Ah, January in Washington D.C.

Bare trees, icy sidewalks, inauguration plans underway — and terrorists dressed up like sweet little grandmothers bussing to the nation’s capital, ready for their annual celebration of restricting women’s access to health care.

That’s right, it’s time for Fetuspalooza 2013!

Ever since the Supreme Court held in 1973 that yes, women have the right to decide whether and when they want to have children — a right that has been redefined, restricted and outright denied ever since — the fetus fetishists have gathered for the “March for Life” to either celebrate or mourn, depending on just how successful their war on women and doctors has been in the preceding year.

In 2012, 19 states passed 43 new laws restricting reproductive rights, so you figure there will be an awful lot of celebrating at this year’s march.

~ Kaili Joy Gray (pictured right), Daily Kos, January 14

[HT: Jill]

On January 16 Americans United for Life released its 8th annual list of state rankings…

AUL compiles its list according to “existing state laws on abortion, legal protection and recognition of the unborn, bioethics and biotechnologies, the end of life, and healthcare freedom of conscience,” according to its website.

For the third time in four years, Louisiana topped AUL’s list as the most protective state, followed by 2. Oklahoma; 3. Pennsylvania; 4. Arkansas; 5. Arizona; 6. Nebraska; 7. Indiana ; 8. Missouri; 9. Georgia; and 10. Virginia.

The least protective state on AUL’s list was Washington, followed by 2. California; 3. New York; 4. Vermont; 5. New Jersey; 6. Connecticut; 7. Oregon; 8. Maryland; 9. Hawaii; and 10. Montana.

This year AUL added a new feature, a list of All Stars, “five states that achieved significant pro-life success in 2012.” Those were 1. Arizona; 2. Georgia; 3. New Hampshire; 4. Virginia; and 5. South Carolina.

Meanwhile pro-abortion group NARAL has released its 2013 Report Card, giving the nation as a whole a “D.” Of course, pro-life over-achievers long for the day we get a big fat “F.”

NARAL grades a state for reasons opposite of AUL.

NARAL’s favorite states were: 1. California; 2. Washington; 3. Connecticut; 4. Hawaii; 5. Maryland; 6. Oregon; 7. Maine; 8. Vermont; 9. New Jersey; and 10. New York.

NARAL’s least favorite states were: 50. Louisiana; 49. North Dakota; 48. Mississippi; 47. South Dakota; 46. Kansas; 45. Utah; 44. Idaho 43. Mississippi; 42. Nebraska; and 41. Kentucky.

The two groups could hardly even agree on which states were among their 10 best (AUL) and worst (NARAL), although in theory the lists should have matched. But only three made both lists: Louisiana, Nebraska, and Missouri. Kudos to Louisiana for making #1 AUL and #50 NARAL!

The groups came much closer in agreement on AUL’s worst vs NARAL’s best. Seven states made both lists: Washington, California, New York, Vermont, New Jersey, Connecticut, Oregon, Maryland, and Hawaii.

Last week Planned Parenthood revealed a surprising new strategy, abandonment of the term, “pro-choice.” Its poll numbers showed 28.5% of voters identify themselves as both or neither:

Planned Parenthood recognizes it already has the blue voters, and that it will never get the red voters, so it is trying to win over the ambivalent middle.

And, of course, PP also seeks to persuade abortion-vulnerable mothers, in part by getting people with pro-life opinions to back away from them.

PP is making an overt push for moral relativity, as is clear in its new ad, released yesterday. Note that PP freely uses the term “pro-life” – only because it suits their purposes…

[youtube]http://youtu.be/2hVSFh__xss[/youtube]

PP also unveiled its new website, “Not In Her Shoes.” Not coincidentally, the National Women’s Law Center also unveiled a “Not In Her Shoes” tumblr page, so this is going to be a widespread campaign on the Left.

More than trying to get people to stifle judgment, Planned Parenthood is trying to stop the debate altogether. From the ad:

So the next time you talk about abortion, don’t let the labels box you in.

Have a different conversation.

A conversation that doesn’t divide you, but is based on mutual respect and empathy.

In other words, let’s just agree to disagree, because we all know disagreeing about abortion is disrespectful and heartless.

Does the abortion lobby fear if Those Previously Known As Pro-Choice stop promoting abortion?

No, the goal on the other side is always to just stop talking about it (and looking at it, but that’s another topic).

[HT: KH; bottom graphic via RH Reality Check]

Sponsored by the March for Life, this pro-life video is narrated by… President Obama:

[youtube]http://youtu.be/Opl0jnKbn5Y[/youtube]

Email dailyvid@jillstanek.com with your video suggestions.

[HT: OnlineForLife]

by Andy Moore of AbortionWiki.org

On January 14 NARAL Pro-Choice America announced it had chosen a new president. The newly-selected leader, Ilyse Hogue, pictured right, is set to take over the reigns of the organization at the end of January.

