Friday, May 31, 2013
by Steven Ertelt
The Maryland Office of the Chief Medical Examiner has released the autopsy report on the death of Jennifer Morbelli, which again confirms the young woman died on February 7, 2013, from complications to a 33-week abortion done by late-term abortion practitioner LeRoy Carhart.
Jennifer McKenna Morbelli, a 29-year-old woman from New Rochelle, New York died from a botched 33-week abortion. The medical examiner’s office confirmed a botched 33-week abortion killed the young woman.
The official death certificate also confirmed Morbelli died at 12:25 p.m. on February 7 at Shady Grove Adventist Hospital. Section 23a indicated that the cause of death was Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation “due to or as a consequence of Amniotic Fluid Embolism following Medical Termination of Pregnancy,” making it clear that the abortion was the event that led to her death.
Now that the autopsy report has been released, the Medical Examiner’s findings are in keeping with the cause of death released earlier and recorded on her death certificate. The report emphasized that the complication occurred after the dangerous late-late term abortion was completed, and reiterated that the manner of death was “natural” even though she would not have died had she not receive the abortion.
continue reading here
The abortion debate is full of horror stories on both
sides of the issue. Coercive and unethical counselors lie to vulnerable
women and pressure them. This has happened in some abortion clinics as
well as some pregnancy care centers. Women have died from botched abortions,
both before abortion was legalized and after, when it is supposed to be
safe. Fanatics resort to violence on both extremes of the pro-choice/pro-life
Focusing on these isolated incidents and extreme cases
makes for effective fund-raising. What it does not do is help women -
which was what the original feminist movement set out to do. In the 1960's,
certain factions of the women's movement made a drastic about-face.
The feminist movement was born more than two hundred
years ago when Mary Wollstonecraft wrote "A Vindication of the Rights
of Women." After decrying the sexual exploitation of women, she condemned
those who would "either destroy the embryo in the womb, or cast it off
when born." Shortly thereafter, abortion became illegal in Great Britain.
The now revered feminists of the 19th century were
also strongly opposed to abortion because of their belief in the worth
of all humans. Like many women in developing countries today, they opposed
abortion even though they were acutely aware of the damage done to women
through constant child-bearing. They opposed abortion despite knowing
that half of all children born died before the age of five. They knew
that women had virtually no rights within the family or the political
sphere. But they did not believe abortion was the answer.
Without known exception, the early American feminists
condemned abortion in the strongest possible terms. In Susan B. Anthony's
newsletter, The Revolution, abortion was described as "child
murder," "infanticide" and "foeticide." Elizabeth Cady Stanton, who in
1848 organized the first women's rights convention in Seneca Falls, New
York, classified abortion as a form of infanticide and said, "When you
consider that women have been treated as property, it is degrading to
women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of
as we see fit."
Anti-abortion laws enacted in the latter half of the
19th century were a result of advocacy efforts by feminists who worked
in an uneasy alliance with the male-dominated medical profession and the
mainstream media. The early feminists understood that, much like today,
women resorted to abortion because they were abandoned or pressured by
boyfriends, husbands and parents and lacked financial resources to have
a baby on their own.
Ironically, the anti-abortion laws that early feminists
worked so hard to enact to protect women and children were the very ones
destroyed by the Roe v. Wade decision 100 years later - a decision hailed
by the National Organization for Women (NOW) as the "emancipation of women."
The goals of the more recent NOW-led women's movement
with respect to abortion would have outraged the early feminists. What
Elizabeth Cady Stanton called a "disgusting and degrading crime" has been
heralded by Eleanor Smeal, former president of NOW and current president
of the Fund for a Feminist Majority, as a "most fundamental right."
Betty Friedan, credited with reawakening feminism
in the 1960's with her landmark book, The Feminine Mystique,
did not even mention abortion in the early edition. It was not until 1966
that NOW included abortion in its list of goals. Even then abortion was
a low priority.
It was a man - abortion rights activist Larry Lader,
who remains active today - who credits himself with guiding a reluctant
Friedan to make abortion an issue for NOW. Lader had been working to repeal
the abortion laws based on population growth concerns, but state legislators
were horrified by his ideas. (Immigration and improved longevity were
fueling America's population growth - not reproduction, which in fact
had declined dramatically.)
