Witness the multiple contortions encountered in the refusal to answer the question, "If you can feel a heartbeat, what is that thing tht's being aborted? Is it a piece of tissue? Is it a separate human being?"
Witness the multiple contortions encountered in the refusal to answer the question, "If you can feel a heartbeat, what is that thing tht's being aborted? Is it a piece of tissue? Is it a separate human being?"
The video below is MUST-VIEWING. PP is one of the slimiest organizations imagineable. The leaders constantly talk about "pre-natal care," but when contacted, 92 out of 97 "clinics" said they only do abortions.
Washington, D.C. (January 24, 2017) – Today, Live Action released a new investigative video debunking Planned Parenthood’s claim that it provides critical prenatal care to pregnant women. The abortion giant has insisted that prenatal care is one of its core services that women will lose if its taxpayer funding is cut off. But Live Action’s investigation proves those services are virtually nonexistent at the abortion chain.
“The Prenatal Care Deception” is the first in Live Action’s “Abortion Corporation” series of investigative videos highlighting Planned Parenthood’s own employees saying its focus is providing abortions, not women’s health care. Live Action is releasing the investigative series as Congress plans to redirect Medicaid dollars away from Planned Parenthood to local health clinics and also vote on the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act.
-- Good idea of the day - relocate a number of federal bureaucracies out of D.C. and to the Midwest
-- French government votes to criminalize prolife websites
-- A major reason for Trump's victory - the progressives went too far in denying religious liberty and created a backlash.
Erika Andersen writes:
When faced with the reality of the abortion procedure, many people who are pro-choice change their minds instantly. A video put out by Live Action shows former abortionist Dr. Anthony Levantino describing and showing the process of a second-trimester (13-24 weeks of pregnancy) surgical abortion procedure. Dr. Levantino has preformed over 1,200 abortions and explains in detail how babies are ripped apart limb by limb in these procedures.
Live Action approached people on the street and asked them if they were pro-choice. To those that said yes, even up to the point of birth, they showed Dr. Levantino’s video of the procedure. After watching the video, the people who claimed to be pro-choice changed their minds on the spot. They admitted they were unaware of how developed babies are at this point in pregnancy and described the video as “inhumane.”
Watch the reactions here:
America’s views on life are changing for the better as science and technology reveal the fascinating stages of life babies progress through from the moment of conception. Videos like this one are helping to change the debate and show uninformed individuals what it is they actually profess to believe in when they say they support pro-choice policies.
Seeing the reality of abortion on it’s face makes people — like those in this video — oppose it outright. Exposing the brutal inhumanity of the abortion procedure may be the most powerful way to change minds and stop this tragic holocaust of children.
Here’s the abortion-procedure video the participants in the film were shown that changed their minds on the spot:
“It is true God can forgive any sin. And it's true Christ died for all sins, past, present, and future. And it's true God will forgive anyone who truly repents and asks for forgiveness. And this person really does seem to be a Christian who's in a difficult situation. So, even though it's terribly tragic that they feel the need to abort their child, technically they are correct: God will forgive them.”
Armed with such considerations, believers often succumb to the notion that since grace is waiting on the other side, even though God very plainly says “thou shalt not murder,” His commandments must be optional. Why else would He indirectly embolden sin with guarantees of subsequent forgiveness?
But does He? Can grace really be used this way, seemingly to magnify God, but actually to defend abortion? Is the above reasoning complete and sound?
What the Question Is Not
Just so we're clear: The question is not whether God will forgive the post-abortiveparent who turns to him in genuine repentance and faith. He most assuredly will. There is no sin, including abortion, that God cannot or will not forgive. God is more eager to forgive than we are to seek forgiveness. That's true regardless of whether we've sinned little or greatly.
Recall, for example, that King David committed both adultery and murder. Yet after the fact, when the prophet Nathan confronted him, David repented and God forgave him. As if to underscore His grace, God even had Nathan call David's second son by Bathsheba “Jedidiah,” which means “beloved of God.” Other examples could be multiplied.
The question is not, will the Father lavish grace upon all who turn to Him in true repentance and faith? Unequivocally, yes, He will.
What the Question Is
The question is, does God give to pre-abortive parents assurance He will forgive the murder of their child if, despite many dire warnings, they go through with it? More to the point, can they who are willing to deliberately ignore the clear moral commands of God be assured their heart will not be hardened to a degree where they will never even want to truly repent?
I submit that neither conscience (God's law written on the heart) nor Scripture gives any such assurance, and that to suppose otherwise is to confuse faith with presumption and grace with license. It is not “faith” that assumes one can deliberately sin without dire consequence; it is presumption. And it is not “grace” that holds forth the promise of consequence-free sin; it is license.
Sinning to the Glory of God?
Those who believe God's grace effectively means “obedience is optional” are likely not true Christians at all. Their thinking is desperately, diabolically wrongheaded. The theological import of it could be paraphrased thus: “Our yet-to-be-committed sins aren't that big a deal to God. Christ died for our sins, so we don't have to break a sweat to avoid them. When tempted to do something wrong, even something as serious as aborting a child, we just need to remember God's grace takes the worry out of sinning. No matter what we do, God will forgive. His grace is greater than our sin. Indeed, because our sin magnifies His grace, when we sin we do so to the glory of God.”
Reaping What We Sow
“Christians” holding to such ideas have far more in common with those who “turn the grace of God into licentiousness,” “suppress the truth in unrighteousness,” and “do evil that good may come.” They have no Scriptural basis to expect things will end well for them. They run the very real risk of being given up to a hardened heart. Indeed, their saying such things gives strong evidence that hardening has already begun. We reap what we sow.
Think about it: If I am so sure that, after I kill one of my children, I absolutely will repent to receive God's forgiveness, then why won't I repent before I kill the child? I have apparently already deceived myself into thinking I can order up my own repentance “on demand.” Yet if that were the case, wouldn't I be repenting now, before I kill my child, rather than after? No one is physically forcing me to kill my child.** If I refuse to repent now before the act, what makes me so sure I will truly repent later? What will have changed? And if I have another child, what assurance do I have I won't do it again? And if I do, did I ever truly repent after the first time?
