The strategy of abortion “storytelling” – a tactic borrowed from LGBT activists – is that a person who has had an abortion talks about it openly and positively in order to elicit the empathy of listeners who might then be persuaded that abortion is normal and a good thing for women….

[T]he architect of the storytelling initiative is a gay political activist named Dave Fleischer, who moved to California in 2009 following the passage of Proposition 8 with the plan of helping the militant gay rights movement get its agenda moving.

Previously, Fleischer had worked for Saul Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation to get out the minority vote in 2008….

Fleischer saw that personal storytelling could be applied to the abortion issue as well.

Observing that the pro-life movement had been successful, he said, “They’ve made people feel that to speak up and say something positive about abortion is something where you risk disapproval, then you’d be suggested to a certain amount of stigma. This is even truer around abortion than it is same-sex marriage.”

Fleischer took his strategy to Planned Parenthood Los Angeles, and had the LGBT Center manage its canvassing effort.

My hunch is,” he says, “talking about real lived experience is extraordinarily helpful in developing empathy and support.”

~ Breitbart News, May 15

These tweets are literally posted one on top the other in pro-abortion Democrat Ted Deutch’s Twitter feed:

The practice of animal crushing is a sexual fetish of the sickest kind.

About his introduction of the PACT Act, Rep. Deutch wrote:

Too many animals are subjected to unfathomable cruelty and abuse, out of no fault of their own and no recourse for protection. These inhumane acts have no place in our society.

Yet, incomprehensibly, particularly by comparison – and on the very same day as he introduced his animal cruelty bill – Deutch, pictured right, blew off the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act as a Republican stunt in his floor speech opposing the 20-wk abortion ban (beginning at 1:08:26 on the video):

Motivation behind H.R. 36 couldn’t be more transparent. They want to make abortion after 20 weeks illegal and abortions before 20 weeks impossible.

Never mind ”abortion” equals human slaughter, and never mind it is a well-established fact that babies feel pain by the age of 20 gestational weeks. Babies much younger than this routinely receive anesthesia during prenatal surgery.

This cognitive disconnect is beyond my capability to comprehend. Can anyone help me?

[HT: Chris C.]

You will note a missing word in the description of the rape/incest exceptions in the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, i.e., 20-week abortion ban, passed in the U.S. House May 13:

EXCEPTIONS….

the pregnancy is the result of rape against an adult woman….

the pregnancy is a result of rape against a minor or incest against a minor….

Do you see it? The missing word is “incest against an adult woman.”

This is because adult consensual incest is, well, consensual. If it is not consensual, then it is rape and covered in the bill. Under the rape exception it is irrelevant whether or not the assailant is related to the victim.

This same logic could have been used to exclude “incest” from the minor rape exception, but as was explained to me by a person close to the bill, “The word ‘incest’ is not ‘needed’ in the minor rape exception, but it does no harm – it does not increase the number of people in the class who qualify for abortions.  It is simpler to have it there than to have to explain why it is not there.  With respect to adults, the contrary is true.”

Actually there was never any version of this bill under which a consenting adult would qualify for a post-20 week abortion on grounds that her chosen sex partner was related to her.

Nor was any such change ever contemplated during the review process. Granting special status to adults who choose to engage in sex with their relatives was never an option.

But at least one Democrat decided during debate on the 20-week ban Wednesday to champion the cause of adult consensual incest, Congressman Steve Cohen (pictured above left) from Tennessee.

Note in this comedic clip how Cohen steps into it, but then falters a bit…

Transcript:

If a person is pregnant – a woman is pregnant because of incest, under this law, if the lady is under 18 years of age, there’s one rule.

But if she’s 18 years of age or older, there’s another rule. And what it says is if you’re 18 or over and you’re pregnant as a result of incest, then you cannot get an abortion. You cannot! But if you’re under 18, you can if you report it to the law enforcement authorities.

In a discussion last night at Rules Committee, the Vice Chair of the Rules Committee errantly compared rape and incest.

