Tag Archives: Clinton

Pro-life blog buzz 6-9-15

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

  • Americans United for Life applauds Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin, who “signed into a law a groundbreaking, pro-life measure that passed with tremendous bi-partisan support and will expand the enforcement options for any violation of state abortion laws as well as provide greater protections for young girls who become victims of sexual abuse.”

    As seen in Live Action’s undercover videos, Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry train their staff to turn a blind eye to sexual abuse and statutory rape. (“I didn’t hear the age. I don’t want to know the age.”) AUL’s Dr. Charmaine Yoest adds, “Too often, sex offenders fake a parent’s signature to use abortion as a cover up for abuse, and for too long, the abortion industry has turned a blind eye to crimes committed by evil men, as they profit from the cover up.”

Continue reading

Deceptive Obamacare architect also behind “Freakonomics” abortion stats

Jon-GruberGruber published a paper during the Clinton administration observing that legalizing abortion saved the government $14 billion in assistance to economically disadvantaged mothers, including African-Americans, and lowered crime.

Gruber argued in his paper that without the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, “marginal children” would have been born to many poor mothers. He said statistics show these children would have been 70% more likely to live in a single-parent family, 40% more likely to live in poverty, 50% more likely to receive welfare and 35% more likely to die as an infant.

Economist Steven Levitt and journalist Stephen Dubner in their bestselling 2005 book Freakonomics, relied on Gruber’s work to argue that legalizing abortion was responsible for an approximately 50% reduction of crime in major urban centers in the early 1990s.

~ Commentator Chelsea Schilling at wnd.com, writing about Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber (pictured), who was revealed this week to have called Americans “stupid” for believing the Obama administration and Democrats’ admitted “lack of transparency” when pushing their massive healthcare plan

[HT: Karen]

Pro-life blog buzz 10-7-14

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

  • Culture Campaign reports that Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring has ruled that Planned Parenthood and other health professionals will no longer be obligated to report statutory rape except when the perpetrator is believed to be the girl’s parent or legal guardian. For those who thought that electing this man along with Clinton crony Terry McAuliffe as VA’s governor was a “pro-woman” idea, you are seeing the fruits of your labor: no one will be expected to help these children. CC quotes the Washington Free Beacon:

    “It is my opinion that a Virginia Department of Health (VDH) licensing inspector who is a nurse and who, during the course of a hospital inspection, learns from the review of a medical record that a 14-year-old girl received services related to her pregnancy is not required to make a report of child abuse and neglect pursuant to Virginia Code § 63.2-1509 unless there is reason to suspect that a parent or other person responsible for the child’s care committed, or allowed to be committed, the unlawful sexual act upon the child,” Democrat Mark Herring’s September 12 opinion said.

    “It is also my opinion that the VDH licensing inspector is not required to make a report to law enforcement of the crime of carnal knowledge of a child between the ages of 13 and 15.”

    Herring includes “prenatal or abortion services” among the signs of potential rape that he said do not have to be reported to law enforcement.

    This is really unprecedented and disturbing.

spermbank

  • At Coming Home, Dr. Gerard Nadal gives his take on the white lesbian couple who is suing for the wrongful birth of their mixed-race daughter, who was born as the result of a mix-up at a sperm bank:

    For a mother so ostensibly concerned with her daughter being picked on by racist family, tortured by racist classmates and neighbors, failed culturally by her mother, she has chosen to label the little girl a mistake, a wrongful birth, a human who never should have been. All because of a little extra melanin and some different hair.

    For all their talk of tolerance, and openness, and inclusivity, and compassion, it isn’t unreasonable to expect gays and lesbians to put their money where their collective mouth is. One would expect a lesbian couple, of all people, to abhor the notion of “wrongful birth,” claiming a genetic etiology for their own orientation as they do.

    Pity the child born to such poverty and bigotry.