Unless one is under the delusion that “repentance” is something done only when it's easy to obey God's commands, one can never be sure one ever did truly repent. Anyone can “repent” when there's no great cost involved. It's when the price of turning from sin is high that we discover whether our repentance is real.
It is a dangerous thing to presume upon the grace of God and say, before deliberately sinning, “God will forgive." Even if I am a genuine Christian, I am almost certainly going to be plagued, perhaps for the rest of my life, with unshakable feelings of guilt and doubt as to whether my repentance and faith was real and whether I am, indeed, a genuine Christian.
Grace never assures us beforehand that if we deliberately sin we will be forgiven. Grace only assures us that there is no sin, sincerely repented of, that God cannot or will not forgive through Christ. It is a crucial distinction.
God's willingness to forgive is never in doubt. But His forgiveness is always predicated upon the genuineness of our repentance. And the genuineness of our repentance is severely suspect if, before we go through with it, we can say in our heart, “I know it's wrong, but since God is going to forgive me anyway, I'm going to go ahead and do it.”
Those who say such things aren't looking for grace, but for permission to sin. They assuredly will not receive the latter, and it is fearfully doubtful they will receive the former, either. Not because God is unwilling to give it, but because they clearly aren't seeking it.
* A discussion of Matthew 12:31 and the “unforgivable sin” is outside the scope of this article.
** I recognize there is often tremendous pressure to abort, but few in this country are literally forced.
Image copyright David Castillo Dominici.
Rolley Haggard is a feature writer for BreakPoint.
Wesley J. Smith clarifies for those confused:
The anti-science liberals are denying again that human life begins with the completion of fertilization (without getting into an arcane debate of the exact moment that process is completed).
Thomas Edsall uses his NYT column to mock that embryology truth. From, “The Republican Conception of Conception:”
Fifteen percent of the Republican presidential candidates, including Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, and Carla Fiorina contend life begins at conception.
So do embryology text books. As I have written here and elsewhere before, the science notes that once conception is complete, a new human individual organism has come into existence, with its own distinct genetic makeup, a determined sex, etc. Here’s just one quote from such a text:
Human development is a continuous process that begins when an oocyte (ovum) from a female is fertilized by a sperm (or spermatozoon) from a male. (p. 2); … but the embryo begins to develop as soon as the oocyte is fertilized. (p. 2); …
Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm … unites with a female gamete or oocyte … to form a single cell. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.
That’s the science. And if we are to be “pro-science,” accuracy in biology must inform our policy positions. When “life” begins is a different question from when “pregnancy” begins. Edsall notes that the government and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (as ideological as scientific) claim pregnancy begins on implantation. [more . . .]
Ramesh Ponnuru offers additional commentary:
** Dr. Ben Carson - "the 'Black Lives Matter' Misfire"
I grew up in neighborhoods most Americans were told to never drive through. I saw bullets, drugs and death in the same places I played tag and ball with my friends. Both of my older cousins died on the streets where I lived. I thought that was my destiny.
But my mother didn't. She changed all of that. She saved my brother and me from being killed on those streets with nothing but a library card.
My mother knew what the problems were and she shielded me and my brother from them. I can tell you she wasn't worried about Socialist senators from tiny rural states. "BlackLivesmatter" could learn from her to focus on the real sources of our hopelessness.
This is where we should march: [more. . .]
** Jay Nordlinger:
The maker, or makers, of those Planned Parenthood videos? I think they should win every award under the conservative sun. Under the human sun, actually. They’ve done a tremendous service. Harriet Beecher Stowe, with a novel, rocked the conscience of America. These videos should do something similar, if the American conscience is open to rocking.
Charles Koch hit back at criticism of “the Koch brothers” during President Barack Obama’s energy speech in Las Vegas earlier this week, saying he was “flabbergasted” by the attack and charging that Obama made the dig as a favor to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who appeared with him.
“It’s beneath the president, the dignity of the president, to be doing that,” Koch said during a phone interview Tuesday.
** M.B. Dougherty - The kids are not all right: The bleak future of the millennial generation
Millennials marry much later. Just 26 percent of younger millennials (18-29) are married. At that same age, 36 percent of Gen Xers, 48 percent of Baby Boomers, and 65 percent of the Silent Generation had married. And that's if millennials get married at all. Pew's research suggests that about 25 percent of those between the ages of 25 and 34 will remain unmarried. That's higher than previous generations.
Family Research Council reports:
. . . Under the new law, moms-to-be would have to visit the office for in-person counseling before returning two days later for the procedure. As part of that consultation, a doctor is required to tell them the age of their baby, the alternatives to abortion, and the risks of it. They'll also learn that if their infant survives the procedure, the medical staff will do everything they can to care for the child. Any doctor who fails to comply could face criminal charges and/or lose his license. For pro-lifers, Tennessee's move puts it just behind Oklahoma's new 72-hour waiting period -- with Florida and North Carolina next in line to enact similar laws.
As popular as the idea was in the legislature, it was even more so with locals. In a poll by Vanderbilt University, only 28% opposed the 48-hour waiting period. Planned Parenthood must have made up a good bit of that percent, since its spokesmen were out in full force blasting the bill as "embarrassing." Calling it a "sad day" for Tennessee, the group's Steven Emmert argued that postponing abortions two days was somehow an "emotional hardship" for women.
Charles C. W. Cooke reports:
This morning, in America’s frigid and fractious capital city, a soft-spoken 77-year-old grandmother named Eleanor McCullen stood up to the machine.
At stake was a Massachusetts law that makes it illegal for any citizen to “enter or remain on a public way or sidewalk” within 35 feet of the entrance or exit to an abortion clinic — unless, that is, that citizen either works in the clinic or is in agreement with what goes on inside. This has severely restricted the ability of McCullen, a regular fixture outside the Planned Parenthoods of Boston, to hand out anti-abortion literature and to offer would-be patients financial support — both of which she has been doing pro bono for decades. The state law, she contends, is flatly illegal, violating her sacred right to free speech, depriving her of equal protection under the law, and effectively establishing speech codes on public land.
