Monday, October 24, 2016

Keep Congress Pro-Life, Here are Pro-Life Senate Candidates Who Need Your Help

As National Right to Life has explained in elaborate detail, the next president will nominate a successor for the late Justice Antonin Scalia, and probably have the opportunity to nominate successors to at least two more justices. The United States Senate will confirm or block these nominees. Pro-lifers across the nation must remain focused on maintaining enough votes to confirm pro-life justices.

The next Senate will also decide whether to advance pro-life legislation, such as the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act and the Dismemberment Abortion Ban Act.

So, yes, elections matter. Your vote matters.

Remember, even if you don’t live in one of the key states we will be looking at, you may have family or friends (or friends of friends – that’s how social media works!) in these states. So please direct your contacts to early and often for voting information.

Given the level of misinformation, some things bear repeating to anyone you discuss elections, voting, or the pro-life cause with.

OVERVIEW - This year, there are 34 U.S. Senate seats up for election: 10 Democrat seats and 24 Republican. All of the Democrats up for re-election are pro-abortion. According to Cook Political Report, only one Democrat seat is currently rated a “toss-up.”

Sadly, 6 Republican seats are listed as “toss-ups,” while two more are leaning toward the Democrats! Democrats need a net gain of five seats to regain control of the Senate, or four if they win the White House. If they hold their one toss-up seat, win the two Republican seats currently rated “lean Democrat” and pick up two or three Republican toss-ups, pro-lifers will be hard-pressed to block pro-abortion policies, much less advance any pro-life legislation. . . .


Among the toss-ups, there is one (only one) bright spot. In Nevada, the retirement of Harry Reid (D), the leader of the Senate Democrats, creates a chance for pro-lifers to pick up a seat. Pro-life Congressman Joe Heck (R) will face pro-abortion former Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto (D) for this Senate seat.

Congressman Heck voted for the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act and he voted for the No Taxpayer Funding of Abortion Act. In contrast, Cortez Masto is supported by NARAL Pro-Choice America and EMILY’s List. She supports abortion on demand, and using your tax dollars to pay for abortions.

One seat currently held by a pro-life Republican is now rated “leans Democrat.” In Wisconsin, pro-life Senator Ron Johnson (R) faces pro-abortion former Senator Russ Feingold (D). Senator Johnson has a strong pro-life voting record. In contrast, Feingold supports the current policy of abortion on demand, and voted against the partial-birth abortion ban every chance he got. Feingold is also endorsed by Planned Parenthood, the nation’s leading abortion provider. (See how I worked that in? I won’t do it every time in this article, but put it in when sharing a new FaceBook post or Tweet.)

Pro-life Florida Senator Marco Rubio (R) faces a tough re-election campaign against pro-abortion Rep. Patrick Murphy (D). Senator Rubio has voted prolife on every occasion. Murphy is a pro-abortion extremist who even voted against the bill to require care for babies who are born alive during an abortion. He voted against protecting babies capable of feeling pain from abortion, and co-sponsored a measure to invalidate nearly every state and federal limitation on abortion.

In New Hampshire, pro-life Senator Kelly Ayotte (R), who has a strong pro-life voting record, faces a tough challenge from pro-abortion Governor Maggie Hassan (D), who is supported by the radical pro-abortion group, EMILY’S List. Hassan supports using your tax dollars to pay for abortion, and as a state senator even opposed notifying parents before an abortion is done on their minor daughter.

In Pennsylvania, pro-life Senator Pat Toomey (R) faces a challenge by Katie McGinty (D), a pro-abortion candidate supported by EMILY’s List. McGinty opposes efforts to ban the brutal dismemberment abortion method.

In North Carolina, pro-life Senator Richard Burr (R) faces a challenge by former Assemblywoman Deborah Ross (D), a candidate supported by EMILY’s List. In the State legislature, Ross supported using tax funding for abortions, and when she was Executive Director of the ACLU’s North Carolina chapter, Ross even tried to take away a parent’s right to prevent an abortion from being done on their minor daughter.

Pro-life Congressman Todd Young (R) will face former Senator Evan Bayh (D) for Indiana’s open Senate seat. Todd Young has a strong pro-life voting record, but Evan Bayh, has voted to endorse Roe v. Wade, the radical Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion on demand.

In Missouri, Senator Roy Blunt (R), a pro-life leader in the U.S. Senate with a strong pro-life voting record, faces a challenge from pro-abortion Secretary of State Jason Kander (D), who had an extreme pro-abortion voting record in the Missouri House of Representatives. He even voted against preventing abortions on babies who can feel pain (Missouri’s Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act).

Among races where the re-election of a pro-life Republican is rated safer but by no means certain, Congresswoman Ann Kirkpatrick (D), another pro-abortion candidate supported by EMILY’s List, is challenging pro-life Senator John McCain (R) in Arizona. Senator McCain’s pro-life record contrasts greatly with Kirkpatrick’s. She voted against the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, against the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, and supports a bill that would invalidate nearly every state and federal limitation on abortion.

