Categories
Abortion Alexis mcgill johnson Cancel culture eugenics Institutional racism Intelwars margaret sanger Planned Parenthood Structural racism

Planned Parenthood CEO wakes up to Margaret Sanger’s racist, evil beliefs

The president and CEO of Planned Parenthood says it’s time for her company — the nation’s largest abortion provider — to “reckon” with the racist legacy of its founder, eugenicist Margaret Sanger.

“Up until now, Planned Parenthood has failed to own the impact of our founder’s actions,” Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill Johnson wrote in an op-ed for the Saturday edition of the New York Times. “We have defended Sanger as a protector of bodily autonomy and self-determination, while excusing her association with white supremacist groups and eugenics as an unfortunate ‘product of her time.'”

Pro-life activists have for years criticized the racist origins of Planned Parenthood. The organization’s founder, Sanger, supported eugenics and was an outspoken advocate for ridding the United States of poor non-whites through birth control and abortion. In her writings, Sanger referred to blacks, immigrants, and indigenous Americans as “human weeds,” “reckless breeders,” “spawning … human beings who should never been born.”

Planned Parenthood had for decades defended Sanger as a champion of women’s rights and reproductive health, until last year when 350 current and former staffers of Planned Parenthood’s Greater New York affiliate published an open letter condemning Sanger as “a racist, white woman” and accusing the organization of “institutional racism.”

After public criticism, last July Planned Parenthood of Greater New York removed Sanger’s name from its Manhattan clinic for her “harmful connections to the eugenics movement.”

Now, McGill Johnson is the first Planned Parenthood CEO to publicly acknowledge Sanger’s evil beliefs. She wrote:

Sanger spoke to the women’s auxiliary of the Ku Klux Klan at a rally in New Jersey to generate support for birth control. And event hough she eventually distanced herself from the eugenics movement because of its hard turn to explicit racism, she endorsed theSupreme Court’s 1927 decision in Buck v. Bell, which allowed states to sterilize people deemed “unfit” without their consent and sometimes without their knowledge — a ruling that led to the sterilization of tens of thousands of people in the 20th century.

The first human trials of the birth control pill — a project that was Sanger’s passion later in her life — were conducted with her backing in Puerto Rico, where as many as 1,500 women were not told that the drug was experimental or that they might experience dangerous side effects.

We don’t know what was in Sanger’s heart, and we don’t need to in order to condemn her harmful choices. What we have is a history of focusing on white womanhood relentlessly. Whether our founder was a racist is not a simple yes or no question. Our reckoning is understanding her full legacy, and its impact. Our reckoning is the work that comes next.

As part of that “reckoning,” McGill Johnson also acknowledged that Planned Parenthood is “privileging whiteness” and that it has “excluded trans and nonbinary people” by narrowly focusing on “women’s health.”

“As we face relentless attacks on our ability to keep providing sexual and reproductive health care, including abortion, we’ve claimed the mantle of women’s rights, to the exclusion of other causes that women of color and trans people cannot afford to ignore,” she wrote.

On behalf of Planned Parenthood, McGill Johnson went on to condemn the “many types of dehuminzation we are seeing right now” including “the dehumanization of Black and Latino victims of police violence such as Adam Toledo, Daunte Wright, Breonna Taylor, George Floyd and too many others. The dehumanization of transgender people whose health care and rights are being denied in states across the country, and who face attacks not just from the right but also from trans-exclusionary radical ‘feminists.'”

She did not spare a word for the dehumanization of an estimated 12 million unborn babies who were killed in abortion procedures globally this year.

Share
Categories
Abortion administration Biden COVID-19 Intelwars pandemic Pills trump

Biden administration to ‘temporarily’ allow abortion pills by mail citing pandemic

The Biden administration is set to “temporarily” lift a Trump administration policy requiring women seeking abortion-inducing drug Mifepristone — also known as RU486 — to be administered in person by health professionals, allowing the pills to be disbursed via mail citing the coronavirus pandemic.

What are the details?

CBS News reported that acting FDA Commission Janet Woodcock informed the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists in a letter on Monday that her agency would allow providers in some states to “exercise enforcement discretion,” citing studies that dismissed any “serious safety concerns…occurring with medical abortion as a result of modifying the in-person dispensing requirement during the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Pro-life organization March for Life said of the move:

“With this action, the Biden administration has made it clear that it will prioritize abortion over women’s safety. Allowing unsupervised chemical abortions via telemedicine, without requiring timely access to medical care, will put women in grave danger.

“Data released in 2018 by the FDA shows thousands of adverse events caused by abortion pills, including 768 hospitalizations and 24 deaths since 2000. Chemical abortions should have more medical oversight not less.”

CBS reported that the “temporary” action by the Biden administration handed “abortion-rights groups one of their first major victories of the new administration.”

It was only the first move of the week by President Joe Biden’s administration in rolling back abortion restrictions imposed by former President Donald Trump.

On Wednesday, the Department of Health and Human Services proposed a rule change that would reverse a Trump-era policy that bans abortion referral-services from receiving federal funding, according to ABC News. Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provided, was hardest hit when Trump implemented the restriction.

In a separate report, CBS News explained:

The current rules stemmed from the Trump administration’s promise to “defund Planned Parenthood.” The rule change prompted Planned Parenthood to exit the program, forgoing an estimated $60 million. In 2018, more than four million people relied on Title X for health care services, 41% of whom received services at Planned Parenthood, according to the health clinic.

For decades, Biden — a lifelong Catholic — supported the 1980 Hyde Amendment, which prohibits taxpayer dollars being spent on abortions. But he reversed his position on the policy when he ran for the Democratic ticket in 2020.

Share
Categories
Abortion Fathers pay half Fathers pay pregnancy costs Intelwars Pro-Life Utah law

Utah law requires fathers to shoulder half of pregnancy costs

A new Utah law requires biological fathers to pay for half of the out-of-pocket costs encountered during a woman’s pregnancy and childbirth, making the state the first in the nation to mandate prenatal child support.

What are the details?

The law, signed by Republican Gov. Spencer Cox in March, was characterized by the bill’s sponsors — Republican state Rep. Brady Brammer and Republican state Sen. Daniel McCay — as a “pro-life” measure to assist women who carry out their pregnancies and increase “the responsibility for men in the bringing of life into the world.”

According to the text of the legislation, biological fathers are specifically required to pay 50% of a mother’s “insurance premiums while she is pregnant; and pregnancy-related medical costs, including the hospital birth of the child, that are not paid by another person.”

Under the new law, fathers also won’t be required to cover the cost of an abortion that they didn’t consent to except in cases of rape or if the mother’s life was in danger. In cases where the paternity is in question, fathers will not be required to pay for half of pregnancy costs until the issue is settled.

What else?

Brammer reportedly decided to sponsor the measure after becoming frustrated with a number of measures moving through the state legislature that he said could be more aptly characterized as “anti-abortion” rather than “pro-life.”

“We want to help people and actually be pro-life in how we do it as opposed to anti-abortion,” Brammer told the Associated Press. “One of the ways to help with that was to help the burden of pregnancy be decreased.”

The lawmaker said the bill was not intended to lower the frequency of abortions, though he acknowledged that could be certainly be a result.

The bill reportedly received widespread support from Republicans in the GOP-controlled legislature and from pro-life groups in the state. Merrilee Boyack, chairman of the Abortion-Free Utah coalition, told the AP she hopes the measure will decrease abortions in the state.

“Anything we can do to support women in these circumstances will help them be able to give birth to their babies, feel good about that choice and feel supported along the way,” she said.

Anything else?

Democratic lawmakers and pro-abortion groups, on the other hand, fought against the law and speculated that it won’t actually help women but may, in fact, unnecessarily bind them to abusive partners.

Planned Parenthood spokeswoman Katrina Barker told the AP that while she supports helping women financially, it would be better to expand federal programs such as Medicaid, provide access to contraception, and grant paid parental leave.

She also argued that abortions likely won’t decrease, either, because “in the grand scheme of things, having a child and raising them to adulthood is going to be a lot more money.”

