research said it showed what could be achieved if staffing levels were kept consistent and adequate resources were pumped into units.

But many experts back the findings of the EPICure study of all UK units, which has indicated little improvement between 1995 and 2006 in the rates of survival to discharge home for babies born below 24 weeks gestation.

UCLH neonatal consultant, Professor John Wyatt, led the new study and gave evidence to last year's Commons science and technology committee, which found no scientific justification for lowering the 24-week limit.

He said the EPICure study gave much lower survival rates than he had found "and it has been argued that there has been no improvement in survival across the country as a whole since EPICure was undertaken in 1995.

"However, studies which average the results from a large number of maternity units obscure the effects of very marked variations in resources, staffing and experience in the care of extremely premature infants.

"It is also plausible that ethical and clinical policies vary between different units and there is published evidence to show that this will have an effect on survival rates."

Prof Wyatt said he fully acknowledged that his study had limitations because it only looked at a small number of babies.

But he said such studies were "hugely important because they provide information on the survival rates that can be achieved with consistent levels of staffing and resources, and with consistent policies."

Are abortion proponents going to try to stop proper resources going to hospitals so premature babies born under 25 weeks won't survive?

[HT: Valerie Ryan, 2 Seconds Faster]

by Bethany Kerr

Planned Parenthood of Arizona is issuing discounts for their services, according to an article at The Wildcat Online.

A coupon for $10.00 off of any purchase $25.00 or more is being issued in the Spring 2008 coupon bonanza, to any new patients.

I'm assuming this coupon includes abortion services, something which Planned Parenthood supposedly wants to be "safe, legal, and rare", as it does not exclude it from the coupon.

The Wildcat Online makes some good points about this story....

There's no need to get into an abortion debate, or a birth control debate or a promiscuity debate. Everybody, except perhaps presidential candidates and the occasional retarded penguin, has a firm position on these oft-beaten dead horses. The issue is that a $10 off coupon from Planned Parenthood Arizona (PPAZ) is tacky and tasteless. More importantly, the coupon raises questions about the organization, its mission and how much students should be willing to trust Planned Parenthood with their health.

The coupon claims that PPAZ is "a comfortable place to go for honest information and compassionate care." Sounds like an organization that wants all people, regardless of income or class, to have the opportunity (or, the "choice") to access Planned Parenthood's goods and services. Why, then, must PPAZ's product be discounted in the first place? Sure, zany places like Whipped can get away with heaving, obscene markups on cupcakes, but a healthcare provider marking up services enough to subsequently discount them? By giving a coupon, PPAZ implicitly acknowledges its profit making potential within the bounds of its non-profit status (which doesn't prohibit profit, but mandates that profit stay within the organization).

Planned Parenthood describes itself as "a trusted health care provider, an informed educator, a passionate advocate and a global partner helping similar organizations around the world." It supports lobbyists, receives millions in federal budget money every year (even approved by President Bush under Title X), funds campaigns to educate on sexual health and provides services ranging from Pap smears and diabetes tests to abortions.

In other words, it's got its hands in every sexual health cookie jar. If PPAZ is pushing a product, why should a consumer trust the claims more than they would trust a Chevrolet salesman's pitch? When Planned Parenthood tells students they need to be checked for sexually transmitted diseases, if they're sexually active, is it any more objective than the dealer saying that you need leather seats in your new car? Should anyone trust a salesman to give them objective, unbiased information, especially in a health-oriented industry like Planned Parenthood's?

Looks like Planned Parenthood of Collier County has the same idea:

And Planned Parenthood of Northeast Ohio:

And Planned Parenthood of Chicago:

These coupons are obviously meant to entice new customers into Planned Parenthood.

This isn't the first time Planned Parenthood has used tactics such as these to lure people in.

In 2006, Planned Parenthood Golden Gate offered an iPod to anyone who made an appointment at PPGG:

Not to mention, they had ads to give out free movie tickets if you "tell a friend" about their services:

These business tactics of Planned Parenthood, which is supposed to be a non-profit organization, are extremely tasteless.

