This week, legislators and governors in Louisiana, South Carolina, and Alabama joined in bipartisan fashion to enact several new restrictions on abortion.
For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:
Abortions Outlawed at 20 Weeks in South Dakota
Abortionists Stymied by New Oklahoma & Kansas Laws
Late-term Abortion Ban Passes in West Virginia
Less Painful Baby Killing: New Utah Abortion Law
Also read Abortionists, Satanists Team Up vs. Missouri Law
And read Indiana Outlaws Killing Disabled, Abortionists Sue
-- From "Louisiana lawmakers vote to ban common abortion procedure" by Melinda Deslatte, Associated Press 5/17/16
Louisiana will become the sixth state to prohibit a commonly used second-trimester abortion procedure, when the governor signs a bill that received final legislative passage Tuesday.
The measure by Rep. Mike Johnson, R-Bossier City, will ban a procedure called dilation and evacuation, known as D&E.; The procedure will only be allowed if necessary to prevent “serious health risk” to the mother.
A 36-2 Senate vote with no debate sent the measure to [Democrat] Gov. John Bel Edwards’ desk. Edwards spokesman Richard Carbo said the governor intends to sign it.
Supporters have described the abortion method as “inhumane and barbaric.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "South Carolina passes bill banning abortion after 19 weeks" by Seanna Adcox, Associated Press 5/18/16
The legislation will now head to Gov. Nikki Haley's desk. The Republican said in March she will almost certainly sign it, but wants to look at the details once it reaches her.
Similar laws are in effect in 12 states. They've been blocked by court challenges in three others, and the U.S. Supreme Court has yet to rule on the ban's constitutionality. A South Dakota law signed in March takes effect this summer.
The South Carolina House approved the compromise 79-29. The Senate approved it 36-9 in March.
A doctor who performs an illegal abortion under the bill would face up to three years in prison and a $10,000 fine.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "South Carolina Legislature Approves Ban on Abortions at 20 Weeks" by Christine Hauser, New York Times 5/18/16
The South Carolina legislature has passed a bill making it illegal for a woman to get an abortion at 20 weeks or more, even if she has been raped or is a victim of incest . . . [and] would allow exceptions only if the mother’s life was in jeopardy or a doctor determined that the fetus could not survive outside the womb.
. . . Representative Wendy K. Nanney, a Republican sponsor of the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, said: “I am so excited. This is something that we’ve been working on for four years. It is a nice ending to a lot of hard work.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Alabama Gov. Bentley signs 2 controversial abortion bills into law" by The Associated Press 5/13/16
Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley has signed legislation into law that could shutter two of the state's largest abortion providers.
Bentley's office on Thursday confirmed the governor signed a bill to deny licenses to clinics within 2,000 feet of public elementary and middle schools. He also approved a ban on a commonly used second trimester abortion procedure.
The law will shutter a Huntsville facility that was forced to move to its current location in 2013 to comply with new facility restrictions on abortion providers. A Tuscaloosa facility could also be affected.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Dismemberment abortion ban signed into law, earns applause for Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley" by Lorraine Caballero, Christian Daily 5/17/16
The Republican governor, who is also a medical doctor, pointed out that Alabama's state law recognizes that an unborn child can suffer from physical pain. The dismemberment abortion ban, which takes effect in August, prohibits the use of forceps, scissors, clamps, or other similar instruments to remove a living unborn child from the uterus in pieces.
Dismemberment abortion, or "dilation and evacuation" (D&E), is a procedure done to terminate pregnancy in the second trimester. It involves severing the limbs of a live unborn child and extracting the pieces from the uterus one piece at a time.
Alabama is the fifth U.S. state to ban dismemberment abortion, after Kansas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, and Louisiana have either approved or is moving the law through the legislature.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Louisiana Is About To Ban ‘Dismemberment’ Abortions" by Rachel Stoltzfoos, Reporter, Daily Caller 5/18/16
. . . all 83 representatives in the State house, including 25 Democrats and two Independents, approved the bill in April.
Doctors commonly use the dilation and evacuation method in second trimester abortions. The abortionist artificially dilates the woman’s cervix, then simply reaches into the womb with metal forceps and pulls the fetus out piece by piece. Lastly, the abortionist vacuums or scrapes out any leftover flesh and blood to make sure no remains cause an infection in the woman.
“The fetus in many cases dies just as an adult would,” Republican Rep. Mike Johnson, who sponsored the bill and is running for Congress, recently told a USA Today affiliate. “It bleeds to death as it is torn limb from limb. There are many who say this is the preferred method not because it is better but because it is cheaper.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortions down in Alabama: Tough laws close clinics, cut numbers" by Amy Yurkanin, The Birmingham News 5/18/16
The number of abortion clinics in Alabama has dwindled from 12 in 2001 to five in 2016, and two of those clinics may have to close if the courts uphold laws recently passed by the state legislature.
The [2000-foot] distance requirement would shut down two of the busiest abortion clinics in Alabama. The West Alabama Women's Center in Tuscaloosa and All Women's Center for Reproductive Alternatives in Huntsville perform more than 70 percent of the abortions in the state, according to the Alabama Department of Public Health.
Pro-choice organizations say a slew of state laws have hurt clinics and made it difficult to access services in Alabama, which has some of the strictest abortion laws in the country.
The rate of abortion is lower in Alabama than the nation. In 2011, 12 percent of Alabama pregnancies ended in abortion, compared to 18 percent nationwide, according to the Guttmacher Institute.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read this Gallup poll: Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
Showing posts with label fetal pain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fetal pain. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 18, 2016
Tuesday, March 29, 2016
Less Painful Baby Killing: New Utah Abortion Law
Yesterday, Utah became the first state to require that pregnant women at or past 20 weeks gestation be anesthetized before an abortionist can be permitted to torture the unborn baby to death.
Abortions Outlawed at 20 Weeks in South Dakota
Late-term Abortion Ban Passes in West Virginia
Abortionists Stymied by New Oklahoma & Kansas Laws
Physicians Force New York Times to Admit 22-week Fetus is a Baby!
Also read this Gallup poll: Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
-- From "New Utah law requires anesthesia for abortions after 20 weeks" by Ed Adamczyk, UPI 3/29/16
Utah now has a law on the books requiring doctors to give anesthesia to abortion patients 20 or more weeks into pregnancy in an effort to reduce pain felt by the fetus.
Republican Gov. Gary Herbert signed the bill, HB 0234, into law Monday. . . .
Republican State Sen. Curt Bramble, sponsor of the bill, said he sought a ban on abortion after 20 weeks but was informed such a bill would likely be tested on constitutional grounds. His bill, which requires that doctors "eliminate or alleviate organic pain to the unborn child," was the next best option, he said.
Proponents of the law say the anesthesia prevents any suffering by the fetus during the abortion procedure. "Pain-capable unborn protection" laws exist in 12 states, although Utah's law is the first to demand that anesthesia is provided.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Utah governor signs bill requiring doctors to give abortion anesthesia" by The Associated Press 3/28/16
Dr. Sean Esplin of Intermountain Healthcare in Utah said anesthesia or an analgesic would need to go through the woman in order to reach the fetus. Doctors could give a woman general anesthesia, which would make her unconscious and likely require a breathing tube, or a heavy dose of narcotics.
No other U.S. state has passed this same law, said Elizabeth Nash, a policy analyst at the abortion-rights nonprofit Guttmacher Institute. Montana lawmakers passed a similar law in 2015 requiring fetal anesthesia before surgeries, including abortions, performed after 20 or more weeks of gestation, but its Democratic governor vetoed the measure.
Twelve states ban abortions after around 20 weeks of gestation, while a handful of other states give women the option of having anesthesia.
Previous Utah law gave women the choice to have anesthesia during an abortion.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Utah gov. signs bill requiring anesthesia in certain abortions" by Steph Solis, USA TODAY 3/29/16
The state Senate amended the bill before passing it earlier this month to make sure the anesthesia was not mandated in cases where it could hurt the mother.
. . . supporters of the law say a fetus should be protected if there’s even a chance it can feel pain. [Republican Sen. Curt] Bramble believes the evidence suggesting a fetus can feel pain by 20 weeks outweighs opponents' arguments.
The law makes sense in Utah, he said, where convicts sentenced to death and animals facing euthanasia receive anesthetics.
"We go to extraordinary lengths in Utah to prevent the pain of an individual sentenced to death," he said. "With euthanasia, we make every effort to not inflict pain on that animal....(mandating anesthesia) it is consistent with other policies we have in the state of Utah."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Florida Defunds Planned Parenthood, Liberals Fume
And read Indiana Outlaws Killing Disabled, Abortionists Sue
"The governor is adamantly pro-life. He believes in not only erring on the side of life, but also minimizing any pain that may be caused to an unborn child."For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:
-- Jon Cox, Spokesman to Republican Governor Gary Herbert of Utah
Abortions Outlawed at 20 Weeks in South Dakota
Late-term Abortion Ban Passes in West Virginia
Abortionists Stymied by New Oklahoma & Kansas Laws
Physicians Force New York Times to Admit 22-week Fetus is a Baby!
Also read this Gallup poll: Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
-- From "New Utah law requires anesthesia for abortions after 20 weeks" by Ed Adamczyk, UPI 3/29/16
Utah now has a law on the books requiring doctors to give anesthesia to abortion patients 20 or more weeks into pregnancy in an effort to reduce pain felt by the fetus.
Republican Gov. Gary Herbert signed the bill, HB 0234, into law Monday. . . .
Republican State Sen. Curt Bramble, sponsor of the bill, said he sought a ban on abortion after 20 weeks but was informed such a bill would likely be tested on constitutional grounds. His bill, which requires that doctors "eliminate or alleviate organic pain to the unborn child," was the next best option, he said.
Proponents of the law say the anesthesia prevents any suffering by the fetus during the abortion procedure. "Pain-capable unborn protection" laws exist in 12 states, although Utah's law is the first to demand that anesthesia is provided.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Utah governor signs bill requiring doctors to give abortion anesthesia" by The Associated Press 3/28/16
Dr. Sean Esplin of Intermountain Healthcare in Utah said anesthesia or an analgesic would need to go through the woman in order to reach the fetus. Doctors could give a woman general anesthesia, which would make her unconscious and likely require a breathing tube, or a heavy dose of narcotics.
No other U.S. state has passed this same law, said Elizabeth Nash, a policy analyst at the abortion-rights nonprofit Guttmacher Institute. Montana lawmakers passed a similar law in 2015 requiring fetal anesthesia before surgeries, including abortions, performed after 20 or more weeks of gestation, but its Democratic governor vetoed the measure.
Twelve states ban abortions after around 20 weeks of gestation, while a handful of other states give women the option of having anesthesia.
Previous Utah law gave women the choice to have anesthesia during an abortion.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Utah gov. signs bill requiring anesthesia in certain abortions" by Steph Solis, USA TODAY 3/29/16
The state Senate amended the bill before passing it earlier this month to make sure the anesthesia was not mandated in cases where it could hurt the mother.
. . . supporters of the law say a fetus should be protected if there’s even a chance it can feel pain. [Republican Sen. Curt] Bramble believes the evidence suggesting a fetus can feel pain by 20 weeks outweighs opponents' arguments.
The law makes sense in Utah, he said, where convicts sentenced to death and animals facing euthanasia receive anesthetics.
"We go to extraordinary lengths in Utah to prevent the pain of an individual sentenced to death," he said. "With euthanasia, we make every effort to not inflict pain on that animal....(mandating anesthesia) it is consistent with other policies we have in the state of Utah."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Florida Defunds Planned Parenthood, Liberals Fume
And read Indiana Outlaws Killing Disabled, Abortionists Sue
Saturday, March 12, 2016
Abortions Outlawed at 20 Weeks in South Dakota
South Dakota Gov. Dennis Daugaard signed a bill this week criminalizing abortions at 20 weeks gestation. The law includes an exception for the life of the mother in certain cases of emergency, but requires every effort be made to deliver the baby alive. No exception is provided for cases of rape or incest.
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
Late-term Abortion Ban Passes in West Virginia
Abortionists Stymied by New Oklahoma & Kansas Laws
Abortionists, Satanists Team Up vs. Missouri Law
Physicians Force New York Times to Admit 22-week Fetus is a Baby!
Also read this Gallup poll: Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
-- From "South Dakota Governor Signs 20-Week Abortion Ban Into Law" by James Nord, Associated Press 3/10/16
The measure allows abortions later than 19 weeks if there is a medical emergency, but a claim or diagnosis that a woman intends to kill or harm herself aren't part of the exemption. The law says that when such an abortion is necessary because of an emergency, the doctor must "deliver the child in the manner which ... provides the best opportunity for the unborn child to survive," but only if that is consistent with preserving the woman's life and preventing an "irreversible" impairment of a major bodily function.
Performing an abortion that violates the new threshold is a Class 1 misdemeanor, which carries a penalty of up to a year in jail and a $2,000 fine. A woman who gets such an abortion would not be subject to that consequence.
Similar laws are in effect in 12 other states. Courts have blocked laws in Arizona, Idaho and Georgia.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "New 20-week limit on abortions sent to governor" by Bob Mercer, Rapid City Journal correspondent 3/10/16
State senators gave final approval Wednesday 26-7 to the legislation, Senate Bill 72 . . .
