Life Advocacy Briefing

Modeling Advocacy for Life

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP (R) IS CONTINUING TO RAISE THE INJUSTICE of abortion in his campaign rallies challenging the crop of Democratic contenders for their party’s Presidential nomination.

Speaking at a mid-August rally in New Hampshire – not the nation’s most conservative state – Pres. Trump declared, reports Calvin Freiburger for LifeSiteNews.com, “‘Virtually every top Democrat also now supports late-term abortion, ripping babies straight from [the] mother’s womb right up until the moment of birth,’ he said. ‘And in the case of the Virginia governor – he’s having a rough, rough time; in his case, the baby is born, and then he goes to talk to the mother – the doctor talks to the mother – the baby is now born, wrapped, as he said. And then they decide whether or not to execute the baby. … That is why I have asked Congress to prohibit extreme late-term abortion, because Republicans believe that every child is a sacred gift of God,’ the President concluded,” as reported by Mr. Freiburger.

The leftwing media and their allies in Internet “reporting” ignored the President’s point, of course, and attacked his use of the word “execute” as equivalent to abortion. He might have said “killed” – would that have been less offensive to the abortion-cartel apologists? Doubtful! The term “execute” does imply that the unborn baby has committed a punishable crime, so it might have been over the top. But among the definitions of “execute” is “murder,” and included in the dictionary definition of “murder” is “to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously” – a good fit for the reality of abortion, regardless of what the 1973 black-robed “Justices” attempted to disguise.

Our point is, if the President can call out the abortion industry on its dark deeds of injustice inflicted on the most innocent among us, when will his party’s other leaders and paid political consultants grasp the value in calling out the abortion lobby and its political servants for their pursuit of injustice and brutality? Choose words carefully, but do tell the truth! Life, after all, is a winning issue, but only if its advocacy is asserted.

After quoting the President and refuting his media critics, the LifeSiteNews reporter goes on to focus his readers’ attention on the languishing Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, sitting in a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee as HR-962, filed by Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO) along with 190 co-sponsors, and its equally languishing twin, S-130, filed by Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) with 48 co-sponsors.

“Abortion defenders have justified their opposition to the federal born-alive bill,” writes Mr. Freiburger, “by claiming that newborns simply aren’t left to die after botched abortions and that current federal law is sufficient to deter it. In fact,” asserts the LifeSiteNews reporter, “abortionists have been filmed admitting they would commit infanticide (as happened in a 2018 Ohio case  highlighted by the pro-life group Created Equal), and current federal law lacks specific criminal penalties for withholding treatment from a newborn after a failed abortion.”

Returning to his report on the President’s rally speech, Mr. Freiburger ends his report with this quote: “‘Above all, we will never stop fighting for the values that bind us together as one America. We will support, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,’ [Mr.] Trump promised [Aug. 15]. ‘We will stand with the incredible men and women of law enforcement. We believe in the dignity of work and in the sanctity of life.’”

Planned Parenthood Throws in First Towel

THE RULE WILL BECOME ENFORCEABLE on Sept. 18, but already Planned Parenthood and Family Planning of Maine have made it official: No more federal Title X (Ten) “family planning” taxpayer funding for outfits which refer their “clients” for abortion.

The Protect Life rule from the Dept. of Health & Human Services (HHS) is still tied up in court, but a ruling from the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals – of all places! – allows its enforcement while the litigation continues. And responsible attorneys expect, based on existing statutory law, that it will ultimately be upheld.

Via its announcement last Monday, Planned Parenthood underscored its true identity as America’s number-one abortion outfit, a far cry from the political smokescreen long draped upon it by its adherents in the political world. Though it will still be drawing hundreds of millions in federal funds for “women’s health services” through other accounts, the $60 million it will lose annually by refusing to comply with the new regulation is not exactly chump change.

The new rule, reports Madeline Osburn in The Federalist, “requires recipients of federal birth control funds to prove they are financially and physically separating those funds from abortion and ‘prohibits the use of Title X funds to perform, promote, refer for or support abortion as a method of family planning.’”

In its still pending lawsuit, notes Ms. Osburn, Planned Parenthood “argues the new Title X rule imposes ‘burdensome and costly impediments to the provision of services,’ which would ‘substantially reduce the ability to provide those services.’

“A spokesman from HHS’s Office of Population Affairs (OPA) said this claim demonstrates,” writes Ms. Osburn, “Planned Parenthood prioritizes abortion referrals over making the changes necessary to receive taxpayer funds for other birth prevention services. ‘Like all Title X providers, Planned Parenthood has the option to comply with the 2019 Title X Final Rule, which faithfully implement[s] the statutes, and continue to receive federal funding,’ the spokesman said.”

The report in The Federalist also quotes Susan B. Anthony List spokesman Mallory Quigley: “‘Planned Parenthood’s refusal to comply with this simple regulation demonstrates yet again just how committed they are to performing abortions – they commit over 300,000 every year.’”

