by 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.”

• Fletcher Armstrong shares a post from the National Abstinence Education Association which illustrates the educational establishment’s change from sex ed to sex advocacy. A teacher from a Minneapolis school took students as young as 11 years old on a field trip to an adult sex shop, taking the store’s description of a “progressive sex toy store for everyone” to a whole new low:
  

  While this story garnered national headlines, explicit sex-advocacy as part of sex education classes across the nation are not all that unique. This particular teacher remarked that in regard to sexual topics, “there is no right age for all kids.” So it comes as no surprise that the sex ed teacher would find it appropriate to introduce barely pubescent students to the products inside the walls of Smitten Kitten [pictured left].

• At Live Action News, Susan Michelle analyzes the reported decrease in abortions nationwide (that is, among the 45 states that actually report abortion statistics):
  

  The survey shows in states with significant pro-life legislation, such as Indiana, Missouri, Ohio and Oklahoma, the drop is closer to 15 percent; however, pro-life states were not alone. The report notes that “more liberal states such as New York, Washington and Oregon also had declines of that magnitude, even as they maintained unrestricted access to abortion.”…

  It’s easy to look at numbers and statistics, but beyond that are the babies who are actually alive today. That’s the most vital reality on the other side of the percent sign.

• At National Review, Dr. Michael J. New also analyzes the abortion decrease. While the pro-choice side is quick to credit contraceptive use for the decline, New says this is unlikely, due to the fact that the unintended pregnancy rate in the United States has remained stable:
  

  Sometimes reported decreases are caused by less rigorous reporting rather than actual declines in the incidence of abortion. Secondly, the AP piece’s analysis would have been better if it had focused on abortion rates rather than the overall number of abortions, since some of the fluctuations in abortion numbers might have been affected by changes in population or demographics….

  [I]ncreased contraceptive use is an unpersuasive argument for America’s long-term abortion decline — unintended pregnancy rates have remained relatively stable and by some measures have actually increased since the early 1990s. A better explanation is the fact that a considerably smaller percentage of women with unintended pregnancies are having abortions. According to data from the Guttmacher Institute, the percentage of unintended pregnancies ending in abortion fell from 54 percent in 1994 to 40 percent in 2008. The Associated Press article does not even consider this as a possibility.

• At Newsbusters, Dustin Siggins exposes a Washington Post “fact-checker” who actually omitted facts about studies on fetal pain in order to push a pro-abortion agenda. Writer Michelle Ye Hee Lee (pictured right) even cited studies that were later refuted in part by the participating researchers, fully aware that certain studies had been discredited by peer review:
  

  The American College of Gynecologists (ACOG) has consistently opposed pro-life bills and laws, yet its pro-abortion tendencies are rarely cited by mainstream news outlets. Lee cites ACOG several times in her piece, yet never acknowledges this bias. More importantly than their bias, however, ACOG was found to have let current U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan modify the results of one of their studies when Kagan was part of the Clinton administration in the 1990s.

  Naturally, none of this was revealed in Lee’s article.
  

  She uncritically cited a study with enormous flaws — flaws that she was fully aware of. By not citing the flaws, Lee violated the journalistic standards of her publication. Her later update treated falsehoods the same as truths, and furthermore did not inform her readers of this change. The only conclusion that one can reasonably come to is that The Fact Checker actively chose to ignore not only professional standards, but scientific realities readily available to the public — and which were provided, in detail, to Lee.

• At The Guiding Star Project, Amanda Wagner commends those who understand that being pro-life is more than stopping abortion – it is building a culture of welcoming support for life and family. Wagner describes ways that friends, neighbors, and family can lend a helping hand when a new baby comes home.

• The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition reports on a Terri Schiavo-esque case in France that should have everyone concerned:
  

  The European court of Human Rights ordered France to withdraw fluids from Vincent Lambert [pictured left], a 38 year-old man with cognitive disabilities.

  The case came about when Lambert’s wife wanted her husband to have his fluids withdrawn to cause his death while his parents wanted to continue caring for him.

  The Telegraph newspaper reported that Lambert’s wife stated after the Strasbourg court decision that withdrawing fluids will fulfill her husbands wishes while Lambert’s mother, Viviane stated: “It’s scandalous. They are condemning my son. We will remain by Vincent’s side and will continue to fight.”

  This decision should concern people who believe in the equality of every human being. Lambert was not dying, but has a cognitive disability. This decision means that people with cognitive disabilities, who are incapable of speaking for themselves, may be intentionally dehydrated to death.

[Photos via The Washington Post and BBC.com]