Sen. Jeff Monroe, R-Pierre, was prime sponsor. His lead sponsor in the House was Rep. Isaac Latterell, R-Tea.
The House of Representatives passed the bill Monday 59-7. The House made changes that Monroe described as necessary to correct minor mistakes in the Senate version. Monroe was the only senator to speak on the matter Wednesday.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Daugaard approves 20-week abortion ban" by Dana Ferguson, Sioux Falls Argus Leader 3/10/16
Supporters say the measure aims to prevent excruciating pain fetuses experience during abortion procedures. While some doctors contend that fetuses can feel pain at 20 weeks, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists says evidence suggests that's not possible until the third trimester begins at 27 weeks.
Opponents including representatives from the American Civil Liberties Union and reproductive rights groups have said the measure is unconstitutional as it bans abortions before the point of viability. They also said the measure could create health problems for some pregnant women.
Thirteen states have approved similar bans, according to the reproductive health think-tank Guttmacher Institute, which depart from the 22-24 week standard of a fetus' viability outside the womb established by the Supreme Court's landmark 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade. At least two of those bans in Arizona and Idaho were enjoined due to court orders, voiding the policies.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "South Dakota Criminalizes Late Abortions" by Lacey Louwagie, Courthouse News Service 3/11/16
Some called the bill unnecessary. The only clinic that performs abortion in South Dakota is Planned Parenthood in Sioux Falls, which will not perform abortions after the 14th week of gestation.
The bill's author, state Sen. Jeff Monroe, R-Pierre, called that "baloney."
"I don't believe they are cutting it off at 14 weeks," he told Courthouse News.
The bill requires medical professionals to fill out a form answering 23 questions about any abortion performed in the state. Information sought includes the reason for the abortion, the mother's age and race, the gestational age of the fetus, and how the procedure was paid for.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "South Dakota Governor Signs Pro-Life Bill Banning Late-Term Abortions After 20 Weeks" by Micaiah Bilger, LifeNews.com 3/11/16
[Gov.] Daugaard spokeswoman Kelsey Pritchard told the Associated Press that the state’s attorney general “will be prepared to defend the constitutionality of the bill” if pro-abortion groups challenge it.
The bill is modeled after the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which has become law in 12 states: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, West Virginia and Wisconsin.
Though abortion advocates deny the science of fetal pain, researchers have established that unborn babies can feel pain at 20 weeks or earlier. Dr. Steven Zielinski, an internal medicine physician from Oregon, is one of the leading researchers into it. He first published reports in the 1980s to validate research showing evidence for unborn pain.
He has testified before U.S. Congress that an unborn child could feel pain at “eight-and-a-half weeks and possibly earlier” and that a baby before birth “under the right circumstances, is capable of crying.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Kill Baby to Save Mother? No! Says Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker
"I think it'll save lives because it lets women know that their children really are humans just like us. I think it's a great step forward for our state, and I would like to see us do more to protect the innocent."For background, read about court battles over late-term abortion restriction laws.
-- Rep. Isaac Latterell (R) Tea, South Dakota
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
Late-term Abortion Ban Passes in West Virginia
Abortionists Stymied by New Oklahoma & Kansas Laws
Abortionists, Satanists Team Up vs. Missouri Law
Physicians Force New York Times to Admit 22-week Fetus is a Baby!
Also read this Gallup poll: Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
-- From "South Dakota Governor Signs 20-Week Abortion Ban Into Law" by James Nord, Associated Press 3/10/16
The measure allows abortions later than 19 weeks if there is a medical emergency, but a claim or diagnosis that a woman intends to kill or harm herself aren't part of the exemption. The law says that when such an abortion is necessary because of an emergency, the doctor must "deliver the child in the manner which ... provides the best opportunity for the unborn child to survive," but only if that is consistent with preserving the woman's life and preventing an "irreversible" impairment of a major bodily function.
Performing an abortion that violates the new threshold is a Class 1 misdemeanor, which carries a penalty of up to a year in jail and a $2,000 fine. A woman who gets such an abortion would not be subject to that consequence.
Similar laws are in effect in 12 other states. Courts have blocked laws in Arizona, Idaho and Georgia.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "New 20-week limit on abortions sent to governor" by Bob Mercer, Rapid City Journal correspondent 3/10/16
State senators gave final approval Wednesday 26-7 to the legislation, Senate Bill 72 . . .
Sen. Jeff Monroe, R-Pierre, was prime sponsor. His lead sponsor in the House was Rep. Isaac Latterell, R-Tea.
The House of Representatives passed the bill Monday 59-7. The House made changes that Monroe described as necessary to correct minor mistakes in the Senate version. Monroe was the only senator to speak on the matter Wednesday.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Daugaard approves 20-week abortion ban" by Dana Ferguson, Sioux Falls Argus Leader 3/10/16
Supporters say the measure aims to prevent excruciating pain fetuses experience during abortion procedures. While some doctors contend that fetuses can feel pain at 20 weeks, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists says evidence suggests that's not possible until the third trimester begins at 27 weeks.
Opponents including representatives from the American Civil Liberties Union and reproductive rights groups have said the measure is unconstitutional as it bans abortions before the point of viability. They also said the measure could create health problems for some pregnant women.
Thirteen states have approved similar bans, according to the reproductive health think-tank Guttmacher Institute, which depart from the 22-24 week standard of a fetus' viability outside the womb established by the Supreme Court's landmark 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade. At least two of those bans in Arizona and Idaho were enjoined due to court orders, voiding the policies.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "South Dakota Criminalizes Late Abortions" by Lacey Louwagie, Courthouse News Service 3/11/16
Some called the bill unnecessary. The only clinic that performs abortion in South Dakota is Planned Parenthood in Sioux Falls, which will not perform abortions after the 14th week of gestation.
The bill's author, state Sen. Jeff Monroe, R-Pierre, called that "baloney."
"I don't believe they are cutting it off at 14 weeks," he told Courthouse News.
The bill requires medical professionals to fill out a form answering 23 questions about any abortion performed in the state. Information sought includes the reason for the abortion, the mother's age and race, the gestational age of the fetus, and how the procedure was paid for.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "South Dakota Governor Signs Pro-Life Bill Banning Late-Term Abortions After 20 Weeks" by Micaiah Bilger, LifeNews.com 3/11/16
[Gov.] Daugaard spokeswoman Kelsey Pritchard told the Associated Press that the state’s attorney general “will be prepared to defend the constitutionality of the bill” if pro-abortion groups challenge it.
The bill is modeled after the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which has become law in 12 states: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, West Virginia and Wisconsin.
Though abortion advocates deny the science of fetal pain, researchers have established that unborn babies can feel pain at 20 weeks or earlier. Dr. Steven Zielinski, an internal medicine physician from Oregon, is one of the leading researchers into it. He first published reports in the 1980s to validate research showing evidence for unborn pain.
He has testified before U.S. Congress that an unborn child could feel pain at “eight-and-a-half weeks and possibly earlier” and that a baby before birth “under the right circumstances, is capable of crying.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Kill Baby to Save Mother? No! Says Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker
Monday, August 10, 2015
Kill Baby to Save Mother? No! — Gov. Scott Walker
As the mainstream media set traps to ensnare pro-lifers in the 2016 presidential quest, most conservative candidates bite their tongues to avoid another 2012 "Todd Akin moment." However, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker boldly answered the "gotcha question" in Thursday's GOP debate:
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
Gallup Poll: Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
Abortionists Lament Ever-greater State Limits
Pro-life Laws Sweep America; Liberals Battle Back
Abortion Rate Declines, Democrats Want More Access
Abortion Clinic Closings Set Record; Abortionists Admit Defeat
Also read Families are Greatest Enemy of Democrats at Polls
-- From "GOP candidates: Ban abortion, no exceptions" by Irin Carmon, MSNBC 8/7/15
[FOX News debate] Moderator Megyn Kelly asked Scott Walker how he could justify opposing an exception to an abortion ban in cases where a woman’s life was in danger, though he did sign a bill with such an exception.
. . . Kelly’s question to Walker pointedly played from the left: “Would you really let a mother die rather than have an abortion, and with 83% of the American public in favor of a life exception, are you too out of the mainstream on this issue to win the general election?”
. . . Even for the party long aligned in opposition to the procedure, the issue of exceptions has been politically challenging. Though the Republican party platform calls for a ban without exceptions, previous GOP presidential nominees Mitt Romney, John McCain and George W. Bush generally said they favored such exceptions. The politics around rape and the specter of a woman dying are considered too toxic for a general election.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "As campaign heats up, Republican candidates are rushing to the right" by Sean Sullivan, Washington Post 8/7/15
Moderate Republicans said Friday they are concerned about the potential for Democrats to revive their “war on women” line of attack from 2012, when they successfully portrayed presidential nominee Mitt Romney and other Republicans as out of touch with or even hostile to the concerns of women.
“Republicans have to be careful not to fall into the trap laid by Democrats so successfully in the 2010 election into the 2012 election cycle,” said Steve Schmidt, a former top presidential campaign adviser to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).
Democratic National Committee Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz on Friday compared the crop of Republican hopefuls to Todd Akin, whose 2012 Senate bid was derailed when he said “legitimate rape” rarely causes pregnancy.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Scott Walker calls abortion to save a woman's life a 'false choice'" by Mary Spicuzza of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel 8/8/15
Abortion rights activists say that in some cases, the only option to protect a woman's life is to end her pregnancy.
"It's a false choice. There is always a better option out there," Walker told Fox News' Sean Hannity on Thursday night.
"I've said for years, medically there's always a better choice than choosing between the life of an unborn baby and the life of the mother," he added. "Medically that's just a nonissue."
Walker answered that he has a position on the issue "that's in line with everyday America."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Scott Walker signs Wisconsin abortion bill" by Eliza Collins, Politico 7/20/15
The legislation makes performing an abortion a felony punishable by up to three and a half years in prison and $10,000 in fines. The only way abortions after 20 weeks are allowed is if the mother is likely to die or be severely injured.
Late on Monday, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton attacked Walker on Twitter for the new law, writing, “Gov. Walker signed dangerous abortion restrictions into law in WI - without exceptions for rape or incest. Extreme and unacceptable. -H.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker signs abortion ban bill" by The Associated Press 7/20/15
While Walker has a long history of opposing abortions . . . Walker's record includes defunding Planned Parenthood; requiring abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, a law currently blocked by a federal court judge; and requiring women to have ultrasounds and be shown images of the fetus before having an abortion.
The governor's signature makes Wisconsin the 15th state to pass similar bans. There is no exception for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest.
"For people, regardless of where they might stand, when an unborn child can feel pain I think most people feel it's appropriate to protect that child," Walker said.
Bans on abortion after 20 weeks are popular, at least on the surface. A Quinnipiac University poll conducted in November of 2014 found that 6 in 10 Americans support banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, except in cases of rape or incest.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Scott Walker informs Megyn Kelly: Abortion is not necessary to save a mother’s life" by Amanda Read, Live Action News 8/7/15
In 2012, a panel of obstetric and gynecological experts signed the Dublin Declaration, which states that “direct abortion is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman… there is a fundamental difference between abortion, and necessary medical treatments that are carried out to save the life of the mother, even if such treatment results in the loss of life of her unborn child.”
When the mother’s life is at stake, medical actions are taken with the intent to save the woman, not to dispose of the child.
Abortion proponents like to remind us that we’re not living in the 19th century or even the 1950s, but they conveniently forget that means we can handle medically challenging pregnancies and deliveries better than ever before. In a 2004 study from the Alan Guttmacher Institute, only 4% of women cited “physical problem with my health” as reason for getting an abortion. But never has literal abortion actually been necessary to save the life of the mother, and no woman should be made to believe otherwise. This is where definition comes into play, and where media figures like Kelly get it wrong.
To read the entire opinion above, CLICK HERE.
From "The case of 10-year-old Paraguayan pregnant girl and why killing is not the answer" by Lila Rose, Live Action 7/10/15
And that’s the reality: abortion is never medically necessary to save a mother’s life. . . . This is reinforced by the testimony of Dr. Anthony Levatino, a reformed abortionist, who described a typical “life of the mother” case as he saw it:
To read the entire opinion above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Chicken Cruelty Exposed by Court, Baby Slaughter Concealed by Court
". . . I’ve got a position I think is consistent with many Americans out there in that I believe that that is an unborn child in need of protection out there, and I’ve said many a time that that unborn child can be protected and there are many other alternatives that will also protect the life of that mother. That’s been consistently proven."For background, read Christians Favor Missouri Candidate Todd Akin over GOP and also read Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker Ignores Atheists' Demands re: Bible as well as Wisconsin Shifts Money Away from Planned Parenthood
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
Gallup Poll: Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
Abortionists Lament Ever-greater State Limits
Pro-life Laws Sweep America; Liberals Battle Back
Abortion Rate Declines, Democrats Want More Access
Abortion Clinic Closings Set Record; Abortionists Admit Defeat
Also read Families are Greatest Enemy of Democrats at Polls
-- From "GOP candidates: Ban abortion, no exceptions" by Irin Carmon, MSNBC 8/7/15
[FOX News debate] Moderator Megyn Kelly asked Scott Walker how he could justify opposing an exception to an abortion ban in cases where a woman’s life was in danger, though he did sign a bill with such an exception.
