Tuesday, August 30, 2011  --  New research confirms Planned Parenthood's racist agenda

Life Dynamics has done new research regarding the location of Planned Parenthood facilities.  This research clearly reveals the intensity with which Planned Parenthood targets minority communities. The report uses population data by zip code to show that Planned Parenthood has purposefully placed abortion centers in urban areas with high percentages of black and Hispanic residents.

Initially, abortion advocates tried to discount this evidence by suggesting the selection of locations was based on client need.  It is ironic that a recent report from the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute provides data to refute such an argument.  

This Guttmacher study reveals that birth control and contraception are not reducing abortions and unplanned pregnancies.  In fact, the rate of unplanned pregnancies in lower income minority areas, where most Planned Parenthood facilities are located, has increased substantially from 1994 to 2006, while it has declined among higher income groups.

The Guttmacher results mean that if Planned Parenthood claims their locations are based on client need, they need to accept that their programs are failing to reduce unwanted pregnancies and abortions in those communities.  If they cannot make that claim about selection of facility locations, then the Life Dynamics evidence demonstrates that they must be targeting areas based on racial composition. 

Friday, August 26, 2011  --  Psychological implications of "selective reduction" abortions

An article in the New York Times about in vitro fertilization (IVF) pregnancies and the common use of "selective reduction" abortions has generated much commentary from the Pro-Life community, especially in response to the mother who reflected on the impersonal nature of IVF and how that condition allowed her to accept "selective reduction" as just another technical step in the IVF process of producing children.

A study highlighted by the Elliot Institute suggests the mother quoted by the New York Times is far from typical in her unconcerned reaction to the random killing of "extra fetuses" when IVF leads to twins, triplets, or even more babies implanting in the womb.

Can you imagine the impact when the aftermath of selective reduction is the failure of the entire pregnancy?  Little is yet known about the impact on the relationship of the parents with the surviving children, or on the surviving children themselves in light of their lost siblings.  Some evidence suggests that overall outcomes after selective reduction are no better than outcomes without it. 

It is also clear that the push for use of selective reduction never considered what the parents faced with these circumstances would actually want.  The potential for a coercive effect on the parents when faced with medical recommendations for selective reduction becomes significant, making the potential negative psychological effects that much greater.

Thursday, August 25, 2011  --  Revisiting a past abortion -- what it implies

Abortion advocates are constantly trying to promote the "benefits" of abortion.  When post-abortive women express concerns about the impact of abortion on their lives, abortion advocates try to redirect attention to some "benefit" the problematic abortion provided.

One recent example was reported by Pro-Life Action League.   A "mommy blog" contained a confession from a woman that her abortion 10 years ago was "affecting my ability to bond with the baby who is here."   Even so, this mother observed, "I know it was the right thing to do.  I have since finished college and graduate school.  I have a great career and married a man with a great career, and we have plenty of money, a beautiful home, and now have a daughter who is 2 months old."

Most of the blog responses reinforced the mother's thinking that she is better off because of her improved circumstances that would likely not have occurred if she had given life to her first baby.  What are they really saying?

They are suggesting that it is perfectly acceptable to sacrifice a human being to achieve material benefits.  This rejection of the value of human life and resulting utilitarian view of human life are not only dangerous, but will never lead to resolution of this mother's underlying concerns. 

Sacrificing a child in the womb because it is inconvenient cannot be resolved as justified no matter how much it improves the future lives of those who sacrifice the child.  Even though it may be buried deep, conscience will recognize the injustice of this "solution" and remain unsettled until true post-abortion healing is sought and achieved, including fully acknowledging the value of the child who was aborted.

Wednesday, August 24, 2011  --  Clinic workers are the abortion industry's weak link

Yesterday, Abby Johnson appeared on a teleconference sponsored by 40 Days for Life where the focus was the abortion industry's weak link.  David Bereit announced that two other abortion facility directors have followed Abby Johnson's lead, leaving the abortion industry and becoming active in Pro-Life efforts. 

Most recently Ramona Trevino, manager at the Planned Parenthood facility in Sherman, Texas, resigned from her position after the first ever 40 Days for Life was held there this spring.  She says she went from believing she was providing a service to women in need, to realizing that Planned Parenthood “treated women like cattle and how they only cared about making money.”

Abby Johnson observed how important it is to reach out to clinic workers, many of whom are conflicted or uncertain about their jobs and looking for a way out of the abortion industry.  She recommends letting them know you are praying for them and can offer them help.  Never consider clinic workers as the enemy.  Use available resources to give them hope, such as Abby Johnson's book unPlanned and the new DVD that provides a video about Abby's experience.