“So, who is this woman?” is the question most pro-lifers and even many on the other side are asking.

When current president Nancy Keenan (pictured below with Hogue) announced in May 2012 her intention to retire, she said she thought a younger leader would better connect with the Millennial generation.

In an interview last month Keenan explained pro-abortion youth were not as motivated to bring about social change as their pro-life counterparts:

This isn’t on the top of their list of issues that they’re concerned about right now. And so we have to close that intensity gap, we have to make the case for the importance of the vigilance around this issue.

This Millennial generation… they are pro-choice, but there is an intensity gap and there still has to be some connecting the personal to the political.

However, as LifeNews.com pointed out, Hogue doesn’t solve NARAL’s problems in terms of its inability to connect with Millenials. At 42 years old, Hogue is not part of the post-Roe generations, as she was born before the Supreme Court handed down that infamous decision.

Hogue also shares a similarly pessimistic outlook on the state of the fight for abortion rights, admitting in a September 2012 op ed piece at The Nation, “we are losing substantial ground on reproductive choice.”

When Janet Denlinger, chair of the group’s board of directors, said NARAL was fortunate to find such a uniquely qualified candidate to lead the organization,  she wasn’t kidding.

However, from our research, Hogue has close to zero experience in the pro-abortion lobby itself.

Yet Hogue more than makes up for this with her vast experience organizing for multiple firmly left-wing groups as well as her political connections. Below is a summary of her more notable activist jobs and activities:

• 1999: “Forest Specialist” for Greenpeace
• 2000 – 2006: Director of the Global Finance Campaign at the Rainforest Action Network, during which time she expressed support for Young Democratic Socialists, the youth arm of Democratic Socialists of America, the largest socialist organization in the U.S., as an “important partner”
• 2006 – 2011: Director of Political Advocacy and Communications for MoveOn.org, mobilizing its members and working closely with leaders in Congress and the White House to advocate for socialist legislation on financial regulatory reform and health care. During this tenure Hogue spoke at three of Campaign for America’s Future‘s annual conferences and met twice with Elizabeth Warren, then-assistant to President Obama and Special Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury
• 2011 – 2012: Senior Adviser to Media Matters for America, where she focused on advocacy programs to undercut the power of right-wing media
• 2012: Co-founded/directed Friends of Democracy PAC, which raised over $2.4 million to reform lobbying rules, rules around donations to candidates, and greater transparency and disclosure of money in politics

Hogue currently serves on the steering committee for the Center for Corporate Policy, a partner organization of the Institute for Policy Studies. She also writes for The Nation, the self-described ”flagship of the left.”

In fact, so influential is Hogue, Huffington Post has listed her as one of 50 women “who made the 2012 election.”

Hogue has invested much of her career discovering cutting edge ways to engage better with a larger support base. With a group of veteran advocates of child killing gathered around her, Hogue will soon learn the ropes and begin to channel her extensive experience in organizing into NARAL. This should greatly benefit NARAL by both strengthening its brand and relevance as well as strengthening its base.

I believe Hogue is more savvy than Keenan. She is more driven. She will serve NARAL as a fiercer opponent of the pro-life movement.

Despite these benefits to NARAL and the pro-abortion lobby, the fact remains that after 40 years of bloodshed, public opinion is shifting.

With the advent and subsequent saturation of our culture by ultrasound imaging, and by a new generation who understand that abortion is not a political issue but a social justice issue, the days of legal abortion are numbered.

Ilyse Hogue has been given the wheel of a sinking ship.

——————–

This article was written using research gathered by AbortionWiki, and all references for this article can be found at Ilyse Hogue’s profile on that website.

If he could smile and play and feel then despite his disabilities he deserved to enjoy whatever life he had left, no matter how short. Just because his life would be shorter or different, didn’t mean he didn’t deserve to experience it.

~ Katyia Rowe who, after viewing her severely disabled baby “smiling, blowing bubbles, kicking and waving his arms” via ultrasound (pictured), could not bring herself to abort him despite medical advice to the contrary. Her baby later died nine hours after birth, as reported by The Daily Mail, January 14

[HT: Jill; Photo via Jeremy Durkin]

UPDATE 7p: I’ve added a poll, at the bottom of the post.

5:35p: I read with alarm a story at CNS News today that the Colorado Supreme Court is allowing an injunction to stand that prohibits pro-lifers from publicly displaying graphic images of aborted babies at a Denver church.

The Court’s reasoning demonstrated the height of judicial hypocrisy. It ruled signs such as Exhibits 43 and 9, right,  “cause ‘psychological harm’ to children under 12,” according to CBN.

This from the same legal system that authorized the murders of the photographed children.

This obvious free speech violation is serious in and of itself, but the injunction also carries ramifications for other pro-life activists around the country.

(That said, a prolonged public debate on just what it is about abortion images that makes them “gruesome,” as the Court called them, would certainly be worthwhile.)

