Tag Archives: Senate

New language in 20-week abortion ban virtually ensures an end to late-term abortions

admin-ajaxYesterday, 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…

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.

hqdefaultIn 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.


Anti-abortion opponents to new fetal anesthesia legislation engage in dishonest debate

partial_birth_diagramMontana may become the first state to force abortionists to provide anesthesia to preborn babies aged 20 weeks and older who they are about to dismember.

A Republican-dominated House and Senate just sent HB 479 to the desk of Democrat pro-abortion Gov. Steve Bullock.

HB 479 is a spin on an outright 20-week abortion ban, which Montana pro-life advocates decided against, believing the governor would veto it.

The thinking, obviously, is this bill will be harder for Bullock to oppose.

A law such as this serves three purposes:

1. Educates the public about the humanity of preborn babies, juxtaposed against the atrocity of abortion

2. Gives abortion-minded mothers one last chance to reconsider – a final big tug on their maternal heartstrings

3. Provides compassionate, humanitarian pain relief if the mother nonetheless proceeds with the abortion, to a baby no one in Montana can as yet legally stop from being brutally torn limb from limb

Of course, the abortion industry opposes this bill – for all the aforementioned reasons. They lose tactical ground every time the focus is placed back on the baby, they lose money when abortion-minded mothers change their minds, and they could care less whether babies suffer while being aborted. (Who knows, they may relish the thought, sadists that they are.)

So they lie, ludicrously claiming babies don’t feel pain at 20 weeks, despite the fact babies 18-wks-old and up routinely receive anesthesia when undergoing prenatal surgery.

And by now it should come as no surprise that pro-life purists, or “immediatists” as they like to be called, oppose this bill as well.

There’s something wrong with a picture that has pro- and anti-abortion advocates working to block the same pro-life legislation.

Nevertheless, if there is a debate between pro-lifers to have on this bill, it should be an honest one, which it is currently not.

An honest debate would be on whether support of abortion restrictions or regulations is to actually sustain abortion, which is what immediatists claim.

They say that were all pro-lifers to focus single-mindedly on stopping all abortions, rather than saving babies around the edges, we would stop abortion faster, and without “compromising.”

This claim is unproven and, in fact, could be considered disproven if the failure of all statewide personhood initiatives to date is taken into consideration. (Although I want to make clear I support personhood initiatives. I basically support any and every pro-life initiative.)

Nor are they undertaking any massive effort to make abortions illegal in the U.S. Immediatist group American Right to Life gave its board 10 years to “end abortion in America” – or resign. That was in 2007. They have two years.

In fact, the only massive effort underway by immediatists is to attack incrementalist efforts and supporters.

At any rate, there is no effort without “compromise” short of enacting a worldwide ban against all abortions. This may be true, immediatists say, but then there is such a thing as “principled” compromise, vs “unprincipled” compromise – which they decide.

In other words, they decide which babies are morally acceptable to leave behind until such future unknown year when all can be saved.  And basically they have determined geographical incrementalism is principled, and all other incrementalism is unprincipled.

So, banning all abortions in Mississippi would be principled, even though this is the same as saying “and then you can kill the baby” in all 49 other states and the rest of the world, but a federal ban against abortions past the gestational age of 20 weeks would be unprincipled.

At any rate, this debate has been raging for decades.

But what is not acceptable is to misconstrue this debate, for instance as Abolish Human Abortion did yesterday, misrepresenting Father Frank Pavone’s statement supporting Montana’s bill


If I’m wrong then the only other conclusion to reach is leaders of AHA are incapable of critical thought as to the rationale for Montana’s fetal pain bill.

As pro-life advocate Tom Herring wrote in response:

AHA falsely portrays Pavone as someone who simply wants babies sedated before they are butchered. What AHA fails to see is that fighting over legislation to numb the baby’s pain makes headlines and causes clueless Americans to consider the fact that abortion is actually a form of human torture. This is common knowledge to AHA and to pro-lifers, but it is a shocking and horrifying revelation to many ignorant and otherwise disinterested voters.

This legislation is one more call, one more appeal to the conscience of a country that is marked largely by its indifference in the matter. The people are indifferent because, for one thing, nobody has told them about the excruciating pain which babies experience in abortion.