Lader teamed up with a gynecologist, Bernard Nathanson,
to co-found the National Alliance to Repeal Abortion Laws, the forerunner
of today's National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL).
Lader suggested to the NOW leadership that all feminist
demands (equal education, jobs, pay, etc.) hinged on a woman's ability
to control her own body and procreation. After all, employers did not
want to pay for maternity benefits or lose productivity when a mother
took time off to care for a newborn or sick child. Lader convinced the
NOW leadership that legalized abortion was the key to the workplace.
Dr. Nathanson, who later became a pro-life activist,
states in his book, Aborting America, that the two were able
to convince Friedan that abortion was a civil rights issue. Later he admitted
that they simply made up the numbers of women dying from illegal abortions,
which had been a major point in their argument.
Lader's and Nathanson's strategy was highly effective.
NOW has made the preservation of legal abortion its number one priority.
Its literature repeatedly states that access to abortion is "the most
fundamental right of women, without which all other rights are meaningless."
With this drastic change, a highly visible faction
of the women's movement abandoned the vision of the early feminists: a
world where women would be accepted and respected as women. There are
now 1.3 million surgical abortions per year in the United States. The
Alan Guttmacher Institute (the research arm of Planned Parenthood) reports
that women have abortions for two primary reasons: lack of financial resources
and lack of emotional support.
continue reading here
for Life is dedicated to systematically eliminating the reasons that
drive women to abortion, primarily lack of resources and support,
because women deserve better.
Father Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, issued the following statement after learning of the death of Canadian abortionist Henry Morgentaler:
"I just gave another retreat for former abortion clinic workers, and saw the beauty of repentance on the part of child killers. Would that abortionist Morgentaler could have been one of the participants. He survived the holocaust in Europe but brought it to Canada.
“We at Priests for Life pray for him. We invite all prolifers to pray both for him and for all abortionists, and to support the work of the Society of Centurions which works for their conversion and healing. (SocietyofCenturions.org)"
Priests for Life is the nation's largest Catholic pro-life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia.
Use this link for more information on Priests for Life
by Bruce Frohnen
In responding to a recent post of mine criticizing our liberal culture for its hostility toward the traditional family, a commenter wrote: “I don’t know a single liberal who … doesn’t value (and participate in) both traditional and non-traditional families.” I think it is important to examine this liberal response to conservative criticism, not because the issue can be “settled,” but because it can tell us why liberals and conservatives so often seem to be talking past one another when it comes to social issues.
Conservatives (like me) often are accused of being unfairly censorious in accusing liberals of undermining primary institutions like the family. After all, the argument goes, we talk about “attacks” on relationships liberals genuinely value. And there is a way in which this is true—a way that shows why the “culture wars” are not likely to end any time soon.
When someone tells you that he and his liberals friends “value (and participate in) both traditional and non-traditional families” that person expects a fight about just what a “non-traditional family” might be. Most liberals, in my experience, are loaded for bear on this question. “What, you mean just because both parents aren’t present, or both happen to be male, or female, or the family is a mixed one, having been through one or more divorces, or there is no marriage certificate, that it somehow isn’t ‘real’? Well how intolerant and narrow-minded is that?”
If true, this charge would be a serious one. But it is not. Tragedies occur, as they always have. Children are left to be raised by a single parent—neither death nor abandonment is new. Children are raised by maiden aunts, struggling uncles, and other relatives or adoptive parents. Broken families seek to reform in the wake of one or more tragedies. And common law marriage grew up to recognize the rights of children and spouses in situations where marriages are difficult to obtain or one spouse (or both) persists in refusing to solemnize the relationship.
Bruce Frohnen is Professor of Law at the Ohio Northern University College of Law. He is also a senior fellow at the Russell Kirk Center and author of many books including The New Communitarians and the Crisis of Modern Liberalism, and the editor of Rethinking Rights (with Ken Grasso), and The American Republic: Primary Source.
