Life Advocacy Briefing

It’s Christmas!

WE WISH OUR READERS JOY & PEACE this Christmas season, looking forward to commemorating the coming of our Savior into the world, amazed at His incarnation and thankful for our salvation through His inestimable sacrifice. We plan to celebrate this holyday with family, and we trust our readers will understand that we will not be publishing next week. We expect our next edition will be dated Jan. 6. The next Congress opens on Friday, Jan. 3, and we will be watching the proceedings, which should include re-election of Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA) as Speaker of the House.

Question of the Week

WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED if the unmarried, adolescent Mary had exercised her “freedom of choice?”

A Prediction

IT MAY APPEAR OBVIOUS BY NOW, but we will say it anyway: The future of the abortion fight will center on the starvation of preborn children via chemical abortion drugs. Fewer and fewer obstetrics students and recent graduates are committed to chopping developing babies apart and suctioning them out of their mothers. And abortion-by-chemical is a cheaper option with a more promising profit margin for the abortion cartel.

We assert – even though it might appear obvious – that the policy debates and political developments in the future will need to be focused largely on making abortion-by-pill unthinkable and illegal.

And we predict that will be a high hill to climb, in part because we start behind in public awareness and opinion.

We are dismayed – but, sadly, cannot claim to be surprised – to read that our incoming President has demurred on the question of whether, reports Stephen Kokx for LifeSiteNews, he would “instruct the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) to ‘limit access to medication [chemical] abortion or abortion pills’” during an interview with Time magazine.

His first response, notes Mr. Kokx, was that “he would ‘take a look at all of that.’ But after being asked to clarify his comment, [Mr.] Trump, who seemed confused about the question at first, forcefully stated that ‘it’s always been my commitment’ to not ban [abortion chemicals]. ‘It would be highly unlikely. … I can’t imagine’ changing my mind, he said,” writes Mr. Kokx. “Still, it is a ‘complex’ issue, and people feel ‘really strongly both ways.’”

Yes, people do. Pro-life Americans – most of whom almost certainly voted for the incoming President – feel “really strongly” that the ingestion of chemicals which will kill and expel a developing human baby ought to be illegal and that the Clinton-era marketing approval for RU-486 ought to be overturned by a Trump Food & Drug Administration.

It is against a long-standing federal law, Mr. President-elect, for fetal-baby-killing chemicals to be carried by the US Postal “Service.” Just because the Biden Regime refused to enforce that law does not excuse your administration, Mr. Trump, from doing just that.

The abortion cartel’s favorite think-tank, the Guttmacher Institute, reports, notes Mr. Kokx, that in 2023, “chemical abortions accounted for 63% of all facility-based abortions in states without near-total bans, a sharp rise from 53% in 2020.” With RU-486 being shipped through the mail, imagine how many more abortions were committed beyond that “facility-based” baby killings statistic.

Though we certainly seek a marketing ban on RU-486, if the incoming President does not want to direct his FDA to withdraw marketing approval for the baby poison, he could at least enforce the long-standing federal law banning its shipment via the postal “service.”

The shift in abortion practice from surgical killings to chemical poisonings is abetted too by the Trump posture that abortion policy should be set only by the various states. States which seek to protect their future citizens are facing a major challenge in enforcing their protective laws against the poisoning of babies in their moms’ bathrooms and have no jurisdiction over the postal “service.”

We call on leaders of our fellow pro-life organizations – several of which offer significant political muscle to the incoming President and our Senators and Members of Congress – to insist that the poisoning of our progeny be a matter for federal government redress. It was the feds who opened the gate; it is up to the feds to shut it.

At Least A.G. Paxton Is Trying

TRYING HIS BEST TO ENFORCE TEXAS’s ABORTION BAN – even with the challenge of cross-border marketing – Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is suing a New York doctor, reports Doug Mainwaring for LifeSiteNews, “for allegedly unlawfully providing abortion-inducing drugs to Texas residents in direct violation of state law.”

