LifeNews

Dangerous Pro-Abortion Bills Moving Quickly at Virginia Legislature, Pro-Life Help Needed

Fri, 15 Jan 2021 23:25:55 GMT

Please use the VSHL legislative action center and make your voice heard today!

The 2021 General Assembly has barely begun and multiple bills that will radically change abortion policies in Virginia have already had hearings or will in the next few days!

Your voices need to be heard right now! No tax funds for abortion!

VSHL LEGISLATIVE ACTION CENTER

A bill that removes the restriction on funding abortion in healthcare plans offered in Virginia under the Affordable Health Care act. That means that Virginians will be required to pay for elective abortions, and it is doubtful that any plans will be allowed to stay in the system if they do not cover abortion costs. Virginians seeking legitimate health care will be unable to find affordable care that is not tainted by abortion.

Please follow LifeNews.com on Gab for the latest pro-life news and info, free from social media censorship.

This bill has both a Senate version, SB 1276 and House of Delegates version too, HB 1896. Both bills are working through the process quickly and could pass if concerned pro-life Virginians don’t call a halt to the use of our taxes funds to pay for abortions for any reason through all nine months of pregnancy.

HB 1922 is another bill that will expand the use of tax funds to pay for all elective abortions under the state Medicaid program. This will lead to hundreds of new abortions performed every year if it passes.

This bill also forces private insurers to cover elective abortions in plans they offer employees!

Information about these bills and links to send your message can be found on the VSHL website Legislative Action Center.

VSHL LEGISLATIVE ACTION CENTER

Even if you think your legislators are very pro-abortion, remember this is an election year. Our comments matter this year! Every contact is counted! So please use the VSHL legislative action center and make your voice heard today!

As more bills are introduced, we will be updating the Legislative Action Center. Expect more to be added tomorrow or this weekend.

Planned Parenthood Stops Abortions By Mail After Supreme Court Upholds Trump’s Pro-Life Rule

Fri, 15 Jan 2021 23:23:14 GMT

This week’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding the FDA requirement that banned the mailed distribution of abortion drugs is already having a positive impact on Pennsylvania.

Planned Parenthood Keystone has removed from its website a page touting abortions by mail. The abortion giant openly avowed that abortions by mail were designed to expand abortion in the Keystone State.

But with the Supreme Court’s FDA v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists decision, Planned Parenthood has obviously been forced to rethink its latest abortion marketing ploy.

RU486 abortions/chemical abortions [called by proponents “medication abortions”) have been on the rise in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. From 2018 to 2019, the number of chemical abortions increased from 12,466 to 13,845. This increase contributed to the slightly more than 2% increase in abortion totals statewide.

Follow LifeNews on the Parler social media network for the latest pro-life news!

At the same time, complications from abortions have risen dramatically in Pennsylvania. In 2019, according to figures from the PA Department of Health, 285 complications from abortion were reported, an astronomical increase of more than 59% over the 2018 totals. The vast majority of the complications—82%—involved baby body parts being left behind in mothers’ wombs. Other complications included excessive bleeding and infection.

Chemical abortions are especially traumatic because they leave women to deal with the aftermath of abortion on their own, in their own homes, without a physician present. Each time they return to the bathroom, they may be reminded of the trauma of losing their child to abortion. In this way, chemical abortions can pose serious emotional health risks for mothers.

The High Court should be applauded for placing a priority on sound medical concerns, rather than appeasing the abortion industry, which appears far more interested in making money than safeguarding women’s health.

LifeNews.com Note: Maria Gallagher is the Legislative Director and Political Action Committee Director for the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation and she has written and reported for various broadcast and print media outlets, including National Public Radio, CBS Radio, and AP Radio.

Planned Parenthood Excited to Push Its Radical Abortion Agenda Under Joe Biden

Fri, 15 Jan 2021 22:51:12 GMT

The latest double issue of Time magazine has an advertisement on the last page inside the cover. Well, to the naked eye, it looks like Journalism, but it’s actually a promotional interview with Alexis McGill Johnson, the president of Planned Parenthood. Above a black and white picture of Johnson is the promotional pull quote:

‘HOW DO WE GO BEYOND ROE TO FULFILL THE PROMISE OF SAFE, LEGAL ABORTION FOR ALL?’

Time reporter Abigail Abrams asks the kind of set-up questions that Larry King asks in infomercials for Omega XL pills, such as “What are your top priorities for the Biden administration?” And “What do you think of Joe Biden’s choice of Xavier Becerra to lead the Department of Health and Human Services”? (“It’s tremendously exciting,” as we could have guessed. “Becerra is a staunch sexual- and reproductive-health champion.”)

Time spent two of its “7 Questions” asking about Kamala Harris, another staunch abortion backer.

During the presidential primaries, Sen. Kamala Harris proposed a law, modeled on the Voting Rights Act, that that would protect the right to abortion nationwide. With Harris as Vice President, is that kind of law something Planned Parenthood would pursue?

SUPPORT LIFENEWS! To help us stand against Joe Biden’s abortion agenda, please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

Even with Roe in place, access to abortion is still limited. As our reproductive justice colleagues always say, Roe is the floor, not the ceiling. We need to engage with our congressional champions, as well as the administration and think about how do we go beyond Roe to fulfill the promise to safe, legal abortion for all. I don’t think that’s a single policy solution. It’s not a single congressional or regulatory solution. You know, it’s about the right, but also the access.

Harris also made other women’s health issues a focus during her campaign for President. How will having her in the White House impact your work?

I really value her leadership on issues like maternal mortality, which is part of sexual and reproductive health care. The Momnibus bill that she was a lead on are ways to talk about the full spectrum of sexual- and reproductive-health care. With all of these appointments and conversations, I think it’s giving us a lot of hope about the ways in which this Administration is using the power of the personnel appointments to demonstrate and signal the direction of policy that isn’t neat. We don’t just live in one neat agency. All of these agencies impact us.

This woman of color is going to get the requisite race question: “How is Planned Parenthood thinking about its own work in the context of health equity and racial justice?”

Johnson very carefully avoids the trap of Planned Parenthood’s founder Margaret Sanger being a eugenicist who wanted to abort minorities: “Planned Parenthood is a 104 year old organization. The reckoning has hit us as well. And I think it’s been very powerful to lean into the work, and to think about, with the patient at the center of everything we do, how we develop a stronger intersectional claim that allows us to deliver care with the values that we espouse.”

There is not a hint of an anti-abortion point in here anywhere, but there is the comical claim at the beginning of the online interview that they’d explore “how Planned Parenthood plans to push its agenda with a moderate Democrat in the White House.” As this interview demonstrates, there’s nothing “moderate” in the Biden-Harris push to expand abortion.

LifeNews.com Note: Tim Graham is the director of media analysis for the Media Research Center, a media watchdog group. He was a White House correspondent for World magazine in 2001 and 2002. This originally appeared on the NewsBusters web site.

Reader’s Digest Canada Pushes Euthanasia, Ignores Hospice

Fri, 15 Jan 2021 22:45:11 GMT

The push is on in Canada to normalize euthanasia as the best way to die — to save money and emotional turmoil. How hard is the push? Reader’s Digest Canada — no less — has published a guide to end-of-life planning that pushes euthanasia and doesn’t even mention hospice.

The guide advises readers to “pick the right time” to die, i.e., be euthanized — euphemistically known as “medical assistance in dying” (MAID). From “The Ultimate Guide to End of Life Planning”:

A scheduled death can allow people to say goodbye in the way they want. According to Helen Long, a MAID is often like a celebration of life—except the guest of honour gets to be there. “A friend of my dad had a classic car, and he and his son went for one last drive around the neighbourhood,” she says. “Once a person makes a decision, it’s often a very freeing experience for them. It gives them back their control.”

The allusion is to “the guest of honour” is to euthanasia parties, where people attend to say goodbye and watch the patient be killed or — as happens in the U.S.A. — take poison pills. In my view, people who attend such gatherings validate suicide and are morally complicit in the death.

