Pro-Life Page

by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 6/23/14 

Leading pro-life activist Gary Bauer, the former presidential candidate who is now the head of the group American Values, says President Barack Obama will have a terrifying legacy once he leaves office: more babies aborted than jobs created.

“This ought to be the epitaph of this administration: In the last five years under this president more babies have been aborted than jobs have been created,” Bauer said on Friday at the Faith and Freedom Coalition’s Road to Majority conference in Washington, D.C.

“Now that is a good summary of this president,” said Bauer, who is president of the nonprofit American Values. “Few things make Barack Obama more passionate than abortion on demand.”

LifeNews chronicled the laundry list of pro-abortion actions Obama took during his first term. Below isa video from CNS News of Bauer’s comments:

CNS News spotlighted the comments from Bauer today and provided more analysis on them.

About 1.2 million babies were aborted surgically in the United States in 2008 (or about 100,000 per month), according to the Guttmacher Institute. If that number has stayed generally constant, then over the last five and a half years of the Obama administration, about 6.6 million babies have been aborted.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics seasonally-adjusted employment numbers, there were 142,152,000 million people employed in January 2009, when Obama was inaugurated. In May 2014, the latest month on record, there were 145,814,000 people employed–an increase of 3,662,000 million.

“That’s how radical this guy is on abortion,” Obama said. “And, by the way, he totally ignores the fact that it’s black babies disproportionally that never get to take the first breath of freedom in this country,” said Bauer.

“And it’s black women that are being exploited by abortion-on-demand as Planned Parenthood intentionally locates abortion clinics in inner cities all over America,” he said.  “The president of the United States ought to be ashamed of himself for being part of this and what it does for black communities.”

by Josh Brahm | Dublin, Ireland | LifeNews.com | 6/20/14 

A foundation in Ireland is helping to provide life-affirming options to parents of children born with severe disabilities.

The mission of The Jack and Jill Children’s Foundation is to provide direct funding to families of children with brain damage up to the age of 4 who suffer severe intellectual and physical developmental delay, enabling them to purchase home respite care. They also provide end of life care to all children up to the age of 4 years.

The foundation’s website says, “These are children who as a result of their condition require intensive home nursing care. The Foundation gives these families the gift of time, time to do the things that we so often take for granted like shopping, taking their other children to the park, a night’s sleep, etc.”

The ministry was a huge help to Tom and Mandy Dunne. When Mandy was 20-weeks pregnant with her daughter Muireann, she learned through an antenatal scan that Muireann had Patau’s syndrome, a condition “incompatible with life.” Patau’s syndrome is a chromosomal abnormality that prevented Muireann’s brain from developing properly. Tom and Mandy were informed that if Muireann survived the rest of the pregnancy, she probably wouldn’t survive the birth.

“Our lives fell apart,” Tom and Mandy told the Irish Times. “When at 20 weeks you are told about this, you have 20 weeks to get in your mind what you want.”

Abortion was never an option to Tom and Mandy. “It would never have been an option for me. We were going to be grateful for whatever time we had with her. When her time was up, it was to be on her terms and not ours.”

When Muireann was born her parents were told that she probably only had minutes to live, but then she surprised everyone by starting to cry. Her skin went from grey to pink. Eventually bringing the child home was becoming a possibility, but that caused Tom and Mandy to panic. They never thought this could happen, so they hadn’t prepared their house for that.

Then they got a very helpful visit from Joanna Doyle from The Jack and Jill Foundation. “When you are coming home with a really sick child and you feel like you are on your own, you don’t know how things are going to work out,” said Mandy. “After talking to Joanne, it really made us more comfortable about going home.”

The Jack and Jill Foundation helped Tom and Mandy to have the right attitude about what they were doing. “We looked on it as if we were bringing her home to live, not die,” said Mandy.

After six-weeks of love and caring, Muireann passed away at her home. The nurses that the Jack and Jill Foundation provided helped Tom and Mandy through that process, as well as with aftercare support.

Tom and Mandy’s story reminds me of one of my favorite YouTube videos, “Choosing Thomas.” Parents T.K. and Deidrea Lauxs allowed The Dallas Morning News to film their journey with their son Thomas who was born with Trisomy 13 and died five days later at home.

At the end of this moving video, Deidrea explains why they did not abort Thomas. “We didn’t not terminate because we were hanging onto some sort of hope that there was a medical mistake or that there was going to be some sort of medical miracle. We didn’t terminate because he’s our son.”

To learn more about The Jack and Jill Foundation, visit their website at JackAndJill.ie.

To learn more about perinatal hospice and palliative care in America, visit PerinatalHospice.org. It is really important to know what options are available because you may know somebody who would benefit from that information one day if they get tragic news about their unborn baby.

An attorney involved in a Supreme Court case that will determine to what extent privately owned businesses can opt-out of providing certain types of birth control for religious reasons believes there are "'high stakes" involved in the outcome.

Matt Bowman, senior counsel with the Alliance Defending Freedom, has served as an attorney for Conestoga Woods Specialties, who alongside Hobby Lobby, have sued the federal government to be exempt from the Health and Human Services' "preventive services mandate" that requires businesses to cover birth control that can lead to the early termination of a pregnancy.