  • Two weeks into the 40 Days for Life campaign, and already babies (and parents) are being spared from abortion. In Tennessee, which currently does not have an informed consent law, a couple walked out of the Memphis Planned Parenthood and took advantage of a mobile ultrasound unit to view their preborn baby. They chose not to abort. Don’t women deserve all the information before making the decision to abort? Currently Planned Parenthood is fighting hard against an amendment that would overturn the state Supreme Court’s 2000 decision and allow women the opportunity to be fully informed once again.
  • At Bound4Life, Ellie Saul says she discovered a supposedly “pro-girl” campaign fundraiser for Girls Inc., launched by Jane.com, a shopping website. Girls Inc. is reported to be a supporter of abortion, and according to their web page, those Teavana Oprah Chai drinks from Starbucks are also providing funding for this organization.

iud

  • American Life League’s Judie Brown expresses disappointment with the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) for recommending long-term IUDs for teens:

    … [W]hy is the AAP suddenly suggesting that the birth control pill can be bad for adolescents but an implant or an IUD can be better? The answer provided by the lead author of the policy statement is this:

    IUDs and hormonal implants cost more, usually hundreds of dollars, because inserting them involves a medical procedure typically done in doctors’ offices. But they’re less expensive in the long run than over-the-counter condoms or prescription birth control pills, said Dr. Mary Ott, an adolescent medicine specialist and associate pediatrics professor at Indiana University….

    Teens have to remember to use pills and condoms consistently. By contrast, IUDs typically work for three to 10 years after insertion, while implants typically last three years.

    This arrogant cynicism about young people raises that old argument about kids to a new level. You know the one: How can we trust a kid to take the pill regularly when she cannot even clean her room?…

    Sadly the most serious problem with this latest policy statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics is that it implies that young people cannot learn self-control and therefore should be treated like the family dog.

[Photos via mommynoire.com, all.org]

The abortion industry’s looming RU-486 legal crisis

RU-486 mifepristone abortion pillA Politico article today about new abortion cases that could reach the Supreme Court gave bare mention of its potential review of RU-486 regulation.

But due a circuit court split on laws regulating the administration of RU-486, such a review looks likely – and promising for the pro-life side.

Quick history of RU-486

In an unprecedented move the FDA approved the abortion pill RU-486 (now known as mifepristone/mifeprex) in 2000 to sell in the U.S. using a fast-track process reserved only for drugs to combat life-threatening diseases, like AIDS.

RU-486 abortion pill NOW mifepristoneIt seemed obvious at the time, and was later confirmed, that “the Clinton administration pushed the abortion pill through the approval process to appease the abortion lobby,” reported Judicial Watch in 2006 after reviewing newly released documents that showed “the RU-486 approval process was infected by raw politics.”

But pro-lifers have recently begun turning the abortion industry’s political ploy on itself.

Importantly, with the FDA’s fast-track approval came “restricted use,” meaning the agency discourages “off-label” administration of RU-486.

In 14 years the FDA has never deviated from its recommended protocol for RU-486, which requires three doctor visits and specific dosages and routes of administration, all within 49 days from the beginning of a pregnant mother’s last period:

  • Day 1: administer three 200 mg tablets (600 mg total) of RU-486 orally to kill the baby
  • Day 3: administer two 200 mcg tablets (400 mcg total) of Cytotec (misoprostol) orally to expel the baby
  • Day 14: check-up to ensure the abortion was completed

Violating FDA protocol at every step

But abortion clinics violate FDA protocol in every possible way. A survey of National Abortion Federation members showed only 4% follow FDA guidelines, and Planned Parenthood is the biggest culprit. It owns 158 of 175, or 90%, of all known chemical abortion facilities in the U.S.

Telemed abortion of RU-486 mifepristoneAccording to court documents, Planned Parenthood commits RU-486 abortions up to 63 days from the first day of a pregnant mother’s last period.

It gives only one 200 mg tablet orally at the abortion clinic, then instructs the woman to take one 200 mcg Cytotec at home by letting it dissolve under her tongue (getting into the system faster than if swallowed).