Thursday, May 30, 2013
Over 1,200 Marylanders joined this year's Maryland March for Life - an inspiring, powerful evening and a beautiful witness to our representatives in Annapolis.
Thank you to Archbishop Lori and Pastor Schindler for leading us in prayer and to Nathaniel, Jenny, Pastor Lisa, and Senator Shore for their testimonies. And to all of you for attending!
In case you didn't catch us in the news, Maryland March-ers were featured on Fox 45 evening news, the Catholic Review, the Capital Gazette, the Gazette.net, in a letter in the Carroll County Times, and Deacon Brent's Catholic Review Blog.
The Maryland March for Life is proud to be a family-friendly, life affirming event with young children in attendance. Therefore it is our policy not to include graphic images as part of the march. The full policy can be found on our website.
Thank you again for your support of the Maryland March for Life. It's a great joy to see the crowds continue to grow! In an effort to continue this growth, we invite each of you to bring at least two friends next year, making it the biggest MD March ever!!
Twelve hundred babies surviving abortions in the U.S., even in just one year, is a conservative estimate. Thousands of children have survived abortions in the forty years following the national legalization of abortion in 1973.
Just eight years after Roe v. Wade, Liz Jeffries and Rick Edmonds were named Pulitzer Prize finalists for their series on the live-birth abortions already epidemic in the abortion industry. Jeffries and Edmonds recorded heartbreaking testimonies from nurses who held and comforted dying abortion survivors. They also revealed the magnitude of these horrors:
"Dr. Willard Cates, an expert on medical statistics who is chief of abortion surveillance for the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta, estimates that 400 to 500 abortion live births occur every year in the United States."
continue reading here
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
By Alan Caruba
The conclusion of the trial of Dr. Kermit Gosnell, convicted of first-degree murder in the killings of aborted babies and involuntary manslaughter in the drug-overdose death of a patient, ignited a renewed national discussion of abortion in America. The discussion has not been aided by the mainstream media that, for the most part, ignored the trial.
Sunday, May 26, 2013
The Bucks County Pro-Life Coalition has been in existence for over 30 years. Our mission has been to assist women and their unborn children. But in order to continue supporting them in these tough economic times, it requires a little more work on our part.
When: Saturday June 29th, 2013 9 AM
Where: Peace Valley Park, Galena Village, Creek Rd. Doylestown, PA
Purpose: Assists Bucks Co. Pro-Life Coalition Pregnancy Homes & Counseling Centers
Registration & Fees: Opens at 7:30 AM. Run and walk start at 9 AM, kids run to follow. Entries 13 and up: $25.00 for run/walkers if received by June 16th, $15 for kids 5-12 till same date. Includes a guaranteed shirt of your size. Afterwards, including race day, add $5 to fee; shirts available while they last. Under 5: no charge but registration still required-no shirt
***************************Prizes, Raffle, Auction***************************
Awards for 5k: Award to top Male & Female plus medals to top 3 Males & Females in:
0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+
Make checks payable to: Bucks County Pro-Life Coalition
Mail to: Bucks County Pro-Life Coalition; P.O. Box 872; Richlandtown, Pa. 18955-9998
Questions: Contact Sandy at email@example.com
(nominal service fee applies, closes midnight of the Wed before the race)
For more information on our organization, you may go to our website here
The rally, an inspiring witness to a community bound together in the common cause of protecting their women and children from abortion, was held in response to Carhart’s brutal, inhuman activity and neglect, fatal to women and children both, in his Germantown facility. Even though the abortion facility is located in a commercial complex and not in a residential area or near a university campus, the protest pulled in a crowd of over two hundred. Protesters gathered on the lawn to present a united front against Carhart’s operations and the damaging effects of abortion. The rally demanded true protection and empowerment of women, justice for Jennifer and Madison Morbelli, and the revocation of Carhart’s license to practice in Maryland.