Fr. Pavone is trying to tell them about it. And you choose to mock and deride him for it. You’ve somehow managed to convince yourselves the world is upside down: Fr. Pavone and Priests for Life are the real enemy, joining pro-aborts to attack Pavone is the answer, and babies will be saved if we can make enough memes against pro-lifers.

Abby Johnson added to the obfuscation by half-quoting Fr. Pavone:


Pro-Life Action League’s Eric Scheidler generically noted:

Those who attack pro-lifers for “incrementalism” don’t seem to have looked up the word.

They pretend that, say, a law requiring fetuses to be anesthetized before being aborted is an end in itself, rather than an achievable *increment* on the way towards the ultimate goal of ending legal abortion.

Worse, they pretend that we’re somehow okay with babies being aborted, as long as they don’t feel pain (or they’re less than 20 weeks old, or their grandparents know about it, or an ultrasound is performed, etc.).

The reality is, we’re so determined to end legal abortion that we’re using *every* legal means available *right now* to save *every* unborn child we can.

12smallA final conclusion to draw is almost too horrifying to imagine.

That is that immediatists do not care that late-term babies headed for slaughter this very moment – whether or not they approve – are feeling the excruciating pain of their dismembered deaths.

They’re clearly willing to let these babies feel the torture of their murders while they wait for the day 5-10-20-50 years down the road when abortion is stopped.

Stanek Sunday funny extra: Heartbeat Bill a ticking time bomb?

Nate Beeler at Townhall.com has posted a cartoon opposing Ohio’s Heartbeat Bill, which would ban abortions after a baby’s heartbeat is detectable, as early as six weeks, and which passed the House last week.

The bill faces an uphill battle in the Senate, and pro-life Republican Governor John Kasich has expressed hesitation, citing Ohio Right to Life’s opposition based on its conjecture that the legislation “could backfire and result in a federal judge somewhere undoing restrictions on abortion enacted in recent years in Ohio and other states,” according to the Columbus Dispatch.

So what are your thoughts? Vote in the poll after the cartoon.



Pro-abortion “firewall” gone in the Senate?

NARAL has posted this interesting graphic:

NARAL is referring to the abortion lobby’s ability to block pro-life bills and amendments by Senate filibusters (i.e., by requiring pro-life proponents to muster 60 votes to “invoke cloture”).

Word to the wise: NARAL enjoys torturing numbers for its own devices.

When discussing public opinion, NARAL counts everybody as “pro-choice” except those who want abortion to be flat-out illegal, and thus NARAL claims to speak for 70% of the population.

Yet when NARAL is counting lawmakers for purposes of whipping up donations, it counts as “pro-choice” only those legislators who unblinkingly follow NARAL’s party line.

Also, NARAL’s dire predictions don’t mention their veto firewall – Barack Obama.

So, the premise on which NARAL claims it lacks a cloture “firewall” in the Senate is there are fewer than 41 “pro-choice” senators, a figure NARAL can only arrive at by adopting a very strict definition of “pro-choice” – those senators NARAL can bank on to vote how it tells them to vote 100% of the time.

If NARAL counted as “pro-choice” another group of senators who in the past have voted NARAL’s way on nearly every issue (the grey dots), then NARAL could no longer plausibly claim to be in jeopardy in the Senate, even setting aside the sure presidential veto.

For fundraising purposes (see chart above) NARAL skews the numbers in the Senate, painting the worst possible outlook for donors, hoping those donors forget that sustaining a veto requires only 1/3 plus 1 in one House.

All that being said, NARAL may indeed have need to worry about a few senators who reassess how far out on a limb they want to go in defense of the extreme pro-abortion agenda, given the recent election results and various polls, but we’ll see.

Those senators are also watching Mary Landrieu and know they could be next, bringing to mind a cartoon I didn’t have room for in the Sunday funnies…


There is also the possibility that deft maneuvering by the Republican majority will compel those grey-dot pro-abortion senators to drop resistance if pro-life bills are tacked on as amendments to other bills they feel they have to support.

So, while NARAL’s vanished firewall should be viewed with skepticism, pro-aborts do indeed have a potentially out-of-control fire on their hands.

[Thanks to Chicken Man for help with this post.]