There was no more detail in the story, but pro-life attorney Rebecca Messall was cited as “vow[ing] to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court,” and with the help of friend Leslie at The Passionate Pro-Lifer, I was able to speak with Rebecca.

Rebecca provided the backstory: For several years a group of pro-life activists had picketed “abortion neutral” St. John’s Episcopal Cathedral in Denver every Palm Sunday, when its pastor led an outdoor procession. The group sometimes conducted a follow-up picket on Easter.

Here are photos of the procession inside the church courtyard, and then as the procession continued on public property, where pro-lifers stood…

In between Palm Sunday and Easter 2005 the church filed for an emergency injunction to stop the protesters from showing images. These included a bloody doll nailed to a cross.

Pro-life activists Ken Scott and Clifton Powell were named in the injunction. It was they who sued and have been fighting a legal battle ever since.

Last week the state Supreme Court upheld a decision by the Court of Appeals to stop the protesters from displaying images at the church. No specific images were cited, just “large posters or similar displays depicting gruesome images of mutilated fetuses or dead bodies in a manner reasonably likely to be viewed by children under 12 years of age attending worship service and/or worship-related events at plaintiff church,” according to Court documents.

“We argued that our clients had a right to be on public property speaking on matter of public concern,” Rebecca, pictured left, told me.

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed in a similar case, Snyder v. Phelps – the Westboro Baptist protesters.

Rebecca said in theory the injunction is just against graphic protests at this church.

“But the Court is agreeing with the concept that a private party can see protesters on public property and say they don’t want to see them,” said Rebecca. “Since when can private parties enjoin you because they find your message offensive, while claiming vague psychological harm to children but submitting no evidence?”

Rebecca reiterated her clients will file a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court. “The idea behind the First Amendment is to motivate change by protecting speech people don’t like,” explained Rebecca. “The world is obviously trying to suppress graphic photos of abortion, because it would motivate people to change.”

[Photos via Ken and Jo Scott]

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

We welcome your suggestions for additions to our Top Blogs (see tab on right side of home page)! Email Susie@jillstanek.com.

• Big Blue Wave spots an article from the liberal Toronto Star, which states that the abortion issue is far from settled, thanks in part to “the rebranding of the anti-abortion position as a pro-woman, with-it, modern stance.” Could the largely publicized issue of sex-selective abortion also be playing a role?
• The FRC Blog discusses the shrinking adoption pool, both domestic and internationally. The prevalence of abortion figures heavily in this picture.

• At Catholic Sistas, longtime pro-life activist Mary Ann Kreitzer recounts the boldness of early pro-lifers, who staged sit-ins and even chained themselves to examination tables at abortion clinics:
  

  We met at nearby St. Matthew’s Cathedral for Mass and prayed the mothers would choose life for their babies. Then we moved on to the “clinic” with chains and padlocks. Three women, myself included, were chained to operating tables in the abortion rooms. When asked later by media why we chained ourselves, I said the chains not only made it harder to remove us, but symbolized what abortion does to women, making them recyclable sex objects chained to the Playboy mentality.

• Down on the Pharm points out the New York Times’ selective outrage over for-profit institutions – specifically, healthcare providers:
  

  It would, however, be a huge shock and surprise to see the leftie press calling for abortionists to provide their services at cost, and take no profits. There’s a fortune in abortion, and this is true for Planned Parenthood, which is excused from taxes as a supposed non-profit… as well as the multitudinous for-profit abortion industries.

• Fletcher Armstrong shares information about how pro-life groups can earn money for handing out cards (pictured right) at the upcoming March for Life.
• Live Action was less than thrilled with the results of the Golden Globe Awards, which honored a movie, Amour, which glamorizes euthanasia. The film has also received numerous Academy Awards nominations.
• At the LTI Blog, Serge takes exception to Time’s recent cover story which claimed the pro-life side is winning the abortion war. He says instead of congratulating ourselves, we must acknowledge that more hard work needs to be done.
• According to the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, a panel of three judges in Ireland have upheld the country’s ban on assisted suicide. However, the case will most likely be appealed to their Supreme Court.
• Wesley J. Smith writes about the latest from Belgium, where 45-year-old deaf twins, upon learning they suffered from an illness that would render them blind, were voluntarily euthanized by lethal injection.
• The Passionate Pro-Lifer writes about her experiences “attending the launch of Nebraska’s Abolitionist Society and participat[ing] in an amazing church protest at First Central Congregational Church in Omaha.” The pastor of the church, Scott Jones, is foster father to a 15-year-old boy and “husband” to a man who identified himself as a Planned Parenthood volunteer. In the video below, this pastor said he believes anyone who protests in front of a church is mentally ill. (Alert: profanity at beginning of video):

[youtube]http://youtu.be/AAFZ2jyVxVs[/youtube]

[Photos via Catholic Sistas and Fletcher Armstrong]