Apologists for the measure claim rather anemically that the law is necessary to prevent “harassment,” and they promise that it strikes a reasonable “balance” between respect for free expression and the need to protect visitors from being hassled. McCullen and her lawyers disagree, holding that because the law’s applicability is contingent not on one’s behavior but on one’s speech per se, it is unconstitutional. They are right.
Ed Morrissey writes:
Allahpundit mentioned this story in his post last night, but it’s worth a post of its own. In a world where the dominant culture divides children into the wanted and undesired for the convenience of others, it’s worth noting when a news story demonstrates the power of hope, love, and life:
A Virginia church says it has received hundreds of calls from people around the world offering to adopt an unborn child with Down syndrome who otherwise would have been aborted.
After the unborn child came to the attention of Rev. Thomas Vander Woude of Holy Trinity Catholic Church in Gainesville, Va., an urgent plea was posted Monday on the church’s Facebook page. …
An adoption agency has narrowed down the hundreds of families to three, Drennan said, and is working with the birth parents to determine the best home for the child.
“Our culture says some babies aren’t wanted and that is not true. This proves there are hundreds of families,” Drennan said. “It was so fast and from all over. It’s a beautiful use of social media that something like this could spread all over the US.”
The mother had less than a week before she would no longer have been able to have an abortion, but allowed the church time to find an adoptive couple if it could. [Morrissey continues...]
A commenter helpfully provided two memorable quotes from Mother Teresa:
“Any country that accepts abortion, is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what it wants.”“It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish.”
Yesterday the House of Represenatives passed the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 1797) Good for them! This would stop the inhumane painful abortion of unborn children 20 weeks and older. But now it goes to the Senate. President Obama has said he will veto it. Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council wrote in response to the House passage:
I applaud the House vote on a bill that is truly informed by modern science, which shows unborn children are fully capable of experiencing pain by 20 weeks after fertilization. Unborn children in their sixth month of pregnancy or later are routinely given anesthesia during prenatal surgery, so this legislation conforms federal abortion law to modern science.
"It's disappointing that the president is stuck in the Roe v. Wade science of the '70s and has threatened to veto the bill. Ignoring modern science is harmful to both unborn children and mothers, as we know babies can survive as early as 22 weeks after gestation. The horrific pain of being ripped apart limb by limb must be stopped.
"Dr. Kermit Gosnell's house of horrors shows we must stop late abortion. He was convicted of murdering babies born alive but also of 21 counts of illegal late abortions after 24 weeks in violation of state law. Yet many states continue to allow these brutal late abortions through the ninth month.
"The only difference between killing a baby born alive and aborting them just prior to birth is location. Human dignity is not dependent upon location.
"We call on the Senate to update legal protection for pain-capable children and pass this legislation to stop future Gosnells. Americans overwhelmingly support restrictions to late abortion and we urge the Senate to ignore the president's advisors and pass the House bill," concluded Perkins.
Update: FRC reports on the heated House floor debate:
Today was the second historic hearing at the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the future of marriage in America. Today, they heard a challenge to the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). DOMA is not new to FRC because we helped lead the efforts for it in the 90s. The Defense of Marriage Act specified that states would not have to recognize same-sex "marriages" from other states and defined marriage for all federal purposes as the union of one man and one woman. Only the latter provision has been challenged in court, but advocates for redefining marriage have been simultaneously trying to repeal the entire law in Congress.
The legal arguments today were complicated by the fact that President Obama and his Justice Department have chosen to abdicate their responsibility to defend federal laws in court, and have instead joined in declaring DOMA unconstitutional. This forced the House of Representatives, in the form of its "Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group" (BLAG), to intervene to defend the law. FRC's Senior Fellows Chris Gacek and Ken Klukowski, both attorneys, were at the Supreme Court for the oral arguments, and Chris said not to believe media spin that DOMA took a total beating. He reported that Paul Clement, the former U.S. Solicitor General hired by the House BLAG to defend DOMA, gave the strongest performance of any attorney in the two days of arguments.
No amount of legal footwork by those seeking redefinition of marriage can change the fact that society needs children, and children need a mom and a dad. It's not just about love between adults, it's about civilization. That's a compelling reason for both California and the federal government to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and for the Supreme Court to uphold both Proposition 8 and DOMA.
Conservatives are rightly dismayed by many of the actions of the current Administration, but this week we can celebrate some true victories in North Dakota--victories achieved in large part due to the leadership and energy of two of FRC's top pro-life advocates coming alongside state leaders.
After testifying multiple times, over a period of several weeks, before various committees of the North Dakota legislature, Dr. David Prentice and Anna Higgins, JD, effectively educated that state's lawmakers who ultimately voted to "ban abortions performed solely for the purpose of gender selection and genetic abnormalities" and to "ban abortions after the detection of a fetal heartbeat." Legislators approved another measure that "requires admitting and staff privileges at a nearby hospital for any physician who performs abortions in North Dakota" so that the courts can decide what kind of "precise restriction" there is on doctors who perform abortions. These precedent-setting bills have been signed into law by Governor Jack Dalrymple (R-N.D.).
Dr. Prentice, the world's leading expert on adult stem cell research, and Anna, who directs FRC's Center for Human Dignity, convincingly and persuasively spoke for the sanctity of unborn life and the well-being of mothers. I'm honored to lead a team of passionate and articulate professionals like David and Anna, who are helping change America, one state at a time.
These days it can be difficult to live out your Christian faith on college campuses. On one Florida University campus, it is especially difficult for students whose grade point average depends on their willingness to stomp on Jesus. Ask Florida Atlantic University Junior Ryan Rotela. When Rotela refused to participate in a classroom assignment that would involve jumping on a sheet of paper bearing Jesus' name, as a way to "discuss the importance of symbols in culture," he was immediately suspended from class and brought up on academic charges after reporting this activity to university officials. Rotela did not want to participate in the exercise, as it violated his religious beliefs.
The University finally backed down yesterday but only after Liberty Institute threatened legal action and Fox News reporter Todd Starnes brought this latest incident of religious persecution to the attention of millions. Liberty Institute, which represented Rotela, declared victory in this case, as officials from Florida Atlantic University apologized and removed the academic charges from his record. Hiram Sasser, Director of Litigation, at Liberty Institute, was thankful. Sasser said, "Decades ago, the Supreme Court ruled that students do not leave their First Amendment rights at the school house gate: That is still true today."