Follow LifeNews on the MeWe social media network for the latest pro-life news free from Facebook’s censorship!

Suicide prevention? Ha! What’s that?

Meanwhile, the guide is notable for what it leaves out. As mentioned above, there is no discussion of the compassionate services available to terminally ill people and their families from hospice, such as pain control, chaplaincy, volunteers, home-care givers, and the like.

Nor is there any discussion about how to access pain and symptom control. Nor of how to overcome the existential fear and anxieties — such as worries about being a burden — that are the primary cause of people asking doctors to kill them, but which can be significantly ameliorated with the proper interventions.

When the Reader’s Digest Canada boosts killing — and gives extremely short shrift to caring — and indeed, leaves out the most important information fearful terminally ill patients and their families need to make proper decisions, you know the culture of death has gone mainstream.

Shame on the Reader’s Digest Canada.

LifeNews.com Note: Wesley J. Smith, J.D., is a special consultant to the Center for Bioethics and Culture and a bioethics attorney who blogs at Human Exeptionalism.

Joe Biden Will Name Francis Collins NIH Director, He Called Research With Aborted Baby Parts ...

Fri, 15 Jan 2021 22:31:10 GMT

Francis Collins, a scientist who has defended using aborted baby body parts in research, is President-elect Joe Biden’s choice to lead the National Institutes of Health.

Biden, a pro-abortion Democrat, announced Collins as his choice to direct the NIH on Friday. Collins has served in the role since 2009 when President Barack Obama appointed him. President Donald Trump kept Collins in the position despite concerns raised by several prominent pro-life groups.

In 2018, Collins defended the NIH using taxpayer funds to support unethical research involving aborted baby body parts. Some of these gristly experiments include a University of Pittsburgh research project that transplanted the scalps of aborted babies onto mice and rats to study the human immune system.

In an interview with the Washington Examiner, Collins implied that research using aborted baby parts may be pro-life.

“I do think that part of the argument has been missing a little bit in the fetal tissue debate: the sort of immediate assumption that if you’re in support of fetal tissue research that you must also think abortion is just fine,” he told the news outlet. “Even for people who are pro-life, who are troubled by abortion, the use of fetal tissue for research, since they are being derived anyway, if that is going to save a life someday, seems like a credible stance.”

Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and videos.

The NIH doles out tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer-funded grants to researchers who use aborted baby parts in their experiments.

The Trump administration began to crack down on these grants in response to pro-lifers’ concerns. It canceled several contracts, including one involving “humanized mice,” and took other steps to stop funding unethical research, including through the formation of the new advisory board.

In August, the bioethics advisory board recommended that the government reject grants for 13 research projects that plan to use aborted baby body parts. Trump appointed a number of leading pro-life researchers and bioethicists to the board last year.

The Trump administration also invested $20 million into promoting ethical alternatives to aborted baby parts in scientific research.

But Biden is expected to reverse this progress. Under the Obama administration, at least $77 million tax dollars were spent on research projects that used aborted baby body parts, and the Biden administration is expected to revert back to funding these unethical experiments.

Other pro-abortion leaders slated to fill Biden’s administration include:

U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris of California as vice president

Boston Mayor Marty Walsh as secretary of labor

Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo as commerce secretary

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra as secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

New Mexico Congresswoman Deb Haaland as secretary of the interior

Former Obama and Clinton administration leader Ronald Klain as chief of staff

David Kessler as the chief science officer of the COVID-19 response

Jaime Harrison as head of the Democrat National Committee

Nurse With Coronavirus Who Gave Birth While on Ventilator Learns Her Baby is Doing Well

Fri, 15 Jan 2021 21:47:14 GMT

Nosipho Nkantini, a nurse in South Africa suffering from Covid-19, was unconscious and on a ventilator when she gave birth to a baby boy in December.

Nkantini was in a state of despair when she woke from her coma, believing her baby had died.

“When the staff members told me ‘No, the child is in ICU and doing well’… I thought ‘Okay I am now alright’…

“Apart from the fact that I was still very weak recovering from Covid-19, I previously lost a baby who was delivered at 35 weeks, so I was extremely traumatised imagining this happening again.”

After struggling to breathe, Nkantini tested positive for Coronavirus. Arriving in hospital, she lost consciousness and was placed on a ventilator.

“From then I can’t remember anything until I woke up days later, when I was told I had suffered complications and my baby had been delivered by emergency C-section”, she recalled.

Having completed her self-isolation period and recovered from the virus, Nkantini was finally reunited with her son on 4 January.

“When they showed me my baby, I was crying because I was so happy. I couldn’t believe it. He is alive.”

Click Like if you are pro-life to like the LifeNews Facebook page!

LifeNews.com

The mother, who describes her son as a “miracle”, has named him Oyena, meaning “the one chosen by God”.

SPUC comment

A SPUC spokesperson said: “This is a wonderful story, though the trauma that this mother went through must have been intense.

“We should not underestimate the sense of separation that she must have felt when for some time she could not even see her newborn son.

“What matters, of course, is that both the mother and the baby are now well. This story shows how we should not take life for granted. It is a precious and wondrous thing.”

March for Life Canceled Due to Coronavirus, Pro-Life Americans Asked to Participate Virtually

Fri, 15 Jan 2021 20:34:31 GMT

Organizers have canceled the in-person March for Life in Washington, D.C. as concerns about the coronavirus and unrest in the capital continue.

Jeanne Mancini, president of March for Life, announced the news Friday afternoon. She urged people to stay home, stay safe and participate in the annual pro-life event online on Jan. 29 instead.

“The protection of all of those who participate in the annual March, as well as the many law enforcement personnel and others who work tirelessly each year to ensure a safe and peaceful event, is a top priority of the March for Life,” Mancini said in a statement to LifeNews.com.

The March for Life organizers expressed concerns about the COVID-19 pandemic as well as the “heightened pressures that law enforcement officers and others are currently facing in and around the Capitol.”

Instead of an in-person march at the National Mall, the March for Life will be held virtually. A small group of pro-life leaders also plan to march in the capital that day to represent pro-life Americans everywhere, Mancini said.

“We are profoundly grateful for the countless women, men, and families who sacrifice to come out in such great numbers each year as a witness for life – and we look forward to being together in person next year,” she said. “As for this year’s march, we look forward to being with you virtually.”

HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

The theme for the 2021 March for Life is Together Strong: Life Unites. More details about participating are available on the March for Life website.

The annual march marks the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that forced states to legalize abortion on demand. In the past four decades, more than 62 million unborn babies have been legally killed in abortions, and countless mothers and fathers have suffered physically and psychologically from their deaths.

Every year, the March for Life brings hundreds of thousands of peaceful protesters to Washington, D.C. to call on the Supreme Court and Congress to restore unborn babies’ right to life.

Couple Goes From 0 to 9 Kids in Three Years After Fostering Siblings, Giving Birth to Quadruplets

Fri, 15 Jan 2021 20:21:51 GMT

Maxine and Jake Young thought they may never have children.

After Maxine was diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome and miscarried two babies, the Pennsylvania couple decided to become foster parents and pursue adoption, The Epoch Times reports.

That was in 2017.

Today, the Youngs are parents to nine children: four adopted and five biological including quadruplets who were born in July. Though the Youngs’ lives are chaotic, they said they feel very blessed by all their children.

“We didn’t plan to have this large of a family,” Maxine told People magazine recently. “But it just seems like these babies are meant to be.”

Their family first grew in July 2017 when the couple welcomed three foster children into their home, according to the report. The three siblings soon became four when, a month later, they were asked to take in the children’s baby sister, too.

Before they had much time to get used to parenting, the couple learned that they had another child on the way: They were pregnant.

Maxine gave birth to their son Henry in October 2018. Then, a year later, the Youngs adopted the four foster siblings – making them a family of seven, the report continues.

LifeNews depends on the support of readers like you to combat the pro-abortion media. Please donate now.

But their surprises were not over.

A short time later, Maxine learned that she was pregnant again. This time, she was carrying four babies, quadruples whom they conceived naturally against massive odds.