Monday, August 22, 2011  --  IRLC has new radio spots on WIND 560 AM streaming

As of today, IRLC has the following new radio messages running on WIND 560 AM via streaming on your computer (with plans to play them over WIND 560 AM radio soon):

Food and water are never medical treatment

Statistics don’t add up at Planned Parenthood

Forcing a teen into abortion is against the law

IRLC Pro-Life Weekend at Pumpkin Fest 2011

Friday, August 19, 2011  --  "No legal right to a contract with the government"

Yesterday, Sangamon County Circuit Court Judge John Schmidt ruled that the state of Illinois can terminate a contractual arrangement with Catholic Charities for providing foster care and adoption services.  Judge Schmidt wrote, “No citizen has a recognized legal right to a contract with the government.” 

Catholic Charities raised the issue of religious discrimination, but the judge did not address that issue.  I certainly do not agree with the result of this ruling, and think that religious discrimination is the issue that needs to be considered.   However, the logic applied in the case has great significance in Planned Parenthood's attempts to maintain government funding in numerous states.

Planned Parenthood claims that denying them government funding is a violation of their free speech rights, but who ever said the govenment needed to fund your free speech?   I would hope that judges in Indiana, Kansas, North Carolina, and elsewhere recognize immediately that “No citizen has a recognized legal right to a contract with the government” and rule against these attempts by Planned Parenthood to obtain government funding through judicial fiat.

Thursday, August 18, 2011  --  Research finds embryonic stem cells problematic

As the push for research using embryonic stem cells continues with more embryonic stem cells lines approved by the National Institute of Health, another reality check gets provided by research done at UCLA.  Family Research Council (FRC) reports:

Scientists at UCLA have found that cells derived from pluripotent stem cells are developmentally very immature, and do not resemble the adult cell types that they would theoretically replace in a transplant. The immaturity was seen in cell derivatives from both embryonic stem cells and induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells.  The data indicate that pluripotent stem cells such as embryonic stem cells are inappropriate substitutes for adult stem cells in patient treatments.

Ironically, the original intent of the UCLA study was to compare embyonic stem cells with induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells.  Since iPS cells do not require the killing of human embryos, confirming they are equivalent to embryonic stem cells was of significant interest.  The UCLA study did confirm that iPS cells are truly equivalent to embryonic stem cells.

However, when the embryonic and iPS cells were compared to normal human tissue cells, there were significant differences that revealed the cells derived from embryonic stem cells were developmentally very immature.  Dr. William Lowry noted that these cells "may present a challenge for transplantation, because the cells you end up with are not something that’s indicative of a cell you’d find in an adult or even in a newborn baby."  In fact, these cells were most similar to cells less than six weeks after conception, in the earliest stages of human development.

David Prentice of FRC noted, "Other groups have previously documented similar results, that embryonic stem cells produce immature cells, and that embryonic stem cell derivatives are inappropriate for use in transplants."  Given these findings, what is scientific about continued pursuit of embryonic stem cells when the evidence confirms that medical advances need to rely on adult stem cells to help human patients?

Wednesday, August 17, 2011  --  Survey shows parents can't trust doctors with their kids

Do you think a doctor should provide contraceptives to your teenage daughter without notifying you?  A study conducted earlier this year by researchers at Columbia University and the University of Chicago reveals that 94% of the ob/gyns surveyed would provide contraceptives to a minor without notifying her parents.

These alarming results are based on a survey of 1,800 ob/gyns, with a 66% response rate.  The study was published in the journal Contraception in January 2011.  Doctors were presented with a hypothetical case of a 17-year-old college freshman who asks them for contraceptive pills but does not want her parents to know.

After choosing to keep parents in the dark, would the doctors give solid advice to the teenage girl? Only 47% said they would encourage her to inform a parent, and only 54% would encourage her to remain abstinent until she is older.  Parents beware!

Tuesday, August 16, 2011  --  IRLC is back on WIND 560 AM (streaming)

This week IRLC begins a new radio campaign with messages on WIND 560 AM.   Initially, the messages will only appear when streaming to WIND over the Internet.   Very shortly, we will have some important new informational messages ready and begin placing these spots on regular radio as well as streaming.  Listen in to check out our radio messages.

Monday, August 15, 2011  --  Richard O'Connor -- rest in peace

Today I learned that former IRLC executive director Richard O'Connor died on August 12th.  He will certainly be missed by the Pro-Life movement in Illinois.  He served as IRLC executive director for 20 years, longer than any other person.  I remember contacting Richard many times for help or information on Pro-Life issues and activities over the years.

Even in retirement Richard took time to write many letters to the editor on Pro-Life topics that often were printed in the local paper in Pearl City, Illinois (near Rockford) where he resided with his wife after he retired from IRLC.  May he rest in peace.