In Ohio, pro-life Senator Rob Portman (R) faces a challenge from pro-abortion Ted Strickland (D), a former member of the U.S. House and a former governor. Portman has a strong pro-life voting record, while Strickland had a pro-abortion voting record in Congress, voting against the pro-life position nearly 80% of the time in a 10-year span. Strickland has been endorsed by Planned Parenthood, and supports the use of tax dollars for abortion.

And finally, in Iowa, pro-life Senator Chuck Grassley (R), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, faces a challenge by pro-abortion former Lt. Governor Patty Judge (D). Senator Grassley has a strong pro-life voting record, while EMILY’s List and Planned Parenthood support Patty Judge. She would like to overturn the Hyde Amendment and force taxpayers to fund abortions.

Among the new pro-life challengers running for the U.S. Senate this year is pro-life El Paso County Commissioner Darryl Glenn (R) who is challenging pro-abortion Colorado Senator Michael Bennet (D). Michael Bennet voted against the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, for taxpayer funding of abortions, and has been awarded a strong pro-abortion lifetime rating by Planned Parenthood. . . .

Remember, elections matter. Your vote matters. . . . Read More

Tags: Keep Congress pro-Life, elections matter, Senate races, National Righ to Life To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Greater Fitchburg For Life. Thanks!

Donald Trump: “According to Hillary You Can Abort a Baby at 9 Months, That’s Unacceptable”

In a new interview with CBN, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump went after pro-abortion candidate Hillary Clinton’s radical abortion views. The interview comes on the heels of a national debate in which Trump and Clinton feuded over the issue of abortion.

During the debate Trump made it very clear that he will appoint pro-life justices to the Supreme Court who would be likely to overturn the Roe versus Wade decision that has led to 58 million abortions. Meanwhile, Clinton made it clear that she wants a Supreme Court nominee who will support unlimited abortion.

"... according to the rules of Hillary you can take the baby at nine months and you can imagine what you have to do to that baby to get it out,” he said to Robertson, “and you can take that baby at nine months and you can abort. And a day prior to birth you can take that baby. And I said that’s unacceptable.” . . .

Trump re-iterated that he will seek to appoint justices approved by the Federalist Society who are pro-life and support the Second amendment. . . . Read More

Tags: Hillary Clinton, Abort a Baby at 9 Months, Donald Trump. That’s Unacceptable” To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Greater Fitchburg For Life. Thanks!

Terminally Ill Woman’s Insurance Company Will Pay for Her Assisted Suicide, But Not for Chemo

The Washington Times reported that the California Assisted-suicide law prompted an insurance company to deny coverage to a terminally ill California woman

Bradford Richardson, from the Washington Times reported that Stephanie Packer, a wife and mother of four who was diagnosed with a terminal form of scleroderma, said that her insurance company initially indicated it would pay for her to switch to a different chemotherapy drug based on the recommendation of her doctors but shortly after the California assisted suicide law went into effect, her insurance company denied her treatment.

Richardson reported Packer as saying: “And when the law was passed, it was a week later I received a letter in the mail saying they were going to deny coverage for the chemotherapy that we were asking for.”

She said she called her insurance company to find out why her coverage had been denied. On the call, she also asked whether suicide pills were covered under her plan.

“And she says, ‘Yes, we do provide that to our patients, and you would only have to pay $1.20 for the medication,’”Mrs. Packer said.

Stephanie Packer believes that legalizing assisted suicide creates an incentive for insurance companies to deny terminally ill people coverage. . . . Read More

Tags: Stephanie Packer, Terminally Ill Woman, Insurance Company, Will Pay for Her Assisted Suicide, But Not for Chemo To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Greater Fitchburg For Life. Thanks!

Friday, October 21, 2016

Global Abortion Advocates Dispense with Mask of “Post-Abortion” Care

by C-Fam staff: A leading consortium of reproductive health advocates announced its intention to drop “post-abortion care” from its title and to begin campaigning for “comprehensive abortion care” instead.

At an event in Washington announcing the shift, one advocate said that sustaining post-abortion care was never the goal. “Post-abortion care” was meant to be an “entry point.” She then presented the strategy for what will now be the consortium’s open promotion of abortion.

The group was apparently emboldened by the liberalizing of abortion laws in developing countries.

Pathfinder International, the host of the meeting and the current administrator of the Post-Abortion Care (PAC) Consortium, is one of eight partnering organizations that since 1993 lobbied Western governments and UN agencies to allow family planning funding for abortion. Two of the biggest international abortion groups, International Planned Parenthood Federation and Ipas, also members of the PAC consortium steering committee, set the PAC strategy in motion defining the term that same year.

