Pro-Life Corner

A sidewalk counselor was talking to one young mother on her way into the mill and when the mother was told that God loves her unborn child she responded with a laugh and said, "it doesn't matter, God will forgive me no matter what I do."

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

SIOUX FALLS, SD, July 3, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, in a 7-4 decision, will allow South Dakota to begin enforcing a state law that requires abortion providers to tell women, in writing, that the abortion procedure "will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being." In Planned Parenthood v. Rounds, the Court vacated a temporary injunction that had been issued by the trial court, which had blocked the law from going into effect.

The opinion addresses the important issue of whether South Dakota can enforce its 2005 informed consent law while the constitutionality of its requirements is litigated in court. Much of the opinion discusses whether the statement, "abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being," is truthful, not misleading and relevant to women's decisions to obtain abortions. The majority found that Planned Parenthood had "submitted no evidence" that this statement was false, misleading, or irrelevant.

Planned Parenthood and abortion activists have tried to deny the fact that abortion kills a separate human being. Denial of this fact was part of a national strategy to create a culture of abortion for the entire nation, according to sworn testimony of Dr. Bernard Nathanson, one of the founders of the National Association to Repeal Abortion Laws (NARAL). Today, a majority of the judges on the Eighth Circuit have clearly and decisively declared that South Dakota need not deny the truth.

Harold Cassidy, chief counsel for the two crisis pregnancy centers which intervened in the case, said: "Planned Parenthood, in a shocking, and perhaps perverse logic, argued that abortion doctors were harmed by being required to tell women the truth, and this supposed harm outweighed the damage to pregnant mothers who lost their children because of these doctors' failure to make material disclosures." The informed consent law is designed to guard against the negligence and misrepresentations by providers, since many women would not obtain abortions if properly informed.

The South Dakota law is designed to provide basic information necessary for a pregnant mother to make an informed decision before she gives up her fundamental rights. In the process, it allows her to apply her own personal, moral, and ethical values to the facts once they are disclosed. This fall, the people of South Dakota will vote on a statewide initiative that will ban abortion except in the case where the mother's life is threatened or in the rare case of rape or incest. This voter initiative will be a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, which sanctioned abortion through all nine months of pregnancy on January 22, 1973.

Mathew D. Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, commented: "Planned Parenthood wants to practice evil while pretending it does not exist. Planned Parenthood is founded on a lie and it seeks to deceive women into thinking that abortion is good for them and that it does not involve a separate human being. When the truth about abortion is known, very few women will choose to kill their children."

__________________________________________________________________

Media Silent on Far-Left Anti-Abstinence Alliance

The ACLU and Planned Parenthood are teaming up to take down federally funded abstinence education.

It’s no secret that Planned Parenthood wants the federal government to stop funding abstinence-only education programs, but did you know the ACLU is working with them hand in hand?

The abstinence-themed headlines making the news recently are like the one from an Associated Press story that ran last week in The Washington Times, "States abandon Bush funding for sex education." The article reports that 17 states, for various reasons, now have refused federal grant monies for abstinence education. For some the grant comes with too many restrictions on what can be taught. For others the fact that the grant program comes up for renewal annually and there is no guarantee it will pass . Still other states cannot come up with the matching funds required.What the Associated Press fails to report is that Planned Parenthood and the ACLU are working together to persuade states across the country to reject federal grant monies for abstinence programs. Interestingly the connection was made on the same day and in the same paper running the AP article, The Washington Times. In the paper’s Culture, Etc. section, excerpts from Ryan T. Anderson’s essay "The War on Abstinence" highlighted the connection between the two far-left organizations.

As Anderson wrote: "The goal is to get enough states to refuse the federal abstinence-education funding to the point where the ACLU and Planned Parenthood can convince Congress to eliminate such funding entirely."

Anderson also states: "A year ago, only four states refused federal abstinence-education funding. Today the number is 17."The Planned Parenthood/ACLU partnership appears to be bearing fruit.

Anderson’s entire piece can be found here. He makes several valuable points, but this may be one of the most important:

While the collusion of Planned Parenthood and the ACLU has gone unreported, some attention has been paid to the fact that a growing number of states are refusing federal monies. Usually, this has been reported as if it were uncoordinated, a mere happenstance that all these states have independently decided to reject abstinence funds. When the Washington Post reported on the trend, it cited the comments of the groups leading the charge as if they were observers, not partisans, in the battle.