. . . Kelly’s question to Walker pointedly played from the left: “Would you really let a mother die rather than have an abortion, and with 83% of the American public in favor of a life exception, are you too out of the mainstream on this issue to win the general election?”
. . . Even for the party long aligned in opposition to the procedure, the issue of exceptions has been politically challenging. Though the Republican party platform calls for a ban without exceptions, previous GOP presidential nominees Mitt Romney, John McCain and George W. Bush generally said they favored such exceptions. The politics around rape and the specter of a woman dying are considered too toxic for a general election.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "As campaign heats up, Republican candidates are rushing to the right" by Sean Sullivan, Washington Post 8/7/15
Moderate Republicans said Friday they are concerned about the potential for Democrats to revive their “war on women” line of attack from 2012, when they successfully portrayed presidential nominee Mitt Romney and other Republicans as out of touch with or even hostile to the concerns of women.
“Republicans have to be careful not to fall into the trap laid by Democrats so successfully in the 2010 election into the 2012 election cycle,” said Steve Schmidt, a former top presidential campaign adviser to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).
Democratic National Committee Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz on Friday compared the crop of Republican hopefuls to Todd Akin, whose 2012 Senate bid was derailed when he said “legitimate rape” rarely causes pregnancy.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Scott Walker calls abortion to save a woman's life a 'false choice'" by Mary Spicuzza of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel 8/8/15
Abortion rights activists say that in some cases, the only option to protect a woman's life is to end her pregnancy.
"It's a false choice. There is always a better option out there," Walker told Fox News' Sean Hannity on Thursday night.
"I've said for years, medically there's always a better choice than choosing between the life of an unborn baby and the life of the mother," he added. "Medically that's just a nonissue."
Walker answered that he has a position on the issue "that's in line with everyday America."
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Scott Walker signs Wisconsin abortion bill" by Eliza Collins, Politico 7/20/15
The legislation makes performing an abortion a felony punishable by up to three and a half years in prison and $10,000 in fines. The only way abortions after 20 weeks are allowed is if the mother is likely to die or be severely injured.
Late on Monday, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton attacked Walker on Twitter for the new law, writing, “Gov. Walker signed dangerous abortion restrictions into law in WI - without exceptions for rape or incest. Extreme and unacceptable. -H.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker signs abortion ban bill" by The Associated Press 7/20/15
While Walker has a long history of opposing abortions . . . Walker's record includes defunding Planned Parenthood; requiring abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, a law currently blocked by a federal court judge; and requiring women to have ultrasounds and be shown images of the fetus before having an abortion.
The governor's signature makes Wisconsin the 15th state to pass similar bans. There is no exception for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest.
"For people, regardless of where they might stand, when an unborn child can feel pain I think most people feel it's appropriate to protect that child," Walker said.
Bans on abortion after 20 weeks are popular, at least on the surface. A Quinnipiac University poll conducted in November of 2014 found that 6 in 10 Americans support banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, except in cases of rape or incest.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Scott Walker informs Megyn Kelly: Abortion is not necessary to save a mother’s life" by Amanda Read, Live Action News 8/7/15
In 2012, a panel of obstetric and gynecological experts signed the Dublin Declaration, which states that “direct abortion is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman… there is a fundamental difference between abortion, and necessary medical treatments that are carried out to save the life of the mother, even if such treatment results in the loss of life of her unborn child.”
When the mother’s life is at stake, medical actions are taken with the intent to save the woman, not to dispose of the child.
Abortion proponents like to remind us that we’re not living in the 19th century or even the 1950s, but they conveniently forget that means we can handle medically challenging pregnancies and deliveries better than ever before. In a 2004 study from the Alan Guttmacher Institute, only 4% of women cited “physical problem with my health” as reason for getting an abortion. But never has literal abortion actually been necessary to save the life of the mother, and no woman should be made to believe otherwise. This is where definition comes into play, and where media figures like Kelly get it wrong.
To read the entire opinion above, CLICK HERE.
From "The case of 10-year-old Paraguayan pregnant girl and why killing is not the answer" by Lila Rose, Live Action 7/10/15
And that’s the reality: abortion is never medically necessary to save a mother’s life. . . . This is reinforced by the testimony of Dr. Anthony Levatino, a reformed abortionist, who described a typical “life of the mother” case as he saw it:
“During my time at Albany Medical Center I managed hundreds of such cases by ‘terminating’ pregnancies [via live delivery by C-section] to save mothers' lives. In all those hundreds of cases, the number of unborn children that I had to deliberately kill was zero.”In other words, when a life-in-danger medical condition arises, the solution is not to kill the baby, but to address what’s wrong with the woman. Granted, if we’re talking before viability, this may not always result in the preborn child surviving.
To read the entire opinion above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Chicken Cruelty Exposed by Court, Baby Slaughter Concealed by Court
Wednesday, June 10, 2015
Supreme Court 'Hail Mary' for Texas Abortionists
After yesterday's 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling upholding the 2013 Texas law (House Bill 2) resulting in closure of all but a fraction of the state's once-burgeoning abortion industry, abortionists' last hope is the U.S. Supreme Court, which has once already halted the new law. H.B. 2, which requires abortion clinics to be as clean and safe as hospitals, dominated the mainstream media in July 2013 when Texas state Senator Wendy Davis, a.k.a. "Abortion Barbie," blocked inevitable passage of the bill for a few hours.
Also, click headlines below to read previous articles:
Texas Yanks Abortionist's License for 268 Killed
Texas Abortion Rate Plunges, Liberals Fume
9th Circuit Court Strikes Abortion Bans, Supreme Court Next
Abortionists Forced to Risk All in Supreme Court
-- From "Federal appeals court backs strict Texas abortion law" by John Bacon, USA TODAY 6/9/15
The Center for Reproductive Rights said it will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The justices had put the 2013 law on hold last year, sending it back to the appeals court for review.
Small clinics claimed they can't afford the high cost of such upgrades [to hospital safety standards]. The center said the ruling puts all but seven abortion clinics in the state at risk of closure.
[Yesterday's] ruling reversed a lower court's injunction blocking the state's admitting privileges requirement except as applied to a single doctor [in McAllen, Texas]. The provision already has been blamed for closure of about half the state's abortion clinics.
The number of abortion clinics operating in Texas has fallen from 41 before the law was passed in 2013 to less than 20 today.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Court upholds key parts of Texas' strict anti-abortion law" by Paul J. Weber, Associated Press 6/10/15
Owners of traditional abortion clinics, which resemble doctor's offices more than hospitals, say they would be forced to close because the new rules demand millions of dollars in upgrades they can't afford. That would mark the second large wave of closures in as many years in Texas, which had 41 abortion clinics in 2012, before other new restrictions took effect that require doctor admitting privileges.
Texas will be able to start enforcing the restrictions in about three weeks unless the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to halt the decision, said Stephanie Toti, an attorney for the [Center for Reproductive Rights]. Only seven abortion facilities in Texas, including four operated by Planned Parenthood, meet the more robust requirements.
If the law takes effect, some women in the state would live hundreds of miles away from a Texas abortion provider. But that argument didn't sway the three-judge panel making the decision for the New Orleans-based appeals court, which is considered one of the most conservative in the nation. The judges noted that a New Mexico abortion clinic was just across the Texas border, and said clinic owners in Texas failed to prove that a "large fraction" of women would be burdened.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Court Upholds Texas Limits on Abortions" by Manny Fernandez and Erik Eckholm, News York Times 6/9/15
In addition to the surgical standards, the court upheld a requirement that doctors performing abortions obtain admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of a clinic. The court said that except as applied to one doctor working in McAllen in South Texas, the provision did not put an unconstitutional burden on women seeking abortions.
Under the 1973 Roe v Wade decision and later cases, the Supreme Court has permitted a wide array of abortion regulations, including waiting periods and parental consent for minors, but said states may not impose an “undue burden” on the right to an abortion before a fetus is viable outside the womb.
“Texas’ stated purpose for enacting H.B. 2 was to provide the highest quality of care to women seeking abortions and to protect the health and welfare of women seeking abortions,” the Fifth Circuit ruling read. “There is no question that this is a legitimate purpose that supports regulating physicians and the facilities in which they perform abortions.”
In the case of the McAllen [Texas] clinic, the sole abortion provider in the Rio Grande Valley, Tuesday’s decision held that the distance of 235 miles or more to the nearest clinic did pose an undue burden. For now, at least, the Fifth Circuit panel exempted that clinic from aspects of the surgical-center and admitting-privileges requirements. But Amy Hagstrom Miller, the chief executive of Whole Woman’s Health, which runs the McAllen facility and was one of the abortion providers that sued the state, said the organization was evaluating whether the ruling would permit the clinic to continue operating.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Federal court ruling could close half of Texas' abortion clinics" by Brittney Martin, Austin Bureau, The Dallas Morning News 6/10/15
In conjunction with a 2011 law that requires women to view a sonogram 24 hours before having an abortion, Texas abortion restrictions are some of the toughest in the country.
The regulations are spelled out in more than 100 pages of state statute and include specific room and doorway sizes, sterilization systems and male and female locker rooms for staff. Estimates are that building or renovating a facility to meet the state’s requirements could cost between $1 million and $3.5 million.
This was the second challenge to a law that also bans abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy, requires that physicians have admitting privileges at a local hospital, and tightens regulations on abortion-inducing drugs. The state has spent more than $790,000 defending the law.
Planned Parenthood South Texas plans to build a clinic in San Antonio that meets all of the state’s requirements, but a spokeswoman for the organization stopped short of confirming Tuesday whether that facility is open yet.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Court Upholds Texas Pro-Life Law Closing Abortion Clinics, Saving 10,000 From Abortion" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 6/9/15
Planned Parenthood did not challenge the law’s prohibition on abortions that take place at 20 weeks or later, a provision based on evidence that demonstrates the baby can feel pain at that stage. Pro-life Texas Gov. Rick Perry signed the omnibus HB 2 bill into law in July 2013.
This case is expected to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. [Americans United for Life] Vice President of Legal Affairs Denise Burke, writing in The Federalist, predicted in January 2015 that the high court would eventually review the life-affirming provisions of Texas House Bill 2 and, in doing so, could dramatically change America’s abortion landscape. Notably, the Supreme Court has never ruled on the constitutionality of comprehensive health and safety standards for abortion facilities.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
In addition, click headlines below to read previous articles:
Abortion Clinic Closings Set Record; Abortionists Admit Defeat
Abortionists Lament Ever-greater State Limits
Abortion Rate Declines, Democrats Want More Access
Pro-life Laws Sweep America; Liberals Battle Back
Abortionists Battle to Kill Without Clinics
Also read Physicians Force New York Times to Admit 22-week Fetus is a Baby!
"Abortion practitioners should have no right to operate their businesses from sub-standard facilities and with doctors who lack admitting privileges at a hospital."For background, read the entire saga of the court battles of H.B. 2.
-- Ken Paxton, Texas Attorney General
Also, click headlines below to read previous articles:
Texas Yanks Abortionist's License for 268 Killed
Texas Abortion Rate Plunges, Liberals Fume
9th Circuit Court Strikes Abortion Bans, Supreme Court Next
Abortionists Forced to Risk All in Supreme Court
-- From "Federal appeals court backs strict Texas abortion law" by John Bacon, USA TODAY 6/9/15
The Center for Reproductive Rights said it will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The justices had put the 2013 law on hold last year, sending it back to the appeals court for review.
Small clinics claimed they can't afford the high cost of such upgrades [to hospital safety standards]. The center said the ruling puts all but seven abortion clinics in the state at risk of closure.
[Yesterday's] ruling reversed a lower court's injunction blocking the state's admitting privileges requirement except as applied to a single doctor [in McAllen, Texas]. The provision already has been blamed for closure of about half the state's abortion clinics.
The number of abortion clinics operating in Texas has fallen from 41 before the law was passed in 2013 to less than 20 today.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Court upholds key parts of Texas' strict anti-abortion law" by Paul J. Weber, Associated Press 6/10/15
Owners of traditional abortion clinics, which resemble doctor's offices more than hospitals, say they would be forced to close because the new rules demand millions of dollars in upgrades they can't afford. That would mark the second large wave of closures in as many years in Texas, which had 41 abortion clinics in 2012, before other new restrictions took effect that require doctor admitting privileges.
Texas will be able to start enforcing the restrictions in about three weeks unless the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to halt the decision, said Stephanie Toti, an attorney for the [Center for Reproductive Rights]. Only seven abortion facilities in Texas, including four operated by Planned Parenthood, meet the more robust requirements.
If the law takes effect, some women in the state would live hundreds of miles away from a Texas abortion provider. But that argument didn't sway the three-judge panel making the decision for the New Orleans-based appeals court, which is considered one of the most conservative in the nation. The judges noted that a New Mexico abortion clinic was just across the Texas border, and said clinic owners in Texas failed to prove that a "large fraction" of women would be burdened.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Court Upholds Texas Limits on Abortions" by Manny Fernandez and Erik Eckholm, News York Times 6/9/15
In addition to the surgical standards, the court upheld a requirement that doctors performing abortions obtain admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of a clinic. The court said that except as applied to one doctor working in McAllen in South Texas, the provision did not put an unconstitutional burden on women seeking abortions.