[HT: Valerie Ryan]

by Mary Kay Hastings

Johnny and Mary sittin' in a tree
K-I-S-S-I-N-G
First comes love,
Then comes marriage,
Then comes a new technology which will allow you to manufacture a baby without ever having to touch each other....

U.K., February 1, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com):

"'Female sperm', 'male eggs' and 'same-sex reproduction' - whether these terms fill you with hope or disgust, a reproductive revolution is already in progress," begins a recent New Scientist report on some of the most bizarre and disturbing scientific research being conducted by stem cell scientists.

Used to be boy meets girl, they fall in love, get married, consummate the marriage, start a family....

In his patent application, Aharonian states, "The present invention includes methods for developing sperm containing a female's chromosomes, or developing eggs containing a male's chromosomes, and the sperm or eggs so produced."

Then it was boy meets girl, consummate relationship, swap phone numbers, kill any family that is started... rinse, repeat.

"In a handful of labs across the world, biologists are trying to make genetically male cells develop into eggs, and female cells into sperm. If successful, their efforts might one day allow lesbian and gay couples to have children that are genetically their own," the report continues.

Now it's boy meets boy, (or girl meets girl), mimic the act of consummation, imitate marriage with a civic union, send in two box tops, some skin cells.... We'll mail you back a bona fide fetus-out -of -the womb, complete with all your own genetic material.... S & H fees may apply.

In his patent application, Aharonian states, "The present invention includes methods for developing sperm containing a female's chromosomes, or developing eggs containing a male's chromosomes, and the sperm or eggs so produced."

by Bethany Kerr

It's about time.Abortionist Malachy DeHenre was found guilty by a grand jury, for killing his wife, Dr. Mysha Rose DeHenre, 10 years ago.

A Jones County Circuit Court deliberated for only 45 minutes before unanimously convicting DeHenre of manslaughter. Sentencing is set for March 13.

DeHenre had claimed that the gun had been accidentally set off after wrestling the gun away from his wife after returning from a trip to Zimbabwe. The autopsy was reviewed, however, and it was confirmed that the death was not accidental or a suicide. According to the autopsy results, it was shown that DeHenre had fired the pistol from more than 24 inches away from the head of his wife while she was lying down....

According to LifeNews.com:

DeHenre has also been charged with raping a 21-year-old patient in March 1992.

DeHenre's New Woman Medical Center abortion facility in Jackson closed in 2005 and he was required, in December 2005, to pay substantial damages to a woman who was injured in a failed abortion in 2003.

Circuit Judge Winston Kidd awarded Latosha Travis $500,000 in damages after the abortion center failed to respond to her lawsuit. DeHenre and the abortion business were defendants in the suit.

In March 2005, the Mississippi state medical board suspended his medical license over botched abortions.

The suspension came after he testified that he did not like performing some 35,000 abortions but did so because he needed the work.

And also:

Medical boards in Alabama and New York have suspended his medical licenses in those states.

In one Alabama case, a woman died 18 hours after having an abortion. The women involved in three other cases had to have hysterectomies to stop massive hemorrhaging from uterine perforations, including Travis.

Travis, who was 20 years old at the time and living in Jackson, paid DeHenre $680 for the abortion, the lawsuit said. She had at least one child already and though she planned to have more children in the future, she was devastated to have the hysterectomy because of the failed abortion.

In the case involving a death, DeHenre admitted he should have met the patient at the hospital or relayed medical information to the doctor who treated her.

Prosecutor J. Ronald Parrish was quoted as saying after the verdict was announced, "This man is one of the most despicable that I have ever prosecuted in this county. He has committed innumerable crimes that he hasn't been convicted for. Of course, we were only concerned about one today."

