Thursday, July 19, 2018

Facebook and Google Censor Pro-Life Christians While Pro-Abortion Liberals Get Free Reign


By Rep. Lamar Smith
Life News


Americans deserve the facts, objectively reported. They know media bias is pervasive. A recent Morning Consult poll found that only a quarter of voters now trust the media to tell them the truth, a record low.

The media savages President Donald Trump and portrays his administration in the worst possible light. Over 90 percent of his network news coverage has been negative, higher than any other president.

The muting of conservative voices by social media also has intensified. Social media companies have repeatedly censored, removed, or “shadow banned” conservative journalists, news organizations, and media outlets that do not share their liberal political views.

Facebook’s new algorithm for what users see on their timeline has disproportionately harmed conservative publishers. They’re getting fewer readers while their liberal counterparts haven’t been impacted to the same degree.

Recently, Google’s employees easily convinced the company’s management to cut ties to contracts with the military.

And Google has long faced criticism from fact-checkers over manipulating search results to slight conservatives. Google also has deleted or blocked references to Jesus, Chick-fil-A, and the Catholic religion. When will it stop?

Also alarming are the guidelines being written by these companies to define “hate speech.” Facebook’s newly published Community Standards, which determine what content is allowed, define these terms for the American people.

It violates Facebook rules “to exclude or segregate a person or group.” So a conservative organization calling for illegal immigrants to be returned to their home country could be labeled a hate group by the platform and their content removed altogether.

Some platforms have allowed liberal interest groups to determine what information is available to the public. The Southern Poverty Law Center is allowed to influence platform guidelines and sometimes censor content that it deems “hate” speech.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has a “hate map” that lists over 900 organizations. These include pro-life, religious freedom, and border security groups—all popular with the American people. And all are unfairly targeted by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

It’s no secret that social media organizations are typically controlled and run by individuals who lean liberal, sometimes radically so. It will require a constant effort by these entities to neutralize this relentless bias if, in fact, they really want to do it.

All media entities should give the American people the facts, not tell them what to think.

LifeNews Note: Rep. Smith is a Republican who has represented Texas’s 21st Congressional district since 1987. This originally appeared at Daily Signal.

Catholic Priest Punished After He Told Pro-Abortion Catholics to Go to Confession


By Steven Ertelt
Life News

The shockwaves after Ireland voted to repeal their pro life legal protections for unborn children are still being felt. A new report indicates a pro-life Catholic priest is being disciplined for telling his congregation that if they voted to repeal the pro-life law they should go to confession.

The vote in Ireland to repeal the 8th Amendment left pro-life people, and specifically members of the Catholic Church around the world, stunned. Ireland had long been a pro-life nation that valued its women and unborn children but it paved the way for legislation to legalize abortion when it removed its Eighth Amendment protections for babies before birth.

According to a news report at the Catholic website Church Militant, a Catholic priest was abruptly transferred from his Parish Church and some members of the congregation say he is unfairly being punished for saying the probe Orson Catholic should go to confession.

Here’s more:

Father James E. Larkin is a priest in the archdiocese of Dublin, headed by Abp. Diarmuid Martin. Formerly of the parish of Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal in Clonskeagh, Larkin was unexpectedly reassigned last week to a chaplaincy with the Sisters of Loreto in Rathfarnham.

Sources say that backlash against Fr. Larkin’s pro-life advocacy is what led to the change in assignment. A local pro-life canvasser who wished to be called “Anne” told Church Militant in an email that Fr. Larkin spoke against the results of Ireland’s abortion referendum, in which Irish voters in May voted to legalize abortion, rejecting the constitutional right to life of the unborn in Ireland’s Eighth Amendment.

According to Anne, Fr. Larkin warned that voting in favor of legalized child killing is a grave sin and that repentance and confession are needed for anyone who voted for abortion.
“After the referendum, he asked the congregation to consider going to confession if they had voted ‘Yes,'” she explained.
“It appears this is the reason he has been moved,” Anne said, adding that the “speed and unfairness” of his removal “upset many people.”
Church Militant called Miraculous Medal Parish for comment on Monday. A staffer there confirmed that Fr. Larkin recently left the parish but declined to give comments or further details, although he did call Fr. Larkin “a pre-Vatican II priest.”