The founder of the Abortion Coalition for Telemedicine, Dr. Margaret Daley Carpenter, notes Mr. Mainwaring, “‘unlawfully provided a Collin County [Texas] resident with abortion-inducing drugs that ended the life of an unborn child and resulted in serious complications for the mother, who then required medical intervention,’ according to a press release from AG Paxton’s office about the case,” quoted by LifeSiteNews.”

Read that again and imagine whether Mr. Paxton would ever have known about this death if the aborting mother had not had to seek medical care for her complications. Imagine how many more Texas babies are being snuffed out via mailed-in abortion chemicals despite the state having outlawed abortion.

Think, too, about the insidious application of “telemedicine” to abortion, giving abortionists access to distressed mothers anywhere in the world via computerized interviews with no personal examination or follow-up. And they call it “medicine” or “care.”

“‘Texas laws prohibit a physician or medical supplier from providing any abortion-inducing drugs by courier delivery or mail service,’” states a press release from AG Paxton, “noting,” writes Mr. Mainwaring, “that doctors are also prohibited from prescribing Texas residents drugs through telehealth services without a valid Texas medical license.” This is one state whose policymakers have thought through the implications of baby poison via computerized “consultation.” As for Mr. Paxton, with all the logistic difficulties, he is seeking to enforce his state’s law even against those who think they enjoy immunity by living in states like New York, whose attorney general, Letitia James (D), issued a statement, quoted by LifeSiteNews, declaring, “‘As other states move to attack those who provide or obtain abortion care [sic], New York is proud to be a safe haven for abortion access.’”

“‘In this case, an out-of-state doctor violated the law and caused serious harm to this patient,’” said AG Paxton in the news release, quoted by LifeSiteNews. “‘This doctor prescribed abortion-inducing drugs – unauthorized, over telemedicine – causing [the woman] to end up in the hospital with serious complications. In Texas, we treasure the health and lives of mothers and babies, and this is why out-of-state doctors may not illegally and dangerously prescribe abortion-inducing drugs to Texas residents.’”

Said Texas Right to Life spokesman Kimberlyn Schwartz, quoted by Mr. Mainwaring, “‘If Texas wins, this case could open the door for the state to take further legal action against one of the largest organizations in the illegal abortion cartel: AidAccess.’” That organization, notes the LifeSiteNews writer, “is an international group that circumvents national abortion laws by sending abortion pills through the mail, including Mifeprex.” The New York abortionist being charged by Mr. Paxton is affiliated with the outfit, reports Mr. Mainwaring.

Even the federal FDA has cautioned about the risks to the aborting mother who chooses to starve her developing baby to death and then expel the baby’s body through the RU-486 chemical cocktail.

“‘As of Dec. 31, 2018,’” the FDA reported, writes Mr. Mainwaring, “‘there were reports of 24 deaths of women associated with Mifeprex [Ru-486] since the product was approved in September 2000, including two cases of ectopic pregnancy resulting in death and several cases of severe systemic infection (also called sepsis), including some that were fatal,’ the FDA has warned, on top of 2,740 cases of severe complications from 2000 to 2012.’”

So much for concern for the safety and mental health of women. Somebody should tell Mr. Trump.

Too Hot to Handle?

AMERICA’s PHARMACY CHAINS APPEAR A BIT FLUMMOXED by a critical marketing decision: Will we or will we not peddle abortion pills over our counters?

Sam’s Club’s pharmacy counter is offering RU-486, though its own website acknowledges the downsides for their customers. In a report by Dan Hart in The Washington Stand on Dec. 14, the Sam’s Club website is quoted: “‘This drug must be used only if you can easily reach adequate emergency medical services in case you have a serious medical problem.’” The website goes on to acknowledge the abortion drug “‘may make you dizzy’” and then adds, “in some cases, ‘bleeding will need to be stopped by surgery.’ The FDA’s medication guide,” writes Mr. Hart, “notes that as much as 7% of women will in fact need surgery after taking mifepristone ‘to stop bleeding’ or to complete the abortion.” Sam’s Club is a division of the retail giant Walmart.