In fact, both the ACLU and Planned Parenthood are aggressively seeking to do away with abstinence-only education. The ACLU has a page on its Web site headlined "Take Issue, Take Charge." The subhead reads "Life, Liberty and Reproductive Freedom." The site contains action steps readers can take to influence their local communities, including a call to support the "Responsible Education about Life" Act which seeks to fund comprehensive sex education.

Planned Parenthood’s assault on abstinence is continual. In addition to legislative efforts it also includes a special Web site for teens (www.teenwire.com) which is laden with "how to" information on everything from abortion to a video showing how to use a condom.

CMI has previously documented the media’s bias against abstinence education. By failing to note the aggressive efforts being made by Planned Parenthood and the ACLU to get rid of federal abstinence education grants, the press is aiding and abetting these two liberal organizations in their efforts.

Kristen Fyfe is senior writer at the Culture and Media Institute, a division of the Media Research Center.

________________________________________________________

Abortionist: I cancel human souls before they become babies.

Former Clinton OB-GYN makes admission in e-mail

An abortionist who claims to have destroyed more than 20,000 unborn children and who once was Hillary Clinton's OB-GYN says he is doing "God's work" when he terminates a pregnancy.

"Embryos and fetuses spontaneously aborted – most, but not all of those 'canceled' by 'God' – are ... luckless human souls," wrote William Harrison, referring to an ancient poem describing the plight of mankind. "But a few spontaneous abortions occur in desired #pregnancies with no discernable abnormalities. For those girls and women and their families whose circumstances would make their #babies 'luckless human souls,' I 'cancel' them before they become babies."

Harrison's comments came in an e-mail to Warren Throckmorton, whose work has been published by journals of the American Psychological Association, the American Mental #Health Counseling Association and the Christian Association for Psychological Studies. He documented his exchange with Harrison on his blog.

"In this e-mail exchange, Hillary Clinton's former OB-GYN and abortionist William Harrison admits that abortion kills a human soul. He euphemizes the language a bit but the effect is chilling by saying he is doing 'God's work,'" Throckmorton told WND. "I was surprised he would admit this in the context of the new South Dakota law but here he is acknowledging that abortionists cancel innocent human life."

The exchange arose recently after the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled a South Dakota law that requires #doctors to tell women seeking an abortion the procedure "will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being" can be enforced.

"The bottom line is if the state Legislature orders a professional to tell the truth, that's not a violation of the First Amendment," Throckmorton quoted South Dakota Attorney General Larry Long as saying. Long is defending the law in court.

On the other side, Sarah Stoesz, president of Planned Parenthood for Minnesota and the Dakotas, said the law is about "imposing compelled speech" on doctors.

"It is about intruding in the doctor-patient relationship," she said.

Throckmorton said there were two issues, prescribing professional speech and the accuracy of that speech. Prescribing speech is relatively common, he noted, with many states requiring some types of doctors "to provide a disclosure statement … regarding services and means of handling complaints."

The second issue, however, he wondered about.

"The South Dakota statement is very specific and no doubt is intended to discourage abortions," he said. "Pro-life advocates are united that abortion ends a life, hence their opposition to abortion. But what do pro-choice doctors believe? To get this perspective, I consulted noted abortion doctor and friend of Hillary Clinton, Dr. William Harrison."

"I e-mailed Dr. Harrison regarding the South Dakota law. … I asked him if the South Dakota statement was accurate," Throckmorton wrote.

Harrison's reply started: "Life is being terminated when a male wears a condom, or has a wet dream or 'spills his seed of life on the ground' or in someone's mouth or anus. Or when he ejaculates into the vagina of a woman who isn't ovulating or is post #menopausal. The sperm are alive until they die. And the egg is alive until it dies. Each is a unique human life, etc. … The only reason the S.Dakota leg passed that law was to either make a girl or woman who was n ot pre pared to have a baby have that #baby, or to make her suffer as much emotionally as they could."

Harrison said the legislation is "designed solely to increase human suffering."

Then Harrison forwarded to Throckmorton a letter he'd written to a newspaper editor on the issue. He specifically addressed the question of whether pro-abortion campaigners ever "lament … the loss of the unborn."

"Anyone who has delivered as many babies as I have, and has seen hundreds of living and dead embryos and fetuses being spontaneously aborted as have I, knows exactly what we are doing when we provide an elective abortion for our patient. We are ending the life of an embryo or a #fetus. Not the life of a person, but certainly a creature that might have become a person under other circumstances. When I am asked this question, I always go back to two of the most insightful and beautiful verses of the Rubaiyat of Omar Khyyam," Harrison wrote.