Share
Categories
Abortion Hyde amendment Intelwars Joe Biden omb Senate Shalanda young

Top Biden nominee claims taxpayer-funded abortion is necessary for ‘racial justice’

President Joe Biden’s nominee for deputy budget director, Shalanda Young, believes that abortion is “a matter of economic and racial justice.”

News of Young’s position on abortion was made public after her nomination was advanced out of the Senate Budget Committee and Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee down party lines last week.

What are the details?

Despite having earned general bipartisan support on Capitol Hill, 15 of the 18 Republicans who sit on both committees ultimately voted against advancing Young’s nomination.

According to the New York Post, the Republican senators who voted against Young cited her perspective toward the Hyde Amendment, the law that prohibits federal tax dollars from funding abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother.

Young told senators that eliminating the Hyde Amendment is necessary to promote “racial justice.”

“The President has spoken in favor of Congress ending the Hyde Amendment as part of his commitment to providing comprehensive health care for all women,” she said, the Post reported.

“Further, eliminating the Hyde Amendment is a matter of economic and racial justice because it most significantly impacts Medicaid recipients, who are low-income and more likely to be women of color,” Young added.

What did lawmakers say?

Ohio Sen. Rob Portman (R) said he initially supported Young’s nomination. But that changed after he became aware of her perspective of the Hyde Amendment.

“I had planned to support Ms. Young based on her testimony before the committee,” Portman said, Roll Call reported. “In reviewing her answers to the committee’s questions for the record, though, I’ve got to say I was really troubled by her responses, particularly her strong advocacy for eliminating the Hyde amendment.”

Meanwhile, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), the ranking member of the Budget Committee, voted to advance Young’s nomination, but sought reassurances that she would not support regulation that “changes Hyde or chips away at it.”

Senate Homeland Security Chairman Gary Peters (D-Mich.), however, voiced concern over sudden opposition by Republicans, and called Young’s perspective “fact.”

“In her written responses, Ms. Young stated that ending the Hyde amendment is a matter of economic and racial justice because its impact is felt most among low-income women of color. This is simply a statement of fact,” Peters said, Roll Call reported. “But she also confirmed that she will follow current law, which includes the Hyde amendment. So I have a hard time following the objections of my Republican colleagues.”

Anything else?

Young’s position on important issues like abortion found new prominence after reports indicated that top Democrats want Biden to nominate Young as director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget.

Biden’s previous nominee for the job, Teera Nanden, withdrew her nomination amid bipartisan scrutiny.

Share
Categories
Abortion Biden administration Covid relief Hyde amendment Intelwars Joe Biden President joe biden

After being ‘betrayed’ by Biden on abortion, evangelical leader says he would not publicly support Biden’s election if he had it to do over

Pro-life evangelical scholar Richard Mouw led a fellowship of pro-life Christians who loudly and proudly endorsed Joe Biden in the 2020 election. That group, Pro-Life Evangelicals for Biden, this week got a lot of attention when they revealed their shock and dismay that pro-abortion President Biden betrayed their movement and was endorsing the use of federal tax dollars to pay for abortions.

Mouw, the president emeritus of Fuller Seminary in California who is realizing too late that there are no take-backsies in real life, told the Christian Post on Tuesday that if he had it to do over, he would not offer his public support for Biden’s election. But he would still vote for the Democratic nominee.

What did he say?

After the Biden-backed COVID relief bill passed the U.S. Senate over the weekend without the Hyde Amendment, which prevents tax money from being used to fund abortion, Mouw’s group wrote an open letter expressing their disappointment. The members said they felt “used and betrayed” by the administration — an administration that literally campaigned on repealing the Hyde Amendment.

Mouw claimed to the Christian Post that he and other members of the pro-life, pro-Biden group were aware that Biden had been “shifting” his stance on the Hyde Amendment when they issued their statement in October publicly urging fellow pro-lifers to give the pro-choice president their vote.

Biden’s campaign site made it clear that Biden “supports repealing the Hyde Amendment” and said so since at least July 2020 — three months before Mouw’s group issued its statement — according to the Wayback Machine internet archive.

But according to Mouw, his group felt reassured by conversations they had with Biden campaign officials.

“We made … clear that we would offer support with the understanding that they would urge the White House to have serious conversations with Catholics and evangelicals who are right-to-life people,” he told the Christian Post. “The problem is that we haven’t had those conversations, and leaving the Hyde Amendment out of this particular package, this latest COVID package, is a signal that … there really … is no room for that kind of conversation.”

The outlet asked Mouw if he wold still vote for and publicly support Biden if he had it to do over again and knew Biden would push a relief package that excluded Hyde Amendment language.

Mouw told the Christian Post that he would “vote the same way” but added, “I would not give my public support.”

Yet he still defended his group’s support of Biden. From the Christian Post:

Acknowledging that he received “a lot of angry messages from right-to-life people,” some of whom called him “naive” due to his support for Biden and subsequent feelings of betrayal, Mouw still defended the object of his previous remarks in support of Biden. He said they would be necessary to provide reassurance to the “many younger evangelicals who are not happy about … the way in which their parents and grandparents have endorsed and defended the Trump administration.”

“We … don’t want to lose them to evangelicalism because of what is perceived as a mean-spirited, highly partisan commitment on the part of the older generation of evangelicals who voted 81% … in the presidential election before this last one for Mr. Trump,” he said.

“We thought it was important to hold up the right to life position and at the same time, say it’s OK to be concerned about a broader range of issues such as global warming and children at the border separated from their parents and those kinds of questions. And so, we wanted to use our own access through the Biden campaign people to at least get them to stay in conversation with people like us.”

Mouw admitted that he was “less optimistic” about the chance that Biden’s Democratic Party would ever be able to build a “bigger tent” to include pro-lifers.

Share
Categories
Abortion Intelwars Joe Biden President joe biden Pro-Life

Pro-life evangelical group that backed Biden shocked to find out they have been ‘used and betrayed’ by a pro-abortion president

A group of pro-life evangelical leaders who banded together to support the election of President Joe Biden in the 2020 election are now
expressing shock and dismay that the Democratic politician who has toed his party’s line on abortion is somehow betraying their movement and using taxpayer money to pay for abortions.

What’s this now?

During the 2020 election, Pro-Life Evangelicals for Biden declared their support for the pro-abortion candidate and put out a petition encouraging fellow believers to back the Democratic nominee.

“As pro-life evangelicals, we disagree with Vice President Biden and the Democratic platform on the issue of abortion,” the group said. “But we believe a biblically shaped commitment to the sanctity of human life compels us to a consistent ethic of life that affirms the sanctity of life from beginning to end.”

The petition went on to say that they were also concerned about racism, poverty, health care, child care, and minimum wage. But they were not going to give up on the life issue.

“We believe that on balance, Joe Biden’s policies are more consistent with the biblically shaped ethic of life than those of Donald Trump,” the group said. “Therefore, even as we continue to urge different policies on abortion, we urge evangelicals to elect Joe Biden as president.”

Well, it looks like their urgings have been for naught — and now they’re realizing it, much to their own shock and dismay.

In an open letter posted over the weekend, the pro-lifers who invested in the Biden campaign now say they feel “used and betrayed” by the Biden administration and decried the fact that the COVID relief package the Senate passed over the weekend excludes the Hyde Amendment, which prevents tax money from being used to fund abortion.


Breaking911 on Twitter

twitter.com

“As pro-life leaders in the evangelical community, we publicly supported President Biden’s candidacy with the understanding that there would be engagement [with] us on the issue of abortion and particularly the Hyde Amendment,” the group’s letter said. “The Biden team wanted to talk to us during the campaign to gain our support, and we gave it on the condition there would be active dialogue and common ground solutions on the issue of abortion. There has been no dialogue since the campaign.”

The group did not bother to explain why they were surprised that the Biden-backed COVID relief package would exclude the Hyde Amendment, considering Biden’s past.

The Biden campaign said on its own website before the election that Biden supported repealing the Hyde Amendment. And since day one, the Biden administration has made it clear that it cannot be trusted on the Hyde Amendment or the Mexico City policy, which bans federal funds for foreign NGOs that promote or perform abortions.

