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

  • Wesley J. Smith examines a New York Times article which celebrates “a woman who waxes ecstatically about choosing the characteristics of her baby – apparently including his sex – as if she were buying a camp shirt at Tommy Bahama.” Smith mourns the fact that our society has become so self-centered and consumer-focused “that we presume the right to both have a baby and the baby we want.”
  • Survivors lists four things we can learn from civil rights hero Rosa Parks, applying this knowledge to combatting the horror of abortion.


  • Right to Life of Michigan says The Women’s Pavilion, an abortion clinic in South Bend, Indiana, will soon have its license revoked due to failure to correct multiple health violations:

    The clinic’s abortionist, Ulrich Klopfer [pictured left], has had a variety of run-ins with the law including his failure to report statutory rape after performing abortions on 13-year-old girls.

    Just another reason why clinic inspections are important.

  • Secular Pro-Life has a new series of blog posts which “deconstruct bizarre, disingenuous, and otherwise noteworthy statements on abortion center websites.” After reviewing the website for Reproductive Health Services of Montgomery, they had this interesting observation:

    There is also a page entitled “Patient Comments,” but upon a close reading, the comments appear to come from political supporters rather than patients. None say anything specific about having had an abortion at RHS (e.g. “The staff treated me well”). One talks about having an abortion in 1973 (before RHS existed); another identifies herself as the mother of a newborn; another talks about wanting abortion to be legal when her four-year-old daughter grows up; and another refers to women she knows who have had abortions, rather than referring to herself.

    The comment that really gave me chills, though, was the last one:

    “I have cared for 53 foster teenagers, most of them born unwanted. I couldn’t appreciate what you are doing more!”

    Dude. If you truly believe that the children in your care would have been better off dead, you have no business whatsoever being a foster parent. I hope those 53 teenagers got out of this person’s home with some measure of their self-esteem intact.


  • ProWomanProLife has an astute comment on the article regarding a Canadian OB-GYN who was recently removed from his job because he put women at risk:

    Dr. Michel Ronald Prevost [pictured right], an Almonte, Ont., gynecologist, admitted he gave abortion patients incorrect doses of medication that resulted in fetal abnormalities in two pregnancies that went to term.

    That the doctor in question was trying as a matter of routine to kill babies bothers no one. That he wasn’t very good at it, however, now THAT’S a problem.

  • John Smeaton discloses the funding of an educational program for teachers which is intended to help them identify safe and unsafe sexual behaviors among children:

    The UK law is clear that sexual activity under the age of 16 is unlawful. Nevertheless, the Department for Education has funded and recommended as a useful resource a Brook “traffic light” system that condones underage sex. The system has been adopted by at least one County Council. (Brook Advisory Service is one of Britain’s leading abortion referral organisations, specialising in advising young people – including those under 16 – about abortion, sex, STIs etc).

    The traffic light system is not distributed to young people but is intended to “inform” teachers and other professionals working with children and young people.

    The tool identifies green, amber and red behaviours. Green behaviours – according to Brook – “reflect safe and healthy sexual development”, and “provide opportunities to give positive feedback”. Those behaviours include “consenting oral and/or penetrative sex with others of the same or opposite gender who are of similar age and developmental ability” – even where those engaged in the activities are in the 13-15 age group.

    Activities classified as amber rather than red include “following others into toilets or changing rooms to look at them or touch them” and “pulling other children’s pants down/skirts up/trousers down against their will”. These behaviours, according to Brook, merely “have the potential” to be unsafe and unhealthy behaviour.

[Photos via and]

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...