Pro-life blog buzz 11-7-14

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

  • In an amazing “look what God can do” announcement, 40 Days for Life reveals that their new headquarters will be housed in the former Planned Parenthood in Bryan-College Station, Texas, where they started their prayer vigils ten years ago:

    “This news shows what God can accomplish when His people pray,” said Shawn Carney, campaign director…. “More than 6,400 children lost their lives in this building, but God is making ‘all things new.’ What was once a place of death and despair is now going to be a place of life and hope. We are excited to start using this location to aid the rapid worldwide growth of 40 Days for Life, and to help other cities become abortion-free.”


  • Pro-Life in TN recaps the David and Goliath pro-life victory achieved by the Yes on 1 movement in Tennessee, overcoming $4 million from the abortion industry, as well as major newspaper and celebrity endorsements. The secret weapon to passing Amendment 1? Grassroots activism and the power of the pulpit.
  • Bound4Life profiles nine pro-life candidates who won in the “red wave” election this week. Read their profiles and be encouraged.
  • Culture Campaign analyzes Wendy Davis’s substantial loss in the Texas gubernatorial race. “War on Women” proponents are stunned that the late-term abortion defender failed to bring out women voters.
  • Ethika Politika challenges the data used by Health & Human Services in deciding that all Obamacare policies must mandate free contraceptive coverage.
  • Josh Brahm announces a speaking engagement at the University of Portland on November 17, in which he and a pro-life convert will discuss relational apologetics: how a pro-life, Christian guy can be friends with a (formerly) pro-choice, lesbian atheist girl after having conversed online for almost two years.
  • Clinic Quotes quotes a pro-choice politician who says she is “heartsick” over attempts to make abortion clinics meet the same standards as other surgery centers.


  • Americans United for Life applauds the election of so many pro-life candidates and looks at key legislative issues passed by the House, which can hopefully now go to the Senate:

    Consider this list of key life-saving measures passed by the House and blocked by the Senate since pro-life Republicans took control of the House in 2011:

    • Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act prohibiting abortion after 5 months of pregnancy (i.e., 20 weeks gestation);
    • No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act applying the restrictions on abortion funding found in the Hyde Amendment to all federal funding streams and requiring that all plans offered through the ACA Exchanges disclose if abortion coverage is included;
    • Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act­ prohibiting sex-selective abortions;
    • Protect Life Act ensuring that no funds appropriated or authorized through the ACA can be used for abortion or insurance plans that provide abortion coverage;
    • The “Pence Amendment” (House. Amendment. 95), this measure would have prohibited the use of federal funds for Planned Parenthood;
    • The “Black-Roby Resolution to Defund Planned Parenthood” (House Continuing Resolution 36), this measure would have defunded Planned Parenthood in the Continuing Resolution;
    • The “Foxx Amendment” (House Amendment 298), prohibits federal funds from being used to train abortion providers.”

[Photos: pastorrobert-nikos.blogspot.com and National Right to Life via pinterest.com]

GOP-controlled Senate “trouble for reproductive rights”?

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell Attends Election Night Gatheringby Carder

A Republican-controlled Senate with McConnell as majority leader could spell serious trouble for reproductive rights.

McConnell has been vocal in his support for a national 20-week abortion ban, which he is likely to try to bring to the floor for a vote.

Democrats would probably filibuster such a bill, and President Obama would almost certainly veto it. But McConnell could bring it up multiple times to try to draw media attention and move the needle on public opinion, or he could even insert it into a must-pass, simple-majority budget bill.

~ Emily Crockett, describing a potentially pro-choice nightmare scenario now that the Republicans have control of the Senate with Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell most likely as Majority Leader, RH Reality Check, November 4

[Note: The hysterical panic is strong, as some feminists rush to stock up on birth control.]

If Planned Parenthood collapses, the abortion industry collapses, Part II

Defund Planned Parenthood abortion kingpin and its clinicsIs it really conceivable that Planned Parenthood could crash, bringing the entire abortion industry down with it? I answer that question today.

Backdrop: “If Planned Parenthood collapses, the abortion industry collapses, Part I.”

As powerful and wealthy as Planned Parenthood appears, its position is tenuous, upheld only by political friends and courts. In contraceptive terms, Planned Parenthood has no Plan B.