Under the 1973 Roe v Wade decision and later cases, the Supreme Court has permitted a wide array of abortion regulations, including waiting periods and parental consent for minors, but said states may not impose an “undue burden” on the right to an abortion before a fetus is viable outside the womb.
“Texas’ stated purpose for enacting H.B. 2 was to provide the highest quality of care to women seeking abortions and to protect the health and welfare of women seeking abortions,” the Fifth Circuit ruling read. “There is no question that this is a legitimate purpose that supports regulating physicians and the facilities in which they perform abortions.”
In the case of the McAllen [Texas] clinic, the sole abortion provider in the Rio Grande Valley, Tuesday’s decision held that the distance of 235 miles or more to the nearest clinic did pose an undue burden. For now, at least, the Fifth Circuit panel exempted that clinic from aspects of the surgical-center and admitting-privileges requirements. But Amy Hagstrom Miller, the chief executive of Whole Woman’s Health, which runs the McAllen facility and was one of the abortion providers that sued the state, said the organization was evaluating whether the ruling would permit the clinic to continue operating.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Federal court ruling could close half of Texas' abortion clinics" by Brittney Martin, Austin Bureau, The Dallas Morning News 6/10/15
In conjunction with a 2011 law that requires women to view a sonogram 24 hours before having an abortion, Texas abortion restrictions are some of the toughest in the country.
The regulations are spelled out in more than 100 pages of state statute and include specific room and doorway sizes, sterilization systems and male and female locker rooms for staff. Estimates are that building or renovating a facility to meet the state’s requirements could cost between $1 million and $3.5 million.
This was the second challenge to a law that also bans abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy, requires that physicians have admitting privileges at a local hospital, and tightens regulations on abortion-inducing drugs. The state has spent more than $790,000 defending the law.
Planned Parenthood South Texas plans to build a clinic in San Antonio that meets all of the state’s requirements, but a spokeswoman for the organization stopped short of confirming Tuesday whether that facility is open yet.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Court Upholds Texas Pro-Life Law Closing Abortion Clinics, Saving 10,000 From Abortion" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 6/9/15
Planned Parenthood did not challenge the law’s prohibition on abortions that take place at 20 weeks or later, a provision based on evidence that demonstrates the baby can feel pain at that stage. Pro-life Texas Gov. Rick Perry signed the omnibus HB 2 bill into law in July 2013.
This case is expected to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. [Americans United for Life] Vice President of Legal Affairs Denise Burke, writing in The Federalist, predicted in January 2015 that the high court would eventually review the life-affirming provisions of Texas House Bill 2 and, in doing so, could dramatically change America’s abortion landscape. Notably, the Supreme Court has never ruled on the constitutionality of comprehensive health and safety standards for abortion facilities.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
In addition, click headlines below to read previous articles:
Abortion Clinic Closings Set Record; Abortionists Admit Defeat
Abortionists Lament Ever-greater State Limits
Abortion Rate Declines, Democrats Want More Access
Pro-life Laws Sweep America; Liberals Battle Back
Abortionists Battle to Kill Without Clinics
Also read Physicians Force New York Times to Admit 22-week Fetus is a Baby!
Saturday, May 30, 2015
Courts Strike Abortion Bans, Supreme Court Next
Even as medical science proves fetal viability ever earlier in gestation, federal appeals courts continue to strike down state laws protecting unborn viable human beings from abortionists. Now, with Congress passing a ban on abortions after 20 weeks gestation, the Supreme Court will soon have no choice but to consider when life begins.
Physicians Force New York Times to Admit 22-week Fetus is a Baby!
Study Shows Babies Can Hear the Abortionist Coming
Abortionists Stymied by New Oklahoma & Kansas Laws
Abortion Outlawed in Florida for Viable Fetuses
Also read about new abortion restriction laws requiring tests for viability after 20 weeks in Ohio and also in Missouri.
And read Planned Parenthood President Asks, Who Cares When Life Begins?
-- From "Court nixes Idaho's 20-week abortion ban" by Peter Sullivan, The Hill 5/29/15
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said Idaho's law violates Supreme Court precedent protecting abortions up to the point of viability for a fetus, which has been considered to be around 24 weeks.
Courts have struck down such bans before. In 2013, the 9th Circuit also ruled an Arizona ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy to be unconstitutional. The Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to that decision.
Ten states currently have 20-week abortion bans, according to the pro-abortion rights Guttmacher Institute. [Those states being Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Arkansas, North Dakota, Texas and West Virginia].
There has been rising support for 20-week bans among Republicans. . . .
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Idaho's Abortion Ban Struck Down" by Matt Reynolds, Courthouse News Service 5/29/15
Idaho's Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act is "facially unconstitutional," a 9th Circuit panel said in a 28-page ruling, because "it categorically bans some abortions before viability" and "places an undue burden on a woman's ability to obtain an abortion by requiring hospitalizations for all second-trimester abortions."
The panel found that Jennie McCormack and her attorney-physician Richard Hearn still faced the "lingering risk" of prosecution under a law which banned abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Therefore they could challenge the constitutionality of the law, the panel said.
In March 2013, Chief U.S. District Judge Lynn Winmill found that the regulations are unconstitutional.
The 9th Circuit unanimously affirmed that decision on Friday . . .
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Arkansas: Stringent Abortion Limit Struck Down" by The Associated Press 5/27/15
A federal appeals court struck down one of the nation’s toughest abortion restrictions [Act 301 of 2013, the Arkansas Human Heartbeat Protection Act] on Wednesday, agreeing with a lower court that a state law unconstitutionally burdens women by banning abortions after the 12th week of pregnancy if a doctor can detect a fetal heartbeat.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit sided with doctors who challenged the law, ruling that abortion restrictions must be based on a fetus’s ability to live outside the womb, not the presence of a fetal heartbeat, which can be detected weeks earlier.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "8th Circuit Strikes Down Arkansas Abortion Law" by Joe Harris, Courthouse News Service 5/27/15
In 2014, an Arkansas federal judge sided with Supreme Court precedent and struck down the law.
Arkansas appealed to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that the viability standard cannot be the end of the discussion when weighed against the state's interest in protecting human life.
The court did acknowledge that medical advances since Roe v. Wade - the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision holding that privacy and due-process rights extend to a woman's decision to have an abortion - have moved fetus viability closer to conception, but found that "viability determination necessarily calls for a case-by-case determination and changes over time based on medical advancements" and that legislatures are better suited to make judgments in this area.
Circuit Judges Lavenski R. Smith, Duane Benton and Bobby E. Shepherd comprised the three-judge panel.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Court: 12-week abortion ban unconstitutional" by John Lyon, Arkansas News Bureau 5/27/15
Then-Gov. Mike Beebe, a Democrat, vetoed the bill [in 2013], saying it was unconstitutional, but the Republican-led Legislature overrode his veto.
The Center for Reproductive Rights and the Arkansas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit challenging Act 301 on behalf of two Little Rock doctors who perform abortions [Dr. Louis Jerry Edwards and Dr. Tom Tvedten].
Sen. Jason Rapert, R-Conway, who sponsored the legislation that became Act 301, said he was disappointed with the ruling but happy that “every single woman who goes to a clinic is going to have to have an ultrasound. She will have to be informed if there is the presence of a heartbeat in the womb.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Supreme Court to decide whether to plunge back into abortion debate" by David G. Savage, Los Angeles Times 5/29/15
For years, the [Supreme Court] justices have steered clear of most abortion cases. A decision to turn down the latest appeals, from Mississippi and North Carolina, would be a victory for abortion rights advocates. . . .
At the Supreme Court, justices could announce as soon as Monday whether they will hear the Mississippi case. A decision on whether to hear North Carolina's appeal should come by mid-June.
Attorneys for the states that have passed new restrictions say the court should clarify the law governing abortions. In 1992, in its last sweeping abortion ruling, the high court said states may regulate the procedures so long as their rules do not put an “undue burden” on women seeking to end a pregnancy.
Lawyers for Mississippi called that a “vague and amorphous standard” which has not provided “meaningful guidance” to lawmakers or judges.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion Edges Up as Important Voting Issue for Americans" by Rebecca Riffkin, Gallup 5/29/15
The percentage of Americans who say they would only vote for a candidate who shares their views on abortion has been edging up over the past seven years. The 21% who currently say this is, by one percentage point, the highest Gallup has found in its 19-year history of asking the question. The percentage of Americans who do not see abortion as a major issue in their voting decision has declined over the same period, and is now at 27%. Most of the rest (46%) say that abortion is one of many important factors they will take into account.
The recent uptick in the importance Americans place on where candidates stand on abortion comes as many states have enacted new or increased abortion restrictions. State lawmakers have passed more than 200 regulations on abortion since 2010, after Republicans gained control of many state legislatures. Republicans in Congress are currently advocating a federal bill banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, although President Barack Obama is unlikely to sign it.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read this Gallup poll: Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
However, as Pro-life Laws Sweep America, Liberals Battle Back; for example, Abortionists and Satanists Team Up vs. Missouri Law
And read Abortionists Forced to Risk All in Supreme Court
“It is high time for this court to revisit the issue” of abortion, Mississippi Atty. Gen. Jim Hood told the Supreme Court justices in a brief filed in early May.For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:
Physicians Force New York Times to Admit 22-week Fetus is a Baby!
Study Shows Babies Can Hear the Abortionist Coming
Abortionists Stymied by New Oklahoma & Kansas Laws
Abortion Outlawed in Florida for Viable Fetuses
Also read about new abortion restriction laws requiring tests for viability after 20 weeks in Ohio and also in Missouri.
And read Planned Parenthood President Asks, Who Cares When Life Begins?
-- From "Court nixes Idaho's 20-week abortion ban" by Peter Sullivan, The Hill 5/29/15
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said Idaho's law violates Supreme Court precedent protecting abortions up to the point of viability for a fetus, which has been considered to be around 24 weeks.
Courts have struck down such bans before. In 2013, the 9th Circuit also ruled an Arizona ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy to be unconstitutional. The Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to that decision.
Ten states currently have 20-week abortion bans, according to the pro-abortion rights Guttmacher Institute. [Those states being Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Arkansas, North Dakota, Texas and West Virginia].
There has been rising support for 20-week bans among Republicans. . . .
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Idaho's Abortion Ban Struck Down" by Matt Reynolds, Courthouse News Service 5/29/15
Idaho's Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act is "facially unconstitutional," a 9th Circuit panel said in a 28-page ruling, because "it categorically bans some abortions before viability" and "places an undue burden on a woman's ability to obtain an abortion by requiring hospitalizations for all second-trimester abortions."
The panel found that Jennie McCormack and her attorney-physician Richard Hearn still faced the "lingering risk" of prosecution under a law which banned abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Therefore they could challenge the constitutionality of the law, the panel said.
In March 2013, Chief U.S. District Judge Lynn Winmill found that the regulations are unconstitutional.
The 9th Circuit unanimously affirmed that decision on Friday . . .
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Arkansas: Stringent Abortion Limit Struck Down" by The Associated Press 5/27/15
A federal appeals court struck down one of the nation’s toughest abortion restrictions [Act 301 of 2013, the Arkansas Human Heartbeat Protection Act] on Wednesday, agreeing with a lower court that a state law unconstitutionally burdens women by banning abortions after the 12th week of pregnancy if a doctor can detect a fetal heartbeat.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit sided with doctors who challenged the law, ruling that abortion restrictions must be based on a fetus’s ability to live outside the womb, not the presence of a fetal heartbeat, which can be detected weeks earlier.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "8th Circuit Strikes Down Arkansas Abortion Law" by Joe Harris, Courthouse News Service 5/27/15
In 2014, an Arkansas federal judge sided with Supreme Court precedent and struck down the law.
Arkansas appealed to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that the viability standard cannot be the end of the discussion when weighed against the state's interest in protecting human life.
The court did acknowledge that medical advances since Roe v. Wade - the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision holding that privacy and due-process rights extend to a woman's decision to have an abortion - have moved fetus viability closer to conception, but found that "viability determination necessarily calls for a case-by-case determination and changes over time based on medical advancements" and that legislatures are better suited to make judgments in this area.
Circuit Judges Lavenski R. Smith, Duane Benton and Bobby E. Shepherd comprised the three-judge panel.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Court: 12-week abortion ban unconstitutional" by John Lyon, Arkansas News Bureau 5/27/15
Then-Gov. Mike Beebe, a Democrat, vetoed the bill [in 2013], saying it was unconstitutional, but the Republican-led Legislature overrode his veto.
The Center for Reproductive Rights and the Arkansas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit challenging Act 301 on behalf of two Little Rock doctors who perform abortions [Dr. Louis Jerry Edwards and Dr. Tom Tvedten].
Sen. Jason Rapert, R-Conway, who sponsored the legislation that became Act 301, said he was disappointed with the ruling but happy that “every single woman who goes to a clinic is going to have to have an ultrasound. She will have to be informed if there is the presence of a heartbeat in the womb.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Supreme Court to decide whether to plunge back into abortion debate" by David G. Savage, Los Angeles Times 5/29/15
For years, the [Supreme Court] justices have steered clear of most abortion cases. A decision to turn down the latest appeals, from Mississippi and North Carolina, would be a victory for abortion rights advocates. . . .