Incest does not necessarily involve rape. It involves intercourse between parties that are not legally supposed to have intercourse, and issues which could result in problems for the child. Incest should always be an exception….

So here we had Cohen advocating for special abortion rights for adults he admitted were involved in consensual but illegal incest.

And “problems for the child“? Major terminology gaffe.

And placing this adult consensual sex on the same plane as rape?

Is this really the next sexual taboo Democrats want to champion?

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

• Wesley J. Smith responds to an article in The Atlantic, which blames one million missing Black voters on a higher mortality rate among the Black population. Smith reminds them of another reason:
  

  But if you really want to find the source of missing African-American voters, it is estimated that more than 10 million African-American babies weren’t born because of abortion. If you really want to find missing black voters, that’s where I think the finger should be pointed. Because of Roe v. Wade, and what some believe to be the targeting of African-Americans by the abortion industry, there are millions of black voters who never had a chance to cast a ballot.

• New Feminism encourages pro-lifers to join the Stop Surrogacy Now movement, which launched this week and is meant to “bring[] together a worldwide, ethnically, religiously, and culturally diverse group opposed to the exploitation of women and the human trafficking of children through surrogacy.”

• At Pro-Life Action League, John Jansen writes about the longtime woes of Albany Medical Surgical Center in Chicago, which was recently fined $50,000 for safety violations and had their license revoked. 41 years ago, the facility had similar trouble and was closed by the state. The difference, however, is that the state took quick action the first time these violations occurred. Today, the wheels of justice turn much more slowly for abortion businesses like Albany:
  

  There are two important takeaways from this story. The first is that there is nothing new about abortion clinics showing utter contempt for the law. It happened then, and it’s been happening ever since.

  But take note also of how swiftly authorities took action at that time once they learned that the Albany facility was operating outside the law. No second chances, no protracted appeals process. Just two options: close, or go to jail.

• At ProWomanProLife, Faye Sonier writes an open letter to the pro-choice protester who decided to go topless at Canada’s March for Life in support of abortion. Sonia wonders what she thought she was accomplishing:
  

  Toplessness isn’t shocking anymore, and for a few reasons. First, probably more than half of the March participants are women. They have their own breasts. They aren’t surprised by another pair. Your bare breasts do nothing to persuade them to adopt a pro-choice position.

• The Survivors discuss three popular reasons used to justify abortion, addressing the misperception that abortion is medical treatment.
• At Secular Pro-Life, Kasey Jackson discusses the need for pro-life artists in our culture whose work will advance the pro-life movement similar to how Harriet Beecher Stowe’s book sparked the war to end slavery. She writes:
  

  … [O]ne day, there will be an Uncle Tom’s Cabin for this movement. It’s just too important of a cause for there to NOT be a piece of artwork that eventually inspires a huge paradigm shift….

  But don’t ever stop using your artistic gifts to inspire the change that you want to see in the world – even if the majority of those that agree with you pick apart your work and seem that they couldn’t care less about being inspired.

  For every revolution, there are artists that sparked flames in the hearts of the revolutionaries. And who’s to say that yours can’t be the voice to strike the match?

• Reflections of a Paralytic features an interview between The Center for Bioethics and Culture president Jennifer Lahl, and Jessica Kern, born via surrogacy. Voices like Jessica’s need to be heard and are too often ignored over the wishes of the parents, with no consideration for how the child may feel in the future about his or her beginnings:

[vimeo]https://vimeo.com/125756487[/vimeo]

[Image via Pro-Life Action League]

by Kelli

Rep. Sean Duffy of Wisconsin made impassioned remarks on the floor of the U.S. House Wednesday in support of the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (which passed):

[youtube]https://youtu.be/kgwEGQXB6GA[/youtube]

Email dailyvid@jillstanek.com with your video suggestions.

by Carder

That reads like a goof on male panic over parental responsibility, as if the guy, in his haste to get her to a clinic, couldn’t spare an extra three seconds to type out a full sentence about taking her to Carafem. In fact, he’s not even offering to take her; all he’s really saying is, “Go. Now. I’LL CALL YOU A CAB.”