Planned Parenthood would hardly have noticed losing taxpayer funding 50 years ago, in 1964. This was when it reported its first government subsidy – chump change of $8,500. Planned Parenthood’s annual income at the time was $6.2 million, 70% of which came from donors, and 30% from clinics.

By 1970, Planned Parenthood’s annual income had jumped to $26.4 million, thanks in large part to taxpayers, who contributed 43% of the total. It was during this period that Planned Parenthood began multiplying clinics. According to Jim Sedlak of American Life League:

In 1962, the year before it received its first taxpayer funds, Planned Parenthood operated fewer than 200 clinics. By 1973, that number had exploded to 700. This, of course, meant that Planned Parenthood’s influence in our nation grew greatly because of government largesse.

In FY2013, 45% of Planned Parenthood’s whopping $1.21 billion income came from taxpayers, to the tune of $540.6 million. Today only 26% of Planned Parenthood’s annual revenue is derived from donations, and 25% from clinics.

Planned Parenthood abortion giant clinic in Fon du Lac closesHow dependent is Planned Parenthood’s nationwide chain on government funding? As Sedlak pointed out, Planned Parenthood was only able to build its conglomerate with taxpayer help.

And only last week Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin claimed it had to close its fifth clinic since 2013 all due to a mere $1 million loss in state funding. 

One should expect a certain amount of fudging on Planned Parenthood’s part; it has been known to conveniently blame clinic closures on government defunding when they were themselves to blame.

But it must also be true that Planned Parenthood is only able to sustain its massive infrastructure with government help. And that is where its potential downfall lies.

“I have always said that if all state and federal tax-funding were cut off from Planned Parenthood, their abortion empire would collapse like dominos,” wrote Operation Rescue’s Cheryl Sullenger via email. “I doubt if more than a handful of clinics of any affiliation could survive without an artificial influx of money from outside sources.”

Sedlak agreed: “Planned Parenthood is set up for destruction if Americans ever get the guts to elect politicians who care.”

Planned Parenthood made the decision long ago to tie its future to the whims of government. Its leaders apparently never considered the organization might some day become anathema, with a segment of the population and politicians calling for it to be defunded.

Planned Parenthood abortion clinic staffer makes graphic sexual suggestionsWhatever murmuring may have been heard before only became real noise beginning in 2007, when Live Action launched its investigations against Planned Parenthood, first revealing the organization would accept donations specifically to abort  black babies, then that it would cover up underage rape, then that it would aid and abet sex traffickers, then that it would commit sex-selective abortions, and most recently that it would encourage minors to engage in violent BDSM.

Add to that charges around the country of Medicaid fraud, failure to report child sexual abuse, substandard clinics, and perverted doctors, and you begin to see momentum that has blossomed into a bill to defund Planned Parenthood and a congressional investigation of the organization.

obama valentine2 If not for President Barack Obama, Planned Parenthood might already be going the way of Enron. It is only he who kept Planned Parenthood from being defunded on the federal level in 2011 and in several more states than it already has.

Planned Parenthood knows this. It knows it is only one presidential election away from seeing its political fortunes turn to dust.

Losing the Senate in 2014 would be an advance blow, hence Planned Parenthood’s plan to spend a whopping $18 million this election cycle, in large part attacking the “Extreme Six” Republican Senate candidates who could swing the majority, setting up for a Republican trifecta in 2016.

Planned Parenthood abortion clinic behemoth fighting Republican takeover of SenatePlanned Parenthood’s situation is all the more dire when considering it could lose its tax-exempt status if convicted of Medicaid fraud, cases of which are beginning to snowball; or lose the windfall profits it is anticipating if Obamacare is overturned or if the contraceptive mandate and abortion funding are repealed; or lose its lucrative contraceptive pill trade (for which it has been known to double- and triple-bill taxpayers) if it is made available over-the-counter.

Added to the recent slew of pro-life laws, the fragility of the abortion industry becomes clear when also considering its eggs are increasingly in one basket, and that basket is wearing thin. From the STOPP Report, September 24:

STOPP’s 2013 Survey of Planned Parenthood facilities shows the abortion giant suffered the eighth straight year of decline in both total facilities and affiliates. Planned Parenthood reported running a total of 695 clinic facilities as of December 30, 2013 – the lowest number reported since 1973.Planned Parenthood’s number of affiliates decreased from 74 in 2012 to 71 in 2013, continuing the trend of massive consolidation in management since the high point of 191 Planned Parenthood affiliates in 1978. 