Just last month, White House press secretary Jen Psaki refused to answer whether the COVID relief bill would include “millions” that would go to the abortion industry.

The Pro-Life Evangelicals for Biden letter went on to call on the president and his party to recognize and honor the courage they and their pro-life, pro-Biden Catholic brethren exercised in 2020.

“We feel used and betrayed and have no intention of simply watching these kinds of efforts happen from the sidelines,” the group wrote. “Many evangelicals and Catholics took risks to support Biden publicly. President Biden and Democrats need to honor their courage.”

The group called on Biden and Congress to insert the Hyde Amendment into the relief package and issued a warning: “If this is not done, it will raise the question of whether or not we are still welcome in the Democratic Party.”

Share
Categories
Abortion Intelwars Kieth merrill Never rarely sometimes always oscars Pro-Life

Pro-life Oscar voter pummels abortion film: ‘I have ZERO interest in watching a woman cross state lines so someone can murder her unborn child’

“Never Rarely Sometimes Always,” an agonizing film about a teenage girl who travels from her home in rural Pennsylvania to New York City to have an abortion procedure without parental consent, is exactly the kind of project you’d expect to be lauded by the progressive award show elites — and so it has.

Since its premiere at last year’s Sundance Film Festival, the film has been celebrated and awarded by numerous film critic groups, including the Indie Spirit Awards, New York Film Critics Circle, and the National Board of Review. Now the film is reportedly seen as a possible Oscar contender.

But apparently not every Oscar voter is agog over the heart-wrenching flick.

What are the details?

Kieth Merrill, a pro-life member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences — yes, apparently those exist — made headlines last week when he offered up a blistering response to a publicist who reached out to see if he had seen the film yet.

Merrill, who is a Mormon and a longtime director and producer known for “The Great American Cowboy” and “Amazon,” candidly told the publicist via email that he has no intentions of watching the film. Here was his response, according to Variety:

I received the screener but as a Christian, the father of 8 children and 39 grandchildren. AND pro-life advocate, I have ZERO interest in watching a woman cross state lines so someone can murder her unborn child.

75,000,000 of us recognize abortion for the atrocity it is. There is nothing heroic about a mother working so hard to kill her child.

Think about it!
With regards,
Kieth Merrill

When the film’s director, Eliza Hittman, caught wind of Merrill’s response, she was infuriated. She reportedly posted a screenshot of the email to her Instagram, which has since been deleted, and blasted the the Academy for being “monopolized by an old white puritanical male guard.”

“I have dedicated the last year of my life to promoting [“Never Rarely Sometimes Always”] and doing teen talks/outreach with [Planned Parenthood],” she wrote in the post’s caption. “As we reach the homestretch of awards season, I am very aware that the film is still on the edges of being a true contender.”

“This email came in last night and was a harsh reminder that the Academy is still so painfully monopolized by an old white puritanical male guard. I wonder how many other voters out there won’t watch the film,” she added, including the hashtag, “#oscarssopuritanical.”

What else did Merrill have to say?

In response to Variety’s requests for comment, Merrill went into greater detail about his pro-life views, as well as his stance against watching the movie.

“Her film is an expression of who she is. My absence of interest in watching her film is an expression of who I am,” he wrote to the magazine. “We are equally valid in our choices, what we do, and how we choose to live our lives.”

In response to the charge that he is a member of the “old white puritanical male guard,” Merrill wrote, “Wow! Ok Eliza, I am ‘old.’ You got that right. I have been a member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for 46 years.”

He added: “‘Puritanical?’ I go to church, pray to God and believe in Jesus Christ. I embrace traditional values and believe in moral agency. I try to love my neighbors — hard as that is sometimes. Does that make me ‘puritanical’? Maybe, but if you knew me, you would need to take away the adjectives that give the word the negative connotation you intended. I am not prudish, austere, stuffy, stiff, rigid, narrow-minded, bigoted or fanatical. I am in fact, quite the opposite.”

The 2021 Oscar ceremony has been set for April 25. Voting for Oscar nomination ends March 10.

Share
Categories
Abortion Intelwars late term abortion Mitt Romney Partial-birth abortion Senate xavier becerra

Romney fires back at Biden nominee who advocates for ‘common ground’ on partial-birth abortions

Xavier Becerra, nominee for secretary of Health and Human Services, said Tuesday that “common ground” can be found on late-term, partial-birth abortions.

What are the details?

The stunning statement came as Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) grilled the former California attorney general over his position on abortion.

Romney asked Becerra why, during his tenure in the U.S. House, he
voted against legislation that banned partial-birth abortions — Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 — which outlawed partial-birth abortions of babies who have heartbeats.

“Most people agree that partial-birth abortion is awful. You voted against a ban on partial-birth abortion. Why?” Romney asked.

Becerra began his response by explaining he respects that “people have different deeply held beliefs” on abortion, before claiming “common ground” can be found on the issue about which Romney asked.

He continued:

I have worked, as I mentioned, for decades trying to protect the health of men and women, young and old. And as attorney general, my job has been to follow the law and make sure others are following the law.


So, I will tell you that when I come to these issues, I understand that we may not always agree on where to go, but I think we can find some common ground on these issues because everyone wants to make sure that if you have an opportunity, you’re going to live a healthy life. And I will tell you I hope to be able to work with you and others to reach that common ground on so many different issues.

How did Romney respond?

The Utah Republican flatly rejected Becerra’s offer of finding “common ground” on partial-birth abortion.

“I think we can reach common ground on many issues, but on partial-birth abortion, it sounds like we are not going to reach common ground there,” Romney shot back at Becerra.

Anything else?

President Joe Biden has been criticized for nominating Becerra.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), for example, has been highlighting Becerra’s lack of professional experience in health industries.

“[Becerra] is not a doctor. He has no scientific background. He has no background in virology, he has never worked at a pharmaceutical company — he’s got nothing to do with health care,” Cruz explained on Fox News.

“But what is he? He is a trial lawyer!” Cruz said. “And his only experience, as far as I can tell, with health care is he sued the Little Sisters of the Poor.”

Share
Categories
Abortion abortion bill Abortion fathers Intelwars Pro-Life Prolife Tennessee Tennessee abortion

Tennessee bill would grant biological fathers veto power over abortion

Tennessee lawmakers have proposed a bill that would enable a biological father to stop a woman from getting an abortion.

Republican state Sen. Mark Pody introduced SB0494 on Feb. 8 that calls for:

As introduced, permits a person to petition a court for an injunction to prohibit a woman who is pregnant with the person’s unborn child from obtaining an abortion; requires the petitioner to execute a voluntary acknowledgement of paternity that is not subject to being rescinded or challenged.

Once the injunction is issued, the court must hold a hearing with both parties within 14 days, The Hill reported. Should the woman violate the injunction and get an abortion, “The court may hold the respondent in civil or criminal contempt and punish the respondent in accordance with the law.”

“The voluntary acknowledgement of paternity may be executed without the signature of the child’s mother,” the bill states. “The voluntary acknowledgement of paternity must be proven by filing a certified copy with the court.”

A judge could grant the petition as long as the petitioner proves he’s the biological father of an unborn child and there is a “reasonable possibility” that the woman would seek an abortion, according to USA Today.

The alleged father does not need to “provide DNA evidence to prove that the petitioner is the biological father of the respondent’s unborn child,” according to the bill.

“If the woman acknowledges the petitioner’s fatherhood, no DNA evidence would be required,” Pody said.

Pody noted that any man who claims to be the father would then be responsible for child support and other parental obligations. The man would not be able to rescind or challenge the paternity of the child after the birth of the child.

“He can’t turn around under any circumstance and say, ‘I was wrong, and it’s not mine,'” Pody explained.

The bill makes no exception for rape or incest.

The Senate bill was passed on second consideration on Feb. 11, and has since been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Republican state Rep. Jerry Sexton sponsored the bill in the House, where it passed first consideration.

If the bills are passed and approved, the legislation would take effect on July 1.

Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee (R) signed a heartbeat bill into law last July that banned abortions at the detection of a heartbeat. Lee called signing the new law a “historic moment,” adding that the legislation is “arguably the most conservative, pro-life legislation in the country.”