Here’s more from the report:

The couple, excited and nervous, were advised to consider [aborting] two of the fetuses to increase the babies’ chances of survival. The couple steadfastly refused. On July 31, Maxine delivered babies Theo, Silas, Beck, and Cecilia via a C-section at 32 weeks of pregnancy.

“Meeting the babies was an indescribable moment,” Maxine wrote on Facebook. “All of the struggles from the past few months were immediately forgotten … in that moment, everything we have been through was worth it.”

Today, the Youngs are a family of 11 with Aiden, 8; Parker, 5; Connor, 4; Elliott, 3; Henry, 2; and 3-month-olds Theo, Silas, Beck and Cecilia.

“It’s definitely chaotic and it’s definitely beautiful,” Maxine told People. “We’ve only known the chaos of a large family … we just make it work!”

Former Abortion Clinic Owner: "Conveyor Belt” Abortion System Turns Women Into Profits

Fri, 15 Jan 2021 19:13:08 GMT

The former owner of American abortion clinics has described the immense profits abortionists make from a “conveyer belt” abortion system.

In the documentary, Life After Abortion, the former owner of five abortion clinics, now turned pro-life activist, Carol Everett, described the inside operations of the clinics.

“Selling abortions”

Ms Everett said: “I sold abortions. I made $25 for each abortion. Now that doesn’t sound like a lot of money, but the last month we did 545 abortions, which means my last month’s income was $13,625. But I wanted to be a millionaire. And I knew how to do that. Math. Forty-thousand abortions a year would provide $1 million of income for me.

“Oh, but we all know, over 90% of all abortions are first trimester abortions. He [the abortionist] can’t make that much money doing a first-trimester abortion for say, $300. In the first trimester, his fee is one-third the total cost of the abortion. But we had a technique that is widely used in the abortion industry to keep that abortionist doing 10 to 12 abortions an hour.”

Technique to perform abortions as quickly as possible

Ms Everett described how the abortionists in her clinic would perform abortions like an assembly line without changing gloves or sanitising between each abortion.

Ms Everett said: “We used two teams of two assistants with each doctor. And the first team would set up the first girl, and the doctor would go in to do that abortion, while across the hall, the second team set up the second girl.

“When he finished abortion number one, he went across the hall. He didn’t stop to do a surgical scrub. He did not stop to do operative notes. He went across the hall, changed his gloves, and started abortion number two.

“Now room number one had to be cleaned and ready and the third girl up. So, this team had to get the first girl out, clean the room, get girl number three up, so when he finished abortion number two, he could go across the hall and repeat the procedure with girl number three.”

Keep up with the latest pro-life news and information on Twitter. Follow @LifeNewsHQ

“Heartless and callous”

Commenting on Ms Everetts’ account, Michael Robinson, SPUC Director of Communications said: “Whilst utterly horrifying, we know that this is the grim reality of how many abortion clinics are operated. Even here in the United Kingdom the conveyer belt abortion system is rife.

“The cattle market culture of abortion in the UK was recently exposed in the damning 2017 Quality Care Commission report. The report exposed leading UK abortion chain Marie Stopes for its practice of quickly ushering women through the abortion process and emplyees encouraging patients to terminate in order to receive their staff bonus.

“We know that the abortion industry is not willing to prioritise patient safety or dignity but is instead treating vulnerable women in a cold and callous manner.”

Parler Tells Court Amazon Shut It Down to Prevent President Trump From Joining

Fri, 15 Jan 2021 18:39:35 GMT

Parler is fighting back in court after Apple, Google and Amazon conspired to shut down the conservative social media platform.

Millions of pro-life conservatives moved to the social media network following the decision by Facebook, Twitter and other social media giants to ban President Donald Trump and censor pro-life conservatives. But Apple and Google both banned Parler from their stores and Amazon dropped Parler as a customer, shutting down its servers. Parler had been purchasing server space from Amazon and the web site is now down completely after Amazon summarily dumped them because it allows free speech to flourish even if it supports President Trump and concerns over election fraud.

Parler has since filed a lawsuit against Amazon and it told a court yesterday that Amazon only shut down its servers to stop President Donald Trump from joining the platform.

Here’s more:

Parler attorney David Groesbeck argued Thursday in court that the conservative-lean learning site would have been a logical place for the president to go since he was unable to access his Twitter account, according to Politico.

“I believe AWS’s decision to terminate service to Parler was based, not on expressed concerns about Parler’s compliance with the AWS Agreement, but in part on a desire to deny President Trump a platform on any large social-media service,” Parler CEO John Matze said.

Follow LifeNews on the MeWe social media network for the latest pro-life news free from Facebook’s censorship!

Groesbeck also in Thursday’s hearing that Parler was not involved in the riot on Capitol Hill and urged Judge Barbara J. Rothstein to order Amazon Web Services to host the platform.

“AWS is alleging without evidence that Parler was used to incite the riots,” he said. “There is no evidence other than some anecdotal press references that Parler was involved … . Millions of Americans have had their voices silenced by AWS.”

The 18-page complaint, filed in U.S. District Court in Seattle, where Amazon is headquartered, accuses Amazon Web Services (AWS) of applying a politically motivated double standard to Parler in contrast to its treatment of the more mainstream social media giant Twitter.

“AWS’s decision to effectively terminate Parler’s account is apparently motivated by political animus,” the lawsuit reads. “It is also apparently designed to reduce competition in the microblogging services market to the benefit of Twitter.”

“Up until Friday afternoon it seemed Apple, Amazon and Google agreed’ the app had been effective in their efforts to remove ‘objectionable content,” it said, adding: “You can expect the war on competition and free speech to continue, but don’t count us out.”

Parler CEO John Matze initially said Parler might be unavailable for “up to a week as we rebuild from scratch,” but now says it might be offline for longer.

Apple warned Parler’s owners Friday that the app would be removed if they didn’t make major policy changes — mainly limits on free speech that Parler owners considered too onerous.

“There is no place on our platform for threats of violence and illegal activity,” Apple said in a statement to NBC News. “Parler has not taken adequate measures to address the proliferation of these threats to people’s safety.”

Apple and Google’s decisions to ban Parler from its stores did not shut down Parler but that happened when Amazon took down it servers.

Parler CEO John Matze said on Fox’s “Sunday Morning Futures” that the Big tech companies had colluded “to make sure that at the same time we would lose access to not only our apps, but they’re shutting all of our servers off tonight, off the Internet.”

Please follow LifeNews.com on Gab for the latest pro-life news and info, free from social media censorship.

He said the companies falsely claim Parler is responsible for the Capitol riots on January 6, even though the companies took no action against any social media platforms last year as Antifa and BLM rioted across the nation.

“They made an attempt to not only kill the apps but to actually destroy the entire company. But it’s not just these three companies; every vendor, from text message services to email providers to our lawyers all ditched us too, on the same day, and they’re trying to falsely claim that we were somehow responsible for the events on [Jan.] 6.”

Matze indicated Parler is considering legal action against the Big tech firms once it obtains new legal counsel.

He also said Parler was in no way organizing any violence or rioting and noted that similar discussions were taking place on Twitter.

Parler is working to get back online “as quickly as possible, but we’re having a lot of trouble, because every vendor we talk to won’t work with us, because if Apple doesn’t approve and Google doesn’t approve, they won’t,” Matze said on Fox. He added that it will be incredibly difficult to get all of the user data moved from its Amazon servers to a new one.

Parler was the number one app on Google at the time the company banned Parler.

Matze said the actions taken against Parler “would put anybody out of business.”

“They could destroy anybody. If they did any app, any company, it would completely destroy them,” he added. “I totally see the danger here. What they’re doing, and the amount of the power they have, is not just frightening, it’s actually extremely scary.”

California Will Give Free Abortion Pills to College Students to Kill Their Unborn Babies

Fri, 15 Jan 2021 18:17:20 GMT

California colleges soon will be offering free abortion pills to students on campus.

The College Fix reports officials with the University of California and California State University are preparing to provide abortions by the Jan. 1, 2023 deadline set in a new pro-abortion law.

