UPDATE 7p: I’ve added a poll, at the bottom of the post.

5:35p: I read with alarm a story at CNS News today that the Colorado Supreme Court is allowing an injunction to stand that prohibits pro-lifers from publicly displaying graphic images of aborted babies at a Denver church.

The Court’s reasoning demonstrated the height of judicial hypocrisy. It ruled signs such as Exhibits 43 and 9, right, “cause ‘psychological harm’ to children under 12,” according to CBN.

This from the same legal system that authorized the murders of the photographed children.

This obvious free speech violation is serious in and of itself, but the injunction also carries ramifications for other pro-life activists around the country.

by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli

We welcome your suggestions for additions to our Top Blogs (see tab on right side of home page)! Email Susie@jillstanek.com.

• Big Blue Wave spots an article from the liberal Toronto Star, which states that the abortion issue is far from settled, thanks in part to “the rebranding of the anti-abortion position as a pro-woman, with-it, modern stance.” Could the largely publicized issue of sex-selective abortion also be playing a role?

by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat

• The Washington Post has an article on Allegheny Reproductive Health Center abortion clinic and abortion history in Pennsylvania. Interestingly, writer Sarah Kliff fails to mention why the state of PA passed a law in 2011 which “requires surgical abortion clinics to become certified as ambulatory surgical centers and meet other rules.” Wouldn’t want to bring up Kermit Gosnell, eh?

by Hans Johnson As reported last week, When police investigated a break-in at the Women’s Medical Services building in Muskegon, Michigan on December 26, they found conditions “potentially dangerous to human life or the general welfare.” The fire marshal has since shut it down. Here is Target 8’s report: Photos show abortion clinic violations You […]

Oddly, at its root, abortion really isn’t a political issue at all. It’s a cultural revolutionary ideal and tactic. It has been indispensable in advancing radical feminism. It becomes political to the extent that it was thrust on this nation by the US Supreme Court in one of the most raw acts of judicial activism. Strictly speaking, it is a state’s rights issue, and the people have been robbed of their ability to decide this at the ballot box, or through their elected representatives.

It’s that time of year again, when NARAL Pro-Choice America hosts its annual Blog for Choice Day on January 22, the anniversary of the infamous Roe v. Wade decision.

Likewise, for the third year in a row, pro-lifers will counter with our Ask Them What They Mean When They Say “Choice” Blog Day.

Or Mean Choice Day, for short.

Ironically, Planned Parenthood just announced it was abandoning the term “pro-choice.”

1/15, 7p: The poll is closed. 91% of you think the DOJ is trying to intimidate pro-lifers.

1/14, 3:08: (See poll at bottom of post.)

Last week President Obama’s Department of Justice lost yet another Freedom of Access to Clinics case when it settled with pro-lifer David Hamilton.

More on Attorney General Eric Holder’s harassment of Hamilton below.

But for those keeping count, here is the losing list of FACE cases brought forth by the Obama DOJ so far (including one not even listed on the DOJ site, US v. Parente):

by LauraLoo Interviewing pageant contestants never fails to bring controversy and hilarity. Miss California, Leah Cecil, had Americans shaking their heads when she responded to a Miss America pre-pageant question on ABC’s Good Morning America January 11 about her thoughts on euthanasia. [youtube]http://youtu.be/vr44Xt6vpSs[/youtube] Email dailyvid@jillstanek.com with your video suggestions. [HT: Jill]