“It’s our responsibility to protect the most vulnerable in our community,” Lee said at the time. “Certainly the most vulnerable in Tennessee includes the unborn, which is why with the signature of this bill, Tennessee is one of the most pro-life states in America.”

During his 2021 State of the State address, Lee said, “You already know that I am strongly pro-life, and I will continue to defend this position.”

Share
Categories
Abortion covid Hyde amendment Intelwars Jen psaki stimulus

Jen Psaki refuses to guarantee next COVID stimulus won’t fund abortions

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki refused to guarantee Tuesday that taxpayers would not be forced to fund abortions as part of the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 stimulus package dubbed the “American Rescue Plan” currently being pushed by President Joe Biden.

What are the details?

Correspondent Owen Jensen from Catholic outlet EWTN addressed Psaki during a press conference, saying, “Regarding the American Rescue Plan, groups like pro-life groups including the Susan B. Anthony List are very concerned that millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars will go to the abortion industry in violation of the Hyde Amendment.”

“We know where President Biden stands on the Hyde Amendment,” the reporter said, referring to the block on public federal funding going to abortions except in certain instances, which Biden supported for decades before vowing to repeal it during the 2020 Democratic primary campaign.

“That being said,” Jensen continued, “can this administration right now guarantee if the American Rescue Plan is passed that no taxpayer dollars will go to the abortion industry?

Psaki asked Jensen to specify which part of the plan he was referring to, and he read back, “a $50 million funding increase for the Title X program…$750 million for global health activities and billions in funding for community health centers without applying the Hyde Amendment.”

“Well,” the White House press secretary replied, “the president’s view on the Hyde Amendment is well known as you have stated in your question. He also believes that community health centers are a key part of addressing the pandemic, of ensuring that people in communities have access to vaccines, have access to treatment and information about making sure they’re healthy and their loved ones are healthy.”

She went on to reiterate that Biden “has shared his view on the Hyde Amendment” without noting his position, before telling Jensen, “I don’t think I have anything new for you.”

Jensen pressed, “Can he guarantee Americans who don’t want their tax dollars —pro-life Americans who don’t want their tax dollars funding abortion — can the administration guarantee those tax dollars won’t go to the abortion industry?”

Psaki refused to answer the question again, saying, “Three quarters of the public supports the components of the package, wants to see the pandemic get under control, wants to people put back to work, vaccines in arms. So I think that answers your question.”


Jen Psaki pressed on Hyde Amendment

www.youtube.com

Anything else?

Psaki has dodged on questions regarding abortion before, an issue Biden has flipped on as a lifelong Catholic who has increasingly voiced support for abortion and now fully embraces using taxpayer dollars to fund the procedures.

Last month, Jensen asked Psaki about Biden’s plan on both the Hyde Amendment and the Mexico City Policy, which bans federal funding of foreign nongovernmental organizations that promote or perform abortions.

“Well, I think we’ll have more to say on the Mexico City Policy in the coming days,” Psaki replied, before pivoting and saying, “but I will just take the opportunity to remind all of you that he [Biden] is a devout Catholic, and somebody who attends church regularly.”

She added, “He started his day attending church with his family this morning, but I don’t have anything more for you on that.”

Share
Categories
Abortion Defund planned parenthood Intelwars Planned Parenthood Texas abortion Texas medicaid

Judge blocks Texas from fully defunding Planned Parenthood day before the action was to take effect

A Texas judge on Wednesday temporarily blocked the state from kicking Planned Parenthood out of the its Medicaid program, a move that would have completely unhooked state taxpayers from funding the abortion provider.

The order came after Planned Parenthood filed a last-minute lawsuit Wednesday — the last day before the action was set to take effect — asking courts to step in and pause the effort. The emergency lawsuit argued that state officials did not give the state’s approximately 8,000 Medicaid patients enough time to find other providers.

Travis County Judge Maya Guerra Gamble agreed that patients should be afforded more time and granted a temporary restraining order on the action, setting a hearing for Feb. 17.

Republicans in Texas have been trying to oust Planned Parenthood from the state’s Medicaid program for several years, ever since an undercover video posted in 2015 by the pro-life group Center for Medical Progress purportedly showed the abortion provider illegally selling baby tissue it had obtained from abortion operations.

In 2017, a federal judge blocked the effort. But late last year, the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the decision, clearing the way for Texas to finally go through with the effort. Following the ruling, Planned Parenthood asked Texas health officials for at least six months to help transition patients to other providers, but the state thought that excessive and offered a 30-day transition period instead.

In the lawsuit, Planned Parenthood characterized the effort as just “one more assault against the same communities that face unjust, systemic barriers to basic human rights, including access to affordable health care, education, and housing.”

Now, with more time on its hands, Planned Parenthood will await potential action by the Biden administration, which has already shown urgency in reversing Trump-era policies pertaining to abortion and health care.

“This comes a week after the Biden-Harris administration made it clear it would put an end to Trump-era attacks against health care, including programs like Medicaid,” Planned Parenthood Texas Votes said in a press release. “Texas’s Medicaid ‘defunding’ offers a clear example of how critical it is for the Biden-Harris administration to stop attacks that target the reproductive health care of people with low incomes, women, and people of color.”

Share
Categories
Abortion Biden administration Intelwars National sanctity of life day President joe biden roe v wade WHITE HOUSE

Biden commits on National Sanctity of Life Day to enshrine Roe v. Wade in federal law

On Friday, acknowledging the 48th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris issued a statement committing to support and defend the landmark court decision that legalized abortion nationwide and work to have it codified into law.

“In the past four years, reproductive health, including the right to choose, has been under relentless and extreme attack. We are deeply committed to making sure everyone has access to care – including reproductive health care – regardless of income, race, zip code, health insurance status, or immigration status,” Biden, a self-described devout Catholic, and Harris said in a joint statement.

“The Biden-Harris Administration is committed to codifying Roe v. Wade and appointing judges that respect foundational precedents like Roe,” they continued.

Abortion rights activists have long sought to have Roe enshrined in federal law to create a national abortion policy that would limit states’ ability to pass abortion restrictions. State-led efforts to pass heartbeat bills, banning abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected, or laws banning abortion after 20 weeks when an unborn child can feel pain could potentially be thwarted if federal law set the rules and procedures for abortion. Pro-abortion activists see these state restrictions as unconstitutional infringements on the right to abortion.

“Nearly half a century later, abortion is a right in name only for millions of people across the country,” Planned Parenthood President Alexis McGill Johnson said in a statement to TheHill Friday.

“As reproductive justice organizations have said for years, Roe is the floor, not the ceiling,” she said.

“Without access to abortion, this right is meaningless. Now is the time for President Biden and our elected officials in states across the country to take necessary and immediate action to ensure that everyone, no matter their race, income, or ZIP code, has access to safe and legal abortion.”

The Biden-Harris statement stands in stark contrast to the policies of the previous administration. Donald Trump, in one of his last acts as president, for the fourth time proclaimed Jan. 22 to be National Sanctity of Human Life Day, declaring “every human life is a gift to the world.”

“This month, we mark nearly 50 years since the United States Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision. This constitutionally flawed ruling overturned State laws that banned abortion, and has resulted in the loss of more than 50 million innocent lives,” Trump said in a statement.

“I call on the Congress to join me in protecting and defending the dignity of every human life, including those not yet born. I call on the American people to continue to care for women in unexpected pregnancies and to support adoption and foster care in a more meaningful way, so every child can have a loving home. And finally, I ask every citizen of this great Nation to listen to the sound of silence caused by a generation lost to us, and then to raise their voices for all affected by abortion, both seen and unseen,” the president said.

Since President Biden took office, the Trump statement announcing National Sanctity of Life Day was removed from the White House website.

Share
Categories
Abortion Hyde amendment Intelwars Joe Biden José gómez Mexico city policy President Biden

Head of US Conference of Catholic Bishops warns Biden’s agenda would ‘advance moral evils and threaten human life’

José Horacio Gomez, the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, issued a strong denunciation of President Joe Biden’s stance on abortion, marriage, and gender.