Speakers at the rally included:
- Lila Rose, Live Action President
- Mary Gabriel, Live Action Strategic Development Director
- Dr. Grace Morrison, Founder of Pray for Germantown
- Mallory Quigley, SBA List
Below is an e-mail letter I received from Senator Bob Casey in response to a letter I sent him asking him to uphold the Defense of Marriage Act. Sadly, he has forgotten his roots and his faith and decided to become "politically correct" in order to stay in office. We need to remember this when his term is up and he runs again for office. I suggest everyone go to his website and let him know just how you feel about the position he has taken on this issue.
Dear Mrs. Dowling,
Thank you for taking the time to contact me about same-sex marriage. I appreciate hearing from you about this issue.
As stated in the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), enacted in 1996, federal law does not currently recognize same-sex marriages. In addition, 31 states have enacted state constitutional amendments defining marriage as between one man and one woman. Other states, including Pennsylvania, have laws establishing same-sex unions as a violation of state public policy. In recent years, a number of states have legalized same-sex marriage.
Currently, twelve states and the District of Columbia allow same-sex marriage as a result of a combination of state court rulings, legislative action, and ballot measures. In the 2010 Census, more than 130,000 same-sex households reported themselves as married. On March 16, 2011, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California introduced the Respect for Marriage Act of 2011, which would repeal DOMA and allow for federal recognition of marriages recognized by states. This legislation has not been reintroduced in the 113th Congress, which began on January 3, 2013.
When the Respect for Marriage Act was introduced and debated in the Senate in 2011, I began to focus on the issue of same-sex marriage much more intensely than I had before. In the past, I have supported civil unions. I also strongly supported the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT), was a leading co-sponsor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), and had stated publicly that I opposed efforts to enact constitutional prohibitions on same-sex marriage.
In the six years I have been in the Senate, there have not been any floor votes to repeal DOMA or to legalize same-sex marriage. Both questions have now been argued before the Supreme Court and are being debated across our country. After much deliberation and after reviewing the legal, public policy, and civil rights questions presented, I support marriage equality for same-sex couples and believe that DOMA should be repealed. As part of my consideration of these issues, I read letters written to me by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Pennsylvanians and their families. These letters included deeply personal statements from people across our Commonwealth and the questions they posed challenged me directly. As a Senator and as a citizen, I can no longer in good conscience take a position that denies Pennsylvania families the full measure of equality and respect.
I understand that many Americans of good will have strong feelings on both sides of this issue. As a supporter of religious freedom, I support same-sex marriage as a secular institution. No religious institution should be required to confer religious or sacramental approval contrary to the tenets of its faith. I also believe elected public officials have an abiding obligation to refrain from demonizing and dividing people for partisan or political gain. Rather, elected officials from both sides of the aisle should come together and find areas of agreement to do what is best for the country. Please be assured that should legislation related to this issue come before the full Senate for consideration, I will have your views in mind.
Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about this or any other matter of importance to you.
For more information on this or other issues, I encourage you to visit my website, http://casey.senate.gov. I hope you will find this online office a comprehensive resource to stay up-to-date on my work in Washington, request assistance from my office or share with me your thoughts on the issues that matter most to you and to Pennsylvania.
United States Senator
Saturday, May 25, 2013
By Archbishop Charles J. Chaput
Let’s begin this week with a simple statement of fact. America’s Catholic bishops started pressing for adequate health-care coverage for all of our nation’s people decades before the current administration took office. In the Christian tradition, basic medical care is a matter of social justice and human dignity. Even now, even with the financial and structural flaws that critics believe undermine the 2010 Affordable Care Act, the bishops continue to share the goal of real health-care reform and affordable medical care for all Americans.
But health care has now morphed into a religious liberty issue provoked entirely – and needlessly — by the current White House. Despite a few small concessions under pressure, the administration refuses to withdraw or reasonably modify a Health and Human Services (HHS) contraceptive mandate that violates the moral and religious convictions of many individuals, private employers and religiously affiliated and inspired organizations.
Coupled with the White House’s refusal to uphold the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, and its astonishing disregard for the unique nature of religious freedom displayed by its arguments in a 9-0 defeat in the 2012 Hosanna-Tabor Supreme Court decision, the HHS mandate can only be understood as a form of coercion. Access to inexpensive contraception is a problem nowhere in the United States. The mandate is thus an ideological statement; the imposition of a preferential option for infertility. And if millions of Americans disagree with it on principle – too bad.
continue reading here
An Opinion by Ryan Bomberger
Scandal. It’s not just a sleazy TV show. It’s real life. And, lately, it’s spreading like wildfire.