We have continued to see a hefty stream of closures in 2014. Planned Parenthood most frequently cited pressure from legislation, be it defunding efforts or laws tightening clinic standards, as the main reason for facility closures during 2013. In states where legislative pressure was not felt, it most frequently reported facility closures due to a dwindling customer base and efforts to consolidate facilities nearer to its core demographic. In 2013, 79% of the facilities closed were contraceptive-only facilities.

It is clear that Planned Parenthood is preparing for even more facility closures as it implements its community organizer model and online birth control counseling. As it does so, it is focusing more and more on its lucrative abortion business.

Because it has to. Planned Parenthood is driven to take over the abortion industry by greed and survival, needing a financial stream aside from the government funding model it has grown dependent on, and also banking on government funding of abortion.

And the abortion lobby is helpless to stop what insiders surely must see as a coming train wreck.

Obama uses the “Chicago Way” to illegally force taxpayers to fund abortion

chicago wayFour of Illinois’ last seven governors ended up in prison for corruption convictions ranging from bribery to racketeering.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg in the state ironically known as the Land of Lincoln.

I doubt people truly grasped the meaning of the Chicago Way when they joked back in 2008 that Chicago politician Barack Obama took it with him to the White House.

But there are now plenty of examples of a lawless president who lets nothing stand between him and his agenda, which includes destroying political opponents and foes alike.

Along the way Obama has also betrayed plenty of friends – Democrats, unions, immigration advocates, and even his pastor, to name just some.

But there is one friend Obama has never, ever let down – abortion, and more specifically, America’s #1 abortion provider, Planned Parenthood.

Obama was willing to shut down the federal government for Planned Parenthood, and he has circumvented several state governments to keep Planned Parenthood’s funding stream undammed.

Obamacare was always anticipated to hand Planned Parenthood a flood of new money through government funded contraceptive sales and sexually or gynecologically related menial healthcare. Other perks have come by surprise, such as HHS bestowing Planned Parenthood a combined total of over $1 million in 2013 and 2014 to help citizens “navigate” Obamacare.

But Obama always denied Obamacare would fund abortion, even though everyone, including Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards and Obama’s former chief-of-staff Rahm Emanuel (now mayor of Chicago) saw through the ruse.

Now, the ruse is up, although what difference will it make? Obama will continue to flout the law to subsidize abortion with taxpayer dollars, which both pro-lifers and abortion supporters know was always the goal. The Washington Examiner explains:

Again and again, during the congressional debate, Obamacare defenders promised: Obamacare subsidies won’t subsidize abortion; customers will be able to choose insurance plans that don’t cover abortion; Obamacare subsidies, if they want to pay for abortion coverage, will be billed separately.

new GAO report shows that Obamacare is failing on these counts.

Warning of “bogus claims spread by those whose only agenda is to kill reform at any cost,” for instance, President Obama told Congress in 2009: “And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up – under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.”

Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson (now a healthcare lobbyist) became the 60th vote for Obamacare after supposedly winning a compromise from his party on abortion coverage. Nelson explained it this way:

If you are receiving Federal assistance to buy insurance, and if that plan has any abortion coverage, the insurance company must bill you separately, and you must pay separately from your own personal funds … for that abortion coverage.

The new GAO study shows that, instead, taxpayers are subsidizing abortions. Customers in five states have no abortion-free plans available to them, and in many states, customers can’t tell which plans cover abortion and which don’t.

What can be done?

Nothing without a Republican-controlled Senate. The House passed HR-7, which would eliminate abortion funding in Obamacare, but Democrat Senate President Harry Reid won’t take the bill up.

Congress could impeach Obama, but a Republican Senate is needed for that as well, and the GOP may be too chicken to bring Obama’s chickens home to roost.

Even then, would Obama sign such a bill? Based on his history of supporting abortion to the point of infanticide, I doubt it.

[“The Chicago Way” graphic via book cover by same name]