At the Supreme Court, justices could announce as soon as Monday whether they will hear the Mississippi case. A decision on whether to hear North Carolina's appeal should come by mid-June.
Attorneys for the states that have passed new restrictions say the court should clarify the law governing abortions. In 1992, in its last sweeping abortion ruling, the high court said states may regulate the procedures so long as their rules do not put an “undue burden” on women seeking to end a pregnancy.
Lawyers for Mississippi called that a “vague and amorphous standard” which has not provided “meaningful guidance” to lawmakers or judges.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion Edges Up as Important Voting Issue for Americans" by Rebecca Riffkin, Gallup 5/29/15
The percentage of Americans who say they would only vote for a candidate who shares their views on abortion has been edging up over the past seven years. The 21% who currently say this is, by one percentage point, the highest Gallup has found in its 19-year history of asking the question. The percentage of Americans who do not see abortion as a major issue in their voting decision has declined over the same period, and is now at 27%. Most of the rest (46%) say that abortion is one of many important factors they will take into account.
The recent uptick in the importance Americans place on where candidates stand on abortion comes as many states have enacted new or increased abortion restrictions. State lawmakers have passed more than 200 regulations on abortion since 2010, after Republicans gained control of many state legislatures. Republicans in Congress are currently advocating a federal bill banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, although President Barack Obama is unlikely to sign it.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read this Gallup poll: Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
However, as Pro-life Laws Sweep America, Liberals Battle Back; for example, Abortionists and Satanists Team Up vs. Missouri Law
And read Abortionists Forced to Risk All in Supreme Court
Thursday, May 07, 2015
New York Times Admits 22-week Fetus is a Baby!
In a stunning revelation, the liberal mainstream media have just discovered that pregnant women may, in fact, have "a person" developing in the womb — thanks to a study in The New England Journal of Medicine published yesterday concerning "fetal viability."
Also read about new abortion restriction laws requiring tests for viability after 20 weeks in Ohio and also in Missouri.
And read Study Shows Babies Can Hear the Abortionist Coming
What do the abortionists say? Planned Parenthood President Asks, Who Cares When Life Begins?
In addition, read about the Georgia teacher ousted last month for revealing President Obama's position on infants who survive abortion.
-- From "Study of premature babies adds to questions for parents, doctors" by Pam Belluck, The New York Times 5/6/15
A new study of thousands of premature births found that a small minority of babies born a week or two before what is now generally considered the point of viability can be treated and survive, in some cases with relatively few health problems.
The findings may also have implications for the abortion debate. The Supreme Court has said states cannot ban abortion before a fetus is viable outside the womb, and 24 weeks has generally been cited by medical experts as the time of viability.
Recently, physicians who work with very premature infants have begun to consider it reasonable to offer active treatment for babies born at 23 weeks. A 2014 summary of a workshop that involved the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Academy of Pediatrics said “in general, those born at 23 weeks of gestation should be considered potentially viable” as more than a quarter of them survive if treated intensively.
The study, involving nearly 5,000 babies born between 22 and 27 weeks gestation, found that 22-week-old babies did not survive without medical intervention. . . .
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Study on premature babies raises questions about abortion and medical care" by Sarah Kaplan, Washington Post 5/7/15
[The study] is heartening news in the world of pediatrics. But it also adds to a list of questions for parents, doctors and lawmakers by challenging the accepted age for “viability” — a standard that has defined the debates about abortion and intensive neonatal care.
According to Neil Marlow, a neonatology expert at University College London, many doctors have assumed that 22 weeks was too early for a child to be a candidate for intensive care because fatality rates were so high. But the NEJM study shows that those high rates are in part due to doctors’ reluctance to attempt a painful intervention on a newborn that’s unlikely to survive.
. . . the Supreme Court has long crafted its abortion rulings around the idea of viability. In Roe v. Wade the court ruled that states could not restrict abortions before the 28th week of pregnancy, at the time thought to be the earliest a newborn could survive on its own.
The 1992 case Planned Parenthood v. Casey, acknowledging that advances in neonatal care made survival of even more premature babies possible, detached the “viability” marker from the 28-week standard but left the sentiment of the original ruling intact: “We reaffirm … the right of the woman to choose to have an abortion before viability and to obtain it without undue interference from the State,” read the majority opinion.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Hospital efforts to save very premature babies vary widely" by Marilynn Marchione, Associated Press 5/6/15
The study involved nearly 5,000 babies born before 27 weeks gestation at 24 hospitals in a research group run by the National Institutes of Health between April 2006 and March 2011.
Researchers looked at rates of comfort care versus active treatment, such as breathing machines, feeding tubes or heart resuscitation. Active treatment was given to 22 percent of babies born at 22 weeks, 72 percent of those at 23 weeks and nearly all beyond that.
Survival rates were higher for the actively treated babies — 23 percent versus 5 percent for all babies in the study born at 22 weeks, and 33 percent versus 24 percent for those born at 23 weeks.
About 12,000 babies each year in the United States are born between 22 and 25 weeks gestation. A full-term pregnancy is about 40 weeks.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "No Standard Treatment for Extreme Preemies - Practice differences appear to explain survival disparities" by Sarah Wickline Wallan, Staff Writer, MedPage Today 5/7/15
"This article raises important questions about what information should be given to parents during counseling about risks after an extremely preterm birth," Neil Marlow, DM, wrote in an accompanying editorial. "To give crude data on the survival rate among all such infants, regardless of whether treatment efforts were made, is misleading and helps to make poor survival a self-fulfilling prophecy."
"The NICHD NRN (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network) collects data only on live births in specialist hospitals and is not population-based; thus these data cannot be used to explore attitudes underlying the decision to provide or withhold treatment or to evaluate antepartum fetal deaths," added Marlow, who is from the Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Institute for Women's Health at University College London.
"The study should prompt physicians, hospitals, state governments, and professional societies to accelerate efforts to provide perinatal regionalization programs that will optimize access of these extremely premature babies to level 3 and 4 perinatal centers that can provide skilled, experienced active treatment in the delivery room when parents and physicians decide in favor of active treatment," F. Sessions Cole, MD, director of the division of newborn medicine at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, said in an email to MedPage Today.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
Gallup poll, Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
As Pro-life Laws Sweep America, Liberals Battle Back
Abortionists, Satanists Team Up vs. Missouri Law
Abortionists Stymied by New Oklahoma & Kansas Laws
Also read Congressman Xavier Becerra (D-Calif. and chairman of House Democratic Caucus) won't answer if unborn child 20 weeks into pregnancy is human being. (video)
“[We now consider viability at 22 weeks,] but this is a pretty controversial area. I guess we would say that these babies deserve a chance. [But parents need to know that] the hospital that you go to might determine what happens to your baby.”For background, read Abortion Outlawed in Florida for Viable Fetuses
-- Edward Bell, study leader and pediatrics professor at the University of Iowa
Also read about new abortion restriction laws requiring tests for viability after 20 weeks in Ohio and also in Missouri.
And read Study Shows Babies Can Hear the Abortionist Coming
What do the abortionists say? Planned Parenthood President Asks, Who Cares When Life Begins?
In addition, read about the Georgia teacher ousted last month for revealing President Obama's position on infants who survive abortion.
-- From "Study of premature babies adds to questions for parents, doctors" by Pam Belluck, The New York Times 5/6/15
A new study of thousands of premature births found that a small minority of babies born a week or two before what is now generally considered the point of viability can be treated and survive, in some cases with relatively few health problems.
The findings may also have implications for the abortion debate. The Supreme Court has said states cannot ban abortion before a fetus is viable outside the womb, and 24 weeks has generally been cited by medical experts as the time of viability.
Recently, physicians who work with very premature infants have begun to consider it reasonable to offer active treatment for babies born at 23 weeks. A 2014 summary of a workshop that involved the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Academy of Pediatrics said “in general, those born at 23 weeks of gestation should be considered potentially viable” as more than a quarter of them survive if treated intensively.
The study, involving nearly 5,000 babies born between 22 and 27 weeks gestation, found that 22-week-old babies did not survive without medical intervention. . . .
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Study on premature babies raises questions about abortion and medical care" by Sarah Kaplan, Washington Post 5/7/15
[The study] is heartening news in the world of pediatrics. But it also adds to a list of questions for parents, doctors and lawmakers by challenging the accepted age for “viability” — a standard that has defined the debates about abortion and intensive neonatal care.
According to Neil Marlow, a neonatology expert at University College London, many doctors have assumed that 22 weeks was too early for a child to be a candidate for intensive care because fatality rates were so high. But the NEJM study shows that those high rates are in part due to doctors’ reluctance to attempt a painful intervention on a newborn that’s unlikely to survive.
. . . the Supreme Court has long crafted its abortion rulings around the idea of viability. In Roe v. Wade the court ruled that states could not restrict abortions before the 28th week of pregnancy, at the time thought to be the earliest a newborn could survive on its own.
The 1992 case Planned Parenthood v. Casey, acknowledging that advances in neonatal care made survival of even more premature babies possible, detached the “viability” marker from the 28-week standard but left the sentiment of the original ruling intact: “We reaffirm … the right of the woman to choose to have an abortion before viability and to obtain it without undue interference from the State,” read the majority opinion.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Hospital efforts to save very premature babies vary widely" by Marilynn Marchione, Associated Press 5/6/15
The study involved nearly 5,000 babies born before 27 weeks gestation at 24 hospitals in a research group run by the National Institutes of Health between April 2006 and March 2011.
Researchers looked at rates of comfort care versus active treatment, such as breathing machines, feeding tubes or heart resuscitation. Active treatment was given to 22 percent of babies born at 22 weeks, 72 percent of those at 23 weeks and nearly all beyond that.
Survival rates were higher for the actively treated babies — 23 percent versus 5 percent for all babies in the study born at 22 weeks, and 33 percent versus 24 percent for those born at 23 weeks.
About 12,000 babies each year in the United States are born between 22 and 25 weeks gestation. A full-term pregnancy is about 40 weeks.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "No Standard Treatment for Extreme Preemies - Practice differences appear to explain survival disparities" by Sarah Wickline Wallan, Staff Writer, MedPage Today 5/7/15
"This article raises important questions about what information should be given to parents during counseling about risks after an extremely preterm birth," Neil Marlow, DM, wrote in an accompanying editorial. "To give crude data on the survival rate among all such infants, regardless of whether treatment efforts were made, is misleading and helps to make poor survival a self-fulfilling prophecy."
"The NICHD NRN (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network) collects data only on live births in specialist hospitals and is not population-based; thus these data cannot be used to explore attitudes underlying the decision to provide or withhold treatment or to evaluate antepartum fetal deaths," added Marlow, who is from the Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Institute for Women's Health at University College London.
"The study should prompt physicians, hospitals, state governments, and professional societies to accelerate efforts to provide perinatal regionalization programs that will optimize access of these extremely premature babies to level 3 and 4 perinatal centers that can provide skilled, experienced active treatment in the delivery room when parents and physicians decide in favor of active treatment," F. Sessions Cole, MD, director of the division of newborn medicine at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, said in an email to MedPage Today.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Click headlines below to read previous articles:
Gallup poll, Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
As Pro-life Laws Sweep America, Liberals Battle Back
Abortionists, Satanists Team Up vs. Missouri Law
Abortionists Stymied by New Oklahoma & Kansas Laws
Also read Congressman Xavier Becerra (D-Calif. and chairman of House Democratic Caucus) won't answer if unborn child 20 weeks into pregnancy is human being. (video)
Saturday, February 28, 2015
Late-term Abortion Ban Passes in West Virginia
When the West Virginia legislature banned abortions after 20 weeks gestation last year, Democrat Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin vetoed the bill, but now with a Republican hold on a veto-proof majority, abortionists who murder children capable of feeling pain could lose their license to kill, with no exception for rape or incest.
For background, read As Pro-life Laws Sweep America, Liberals Battle Back as well as 75% of Abortion Clinics Closed: Jan. 2015 vs. 1991
Also read Gallup Poll: Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
In addition, watch how Democrat leader Nancy Pelosi, who claims to be Catholic, refuses to acknowledge a fetus as a person.
-- From "W.Va. lawmakers pass ban on abortions after 20 weeks" by The Associated Press 2/25/15
With little debate, West Virginia senators cleared the ban Wednesday [29-5]. The House of Delegates passed it overwhelmingly [87-12] earlier this month after a more heated back-and-forth.
The proposal bans abortions after 20 weeks, with some exemptions for women in medical emergencies. Rape and incest aren't exempted, despite Democrats' effort to try to include them.
The proposal would also prohibit abortions when women have psychological conditions that could lead them to hurt or kill themselves.
Even for abortions that would be exempted, the bill requires doctors to terminate pregnancies in a way that gives "the best opportunity for the fetus to survive," unless the process would kill or irreparably harm the mother.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Full WV Legislature passes 20-week abortion ban" by Mandi Cardosi, Government Reporter, The State Journal 2/25/15
Sen. Corey Palumbo, D-Kanawha, offered an amendment to change the 20-week ban to 22 weeks. He said the amendment would have made the bill constitutional. Tomblin, acting on a similar bill last year, said he vetoed the measure because his office found it to be unconstitutional.