Anne said she attended Fr. Larkin’s last Mass at Miraculous Medal on July 13.
“He read out the letter from Archbishop Diarmuid Martin which said that ‘he was delighted to appoint him as Chaplain to a Loretto convent in Rathfarnham in Dublin,'” she explained. “This was with immediate effect and he was to start this new job on Saturday 14th. He was to have no public Masses and to have no contact with his old parish or parishioners.

Born Premature at 21 Weeks, Eliora Celebrates Her First Birthday

"...if babies can survive earlier and earlier with medical intervention, then abortion laws based on viability may eventually be changed to reflect this."


By Kelli
Live Action News


Saint Luke’s Hospital in Kansas City, Missouri, is proving that the age of “viability” is not set in stone. With advancements in medical treatments, it has become an ever-changing number, moving earlier and earlier in the lives of babies. 

Saint Luke’s was the first hospital in the area to initiate a program designed to treat very premature babies born before 24 weeks of pregnancy. According to KSBH Kansas City (emphasis added), “Nationally… babies born prior to the 24-week mark… have a 6 percent survival rate, but at Saint Luke’s, they have a 50 percent survival rate.” It’s clear that medical intervention has made a huge difference.

And the fact that they started this program three years ago is likely what saved the life of little Eliora “Ellie” Schneider, who just celebrated her first birthday.

Born at 21 weeks and 6 days, Eliora weighed only 14 ounces — the size of a soda can. Her parents had to wait four months before they heard her cry. Her mother, Robin, told KSBH at the time, “The fact that she’s alive and has as few complications as she does is a miracle. There’s no other way around it. Whether or not you believe in God — it’s a miracle. She should not be here… and she needs to know that. That she has a special calling on her life.”

Her parents’ belief in that special calling no doubt played a role in Eliora’s healing. “She had all the odds stacked against her,” neonatologist Barbara Carr told KSBH, adding that her parents “had a very deep faith. They just continued to believe, we all kept working on and continuing to believe in her and she did well.” Eliora has regular doctor visits and regular physical therapy, which are helping to monitor and keep her on track developmentally.

READ: 12 amazing facts that prove the preborn’s humanity in the first trimester

While babies born very prematurely often have developmental issues, Carr says these delays may not be seen until a child starts school. But what’s most important is that children like Eliora are given a chance at life, regardless of possible challenges. And now other hospitals are beginning to treat these very premature babies as well. KSBH notes, “Over the past three years, equipment and strategy to treat these premature babies have improved. Carr said some other hospitals in the area also now treat babies born prior to 24 weeks.”

A 2015 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine is changing the way the medical community looks at viability, or the ability of babies to survive outside the womb. The study found that “babies born at 22 weeks had a nearly 25 percent survival rate if actively treated in a hospital.” 

Around 5,000 babies are born at this gestational age every year in the United States. According to University of Iowa pediatrics professor Dr. Edward Bell, “these babies deserve a chance.” He also believes 22 weeks, not 24, should be “the new standard of viability.” But this is, of course, controversial, because if babies can survive earlier and earlier with medical intervention, then abortion laws based on viability may eventually be changed to reflect this.


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 FacebookGoogle, 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.  


Wednesday, July 18, 2018

Judge Rejects Planned Parenthood Suit Against Trump Prioritizing Abstinence Education


By Calvin Freiburger
Life Site News


A federal judge has sided with the Trump administration in a lawsuit challenging its move to prioritize faith-based, abstinence-focused programs for dispensing family-planning dollars.

In May, three Planned Parenthood groups and the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association (NFPRHA) sued the administration over the Department of Health & Human Services’ (HHS) February guidelines overhauling how it evaluated applications for Title X family planning grants.

The new rules gave priority to abstinence, ease of primary care access, more family participation, and cooperation with faith-based groups.