The law, the first in the nation, mandates that all public colleges and universities provide abortion drugs for free to students up to 10 weeks of pregnancy. Gov. Gavin Newsom signed it in 2019.

Toni Molle, a spokesperson for California State University, said their 23 schools will meet the deadline.

“The COVID-19 pandemic has not deterred or impacted implementation planning,” Molle told The Fix. “A working group comprised of health services professionals is determining the needs of each campus to implement the legislation.”

Meanwhile, one University of California school already is giving out free abortion pills and the other nine will be by next year, according to the report.

“Access to this health care service is currently available at UC Berkeley and expected soon at [University of California Irvine],” spokesperson Heather Harper told The Fix. “Other UC student health centers on UC campuses continue to work toward providing access to this service as outlined under state law.”

Follow LifeNews on the MeWe social media network for the latest pro-life news free from Facebook’s censorship!

In total, 34 public college campuses in the state will be forced to provide abortion drugs to students on campus.

Thousands of unborn babies could be aborted on campus each year as a result. According to a state Senate Health Committee April 1, 2019 analysis, “… up to 500 public university students currently must leave campus each month to access medication abortion.”

Democrat lawmakers who sponsored the legislation said they hope to collect about $10 million in private donations to help campuses set up their abortion practices. The state Commission on the Status of Women and Girls is in charge of overseeing the funding.

However, a California Department of Finance report predicted that the donations will not be nearly enough to fund the program over the next several years. That means California taxpayers and students will be forced to pay for unborn babies to be aborted across the state

The legislation was met with wide-spread concern, including from the colleges and Newsom’s own state Department of Finance as well as pro-life advocates. Former Gov. Jerry Brown, a pro-abortion Democrat, vetoed a very similar bill in 2018, saying the measure was “not necessary” because abortions already are easily accessible to college students.

Brown pointed to a study from the supporters of the bill showing that the average distance to an abortion facility from campus was only about 5 miles.

Before the bill passed, the University of California and the California State University systems also expressed concerns. They said they were not prepared to handle the immense costs of providing abortions on campus, pointing to the need for ultrasound machines and staff training and increased liabilities, according to CBS 13 Sacramento.

But abortion activists insisted that women need easy access to abortion.

“It’s about access. Just because you have a constitutional right, if you don’t have access to that constitutional right, then it’s really no right at all,” state Sen. Connie Levya, a Democrat and lead sponsor of the bill, told Vice, previously. “I’m tired of women being shamed.”

Leading pro-life advocates nationally and in California lamented Newsom signing the bill.

Students for Life of America president Kristan Hawkins told LifeNews.com, previously, “The Pro-Life Generation will not sit back and watch their college and university campuses be turned into Planned Parenthood’s new money making machine.”

Hawkins said her organization can help students and health care workers in California if their conscience rights are violated by being forced to participate in abortions.

California Family Council president Jonathan Keller also previously criticized Newsom for prioritizing the goals of the pro-abortion lobby over the safety of students.

“Newsom ignored his own financial experts. He ignored the wisdom of a two-term governor from his own party. He ignored university officials who didn’t want to bear the liability and cost of on-campus abortions,” Keller said. “Sadly, it appears Governor Newsom’s commitment to discredited groups like Planned Parenthood overruled legitimate concerns about turning America’s largest higher education system into a chemical abortion network.”

Planned Parenthood Keeps Lying About Babies Who Survive Abortions

Fri, 15 Jan 2021 00:31:22 GMT

Planned Parenthood keeps lying to the public about babies surviving abortions.

And news outlets continue to parrot its false claims without question.

The latest example comes from an article published in the “progressive” Maine Beacon. It described several pro-life bills introduced in the Maine legislature this month, including state Rep. MaryAnne Kinney’s bill (LR 1363) to require that babies who survive abortions be provided with the same basic medical care that any other baby would receive.

Nicole Clegg, senior vice president of public affairs at Planned Parenthood of Northern New England and the Planned Parenthood Maine Action Fund, told the news outlet that Kinney’s legislation is based on “junk science.”

“[It] makes the erroneous claim that fetuses could end up being delivered alive during an abortion, which is not something that happens, but it is something that we see legislation around,” Clegg said. “We’ve also actually seen advertisements on television making these same erroneous claims.”

In a press release, the abortion chain also claimed Kinney’s and other pro-life bills are based on “medically inaccurate misinformation and lies,” according to the report.

The Maine Beacon did not question Clegg’s assertions, though it is not the first time abortion activists have deceived the public. In 2015, former Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards denied ever hearing of a baby who survived an abortion during a U.S. Congressional hearing.

Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

But there is ample evidence to prove otherwise.

Babies do survive abortions, though no one is sure exactly how many. In America, most states do not keep track of abortion survivors, but a few do. Between 2016 and 2018, three states reported 40 babies were born alive after botched abortions . According to the state health data, 11 babies were born alive in Minnesota, 10 in Arizona and 19 in Florida.

Additionally, Texas reported six babies were born alive in botched abortions in 2019. In Michigan, state health reports from 2008 through 2013 indicate that 11 babies were born alive during abortions.

Reports from other countries prove that babies survive abortions, too, and legal protections for them are needed. In Canada, the Canadian Institute of Health Information recorded 766 late-term, live-birth abortions over a five-year period in 2018. And in Australia, the country’s health minister admitted that 27 babies survived abortions in the state of Western Australia between 1999 and 2016. A report out of Ireland in the fall also suggests babies are surviving abortions and being left to die there.

Then there are abortion survivors themselves, people like Melissa Ohden, Claire Culwell, Gianna Jessen and Josiah Presley who share their stories publicly to raise awareness about the cruelty of abortion. The Abortion Survivors Network has connected with 356 people across the world who survived abortion attempts on their lives.

Testimonies from nurses and news reports provide even more evidence. In 2016, the Arizona news station NBC 11 Alive uncovered audio evidence about a baby who was born alive at a late-term abortion facility in Phoenix, Arizona and transported to a local hospital. The baby later died.

A 2002 article in The Journal of Clinical Nursing also described how nurses sometimes witness babies being born alive in abortions:

“In the case of late termination, the death of the fetus before delivery, though usual, is not inevitable except in rare cases of extreme physical abnormality[.] … At times the fetus will actually attempt to breathe or move its limbs, which makes the experience extremely distressing for nurses. Also, whereas the woman will probably go through this process once in her lifetime, nurses may go through it several times a year or even in the same week. (1)”

Yet, the lie persists – and continues – as Planned Parenthood and other abortion advocacy groups fight against ongoing efforts to protect babies who survive abortions from infanticide.

Kentucky just passed a bill to protect abortion survivors last week; both Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union lobbied against it and now are urging the governor to veto the legislation.

Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress have been trying to pass the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act for years. The bill would increase protections for babies who survive abortions. The bill would require that the same basic medical care be provided to babies who survive abortions as would be provided to any other baby born at the same gestational age. It also would impose penalties on medical workers who neglect to provide that care. However, Democrat lawmakers who receive campaign donations from Planned Parenthood blocked the legislation dozens of times.

BLM Activist Who Infiltrated Trump Supporters and Led Capitol Riots is Arrested, Charged

Thu, 14 Jan 2021 23:48:19 GMT

The liberal media narrative of the Capitol riots last week was that pro-life conservative Trump supporters were behind storming the Capitol. But a BLM activist has been arrested for his role in infiltrating the Trump voters outside the Capitol and urging them to riot and destroy property.

Radical BLM activist John Sullivan has been charged with participating in and urging the Capitol riots. He’s a leftist who founded a group called Insurgence USA and was interviewed on CNN by Anderson Cooper to talk about his liberal advocacy.

Epoch Times has more about how Sullivan not only participated in the riots but led them by urging Trump supporters to riot and inciting them to violence:

A newly released court filing says John Earle Sullivan, 26, told FBI agents last week that he was at the Capitol when the breach happened. He said he entered through a window that had been broken out. He also said he was present when Ashli Babbitt, an Air Force veteran, was shot dead by a U.S. Capitol Police officer as she tried to climb into the House Speaker’s Lobby through a window.