Friday, August 12, 2011  --  ObamaCare mandate declared unconstitutional

With 26 states joining the same lawsuit against ObamaCare, and given the original ruling by Judge Roger Vinson that the entire law is unconstitutional, the appeals court ruling was widely anticipated. That ruling from a three judge panel of the U.S. Appeals Court in Atlanta, Georgia was issued today.

The appeals court ruled that ObamaCare’s individual mandate to purchase health insurance is unconstitutional, calling it “an unprecedented exercise of congressional power.”  Since some earlier rulings reached a different conclusion and other rulings are still pending, there is still a long road ahead, but it most certainly leads to the Supreme Court.  There is some speculation that the Supreme Court could take the case and rule on it prior to the 2012 election.

Thursday, August 11, 2011  --  Actions speak louder than words!

I submitted comments to Crain's Chicago Business in response to their August 8th article "The women keeping threats to Planned Parenthood at bay."  Here is my response:

In Crain's August 8th article "The women keeping threats to Planned Parenthood at bay," Helen Zell is quoted as saying, "Government shouldn't be in the bedroom—or in the womb. It's just not relevant."  Using her own money to support Planned Parenthood is consistent with her statement.  However, Zell's support for government funding of birth control, sex education, and abortion contradicts her statement.  How can you keep government out of the bedroom when they are funding all aspects of what occurs in the bedroom?

Laura Tucker is quoted as saying she helps "elect individuals who respect the focus or the mission of Planned Parenthood."  What exactly is the mission of Planned Parenthood?  They market the idea that their birth control and sex education services reduce unwanted pregnancy and abortion.  If this is their mission, they seem to be extremely unsuccessful in achieving it.  Planned Parenthood continues to sell more abortions virtually every year.  Within the abortion industry, they have moved from 6% of annual abortions 25 years ago to 27.6% of abortions today.  Planned Parenthood's last report on services performed documents 332,278 abortions in 2009.   Actions speak louder than words!

Wednesday, August 10, 2011  --  61% of abortions obtained by women with children?

Pro-Life Action League has recently observed that abortion advocates appear to be trying out a new sales pitch by claiming that "women need abortion to be better mothers."  Of course, such a claim is detestable.  I decided to check how many mothers with children are having abortions. 

The only statistic that I could find is one from 2008 offered by the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute.  That statistic was obtained from a survey given over 13 months at 95 abortion facilities to 12,866 abortion patients with 9,493 surveys completed for a 74% response rate. 

The Guttmacher report on this survey indicates that 61% of women getting abortions already have children.  That percentage of mothers with other children getting abortions just seems too high to me.  Maybe the non-responders were more concerned about their privacy and tended to be younger and without children.  Maybe the 95 locations selected were not representative of other areas around the nation.

Regardless of the accuracy of the 61% statistic, the concept that mothers need abortions to take care of their other children is a horrible premise.  What is left of human rights when one child is killed  for the "benefit" of other children?  Studies indicate that surviving children are negatively impacted by abortion because they recognize it could have been them.  Abortion is certainly not a good solution, regardless of negative family circumstances.

Monday, August 8, 2011  --  Illinois Pro-Life bill signed into law -- first since 2005

Even though it is a very small step, a Pro-Life bill has become law in Illinois for the first time since 2005.  On August 4th, Governor Quinn signed HB 2093 into law.   Since the bill passed the Illinois legislature by unanimous votes in both House and Senate, Quinn did not really have much to stand on if he would have chosen to veto it.

HB 2093 extends the list of persons required to report child abuse or neglect to include "any physician, physician's assistant, registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, medical technician, certified nursing assistant, social worker, or licensed professional counselor of any office, clinic, or any other physical location that provides abortions, abortion referrals, or contraceptives."  The law goes into effect on January 1, 2012.

Given the poor track record of abortion facilities complying with regulations and laws, it remains to be seen if this law will have any impact in really protecting young girls who are victims of statutory rape, but it is certainly better to have the law on the books.

The 2005 Pro-Life law that was passed in Illinois was the Born Alive Infant Protection Act intended to ban the practice of live birth abortion.  Jill Stanek fought for years to get this bill passed after her encounter with the practice at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn where she ultimately lost her nursing job because of taking a stand.

Friday, August 5, 2011  --  Is "brain death" a reliable means to establish death?

I have often questioned the reliability of "brain death" as a means to accurately ascertain death.  When numerous cases get reported (scroll to "Recovery After Brain Death" here) where patients who were declared "brain dead" actually recover, how can it be possible to accept "brain death" as accurate?