On Monday, District Court Judge for the District of Columbia Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee, issued his ruling in the case, Reuters reports.
“[C]ourts cannot review substantive objections to a non-final agency action, nor can they require formal rulemaking for a change in agency procedure,” he wrote. McFadden added that his ruling was not a decision on the merits of the case, but if it was he would conclude that the administration’s priorities were consistent with the Title X program’s mission of supporting “voluntary family projects ... offering a broad range of acceptable and effective family planning methods and services.”
All told, the case is estimated to impact the fate of up to $260 million in federal tax dollars. Abortion giant Planned Parenthood handles more than 40 percent of patients receiving Title X care.

President Donald Trump and his administration have supported sexual risk avoidance education over contraceptive distribution throughout his presidency. Last year, Trump's HHS recommended abandoning an Obama-era contraception-based teen pregnancy prevention program on the grounds that the results appeared to be an increased likelihood of teen pregnancy.

In January, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) released a study finding downward trends in teen sexual activity from 2005 to 2015. The study did not declare a direct link between the results and abstinence education funding, but pro-family advocates say that message is clear when the CDC findings are combined with other studies connecting condom distribution and the promotion of promiscuity to increased teen pregnancy.



Federal Judge Condemns the “Moral Tragedy of Abortion”


By Micaiah Bilger
Life News


In a strongly-worded ruling this week, a federal judge criticized the abortion industry’s apparent attempt to “retaliate against people of faith” who believe unborn babies deserve a right to life.

Judge James C. Ho of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit also described abortion as a “moral tragedy” in his opinion about a case involving pro-abortion groups and the Texas Conference of Catholic Bishops.

The Fifth Circuit permanently blocked a ruling that would have forced the Texas bishops to hand over private emails and other communications as part of a lawsuit between the abortion business Whole Woman’s Health and the state, World News Daily reports. The bishops are not part of the lawsuit.

The abortion chain is challenging a law that requires abortion facilities to bury or cremate the remains of aborted babies.

The Catholic bishops offered to allow the free burial of aborted fetal remains in Catholic cemeteries in Texas after abortion activists complained about burdensome costs of the new law, according to the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represents the bishops.

Earlier this year, a lower court sided with the abortion industry in its subpoena for documents, but the Fifth Circuit disagreed this week.

Judge Edith J. Jones wrote the majority opinion, but Ho’s strong concurring opinion has received the most attention. Ho is an appointee of President Donald Trump.

“The First Amendment expressly guarantees the free exercise of religion – including the right of the Bishops to express their profound objection to the moral tragedy of abortion, by offering free burial services for fetal remains,” Ho wrote.
Referencing the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling involving Masterpiece Cakeshop and gay wedding cakes, Ho wondered if the abortion groups sought the documents “to retaliate against people of faith for not only believing in the sanctity of life – but also for wanting to do something about it.”
“It is hard to imagine a better example of how far we have strayed from the text and original understanding of the Constitution than this case,” he continued.
Crux reports more:

In a move that has been described as punitive by Becket Law, who is representing the Conference, Whole Women’s Health subpoenaed the bishops in March 2018 to release all of its internal documents concerning embryonic and fetal tissue remains, miscarriage, or abortion – including deliberations on matters of theology and philosophy, along with all correspondence between state agencies and their employees and any documentation pertaining to the lawsuit.

While the bishops provided more than 4,000 pages of documents, they insisted that all internal communication remain private. Last month, however, a district court ruled that they must turn over all documentation within 24 hours.

The decision, which came down on June 17 – Father’s Day – provided a 24 hour window to comply, which the bishops appealed, leading to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals granting an emergency stay in the case.

WND reports the circuit court also said the request “looks like an act of intimidation” against the bishops whose representative agreed to testify in the case. The pro-abortion groups agreed to withdraw the request for documents if the representative would not testify, according to the report.




What Really Happened with the Breastfeeding Scandal in Geneva





by Susan Yoshihara
for The Hill



After the fire bombings leveled Tokyo in the Pacific War, my father-in-law watched his parents bury his infant sister, who starved to death. His mother, malnourished in her poverty, had no breast milk to give. Formula could have saved his sister’s life and his mother a lifetime of guilt.