Sullivan showed agents some of the footage he captured inside the building, which he and others entered illegally.

Follow LifeNews on the MeWe social media network for the latest pro-life news free from Facebook’s censorship!

Videos showed Sullivan and others breaking through a barricade, with the Utah man shouting: “There are so many people. Let’s go. This [Expletive] is ours! [Expletive] yeah. We accomplished this [expletive]. We did this together. [Expletive] yeah! We are all a part of this history. Let’s burn this [Expletive] down.”

He was later heard encouraging protesters to climb a wall to get to an entrance to the Capitol and was seen entering the building.

During one conversation with others while inside, Sullivan said, “We gotta get this [expletive] burned.” At other times, he said, among other things, “it’s our house [expletive]” and “we are getting this [expletive].”

Sullivan now faces federal charges from the Department of Justice.

The charges come after major social media platforms blamed President Trump for the violence and banned him from using their services.

YouTube has banned Trump for one week from uploading any new videos to the popular video-sharing service.

The Google-owned platform cited concerns over “ongoing potential for violence,” even though President Trump has repeatedly called for peace during and after riots at the U.S. Capitol last Wednesday.

YouTube officials indicated that the service would remove content President trump uploaded yesterday, claiming it somehow promotes violence but providing no proof that is so. Although Trump’s channel will stay online for users to view old videos, the president can’t live stream or add new videos to the account for one week. Comments have also been disabled on the channel.

“After careful review, and in light of concerns about the ongoing potential for violence, we removed new content uploaded to the Donald J. Trump channel and issued a strike for violating our policies for inciting violence,” a YouTube spokesperson said in an emailed statement.

YouTube indicated that a second strike would result in a 2-week ban of Presidnet Trump’s account and said a third strike would result in permanent suspension from the platform.

The social media giant Twitter first suspended President Donald Trump’s account after falsely claiming he promoted rioting and violence. In a statement on its twitter Support account, twitter official claimed that Trump’s recent Twitter posts were “in violation of the Glorification of Violence Policy.” Other social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram and Pinterest followed suit.

After Twitter censored him, Trump posted a statement in response from the official governmental account of the office of President, @POTUS.

“As I have been saying for a long time, Twitter has gone further and further in banning free speech, and tonight, Twitter employees have coordinated with the Democrats and the Radical Left in removing my account from their platform, to silence me—and YOU, the 75,000,000 great patriots who voted for me,” Trump said in a statement.

“Twitter may be a private company, but without the government’s gift of Section 230 they would not exist for long,” he added.

“I predicted this would happen. We have been negotiating with various other sites, and will have a big announcement soon, while we also look at the possibilities of building out our own platform in the near future. We will not be SILENCED!” Trump continued.

“Twitter is not about FREE SPEECH. They are all about promoting a Radical Left platform where some of the most vicious people in the world are allowed to speak freely,” Trump concluded. “STAY TUNED!”

Please follow LifeNews.com on Gab for the latest pro-life news and info, free from social media censorship.

Shortly after President Trump posted the statement, Twitter suspended that account as well.

“Using another account to try to evade a suspension is against our rules,” Twitter said in a statement to news outlets. “We have taken steps to enforce this with regard to recent Tweets from the @POTUS account.”

“For government accounts, such as @POTUS and @WhiteHouse, we will not suspend those accounts permanently but will take action to limit their use.”

Twitter explained its initial banning of President Trump’s personal account this way:

“After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them—specifically how they are being received and interpreted on and off Twitter—we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence,” Twitter said in a statement. “In the context of horrific events this week, we made it clear on Wednesday that additional violations of the Twitter Rules would potentially result in this very course of action. Our public interest framework exists to enable the public to hear from elected officials and world leaders directly. It is built on a principle that the people have a right to hold power to account in the open.”

It added: “However, we made it clear going back years that these accounts are not above our rules entirely and cannot use Twitter to incite violence, among other things. We will continue to be transparent around our policies and their enforcement.”

Twitter cited two of the president’s most recent posts as justification for its action, neither of which promoted rioting or violence in any fashion.

The first post read, “The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!”

A second post indicated President Trump would not attend pro-abortion Joe Biden’s inauguration.

“To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.”

That was the final post to Twitter before it removed President Trump from its platform.

Twitter claimed that the two posts had violated its “Glorification of Violence policy.” The policy aims to “prevent the glorification of violence that could inspire others to replicate violent acts.”

It claims Trump is “highly likely to encourage and inspire people to replicate the criminal acts that took place at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.”

How can a tweet about not attending the inauguration be considered violent. Twitter stretches the truth to claim it “is being received by a number of his supporters as further confirmation that the election was not legitimate and is seen as him disavowing his previous claim made via two Tweets (1, 2) by his Deputy Chief of Staff, Dan Scavino, that there would be an ‘orderly transition’ on January 20th.” It further claimed that Trump’s statement “may also serve as encouragement to those potentially considering violent acts that the Inauguration would be a ‘safe’ target, as he will not be attending.”

Twitter also claimed the term “American patriots … is also being interpreted as support for those committing violent acts at the US Capitol.”

The social media giant also speculated that Trump’s saying that his supporters have a “GIANT VOICE long into the future” and that “They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!” is being interpreted as “further indication that President Trump does not plan to facilitate an ‘orderly transition’” despite his repeated statements otherwise.

Twitter claims that Trump supporters are planning future violence, saying “Plans for future armed protests have already begun proliferating on and off-Twitter, including a proposed secondary attack on the US Capitol and state capitol buildings on January 17, 2021.”

The social media giant also removed the Team Trump account used by President trump’s campaign to post videos, statements and other items promoting his re-election.

But the record shows President Trump never incited violence and called for peace.

The president himself condemned the violence in very clear remarks:

“Like all Americans, I am outraged by the violence, lawlessness, and mayhem. I immediately deployed the National Guard and federal law enforcement to secure the building and expel the intruders. America is and must always be a nation of law and order. The demonstrators who infiltrated the Capitol have defiled the seat of American democracy. To those who engaged in acts of violence and destruction, you do not represent our country. And to those who broke the law, you will pay.”

After the Electoral College vote, President Donald Trump promised a peaceful transition of power to the pro-abortion president.

“Even though I totally disagree with the outcome of the election, and the facts bear me out, nevertheless there will be an orderly transition on January 20th. I have always said we would continue our fight to ensure that only legal votes were counted. While this represents the end of the greatest first term in presidential history, it’s only the beginning of our fight to Make America Great Again,” he said.

His spokeswoman also condemned the rioting.

“We condemn it, the president and this administration, in the strongest possible terms,” White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany told a press conference about what happened at the Capitol. “It is unacceptable and those that broke the law should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

She said “a group of violent rioters undermining the legitimate first amendment rights of the many thousands who came to peacefully have their voices heard in our nation’s capital.”

“Those who violently besieged our capitol are the opposite of everything that this administration stands for,” she said. “The core value of our administration is the idea that all citizens have the right to live in safety peace and freedom.”

She said that people working in the White House “are working to ensure an orderly transition of power.”

South Carolina Committee Passes Bill to Ban Abortions After Unborn Baby’s Heartbeat Begins

Thu, 14 Jan 2021 23:01:13 GMT

A South Carolina bill to protect unborn babies once their heartbeats are detectable moved forward Thursday in the state Senate.

The Post and Courier reports a subcommittee approved the pro-life heartbeat bill in a 3-2 vote, sending it to the full Senate Medical Affairs Committee for consideration.

The South Carolina Fetal Heartbeat and Protection from Abortion Act (Senate Bill 1) would prohibit abortions once an unborn baby’s heartbeat is detectable, typically about six weeks of pregnancy. Exceptions would be allowed for emergency situations. Abortionists who violate the law could face a $10,000 fine or imprisonment for up to two years.

State lawmakers have been trying to pass a heartbeat bill for years and, after Republicans gained seats in the state legislature in November, many hope 2021 will be the year, One News Now reports.