Gomez, the archbishop of Los Angeles, offered prayers for the new president and his family on Inauguration Day.

“I am praying that God grant him wisdom and courage to lead this great nation and that God help him to meet the tests of these times, to heal the wounds caused by this pandemic, to ease our intense political and cultural divisions, and to bring people together with renewed dedication to America’s founding purposes, to be one nation under God committed to liberty and equality for all,” Gomez said in a statement.

The USCCB president emphasized that “Catholic bishops are not partisan players in our nation’s politics,” but are “responsible for the souls of millions of Americans and we are advocates for the needs of all our neighbors.”

Gomez noted that bishops must try to “guide consciences” by offering principles that are “rooted in the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the social teachings of his Church.”

“I must point out that our new President has pledged to pursue certain policies that would advance moral evils and threaten human life and dignity, most seriously in the areas of abortion, contraception, marriage, and gender,” Gomez criticized Biden. “Of deep concern is the liberty of the Church and the freedom of believers to live according to their consciences.”

“For the nation’s bishops, the continued injustice of abortion remains the ‘preeminent priority,'” the archbishop pointed out. “As Pope Francis teaches, we cannot stay silent when nearly a million unborn lives are being cast aside in our country year after year through abortion.

“Abortion is a direct attack on life that also wounds the woman and undermines the family,” Gomez explained. “It is not only a private matter, it raises troubling and fundamental questions of fraternity, solidarity, and inclusion in the human community. It is also a matter of social justice. We cannot ignore the reality that abortion rates are much higher among the poor and minorities, and that the procedure is regularly used to eliminate children who would be born with disabilities.”

Gomez concluded his statement, “We are all under the watchful eye of God, who alone knows and can judge the intentions of our hearts. I pray that God will give our new President, and all of us, the grace to seek the common good with all sincerity.”

Despite being a practicing Catholic, President Biden has shown support for pro-abortion policies. The Biden administration wants to repeal the Hyde Amendment and will rescind the Mexico City policy that former President Donald Trump brought back to life in January 2017.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, Biden’s chief medical adviser, said Thursday that the new administration would rescind the Mexico City policy, which bans federal funding of foreign nongovernmental organizations that promote or perform abortions.

Fauci delivered a statement to the World Health Organization’s executive board that said the Biden administration is overturning the Mexico City policy “as part of his broader commitment to protect women’s health and advance gender equality at home and around the world.”

Biden has turned his back on supporting the Hyde Amendment, which blocks federal funds from being used to pay for abortions, except to save the life of a woman, or in pregnancies from incest or rape.

For decades, Biden supported the Hyde Amendment, but he flipped on the issue during the 2020 Democratic primary campaign. The official Biden campaign website says, “Vice President Biden supports repealing the Hyde Amendment because health care is a right that should not be dependent on one’s zip code or income. And, the public option will cover contraception and a woman’s constitutional right under Roe v. Wade.”

President Biden selected Xavier Becerra to be his secretary of Health and Human Services. Becerra previously sued the Little Sisters of the Poor, an order of Catholic nuns who care for the elderly poor, for refusing to accept the Obamacare contraception mandate.

“Becerra spent years tormenting the Little Sisters of the Poor in court, trying to force them to pay for things like abortion pills against their consciences. He also led efforts to force pro-life pregnancy resource centers to advertise for abortion,” said Ashley McGuire, a senior fellow at the Catholic Association.

Share
Categories
Abortion Hyde amendment Intelwars Jen psaki Joe biden abortion Kamala Harris Mexico City Mexico city policy

New White House press secretary dodges question about abortion as Biden prepares to overturn Trump abortion policy

The press secretary for President Joe Biden dodged a question about the administration’s stance on taxpayer-funded abortions. New White House press secretary Jen Psaki instead took the opportunity to tell reporters that Biden attended “church this morning.”

Owen Jensen, a correspondent for the Eternal Word Television Network, asked the press secretary about the Biden administration’s plan on the Hyde Amendment and the Mexico City Policy.

“Well, I think we’ll have more to say on the Mexico City policy in the coming days,” Psaki told the EWTN correspondent on Wednesday, before shifting to highlighting Biden’s faith.

“But I will just take the opportunity to remind all of you that he [Biden] is a devout Catholic, and somebody who attends church regularly,” Psaki digressed. “He started his day attending church with his family this morning, but I don’t have anything more for you on that.”

The Mexico City Policy, which is referred to as the “Global Gag Rule” by pro-abortion groups, bans federal funding of foreign nongovernmental organizations that promote or perform abortions, such as the International Planned Parenthood Federation. The U.S. government policy was first announced by the Reagan administration in 1984 at the International Conference on Population in Mexico City, Mexico.

A 2019 report published in the Lancet claimed that the Mexico City policy increased the abortion rate in some countries by as much as 40%.

Since 1993, Democratic and Republican presidents have taken turns rescinding and reinstating the Mexico City policy. Most recently, former President Donald Trump brought the legislation back to life in January 2017. Trump expanded the Mexico City policy by adding “Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance,” a “directive that no U.S. taxpayer money should support foreign organizations that perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci, Biden’s chief medical adviser, said Thursday that the new administration will revoke the Mexico City policy. In a prepared statement to the World Health Organization’s executive board, Fauci said the Biden administration is overturning the policy “as part of his broader commitment to protect women’s health and advance gender equality at home and around the world.”

For decades, Biden supported the Hyde Amendment before reversing his position during his Democratic primary campaign. The Hyde Amendment, which was enacted in 1976, blocks federal funds from being used to pay for abortions, except to save the life of a woman, or in pregnancies from incest or rape.

During a Democratic presidential primary debate in July 2019, Vice President Kamala Harris challenged Biden for supporting the Hyde Amendment for years.

Harris grilled Biden for flip-flopping on his Hyde Amendment position, “On the Hyde Amendment, Vice President, where you made a decision for years to withhold resources to poor women to have access to reproductive health care, including women who were the victims of rape and incest, do you now say that you have evolved and you regret that?”

“Only since you’ve been running for president this time, said that you in some way would take that back or you didn’t agree with that decision you made over many, many years, and this directly impacted so many women in our country,” Harris told Biden.

During the debate in Detroit, Biden defended himself against his now-vice president.

“Once I wrote the legislation making sure that every single woman would in fact have an opportunity to have health care paid for by the federal government — everyone — that could no longer stand,” Biden said of the Hyde Amendment. “I support a woman’s right to choose. I support it as a constitutional right. I’ve supported it, I will continue to support it and I in fact will move as president to see to that the Congress legislates that that is the law.”

The official Biden campaign website states, “Vice President Biden supports repealing the Hyde Amendment because health care is a right that should not be dependent on one’s zip code or income. And, the public option will cover contraception and a woman’s constitutional right under Roe v. Wade.”

The website also says that President Biden will “rescind the Mexico City Policy that President Trump reinstated and expanded.”

Share
Categories
Abortion Intelwars March for life March for life 2021 Pro life activism Pro-Life roe v wade washington dc

March for Life organizers announce no 2021 gathering, virtual event instead

Organizers for the March for Life announced Friday that the annual gathering of pro-life activists to protest abortion will take place virtually this year because of the coronavirus pandemic and the risk of unrest at the nation’s capital.

This year’s virtual march will take place on Jan. 29, the Catholic News Agency reported. There will still be an event in Washington, D.C., but attendance will be limited to a small number of pro-life leaders and speakers.

“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,” said Jeanne Mancini, president of the March for Life Education and Defense Fund.

“In light of the fact that we are in the midst of a pandemic which may be peaking, and in view of the heightened pressures that law enforcement officers and others are currently facing in and around the Capitol, this year’s March for Life will look different,” Mancini continued. “The annual rally will take place virtually and we are asking all participants to stay home and to join the March virtually.”

Those who wish to participate in the march are encouraged to do so virtually through the March for Life’s website.

“We will invite a small group of pro-life leaders from across the country to march in Washington, D.C., this year,” Mancini said. “These leaders will represent pro-life Americans everywhere who, each in their own unique ways, work to make abortion unthinkable and build a culture where every human life is valued and protected.”