Post-abortion care is legal everywhere, since by definition it provides essential medical treatment to a woman suffering from complications of an incomplete abortion or spontaneous miscarriage. However, as Steven Mosher from the Population Research Institute points out, the reality on the ground is that abortion is often provided under the guise of post-abortion care.

The PAC Consortium annual meeting reviewed past success in promoting abortion in countries like Ethiopia, Egypt and Ecuador, presenting these as models on how to systematize abortion working within what is permitted by law. In Bangladesh where abortion is technically illegal, “menstrual regulation” was highlighted as the cover for a woman to abort.

As countries change their laws to allow legal exceptions for abortion, even in very restricted circumstances, consortium members work from within countries to broaden the application. Government officials and health ministers are lobbied by abortion advocates often equipped with the World Health organization’s guidance document on the roles of health care workers in providing abortion to help persuade officials to mainstream abortion by including it in family planning clinics where community health workers and midwives can be brought in to assist.

Ipas has long worked to promote abortion by a plastic manual vacuum aspirator (MVA) or by pills. The latter was facilitated by the inclusion of misoprostol to the WHO’s essential medicines list.

Abortion advocates lobbied for the inclusion of misoprostol to the list as a treatment for bleeding after childbirth, knowing its off-label use as an abortifacient would allow women to self-induce an abortion and then seek “post-abortion care.” Consortium members also cited WHO guidelines to promote “self-management abortion” to make abortion more convenient for poor women in less developed countries.

Members of the PAC, soon to be CAC or “Comprehensive Abortion Care” Consortium, asked presenters how the move from post-abortion care to comprehensive abortion care could jeopardize funding from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which has funded PAC programs since 1994.

Most of the organizations in attendance were USAID PAC grant recipients. The question was never answered though it was announced a subsequent meeting would be scheduled to discuss what participants called “an overly conservative reading of compliance” with existing U.S. laws preventing foreign aid funds being spent on abortion.

Consortium members spoke freely about their willingness to work with “extra-legal” groups which dispense abortion pills in violation of national laws.

Tags: C-FAM, UN, United Nations, Global Abortion Advocates, dispense with mask, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Greater Fitchburg For Life. Thanks!

Apologists For Partial-Birth Abortion

by Bill Donohue, Catholic League: Lying about abortion is a cottage industry, so it was hardly surprising to learn that pro-abortion advocates would label Donald Trump a liar for telling the truth about partial-birth abortion. "You can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb in the ninth month, on the final day," he said.

Trump was right: he offered an accurate account of what partial-birth abortion entails.

This did not sit well with the champions of abortion. Dr. Aaron B. Caughey, chairman of obstetrics and gynecology at Oregon Health and Science University, branded Trump's comment "absurd." He said, "I'm unaware of anyone that's terminating a pregnancy a few days prior to delivery of a normal pregnancy." Similarly, Erin Gloria Ryan, writing for The Daily Beast, said Trump was peddling a "myth."

Too bad these apologists didn't explain why the U.S. Supreme Court felt obliged to ban this barbaric procedure (in most instances) in 2007. If it were a fiction, what were the judges banning?

Their lame denials—have they ever heard of Dr. George Tiller or Dr. Kermit Gosnell—won't wash. Tiller performed over 60,000 abortions, many of them—he bragged about it—involving babies who were 80 percent born. Gosnell's "house of horrors" included the remains of babies he cut up just prior to, or after, birth. No wonder Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Ed Koch, both of whom defended Roe v. Wade, labeled partial-birth abortion "infanticide."

We've been down this road before. In 1995, Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, went on national television saying he "lied through [his] teeth" when he "just went out there and spouted the party line" about how rare partial-birth abortion is.

Apologists also contest what partial-birth abortion really is. Dr. Jen Gunter, for instance, protests Trump's comment about "ripping" the baby out of the mother's womb. She says "we don't 'rip' anything in OB/GYN." So what do they do? "We use sharp dissection and blunt dissection, but we don't rip." How reassuring to know that when a scissors is jammed into the skull of a baby about to be born that nothing is "ripped."

In 2004, Dr. Carolyn Westhoff testified before a federal panel on this subject. Here is an excerpt from the exchange during cross-examination.

Q: And at that point the fetus' body is below the cervix and the neck is in the cervix with the head still in the uterus, right?

Westhoff: Yes.

Q: And it's at that point that you take a scissors and insert it into the woman and place an incision in the base of the fetus' skull, right?

Westhoff: Yes.

Q: Now the contents of the fetus' skull, just like the contents of my skull, and your skull, is liquid, right?

Westhoff: That's right.

Q: And sometimes after you've made the incision the fetus' brain will drain out on its own, right?

Westhoff: That's right.

Q: Other times you must insert a suction tube to drain the skull, right?