Click Like if you are pro-life to like the LifeNews Facebook page!

LifeNews.com

Gov. Henry McMaster, a pro-life Republican, promised to sign the bill if it reaches his desk.

“Let this be the year that we further protect the sanctity of life with the heartbeat bill,” he said Wednesday during his state of the state address. “It’s time to vote. Send me the heartbeat bill and I will immediately sign it into law.”

Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette also attended the subcommittee meeting Thursday to show her support, according to the local news.

However, one Republican leader expressed hesitancy because the bill does not allow exceptions for abortions on unborn babies conceived in rape.

“I can’t look at a woman who’s been impregnated after being raped and tell her, ‘You have to have that child,’” said Sen. Tom Davis, R-Beaufort, the Post and Courier reports.

Polls suggest many Americans support strong limits on abortion. A 2019 Hill-HarrisX survey found that 55 percent of voters said they do not think laws banning abortions after six weeks – when an unborn baby’s heartbeat is detectable – are too restrictive. Gallup polls also consistently have found that a majority of Americans think all or most abortions should be illegal.

While a number of states have passed heartbeat laws in recent years, most have been banned from enforcing them due to legal challenges by abortion activist groups.

Some pro-lifers have renewed hope that the U.S. Supreme Court will uphold an abortion ban and overturn Roe v. Wade. Others, however, are hesitant because of concerns about losing the court battle and being forced to reimburse pro-abortion groups for their legal fees.

Though the high court currently has a conservative majority, Chief Justice John Roberts, who was nominated by a Republican president, has sided with the liberal justices on a number of occasions.

North Dakota and Arkansas passed heartbeat laws several years ago, but federal courts struck down both laws. Judges also blocked heartbeat laws in Iowa, Georgia, Ohio, Mississippi, Missouri, Tennessee and other states.

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals said the following about its ruling on the six-week abortion ban: “Because there is no genuine dispute that (North Dakota’s law) generally prohibits abortions before viability — as the Supreme Court has defined that concept — and because we are bound by Supreme Court precedent holding that states may not prohibit pre-viability abortions, we must affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the plaintiffs.”

The Supreme Court took away the states’ ability to protect unborn babies from abortion under Roe v. Wade, and instead allowed abortion on demand through all nine months of pregnancy. Roe made the United States one of only seven countries in the world that allows elective abortions after 20 weeks.

Amazon Sells 204 Items Promoting Violence and Hate, Like This "Kill All Republicans” Shirt

Thu, 14 Jan 2021 22:39:12 GMT

Amazon terminated its contract with free speech platform Parler for “violent content on your website.” But Amazon itself deals with merchandise that advocates the death of all Republicans or specifically targets President Donald Trump.

The Media Research Center found at least 204 examples of merchandise sold on Amazon that promoted violence, either toward President Donald Trump, Republicans or members of the police force. Riot gear, including tasers, brass knuckles and stun sticks were also sold. Some of these violent products included a flag with a graphic image of Trump blowing his brains out, a mug with the slogan “Where is Lee Harvey Oswald now that we really need him?” and a black T-shirt with a red slogan, “Kill All Republicans.” The shirt that urged the death of Republicans was even a sponsored listing on Amazon.

Amazon accused Parler of “potential hate speech,” while it is selling actual Nazi memoribilia and jewelry covered with swastikas. And while Americans were outraged at the death of police officer Brian D. Sicknick who was struck with a fire extinguisher at the Capitol riot, Amazon sells at least 130 pieces that condone that kind of violence with the hateful slogan, ACAB (All Cops Are Bastards). That ACAB term is popular with rioting members of Antifa.

The Amazon Terms of Service states, “Amazon does not allow products that promote, incite or glorify hatred, violence, racial, sexual or religious intolerance or promote organizations with such views. We’ll also remove listings that graphically portray violence or victims of violence.” These terms of service do not apply to media. Therefore, the Media Research Center did not examine music, books, television or movies.

Follow LifeNews on the MeWe social media network for the latest pro-life news free from Facebook’s censorship!

Examples of products that promote violence and hatred are even listed in the Amazon Terms of Service. Some of the categories listed include, “Products that promote, incite, or glorify hate or violence towards any person or group. This includes products that contain violent or offensive material that has no historical significance.”

Amazon is good at policing outside sites it doesn’t like. It doesn’t apply the same standards to itself. The company removed QAnon products from its website on Jan. 11, according to NBC News. The news outlet warned, “Amazon said vendors who attempt to continue to sell such products could be banned from its site.”

‘Kill All Republicans’ As a Sponsored Listing

The vendor named Florence & Partner sells a black T-shirt with a red slogan, “Kill All Republicans.” This product was sponsored by Amazon, which means the vendor paid to have the product advertised on the platform.

However, the product violates Amazon’s sponsored product guidelines, which prohibit “Content that promotes hate, incites violence or intolerance, or advocates or discriminates against a protected group, whether based on race, color, national origin, religion, disability, sex, sexual orientation, disability, age or another category.” Amazon’s sponsored product guidelines also prohibit “Content related to campaigns, elections, or political issues of public debate; that advocates for or against a politician or a political party; or that personally attacks a political figure.”

The Media Research Center was unable to find any products that advocated for the death of all Democrats.

Other forms of violent merchandise included a T-shirt that featured the slogan, “Hospitalize Your Local Fascist.” A knife with a red drop of blood formed part of the graphic on the front of the shirt. The brand FUNKI SHOP sold several items of clothing with similar messages, including “Punch TERFs,” and “Goodnight Alt-Right.” TERF is a hateful leftist term that stands for trans exlusionary radical feminist. Journalist Meghan Murphy argued that the term TERF was hate speech. She wrote, “Men with large platforms who are publicly associated with Antifa and groups like the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) have amplified the ‘punch TERFs’ and ‘TERFs get the guillotine’ message proudly, with the support of their comrades.”

Guillotines, a popular symbol among Democratic Socialists, are also bought and sold on Amazon. The slogan “Fuck Around and Find Out” was juxtaposed on a T-shirt over a picture of a guillotine. Another shirt had the slogan, “Be the guillotine you want to see in the world.”

Historical memorabilia has a place in the world. Amazon recognizes that statement in its Terms of Service, saying, “Amazon reserves the right to make a determination on the historical value of the item.” However, even among the Nazi stamps and the coins with swastikas, some modern pieces of jewelry with swastikas on them are being sold. A ring covered in swastikas and a skull ring with a large swastika on the top are sold. Even though the skull ring is captioned as Buddhist, the symbol is not the same as the Buddhist symbol.

Disturbing Anti-Trump Merchandise

Regardless of how one’s politics may lie, to wish for or advocate for the violent death of a politician is wrong. Yet several pieces sold by Amazon seem to delight in fantasies of Trump blowing his brains out, Trump being shot (albeit with Nerf guns), or Trump’s head being stabbed with knives.

The “Donald Trump Knife Rack,” marketed as the “Perfect Gift,” features the head of Trump filled with steak knives. It is also labeled as an “Exceptional Conversation Starter.” A mug asking the whereabouts of President John F. Kennedy’s assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, is also available for purchase on the platform.

The brand Partner & Alana sells several pieces, from flags to T-shirts, featuring a gory drawing of Trump blowing his brains out. Blood and body parts are scattered across the front of the shirt. The product description says, “The Only Walls We Build are Walls of Death.”

130 Examples of ACAB Merchandise

The liberal Anti-Defamation League defines ACAB as “a slogan of long standing in the skinhead subculture.” It is classified as a “hate slogan.” The magazine GQ described it: “ACAB has proven flexible, and not always in good ways: it’s embodied ideas of varied nuance and intensity, from a casual expression of rebellion to nuanced anarchist thought to more ominous skinhead ideology.”

But none of these warning signs from the left have stopped Amazon from selling merchandise that features police officers depicted as pigs, burning police cars, and a Simpsons police character with a knife protruding from his head. The gory images on all these products were emblazoned with the slogan ACAB.