Abby Johnson Story Making a Splash

THE MOVIE DRAMATIZING THE ESCAPE OF ABBY JOHNSON from her Planned Parenthood management post and from the abortion industry hit number-one in Amazon sales on its first day of DVD sales in mid-August.

Before the DVD release, Unplanned already reportedly grossed more than $18 million during 19 weeks on more than 1,500 US cinema screens. The film is now being shown at cinemas in Latin America, Canada, the United Kingdom and the Philippines, and according to a Facebook post by Ms. Johnson, cited in a LifeSiteNews.com story by Martin M. Barillas, Unplanned “will be shown broadly in Pakistan.”

Mr. Barillas quotes a Daily Signal interview with Unplanned’s co-director Cary Solomon, who, he writes, “credited a mystical experience for the success of the film. She said that when the producers of the film were initially ‘very worried, very scared’ about making the film,” Mr. Barillas reports, “ ‘we had a Holy Spirit moment: The Spirit dropped on us and basically said, “Do not be afraid. This is for My glory.”’ Despite all doubters,” writes Mr. Barillas, “Solomon asserted that this was precisely what happened.”

In the Courts

• A FORMER PLANNED PARENTHOOD DIRECTOR IN ARIZONA HAS WON a $3 million damage award against the abortion chain via a jury verdict in Phoenix. At issue was the woman’s firing after a 17-year career at Planned Parenthood, for which she had managed three Arizona “clinics.” Mayra Rodriguez was “wrongfully terminated,” reports Claire Chretien for LifeSiteNews.com, “in October 2017 after repeatedly making claims that Planned Parenthood was endangering the health and safety of its patients. [Ms.] Rodriguez is an ‘undocumented’ alien, according to And Then There Were None, a non-profit that helps former abortion workers leave the industry. ATTWN,” writes Ms. Chretien, “said Planned Parenthood tried to use [Ms.] Rodriguez’s immigration status against her.” Her attorney had not specified a dollar amount in comments to the jury; it took just three hours for the jury to award her $3 million.  Ms. Rodriguez, reports Ms. Chretien, “said Planned Parenthood representatives frequently called her a ‘liar’ in court because of her immigration status and that it was hurtful to experience the deception by women she had considered friends and by Planned Parenthood executives themselves. ‘But here we are,’ she said. ‘The jury heard the truth. … I hope my case is a lesson to other workers that shows them that the truth will prevail. I also hope my case is a lesson,’” she said in the LifeSiteNews account, “‘to other workers that shows them that the truth will prevail. I also hope,’” added Ms. Rodriguez, “‘my case is a lesson to employers who abuse their power: sometimes the underdog wins and justice will be done.’”

• A FEDERAL JUDGE IN CALIFORNIA has ruled in favor of Students for Life of America’s chapter at California State University/SanMarcos, north of SanDiego. The ruling came in a two-year dispute over the refusal of the school to grant $500 of student activity fees to host a speaker, Dr. Mike Adams, professor of Sociology & Criminology at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington, while at the same time granting nearly $300,000 in mandatory student fees – nearly 22% of the total – to the Gender Equity Center and LGBQTA Pride Center in just one year for hosting events we will not name here. The lawsuit was brought by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF). “The root of the problem” exposed in the lawsuit, notes an ADF blog posting by Sarah Adams, “is that [the campus students assn.] does not have any guidelines or criteria to abide by when determining how to distribute [mandated-fee student] funds. So, certain student groups can easily be favored over others,” comments Ms. Adams, “as [the SFLA chapter president] and Students for Life discovered. This unequal treatment is viewpoint discrimination – a blatant violation of the Constitution.” The ruling by Judge James Lorenz criticizes the university for its lack of clear rules governing the use of the mandatory fees. The judge’s ruling denied “‘qualified immunity’” for the university’s chancellor and president, notes Greg Piper for TheCollegeFix.com, “against claims that they personally violated the constitutional rights of the pro-life students.”

In the States

• NORTH CAROLINA’s YADKIN COUNTY Board of Commissioners have adopted a resolution declaring their exurban county – west of Winston-Salem – “the first official sanctuary county for pre-born children in America,” reports LifeSiteNews.com. The two main objectives of the resolution, notes LifeSiteNews, are to establish “as the official policy of the county, the scientific fact that life begins at conception or fertilization,” and to commit the county “to enforce this policy ‘by all means within its power, in accordance with its responsibilities as the people’s elected local representatives.’ Follow-up activities being organized right now by Personhood North Carolina and the local churches and civil society,” notes the report, “include placing a plaque on the grounds of the county government that commemorates the resolution and serves as a tangible reminder of the commitment made by the people of the county. There are also plans for public townhall meetings to work with the people, churches and local organizations to find ways to provide support for mothers and fathers of pre-born children so that the county can become a place that truly welcomes and protects the gift of life. … The Yadkin County resolution is unique,” notes LifeSiteNews, “because it affirms the right of the people to protect the right to life against a tyrannical judiciary.”