Westhoff: That's right.

Q: And then the skull will collapse immediately after its liquid contents have been removed and the head will pass easily through the dilated cervix, right?

Westhoff: That's right.

Another tactic used by the apologists for partial-birth abortion is to take issue with the nomenclature. Dr. Caughey says that doctors like him "wouldn't use" language like partial-birth abortion. He prefers a more sanitized expression. He calls aborting an unhealthy baby at the end of term an "induction of labor for a nonviable pregnancy."

No doubt he calls "throwing up" by its medical term, "emesis." In all honesty, this is enough to make me puke.

Tags: Apologists, Partial-Birth Abortion, Bill Donohue, Catholic League To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Greater Fitchburg For Life. Thanks!

Thursday, October 20, 2016

Cardinal Dolan Blasts Hillary Clinton’s Catholic Bashing: It is “Patronizing and Insulting to Catholics”

After CBS and ABC ignored the WikiLeaks revelation that top Hillary Clinton staffers exchanged anti-Catholic rhetoric via e-mail and NBC only offered mere seconds to controversy, one would expect a major U.S. Catholic leader denouncing the comments would draw at least some media attention. However, after New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan condemned the “insulting” remarks and demanded an apology from the Democratic nominee’s campaign on Tuesday, the networks have remained silent.

In sharp contrast, during 7 p.m. ET hour pre-debate coverage on Fox News Wednesday night, anchors Megyn Kelly and Bret Baier provided full coverage of the new development. A report from correspondent Ed Henry featured a soundbite of Dolan’s statement:
“The remarks attributed to John Podesta, who is Mrs. Clinton’s chief of staff, are just extraordinarily patronizing and insulting to Catholics. What he would say is offensive. And if it had been said about the Jewish community, if it had been said about the Islamic community, within 10 minutes there would have been an apology.” . . .  Read More

Tags: Cardinal Dolan, Blasts, Hillary Clinton, Catholic Bashing To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Greater Fitchburg For Life. Thanks!

How Can Tim Kaine be “Personally Pro-Life” If He Supports Abortion for Everyone Else?

There has been a lot of talk recently of politicians like Vice-Presidential candidate Tim Kaine who claim to be “personally pro-life.” While they say they do not support abortion personally, mainly because of their faith, they refuse to allow their faith to impact their public policy position.

This bears a question…if not for religious beliefs, why is abortion wrong?

At the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation, we are a non-religious organization. We have people of all faiths, and some of no faith at all, who are part of our organization. We believe that being pro-life goes beyond one’s religious beliefs and is a basic human right. We believe every human life, from conception to natural death, has value, and deserves to be protected.

So how do we “prove” the preborn child is a human being? The good news is, we don’t have to…modern science and medical technology have already done so. Ultrasound images have truly become a window to the womb, where we can see a pre-born child reacting to his or her mother’s voice, dancing to music, and responding to stimuli.

Unfortunately, those who support abortion choose to turn a blind eye to science when it comes to fetal development. They ignore the discovery by researchers at Northwestern University of tiny sparks that erupt from the egg at the exact moment of conception. . . .

At the end of life, who decides what constitutes “quality of life”? Right now, the standard for [assisting in a suicide] is if they have less than six months to live. But what if someone decides to make that 60 months?

The fact of the matter is, once we go down the slippery pro-abortion slope of determining which lives are worth allowing to continue, and which should be terminated, whether for the convenience of others, or for any other reason, we can’t turn back. That is why the abortion issue goes beyond an issue of religious belief and is a human rights issue.

That is why those who claim to be “personally pro-life” should be fighting to protect all life. ....Read More

Tags: INSERT TAGS To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Greater Fitchburg For Life. Thanks!

Wednesday, October 19, 2016

Hillary Clinton Defends Killing Babies in Partial-Birth Abortions: “Gov't Shouldn’t Step In”

Tonight, during the presidential debate, pro-abortion presidential candidate Hillary Clinton defended partial birth abortions on babies late in pregnancy. She said that she didn’t think the government should be stepping in to protect unborn children that late in pregnancy. . . . .

“I’m going to give you a chance respond but I want to ask you Secretary Clinton I want to explore how far you believe the right to abortion goes. You have been quoted as saying that the fetus has no constitutional rights. You also voted against a ban on late-term partial-birth abortions. Why? ” moderator Chris Wallace asked Clinton.

“I do not think the United States government should be stepping in,” Clinton said in defense of the partial-birth abortion procedure.

. . . Marjorie Danenfelser, the head of the pro-life women’s group Susan B. Anthony List, said Clinton’s response was unbelievable.