Catholic News Agency reported that the pro-life leaders who will be in the nation’s capital will carry roses with them, which they will bring to the steps of the Supreme Court to honor the lives lost to abortion.

Mancini concluded saying the March for Life “is 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. As for this year’s march, we look forward to being with you virtually.”

The March for Life takes place annually on or near Jan. 22, the anniversary of the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion across the United States. In past years, the march has drawn crowds hundreds of thousands of volunteer activists to protest in support of the victims of abortion.

Share
Categories
Abortion Intelwars Missouri abortion Missouri abortion free Missouri pro-life Pro-Life

Missouri becomes first ‘abortion-free state’ as last remaining abortion facility quits offering procedures

Missouri has become the nation’s first “abortion-free state” after its last remaining abortion facility allegedly stopped terminating pregnancies this year, a pro-life group discovered.

What are the details?

According to an Operation Rescue investigative report on the nationwide status of abortion facilities in 2020, “a total of 45 abortion facilities closed or halted abortions nationwide in 2020, leaving one state without an active abortion facility.”

The group claims that while the state’s only abortion facility remains open, it has ceased providing abortion procedures, instead referring those seeking an abortion to a separate facility across the Mississippi River in Illinois.

The Reproductive Health Services Planned Parenthood in St. Louis was almost shut down completely in 2019 after the state launched an investigation into “deficient practices” and threatened not to renew its medical license over the facility’s alleged failure to comply with existing abortion laws. But a judge ultimately blocked the state from closing the facility after Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit aiming to keep the facility open.

“While the RHS Planned Parenthood remains open and licensed for abortions, we confirmed that none are being done there,” Operation Rescue President Troy Newman said in the report. “That means this facility is currently acting only as an abortion referral center. There is no operational abortion facility in the State of Missouri, making it the first Abortion-Free State at this time.”

“It is obvious that Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region, which operates RHSPP, seeks to avoid having to comply with Missouri’s strong pro-life laws, and has opted to abort in Illinois where abortion facilities are essentially unaccountable. This shows a gross disrespect for the lives and safety of the women Planned Parenthood purports to serve,” he added.

Planned Parenthood confirmed the news with the Christian Post, acknowledging that its St. Louis facility no longer performs abortions but refers all individuals seeking abortions to its Fairview Heights, Illinois facility, just 13 miles away.

What else?

Missouri has some of the strictest laws regulating abortion in the country. Women seeking abortions in the state are required to receive counseling and pro-life literature beforehand and must wait 72 hours before undergoing the procedure. Abortion procedures are also generally not covered by insurance except in cases of life endangerment.

In 2019, the state enacted legislation that would ban abortions after eight weeks, but the law was soon blocked by a federal judge.

Missouri was ranked the eighth-most pro-life state by pro-life group Americans United for Life in 2020 based on a “comprehensive analysis of each state’s law and policy protections for human life from conception to natural death.”

Share
Categories
Abortion Intelwars Mass legislature Massachusetts abortion laws pro choice Pro-Life

Massachusetts lowers age of legal consent to obtain abortion without parents’ OK to just 16 years old

The Massachusetts legislature lowered the age to legally obtain an abortion — without parental permission — to age 16.

What are the details?

The state legislature last week overrode Massachusetts Republican Gov. Charlie Baker’s veto of the ROE Act, which aimed to, among other things, codify the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision. Baker vetoed the bill over its provision that lowered the age to get an abortion without a the consent of a parent or guardian to just 16.

In a statement on his veto, Baker said, “I cannot support the sections of this proposal that expand the availability of later term abortions and permit minors age 16 and 17 to get an abortion without the consent of a parent or guardian.”

According to Fox News, the state’s Democrat-controlled Senate and House voted 32-8 and 107-46 respectively to override the veto.

What are people saying about this?

On Tuesday, Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser issued a scathing statement on the matter.

“This dangerous new law allows for late-term abortion on-demand across Massachusetts, and secret abortions for minor girls as young as 16,” the pro-life organization wrote. “Governor Baker is pro-choice, but this legislation was too much for him to stomach: His veto exemplifies just how extreme it is.”

Dannenfelser added, “The actions taken by Democrats to ram through this legislation are a reflection of just how extreme the party has become on abortion. Led by Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Chuck Schumer, and Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats’ agenda for the entire nation is reflected in this bill: abortion-on-demand, up until the moment of birth.”

Democratic state Sen. Harriette Chandler championed the legislation as well as overriding the governor’s veto.

In a tweet, Chandler wrote, “Pregnant people who once faced near-insurmountable barriers accessing abortion care can now seize the right to control their own bodies. I am so proud of the policies included in the #ROEAct and of the @MA_Senate for our commitment to reproductive freedom.”

Anything else?

According to The Daily Wire, the bill “expands women’s legal authority to get an abortion after 24 weeks of pregnancy if doctors say the baby will not survive after birth.”

Further, the bill also removed a mandate requiring a 24-hour waiting period prior to an abortion taking place.

Share
Categories
Abortion Get rid of it Intelwars Lil nas x Old town road Pregnancy Pregnant fan Pro-Life

Rapper tells fan who thinks she’s pregnant to ‘get rid’ of unborn baby. Pro-life advocacy group steps in and shares a bit of reality.

Rapper and entertainer Lil Nas X told a fan who made a possible pregnancy announcement that they should “get rid” of the unborn child.

Live Action, a pro-life advocacy group, took note of the rapper’s remarks and took him to task on social media.

The rapper — real name Montero Lamar Hill — responded with a brush-off, but the nonprofit organization saved the best response for last.

What are the details?

According to LiveAction.org, a fan during a live Instagram chat told the rapper, “I think I’m pregnant.”

Hill responded with what appeared to be a distasteful attempt at a joke and said, “Congratulations! Get rid of it.”


Lil Nas “Get Rid of It” Video

www.youtube.com

What else?

Live Action reported on Hill’s remarks Wednesday, writing, “BREAKING: Rapper [Lil Nas X] known for his song ‘Old Town Road’ tells his pregnant fan to kill her baby — ‘Congratulations! get rid of it.'”

Hill took the outlet to task over the story and responded, “No one cares, ratio,” and shared, instead, the video for his new single, “Holiday.”

Live Action had the last word, however.

In a scathing response, Live Action’s Twitter wrote, “Tens of millions of Americans DO CARE that 2,400 babies are being murdered every day.”

The group then took the opportunity to expound on the sanctity of life and shared a link to 10 images victims of second-trimester abortions.

The article, titled “These 10 images may change your mind about abortion,” features graphic images of babies aborted during their mother’s second trimester.

A portion of the article states, “The children in these photographs were aborted at the University of Wisconsin Hospital in the early 1980s. They were eventually smuggled out of the pathology lab there, given to Citizens for a Pro-life Society, and provided proper burials.”

(H/T: The Daily Wire)

Share
Categories
Abortion Born alive survivors Congress Intelwars Pain-capable abortion Pro-Life Tulsi Gabbard

Tulsi Gabbard introduces bills to protect abortion survivors and pain-capable unborn children

Outgoing Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) has introduced two pro-life bills in the House of Representatives, one to protect abortion survivors and another to protect pain-capable unborn children from abortion.

The first piece of legislation, H.R. 8923, would amend Title 18 of the United States Code “to ensure a health care practitioner exercises the proper degree of care in the case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion.” Live Action News reported that this bill has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. The second bill is H.R. 8938, and while the text is currently unavailable, the title of the bill states its purpose is “to protect pain-capable unborn children.”

Pro-life Republicans have long supported additional legislative measures to protect unborn children and those that survive abortion procedures, but Democrats generally have blocked efforts to pass such bills. Gabbard herself has voted against similar pro-life bills to the ones she has now introduced.

As a presidential candidate in the 2020 Democratic primary, Gabbard was heavily criticized by members of her party for taking a more moderate position on abortion and supporting some restrictions on abortion in the third trimester.

TheBlaze reached out to Gabbard’s office for comment but did not hear back before this article was published.

Gabbard, who will retire from Congress at the end of her current term, has received praise from pro-life groups and activists for her legislation.