“Bills similar to this have been passed in at least 10 states; I think three of them have been challenged and all three have been held unconstitutional,” Palumbo said. “According to evidence out there, I don't see anyway this bill would be found to be constitutional.”
The bill did not contain criminal penalties against physicians for performing abortions, but a similar bill that passed the Legislature last year did contain penalties and was vetoed by Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "West Virginia lawmakers pass 20-week abortion ban" by Matt Pearce, Los Angeles Times 2/26/15
The U.S. Supreme Court, which has barred undue restrictions on abortion before fetuses are viable outside the womb -- generally considered to be 24 weeks -- has declined to weigh in on "fetal-pain laws," at least so far.
The West Virginia legislation, titled the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act [HB 2568], provides no exceptions for rape or incest and threatens to strip medical licenses from providers who perform abortions after 20 weeks.
Federal judges have stopped similar pre-viability abortion bans in Texas, Arizona, Georgia, Arkansas and North Dakota.
As of the start of February, 10 states had pre-viability abortion bans similar to the proposal in West Virginia, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health advocacy group.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "West Virginia Legislature Passes Ban on Abortions After 20 Weeks" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 2/25/15
Across the country, eight states have the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act in effect: Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, North Dakota, and Texas. . . . More than 18,000 ‘very late term’ abortions are performed every year on perfectly healthy unborn babies in America.
The bill [considered last month in Congress] relies on the science of fetal pain to establish a Constitutional reason for Congress to ban abortions late in pregnancy. The science behind the concept of fetal pain is fully established and Dr. Steven Zielinski, an internal medicine physician from Oregon, is one of the leading researchers into it. He first published reports in the 1980s to validate research showing evidence for it.
He has testified before Congress that an unborn child could feel pain at “eight-and-a-half weeks and possibly earlier” and that a baby before birth “under the right circumstances, is capable of crying.”
He and his colleagues Dr. Vincent J. Collins and Thomas J. Marzen were the top researchers to point to fetal pain decades ago. Collins, before his death, was Professor of Anesthesiology at Northwestern University and the University of Illinois and author of Principles of Anesthesiology, one of the leading medical texts on the control of pain.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Liberals Embrace Science Lies, Reject Science Truth Regarding Abortion
And read Abortion Rates Plunge: Liberals Fume, Call for More Access
For background, read As Pro-life Laws Sweep America, Liberals Battle Back as well as 75% of Abortion Clinics Closed: Jan. 2015 vs. 1991
Also read Gallup Poll: Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
In addition, watch how Democrat leader Nancy Pelosi, who claims to be Catholic, refuses to acknowledge a fetus as a person.
-- From "W.Va. lawmakers pass ban on abortions after 20 weeks" by The Associated Press 2/25/15
With little debate, West Virginia senators cleared the ban Wednesday [29-5]. The House of Delegates passed it overwhelmingly [87-12] earlier this month after a more heated back-and-forth.
The proposal bans abortions after 20 weeks, with some exemptions for women in medical emergencies. Rape and incest aren't exempted, despite Democrats' effort to try to include them.
The proposal would also prohibit abortions when women have psychological conditions that could lead them to hurt or kill themselves.
Even for abortions that would be exempted, the bill requires doctors to terminate pregnancies in a way that gives "the best opportunity for the fetus to survive," unless the process would kill or irreparably harm the mother.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Full WV Legislature passes 20-week abortion ban" by Mandi Cardosi, Government Reporter, The State Journal 2/25/15
Sen. Corey Palumbo, D-Kanawha, offered an amendment to change the 20-week ban to 22 weeks. He said the amendment would have made the bill constitutional. Tomblin, acting on a similar bill last year, said he vetoed the measure because his office found it to be unconstitutional.
“Bills similar to this have been passed in at least 10 states; I think three of them have been challenged and all three have been held unconstitutional,” Palumbo said. “According to evidence out there, I don't see anyway this bill would be found to be constitutional.”
The bill did not contain criminal penalties against physicians for performing abortions, but a similar bill that passed the Legislature last year did contain penalties and was vetoed by Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "West Virginia lawmakers pass 20-week abortion ban" by Matt Pearce, Los Angeles Times 2/26/15
The U.S. Supreme Court, which has barred undue restrictions on abortion before fetuses are viable outside the womb -- generally considered to be 24 weeks -- has declined to weigh in on "fetal-pain laws," at least so far.
The West Virginia legislation, titled the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act [HB 2568], provides no exceptions for rape or incest and threatens to strip medical licenses from providers who perform abortions after 20 weeks.
Federal judges have stopped similar pre-viability abortion bans in Texas, Arizona, Georgia, Arkansas and North Dakota.
As of the start of February, 10 states had pre-viability abortion bans similar to the proposal in West Virginia, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health advocacy group.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "West Virginia Legislature Passes Ban on Abortions After 20 Weeks" by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com 2/25/15
Across the country, eight states have the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act in effect: Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, North Dakota, and Texas. . . . More than 18,000 ‘very late term’ abortions are performed every year on perfectly healthy unborn babies in America.
The bill [considered last month in Congress] relies on the science of fetal pain to establish a Constitutional reason for Congress to ban abortions late in pregnancy. The science behind the concept of fetal pain is fully established and Dr. Steven Zielinski, an internal medicine physician from Oregon, is one of the leading researchers into it. He first published reports in the 1980s to validate research showing evidence for it.
He has testified before Congress that an unborn child could feel pain at “eight-and-a-half weeks and possibly earlier” and that a baby before birth “under the right circumstances, is capable of crying.”
He and his colleagues Dr. Vincent J. Collins and Thomas J. Marzen were the top researchers to point to fetal pain decades ago. Collins, before his death, was Professor of Anesthesiology at Northwestern University and the University of Illinois and author of Principles of Anesthesiology, one of the leading medical texts on the control of pain.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Liberals Embrace Science Lies, Reject Science Truth Regarding Abortion
And read Abortion Rates Plunge: Liberals Fume, Call for More Access
Tuesday, January 27, 2015
Pelosi Anti-Life Science NOT Catholic: Archbishop
When San Francisco Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi was asked if an unborn baby is a human being at 20 weeks gestation, she said that the mother is the one who matters and anyway that's not a question for politicians to answer. In response, San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone denounced House Minority Leader Pelosi's refusal to verbalize the “scientific fact that human life begins at conception,” and he further stated that “no Catholic can dissent in good conscience” from the Church teaching on abortion.
For background, read Archbishop Cordileone Rebuts Pelosi's Government-run Church and also read Rep. Nancy Pelosi is a Fraud, Catholic Leaders Say as well as Pope Francis Says Wayward Politicians Can't Take Communion (e.g.: Biden, Pelosi, Kerry, et. al.)
And read Pelosi Thanks God for Nuns' Support for Abortion Bill
Not surprisingly, the liberal media ignore Pope Francis when he speaks on the sanctity of life.
In addition, read Liberals Embrace Science Lies, Reject Science Truth
-- From "Pelosi On Abortion: The Mother Comes First" by Rachel Stoltzfoos, Reporter, Daily Caller 1/22/15
“I don’t think it’s up to politicians to do that,” Pelosi said in a briefing Thursday.
“You know it’s really interesting that you would come to these meetings to talk about [abortion],” she told the reporter. “The fact is what we have said. The life and the health of a mother is what is preeminent when a decision is made about a woman’s reproductive health.”
“It isn’t an ideological fight,” she added. “It’s a personal health issue. This is up to women — their conscience, their god their doctor, their health, their fate, survival.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "SF Archbishop on Pelosi: No Catholic Can Dissent from Church Teaching on Abortion" by Lauretta Brown, CNSNews.com 1/26/15
At her Jan. 22 briefing Pelosi said she had "great standing" to speak on the issue of abortion, noting that she was a "Catholic and a mom of five" and asserting that it was "true" she knew "more about having babies than the pope."
CNSNews.com asked Archbishop Cordileone about Pelosi’s comments on human life, particularly in light her self-description “as a Catholic and a mom of five."
"It is a scientific fact that human life begins at conception," the archbishop said in a written statement to CNSNews.com. "This has been established in medical science for over 100 years. Catholic moral teaching acknowledges this scientific fact, and has always affirmed the grave moral evil of taking an innocent human life.
“This has been the consistent teaching of the Church from the very beginning, a teaching already discernible in the natural moral law, and so a teaching from which no Catholic can dissent in good conscience,” he said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Pelosi asked twice if unborn baby at 20 weeks is ‘human’: refuses to respond" by John Jalsevac, LifeSiteNews.com 1/23/15
The question, and follow-up, were asked by a reporter with CNSNews in reference to the ongoing debate about a bill in Congress that would ban abortion after 20 weeks, except in cases of rape, incest, and a threat to the life of the mother. . . . One recent poll found that 84% of Americans support the bill.
CNSNews.com: "Is an unborn child 20 weeks into pregnancy a human being?"
Pelosi: "You know what, what we're talking about on the floor of the House is something that says politicians should determine what effects the health of a woman, her life, her health, and the rest. I don't think it's up to politicians to do that. And that's why we are very overwhelmingly opposing what is going on on the floor of the House."
Later…
CNSNews.com: "My question is pretty simple. On the abortion issue, I understand your position on the legislation, but even the legislation aside, when it comes to the matter of whether or not an unborn child is a human being at 20 weeks gestation, what is your personal take on it. If it is not a human being, then what do you believe it is?
Pelosi: “You know it is really interesting that you would come to these meetings to talk about it. The fact is is what we have said: The life and the health of the mother is what is preeminent in when a decision is made about a woman’s reproductive health. It isn't an ideological fight, it is a personal health issue."
To read the entire Pelosi transcript above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 1/27/15: Congressman Xavier Becerra (D-Calif. and chairman of House Democratic Caucus) won't answer if unborn child 20 weeks into pregnancy is human being. (video)
Also read President Obama Touts Abortion, While Americans March Against It
And read As Pro-life Laws Sweep America, Liberals Battle Back as well as 75% of Abortion Clinics Closed: Jan. 2015 vs. 1991
For background, read Archbishop Cordileone Rebuts Pelosi's Government-run Church and also read Rep. Nancy Pelosi is a Fraud, Catholic Leaders Say as well as Pope Francis Says Wayward Politicians Can't Take Communion (e.g.: Biden, Pelosi, Kerry, et. al.)
And read Pelosi Thanks God for Nuns' Support for Abortion Bill
Not surprisingly, the liberal media ignore Pope Francis when he speaks on the sanctity of life.
In addition, read Liberals Embrace Science Lies, Reject Science Truth
-- From "Pelosi On Abortion: The Mother Comes First" by Rachel Stoltzfoos, Reporter, Daily Caller 1/22/15
“I don’t think it’s up to politicians to do that,” Pelosi said in a briefing Thursday.
“You know it’s really interesting that you would come to these meetings to talk about [abortion],” she told the reporter. “The fact is what we have said. The life and the health of a mother is what is preeminent when a decision is made about a woman’s reproductive health.”
“It isn’t an ideological fight,” she added. “It’s a personal health issue. This is up to women — their conscience, their god their doctor, their health, their fate, survival.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "SF Archbishop on Pelosi: No Catholic Can Dissent from Church Teaching on Abortion" by Lauretta Brown, CNSNews.com 1/26/15
At her Jan. 22 briefing Pelosi said she had "great standing" to speak on the issue of abortion, noting that she was a "Catholic and a mom of five" and asserting that it was "true" she knew "more about having babies than the pope."
CNSNews.com asked Archbishop Cordileone about Pelosi’s comments on human life, particularly in light her self-description “as a Catholic and a mom of five."
"It is a scientific fact that human life begins at conception," the archbishop said in a written statement to CNSNews.com. "This has been established in medical science for over 100 years. Catholic moral teaching acknowledges this scientific fact, and has always affirmed the grave moral evil of taking an innocent human life.
“This has been the consistent teaching of the Church from the very beginning, a teaching already discernible in the natural moral law, and so a teaching from which no Catholic can dissent in good conscience,” he said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Pelosi asked twice if unborn baby at 20 weeks is ‘human’: refuses to respond" by John Jalsevac, LifeSiteNews.com 1/23/15
The question, and follow-up, were asked by a reporter with CNSNews in reference to the ongoing debate about a bill in Congress that would ban abortion after 20 weeks, except in cases of rape, incest, and a threat to the life of the mother. . . . One recent poll found that 84% of Americans support the bill.
CNSNews.com: "Is an unborn child 20 weeks into pregnancy a human being?"
Pelosi: "You know what, what we're talking about on the floor of the House is something that says politicians should determine what effects the health of a woman, her life, her health, and the rest. I don't think it's up to politicians to do that. And that's why we are very overwhelmingly opposing what is going on on the floor of the House."
Later…
CNSNews.com: "My question is pretty simple. On the abortion issue, I understand your position on the legislation, but even the legislation aside, when it comes to the matter of whether or not an unborn child is a human being at 20 weeks gestation, what is your personal take on it. If it is not a human being, then what do you believe it is?
Pelosi: “You know it is really interesting that you would come to these meetings to talk about it. The fact is is what we have said: The life and the health of the mother is what is preeminent in when a decision is made about a woman’s reproductive health. It isn't an ideological fight, it is a personal health issue."