In addition to that victory, Florida Governor Rick Scott has asked the state's university system to look into this incident and to ensure that this type of lesson will not take place again. Scott said, in a letter to the chancellor, "The professor's lesson was offensive, and even intolerant, to Christians and those of all faiths who deserve to be respected as Americans entitled to religious freedom." Bravo to Ryan for standing firm in his faith even in the face of harassment and threats. You have inspired millions to keep standing firm for their biblical beliefs and First Amendment rights.
** FRC has been at the forefront of the recent Supreme Court oral arguments. Don't miss my appearance on Fox News' "America Live with Megyn Kelly," as I debated why the U.S. Supreme Court should uphold natural marriage. You can watch the clip below. Also, don't miss my appearance on Fox Business' "Lou Dobbs Tonight," at 7:00 p.m. (ET), as well as Ken Klukowski's appearance on PBS' "NewsHour with Jim Lehrer," at 6:15 p.m. (ET).
President Obama will likely choose Susan Rice as his next Secretary of State. FRC reports:[...] As a member of both the Clinton and Obama administrations, Rice has been a shameless advocate for exporting abortion-on-demand--even to countries with moral objections. "Reproductive rights are human rights," she tweeted on World Population Day. "They are essential, which is why the U.S. works tirelessly to protect them."
Like Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice has several liberal cheerleaders, including Planned Parenthood, National Organization for Women, and Emily's List. If that doesn't tell you everything you need to know about global diplomacy under Susan Rice, take this statement from Planned Parenthood chief Cecile Richards: "Susan Rice has consistently affirmed... [and] understands the important role the United Nations plays in promoting and protecting women's health around the world, especially in developing countries. We expect that she will work effectively with other countries to fulfill the UN's development agenda, including the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) on maternal health," whose goal is to "achieve universal access to reproductive health care" [read: abortion]. For more on Susan Rice's record--and the red flags her nomination to State would raise--check out FRC's new backgrounder.
Jon A. Shields contends that mainstream abortion coverage, superficial in the past, appears to be getting worse. He writes:
Just consider the mendacious, slash-and-burn "New York Times Magazine" story by Emily Bazelon on Charmaine Yoest, the director of Americans United for Life.
I learned quite a lot from Shields' article, including that
American abortions laws [are] far more permissive than any other western democracy, with the possible exception of Sweden and the Netherlands. The vast majority of western democracies limit abortion access to the first trimester and many impose more onerous regulations." [my bolding]
In anti-Catholic France, for instance, abortion is legal only in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy, and only after counseling and a one-week waiting period. Waiting periods range from 7 days in Italy, 6 days in Belgium, 5 days in the Netherlands, and 3 days in Germany. By way of contrast, waiting period are generally 24 hours in the twenty-six American states that impose them. Given the relative conservatism of abortion laws in Europe, the New York Times might consider redirecting its concern abroad.
Shields says a whole lot more.
The Family Research Council reports:
Washington may defy our values, but the march of pro-life, pro-family revolutionaries goes on. There's no more powerful illustration of this than the states, where thousands of local leaders are building the kind of government voters can be proud of. Earlier this week in New Hampshire, a legislature that flipped to Republican control in 2010, proved once again how important elections can be. Despite Gov. John Lynch's (D) opposition, lawmakers hit the two-thirds majority it needed to overturn his veto and enact a stricter law barring partial-birth abortion. Although the procedure is illegal under federal law, New Hampshire doesn't trust the government to prosecute it. (And given Eric Holder's record, who can blame them?)
The state's House and Senate also overrode a veto to a school choice measure that will help more public school students switch to private schools. To round out the day, House and Senate leaders shot down a third veto on the state's voter ID law. Anyone who doubts the significance of local elections needs only to look toward New Hampshire for proof. While the Supreme Court was dominating headlines, another court took center stage in the battle over pregnancy resource centers (PRCs).
Gallup this week reported that 41 percent of Americans identify themselves as “pro-choice,” down seven points since last July. This is good news indeed. National Review Online has published a number of observations from a variety of pro-life "experts" to explain this latest polling data.
The vicious, one-sideness of this Administration in its promotion of abortion got slapped down today by a U.S. district judge who called out the DOJ in no uncertain terms. J. Matt Barber reports (HT: Tina Korbe):
For several months now the Obama administration has been abusing our judicial system through a concerted political intimidation campaign via the federal courts. Obama has instructed the Justice Department to sue a number of pro-life counselors and volunteers for allegedly violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrance (FACE) Act.
You won’t hear it from the mainstream media, but the Justice Department has just faced an embarrassing smack down on the highest profile of these cases. It has dropped an appeal in Holder v. Pine against pro-life sidewalk counselor Mary “Susan” Pine, who is represented by the civil rights firm Liberty Counsel. The DOJ has agreed to pay $120,000 for this frivolous lawsuit which, as the evidence indicated, was intended to intimidate Ms. Pine and send a shot over the bow of pro-lifers around the country.
Mr. Holder unsuccessfully sought thousands of dollars in fines against Ms. Pine, as well as a permanent injunction banning her from counseling women on the public sidewalk outside the Presidential Women’s Center (PWC) abortion mill (or any other “reproductive services” clinic).
After 18 months of litigation, the DOJ’s case was thrown out of federal court, and the department was chastised in a scathing ruling by U.S. District Judge Kenneth Ryskamp for filing a case with no evidence.
I saw "October Baby" tonight and thought it great! Go see it. (I don't think the trailer does it justice).
Chuck Colson comments:
[...] In October Baby, we have the story of Hannah, a college student suddenly hit with earth-shattering news. Not only is she adopted, but her biological mother had tried to abort her. Her overprotective adoptive parents had tried to shield her from the truth, but the lingering health problems caused by the procedure finally force them to tell her what happened.
The devastating news propels Hannah on a journey to learn more about her origins, but she finds out even more than she bargained for.