It is a shocking and sad sign of our times that the Trump administration finds itself excoriated this week for taking a step toward helping poor women in similar situations.

U.S. delegates to the World Health Organization in Geneva three months ago stand accused of greedy motives for seeking to expand information about breastfeeding alternatives. They were accused of not caring about women and children. They were accused of threatening a poor country’s national security to funnel billions of dollars to U.S. corporations.


What really happened is that a U.S. delegation, including women who were experienced breastfeeding advocates and savvy negotiators, bested the entrenched interests of a powerful activist lobby in a fair fight and for good reasons. As the New York Times accurately reported, this “stunned” global health officials who had gotten all too accustomed to the status quo, including the previous U.S. administration’s reluctant acquiescence to the 2016 version of the resolution.

Continue reading this article here



Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D., has taken part in United Nations negotiations on maternal and child health since 2006 as a delegation member and civil society participant. She is senior vice president for research at the Center for Family and Human Rights in Washington.


 
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 FacebookGoogle, 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.  



Tuesday, July 17, 2018

Challenging Preconceptions About Roe v. Wade



By Maria Gallagher, Legislative Director
Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation


I was disheartened recently while watching Fox News coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court.

A news anchor cited a misleading poll purporting that more than 60 percent of Americans support Roe v. Wade, the tragic Supreme Court decision which legalized abortion on demand. The anchor was interviewing an editor with the Washington Examiner newspaper. When the editor tried to explain the false impression left by the poll, the anchor quickly shouted him down.

The fact is that most Americans do not know that Roe meant abortions for any reason during all nine months of pregnancy. They also do not realize that Roe led to the outrageous practice of partial-birth abortion, where a baby is partly delivered, then killed. They also do not recognize the fact that Roe gave rise to the massive tragedy in West Philadelphia, where abortionist Kermit Gosnell was ultimately found guilty of the murders of three full-term babies and the death of a female patient, Karnamaya Mongar.

A Fox News Sunday interview left me similarly disappointed. The head of the abortion lobbying group NARAL was interviewed, without counterpoint, about the Supreme Court. The NARAL spokeswoman claimed that most people are "pro-choice" because they believe in compassionate, healthy choice.

But abortion is not compassionate for the child who is killed. And how can it be a mark of compassion when you leave a woman to grieve a baby who has been unnecessarily lost to abortion?

"Choice" is unhealthy when it results in the death of a baby in the womb. It is also quite unhealthy for those mothers who turn to alcohol and drugs to numb their pain.

The compassionate, healthy choice in the abortion equation is the choice for life. If only mainstream news anchors would recognize that fundamental truth, we would be well on our way to building a culture of life. Until that day comes, we must work through polite persuasion to convince the news media of the rightness of the pro-life cause.


 
The Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation is a grassroots right-to-life organization with members statewide. As the state affiliate of National Right to Life, PPLF is committed to promoting the dignity and value of human life from conception to natural death and to restoring legal protection for preborn children.  For more information on the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation, please use this link. 



Baby Oliver Saved in U.S. After UK Doctors Said His Heart Couldn’t be Fixed


By Cassy Fiano
Live Action News


Most parents would readily cross oceans to save their child’s life, with no thought as to the cost or distance. But for some children in the UK, like Alfie Evans and Charlie Gard, that simply wasn’t an option they were given. Oliver Cameron is one of the fortunate ones, though, and thanks to the tireless efforts of his parents and doctors at Boston Children’s Hospital, Oliver is alive and thriving today.

When Oliver was born in the United Kingdom, he had a large, non-cancerous tumor in his heart, called a cardiac fibroma. It was so rare that doctors in the UK weren’t able to treat it. Only a handful had even seen it.
“They couldn’t treat the tumor in the U.K. because they didn’t have any doctors with the right expertise,” his mother, Lydia, said. “They said our only option was a heart transplant, but we thought there must be another route, so we started doing our own research.”