Whom Do They Think They Are Kidding?

Aug. 13, 2019, Washington Examiner commentary by Ryan Neuhaus, Florida regional coordinator, Students for Life of America

            Recently, a coalition of 75 organizations including Planned Parenthood, National LGBTQ Task Force, the ACLU and the National Abortion Federation released a 116-page blueprint outlining a policy agenda aimed at advancing policies for women and children in the name of “sexual and reproductive health care, rights and justice.” However, after reading over the policies, one quickly realizes that they would substantially harm American families without bringing forth “rights” or “justice.”

            Parental rights, for example, are targeted for elimination. The coalition deemed parental consent for an abortion as detrimental to the empowerment of “girls and youth assigned female.”

            If the true goal of the coalition is to help empower young women, shouldn’t they encourage young women to look to their mothers, their families or at least an experienced adult such as a judge for guidance in potentially intense and emotional times? After all, considering that adult engagement is required for getting your ears pierced or taking an aspirin at school, surely making a life-ending decision such as abortion is worth a conversation with someone who isn’t going to profit from it.

            Cutting out mothers seems like the most glaring oversight of all. “Of all familial relationships, the mother-daughter one is most likely to remain important for both parties, even when major life changes occur,” write the authors of a study led by Kathryn Bojczyk of Florida State University. “Multiple theoretical perspectives recognize the mother-daughter bond as lifelong, intimate and developmentally important.” Distancing a mother’s guidance regarding the health and well-being of their children is terrible policy.

            Research conducted by Paula Goodwin of Purdue University and Osman Gala of UCLA has shown that traditional family structures have positioned women to directly impact the overall health and well-being of their families. If the true intent of pro-abortion activists were to provide health care to women, while respecting and valuing women, taking mothers out of the decision-making process alongside their children would be viewed as irresponsible, as it devalues motherhood and endangers adolescent women.

            Good policy would uphold parental and adult engagement laws, as mothers and fathers are at the heart of a child’s education and health care. And parents will be the ones helping pick up the pieces when things go wrong. Judicial bypass laws also at least ensure that someone with the child’s interest in mind is looking at the needs of all.

            Perhaps the abortion lobby’s desire to cut out parents has to do with the fact that they want unrestricted access to minors to make an abortion sale. The substantive work of Dr. Mchael New has shown conclusively that when a state passes a law ensuring that parents are involved in the decision, the overall statewide rate of abortion decreases by an estimated 13.6%.

            Abortion has harmed millions of women across the United States. Often portrayed as a safe medical practice, abortion has been found to scar the lining of the uterus, damage the cervix and other internal organs, lead to eating disorders, depression, suicidal thoughts and even death. Complications from botched surgeries have resulted in hysterectomies, ending girls’ chances ever to have children of their own later in life.

            The overriding problem with the healthcare proposal coming from abortion advocates is a fundamental disagreement over what constitutes health care. Pregnancy is not a disease cured by abortion. Pushing an agenda that distills all women’s interests down to the presence or absence of abortion ignores needs for economic advancement, access to education or a level playing field in the law.

            A blueprint for health care that values and strengthens the lives of mothers and children is a good idea. It won’t be achieved if we cut the ties between adults and children. The real question is, who can be better trusted to help a child make an abortion decision – the people who have devoted their lives to a child or the people whose goal is to make a sale?

Planned Parenthood’s Bottom Line

Aug. 20, 2019, commentary by former Reagan domestic policy chief Gary Bauer

            As you may recall, the Trump Administration has reinstated tough regulations from the Reagan era that prohibit family planning clinics receiving federal funding under Title X [Ten] from promoting abortions.

            After losing several preliminary cases in the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals, Planned Parenthood announced yesterday that it was withdrawing from the Title X program if it could not use those tax dollars to promote abortion. That’s great news! I couldn’t help but notice the irony, however.

            Throughout this debate, Planned Parenthood has claimed that if it is denied Title X funding, women’s healthcare services would suffer, and Planned Parenthood insists that providing healthcare services is the main reason it exists. Obviously that was a lie, as Planned Parenthood voluntarily withdrew from the program.

            Once it lost the fight to block the Administration’s rule, Planned Parenthood exposed its real priority. It will not in any way compromise its ability to destroy innocent unborn children. They would rather give up millions of dollars than abort one less baby.

            And let’s be clear about this. The government has no money that it does not get from you. So Planned Parenthood is no longer using your money to conduct its jihad against defenseless unborn children. And that is a good thing!

            In reality, Planned Parenthood is two things: the biggest abortion mill in the country and one of the most powerful political action committees in the country. You can bet it will be out in full force in 2020, working overtime to defeat the pro-life Trump/Pence ticket.