Worse, Planned Parenthood has lately been trying to do all this via telemed – dispensing chemical abortion drugs via remote computer, so the abortionist never comes in contact with the patient.

The pro-abortion claim that “off-label” use of drugs is commonplace is disingenuous, because the pathway by which RU-486 was approved placed it in a restricted category.

Abortion industry’s cash cow

RU-486 is the abortion industry’s new cash cow business model, as verified by the surge of Planned Parenthood’s chemical abortion business. A 2014 Guttmacher report indicated that while abortion dropped 13% in 2011, the percentage of chemical abortions increased by 20% from three years earlier, to account for 22.6% of all abortions.

Abortion clinics are obviously trying to cut corners. And safety be damned because, as Americans United for Life attorney Mailee Smith noted:

Eight. That’s the number of women who have died from a severe bacterial infection following use of RU-486. In all eight cases, the women were instructed to use the abortion drugs in a way that has not been approved by the FDA.

Zero. That’s the number of women who have died from a severe bacterial infection after using RU-486 in the way approved by the FDA.

AUL has written model legislation that forces abortion clinics to comply with FDA protocol on RU-486 drug administration.

Four states have thus far passed legislation based on AUL’s language: Arizona, North Dakota, Ohio, and Oklahoma.

The abortion industry has sued to block all four laws. To date the federal 5th and 6th Circuit Court of Appeals have both ruled in our favor, and the 9th Circuit has ruled in the other side’s favor.

This gives us a “circuit split,” making it more likely the Supreme Court will weigh in.

Supreme Court precedent satisfied

Smith cited three reasons AUL is “confident” the language AUL has encouraged states to adopt falls well within Supreme Court precedent for both the Casey and Gonzales decisions:

  1. The first so-called right at issue is the right of a woman to make the ultimate decision to have an abortion, and the regulation of chemical abortion does not interfere with that.
     

  2. The court has said state legislatures are given wide discretion to legislate when there is medical uncertainty over a procedure or regulation. Here we know the unapproved use of RU-486 regimen has been tied to eight deaths. The other side argues that the off-label use did not cause those deaths. What’s important here is the cause is unknown. That is what creates the medical uncertainty.
     

  3. In Gonzales the court upheld the federal Partial Birth Abortion Ban in part because there were other commonly used methods still available. If the regulation of chemical abortion means a woman cannot have one because she’s past gestational dates, she still has the option of surgical abortion. Surgical abortion is the most common method, and there is peer-reviewed evidence it’s safer than chemical abortion.

Were SCOTUS to uphold chemical abortion regulations, more state legislatures would be encouraged to regulate them, making abortions harder for the industry to commit.

[Screenshot of telemed abortion in Iowa via LifeSiteNews.com]

Ponnuru: HHS Mandate contradicts Religious Freedom Restoration Act

by Kelli

ponnuruFrom reading the New York Times, you might think that religious conservatives had started a culture war over whether company health-insurance plans should cover contraception. What’s at issue in two cases the Supreme Court has just agreed to hear, the Times editorializes, is “the assertion by private businesses and their owners of an unprecedented right to impose the owners’ religious views on workers who do not share them.”

That way of looking at the issue will be persuasive if your memory does not extend back two years. Up until 2012, no federal law or regulation required employers to cover contraception (or drugs that may cause abortion, which one of the cases involves)….

What’s actually new here is the Obama administration’s 2012 regulation requiring almost all employers to cover contraception, sterilization and drugs that may cause abortion….

The regulation runs afoul of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a Clinton-era law. That act says that the government may impose a substantial burden on the exercise of religious belief only if it’s the least restrictive way to advance a compelling governmental interest. The act further says that no later law should be read to trump this protection unless it explicitly says it’s doing that. The Affordable Care Act has no such language.

Is a marginal increase in access to contraception a compelling interest, and is levying steep fines on employers who refuse to provide it for religious reasons the least burdensome way to further it? It seems doubtful.