READ: Alfie Evans is just the latest victim in Europe’s culture of death

Their research led them to Boston Children’s Hospital, where another little girl, Francesca, had successfully had her large cardiac tumor removed. Her story was posted on the Boston Children’s Hospital Facebook page the day after Oliver was born, which Lydia took as a sign. So she reached out to Francesca’s doctors, Dr. Pedro del Nido and Dr. Tal Geva, and sent Oliver’s records to them. They responded that he would be a good candidate for the surgery — even though the NHS doctors were insistent that Oliver’s tumor could not be removed. But the difficulties of getting Oliver treatment weren’t over yet; the Cameron family now had to find a way to pay for it.

At first, the NHS refused to pay. 

“Oliver’s cardiologist spent hours of his own time trying to get Oliver to Boston — he kept applying and reapplying for the National Health Service to cover the surgery in the U.S., but with no luck,” Lydia said.
“So, we started our own fundraising campaign, because we had no other way to get him there.” But after they successfully raised most of the money, they got good news: not only would the NHS pay for the surgery, they would also send two cardiologists and a cardiac surgeon to learn from the doctors at Boston Children’s.

In November of 2017, Oliver underwent the eight-hour surgery, which went better than expected. “Dr. del Nido warned us that they may not be able to remove the entire tumor because it was so large, but that he would remove as much as possible,” Lydia explained. “So when they told us he had removed all of it, we were so happy we just burst into tears.”

The tumor ended up being one of the largest the doctors had ever seen.

After the surgery, Oliver continued to stun doctors by making a rapid recovery, and was able to return home by Christmas. “This experience has shown us how much good there is in the world,” Lydia said. “So many people supported us along the way, from near and far. And without Dr. Geva and Dr. del Nido, we would have lost Oliver. Miracles do happen — and we are grateful to be celebrating ours.”

The Camerons were exceedingly fortunate that they were able to bring Oliver to the United States to receive treatment. It’s a blessing not given to everyone, denied most notably to toddlers Charlie Gardand Alfie Evans

The parents of both boys were told that treatment was futile and that they should just be allowed to die; when the parents raised money to seek treatment outside of the United Kingdom, hospitals and courts refused to allow it, and forced both boys to be removed from life support.



Planned Parenthood Kills More Blacks in 2 Weeks than the KKK Killed in a Century

She [Margaret Sanger] led the crusade to, in her own words, “prevent the birth of defectives”.


By Ryan Bomberger
Town Hall


What is it about truth that sends people scrambling to their “safe” (dishonest) spaces? Too many have such a visceral aversion to the truth. Even among fellow Christians, who claim that the truth sets us free, the resistance to inarguable facts is often met with misapplied defenses of grace and non-judgement.

One of my latest memes set off a firestorm among those who think that invoking history to illuminate its repeated present is “offensive”, “disgusting”, and “hurtful”.

The online graphic reads: 

“We kill more black lives in 2 weeks than the KKK lynched in a century…Planned Parenthood: Eugenics. No Matter What.” 
The URL in the meme provides the context of how abortion has become the leading killer in the black community. And finally, an image of a noose appears above those words as an instrument of racial violence (which killed an estimated 3,446 African-Americans). Today, an estimated 247 black lives are killed every day by Planned Parenthood with forceps, vacuum aspiration machines, chemicals and other devices.

Thousands liked and loved the meme on social media. It was even posted on Instagram by Bill Johnson—pastor of California megachurch, Bethel Church. I wish more pastors would stand firm in truth and love like he does. If churches actually talked openly about social issues, we’d could better address the brokenness (that only God can heal) in our present.

Some were more offended by the image of a noose than the fact that those made in the image of God have been slaughtered by the millions. Where is the outrage over the shedding of innocent blood?

In fact, Instagram deleted our post, warning us they would restrict or disable our account if we violate their guidelines again. We didn’t violate any guidelines. They claimed the meme “threatened” or “encouraged violence”. How does a meme denouncing racial violence possibly threaten violence against anyone?

Instagram can delete our posts, and even our account, but they can’t delete the truth. And of course, there was no due process, no appeal process, no one to reach to correct this injustice. There was no option other than to click OK and the purge was complete. #Liberalism.

Soooo…the meme is the problem, not the genocide. And yes, I used the word genocide. Fannie Lou Hamer did, too. Oh, and so did pre-pro-abortion Rev. Jesse Jackson.