One product, a refrigerator magnet, featured a dead pig’s head wearing a policeman’s cap. A knife was stuck through the head and blood was drawn coming out of the head. The product description boasted, “EASY to place on a car and even easier to remove, these are a great alternative to bumper stickers.”

Another decal was a sketch of a cat throwing a Molotov cocktail (a homemade bomb). The bottle said “ACAB” on it. One Amazon customer left a review remarking, “People are literally dying and instead of signing petitions or donating you try to turn their death and pain into a stupid a$$ sticker.”

The Washington Post editorial board in Sept., 2020 wrote that even though they believed white supremacists were more responsible for violence, “That doesn’t mean that online provocateurs who endorse violence against the police should be shrugged off.”

LifeNews Note: Corinne Weaver writes for Newsbusters, where this originally appeared.

Women File Lawsuit to Overturn Radical New York Law That Legalized Abortions Up to Birth

Thu, 14 Jan 2021 21:52:32 GMT

Women in New York filed a lawsuit Tuesday challenging a radical pro-abortion law that legalizes abortions for basically any reason up to birth in the Empire State.

The class action lawsuit argues that the New York Reproductive Health Act, signed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo in 2019, puts women in danger and violates the fundamental rights of women and children, including unborn babies who can survive outside the womb.

Along with expanding late-term abortions, the law repealed criminal charges for killing an unborn baby even in a violent criminal act against the mother.

In the lawsuit, victims of domestic abuse slammed New York for denying them and their children justice, the Catholic News Agency reports.

“New York has stripped women and their families of their ability to pursue justice for those deaths,” said Christen Civiletto, an attorney representing the women with the Women’s Alliance Against Violence. “That’s outrageous. In fact, it is contrary to the stated policy of the RHA itself: to affirm the ‘fundamental right [of women] to choose to carry the pregnancy to term, to give birth to a child.’” The alliance is part of the Thomas More Society, a pro-life legal group.

HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a year-end donation!

Cecelia Hayes, Feminists Choosing Life of New York vice president, praised the lawsuit. In a statement, she said the law deprives women of their First Amendment right to petition the courts for redress of grievances and to seek judicial relief for the loss of their unborn children.

“This demeans women. When the law says your wanted unborn child is so irrelevant that he or she can be murdered without fear of prosecution, the status of women as mothers is diminished,” she said.

Her organization pointed to studies showing that pregnancy substantially enhances women’s risks of being lethally assaulted, and homicide is a leading cause of death for pregnant women. It also said domestic violence has increased against New York women since the passage of the pro-abortion law.

The lawsuit identifies pregnant women and unborn children who were victims of intimate partner and domestic violence in New York after the law passed. These include a Queens woman who was stabbed to death while pregnant. The Queens District Attorney charged the woman’s boyfriend with two crimes but later had to drop the second charge for the unborn baby’s death because of the new law.

Additionally, the new lawsuit argues that the New York law puts women’s health at risk by lowering health and safety standards for abortions. The law allows non-doctors to abort unborn babies, including nurse practitioners and midwives.

“There are numerous cases where women have died or been injured during abortions performed by unqualified and untrained clinic staff,” said Catherine Glenn Foster, a lawyer with Women’s Alliance Against Violence.

The lawsuit also argues that the law violates the rights of viable unborn babies by allowing them to be killed for non-medical “health” reasons, including the mother’s age.

Michele Sterlace, executive director of Feminists Choosing Life of New York and a lawyer with the alliance, said the lawsuit is true feminism in action.

“Feminism is inclusive, not exclusive regarding human rights. Human beings are not property, to be bought, sold or disposed of,” Sterlace said. “These are the principles on which feminist foremothers stood, and universal precepts that underlie the extension of human rights.”

Texas AG Ken Paxton Launches Investigation Into Big Tech After They Ban Trump and Parler

Thu, 14 Jan 2021 20:54:41 GMT

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced an investigation into the content moderation policies of multiple Silicon Valley based tech companies after President Trump was permanently banned from Twitter last week.

Paxton’s office demanded four big tech giants such as Facebook, Twitter, Apple, Amazon and Google provide information relating to their censoring of conservative speech as well as their termination of the popular conservative social media app Parler from their platforms.

Follow LifeNews on the MeWe social media network for the latest pro-life news free from Facebook’s censorship!

BREAKING: Today I launched an investigation into @Google @Facebook @Twitter @amazon & @Apple investigating their policies & practices regarding content moderation and for information related to Parler, a social media app terminated or blocked. https://t.co/yKjetiMGSX

— Attorney General Ken Paxton (@KenPaxtonTX) January 14, 2021

“For years, these Big Tech companies have silenced voices in the social media sphere and shut down competing companies and platforms,” Paxton said in a press release Thursday. “It has only grown worse in recent months. And just last week, this discriminatory action included the unprecedented step of removing and blocking President Donald Trump from online media platforms.”

Paxton criticized Twitter’s decision to ban President Trump from their platform following the riots in the Capitol last week and raised questions over whether the recent crackdown on conservative speech by big tech companies violates the First Amendment.

Please follow LifeNews.com on Gab for the latest pro-life news and info, free from social media censorship.

“First Amendment rights and transparency must be maintained for a free online community to operate and thrive. However, the seemingly coordinated de-platforming of the President of the United States and several leading voices not only chills free speech, it wholly silences those whose speech and political beliefs do not align with leaders of Big Tech companies. Every American should be concerned about this large-scale silencing and the effects it will have on the future of free speech,” said Paxton.

Paxton expressed his intent to utilize civil investigative demands, a legal evidentiary tool, to compel the corporations to produce documents outlining what their official content moderation policies are so the state may determine whether discrimination took place.

“The public deserves the truth about how these companies moderate and possibly eliminate speech they disagree with. I am hopeful that these companies will set aside partisan politics and cooperate with these [civil investigative demands] in order to get to the bottom of this contention and ensure a truly free online community consistent with the highest American ideals,” Paxton said.

More Babies are Thrown Away in Toilets as They’re Killed in Abortions at Home With Pills

Thu, 14 Jan 2021 20:30:56 GMT

A prominent Scottish bioethicist has argued that proposals to introduce DIY abortion in Scotland on a permanent basis undermines the “appropriate and sensitive respect for the disposal of the remains of the embryo/foetus”.

DIY home abortions, whereby a woman seeking a medical abortion up to ten weeks’ gestation is able to complete it at home, were introduced in Scotland at the end of March 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns. While this was introduced as a temporary measure, the Scottish Government has just completed receiving submissions to a public consultation asking whether this change should be made permanent.

Dr Calum MacKellar of the Scottish Council on Human Bioethics argued against the making ‘DIY’ abortion permanent in Scotland.

Dr MacKellar said: “One significant challenge, amongst others, with these partial or complete home abortions, however, is the destiny of the remains of the embryo/foetus”.

He said that under the normal circumstances of an abortion in a hospital, foetal remains are disposed of “with appropriate respect”.

“With home abortions, however, appropriate and sensitive respect for the disposal of the remains of the embryo/foetus does not generally take place since these are usually flushed down the toilet or discarded as waste in another manner. An outcome which may cause considerable distress to some vulnerable women having an abortion as well as the persons supporting them at home”.

LifeNews depends on the support of readers like you to combat the pro-abortion media. Please donate now.

“This may happen because of their possible grief, especially when they see the dead embryo/foetus, which is up to 3-6cm in size at about ten weeks of gestation and which ends up in the sewage”.

He went on to argue that: “It may also create very significant trauma to other professionals, such as sewage and plumbing professionals, if they ever encounter these dead human embryos/foetuses in the course of their work”.

MacKellar concluded that: “Scottish society cannot, therefore, continue to let the remains of embryos/foetuses simply be discarded as worthless waste”.

No in-person consultation

Other sections of society have also voiced their objections to making DIY abortion a permanent feature of Scottish law. Late last year, in a comment piece in the Times, John Mason, the SNP MSP for Glasgow Shettleston, raised concerns about the lack of in-person consultation:

“There is no entirely reliable way to verify the stage of pregnancy without an ultrasound or physical examination”.