Every year my wife, Bethany, and I dread filing our taxes. We’re diligent and organized, but worry about missing some minute detail that would trigger the harrowing experience of an audit. I’ve been through one before because I own a small business. In the end, the IRS paid me thousands more in that year’s refund.
Middle class families have been hit hard with a crumbling economy, so getting any tax break we can relieves some of the fiscal pain, especially for adoptive families. The Adoption Tax Credit enables parents to recoup some of the out-of-pocket expenses incurred in the adoption process. The $13,360 refundable tax credit for 2011 was a welcome offset. (Depending on the type of adoption, that refund would only be a fraction of the actual cost—a cost that is well worth it.) It was the most the federal government has offered since 2006, and only 2010 and 2011 were refundable. In all other years, including this most recent year, the Adoption Tax Credit was non-refundable. This means it will only offset any amount that you may owe in federal taxes, but adoptive families will not see any of that amount refunded in cash.
continue reading here
by Peter LaBarbera
May 23, 2013, was a sad day for the Boy Scouts of America (BSA), and another tragic day for an America in decline. The Scouts’ corporate-driven leaders in their folly put sexual morality up for a vote, and when it was all over, the Scouts as we once knew them – a God-fearing, wholesome organization – were finished. Now, truly “morally straight” organizations (to quote the Scout Oath) will rise up to compete with the corrupted BSA, and parents by the hundreds of thousands will migrate with their sons to these trustworthy alternatives.
This was a completely unnecessary capitulation. The equivocating Scouts somehow managed to snatch defeat from their hard-won victory in the Supreme Court in 2000 – which preserved the Scouts’ right to live by their own moral creed. Now they have eviscerated that creed, thus rewarding the very Homosexual lobby that tormented the BSA since its high court triumph.
Pursuing godliness and virtue is not a democratic exercise but a walk of obedience. Truth is transcendent; it is not decided by polls or votes. (Two men or two women will never truly be “married.”) We all fall short and hence need a Savior, but absolute Truth never changes. God – not man -- sets the standard for proper living. Allowing boys who identify with and, presumably, engage in homosexual behavior is the opposite of virtue -- and certainly wasn’t a Scouting value in my father’s and grandfather’s America.
Let’s cut through all the pro-“gay” noise that infests most discussions of this issue. Practicing homosexuality is a destructive lifestyle choice and a sin. It is immoral, against nature, and changeable – as evidenced by the countless men (like Michael Glatze) and women (like Charlene Cothran) who once proudly considered themselves “gay” but now live in accordance with God’s natural design for their bodies.
continue reading here
Note: Now that the Boy Scouts of America's leaders have sold their souls to the devil, good, moral families will be looking for alternative organizations. Below is a link to "Faith Based Boys", just such an organization.
Use this link for more information on this organization
Friday, May 24, 2013
From Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-TX)
President Obama and his pro-abortion pals are looking at the U.S. Supreme Court and licking their lips. They know President Obama’s next high court pick could secure a pro-abortion Supreme Court for decades to come. And the Abortion Lobby believes, the next radical court nominee could lead to the destruction of virtually EVERY pro-life law in the country, as well!
The Abortion Lobby is NOT sitting around on their hands waiting for another Court vacancy to occur before they mobilize. Right now, the so-called National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), Planned Parenthood and Emily’s List are working feverishly to ensure President Obama’s next Court pick is his most outrageous nominee yet. And they plan to ram him or her through the U.S Senate for confirmation before pro-lifers know what hit them!
For more than 40 years, the Supreme Court has been anything but a friend to unborn children. Just as we have seen with “ObamaCare” and the Roe v. Wade travesty itself, Supreme Court Justices aren’t above imposing the Abortion Lobby’s radical agenda on America through judicial decree.