Hannah’s cinematic story was inspired by the real-life story of Gianna Jessen. Gianna was born with cerebral palsy after a botched abortion and has become a celebrated pro-life speaker. After watching October Baby, Giann said that watching the film was a healing experience for her.
For those of us who haven’t been through anything like what Gianna has, the film is a valuable glimpse at experiences that we can hardly begin to imagine. It raises awareness of the unseen person who is always involved in an abortion, and asks us to identify with that person in a way that we never have before.
But another one of October Baby’s strengths is that it doesn’t present only a single perspective. Hannah talks with a nurse involved with her abortion. She learns about a clinic bombing that affected that nurse’s life.
The film, you see, doesn’t do any demonizing; it shows the pain that surrounds this issue for everybody, from the abortion-minded mother to the adoptive parents dealing with the fallout of her decision. . .
'October Baby': A film with a fresh perspective
Gina Dalfonzo | BreakPoint Blog | February 6, 2012
October Baby Stories: Gianna Jessen
YouTube.com | October 21, 2011
Update 3/27/12 - Tina Korbe wrote today, "October Baby brings out movie reviewer's bias." Korbe cites one reviewer's extreme hostility which is quite incredible, especially since the movie is so mild in its telling of a compelling story:
Catsoulis can’t restrain her antipathy, claiming the movie has “an essential ugliness at its core” and “communicates in the language of guilt and fear.” It’s “clearly intended to terrify young women,” she writes. Then, she reveals her true objection to the film is political: “It fits right in with proposed state laws that increasingly turn the screws on a woman’s dominion over her reproductive system.”
As I've written before, anything George Weigel writes is well worth reading and pondering. What he says in this short essay will be familiar to students of the Bible but it may come as a shock to others. Weigel writes:
The Hebrew Bible is not for the squeamish. And its harshest maledictions are called down upon those who practiced the abomination of child-sacrifice.
Thus the Psalmist:
“They sacrificed their sons and daughters to the demons/they poured out innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan; and the land was polluted with blood./Thus they became unclean by their acts, and played the harlot in their doings./Then the anger of the LORD was kindled against his people, and he abhorred his heritage./… they were rebellious in their purposes, and were brought low because of their iniquity” (Psalm 106:38-40, 43).
And the prophet Ezekiel, delivering the word of the Lord:
“And you took your sons and your daughters, whom you had borne to me, and these you sacrificed to them to be devoured. Were your harlotries so small a matter that you slaughtered my children and delivered them up as an offering by fire to them?... Behold, therefore, I stretched out my hand against you, and diminished your allotted portion, and delivered you to the greed of your enemies…” (Ezekiel 16:20-21, 27).
Thirty-nine years after Roe v. Wade created an unrestricted abortion license in the United States, and during the week when hundreds of thousands of Americans pray and march for life, all Americans ought to ponder these words—and the kind of country to which Roe v. Wade led.
Click through for more, including terrible statistics of abortion rates in New York City.
Tina Korbe writes:
My hopes for a Time magazine spread about the March for Life protesters are fading fast. For the fifth year in a row, The New York Times ignored the March for Life, which drew at least a hundred thousand participants in D.C. alone.
She quotes NewBusters:
For the fifth year in a row, there was no story in the Times print edition on the annual March for Life against abortion in Washington, D.C., which every year draws massive crowds in unpromising weather on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court’s decision legalizing abortion. …
As Times Watch reported last January, the 2011 print edition of the Times did not feature an actual news story of the thousands who marched in frigid weather, just two photos with the caption “Abortion Opponents Rally On the National Mall,” above a three- sentence description that led to a link to photographs online. That was actually a vast improvement; the Times in print absolutely ignored the March for Life in 2010, 2009, and 2008 (a 300-word story marked the 2007 March for Life on January 23 of that year).
The Times is far more eager to publicize protests in support of liberal causes, no matter how puny. When four protesters marched in support of the doomed Dream Act to grant amnesty to illegal immigrant students, the Times marked the occasion with a 780-word story.
Korbe comments further:
Believe it or not, it gets worse. The NYT has a special standing feature on its blog, The Caucus, to document “Happenings in Washington” and not even that included a reference to the March. It did, however, mention that the N.H.L. Stanley Cup Champions, the Boston Bruins, would be honored by the president at the White House. Important stuff.
Meanwhile, about 50,000 people participated in the West Coast March for Life and, according to a tweet from Michelle Malkin, not even the local media turned out to cover it.
As a reminder to journalists who’ve forgotten, in general, the bigger the size and scope of the event, the more newsworthy it is. That means a protest of 100,000 is generally more newsworthy than a protest of 10. . . .
Me: I think it shameful and embarrassing that the New York Times is such an ideological organ that it fails to cover major events such as a pro-life rally. Shame and double shame.
Photo credits: St. Blogostine blog
Further note: Record Turnout for Paris March for Life.
The Familly Research Council reports:
Planned Parenthood may think abortion is "sexy," but New Hampshire sure doesn't. After a year-long debate, the state finally passed a bill zeroing out taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood and any other abortion provider. Although some Republicans had lobbied to kill the bill, House Speaker William O'Brien (R) almost single-handedly pushed the ban forward. Despite threats from the Obama administration, leaders voted the bill to victory 207-146. "I do not ever want to contribute to the stopping of a baby's heart with my tax dollars," said state Rep. Susan DeLemus (R). I'm sure her constituents agree. Congratulations to Speaker O'Brien and the many pro-life groups who helped make this goal a reality!
(HT: Justin Taylor)
Rick Santorum and his wife offer a wonderful window into the reality of God-breathed love and life. Very moving and inspiring.
Tina Korbe comments:
How hopeful is this? The New Hampshire legislature yesterday overrode Gov. John Lynch’s veto of a bill that requires abortionists to notify parents of minors 48 hours before conducting the procedure, The New York Times reports:
The House overrode the veto by a 266-102 vote; the Senate vote was 17-7. “Granite Staters believe in more parental involvement, not less,” the House speaker, William O’Brien, said in a statement.
Seems to me stakeholder “notification,” whether in personal, financial or political matters, is pretty commonly recognized as both polite and important. And don’t parents have a high stake in the health and well-being of their children (not to mention their grandchildren)? Obviously, 266 New Hampshire house members and 17 state senators think so. The legislatures of thirty-six other states thought so, too: New Hampshire becomes the 37th state to enact such a law.