To read the entire Pelosi transcript above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 1/27/15: Congressman Xavier Becerra (D-Calif. and chairman of House Democratic Caucus) won't answer if unborn child 20 weeks into pregnancy is human being. (video)
Also read President Obama Touts Abortion, While Americans March Against It
And read As Pro-life Laws Sweep America, Liberals Battle Back as well as 75% of Abortion Clinics Closed: Jan. 2015 vs. 1991
Sunday, January 25, 2015
Obama Touts Abortion; Americans March Against It
Although the media largely ignored hundreds of thousands of citizens on the streets across America this week, attention was paid to congressional Republicans debating how to reduce the killing of unborn children. As Americans marched, the president praised ObamaCare for forcing all citizens to pay for the slaughter.
For background, read President Obama Praises Abortion on 41st Anniversary of Roe v. Wade
UPDATE 2/9/15 - Gallup Poll: Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
Also read As Pro-life Laws Sweep America, Liberals Battle Back as well as 75% of Abortion Clinics Closed: Jan. 2015 vs. 1991
-- From "'Roe v. Wade' turns 42; thousands march in opposition" by John Bacon and Greg Toppo, USATODAY 1/22/15
After a brief rally at the Washington Monument, the crowd filled Constitution Avenue, stretching for several blocks as people headed for Capitol Hill.
The march was scheduled to pass in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, but as it neared the marble edifice, a small counterprotest stepped into the street and stopped the marchers. . . . The group, which numbered a few dozen, chanted, "Without these basic rights, women can't be free — abortion on demand and without apology."
Police quickly moved the abortion opponents to the curb and arrested most of the counterprotesters, restraining their arms behind them with plastic ties and carrying them off as the march members cheered. A few chanted, "Je-sus! Je-sus!" and "USA! USA!"
The march took place as congressional leaders canceled a vote, scheduled for Thursday, on an abortion bill sponsored by Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz. The decision came after some members objected that the legislation was too restrictive and would hurt them with voters. Lawmakers instead approved a watered-down bill that would ban federal funding for abortions.
Franks' bill would have banned abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy and provided exceptions for a woman's health and in cases of reported rape or incest involving a minor.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Traffic At A Virtual Standstill As Thousands Of Anti-Abortion Demonstrators Converge On San Francisco" posted at KCBS 1/24/15
Tens of thousands of people who oppose abortion gathered in San Francisco Saturday for the 11th Annual Walk for Life event. The event created major gridlock in The City, with traffic backed up all the way onto the Bay Bridge.
The Walk for Life in San Francisco is one of the largest in the country. It marks the anniversary of the 1973 Supreme Court decision, Roe Vs. Wade that made abortion legal in this country. The event attracts more than 50,000 people from all over the country who come in by the busloads.
Pastor Clenard Childress was one of them. He came all the way from New Jersey. Childress said it is intellectually dishonest for a woman “to claim a right for herself and in so doing, take away the right of somebody else.”
“This is so hypocritical to me, that we are grateful that our mothers chose life, yet we want a child in the womb to be denied the access we have already gained,” he said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "White House signals Obama will veto abortion ban" by Irin Carmon, MSNBC 1/20/15
Thursday is, not coincidentally, the 42nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade, and the day when anti-abortion activists are marching on the National Mall in the annual March for Life, featuring several Republican elected officials. H.R. 36, which bans abortion at 20 weeks on the unscientific (and so far legally irrelevant) claim that fetuses feel pain at that point, passed the House in 2013 but never got a vote in the Senate — which may change now that Republicans control it. About 1% of abortions take place after 20 weeks.
The political strategy of the 20 week ban is clear: Force Democrats to get on the record about later abortions, which poll poorly unless accompanied by information about the difficult circumstances facing women who get them. The legal strategy is also pretty clear: Justice Anthony Kennedy, once a swing vote on abortion, signaled his distaste for later abortions in the last major Supreme Court abortion case, Gonzales v. Carhart. Anti-abortion strategists are hoping to get him to sign onto a 20-week ban with vivid talk of fetal pain, thus undercutting his repeated holding that it’s unconstitutional to ban abortion before a fetus can survive outside of the womb. So far, the Supreme Court has declined to hear recent abortion cases before them, including Arizona’s 20-week ban, which was held unconstitutional by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "House votes to block federal funding of abortion" by Natalie Villacorta, Politico 1/22/15
President Barack Obama lashed out at House passage Thursday of a bill that would permanently prohibit taxpayer funding for abortion. The House easily passed it after GOP leaders had to cancel a vote on another bill that would have banned most abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, which got caught up in a fight about exemptions for rape victims.
The House vote took place on the anniversary of the Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion. Anti-abortion protesters had come to Washington for the annual March for Life.
More than 50 angry march participants showed up outside the office of Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-N.C.), who pulled her co-sponsorship of the 20-week ban because of the requirement that rape victims report the crime to law enforcement authorities in order to obtain an exemption.
The House did easily pass H.R. 7, the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2015, sponsored by Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.). White House advisers said they would recommend a veto should the bill reach the president’s desk.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Statement by the President on the 42nd Anniversary of Roe v. Wade" posted at WhiteHouse.gov 1/22/15
I am deeply committed to protecting this core constitutional right, and I believe that efforts like H.R. 7, the bill the House considered today, would intrude on women's reproductive freedom and access to health care and unnecessarily restrict the private insurance choices that consumers have today. The federal government should not be injecting itself into decisions best made between women, their families, and their doctors. I am also deeply committed to continuing our work to reduce unintended pregnancies, support maternal and child health, promote adoptions, and minimize the need for abortion.
Today, as we reflect on this critical moment in our history, may we all rededicate ourselves to ensuring that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons.
To read the entire statement from President Obama above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 1/22/16: From "Statement by the President on the 43rd Anniversary of Roe v. Wade" posted at WhiteHouse.gov
Today, we mark the 43rd anniversary of the Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade, which affirmed a woman’s freedom to make her own choices about her body and her health. The decision supports the broader principle that the government should not intrude on private decisions made between a woman and her doctor. As we commemorate this day, we also redouble our commitment to protecting these constitutional rights, including protecting a woman’s access to safe, affordable health care and her right to reproductive freedom from efforts to undermine or overturn them. In America, every single one of us deserves the rights, freedoms, and opportunities to fulfill our dreams.
To read the entire statement from President Obama above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Taxpayers Provide Almost Half of Planned Parenthood's $Billion$
And read Planned Parenthood Reports its Abortions & Profits Increased Last Year
For background, read President Obama Praises Abortion on 41st Anniversary of Roe v. Wade
UPDATE 2/9/15 - Gallup Poll: Americans Want Abortion Laws Changed
Also read As Pro-life Laws Sweep America, Liberals Battle Back as well as 75% of Abortion Clinics Closed: Jan. 2015 vs. 1991
-- From "'Roe v. Wade' turns 42; thousands march in opposition" by John Bacon and Greg Toppo, USATODAY 1/22/15
After a brief rally at the Washington Monument, the crowd filled Constitution Avenue, stretching for several blocks as people headed for Capitol Hill.
The march was scheduled to pass in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, but as it neared the marble edifice, a small counterprotest stepped into the street and stopped the marchers. . . . The group, which numbered a few dozen, chanted, "Without these basic rights, women can't be free — abortion on demand and without apology."
Police quickly moved the abortion opponents to the curb and arrested most of the counterprotesters, restraining their arms behind them with plastic ties and carrying them off as the march members cheered. A few chanted, "Je-sus! Je-sus!" and "USA! USA!"
The march took place as congressional leaders canceled a vote, scheduled for Thursday, on an abortion bill sponsored by Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz. The decision came after some members objected that the legislation was too restrictive and would hurt them with voters. Lawmakers instead approved a watered-down bill that would ban federal funding for abortions.
Franks' bill would have banned abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy and provided exceptions for a woman's health and in cases of reported rape or incest involving a minor.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Traffic At A Virtual Standstill As Thousands Of Anti-Abortion Demonstrators Converge On San Francisco" posted at KCBS 1/24/15
Tens of thousands of people who oppose abortion gathered in San Francisco Saturday for the 11th Annual Walk for Life event. The event created major gridlock in The City, with traffic backed up all the way onto the Bay Bridge.
The Walk for Life in San Francisco is one of the largest in the country. It marks the anniversary of the 1973 Supreme Court decision, Roe Vs. Wade that made abortion legal in this country. The event attracts more than 50,000 people from all over the country who come in by the busloads.
Pastor Clenard Childress was one of them. He came all the way from New Jersey. Childress said it is intellectually dishonest for a woman “to claim a right for herself and in so doing, take away the right of somebody else.”
“This is so hypocritical to me, that we are grateful that our mothers chose life, yet we want a child in the womb to be denied the access we have already gained,” he said.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "White House signals Obama will veto abortion ban" by Irin Carmon, MSNBC 1/20/15
Thursday is, not coincidentally, the 42nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade, and the day when anti-abortion activists are marching on the National Mall in the annual March for Life, featuring several Republican elected officials. H.R. 36, which bans abortion at 20 weeks on the unscientific (and so far legally irrelevant) claim that fetuses feel pain at that point, passed the House in 2013 but never got a vote in the Senate — which may change now that Republicans control it. About 1% of abortions take place after 20 weeks.
The political strategy of the 20 week ban is clear: Force Democrats to get on the record about later abortions, which poll poorly unless accompanied by information about the difficult circumstances facing women who get them. The legal strategy is also pretty clear: Justice Anthony Kennedy, once a swing vote on abortion, signaled his distaste for later abortions in the last major Supreme Court abortion case, Gonzales v. Carhart. Anti-abortion strategists are hoping to get him to sign onto a 20-week ban with vivid talk of fetal pain, thus undercutting his repeated holding that it’s unconstitutional to ban abortion before a fetus can survive outside of the womb. So far, the Supreme Court has declined to hear recent abortion cases before them, including Arizona’s 20-week ban, which was held unconstitutional by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "House votes to block federal funding of abortion" by Natalie Villacorta, Politico 1/22/15
President Barack Obama lashed out at House passage Thursday of a bill that would permanently prohibit taxpayer funding for abortion. The House easily passed it after GOP leaders had to cancel a vote on another bill that would have banned most abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, which got caught up in a fight about exemptions for rape victims.
The House vote took place on the anniversary of the Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion. Anti-abortion protesters had come to Washington for the annual March for Life.
More than 50 angry march participants showed up outside the office of Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-N.C.), who pulled her co-sponsorship of the 20-week ban because of the requirement that rape victims report the crime to law enforcement authorities in order to obtain an exemption.
The House did easily pass H.R. 7, the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2015, sponsored by Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.). White House advisers said they would recommend a veto should the bill reach the president’s desk.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Statement by the President on the 42nd Anniversary of Roe v. Wade" posted at WhiteHouse.gov 1/22/15
I am deeply committed to protecting this core constitutional right, and I believe that efforts like H.R. 7, the bill the House considered today, would intrude on women's reproductive freedom and access to health care and unnecessarily restrict the private insurance choices that consumers have today. The federal government should not be injecting itself into decisions best made between women, their families, and their doctors. I am also deeply committed to continuing our work to reduce unintended pregnancies, support maternal and child health, promote adoptions, and minimize the need for abortion.
Today, as we reflect on this critical moment in our history, may we all rededicate ourselves to ensuring that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons.
To read the entire statement from President Obama above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 1/22/16: From "Statement by the President on the 43rd Anniversary of Roe v. Wade" posted at WhiteHouse.gov
Today, we mark the 43rd anniversary of the Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade, which affirmed a woman’s freedom to make her own choices about her body and her health. The decision supports the broader principle that the government should not intrude on private decisions made between a woman and her doctor. As we commemorate this day, we also redouble our commitment to protecting these constitutional rights, including protecting a woman’s access to safe, affordable health care and her right to reproductive freedom from efforts to undermine or overturn them. In America, every single one of us deserves the rights, freedoms, and opportunities to fulfill our dreams.
To read the entire statement from President Obama above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Taxpayers Provide Almost Half of Planned Parenthood's $Billion$
And read Planned Parenthood Reports its Abortions & Profits Increased Last Year
Monday, January 12, 2015
Pro-life Laws Sweep America; Liberals Battle Back
As abortion-restricting legislation reaches new heights at the state level across the nation, congressional pro-life legislators are planning unprecedented efforts to save lives of the unborn, while pro-abortion Republicans hold firm: “I’ve been supporting a woman’s right to choose throughout my time in public life. [I want to] make sure that we don’t overturn Roe v. Wade . . .” says Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Illinois).
UPDATE 4/7/15: Now Illegal to Rip Unborn Babies Limb From Limb in Kansas & Oklahoma
For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:
75% of Abortion Clinics Closed: Jan. 2015 vs. 1991
Abortionists Lament Ever-greater State Limits
Missouri Legislators Override Governor's Veto: Pro-life Law
Democrats Restrict Abortion in Louisiana and South Carolina
Also read Abortion Rates Plunge: Liberals Fume, Call for More Access
-- From "GOP hopes it’s cracked the abortion code" by Burgess Everett and Lauren French, Politico 1/12/15
Now, with Congress and two-thirds of state legislatures under GOP control, the party hopes the 20-week [gestation limit for abortion] offers a moment of unity while aligning Republicans with polls that show most Americans support such a [limit] . . . an easy-to-explain proposal they believe will animate their base without alienating swing voters who might be turned off by a frontal assault on Roe v. Wade. The 20th week — about halfway through a typical pregnancy — approaches the point when a fetus is viable outside the womb. It’s also the time at which anti-abortion activists maintain that unborn fetuses can feel pain.