[HT: Sue Turner, Physicians for Life]

Aloha from Hawaii! My husband Rich and I (pictured right at the annual IL pro-life conference this past Sunday) are celebrating our 25th anniversary 2 years late (i.e., 27th... :)

We'll be gone until February 14. Meanwhile, the moderators will write posts. Bethany, bless her heart, will bear the brunt of my absence by taking over administrative responsibilities.

I'll check in every day, unless we decide to become beach bums and live here forever.

Meanwhile, I can't part without passing along this one, courtesy of Fran at Illinois Review, who also took our picture:

Just why did Rudy Giuliani lose in his bid to become the Republican presidential nominee? San Francisco Chronicle columnist Debra Saunders suggested his equivocation on the abortion issue made him look weak:

I have to wonder if Giuliani's biggest mistake was not touting himself as the only supporter of abortion rights in the Republican primary....

It may seem counter-intuitive to take a stand that most party members do not embrace. According to recent AP poll, two-thirds of Democrats - but only one-third of Republicans - believe abortion should be legal.

Nonetheless, a year ago, when GOP voters knew Giuliani's pro-choice position, they liked him the most because they saw him as a strong leader. After a year of soft-pedaling his abortion position, he doesn't look so strong.

"Counter-intuitive" is putting that theory nicely. "Wildly imaginative pro-abort spin" is more like it. Why do you think Giuliani's star fell?

This sad story is all over the British press.

It appears the Muslim family of 22-year-old Sabia Walla forced her to get a late-term abortion in Pakistan at 5 months gestation after learning she was pregnant by British national Usman Gulzar, 24 and pictured right, who she married in secret on December 27 in Scotland, where both families live.

Walla died January 23 following a botched abortion. She was apparently pregnant when married.

Here's a story snip, from The Daily Record, January 30:

Usman Gulzar was last night dealing with the shocking revelation that his pregnant wife died after a botched abortion....

As revealed in the Record yesterday, Sobia's death came just weeks after the Glasgow couple married in secret, infuriating her family.

Now it has emerged that 22-year-old Sobia, who was nearly five months pregnant, died in agony after the operation at a hospital in Gujranwala, near the Pakistani city of Lahore.

Sobia went to Gujranwala's Najma Zia clinic for the abortion but suffered complications.

She was then transferred to the bigger private Surgimed Hospital, in Lahore, where she died of massive bleeding.

Usman, 24, called in police after refusing to accept Sobia had died from food poisoning while attending a family funeral in Pakistan....

The Record revealed yesterday how Sobia had been afraid to tell her parents of her pregnancy and subsequent secret marriage...

Sobia's parents, Mohammad and Safia Wali, have said they do not want a police investigation.

But detectives are expected to interview them and her [four] brothers... on their return from Pakistan.

Here we go again, Terri II.

This information comes from Bess McAneny of the Delaware Pro-Life Coalition, who I spoke with this morning.

I'm told Hannity & Colmes will tonight feature the story of Lauren Richardson of Delaware, a now 23-year-old who overdosed on heroin in August 2006 while 3-4 months pregnant.

Lauren was kept on life support until she delivered a healthy baby girl in February 2007, and then the fight began to euthanize Lauren.

Lauren's mother, Edith Towers, is fighting to dehydrate and starve her to death, while her father, Randy Richardson, is fighting to keep Lauren alive and assume responsibility for her care.

So far Edith is winning. Last week a court awarded her guardianship of Lauren, but any actions to kill Lauren are being staved pending appeals....

UPDATE, 2/2, 4:50a: Lauren's family has put her video up on YouTube. I've switched links to the video on page 2. And Hannity & Colmes did feature Lauren's story last night. No video available yet.

After delivery, Lauren's trach was removed, and she began breathing on her own, although she is now considered in a "persistent vegetative state." This comes despite a neurologist's report:

Nonetheless, her definite vocalization increase after I speak to her and the character of the movement of her arms suggests the possibility of her awareness of her surroundings, and thus, some cognitive capability.