I’m always impressed when a legislature overrides a veto. It reflects such widespread conviction. And, in this case, I’m especially excited because, as I just learned when I was in the state for the GOP debate, the New Hampshire legislature is the fourth-largest English-speaking legislative body in the world, after the British Parliament, the Parliament of India and the U.S. Congress. Supermajorities in such a legislature suggest the state pretty solidly supports parental notification, too.
** Added 6/20/11 - Kellyanne Conway writes on "The Power of Bachmann":
As I told K-Lo, Michele Bachmann’s commanding performance in last week’s Republican presidential debate sealed a political evolution that has been fomenting for some time: the diminution of feminism and the evolution of femininity. [my emphasis]
In filing her papers, Bachmann became the first serious female U.S. presidential candidate who is neither a career politician nor married to one. She has an everywoman appeal that connects her to millions of Americans; she is accessible, authentic, and affable. She is passionate but not angry; intelligent but plain-spoken. . . . She seems the happy warrior, even as she takes on President Obama’s policies frontally and unapologetically. She neither leads with her gender nor believes it entitles her to special treatment. She stood shoulder to shoulder with men of accomplishment and intelligence on the debate stage because she earned it, based on what she believes, not on what gender she is. . . .
** (Original post) - My enthusiasm for Michele Bachmann is long standing. News items:
-- Wintery Knight - Michele Bachmann's Republican Leadership Conference Speech June 17, 2011 (Video)
-- Pathetic: Lib Media Attacks Michele Bachmann On Her Foster Care Record Did She really foster care for 23 children?
IMPORTANT NOTE: Wintery Knight has posted three videos of Mitt Romney supporting abortion rights - 1994, 2002, 2005
Here's the pro-life pledge Mitt Romney refuses to sign:
I PLEDGE that I will only support candidates for President who are committed to protecting Life. I demand that any candidate I support commit to these positions:
FIRST, to nominate to the U.S. federal bench judges who are committed to restraint and applying the original meaning of the Constitution, not legislating from the bench;
SECOND, to select only pro-life appointees for relevant Cabinet and Executive Branch positions, in particular the head of National Institutes of Health, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Health & Human Services;
THIRD, to advance pro-life legislation to permanently end all taxpayer funding of abortion in all domestic and international spending programs, and defund Planned Parenthood and all other contractors and recipients of federal funds with affiliates that perform or fund abortions;
FOURTH, advance and sign into law a Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act to protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.
I am a fan of Wintery Knight's blog. It should be checked frequently. In case you haven't done so lately, here are some links to recent posts:
These compilations from a variety of sources by the Family Research Council continue to offer interested people a gold mine. A new edition appears every two weeks. Readers will find in each a wealth of information not readily found elsewhere. For previous reviews I've posted, click here. For a complete list of articles from this latest edition, click "continue reading" below.
Meanwhile here's a quote from Hadley Arkes' article on Ave Maria University in south Florida: (my underlining)
But a collision of worlds – and a serious challenge – came out at dinner with a dear friend, an accomplished professor, a graduate of Harvard transplanted from the Northeast. He has two daughters at Ave Maria and he said, when I pressed him, that he wouldn’t send any of his children to Harvard. The new sexual ethic, whether on pornography, promiscuity, abortion, homoeroticism, is so pervasive, touching every aspect of life, that there is little room for those who will not pay homage to that reigning ethic. I do think that it is mainly the schools with a religious character that can offer now real academic freedom and a course of study in the humanities not warped by ideology.
Me: What an extraordinary admission! For "real academic freedom" and a "course of study in the humanities not warped by ideology," it is to religious schools one must go.
Thaddeus Baklinski writes: (HT: DV)
PADOVA, Italy, January 12, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Unborn twin babies socialize as early as week 14 of gestation, a new study has shown.
Italian researcher Dr. Umberto Castiello of the University of Padova and associates used an advanced method of ultrasonography, which enables the movements of the babies to be recorded over time in 3D, to study five pairs of twins from a sample of low-risk pregnant women attending the Institute of Child Health I.R.C.C.S. Burlo Garofolo.
The purpose of the study was to see how twins interacted with each other in their mothers’ wombs and to determine if the interaction was intentional or accidental.
“Newborns come into the world wired to socially interact,” Dr. Castiello states in the preamble to the study report, then poses the question, “Is a propensity to socially oriented action already present before birth?”
A young man named Doug made a startling announcement to a friend. “When I get married,” he said, “I hope that my wife and I will have a child with Down syndrome.”
The woman Doug told this to—Joni Eareckson Tada—chalked it up to youthful idealism. But as she writes in her new book, Life in the Balance, Doug meant every word. He’d spent a lot of time with children with Down Syndrome, and witnessed “an unusual joy and guilelessness” in them. And it was clear that these children were a blessing to their parents.
And yet, children with Down Syndrome are among the most “at-risk” when it comes to survival—not from their chromosomal abnormalities, but from doctors and scientists who are determined to wipe them out.
ABC News’ Devin Dwyer reports: An anti-abortion candidate running for D.C. delegate to the U.S. House is airing what is arguably one of this election cycle’s most provocative TV campaign ads, featuring extremely graphic images of aborted fetuses.
The 30-second ad for Missy Smith will air 24 times on local broadcast network affiliates across the greater Washington, D.C., metropolitan area. It is so explicit that it's preceded by a 15-second warning that was added by the stations’ administrators.
Over gruesome images of bloody and lifeless premature bodies, Smith says she had two abortions but has turned against the practice.
“I was told it’s not a baby. They lied to me. They exploited me. Then I learned the truth and I’ve suffered for years,” she says. “And believe me I am angry. My heart has been ripped out. Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Norton – they all support the murder of babies and the abuse of women by abortion. It’s time to make child killing illegal again.”
YouTube has pulled the video from its site, posting a notice that it amounted to “a violation of YouTube's policy on shocking and disgusting content.”
WJLA, the local ABC affiliate to first air the ad, noted in its disclaimer that the station was required to air the ad under federal law.