~ Allahpundit, criticizing the juvenile Washington, D.C., subway ad (pictured) by the Carafem abortion clinic, Hot Air, May 14

Yesterday, the U.S. House passed the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act by a vote of 242-184-1.

In the gallery for the debates and vote, I was as horrified by pro-abortion opposition as I was elated by pro-life support.

Most egregious was Democrat Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, who evoked faith, God, and even the song “Glory” from the movie Selma to defend the right to dismember 5-mo-old children (beginning at 33:32).

Both Hillary Clinton and Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards hid behind tweets to express support for stabbing and decapitating little babies. Richards went too far, however, even for her…

Put simply: a 20-week abortion ban lacks compassion & it lacks respect. #StopTheBans #HR36

— Cecile Richards (@CecileRichards) May 13, 2015

I can’t even begin to fathom such an openly depraved mind as that.

Now the bill moves to the Senate, where the lift will be heavier than it was (but should not have been) in the House. Required will be 60 votes to surmount a Democrat filibuster.

Then, of course, there is our pro-abortion/pro-infanticide president to contend with.

But do not forget how the arduous progression of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban only served to heighten awareness of both the savagery of abortion and the humanity of the preborn child and with it heighten support for the sanctity of life.

Good riddance to late-term abortions

The other day I directed you to new verbiage in the Pain-Capable Act, but I want to explain how the added language will virtually end late-term abortions in the U.S, exceptions notwithstanding.

Those exceptions are: 1) rape/incest, 2) life of the mother.

Backing up, the Pain-Capable Act protects children from the “post-fertilization age [of] 20 weeks.”

But, as Wikipedia explains, “In human obstetrics, gestational age refers to the embryonic or fetal age plus two weeks. This is approximately the duration since the woman’s last menstrual period began.”

So, the New York Times article two weeks ago, entitled, “Premature Babies May Survive at 22 Weeks if Treated, Study Finds,” was speaking of gestational age, which is the same as 20 weeks post-fertilization.

In other words, the Pain Capable Ban protects potentially viable babies.

The added bill language specifies that pregnancy terminations must be committed in a way that “provides the best opportunity” for the preborn baby to survive.

This means the abortionist cannot kill the baby ahead of time by injecting him or her with a medication to stop the heart.

It also requires that a second physician trained in neonatal resuscitation be present to care for the baby, and that babies born alive be transported to a hospital.

Additionally, there is the “call the cops or wear the cuffs” provision, making it a federal offense if employees/doctors witnessing an abortionist’s failure to provide medical care do not report this to police.

There is also a required informed consent form that includes the age of the child, a description of the law an explanation that if the baby is born alive, s/he will be given medical assistance and transported to a hospital, and information about the woman’s right to sue if these protections are not followed.

Finally, the aborting mother is empowered with the right to sue her abortionist if s/he fails to comply with the law. Parents of minors may also sue.

Given these confines, I cannot imagine any abortionist daring to commit late-term abortions. And what second physician would agree to help?

If a mother’s life is truly endangered, and her obviously wanted baby (otherwise she would have aborted much earlier) is potentially viable, it would be abnormal to say the least for her to want her baby killed rather than saved.

The end result, if and when this bill is enacted into law, will be an end to abortions past 20 weeks in the U.S.

by Hans Johnson

Like a tree falling in a far-off forest, President Barack Obama committed another little-noticed and hypocritical political gaffe on the Life issue on National Equal Pay Day (ironic on its own given the White House’s record).

The same man who once referred to them as a punishment also apparently:

…must have forgotten that he does not believe that the children he’s repeatedly justified leaving to die if born alive in botched abortions, in reality, are actual babies.

In a speech highlighting the plight of working families, Obama admitted what everyone knows, but some refuse to confess: in-utero babies are very much alive and have “feet that kick” to prove it.

[youtube]https://youtu.be/RYWj336LjHE[/youtube]

Just who is doing all that kicking, Mr. President?

Email dailyvid@jillstanek.com with your video suggestions.