“Clinton defended her vote to protect this procedure confirming her view that unborn children have no rights up until birth. It is confirmed: Clinton supports unlimited abortion on-demand,” she said. “Clinton’s position on abortion is wildly out of step with the majority of Americans who support a compassionate limit on abortion after five months and who do not want their tax dollars used to pay for abortion on-demand. In pressing Clinton to state her opinion about the reality of the abortion procedure, Donald Trump did a service to all Americans. On this issue the contrast between the two candidate could not be more clear.”

. . . Meanwhile, Clinton’s claims are false.

A number of reputable doctors’ groups say there is no medical reason for a pregnant woman to have a partial-birth abortion. In fact, such abortions, which are at the center of a national legal debate, can be dangerous to women who have them.

These physicians say there is no truth to the claims made by the abortion industry that the second- and third-trimester abortion method is necessary for a woman’s health.

Groups including the Christian Medical and Dental Society, the Catholic Medical Association, the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and the Physicians Ad Hoc Coalition for the Truth have all stated that partial-birth abortion is a dangerous practice for both mother and child.

The groups supported the federal ban passed by Congress and signed by President George W. Bush. . . . Read More:TEXT

Tags: Hillary Clinton, abortion, partial birth abortion To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Greater Fitchburg For Life. Thanks!

Donald Trump: Pro-Life & Will Appoint Pro-Life Supreme Court Judges

During tonight’s presidential debate Donald Trump made it very clear that he will appoint pro-life justices to the Supreme Court who would be likely to overturn the Roe versus Wade decision that has led to 58 million abortions.

Trump said he is pro-life and the kinds of Judges he would put on the nation’s highest court are those that would be the kind pro-life voters would appreciate. For pro-life voters, the Supreme Court is probably the most important election issue this year as the nation’s highest court could control the fate of abortion for decades to come and whether another 58 million abortions happen or if unborn children will eventually enjoy legal protection.

“The Supreme Court – it’s what it’s all about. Our country is so, just so imperative that we have the right justices,” Trump said. ” I feel that the justices that I am going to appoint– and I’ve named 20 of them. The justices that I’m going to appoint will be pro-life. They will have a conservative bent.“ . . . Read More

Tags: Domald Trump, 3rd Presidential Debate, appointing, Pro-Life, Supreme Court JudgesTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Greater Fitchburg For Life. Thanks!

Planned Parenthood Celebrates Centennial: 6,803,782 Babies Aborted

by Penny Starr: Planned Parenthood Federation of America marked its 100th birthday on Oct. 16, the day in 1916 that eugenicist Margaret Sanger opened the first "birth control" clinic in Brooklyn. Since 1978, Planned Parenthood, which is America's largest abortion provider, has ended the lives of approximately 6,803,782 babies.

That is the number of abortions Planned Parenthood has reported in its own documents. obtained the Planned Parenthood annual reports, fact sheets, and service reports from 1978 through 2014 and counted the number of abortions that the organization said it had performed over that time frame.

To put that number (6,803,782 abortions) in perspective, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the combined populations of Los Angeles and Chicago in 2015 was 6,692,379. obtained Planned Parenthood records from the organization and from Jim Sedlak, the founder of Stop Planned Parenthood (STOPP International) and executive director of the American Life League, which has collected Planned Parenthood documents for decades. These records included Planned Parenthood annual reports, as well as "fact sheets" and "service reports" published by the organization.

Although abortion was not legal when Sanger opened the first birth control office in Brooklyn, the procedure was legalized in the state of New York on July 1, 1970. The very next day, July 2, 1970, the New York clinic performed the first abortion, according to Sedlak. . . .

Abortions Performed by Planned Parenthood, 1978-2014
1978 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report 1978. (Calendar Year) "... 70,000 abortions."
1979 - Planned Parented Federation of America Annual Report 1979. (Calendar Year) ... 67,000 abortions."
1980 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America 1991 Service Report (Calendar Year) 77,880
1981 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America 1991 Service Report (Calendar Year) 79,997
1982 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year)
"Women Came to Planned Parenthood clinics on nearly 80,000 occasions for first-trimester abortions." 80,000
1983 -- Planned Parenthood Federation of America Service Report 1991 (Calendar Year) 85,242
1984 -- Planned Parenthood Federation of America 1991 Service Report (Calendar Year) 88,824
1985 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America 1991 Service Report (Calendar Year) 91,065
1986 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 91,000
1987 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 98,600
1988 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 104,000
1989 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 111,000
1990 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 122,000
1991 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 129,000
1992 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 132,000
1993 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 134,277
1994 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 133,289
1995 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 139,899
1996 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 153,367
1997 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 165,174
1998 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 168,509
1999 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 182,792
2000 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 197,070
2001 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 213,026
2002 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 230,630
2003 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 245,092
2004 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 255,015
2005 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 264,943
2006 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 289,750
2007 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 305,310
2008 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Fact Sheet "Abortion Services" 324,008
2009 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 331,796
2010 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (Calendar Year) 329,445
2011 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (FY 10/01/2010 to 9/30/11) 333,964
2012 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (FY 10/01/2011 to 9/30/12) 327,166
2013 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (FY 10/01/2012 to 9/30/13) 327,653
2014 - Planned Parenthood Federation of America Annual Report (FY 10/01/2013 to 9/30/14) 323,999
Total: 6, 803,782 babies killed by abortion

Tags: INSERT TAGS To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Greater Fitchburg For Life. Thanks!