He then quoted the ancient poem:Oh, if the world were but to recreate

That we might catch ere closed the Book of Fate

And make the Writer on a fairer leaf

Inscribe our names, or quite obliterate.

Better, oh, better cancel from the Scroll

Of universe one luckless Human Soul,

Than drop by drop enlarge the #Flood that roars

Hoarser with Anguish as the ages roll."When Omar wrote his beautiful and treasured poem over a thousand years ago, mankind had no way of safely canceling 'from the scroll of universe one luckless human soul' whose numbers make up that flood of howling anguish; at least, no way of canceling it without risking also the life of the woman carrying it. In this day of medical marvels and, hopefully, ever increasing social justice, we possess such a way," Harrison boasted.

He continued that those who do the "cancelling" actually "are doing God's work."

Said Throckmorton, "I am still reflecting on his response but I think he and I have different ideas of what preventing a life/soul is. For him, it appears that prevention ranges from preventing conception to preventing a birth, whereas, I see the fetus as a human soul, luckless or not."

__________________________________________________________________

Barack Obama Misrepresented Supreme Court Decision on Abortion, Health.

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Barack Obama has clarified his comments from last week when he said that abortions shouldn't be allowed for very minor mental health reasons. However, Obama is drawing heavy criticism from those who say he has misrepresented the Supreme Court, which has allowed unlimited abortions. As LifeNews.com reported last week, Obama said "mental distress" wasn't sufficient to qualify abortions for the mental health exceptions abortion advocates favor. This would seem to go against the Doe v. Bolton companion case to the more famous Roe v. Wade decision. Doe made it clear abortions would be allowed even for the mo st min or so-called mental distress making a woman consider an abortion. Over the weekend, Obama clarified his comments but appeared to make his misstatement worse. "In the past there has been some fear on the part of people who, not only people who are anti-abortion, but people who may be in the middle, that means that if a woman just doesn't feel good then that is an exception. That's never been the case," Obama claimed. Ramesh Ponnuru of National Review says that, for a constitutional law professor, Obama appears to know very little about the finer points of the Supreme Court's 1973 landmark abortion decisions. "At best, he is being highly misleading," Ponnuru says. "To review: Roe said that states could prohibit late-term abortions so long as they made an exception for the health of the mother. The Supreme Court handed down Doe v. Bolton on the same day as Roe. Both opinions were written by Justice Harry Blac kmun, w ho said that they were to be 'read together,'" Ponnuru explains. Full story at: http://www.lifenews.com/nat4027.html __________________________________________________________________

by Laura Echevarria

          I learned somethng new about John McCain this week. I knew that he and his wife had an adopted daughter and that Cindy McCain had brought her home as an infant after visiting Mother Teresa in India. What I did not know was that when they brought their little girl back to care for her and save her life, they brought back another little girl as well. She was adopted by one of McCain's aides.

          The story in the Jerusalem Post reads: Also little-known is the story of McCain's youngest child. As a result of a 1991 Cindy McCain visit to Mother Teresa's orphanage in Bangladesh, the McCains adopted an infant daughter dying from a host of health iss ues. T he orphanage could not provide the medical care needed to save the little girl's life, so the McCains, already the parents of six children, brought the child home to America, and paid for desperately needed surgeries and years of rehabilitation. That child is their teenage daughter Bridget. In fact, there was a second infant girl brought back from the orphanage that the McCains saved. She ended up being adopted by one of McCain's aides, Wes Gullett, and his wife. "We were called at midnight by Cindy," Gullett has stated, and "five days later we met our new daughter Nicki at the LA airport." This fall, Nicki will be a high school junior. Even after years of expensive medical treatment for the child, Gullett says, "I never saw a hospital bill" for her care. It is an extraordinary man who commits himself to such generous and heroic acts; it is an extraordinary politician who won't utter a word about such acts for political aggrandizement.

Full story at :http://www.lifenews.com/nat4026.html____________________________________________________________________