What do you call it when more black babies are killed by abortion than are born alive? This is the grim reality in NYC where Planned Parenthood was spawned. Pro-abortion activists call this ‘reproductive justice’. When did justice become the strong and the profitable prevailing over the weak?

Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger, boasted about keynoting a Ku Klux Klan meeting on in her autobiography (pp. 366-367). And no, not everyone was a racist in 1938, nor was every political figure open to speaking to a terrorist organization like the KKK. But Sanger found it amusing to address a secret meeting with KKK members and bragged about getting a dozen offers to speak to similar groups.

Sanger’s Planned Parenthood and Birth Control Review boards were filled with eugenicists who proudly paraded their racism and elitism. One of those was Lothrop Stoddard, a eugenicist, klansman, Planned Parenthood Board member and a prolific writer whose words inspired the NAZIS. His 1921 book, The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy (as if you need any further explanation than the title), was a blueprint for racial hygiene theory employed with grotesque and incomprehensible effect during the Holocaust. Stoddard wrote (pg. 162): 

“The white race divides into three main sub-species the Nordics, the Alpines, and the Mediterraneans. All three are good stocks, ranking in genetic worth well above the various colored races. However, there seems to be no question that the Nordic is far and away the most valuable type; standing, indeed, at the head of the whole human genus. As Madison Grant well expresses it, the Nordic is ‘The Great Race.’” 
Madison Grant was the co-founder of the deeply racist American Eugenics Society (AES), and his book Passing of the Great Race was considered by Hitler to be his most valuable book.

Sanger was a member of the AES and was its most public figure. She led the crusade to, in her own words, “prevent the birth of defectives”.


Blogger's note:

For more details on Planned Parenthood's founder, Margaret Sanger, and how her views on racism and the elimination of 'defectives' fueled the widespread acceptance and practice of abortion visit Black Genocide.


“Pro-Life” Democrat Bob Casey Refuses to Support Brett Kavanaugh: “I’m a No and Will Remain a No”


By Christina Vazquez
Life News


Before U.S. Senate hearings have even taken place, Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey Jr. already has made up his mind about Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, and his answer is no.

Vassar News reports the seemingly moderate Democrat senator has refused to consider approving President Donald Trump’s nomination to the Supreme Court.

“I’ve got a position and I’m not backing off that: I’m a No and I’m [going to] remain No,” Casey said.

The senator has yet to meet with Kavanaugh, and committee hearings to confirm the nominee have yet to take place.

This hard-lined response to Kavanaugh is perplexing for a senator who has stated that he is pro-life and has a family history of pro-life leadership. Casey’s father, Robert Casey Sr., was the governor of Pennsylvania in the 1980s and 90s, and was known as a leading pro-life Democrat who famously fought Planned Parenthood in the Supreme Court case, Planned Parenthood vs. Casey. If Kavanaugh were to be approved, there is potential for cases like Roe vs. Wade to be overturned and protections for unborn babies upheld.

In an interview with Politico, Casey defended his congressional voting record: 


“I think it’s clear to most people that the description of pro-life Democrat is accurate. I’ve been very consistent…What it means is I try to support policies that help women and children both before and after birth.  
Part of that is making sure you are honest about differences but also at the same time trying to focus on ways to reduce both the number of abortions and the number of unwanted pregnancies, and I think my record reflects that.”

Casey’s record shows that his actions are not as pro-life as he chalks them up to be. The National Right to Life scorecard puts the Pennsylvania senator at 20 percent based on how he has voted on pro-life bills in the past year. Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood gives the senator a 75 percent in favor of abortion-friendly laws. NARAL Pro-Choice America, a radical pro-abortion organization, rates Casey at 100 percent.

Casey’s staunch position against Kavanaugh may hurt him in the long run, especially with midterm elections coming up this fall. In 2016, Trump won Pennsylvania during the presidential election.

Casey’s senate challenger, U.S. Rep. Lou Barletta, a pro-life Republican, commented on Kavanaugh and Casey during a news conference in Pennsylvania last week.