~ Ramesh Ponnuru, Bloomberg, December 1

Paul Ryan: Obama has “never once lifted a finger” to protect preborn

“We’re all in this together” – it has a nice ring. For everyone who loves this country, it is not only true but obvious. Yet how hollow it sounds coming from a politician who has never once lifted a hand to defend the most helpless and innocent of all human beings, the child waiting to be born.

Giving up any further pretense of moderation on this issue, and in complete disregard of millions of pro-life Democrats, President Obama has chosen to pander to the most extreme elements of his party.

In the Clinton years, the stated goal was to make abortion “safe, legal and rare.” But that was a different time, and a different president. Now, apparently, the Obama-Biden ticket stands for an absolute, unqualified right to abortion – at any time, under any circumstances, and even at taxpayer expense.

~ Republican pro-life Congressman and Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan, speaking at Family Research Council’s Values Voter Summit, September 14. See video and read full transcript here.

Politico: Democrats forced to switch strategies because abortion now a losing issue

If Democrats and liberal feminists lose the presidential election this fall despite their “war on women” pro-abortion strategy, they will have depleted their arsenal.

In their most candid interviews to date, various Democrats and abortion industry players freely admitted in a Politico article today what they have only heretofore hinted at (such as here and here): They know abortion has become a losing issue for them.

In order to get women to unwittingly support abortion, they are pulling out all stops, accusing Republicans of wanting to ban contraception,  encourage domestic violence, and deny women breast exams, maternity care, equal pay, and education access.  It’s all in a quite revealing article…

Democrats think they’ve figured out how to win the abortion debate: Don’t make it about abortion.

Starting Tuesday, the Democratic convention here will feature speeches from Planned Parenthood Action Fund President Cecile Richards, NARAL President Nancy Keenan and Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke, who became a flashpoint in the debate over requiring Catholic institutions to pay for birth control.

But don’t expect them to focus on abortion – or even necessarily use the word. Instead, they’ll defend President Barack Obama’s record on reproductive health and reproductive rights. And, as they have before, they’ll accuse GOP nominee Mitt Romney and his party of waging a “war on women.”…

To keep and strengthen its standing, the party has recast its rhetoric on abortion rights. Polls consistently show that a majority of Americans favor at least some abortion restrictions. So Democrats have made the contentious issue part of a larger conversation about women’s health – and that, in turn, is part of a larger conversation that depicts Republicans as opposed to equal pay and access to education for women….

Democrats haven’t always been this cohesive on the abortion debate. In 1992, then-Pennsylvania Gov. Bob Casey was blocked from speaking to the Democratic convention as part of a fight over his anti-abortion views. For the next decade, Democrats lost House and Senate races in which abortion and measures to limit abortion became central, including fetal-pain legislation and late-term abortion bans.

In the years since, the number of anti-abortion Democrats in Washington has dwindled, and the party has coalesced in favor of abortion rights. Not until the past few months, though, did Democrats begin to put so much attention on issues related to contraception, women’s health care and abortion.

“I’ve never actually seen an election  and I’ve been through a few  where women’s basic access to health care has been so early and so often a topic of conversation,” Richards said.

(This is only because Richards and her tribe have made it so… because they can no longer scaremonger on “choice”… and also because they are greedy desperate for the windfall profits they would get from taxpayer funded contraception via Obamacare.)

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) described the issue in broad terms. “This is not just about the right to determine when or whether to have a family. It is about the ability to receive regular cancer screenings, maternity care and access to domestic violence counseling,” she said in a statement….

The shift in language helps her party: Asking people to support abortion is a lot harder than criticizing those who are against “rights” and “health.”