Cincinnati, OH (LifeNews.com) -- Leading pro-life African Americans are finalizing their plans to protest abortion at the upcoming national convention of the NAACP. The black pro-life advocates say they plan to point out how the civil rights group is unwilling to discuss how abortion disproportionately affects the African-American community. As LifeNews.com reported exclusively last month, Rev. Clenard Childress, a New Jersey pastor, and a leader of the black pro-life group LEARN, says the protests will address the NAACP, abortion and Barack Obama. His group, with the help of several other pro-life organizations, will hold signs at the entrance to the Duke Energ y Cent er when the NAACP delegates gather next Monday. "Abortion kills 1,452 black infants every day in this country. Sadly, the black community and its leaders are largely ignoring the slaughter," Childress said in a new statement on Monday. Childress says that, historically, the NAACP "has failed to address the concerns of many of its delegates about abortion." He pointed to a 2004 resolution voicing support for "equal access to abortion" and urging its members to participate in a pro-abortion rally in Washington. Then, in 2007, the NAACP, for the second time in four years, blocked a proposed resolution expressing opposition to abortion. "The good news is the NAACP’s Macon chapter is once again poised to present anot her pro-life resolution at this year’s Cincinnati conference and we will be there to support them," Childress says

__________________________________________________________________

LONDON, July 3, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Doubtless in anticipation of the apparently imminent passage of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, the UK's embryo research authority has granted a license to scientists to begin work to create human/pig cloned hybrid embryos. The Labour government's proposed bill, however, would, if passed into law, do away with the necessity of researchers even asking for individual licenses.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) granted the license to the Clinical Sciences Research Institute, University of Warwick, who want to make the embryos in order to produce embryonic stem cells.

Professor Justin St. John told the Daily Telegraph: "We will take skin cells from patients who have a mutation for certain kinds of heart disease...and put them into pig eggs after their chromosomes have been removed. We will then make embryos so that we can attempt to derive embryonic stem cells which will allow us to study some of the molecular mechanisms associated with these heart diseases."

The researchers say they hope to use the cells to learn the origins and workings of certain types of heart disease and provide models for drug testing. "We will effectively be creating and studying these diseases in a dish," Professor St. John said.

The initial stages of the research will be focused on learning to create human/animal hybrid clones more efficiently.

The Christian Legal Centre responded to the announcement with a warning that this was only a "foretaste of things to come." Andrea Minichiello Williams, Director of the Christian Legal Centre, also argued that the 1990 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act does not give the HFEA the power to grant such licences.

"The HFEA has not met the 1990 Act's stringent standards for granting licences, in as much as these licences are neither 'necessary' nor 'desirable'," said Mrs Williams.

"No significant advances have been made in embryonic stem cell research, while great advances in disease treatment have been seen in research on adult stem cells and umbilical cord blood cells," she said.

"When other viable alternatives to such controversial research already exist, such as human induced pluripotent stem cells, then it cannot be claimed that such new research is either necessary or desirable."

The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) have called on supporters to contact their MPs to defeat the HFE bill, currently moving into its final stages in

Parliament.

Mrs. Williams added, "When we are talking about making human pig clones, we should lament our dulling of conscience as a society which permits such embryos to exist. This underscores the deplorable state of bioethics in which the UK now finds itself."

__________________________________________________________________

Refuses request to be neutral in culture war

McDonald's has refused a request to remain neutral in the culture war, choosing to continue support of the homosexual agenda. AFA wrote McDonald's asking the company do two things:

Remove McDonald's name and logo from the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (NGLCC) Web site listing McDonald's as a "Corporate Partner and Organization Ally" of NGLCC.

Remove the endorsement of NGLCC by Richard Ellis, Vice President of Communications for McDonald's USA, from the NGLCC Web site.

McDonald's refused both requests. McDonald's donated $20,000 to NGLCC in exchange for membership in the NGLCC and a seat on the group's board of directors. The NGLCC lobbies Congress on a wide range of issues including the promotion of homosexual marriage.

This boycott is not about hiring homosexuals, or homosexuals eating at McDonald's, or how homosexual employees are treated. It is about McDonald's, as a corporation, choosing to put the full weight of their corporation behind promoting the homosexual agenda, including homosexual marriage.

Pat Harris, Global Chief Diversity Officer, Vice President, Inclusion & Diversity at McDonald's, responded: "I would like to take this opportunity to reaffirm our position on diversity." Notice that Ms. Harris said "reaffirm." Translated: McDonald's will not change their policy of supporting the NGLCC and their promotion of homosexual marriage.

Richard Ellis, who is openly homosexual, was given a seat on the NGLCC Board of Directors. He was quoted as saying: "I'm thrilled to join the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce and ready to go to work. I share the NGLCC's passion for business growth and development within the LGBT community, and I look forward to playing a role in moving these important initiatives forward."

Addressing McDonald's promotion of social issues, McDonald's CEO Jim Skinner said earlier the company will aggressively promote the issues they approve. In remarks on its Web site, Skinner said: "Being a socially responsible organization is a fundamental part of who we are. We have an obligation to use our size and resources to make a difference in the world ... and we do."