Since brain death is accepted by a large majority of the medical profession and recognized by law, how is it possible that these situations are occurring?  If we assume that brain death is real death, then could there be issues about the accuracy of methods used to confirm that brain death has truly occurred?   continue reading

Thursday, August 4, 2011  --  Attempts to hide the truth confront the First Amendment

The culture of death never seems to run out of ideas on ways to hide the truth about what they are supporting.  After losing a court decision in a case where a truck with pictures of abortion was stopped by police near a school, California passed a “school safety” establishing a misdemeanor crime for “creating a disturbance on or next to an elementary or middle school campus where the action threatens the physical safety of students.” 

This law is clearly intended to provide a means to prevent "truth trucks" from passing near schools, but the law is being taken to court as another violation of the First Amendment.  It seems that the advocates of "choice" are very consistent at proving they are against choice.

Now San Francisco, under the influence of NARAL, is considering an ordinance aimed at pregnancy care centers, similar to those already enjoined as violations of the First Amendment in three other locations.  However, San Francisco wants to go ever further and control the Internet so that searches on abortion would never display any Pro-Life results, especially no pregnancy care centers.  Steven Ertelt of LifeNews.com observes:

The person searching might want to explore local laws or public discussions about abortion, prominent abortion providers or pro-life leaders in the Bay Area, the history of clashes between Operation Rescue and B.A.C.A.O.R., or even facts about abortion itself.

The term “abortion” should produce websites from both pro-life and pro-abortion viewpoints. That’s what free speech means.

Yet San Francisco and NARAL want to define it as “deceptive” and punishable if pro-life sources turn up in a search for “abortion.” This is no different than banning all pro-life books from the library if they mention abortion. In such a “liberal” mindset, only one side can talk freely about abortion; the rest get fined.

Wednesday, August 3, 2011  --  Can adoption of frozen embryos be an ethical solution?

There are many ethical problems created by in vitro fertilization.   One of those problems is the excess embryos that are often frozen for potential later use.  Some see adoption of these embryos as the solution, and organizations have even been formed to encourage and facilitate this approach.

Is adoption of embryos to then be implanted in the adopting mother really a solution?  Msgr. Ignacio Barreiro Carámbula, Interim President of Human Life Int'l, does not find embryo adoption to be a viable solution.  He states:

From a rational perspective it should be clear that embryo adoption is unnatural.  It should be evident that God has given a womb to woman to receive and gestate her own children and not other embryos.  There is a quantitative leap in the involvement of woman in the adoption of an already born child and adoption in the womb that leads to qualitative change in the involvement.

He continues by pointing out that, "It constitutes a modification of the (marriage) covenant because it infringes the mutual and exclusive right of the spouses to become a mother and father only through each other." 

Thus, for multiple reasons, embryo adoption cannot be viewed as a resolution for frozen embryos.  The only ethical solution is to stop creating excess embryos, which ultimately means that in vitro fertilization itself must be abandoned.

Tuesday, August 2, 2011  --  Agenda-driven court ruling denies the facts

The evidence that ObamaCare will fund abortion is overwhelming, but this fact is still denied by those who want to distort reality to confuse the voting public.   Claims by politicians are one thing, but now U.S. District Judge Timothy Black has declared that a defamation lawsuit can proceed because "the health care law will not result in taxpayer funding of abortions."

Such a distortion of reality by a judge could be very serious if this case is not ultimately ruled in favor of the Susan B. Anthony List.  Former Congressman Steve Driehaus brought the defamation charge against the organzation after it produced messages stating that Driehaus voted for the health care bill that would fund abortion.

Pray that this case gets a fair hearing and a ruling based on the facts, not the distorted reality of a judge appointed by President Obama.  Otherwise, any politician who wants to deceive the public about their view on abortion will be motivated to file a lawsuit against anyone who tries to let the public know what their real position is.

Monday, August 1, 2011  --  Is pregnancy a disease that needs prevention?

The Federal govenment has determined that pregnancy is a disease that needs mandated prevention measures covered fully by all health insurance plans!  And you thought children were a gift from God?  Not so, according to regulations just adopted by the Department of Health and Human Services to take effect for new health plan years beginning on or after August 1, 2012.  Preventive health care is now defined to include all forms of birth control, including the so-called morning-after pills Plan B and Ella.

Our government has declared a war on babies, funded by our own insurance premiums and facilitated by government programs.  Government policy wants everyone to have sex often and always, but babies are not wanted.  They have not explained how this policy will help keep Social Security and Medicare funded.  Maybe they have not thought through the future implications.

No, they have a plan for solving that problem, too.  Under the cover of palliative care, they plan to dispatch seniors by providing lots of morphine and denying food and water at the onset of anything serious.  That way they can reduce spending by Social Security and Medicare.