That 7% risk rate was cited by Live Action, quoted by Mr. Hart: “‘With Guttmacher’s latest numbers showing that 63% of the 1,037,000 abortions in 2023 were done by abortion pill, this means that as many as 45,000 women could require surgery after taking the abortion pill every year.’” Such a deal.

“Other studies have found,” writes Mr. Hart, “that one in five chemical abortions have resulted in negative health outcomes. In addition, according to incomplete FDA data from between 2000 and 2021 (due to some states’ refusal to report abortion data), ingestion of the abortion drug resulted in 4,207 adverse events, including 26 deaths, 1,045 hospitalizations, 603 events requiring a blood transfusion and 413 infections. Still other studies,” notes Mr. Hart, “show that women suffer extensive psychological harm after taking the abortion pill. One found that one-third (34%) of women ‘reported an adverse change in themselves, including depression, anxiety, substance abuse and thoughts of suicide.’”

Though Sam’s Club seems dug in for now – as do Walgreens and CVS – one major marketer, Kroger, appears to have backed off the abortion drug. Just four days after the pro-life Live Action alerted its adherents to the major grocery chain’s decision to market RU-486, The Washington Stand, reports Mr. Hart, “received an e-mail from Kroger’s communications director stating, ‘The Kroger Company Family of Pharmacies do not carry mifepristone, nor do we dispense it.’” Somebody should tell the company’s webmaster. “As of that time, however,” writes Mr. Hart, “Kroger’s Health Savings Club website still listed the drug. After we pointed out the discrepancy and requested an explanation, Kroger responded,” notes Mr. Hart, “‘The Kroger Family of Pharmacies doesn’t carry mifepristone and was listed on the Kroger Health Savings Club site in error,’ further requesting a ‘retraction of Kroger’s inclusion in the story.’”

But, reports The Washington Stand, “the mifepristone listing still remained on the site at 5 p.m. EST. TWS sent a further e-mail acknowledging Kroger’s response but also pointing out that the abortion drug webpage was still live. Several minutes later, Kroger responded, stating, ‘The link you are using is old.’ By 8 a.m. the following morning, the mifepristone listing was removed.’” Yes!

Said Mary Szoch, Family Research Council’s director of the Center for Human Dignity, quoted by Mr. Hart: “‘I’m so grateful for the clarification from Kroger that they are not selling the abortion drug, mifepristone. … It doesn’t make sense for grocery stores to be abortion businesses. The two just don’t go together. Because of this clarification, you’ll definitely see my kids and [me] zooming around the store this week in their steering wheel cart!’” As a regular Kroger customer, Mrs. Szoch had previously weighed in with sadness over the early reports.

R.F.K. Willing to Go Along

ONE OF THE MORE LIBERAL of President-elect Trump’s Cabinet nominees appears to be hedging a bit on abortion. And that is good news, especially considering what post he is to hold.

“Robert F. Kennedy Jr. reportedly said he believes there are ‘too many abortions in the world,’ while meeting with Republican Senators as he works to build support for his nomination to lead the Dept. of Health & Human Services,” reports Matt Lamb for LifeSiteNews.

The former Democrat “also reportedly made promises,” writes Mr. Lamb, “that the Trump Administration would reinstate pro-life policies from its first term and suggested he opposes efforts to include ‘gender identity’ in federal healthcare law and mandate medical professionals provide transgender drugs and surgeries.

“‘I think there’s too many abortions in the world, let’s just start there,’ he reportedly said,” notes Mr. Lamb. “The quotes come from Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), who rehashed the conversation to The Daily Wire.

“‘It’s not that I don’t value life, I value life. I just look at it a little bit different in certain circumstances, what we’ve been through as a family,’ Mullin reported RFK Jr. saying,” quoted by LifeSiteNews, who notes, “He has held a variety of positions on abortion, most recently settling on what he called the ‘emerging consensus’ that killing babies should be limited to the first 15 weeks or so. This would only protect about 7% of babies from abortion, according to CDC data.” And it is assuredly not a position held by Life Advocacy, in case readers wonder.

