Yes, Sarah, There is a Difference Between Abortion Clinics and Crisis Pregnancy Centers, Just Not the Ones You Imagine

By Dave Andrusko
National Right to Life

Under the category of, “no kidding?” I offer you the following from the Mississippi Clarion Ledger: “Abortion Clinics and Crisis Pregnancy Centers Differ.”

Ok, to be fair that is the headline the Associated Press gave to the story when it gave Sarah Fowler’s account much wider circulation. The original headline read “Abortion clinic vs. crisis pregnancy center: What’s the difference?”.

Either way, you can’t come away from Fowler’s account without thinking CPCs are horrible, intending only to make pregnant women feel horrible about themselves. Not only that they are duplicitous and deceptive.

As contrasted with “Abortion providers and clinics such as Planned Parenthood” which are, in Fowler’s glowing account, “staffed by doctors, nurses and other professionally trained staff. Jackson [Mississippi] Women’s Health Center and Planned Parenthood in Hattiesburg offer a range of health care options including pap smears, annual exams, cancer and STI screenings and access to contraception.”

Get it? All those CPCs are good for is attempting to save the lives of babies by helping women find a better solution as composed to those full-service Planned Parenthood clinics which provide “medically accurate information that is evidence-based.”

I mean if you are going to write a hatchet job, couldn’t you at least do a little research that might challenge your preconceived ideas?

Could you, for example, talk with women and girls who are eternally grateful they were give a real alternative to killing their babies?

And what does this mean? “Entering 2018 just a few thousand contacts shy of 3 million since answering its first call in 2003, Heartbeat International’s 24-7, 365 pregnancy helpline Option Line responded to well over 350,000 women facing an unexpected or difficult pregnancy in 2017,” according to Jennifer Minor.

No doubt Fowler’s response would be that it’s bad enough that there is just one abortion clinic in Mississippi while “There are more than 30 organizations that identify along the lines of a crisis pregnancy center.” Worse yet, nationwide there are probably four times as many CPCs (Pregnancy Help Centers) as there are abortion clinics. Of course to “journalists” such as Fowler, that would be just further evidence of CPCs cancer-like growth.

Or maybe just one story of how a woman’s future life was not ruined because she chose not to take the life of her baby. How about that? They are very, very easy to find.

Just the latest example (of countless examples) of how the Abortion Industry and its media allies fear and loathe any organization whose first objective is to find win-win solutions for moms and babies.

Website: National Right to Life

Voices for Life is an e-publication dedicated to informing and educating the public on pro-life and pro-family issues. To read our Mission Statement, use this link.  Follow us on Facebook, Google, and Pinterest.  Help us spread the pro-life message by sharing our articles on your favorite social networks.

Pregnant, need help or know someone who does?  

National Hotline: Call 1-800-712-HELP or Text 'HELPLINE' to 313131.
In Southeast Penna:  Call the Community Women's Center at  215-826-8090

If you or someone you know is suffering after abortion, confidential non-judgmental help is available.  

Call Project Rachel's national toll-free number 888-456-HOPE (4673) or visit hopeafterabortion.org.  

The Threat Pregnancy Help Centers Pose to the Abortion Industry Explains Their Hysterical Response

To come full circle, a primary mission of the abortion industry and its legion of media apologists is to drive its “competition” out of business.

Linda Greenhouse, 

former NY Times Supreme Court Reporter

By Dave Andrusko
National Right to Life

I think it would be fair to say that the savvier pro-abortionists understand there is case pending before the Supreme Court that has the potential to seriously upset a major objective of the Abortion Industry: compelling pro-lifers to compromise their principles, lessen their impact, and to force them to do the bidding of the likes of Planned Parenthood.

We’ve written or reposted a dozen stories or more about California’s so-called Reproductive FACT Act [“FACT” stands for Freedom, Accountability, Comprehensive Care, and Transparency]. In a word, the legislature is threatening to cripple pregnancy help centers if they do not comply.

Today we revisit the topic in light of former New York Times Supreme Court reporter Linda Greenhouse’s latest diatribe which appeared today in the Times’ opinion section.

Understand, these are alternative to abortion organizations, which rely heavily on volunteers (like my middle daughter), and receive no government funding. As Jay Hobbs has explained

California’s law orders the pro-life organizations to prominently post and distribute the following notice. “California has public programs that provide immediate free or low-cost access to comprehensive family planning services (including all FDA-approved methods of contraception), prenatal care, and abortion for eligible women. To determine whether you qualify, contact the county social services office at [insert the telephone number].”

What about pregnancy centers that do not offer free medical services such as ultrasounds?

They must post the following disclaimer “conspicuously at the entrance to the facility” “in no less than 48-point type”: “This facility is not licensed as a medical facility by the State of California and has no licensed medical provider who provides or directly supervises the provision of services.”

Greenhouse can’t be bothered with the Big Brother aspect of this case: the entire force of the California governmental apparatus coming down on organizations who are hopelessly outgunned.

What about other courts which, unlike the oft-overturned U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, struck down very similar laws? That doesn’t delay Greenhouse either.

She takes up the distinction without a difference argument the 9th Circuit used to uphold the Reproductive FACT Act versus a New York Appeals court that struck down a similar law. And, of course, she bludgeons the Supreme Court for opening the floodgates by recognizing and protecting free speech rights.

Greenhouse’s overarching argument is all that California is requiring is the truth. Which(a) misses the whole point of compelling a pro-life organization to advertise to its clients that they can get free or reduced abortions elsewhere, and (b)is grounded in the pro-abortion meme that women-helping centers are by nature liars and ought to be put out of business.

National Right to Life article continues here