In the age of the ultrasound, the framing of ‘choice’ does continue to resonate with a segment of voters, but not everyone. There’s a lot of women for whom abortion is not a black-and-white issue, but quite gray,” said Matt Bennett, co-founder of Third Way, the moderate Democratic think tank. “Reproductive health is pretty straightforward.”…

Former Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak’s amendment to restrict funding for abortion in Obama’s health care bill nearly tore the party apart and scuttled the law. In the 2010 midterms, the anti-abortion movement almost exclusively backed Republicans, further thinning anti-abortion rights Democrats in Congress. Staunch anti-abortion rights Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (D-PA), for example, was among lawmakers targeted in a multimillion dollar 2010 midterm ad campaign from the Susan B. Anthony List that charged she’d “betrayed” her district and “voted for the biggest expansion of abortion in decades.” She lost….

To boil down the pro-abortion dynamics: At some point the Democrat Party started losing politically due to the abortion issue. Rahm Emmanuel recognized this and won Dems back the House majority in 2006 by recruiting pro-lifers. Obama and Nancy Pelosi went on to sacrifice those pro-lifers to pass Obamacare, which has left the Party with no pro-life voice once again. In addition, the Democrat Party has become so liberal in so many other synergistic areas it is barely recognizable from the Party of even 20 years ago.

While the feminist, pro-abortion wing of the Democrat Party is exhibiting great muscle at present, a lot is on the line for them. They may not look desperate, but they really must be.

[Photos via Politico]

Photos of forcibly aborted late-term baby in China spark worldwide outrage

On May 30, 20 local Chinese officials dragged 23-yr-old pregnant mother Feng Jianmei from her home and held her three days for a 40,000 yuan ($6250) ransom before killing her seven-month-old baby en utero by lethal injection and delivering her tiny corpse after family failed to come up with the cash.

Feng and her husband Deng Jiayuan had failed to complete the proper paperwork required for rural families to have a second child. They already had a six-yr-old daughter.

On June 11 photographs taken by Feng’s cousin of Feng next to her murdered baby appeared on the Internet, with International outrage ensuing. This video news report alleges the photo itself was posted by Family Planning Officials, perhaps as a “warning” to other families of what happens when families do not comply with the law. According to USA Today:

In years past, Feng’s forced abortion would have happened with little public reaction, but Internet-based social media tools allow individual Chinese to take their stories directly to the people and are forcing the government to address complaints.

As of Thursday, comments on Feng’s abortion neared 1 million on the Twitter-like microblog site Sina Weibo.

According to ABC, all stories mentioning Feng have now been scrubbed in China.

Meanwhile, government authorities, who at first denied any wrong-doing, finally admitted “the abortion was illegal,” according to The Daily Telegraph, which also reported:

“At the hospital they held her down,” said Mr Deng to All Girls Allowed, a Christian organisation in the United States that campaigns against the One Child policy. “They covered her head with a pillowcase. She could not do anything because they were restraining her,” he added. He said his wife had tried to kill herself after the abortion.

Mrs Feng told All Girls Allowed that she could “feel the baby jumping around inside me all the time, but then she went still”….

Chai Ling, of All Girls Allowed, said officials had “launched a campaign of forced abortions”. Li Yuongjiou, of Ankang’s family planning department, told Caixin, a magazine, that the town had missed its targets under the One Child policy for two years, and this year there was an emphasis on stricter enforcement.

According to ABC News, the distraught Feng slit her wrists. MSNBC reported last night that “three officials would be relieved of their duties” in the wake of the murder and that a deputy mayor had apologized to the couple. A lot of good that will do.

The Susan B. Anthony List is calling on President Obama to condemn China’s One-Child forced abortion/sterilization policy and to immediately cut off funding to the United Nations Population Fund, which helps facilitate China’s horrific family planning program. Both Presidents Obama and Clinton reinstated funding to UNFPA after Presidents G.W. Bush and Reagan cut it off. Under Obama’s watch the U.S. has given $145 million to UNFPA, and he has requested another $47 million in his 2012 budget.

But vocal opposition from Obama may be slow to come, since China holds the largest share, 26%, of the United States’ $15.77 trillion debt.

Meanwhile, if any U.S. feminist or abortion groups are outraged by the forced denial of Feng’s “choice,” I can’t find evidence.

[Video HT: LauraLoo]