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

Catholic Bishop Blasts Tim Kaine: He’s Just a “Cafeteria Catholic” Because He Supports Abortion

Tim Kaine Supporting Abortion
Catholic in name only not principled beliefs
Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas doesn’t mince any words in a new editorial he posted on the web site of the Catholic archdiocese he heads. He says Hillary Clinton’s running mate Time Kaine is just a “cafeteria Catholic” because he supports abortion.

Naumann’s column is so eloquent nothing needs to be added to it:

In the Oct. 4 vice presidential debate, Senator Kaine acknowledged he was blessed with great Irish Catholic parents and grew up in a wonderful faith-filled family. He also mentioned proudly that he is a graduate of Rockhurst High School, crediting the Jesuits with instilling within him a desire for public service and a commitment to advocate for the poor. I wish that was the end of the story.

It was painful to listen to Senator Kaine repeat the same tired and contorted reasoning to profess his personal opposition to abortion while justifying his commitment to keep it legal. He said all the usual made-for-modern-media sound bites: It is not proper to impose his religious beliefs upon all Americans. He trusts women to make good reproductive choices. And when all else fails, there is always: Do we really want to criminalize and fill our jails with post-abortive women?

With regard to the imposition of religious beliefs, Senator Kaine appears to have no qualms with his public positions conforming with his religious beliefs with regard to such issues as the church’s opposition to racism or our preferential option for the poor. He appears not to be conflicted with our public policies mirroring the Ten Commandments with regard to stealing, perjury, or forms of murder, other than abortion.

Why is Senator Kaine personally opposed to abortion, if he does not believe that it is the taking of an innocent human life? I hope in his science classes at Rockhurst he learned that at the moment of fertilization a new human life has begun with his or her own distinct DNA — different from the genetic code of both the child’s mother and father.

It is difficult to imagine that Senator Kaine has not seen the ultrasound images of his children and grandchildren when they were in their mother’s womb. Is the senator unaware that abortion stopped the beating hearts of 60 million American children aborted legally since 1973?

If he knows these truths of biology, why would he believe that anyone has the right to authorize the killing of an unborn human being? This is where the reproductive choice euphemism breaks apart. Does anyone really have the choice to end another human being’s life? Our choices end where another individual’s more fundamental rights begin.

Actually, I wish Senator Kaine would take the time to talk with some of the post–abortive women that are assisted by Project Rachel and other post-abortion ministries helping women and men find healing, hope and mercy after an abortion. Our current permissive abortion policies, placing the entire burden of responsibility for the abortion decision upon the mother, results in millions of women experiencing an inner imprisonment where the bars keeping them from freedom and happiness are the guilt and unresolved grief that inevitably ensues from abortion.

It is interesting that Senator Kaine expressed his personal anguish when as governor he enforced capital punishment sentences. He gave the impression that he attempted unsuccessfully to convince Virginians to abolish the death penalty. Yet, with regard to legalized abortion, I am not aware of Senator Kaine making a similar effort to convince his constituents to work for public policies that protect the lives of the unborn. Instead, he appears eager to champion not only maintaining the status quo, but actually expanding abortion rights.

Unfortunately, the vice-presidential debate revealed that the Catholic running for the second highest office in our land is an orthodox member of his party, fulling embracing his party’s platform, but a cafeteria Catholic, picking and choosing the teachings of the Catholic Church that are politically convenient. . . Read More

Tags: INSERT TAGS To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Greater Fitchburg For Life. Thanks!

Kaine Speaks in Remorse Code on Religion

Tony Perkins' Washington Update: The Clinton campaign is sorry about its string of anti-Catholic emails alright -- sorry they got out.

Real remorse, on the other hand, has been tough to come by. Even Sunday, a few days after Hillary Clinton's top campaign official and communications director were implicated in the latest WikiLeaks dump, running-mate Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va.) wasn't overly contrite for the offensive things campaign officials said about his own faith. Taking a turn doing damage control on ABC's "This Week," Kaine was asked by Martha Raddatz about the mockery of Catholicism. "Many took offense," she argued. "...You're Catholic. Should the campaign apologize?"