Apparently, the topic was broached by Sen. Mullin, who told The Daily Wire, quoted by LifeSiteNews, Mr. Kennedy “had been ‘all over the map on it.’”

For his part, Pres. Trump, writes Mr. Lamb, “has … signaled he does not see a role for the federal government in enacting legislative protections for preborn life. He also recently reiterated that he supports keeping in place Pres. Biden’s policy of allowing dangerous chemical abortion drugs to be mailed across the country with minimal oversight. … However, he reportedly plans to defund Planned Parenthood,” notes Mr. Lamb, “reinstate a ban on taxpayer funding of foreign abortions (the Mexico City Policy) and ensure conscience protections for pro-life medical professionals. Defunding Planned Parenthood,” reports Mr. Lamb, “has been endorsed by both Vice President-elect J.D. Vance and Speaker of the House Mike Johnson.”

According to Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), writes Mr. Lamb: “RFK also ‘supports reinstating the bar on Title X [Ten] funds going to organizations that promote abortion. … He pledged to reverse the Biden Administration’s Section 1557 rule and also said all of his deputies at HHS would be pro-life,’ [Mr.] Hawley wrote” in a post on X (ex-Twitter), reports Mr. Lamb, who explains, “Sec. 1557 is an ObamaCare regulation that would force healthcare providers to go along with a gender-confused person’s declared gender despite it being incongruent with biological sex.

The Missouri Senator also reiterated the comments the nominee gave to Sen. Mullin,” notes Mr. Lamb. “‘He told me he believes there are far too many abortions in the US and that we cannot be the moral leader of the free world with abortion rates so high.’

“Kennedy also reportedly told Mullin,” reports Mr. Lamb, “‘I’m serving at the will of the President of the United States, and it’s his policies that I will put forth. And so we may not agree on every single issue, but we agree 100%, we shouldn’t even be having abortions in this world anyways. But my policies are not what I’m pushing forward; it’s the President’s, and I think the country knows where the President is on that, and so therefore, that’s my position.’

“Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) said Kennedy ‘was very clear: Pres. Trump is pro-life, and he’s gonna have this as a pro-life HHS,’” writes Mr. Lamb. “He mentioned Trump’s ‘three exceptions’ for rape, incest and life of the mother, a view Trump mistakenly attributes to Pres. Ronald Reagan,” who wrote a brief book called On Abortion, stating a clear pro-life position.

Warning to Parents

Excerpted from Dec. 18, 2024, LifeSiteNews commentary by Matt Lamb

             While parents and other citizens are rightly concerned with the curricula in schools and the books in their libraries, another threat to parental rights and the well-being of minors exists in “school-based health centers.”

             The Daily Signal highlights an issue with one such proposal in Maine, where a high school would operate a center that could give out abortifacient birth control. The Maine School Administrative Dist. 11 would “provide confidential ‘mental health, reproductive health and substance use’ care to minors who ‘demonstrate decision-making capacity,’ according to The Daily Signal. While the district does not currently plan to offer transgender drugs, the news outlet notes that Maine law allows 16-year-olds to get these substances without parental approval.

             Some may assume that the health centers must get parental consent before prescribing birth control. After all, while a school could be empowered to provide emergency first aid, such as if a student drops a beaker and gets cut during chemistry class, doesn’t it need to get permission to hand out birth control? Not likely. … A … ‘general consent’ form opens the door … .

             Chicago Public Schools is also happy to help minor students as young as 12 get birth control and other “reproductive health” services, including abortion. The school district also has an explicit policy of hiding information from parents.” …

Life Advocacy Briefing editor’s note: Chicago Public Schools has welcomed confidential “school-based clinics” since at least the early 1980s. Often these shops operate in cooperation with Planned Parenthood. “Confidential” STD diagnosis and treatment, contraception and abortion referral are entirely intentional. Readers who desire more detail about the current news on school-based clinics are referred to https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/12/09/parents-outraged-maine-school-clinic-could-give-students-confidential-reproductive-health-care. The full LSN commentary can be read at https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/maine-high-school-plans-to-give-students-birth-control-in-secretive-health-center.