There is also the following video, released by Randy, showing Lauren responding to family and a dog, sometimes verbally. Click on the graphic below to go to the video, although it could be removed at any time. I'm told Towers' attorney is supposedly furious Lauren's "right to privacy" has been breached even as he fights to kill her. I told McAneny to get the video on YouTube asap [2/2 update: done]:

Towers says Lauren watched the Terri Schindler Schiavo case unfold and expressed a wish not to live in that state, a wish made when 18 and before she was a mother.

Towers has never let Lauren see her baby and, in fact, pressured her to abort, according to McAneny, which she refused - clearly demonstrating she was pro-life.

No person should ever be starved and dehydrated to death, all the more if a loving family member wants to take responsibility for care. Only yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the execution of James Callahan, a convicted rapist and murderer in Alabama, due to concerns lethal injection may be cruel and unusual punishment. How can people have such schizophrenic opinions on life and death?

See yesterday's DelawareOnline story here.

See the webpage supporters have launched for Lauren here.

The Family Research Council blog has linked to most of the speeches given at the Blogs 4 Life conference in DC on January 22.

Unfortunately, FRC didn't capture the first few speeches, including mine. But I have posted the test of my speech on page 2 along with powerpoint slides for those interested.

At last year’s conference I discussed blog basics, much of which I gleaned from Hugh Hewitt’s book, Blog, which I would recommend to anyone interested in blogging.

This year I will discuss ideas on how to grow your blog.

I returned home from the 2007 Blogs for Life conference with a greater understanding of the importance of pro-life blogs, and I committed myself to work harder on mine.

We all know the mainstream media leaves so many of our stories unreported, underreported, or misreported.

The message I got from last year’s conference was that pro-life blogs aren’t just exercises in frustration relief, which is basically how I previously used mine. Pro-life blogs can really make a difference in our war against the culture of death.

And so, this past year I made my blog my #1 pro-life work priority. And it paid off with a good deal of growth.

The number of visitors checking my site daily is up 650%.

The commenters have become prolific, often over 100 on each post. I started the year with zero moderators and now need six, plus a proofreader. I was quoted this year too many places to count, including many pro-abortion blogs and websites.

Because of my increased visibility, I received calls from the mainstream media,

such as the Chicago Tribune and Los Angeles Times, seeking my opinion simply because I was a pro-life blogger.

I am by no means an expert on blogging. Many here today could be and are my instructors. But I did a few things that increased my traffic that I would like to pass along.

The first thing I did was blog more often, which is a fundamental principle of noteworthy blogging. I now write 3-5 posts a day on weekdays. If you feed it, they will come.
That said, posts must be meaningful, not just take up cyberspace. It’s better not to say anything than to say something poorly.

And it’s better to take time and produce one good post than write something inaccurate or inane and lose credibility.

Internet viewers are not a captive audience. They can and do pick up and leave when the least bit bored.

Which is why less is always best on blogs. It takes me longer to edit than to write. In journalism it is said, “Edit until it hurts, and then edit some more.” I do. Every word has a reason for being there.

So I don’t just recycle what is already out there. I don’t just cut and paste from LifeNews.com or LifeSiteNews.com, although they are great sources. I find new information, or a new angle.

One easy way to get new information is to send yourself google alerts.

Go to google, then go to “more,” then send yourself notification on any word or phrase you like as often a day as you’d like.

I receive google alerts every day on the words “abortion,” “pro-life,” “pro-choice,” “anti-abortion,” “stem cell,” and, of course, “Jill Stanek.”

But sources are everywhere. Develop an eye, even at the grocery check-out, where you can scan magazine headlines.

On the topic of angles, one perfect niche for pro-life bloggers is to dissect mainstream media stories on our issue and correct them or draw out points, sometimes buried headlines.

The Los Angeles Times featured a story January 7 on men and post-abortion stress syndrome. The LAT quoted the president of the American Psychiatric Association, Nada Stotland, making some remarkable statements.