The Communications Act requires broadcasters to provide legally qualified candidates fair access to ad time and forbids them from censoring ads “in any way, or for any reason.”
Smith, who is running against incumbent Democrat Eleanor Holmes Norton, claims to have backing of Tea Party. Her website reads “Tea Party’s Number One Mission: End Legalized Child-Killing.”
She is shown in photos posing with Republican Reps. Mike Pence (IN), Steve King (IA), Trent Franks (AZ) and Jeff Fortenberry (NE), who all have support of the Tea Party movement.
Smith could not be reached for comment.
For those inclined, you can view the ad on Smith's website HERE.
Mark Early writes on "Free Speech and Crisis Pregnancy Centers":
Imagine going to a shoe store—and seeing a large sign on the door announcing, “We don’t sell puppies here.” Or suppose you’re about to board a plane, and spot a sign in the waiting area: “No train service here.” You might think, what in the world?
Or imagine walking into a four-star restaurant, and seeing a sign reading: “The county government recommends that you dine somewhere else.”
Now imagine these nutty signs might be required by law. Believe it or not, in Maryland, lawmakers have ordered signs like these to be posted—but only in front of one business: crisis pregnancy clinics. Signs that announce, not what the clinics offer—but what they don’t offer.
Baltimore and Montgomery counties in
have passed laws forcing crisis pregnancy centers to post signs announcing Maryland
The Family Research Council is launching The Social Conservative Review. An e-mail states it will constitute
"a unique summary of news of interest to social conservatives. The focus of this comprehensive collation of stories, journal articles, and op-eds is the intersection of moral concern and public life, the issues that reflect and shape not only events and legislation, but the nation's very soul.
FRC will send the Review out twice monthly.
It will feature important pieces from the country's leading newspapers, magazines, journals and conservative Web sites. FRC's goal is to help keep you informed -- and ready to act -- about the policies and proposals, research and reports that bear directly on life, liberty, family and Christian faith.
Me: I have reproduced the e-mail below, complete with links. It looks to me like a fabulous service.
April 29, 2010
Educational Freedom and Reform
Faith and Policy
Homosexuals in the Military
Marriage and Family
Sanctity of Life
Stem Cell Research
Other Articles of Note for Social Conservatives
Sunday, 02 May 2010 in Abortion, Bioethics, Conservatism, Cultural struggle, Current Affairs, Education, Environmentalism, Families, Free Speech, Freedom of Religion, Health Care, Homosexuality, Israel, Judges and courts, Marriage, Military, Obama foreign relations, Pornography, Pro-Life, Stem Cell Research | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)
La Shawn Barber comments astutely on NPR's new guideline on how to talk about the abortion debate. NPR instructs its staff to no longer refer to pro-life people as "pro-life," but instead as "abortion rights opponents." NPR bills that a "neutral position." Uh huh. In addition to the original "Bill of Rights," Barber observes:
Our rights have expanded to include the right to health care and housing we can’t afford, the right of privacy to kill unborn babies, and the right to not be offended. In 2010, these rights are on the same level as the right to free speech, free exercise of religion, and free association.
She goes on to suggest how lame stream news organizations should henceforth frame their stories:
Ted Slater - Did the Tebow Super Bowl Ad Accomplish Anything? (HT: Justin Taylor)
Time Magazine - Morocco deports Christian aid workers (HT: Justin Taylor)
George Will - 'Promoting Dependency is the Democratic Party's Vocation."
Ed Morrissey - Guess Who's Exempt from ObamaCare Mandates?
They came (200,000 is the estimated number), on Friday, January 22nd, 2010, the 37th anniversary of Roe v. Wade.
Dr. Zero: [my emphases]
Friday brought the annual March for Life to Washington, D.C. Held on the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, it brings us the bittersweet comedy of watching the media studiously ignore a massive, peaceful protest in the nation’s capitol, even on a slow news day.
Me: I didn't watch any newscasts Friday night, but if the media did, indeed, totally ignore a gathering of 200,000 at the nation's capital, then their credibility is not simply at "zero" but 10 feet under water. Unbelievable. And contemptible.
Dr. Zero again:
When the media does pay attention to the March for Life, it typically describes the event as a dreary vigil held by a graying herd of humorless, elderly scolds. Have a look at this photo gallery of the 2010 event and decide for yourself if this is an accurate description. Consider also this remarkable survey that shows six in ten young people believe abortion is morally wrong. Pro-lifers are not a dwindling band of tired footsoldiers decomposing at their posts.
Me: Indeed. Julia Dunn of the Washington Times described the crowd as "mostly college-aged." Wow. Contrast the pro-life enthusiasm of youth with what I call the dying "old guard," and (to quote Dr. Zero) "its disproportionate influence over media coverage, as can be seen from Newsweek’s hit piece on the March for Life rally."
Ironically, the "dying old guard" describes President Obama himself, he who came dressed up as a "new voice" who would bring about "change" and "hope." Could anything be more tired and hackneyed than the statement he issued Friday?
Today we recognize the 37th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, which affirms every woman’s fundamental constitutional right to choose whether to have an abortion, as well as each American’s right to privacy from government intrusion. I have, and continue to, support these constitutional rights.I also remain committed to working with people of good will to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant women and families, and strengthen the adoption system.
Today and every day, we must strive to ensure that all women have limitless opportunities to fulfill their dreams.
Me: If Obama paid a speechwriter to write that, he should demand his money back. Unless, of course, he believes it. And apparently he does. One could justly paraphrase his statement this way:
When a baby is detected growing in a mother's womb, a mother is confronted with a serious choice of whether or not to kill her baby. Uppermost in a mother's consideration must be the high probability that a child will limit her opportunities to fulfill her dreams. That being the case, it is perfectly acceptable to torture and kill the child via a variety of currently employed methods. Priorities are priorities.
I pass over without further comment Obama's statement concerning "each American's right to privacy from governent intrusion." This from the man who would intrude the government into every other aspect of a citizen's life!
Update: Wintery Knight linked to this post and added valuable material of his own. Note especially Congressman Mike Pence's two minute YouTube speech at the March for Life rally and Pence's excellent op-ed on his website. in which he invokes the memory of William Wilberforce and reiterates his desire to deny Planned Parenthood federal funding. To which I say, Amen! It's past time. Mike Pence bio here.