Their first salvo will come from the House, where GOP leaders plan to vote on a federal 20-week abortion ban on Jan. 22. That’s the 42nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade and falls on the same day as the March for Life, an annual mass demonstration of anti-abortion activists on the streets of Washington.
And eight major potential Republican presidential hopefuls are on board with the national ban, cementing the party’s abortion plank long before primary season. Besides [former Florida governor Jeb] Bush and [Kentucky Sen. Rand] Paul, that list includes Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas, Govs. Mike Pence of Indiana and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas. Huckabee and Bush are the two candidates who have taken the most concrete steps toward running.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "The GOP wants to take the abortion wars national again" by Irin Carmon, MSNBC 1/8/15
. . . Monday, the first day of the new session, Rep. Trent Franks and Rep. Marsha Blackburn reintroduced the tendentiously named “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.” It bans abortion after 20 weeks on the medically-disputed theory that fetuses can feel pain at that point.
Republicans are now surely feeling confident after a focus on reproductive rights didn’t deter a GOP wave in the midterm elections, including in purple Colorado. And the optics have improved, too. Thanks to that election, they’ve gone from two anti-abortion women in the Senate, Sen. Kelly Ayotte and Sen. Deb Fischer, to four, with the addition of Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa and Sen. Shelly Moore Capito of West Virginia. Capito ran as a moderate, but has already voted for the House version.
Meanwhile, one way or another, the Supreme Court is expected to address the abortion issue after long avoiding it. Ever since Justice Anthony Kennedy expressed his distaste for later abortions in Gonzales v. Carhart, the decision upholding the Partial Birth Abortion Ban, anti-abortion legal strategists have been hoping to use a 20 week ban to chip away at Roe v. Wade.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "GOP renews funding fight against Planned Parenthood" by Sarah Ferris, The Hill 1/8/15
More than 80 House Republicans are again seeking to block federal funding for abortion providers like Planned Parenthood, saying they want to defund "the big abortion industry.”
"Planned Parenthood and organizations like it that profit off the destruction of innocent life do not deserve one more dime from American taxpayers,” Rep. Diane Black (R-Tenn.) wrote in a release Thursday after reintroducing the bill.
Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), co-chairman of the Pro-Life Caucus, said the federal government should not be supporting Planned Parenthood at all, describing the nonprofit as “Child Abuse, Incorporated.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Planned Parenthood Reports its Abortions & Profits Increased Last Year
And read Taxpayers Provide Almost Half of Planned Parenthood's $Billion$
From "Abortion Restrictions Pick Up Steam in GOP-Led States" by Arian Campo-Flores and Cameron McWhirter, Wall Street Journal 1/11/15
GOP gains in legislatures across the U.S. are boosting abortion foes seeking to spread restrictive laws to more states or devise new approaches to limit the procedure, advocates on both sides say.
Antiabortion bills have been filed in advance of this year’s legislative sessions in at least 10 states, including Missouri, South Carolina and Texas, with more sure to come, said Elizabeth Nash, state-issues manager at the Guttmacher Institute. The proposals range from declaring that “personhood” begins at fertilization to requiring medical professionals to conduct ultrasounds on pregnant women and display the results to them.
The National Right to Life Committee, a federation of antiabortion groups, plans to push for abortion bans after about 20 weeks of pregnancy in states such as South Carolina and West Virginia, said Mary Spaulding Balch, director of state legislation. Such measures, already in effect in 10 states, rely on the contested argument that fetuses can feel pain at that point.
Meanwhile, Americans United for Life intends to continue promoting a package of measures it has championed in recent years that include restrictions on the use of abortion-inducing drugs and stiffer regulations for clinics, [AUL President Charmaine] Yoest said. The group also will keep pressing for laws that require abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at a local hospital, an approach that has triggered litigation across the country and resulted in the closure of about half the clinics in Texas.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion Hostility Depends on Your Zip Code" by Lindsay Menard-Freeman, posted at Huffington Post 1/7/15
From 2011 to 2014, the number of legislative restrictions against abortion rights skyrocketed to 231, quadrupling the number of restrictions within just three years. In 2014 alone, legislators enacted 26 brand new measures to restrict access to abortion rights.
According to a new report by the Guttmacher Institute, the number of measures enacted are not just surging, but the severity of these 'hostility' classifications is alarming and threatening to women's rights.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion by ZIP Code" by Lucia Graves and Libby Isenstein, National Journal 1/6/15
A recent analysis of state abortion laws by the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive-rights think tank, categorized states with four to five abortion restrictions as "hostile" to abortion, and placed states with more than five restrictions into the "extremely hostile" camp.
It's not just a matter of outright abortion bans. The restrictive measures include a variety of measures making abortions more difficult to obtain, from expanding mandatory waiting periods to making it more difficult for minors to access those services.
But there is a silver lining for abortion advocates. Over the past year, some lawmakers have pushed back against the rising tide of restrictions, introducing 95 measures designed to expand access to abortion in 17 states. While the win is dubious—only four of those measures have actually been signed into law—that still accounts for more pro-abortion measures than have been introduced in any year since 1990.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "In Just the Last Four Years, States Have Enacted 231 Abortion Restrictions" posted at the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute 1/5/15
. . . In 2000, 31% of women of reproductive age lived in a state hostile to abortion rights, with no women living in a state with enough restrictions to be considered extremely hostile. By 2014, 57% of women lived in a state that is either hostile or extremely hostile to abortion rights.
[The 2014] midterm election results provide good reason to be concerned about a renewed focus on restricting abortion in the upcoming 2015 legislative sessions. Republican legislators, who overwhelmingly oppose abortion rights, solidified their dominance in the states. Republicans will now control both legislative chambers in 30 states, three more than in 2014; in 23 of those states, the governor will also be Republican. Democrats will control both legislative chambers and the governor’s mansion in only seven states. In addition, the ballot initiative approved in Tennessee likely will open the door to additional restrictions in that state.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
UPDATE 4/7/15: Now Illegal to Rip Unborn Babies Limb From Limb in Kansas & Oklahoma
For background, click headlines below to read previous articles:
75% of Abortion Clinics Closed: Jan. 2015 vs. 1991
Abortionists Lament Ever-greater State Limits
Missouri Legislators Override Governor's Veto: Pro-life Law
Democrats Restrict Abortion in Louisiana and South Carolina
Also read Abortion Rates Plunge: Liberals Fume, Call for More Access
-- From "GOP hopes it’s cracked the abortion code" by Burgess Everett and Lauren French, Politico 1/12/15
Now, with Congress and two-thirds of state legislatures under GOP control, the party hopes the 20-week [gestation limit for abortion] offers a moment of unity while aligning Republicans with polls that show most Americans support such a [limit] . . . an easy-to-explain proposal they believe will animate their base without alienating swing voters who might be turned off by a frontal assault on Roe v. Wade. The 20th week — about halfway through a typical pregnancy — approaches the point when a fetus is viable outside the womb. It’s also the time at which anti-abortion activists maintain that unborn fetuses can feel pain.
Their first salvo will come from the House, where GOP leaders plan to vote on a federal 20-week abortion ban on Jan. 22. That’s the 42nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade and falls on the same day as the March for Life, an annual mass demonstration of anti-abortion activists on the streets of Washington.
And eight major potential Republican presidential hopefuls are on board with the national ban, cementing the party’s abortion plank long before primary season. Besides [former Florida governor Jeb] Bush and [Kentucky Sen. Rand] Paul, that list includes Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas, Govs. Mike Pence of Indiana and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas. Huckabee and Bush are the two candidates who have taken the most concrete steps toward running.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "The GOP wants to take the abortion wars national again" by Irin Carmon, MSNBC 1/8/15
. . . Monday, the first day of the new session, Rep. Trent Franks and Rep. Marsha Blackburn reintroduced the tendentiously named “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.” It bans abortion after 20 weeks on the medically-disputed theory that fetuses can feel pain at that point.
Republicans are now surely feeling confident after a focus on reproductive rights didn’t deter a GOP wave in the midterm elections, including in purple Colorado. And the optics have improved, too. Thanks to that election, they’ve gone from two anti-abortion women in the Senate, Sen. Kelly Ayotte and Sen. Deb Fischer, to four, with the addition of Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa and Sen. Shelly Moore Capito of West Virginia. Capito ran as a moderate, but has already voted for the House version.
Meanwhile, one way or another, the Supreme Court is expected to address the abortion issue after long avoiding it. Ever since Justice Anthony Kennedy expressed his distaste for later abortions in Gonzales v. Carhart, the decision upholding the Partial Birth Abortion Ban, anti-abortion legal strategists have been hoping to use a 20 week ban to chip away at Roe v. Wade.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "GOP renews funding fight against Planned Parenthood" by Sarah Ferris, The Hill 1/8/15
More than 80 House Republicans are again seeking to block federal funding for abortion providers like Planned Parenthood, saying they want to defund "the big abortion industry.”
"Planned Parenthood and organizations like it that profit off the destruction of innocent life do not deserve one more dime from American taxpayers,” Rep. Diane Black (R-Tenn.) wrote in a release Thursday after reintroducing the bill.
Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), co-chairman of the Pro-Life Caucus, said the federal government should not be supporting Planned Parenthood at all, describing the nonprofit as “Child Abuse, Incorporated.”
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Also read Planned Parenthood Reports its Abortions & Profits Increased Last Year
And read Taxpayers Provide Almost Half of Planned Parenthood's $Billion$
From "Abortion Restrictions Pick Up Steam in GOP-Led States" by Arian Campo-Flores and Cameron McWhirter, Wall Street Journal 1/11/15
GOP gains in legislatures across the U.S. are boosting abortion foes seeking to spread restrictive laws to more states or devise new approaches to limit the procedure, advocates on both sides say.
Antiabortion bills have been filed in advance of this year’s legislative sessions in at least 10 states, including Missouri, South Carolina and Texas, with more sure to come, said Elizabeth Nash, state-issues manager at the Guttmacher Institute. The proposals range from declaring that “personhood” begins at fertilization to requiring medical professionals to conduct ultrasounds on pregnant women and display the results to them.
The National Right to Life Committee, a federation of antiabortion groups, plans to push for abortion bans after about 20 weeks of pregnancy in states such as South Carolina and West Virginia, said Mary Spaulding Balch, director of state legislation. Such measures, already in effect in 10 states, rely on the contested argument that fetuses can feel pain at that point.
Meanwhile, Americans United for Life intends to continue promoting a package of measures it has championed in recent years that include restrictions on the use of abortion-inducing drugs and stiffer regulations for clinics, [AUL President Charmaine] Yoest said. The group also will keep pressing for laws that require abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at a local hospital, an approach that has triggered litigation across the country and resulted in the closure of about half the clinics in Texas.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion Hostility Depends on Your Zip Code" by Lindsay Menard-Freeman, posted at Huffington Post 1/7/15
From 2011 to 2014, the number of legislative restrictions against abortion rights skyrocketed to 231, quadrupling the number of restrictions within just three years. In 2014 alone, legislators enacted 26 brand new measures to restrict access to abortion rights.
According to a new report by the Guttmacher Institute, the number of measures enacted are not just surging, but the severity of these 'hostility' classifications is alarming and threatening to women's rights.
To read the entire opinion column above, CLICK HERE.
From "Abortion by ZIP Code" by Lucia Graves and Libby Isenstein, National Journal 1/6/15
A recent analysis of state abortion laws by the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive-rights think tank, categorized states with four to five abortion restrictions as "hostile" to abortion, and placed states with more than five restrictions into the "extremely hostile" camp.
It's not just a matter of outright abortion bans. The restrictive measures include a variety of measures making abortions more difficult to obtain, from expanding mandatory waiting periods to making it more difficult for minors to access those services.
But there is a silver lining for abortion advocates. Over the past year, some lawmakers have pushed back against the rising tide of restrictions, introducing 95 measures designed to expand access to abortion in 17 states. While the win is dubious—only four of those measures have actually been signed into law—that still accounts for more pro-abortion measures than have been introduced in any year since 1990.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
From "In Just the Last Four Years, States Have Enacted 231 Abortion Restrictions" posted at the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute 1/5/15
. . . In 2000, 31% of women of reproductive age lived in a state hostile to abortion rights, with no women living in a state with enough restrictions to be considered extremely hostile. By 2014, 57% of women lived in a state that is either hostile or extremely hostile to abortion rights.
[The 2014] midterm election results provide good reason to be concerned about a renewed focus on restricting abortion in the upcoming 2015 legislative sessions. Republican legislators, who overwhelmingly oppose abortion rights, solidified their dominance in the states. Republicans will now control both legislative chambers in 30 states, three more than in 2014; in 23 of those states, the governor will also be Republican. Democrats will control both legislative chambers and the governor’s mansion in only seven states. In addition, the ballot initiative approved in Tennessee likely will open the door to additional restrictions in that state.
To read the entire article above, CLICK HERE.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