“The abortion provider [BPAS] has already announced investigations of nine cases of women taking abortion pills beyond the ten-week limit, while police in England are investigating the death of an unborn baby after the mother took home-abortion pills when she was 28 weeks’ pregnant”.

Similarly, Baroness Stroud made the same point when she highlighted that “there are at least 52 cases officially reported to the Department of Health and Social Care of women who were provided pills-by-post beyond 10 weeks’ gestation, including one case where the unborn child was at 28 weeks’ gestation (beyond the legal limit)”.

Coercion and abuse

Mr Mason said: “The dangers of exacerbating coercion and undetected abuse through unsupervised at-home abortion are similarly sidelined by proponents of the scheme”.

Alongside the medical complications of ‘DIY’ home abortion, Baroness Stroud also decried the potential for abuse and coercion, which becomes difficult to detect without in-person consultation.

She noted: “This poses a threat to vulnerable women and girls who are at risk from an abusive partner, sex-trafficking or child-sex abuse, as the home abortion could be used by their abusers as a means to more easily cover up trafficking or abuse scandals”.

“There appear to be very few reasons to make the change permanent”.

Critics of ‘DIY’ home abortions have highlighted the large potential for abuse from the beginning, pointing out that once abortion pills are sent in the post, there is no guarantee about who ultimately takes them.

A series of undercover investigations last year revealed how a number of women were able to obtain pills for their children by pretending to be pregnant themselves. Other women in the investigation were able to obtain abortion pills after the 10-week limit.

Mr Mason concluded: “These serious matters deserve immediate redress. Weakening safeguards and waiving safety concerns for some of the most vulnerable in our society is surely the wrong move. The women of Scotland deserve better”.

Right To Life UK spokesperson, Catherine Robinson, said: “The case against DIY at-home abortion is overwhelming. Not only is it wide-open for abuse because it is impossible to know who ultimately takes these abortion pills but, as Dr MacKellar says, it is likely to be highly distressing for women to encounter the remains of their own child”.

“Of course, even if the remains of a foetus are disposed of ‘properly’ this does not make abortion right. Nevertheless, this once again shows the callousness of the abortion lobby, who appear to be concerned with expanding abortion access at almost all costs regardless of the risks to mother’s mental and physical health”.

LifeNews Note: Republished with permission from Right to Life UK.

25-Year Study Showed Abortion Hurts Women, But Feminists Tried to Suppress It

Thu, 14 Jan 2021 19:54:36 GMT

Pro-life doctor Marissa Ogle, M.D., wrote about an abortion study by Dr. David Ferguson that pro-abortion people tried to repress. (Marissa Ogle, M.D., Still Healing: pp 13 – 14.)

A reputable research scientist attempted to publish results of a well-designed study that concluded, to his surprise, that abortion has a negative impact on the psychological well-being of women. This study by Dr. David Ferguson, a New Zealand pro-choice researcher who was attempting to disprove abortion’s psychological effect on women, found that 42% of women who have had abortions had experienced major depression within the prior 4 years – almost double the rate of women who never became pregnant. The study also indicates that women who have had abortions are twice as likely to drink alcohol at dangerous levels and 3 times as likely to be addicted to illegal substances. The study also found that the risk of anxiety disorders was doubled.

Dr. Ferguson’s study was well-designed, spanning the course of 25 years… The study was undertaken with the position of validating the viewpoint that abortion did not increase mental health problems, but to confirm that these problems were preexisting. Much to the surprise of the researching team, the exact opposite was true. When Dr. Ferguson’s results were presented to New Zealand’s abortion supervisory committee, which ensures that abortions in the country are conducted in accordance with legal requirements, Dr. Ferguson was discouraged from publishing the results. Fortunately, despite his political beliefs, Dr. Ferguson felt that this would be “scientific irresponsibility.” Ferguson himself stated that he remains pro-choice and is not a religious person. The findings were surprising to him, however in his opinions were very robust. He went on to say that abortion is a traumatic event, involving loss and grief that may, in fact, predispose women to mental illness.

Dr. Ferguson found, according to Ruth Hill,“Abortion researcher confounded by study,” The New Zealand Herald January 5, 2006, that

“The fact is that abortions are the most common medical procedure that young women face – by the age of 25, one in 7 have had an abortion – and the research into the costs and benefits have been very weak. This is because the debate between the pro-life and the pro-choice has, in a sense, driven the science out. It verges on scandalous that a surgical procedure that is performed on over one in 10 women has been so poorly researched and evaluated, given the debates about the psychological consequences of abortion.”

Dr. Ogle wrote

“Ferguson then went on to experience a great challenge in finding a journal that would publish the study, very unusual for a research team who typically has research published with the first attempt. A subsequent study by Ferguson reiterated his findings.”

Keep up with the latest pro-life news and information on Twitter. Follow @LifeNewsHQ

The studies are:

David Ferguson, M., L. John Horwood, Elizabeth M Ritter “Abortion in young women and subsequent mental health” Journal of Psychology and Psychiatry 47.9 (2013): 819 – 827; and

LifeNews.com Note: Sarah Terzo is a pro-life liberal who runs ClinicQuotes.com, a web site devoted to exposing the abortion industry. She is a member of the pro-life groups Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians and Secular Pro-Life. Follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

New North Dakota Bill Would Let People Sue Facebook and Twitter for Censoring Them

Thu, 14 Jan 2021 18:29:52 GMT

With pro-life conservative Americans facing more social media censorship now than ever before, lawmakers in North Dakota are sensitive to their concerns. New legislation there would allow people to sue social media giants like Facebook and twitter for censoring them or deleting their accounts.

The Epoch Times has more:

The new bill (pdf), sponsored by six legislators, is titled, “an Act to permit civil actions against social media sites for censoring speech,” and it stipulates that websites with more than 1 million users would be “liable in a civil action for damages to the person whose speech is restricted, censored, or suppressed, and to any person who reasonably otherwise would have received the writing, speech, or publication.”

For individuals who have been censored, compensation includes “treble damages for compensatory, consequential, and incidental damages,” according to the bill.

North Dakota state Rep. Tom Kading (R), a sponsor of the bill, explained his rationale.

“It’s just wrong to ban a sitting president,” Kading told the Grand Forks Herald, adding that the proposal is meant to provide a legal tool for those who live in North Dakota. He was referring to Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and other platforms taking action against President Donald Trump.

Follow LifeNews on the MeWe social media network for the latest pro-life news free from Facebook’s censorship!

Kading further argued that Facebook and Twitter, namely, violate their own terms of agreement signed by users after they ban or restrict content related to politics.

Social media giants have not faced more lawsuits from disgruntled users in part because of the protections afforded to them under Section 230 of federal law. And there is some concern the bill, if it becomes law, wouldn’t overcome those problems.

Attorney Akiva Cohen wrote on Twitter that the law “would immediately be deemed void as preempted by Section 230 [of the Communications Decency Act],” because “federal law is supreme over state law where they conflict, and this would create an express conflict.”

Section 230 has been criticized by conservatives as a law that essentially serves as a liability shield for Twitter and Facebook. The 1996 law states that providers and users of computer services shouldn’t be held liable for “any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.”

The law gives a shield to companies that moderate user-generated content. Trump and other Republicans have said it should be repealed, arguing that Big Tech firms have essentially overstepped their bounds by moderating content.

Please follow LifeNews.com on Gab for the latest pro-life news and info, free from social media censorship.

Facebook and Twitter have lost a combined $51 billion in market value since banning President Donald trump from their platforms as Americans across the country divest themselves from the companies’ stock offerings.

Yahoo! News reported that Twitter shares dive-bombed more “than 10% on Monday” following its decision to ban President Donald Trump from its site. “Shortly after market open Monday, the stock dropped as much as 12.3% to reach as low as $45.17 per share.” The stock has dropped from $51.48 right before the ban to $47.22 as an opening price today.

As the Business Insider reports, Facebook is losing value as well. Facebook saw $47.6 billion erased from its public valuation, while Twitter’s market cap dropped by $3.5 billion.