The Virginia senator, who's made a point of putting his religion in the campaign spotlight, shrugged off the insults. "You know," he replied, "we all have opinions and I don't think you need to apologize for your opinions. But, in fact, that's a great thing about our country and even about being Catholic, we have plenty of opinions. So you don't need to apologize for an opinion, but in terms of respect for the church and people's faith lives, Hillary Clinton has that respect, because it's what motivates her." "I don't think you need to apologize for your opinions?" This from a political party that not only shames people over their opinions on things like marriage, but uses the government to punish them for it. It's astounding. You don't need to apologize or hide your opinion as long as it is liberal. The Left has made it abundantly clear that Christians are fair game for discrimination and ridicule.

No wonder why church leaders are furious. In a letter to the Clinton campaign, dozens of prominent Catholics and evangelicals called out the Democratic nominee for her refusal to express any sort of regret over the incident. "The WikiLeaks emails reveal a contempt for all traditional Christians, and we are -- Catholic and Evangelical -- united in our outrage and united in our call for Mrs. Clinton to immediately apologize for the Christophobic behavior of her associates." Unfortunately, no such apology seems imminent -- not when the campaign's most prominent Catholic, Senator Kaine, is busily excusing away the hostility. "I'm very, very serious about my Catholicism," he insisted, "and Hillary views that as a real asset. And we've talked about our faith lives, as she asked me to be on the ticket with her. So in terms of what Hillary Clinton, who's running for president, thinks about Catholics and the value more broadly of having a faith background, I can tell you she views at it as a plus..."

Well, Hillary may view religion as a plus politically, but she's shown very little use for it practically. As Secretary of State, she stood by and watched while Christians were mercilessly slaughtered for their faith. Instead, she traveled the world advocating for sexual freedom while religious freedom was on the back burner -- or worse -- being attacked from the inside. For years, Clinton made no secret of her disdain for the deeply-held beliefs of the faith culture, arguing that religious practice should give way to make room for the Left's radical social agenda.

On the issue of abortion, Clinton left little doubt as to where she stands. "Rights have to exist in practice -- not just on paper,"Clinton argued. "Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will. And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed." In some ways, that view is more extreme than even President Obama's. Although she and the current administration agree that liberals have to remove biblical Christianity from a place of influence in our country and culture, only Clinton has been so openly antagonistic by calling Americans who hold biblical views of morality as deplorable and irredeemable.

As Bill Donohue from the Catholic League pointed out on Washington Watch last week, the next best thing to eliminating religion is corrupting it. And with Senator Tim Kaine by her side, proudly rejecting the values the Church stands for, and her campaign for creating phony Catholic groups as fronts from their liberal agenda, she is well on her way. That's more dangerous than just religious hostility. This is a fundamental effort to neutralize the influence of biblical Christianity and then transform religion into a political tool of the Left. And unless Americans wake up to the implications of this scandal -- and what it means to the future of religious liberty in our nation -- the last eight years will seem tame by comparison.

Tags: Senator Tim Kaine, remorse code, rekecting church values, religion, Tomy Perkins, Washington Update To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Greater Fitchburg For Life. Thanks!

Dobson Urges Civil Disobedience

9th Circuit Court Rules:
Pro-Life Pregnancy Centers
Must Promote Killing Babies!
by Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: Dobson Urges Civil Disobedience - My good friend Dr. James Dobson is calling on Christians in California to engage in civil disobedience. At the same time, he is warning Christians across the country about the tremendous stakes in this election and what awaits us all depending on the outcome.

Dr. Dobson's extraordinary statement comes on the heels of an unbelievably anti-religious ruling from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The left-wing court upheld a radical pro-abortion law that forces pro-life pregnancy centers, many of which are religious charities, to promote abortion.

Yes, you read that correctly. Federal judges have just ruled that you cannot open a center to promote the sanctity of life without also promoting abortion.

In an urgent statement this morning, Dr. Dobson blasted the court's ruling as "an affront to religious freedom," adding, "I have a simple word of advice to those pastors, priests and others who run California's crisis pregnancy centers. If California attempts to enforce this law then do not comply. Make them put you in jail."

Dr. Dobson continued, "This decision is further affirmation of the importance of this presidential election. Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be responsible for appointing the replacement of Antonin Scalia, and -- in all likelihood -- two to three other Supreme Court Justices. That court will eventually decide whether or not this remains the law in California and becomes law across America."

Any Christian who votes in a way that enables Hillary Clinton to become president, empowering her to name Justice Scalia's replacement and pack the courts with pro-abortion radicals, must be prepared to accept responsibility for the continued carnage of the unborn and the inevitable restrictions on religious liberty.
Gary Bauer is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families

Tags: Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families, James Dobson, Urges Civil Disobedience, 9th Circuit Court, pro-life, Pregnancy Centers, Must promot, killing babies, abortion, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Greater Fitchburg For Life. Thanks!