President Obama’s next Court nominee could very well give the Abortion Lobby the Supreme Court majority they need to DESTROY all pro-life laws throughout the country, including:
*** Parental intervention laws to stop abortionists from secretly preying on underage girls by ensuring that parents are legally able stop any abortion on their minor children;
*** Ultrasound Laws to prove to expectant mothers that they are carrying a precious unborn life inside them -- not a meaningless “glob of flesh” as abortionists would have them believe;
*** Bans on sex selection abortions, which prohibit the killing of the unborn just because the a parent didn’t like the sex of their baby;
*** Bans on taxpayer funding for abortions to allow the Abortion Lobby to pick the pockets of every American taxpayer.
While our ultimate goal is to overturn Roe v. Wade and to end abortion nationwide through passage of the Life at Conception Act, through laws like these and others, states are saving unborn lives. In fact, Time Magazine ran a January 14 cover story entitled, “Why Abortion Rights Activists Have Been Losing Ever Since Roe v. Wade.” The fact is, when popularly elected representatives decide, the outcome is overwhelmingly pro-life.
That’s why this next Supreme Court pick is so important to them, why they’re not waiting around to mobilize -- and why we must prepare to fight back NOW!
President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) know the key to handing their pro-abortion allies the Supreme Court power they crave is SPEED. So we MUST start fighting back now and be ready to flood the Senate with hundreds of thousands, even millions, of pro-life petitions on DAY ONE of the fight.
Today, while the Supreme Court certainly doesn’t have a pro-life majority -- the most radical wing of the pro-abortion justices on the Court holds only a slim minority. So Obama’s next pick could tip the scale!
Can you imagine the slaughter in store for the unborn from the Court should the Abortion Lobby get their way with EVERYTHING they want? We will be sure to see the destruction of pro-life laws all over the country!
The good news is, the National Pro-Life Alliance has a plan to WIN, so I’ve agreed to help them. I hope you will too. I know we have heard plenty of U.S. Senators saying there can be no “litmus tests” for Court nominees of the years. Sadly, many self-described “pro-life” Senators often use the “litmus test” excuse to run scared from any fight with the Abortion Lobby over Court nominees. In fact, during the last Supreme Court confirmation fight in 2009, NINE Republican Senators -- many of whom publicly parade themselves as “pro-life” -- crossed party lines to vote for Obama’s radical justice Sonia Sotomayor!
Of course, I understand the incredible power our Founders vested in the presidency. But I believe no U.S. Senator can uphold our Constitutional liberties while ignoring our God-given right to life!
That’s why your signed Supreme Court Confirmation petition and your generous financial support for NPLA TODAY are so critical.
With your support, NPLA has a massive four-part plan designed to turn up the heat on the U.S. Senate, including:
1) Contacting up to 12 million pro-lifers and more all over the country using mail, email and phones to alert them to this absolutely critical battle and generate petitions to their U.S. Senators;
2) Working the talk radio lines, granting media interviews, holding press conferences and launching church tours to ensure every pro-life American is aware of the stakes in the next Supreme Court nominee fight;
3) Running web ads on heavily trafficked websites, working the blogs, and launching a state-of-the-art Facebook campaign to reach and mobilize up to four million more supporters;
4) And finally, if funds permit, NPLA will launch a powerful TV ad campaign in the days before each nominee's final vote ensuring every targeted Senator knows his reelection (or even party re-nomination) could ride on his or her Supreme Court confirmation vote.
Such a massive program will be what it takes to win any Supreme Court confirmation battle. President Obama and the Abortion Lobby have proven they’re willing to play hardball. I believe the unborn deserve our honorably doing the same.
This is NOT a fight pro-lifers like you and me can afford to ignore. I can hardly make myself think of the horrific results you and I could see if the Abortion Lobby gets their way. The innocent unborn who will pay the price with their lives. This battle will be a defining one for the pro-life movement.
Use this link to sign the petition to stop pro-abortion Supreme Court nominees!
The focus of the National Pro-Life Alliance is passing substantive pro-life legislation. Their staff, members and volunteers are dedicated to halting the slaughter of precious unborn babies once and for all.