by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli
- Josh Brahm reprints John Thorp and Clarke Forsythe’s Washington Times article showing how the abortion industry cannot claim abortion is safe with our current system of reporting:
Abortion advocates in Congress and in state legislatures claim that abortions are “safe.” Yet numerous, long-standing problems at the state and federal level illustrate that the abortion data collection and reporting system in the United States is haphazard and dysfunctional, making assertions about “abortion safety” unreliable.
The U.S. abortion data and reporting system, unlike many other countries, relies completely on voluntary reporting. No federal law requires the reporting of abortion numbers, complications or deaths. (Denmark, in contrast, requires mandatory reporting by providers of all induced abortions.)
- Abstinence Clearinghouse says 75% of parents would not approve of one South Carolina school district’s sex ed program, Making Proud Choices. AC says that in the program, girls are taught how to sexually arouse boys, put on the condom, remove it following intercourse, and relax after sex.
- Big Blue Wave was cautiously optimistic when the Quebec Health Minister wanted to limit the number of abortions performed – knowing the devil was in the details. In BBW’s update, we learn that this caution was well founded:
The Health Minister says [a] new health law will increase access to abortion, because all family physicians will be able to perform them. Career abortionists will be able to obtain special dispensations to perform all the abortions they want.
- 40 Days for Life rejoices that just in their most recent campaign, at least 402 babies that had their death sentences vacated because of the presence of volunteers at countless abortion facilities across the US and participating countries abroad.
- At Live Action News, Alexandra Liebl discusses the “imprecision” of abortion language. As seen in the book and movie, The Giver, the main character, Jonas, learns that “precision of language” in his society is important “to ensure that unintentional lies were never uttered.”
Liebl “implore[s] President Obama to be more precise in his use of language” when lauding abortion providers as he did two years ago when he said “We… gather to recommit ourselves to the decision’s guiding principle: that women should be able to make their own choices about their bodies and their healthcare”:em>Precision of language please, President Obama. What he really must mean is that women should be able to make their own choices not just about their own bodies but about the child’s body that they carry within them….
If women were treated fairly in every aspect of life, they would be protected in their mother’s womb from the moment of conception. If Obama believed in a nation where all Americans should have the freedom and opportunity to reach their potential, he would protect our most innocent, defenseless Americans to ensure they get the opportunity and freedom of life itself….
In language I saw as more accurate and fit in conveying President Obama’s message, I have rewritten the last excerpt: To everyone at NARAL Pro-Choice America, thank you for your tireless advocacy for the exploitation of women and the destruction of preborn children and families. I couldn’t be prouder of the work each of you is doing to make the world an intangible place for select, preborn Americans.