In a statement posted to Facebook, Democrats for Life of America thanked Gabbard for introducing the legislation, acknowledging that she previously opposed similar bills.

“Former Democratic Presidential Candidate Tulsi Gabbard introduced her SECOND Pro-Life bill this week, which would amend Title 18 of the U.S. code to give pain-capable fetuses rights under the law,” said the pro-life group. “Tulsi has previously voted against this bill three times, but is now the SPONSOR of the new bill. […] thank you Tulsi!”

“Democratic House Rep and former Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard has introduced two crucial bills, one to protect pain-capable fetuses and another to ensure the provision of healthcare for abortion survivors,” Pro-Life San Francisco wrote in a Facebook post. “Both are fundamental to ensuring justice for UCSF’s most vulnerable victims of fetal organ harvesting, and we are inspired to see them originate from a left-leaning national legislator. The future of California, the Democratic Party, and all of America is pro-life!”

Activists on the left, however, expressed hostility toward Gabbard because of her legislation.

“Tulsi Gabbard also introduced a redundant bill that claims to protect infants in the infinitesimally rare cases they are born after attempted abortions,” feminist Jill Filipovic said, claiming that “infants are already legally protected.”

Rewire editor Imani Gandy criticized Gabbard as well, tweeting, “You seem to be under the impression that born alive is a thing. It is not. Shame on you. I don’t know what your problem is but you’re turning out to be a real right wing s**t heel.”

The Rev. Franklin Graham, a prominent evangelical leader and outspoken supporter of President Donald Trump, came to Gabbard’s defense, asking, “She introduced a bill to protect babies who survive abortions & are born alive. How could any sane person be against that?”

Gabbard thanked Graham for his support.

Gabbard’s pro-life legislation follows her introduction of a bill to ban males from competing in women’s sports if they identify as transgender and the introduction of a bill with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) to repeal the Patriot Act.

All of this legislation could attract bipartisan support but is unlikely to pass the Democrat-controlled House.

Share
Categories
Abortion Bible Christianity Georgia runoff election Intelwars Pastor Pro-choce Raphael warnock Tony dungy

Tony Dungy questions faith of ‘pro-choice pastor’ and Georgia Senate candidate Raphael Warnock: ‘Is he a Christian?’

Former NFL coach Tony Dungy is an outspoken Christian who’s not afraid to stand up to those who speak falsely about the faith.

The Rev. Raphael Warnock — a Georgia Democrat who’s running against incumbent GOP Sen. Kelly Loeffler in a runoff election Jan. 5 — earlier this week tweeted that he’s a “pro-choice pastor.”

Rev. Warnock, meet Coach Dungy:

“Rev. Warner may be a pastor,” Dungy tweeted about the leader of Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta. “My question would be, ‘Is he a Christian?’ That is, does he follow the teachings of Jesus, and does he believe that the Bible is the absolute word of God?”

The Super Bowl-winning coach added, “I would think it would be difficult for someone who believes that God sees us when we are in the womb (Psalm 139:13-16) to think that it is OK to choose not to bring that life to fruition.”

When a Twitter user brought up back-alley abortions to Dungy and that “all women should choose what happens to their body,” Dungy replied by asking the critic to read the verses in Psalm 139 he referenced the previous day.

“Then tell me if you think God puts babies in the womb or man does?” Dungy continued. “If you believe they randomly get there, then I have no argument. But if you believe God puts them there, then how does anyone have a right to ‘choose’ which ones survive?”

In another tweet, Dungy also focused the debate on an unborn baby being a life:

“What if I was advocating for the right to kill someone who was already born?” Dungy argued. “Would that be morally OK? Of course not. The only question in this debate is what we think of the unborn baby? Is it a life, or is it not?”

And then a left-wing commenter declared to Dungy that the definition of a Christian is “someone who dedicates their life to the service of the poor, the sick, and the marginalized. Someone who lives without judgement [sic] or lies. This applies to about 0% of conservative ‘Christians.'”

But Dungy had something to say about that, too.

“A Christian is someone who believes Jesus is the son of God and that He died on the cross for our sins,” Dungy wrote. “They follow God’s teachings and use the word of God to make all their decisions. I don’t know how many people in the world that applies to but there are many.”

Share
Categories
Abortion Charles chaput Church Faith Holy communion Intelwars Joe Biden Religion

Former Philly archbishop says Joe Biden should be denied Holy Communion

The archbishop emeritus of Philadelphia proclaimed that Joe Biden should be denied the sacrament of Holy Communion. The former archbishop maintains that his opinion is not “political,” but rather a “pastoral concern.”

Charles Chaput said that despite Biden being Catholic, the former vice president should not receive Holy Communion. Chaput asserts that Biden’s support for the “grave moral evil” of abortion should disqualify him from Holy Communion.

Chaput voiced his viewpoint in First Things, a religious journal aimed at “advancing a religiously informed public philosophy for the ordering of society.”

“Public figures who identify as ‘Catholic’ give scandal to the faithful when receiving Communion by creating the impression that the moral laws of the Church are optional,” Chaput wrote. “And bishops give similar scandal by not speaking up publicly about the issue and danger of sacrilege.”

“Those bishops who publicly indicate in advance that they will undertake their own dialogue with President-elect Joseph Biden and allow him Communion effectively undermine the work of the task force established at the November bishops’ conference meeting to deal precisely with this and related issues,” Chaput explained. “This gives scandal to their brother bishops and priests, and to the many Catholics who struggle to stay faithful to Church teaching. It does damage to the bishops’ conference, to the meaning of collegiality, and to the fruitfulness of the conference’s advocacy work with the incoming administration.”

“This is not a ‘political’ matter, and those who would describe it as such are either ignorant or willfully confusing the issue,” he continued. “This is a matter of bishops’ unique responsibility before the Lord for the integrity of the sacraments. Moreover, there is also the pressing matter of pastoral concern for a man’s salvation.”

“At minimum, every bishop has the duty of privately discussing these vital moral issues and the destructive effect of receiving Communion unworthily with public figures who act contrary to Church teaching,” he concluded. “Reception of Communion is not a right but a gift and privilege; and on the subject of ‘rights,’ the believing community has a priority right to the integrity of its belief and practice.”

The debate is ignited because Washington, D.C., Cardinal Wilton Gregory proclaimed that he would administer Holy Communion to Biden.

Cardinal-designate Gregory told the Catholic News Service, “I’m not going to veer from that,” in regards to Biden receiving Holy Communion.

He said there is a need for dialogue within the church among people who think differently.

“Conflict within the church is not a new reality; it goes back to apostolic times,” Gregory said. “What seems to be new is the capacity for people to broadcast the conflicts and to allow social communications to intensify the conflict.”

Share
Categories
2020 presidential election Abortion catholic church Catholicism Congratulate Intelwars Joe Biden Pope Francis

Pope Francis congratulates, blesses fellow Catholic Joe Biden. The pair agree on some issues — but abortion isn’t one of them.

Pope Francis congratulated fellow Catholic Joe Biden during a call Thursday morning, according to a Biden-Harris Transition
statement.

What did they talk about?

The statement said Biden “thanked His Holiness for extending blessings and congratulations and noted his appreciation for His Holiness’ leadership in promoting peace, reconciliation, and the common bonds of humanity around the world.”

The former vice president — who on Saturday was declared the winner of the 2020 election over President Donald Trump by numerous media outlets, although Trump is disputing the vote count — also “expressed his desire to work together on the basis of a shared belief in the dignity and equality of all humankind on issues such as caring for the marginalized and the poor, addressing the crisis of climate change, and welcoming and integrating immigrants and refugees into our communities,” the statement added.

Biden would be the second Catholic president in U.S. history, following John F. Kennedy, National Public Radio said.

The rest of the story

NPR also characterized Biden as a “deeply devout person of faith” who “often delivers speeches with references to biblical language or the pope.”

But given that Biden staunchly favors abortion rights — a distinctly non-Catholic position — prominent Catholic church officials don’t view Biden as someone who takes faith seriously.

According to LifeSite News, Cardinal Raymond Burke just days before the election gave a failing grade to Biden’s positions on life, marriage, and the family.

