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

• Wesley J. Smith comments on the new California bill that would require pro-life pregnancy resource centers to refer clients for abortions. California already opts out of abortion reporting and allows abortions to be performed by non-physicians. If you thought they couldn’t get any worse, you would be wrong. From AB 775:
  

  (a) A licensed covered facility shall disseminate to clients on site the following notice in English and in the primary threshold languages for Medi-Cal beneficiaries as determined by the State Department of Health Care Services for the county in which the facility is located.

  (1) The notice shall state: “California has public programs that provide immediate free or low-cost access to comprehensive family planning services (including all FDA-approved methods of contraception), prenatal care, and abortion for eligible women. To determine whether you qualify, contact the county social services office at [insert the telephone number].

Who can forget the pink Minuzos former Texas state Sen. Wendy Davis wore when in 2013 she filibustered an omnibus pro-life bill for 13 hours?

As most know by now, the U.S. SUPREME COURT ruled by a lopsided 6-3 majority on October 14 that Texas could not enforce that part of its 2013 omnibus pro-life law requiring abortion clinics to meet the same standards as other ambulatory surgical centers, this while the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals makes its decision on the case.

The abortion cartel has reacted to a new genre of pro-life laws, which force abortion clinics to administer RU-486 per FDA protocol, in a way that makes no sense.

Four states – Arizona, North Dakota, Ohio, and Oklahoma – have now passed a version of this law, and the abortion lobby has responded by taking the more difficult path - suing to block the statute.

In terms of PR, this is an uphill battle. Abortion proponents are trying to justify giving RU-486 off-label by framing the FDA as incompetent. Quoting Tulsa World, October 1:

A 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.

by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat

• Planned Parenthood’s Cecile Richards has an editorial at CNN which claims that making the birth control pill available over the counter would “push women back to 1950s.”

  Compare this recent editorial to a Huffington Post piece written by Richards in 2013 where the FDA’s decision to make emergency contraception available over the counter for women of all ages (including teen girls) was described as “wonderful news” and meant that there would be “no barriers, no shame.”

I’ve written previously (here and here) about the possible connection between autism and vaccines made with aborted fetal cells.

Now, the September issue of the prestigious Journal of Public Health and Epidemiology has published a study conducted by scientists at Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute that shows an spike in autism in country after country where vaccines using fetal cells from aborted babies have been introduced.

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

• Bound4Life writes about Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit against the state of Arizona in which they are seeking to prevent the enforcement of legislation that would require them to prescribe the chemical abortion pill RU-486 according FDA safety guidelines. So much for caring about women’s safety.