Monday, October 17, 2016

Hillary Clinton Celebrates Planned Parenthood’s 100th Birthday and Its 7 Million Abortions

Yesterday, the Planned Parenthood abortion business marked 100 years of existence. From its days of pushing eugenics views under Margaret Sanger to its history as an abortion business over the last four decades, both actors and celebrities celebrated the Planned Parenthood abortion company.

But perhaps nobody celebrated Planned Parenthood and its 7 million abortions more than Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. She pushed Planned Parenthood hard Sunday evening posting five separate tweets either praising or defending Planned Parenthood.

The five tweets constituted almost all of the total tweets from her official account by 7:30 p.m — including a re-tweet of pro-abortion President Barack Obama.
Ironically the tweets come just one day after a Clinton tweet celebrating children.
. .. Read More

Tags: Hillary Clinton, Celebrates, Planned Parenthood, 100th Birthday, 7 Million Abortions To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Greater Fitchburg For Life. Thanks!

3 Ways to Expose the Truth About Planned Parenthood

by Beverly Hallberg, The Daily Signal: Usually the century mark for a person, place, or thing is a momentous and joyous occasion. Not so this time.

On Sunday, Planned Parenthood turned 100. Both pro-lifers and pro-choicers are marking the organization’s birthday in hashtags: #100YearsOfAbuse and #100YearsStrong, respectively.

But the statistics that have emerged from that 100-year reign are staggering. The award for “most notable” goes to—more than 7 million abortions.

And Cecile Richards has claimed: “We’ve made incredible gains during our first century and we’re just getting started. We will build on our proud legacy and launch our second century with as much passion, courage, and conviction as our first.”

Planned Parenthood is likely here to stay (at least for the foreseeable future), but that doesn’t mean we stop having conversations about the organization and the truth behind its practices.

Here are three ways to talk to someone in your life about Planned Parenthood.

Common Ground
Whether pro-life or pro-choice, it’s safe to assume you want women to have access to quality health care.

The definition of “quality health care” is where the two sides diverge. It seems reasonable to claim that quality health care should include a safe and clean environment where nurses and doctors provide all the information to a patient. And if that patient is pregnant, the information provided includes an ultrasound with a detectable heartbeat.

But to start with common ground means to establish the low bar of quality health care as a right we can all support. Don’t wade into the bothersome details just yet.

Though Planned Parenthood has escaped the restriction of federal funds, the facts don’t lie and are hard to deny. It’s very important to cite the numerous other health care providers, what services they perform, and their accessibility.

First, there are 20 times as many federally qualified health care centers that serve women as Planned Parenthoods. The argument that closing Planned Parenthood clinics or restricting their funds will inhibit access to quality health care for women is ridiculous. Don’t we want women to have access to a health care provider in their neighborhood? Doesn’t proximity matter?

Second, The Daily Signal cited a few interesting numbers. Planned Parenthood claims about 30 percent of all abortions in the United States every year. Compare this outrageous number to the percentage of Pap tests performed (less than 1 percent) and breast exams (less than 2 percent).

If a woman needs a mammogram (which Planned Parenthood is not licensed to perform), why not remove the middleman that Planned Parenthood has become? Don’t we want clinics that offer access to every health service instead of just a few?

Third, we’re all aware of the horrifying videos released by David Daleiden that rasied questions about the selling of baby parts by Planned Parenthood for profit. (Planned Parenthood had denied any illegal activity.) Though the organization has avoided suffering any major consequences, the videos exist and those conversations are difficult to forget.

If we care about women, it’s important to point out that altering abortions (therefore putting a woman’s health in danger) in order to make a profit is not only illegal, but heartbreaking. Women deserve the truth, and they deserve better.

Words are one of the best defenses you have in this conversation. It’s “baby” vs. “fetus,” and neither side can change what terms they use because both risk losing the argument. So, stick with “unborn baby/child.” Humanize the life the other side refuses to.

Also, talk about rights. Pro-choicers love to talk about the human right to do with your body what you want. But their opinion of when the same rights do/don’t apply to an unborn child are loose (at best), and are usually defined by convenience. So, fight back.

Steal the word “rights” to talk about the unborn child and their right to dignity and respect. As medical advances show more clearly when life begins, the battle for the word “rights” becomes more important.

Just make sure that when talking about Planned Parenthood and abortion you don’t demonize the women who’ve chosen this option. Many have been lied to and felt like they had no choice. To win this argument is to show compassion—for the mother and for the baby growing inside her.

Planned Parenthood has been around for 100 years, but that doesn’t mean the organization will celebrate another century of “success”—especially with the rise of health care technology, social media, and your willingness to have a conversation about the true nature of its practice.

Gather your facts, establish common ground (remember: this is a conversation, not a shouting match), cite examples, and choose your words wisely.

Tags: 3 Ways, Expose the Truth, Planned Parenthood, Beverly Hallberg, The Daily Signal To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Greater Fitchburg For Life. Thanks!