- Her latest Facebook message is here.
- Update 12/4/09 - On a different subject, Ben Smith names Sarah Palin a "Pro-Life Star" (he calls her the "anti-abortion star"). It's an excellent article that needs to be read in full. (HT: HotAir) It begins:
In the months since she returned to the public spotlight, Sarah Palin’s continually evolving political identity has undergone a subtle change as her public persona centers increasingly on her disabled son, Trig.
Palin began her political career as a reformer breaking up Alaska’s corrupt boys club and shifted seamlessly into last fall’s campaign trail culture warrior. But her decision to carry to term her Down syndrome child established a special relationship with anti-abortion activists, and now Palin has transformed herself from a politician who was anti-abortion into the leading figure of the anti-abortion movement. . .
But the most striking evidence of her son’s impact has been Palin’s book tour promoting her memoir, “Going Rogue.” As she descends from her tour bus or private jet to meet her fans, 19-month-old Trig has been a conspicuous presence — and generated a huge response. “There’s a lot of people who come through the line to see Trig instead of to see her,” says Jason Recher, a campaign aide who remained close to Palin and is now accompanying her on her book tour.
And those people, says Greg Mueller, a veteran anti-abortion political operative and former spokesman for Pat Buchanan, are getting a powerful message. “She’s going out there as a pro-life woman to say that there’s great joy in special-needs kids — and that we shouldn’t be aborting them.” [Read the whole thing. . .]
See also Gary Bauer - Trig Palin has divided America
This interview is well worth reading. (HT: DV) I thought I knew all there was to know about Abby Johnson's change of heart from being a director of a Planned Parenthood clinic to becoming a pro-life advocate. I previously blogged about her here, but this interview goes into more detail. In this interview Johnson explains her climb up the Planned Parenthood ladder beginning with volunteering as an "escort" in college to becoming the director and even winning the affiliate's Employee of the Year award in 2008. Excerpt:
I think the mentality, though, that they tried to instill in you is that if you work at Planned Parenthood, you are the victim — that you have all of these outside attacks from these pro-lifers. So that’s what keeps you there, that victim mentality, and it works. . .
She said that in most abortions, the doctor doesn't use ultrasound but in one case he did, and she was called in to assist (an unusual occurrence for her).
My job was to hold the ultrasound probe on the woman’s abdomen during the procedure so he could visualize the uterus during the abortion. What I saw during the procedure was so gruesome to me, and something I had never experienced before, that I just thought, “I’ll never do this again.”
She was asked if she had faith while working at Planned Parenthood. She replied:
I was always trying to rationalize my work and my faith, and I was trying to make it fit.
One thing that I’ve said throughout this whole thing is that there’s no spirituality in abortion because there really can’t be. It’s very hard to justify what you’re doing if you’re a Christian. You try to make it fit, you try to make it work, but in the end it just really doesn’t wash. So that’s why, I think, God was in this the whole time, and he is the one who led me out of there.
Read the whole thing.
- UPDATE 11/14/09 - Click here to view O'Reilly's interview with Abby Johnson conducted Nov. 11, 2009. It's well worth viewing, as well as the earlier Huckabee interview posted below. Click here for the O'Reilly interview transcript.
Heartbreaking…just heartbreaking. That’s all I can say. If we continue to consider human life AT ANY stage is worthless, we will continue to devalue our own humanity.
Former Planned Parenthood Director, Abby Johnson, appeared on the Huckabee show this weekend to talk about her transformation from a pro-choice advocate to a pro-life advocate. It all started when she first was called in to assist on an abortion, and she saw on the ultrasound the actual crumbling of an innocent life. She has turned that experience into her new quest to expose what abortion REALLY is; the extermination of a living being.
You can find the full transcript here from Newsbusters.
After eight years working at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Bryan, Texas, including two years as its director, Abby Johnson suddenly decided that she could no longer participate in abortions. What pushed Johnson out was both an ultrasound of an abortion and a renewed emphasis on the cash-generating business in the failing economy. After being told to deemphasize prevention and market for abortions, Johnson finally had enough: [more . .]
Mark Early reports:
This past Saturday, a demonstration in Madrid drew an estimated one and a half million protesters. That’s between 3 and 4 percent of Spain’s entire population, the equivalent of 9 to 12 million Americans gathering in Washington.
None of those—they were protesting a proposal to liberalize Spain’s abortion laws. They were there to tell the government, their fellow Spaniards, and the rest of the world that “every life matters.” [more...] Photos here.
Terrible news. Story here. (HT: Drudge) I'll be revisiting this post later.
Update: USA Today provides more details:
Some activists in Detroit mourned the death of Pouillon, who they said was a well-known abortion foe. "Jim Pouillon is a hero," said Monica Migliorino Miller of South Lyon, the director of Citizens for a Pro-life Society. "He died for the cause of life."
Miller said Poullion was dependent on an oxygen tank and wore leg braces. She said he often stood outside Flint area abortion clinics and Planned Parenthood offices. . . Pouillon, who often carried an oxygen tank and often used a wheelchair, was known around town as an active anti-abortion activist who displayed graphic images of aborted fetuses.
The Family Research Council's "Washington Update" eulogizes Shriver saying:
When President Reagan awarded the Medal of Freedom to Eunice Kennedy Shriver in 1984, he lauded President Kennedy's beloved sister with these words: "With enormous conviction and unrelenting effort, Eunice Kennedy Shriver has labored on behalf of America's least powerful, those with mental retardation... Her decency and goodness have touched the lives of many."
Mrs. Shriver, who died today at 88, helped in many ways to improve life in America. She will probably be best remembered for founding the Special Olympics. At a time when, tragically, the vast majority of unborn children who are diagnosed with Down Syndrome are aborted, Mrs. Shriver affirmed the worth of their lives as children created in the image of God. She spearheaded Community of Caring--to help teen-age women and their children. She was a loyal supporter of Feminists for Life. Our prayers and our thanks go out to the Kennedy and Shriver families for the life of this extraordinary woman.'