“I can’t imagine that he would present himself as a devout Catholic,” Burke said of Biden. “He has a record which is unfortunately perfect in promoting the attack on the innocent defense of the unborn. … He is also not correct on the issues with regard to marriage and the family. … The great darkness in our nation comes from the wholesale slaughter of the unborn, also the attack on the family, all this gender theory … and now the attack on religious freedom.”

And while Biden in April called abortion an “essential health care service” during a conversation with former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, Pope Francis decried that specific view in a United Nations address in September.

“Unfortunately, some countries and international institutions are also promoting abortion as one of the so-called ‘essential services’ provided in the humanitarian response to the pandemic,” the pope said, according the Catholic News Agency.

Biden has at times claimed he is personally opposed to abortion, LifeSite News said in separate story, but has drifted leftward on the issue over the years. The outlet said Biden in June 2019 reversed his stance on the Hyde Amendment, which bans federal funding for most abortions, and explained that “circumstances have changed.” Indeed, Biden announced his candidacy for president in late April.

How would their differing views on abortion affect Biden’s relationship with Pope Francis in the future? Well, LifeSite News also said that Biden — commenting late last year on a priest who denied him Communion — claimed that “it’s not a position that I’ve found anywhere else, including from the Holy Father, who gives me Communion.”

Share
Categories
Abortion Donald Trump family Intelwars life

United States and more than 30 other nations sign declaration that ‘there is no international right to abortion’ and that the family is ‘fundamental’ to society

The U.S. and 32 other nations signed a declaration last week that made clear that “there is no international right to abortion” and highlighted the foundational importance of the family unit to society.

The document, called the “Geneva Consensus Declaration On Promoting Women’s Health and Strengthening the Family” and co-sponsored by the U.S., Brazil, Egypt, Hungary, Indonesia, and Uganda, was signed at a virtual event.

What does the declaration say?

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued a statement touting the document as an effort to achieve four main pillars:

  1. better health for women;
  2. the preservation of human life;
  3. strengthening of family as the foundational unit of society; and
  4. protecting every nation’s national sovereignty in global politics.

Cultural conservatives in the U.S. took particular note that the document took a stance that appears contrary to the increasingly liberal international community’s stance on the right to life and the importance of the family unit.

The declaration stated a reaffirmation of “the inherent ‘dignity and worth of the human person,’ that ‘every human being has the inherent right to life,’ and the commitment ‘to enable women to go safely through pregnancy and childbirth and provide couples with the best chance of having a healthy infant.”

It went on to say that “in no case should abortion be promoted as a method of family planning” and declared that “any measures or changes related to abortion within the health system can only be determined at the national or local level according to the national legislative process.”

It further reaffirmed that “‘the child … needs special safeguards and care … before as well as after birth’ and ‘special measures of protection and assistance should be taken on behalf of all children,’ based on the principle of the best interest of the child.”

In order to make it clear they meant business on the pro-life front, the co-singers all committed to “[r]eaffirm that there is no international right to abortion, nor any international obligation on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion.”

Regarding families, the agreement said “the family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State” and called the family “foundational to society” and noted that it is a “source of health, support, and care.”

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo touted the agreement and President Donald Trump’s guidance on protecting the unborn and the family. He noted in his remarks:

Under President Trump’s leadership, the United States has defended the dignity of human life everywhere and always. He’s done it like no other president in history. We’ve also mounted an unprecedented defense of the unborn abroad.

In front of world leaders at the 2019 United Nations General Assembly, President Trump said, “We in America believe that every child — born and unborn — is a sacred gift from God.” […]

Today, we’re taking the next step, as we sign the Geneva Consensus Declaration. At its very core, the declaration protects women’s health, defends the unborn, and reiterates the vital importance of the family as the foundation of society.


Ceremonial Signing of the Geneva Consensus Declaration | October 22, 2020

youtu.be

Who signed the declaration?

According to the HHS website, these 33 countries, representing more than 1.6 billion people, signed the declaration:

  • Bahrain
  • Belarus
  • Benin
  • Brazil
  • Burkina Faso
  • Cameroon
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo
  • Republic of the Congo
  • Djibouti
  • Egypt
  • Eswatini
  • The Gambia
  • Georgia
  • Haiti
  • Hungary
  • Indonesia
  • Iraq
  • Kenya
  • Kuwait
  • Libya
  • Nauru
  • Niger
  • Oman
  • Pakistan
  • Poland
  • Saudi Arabia
  • Senegal
  • South Sudan
  • Sudan
  • Uganda
  • United Arab Emirates
  • United States
  • Zambia

(H/T: The Christian Post)

Share
Categories
Abortion court case Intelwars Justice amy coney barrett roe v wade SCOTUS Supreme Court

Coming Friday: Mississippi heartbeat bill among first cases Justice Amy Coney Barrett will consider

The Supreme Court will deliberate Friday on whether it will review a Mississippi pro-life law that bans abortion after an unborn child’s heartbeat can be detected.

If the Supreme Court takes the case, it will be the first potential challenge to Roe v. Wade‘s precedent to come before the court with newly installed Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett hearing the arguments.

Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch petitioned the court last week to review the state’s 15-week abortion ban, asking the court to clarify how lower courts should interpret a previous Supreme Court decision striking down a Louisiana pro-life law, CBS News reported. He cited several opinions from federal appeals court judges that varied in their reasoning on separate abortion-related cases, some citing the Supreme Court’s majority opinion from Medical Services v. Russo to strike down restrictions on abortion, others referring to Chief Justice John Roberts’ concurring opinion to keep those regulations in place.

“This case remains an ideal vehicle to promptly resolve both that question and the first question presented — the contradictions in this Court’s decisions over use of ‘viability’ as a bright line for measuring pro-life legislation,” Fitch wrote in a supplemental brief sent to the Supreme Court.

The case asks the court to decide “whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional,” taking direct aim at the heart of the Roe v. Wade decision, which legalized abortion before fetal viability at 24 weeks nationally.

The lawyer for the pro-choice group challenging Mississippi’s heartbeat law told CBS News the law explicitly violates Roe‘s precedent.

“Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban defies nearly fifty years of Supreme Court precedent,” Hillary Schneller, the staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights, told CBS News. “Mississippi’s abortion ban, by definition, is a complete and insurmountable obstacle for pregnant people seeking abortion care after 15 weeks.”

On Friday, the nine justices of the Supreme Court will meet to discuss and vote on whether they will hear this case and others. Four justices must agree to take the case before the Supreme Court will hear the arguments. An announcement on the Supreme Court’s decision is expected to come Monday.

All eyes are on newly confirmed Justice Amy Coney Barrett as the court weighs this decision. Progressives fear and conservatives hope that Barrett’s addition to the court has cemented a 6-3 originalist-leaning majority that will overturn Roe, ending the national legalization of abortion and sending the issue back to the states.

The last abortion-related case to come before the court was Medical Services v. Russo, in which a 5-4 majority blocked a Louisiana law that required abortionists to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. Chief Justice John Roberts joined the four progressives on the court in a concurring opinion, saying that while he disagrees with prior rulings declaring such restrictions unconstitutional, the court is bound by precedent.

Multiple senators questioned Barrett on the role of Supreme Court precedent during her confirmation hearings, with Democrats attempting to have her clarify her views on Roe in particular. Barrett, following Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s example, refused to give her opinion on Roe v. Wade‘s precedent, noting that there were pending cases before the court system challenging aspects of Roe and that it would be unethical for her to signal to potential litigants how she might rule.

During one exchange with Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), however, Barrett did not list Roe among several cases she called “super-precedents” that the court cannot overturn because they are established law. An example of one such case would be Brown v. Board of Education, the 1954 court ruling that declared “separate is not equal,” ending racial segregation in public schools.

She didn’t tip her cards, though, deftly answering Klobuchar’s questions in a way that left her position on Roe‘s precedent ambiguous.

Roe is not a super-precedent because calls for its overruling have never ceased, but that doesn’t mean that Roe should be overruled,” Barrett explained.

Other pending cases the Supreme Court may consider are whether a New York prosecutor will get access to President Donald Trump’s financial information and election-related cases.

Share