Stotland said pro-lifers “’have succeeded in convincing a lot of the American public’ that abortion leaves women wounded… But the research does not prove cause and effect… and women who have abortions are more emotionally unstable in the first place.”

Now what would cause the president of the American Psychiatric Association to disparage the feelings of an entire class of people, when anyone who has taken psych 101 knows “feelings are neither right or wrong, they just are. But further Stotland called women who abort “emotionally unstable”?
In my opinion, that was a buried headline, and I wondered, why did she say that?

Well, I researched Stotland and found she is a lesbian feminist who sits on the board of Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health, and then I blogged on it.

So no wonder she said what she said. She has a liberal agenda that trumps her profession.

You may wonder why Stotland’s lesbianism matters, but the homosexual lobby supports and works with the abortion lobby because they both have the same goal: illicit sex with no consequences.

Pro-life bloggers can also show graphics and pictures to make our point, something the mainstream media can’t do to the same extent, and on our issue doesn’t if it can. Readers enjoy graphics, and they break up a page. I include photos or graphics with every post. Planned Parenthood never fails to provide fodder, such as the valentine it’s sending to Barack Obama.

And on the right is a photo from the January issue of Vogue magazine, with the photo of a post-partial birth abortive mother modeling the latest in fashion – including a Christopher Fischer cardigan - and smiling at her wanted live child. Grotesque. I didn’t need to add much commentary to that post.

Another area where pro-life bloggers can excel is by providing documentation. Eric Scheidler spoke a few moments ago about the Aurora Planned Parenthood debacle, and Eric and his team were great at providing fodder to bloggers to hammer to the America public that PP lied its way into the city.

Here is a document PP’s front company, Gemini Office Development, submitted to the City of Aurora falsely stating it did not know who would occupy its building, when PP had created Gemini specifically to cover up that fact.

By showing that document and others like it, we let PP and Gemini condemn themselves.

I even posted PP Chicago Area’s tax returns, showing its CEO Steve Trombley made almost $300k and its lead abortionist $500k in 2005.

And when we had pickets, how superior was it to show 1k marchers rather than just say there were 1k marchers, as MSM did? I even made a couple YouTube videos.

In fact, pro-lifers have become quite adept at using YouTube, for instance posting 130 videos about Aurora Planned Parenthood – marches, public hearings, prayer vigils, etc.

It was in fact pro-life bloggers who swarmed around this story and gave it wings. MSM was clearly planning to ignore it by its first stories. I once listed all the pro-life blogs that google said had carried this story until google went ga-ga and wouldn't let me open blogs past page 29 of its search pages.

Another way I increased traffic to my blog was by encouraging conversation. My blog software includes a spam blocker, so I don’t make commenters go through an elaborate sign-up or sign-in process, and I don’t screen their comments before posting them. I encourage dissent. I think it strengthens us to debate. It hones our skills. I don’t block pro-aborts, and I don’t force commenters to stick to the topic, although we’d prefer that Our goal is to encourage discussion of our issue and to build relationships.

This open comment policy has an element of danger to it but has worked out very well for me, surprisingly. I can count on one hand the number of times we’ve had to lock down comments when trolls came to call. Fortunately, I have many moderators who constantly check to make sure commenters abide by our posted guidelines, and they usually do.

You must have a thick skin to do this, because comments can get rough. But there are rewards. Over the past several months we’ve had 4 converts – people who came to our site pro-abortion, engaged in prolonged conversation, and changed their view to pro-life.

Pro-life bloggers must not lose sight of the goals, to convert those on the other side and make America abortion free ultimately through a human life amendment to the constitution, likely preceded by the overturn of Roe v. Wade. We also have many new Life issues to contend with like euthanasia and human embryo experimentation, which reminds me to mention that developing a niche is also a way to grow your blog. Become an expert, the go-to person on a certain issue or organization, and you’ll get noticed.

And always remember, blogging is a means, not an end. Don’t become more concerned about growing your blog than the issue at hand.

Thank you.