"The stakes are very high in the Conestoga and Hobby Lobby case," explained Bowman regarding the First Amendment implications in the lawsuit. "It involves fundamental issues of whether or not religious freedom belongs to every American, and whether the government can redefine freedom to force citizens to buy abortion pills for other people."

Bowman also told The Christian Post he believes that family-owned businesses, like Hobby Lobby, should not have the government "deprive them of the religious freedom that all Americans possess by imposing crippling fines on them unless they violate their consciences."

"All Americans, including family business owners, must be free to live and work according to their beliefs without threat of government punishment," said Bowman.

Since the HHS announced their new rules regarding contraceptive services that businesses must provide in their health care plans, numerous lawsuits have been filed against the federal government.

Hobby Lobby and Conestoga both had their appeals reach the Circuit Court level. Hobby Lobby won their case before Tenth Circuit, while Conestoga lost theirs before the Third Circuit. The Supreme Court combined the two cases and heard oral arguments in late March.

In a statement made to the press on the day of oral arguments, Barbara Green, a member of the family that owns Hobby Lobby, said she felt "encouraged" by the direction of the arguments.

"We were encouraged by today's argument. We are thankful that the Supreme Court took our case and we prayerfully await the Justices' decision," said Green, whose family-owned business already provides coverage for 16 of the 20 different types of contraceptives in the mandate – just not the four drugs and devices that can cause the early termination of a pregnancy: two types of IUDs and for Plan B and EllaOne, the morning-after and week-after pills, respectively.

Critics of Hobby Lobby and Conestoga have argued that if the two companies win their case before the Supreme Court it will have dangerous ramifications both regarding religious freedom and women's health.

Julia Mirabella and Sandhya Bathija of the Center for American Progress argued that Hobby Lobby succeeding harms employees' religious freedom.

"If the Supreme Court were to side with Hobby Lobby, it would be another piece of pro-corporate precedent from an increasingly pro-business court. Such a decision would also impact how we define religious liberty in America," wrote Mirabella and Bathija.

"Will corporations soon be permitted to override the religious-freedom rights of their employees? What other types of exemptions will these corporations have? Will these companies be free to disregard all civil rights laws barring discrimination?"

A decision by the Supreme Court on the two appeals regarding the HHS preventive services mandate is expected by the end of the month.

By Kristan Hawkins | Austin, TX | LifeNews.com | 6/18/14 

Anyone who remembers pro-life activity last summer will recall the battle of getting HB 2 passed successfully and signed into law – Wendy Davis, pink sneakers, Planned Parenthood buses, protests in Austin, filibusters, and ultimately victory.

Students for Life rallied with many of our pro-life friends in Austin in support of HB 2 that would force abortion facilities to provide the same standard of care and meet the same requirements of ambulatory surgical centers as well to make sure that all abortionists have hospital admitting privileges within 30 miles of their abortion facilities. It also thankfully banned late-term abortions.

While abortion advocates were in an uproar over this bill that would provide higher standards for women’s health, pro-life advocates were fighting to make this bill law and succeeded. Governor Rick Perry signed the bill into law and several abortion facilities shut down almost immediately because they couldn’t meet the basic health standards.

Dr. Douglas Karpen, an abortionist in Houston, Texas,  has been referred to as the Kermit Gosnell of Texas because of similar horrific practices of aborting very late-term babies, killing babies after botched abortions, and causing significant harm, and death, to women.

According to the Texas Medical Board, Dr. Karpen has no admitting privileges to any hospitals within a 30 mile radius of any of his facilities. Because of this law, the Gosnell of Texas, Douglas Karpen has been shut down and cannot legally perform abortions.

It’s a good thing too because this abortionist deserves every comparison to Kermit Gosnell and women and their unborn children would be in grave danger if they ever set foot in one of his abortion facilities.

Last year, brave employees of Dr. Karpen went public and revealed the heinous practices of the abortionist, including delivering live babies and then killing them. Unfortunately, in December a Texas grand jury said it didn’t have enough evidence to convict him. However, theWashington Examiner points out that he still faces another lawsuit from a “woman who suffered a life-threatening injury to her uterus following an abortion he performed.” And in a scene from a horror movie, it was reported that “waste” from one of Karpen’s facility leaked into a neighboring car dealership where a woman said she saw human body parts and “little legs.”

Shutting down Karpen and others like him cannot happen soon enough. Abortion advocates should rejoice that Karpen is not allowed to perform abortions because he is a danger to women, the very women seemingly pro-choice advocates dare to say they want to protect.

Since the law was passed, 19 facilities in Texas have closed down because they couldn’t meet the health standards and many more are expected to follow. Other states should follow Texas’ lead and stand up to protect women and their unborn babies, demand abortion facilities adhere to high medical standards and put other Karpen’s and Gosnell’s out of business for good.

By Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 6/17/14 

The Supreme Court decision in the monumental Hobby Lobby case against the abortion mandate in Obamacare is expected either this week or next.

The Obama administration is attempting to make Hobby Lobby and thousands of pro-life businesses and organizations comply with the HHS mandate that compels religious companies to pay for birth control and abortion-causing drugs for their employees. However, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to take up Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., a landmark case addressing the Constitutionally guaranteed rights of business owners to operate their family companies without violating their deeply held religious convictions.

Kristina Arriaga, Executive Director of the Becket Fund, the pro-life legal group heading up the lawsuit against the mandate for Hobby Lobby, talked about what to expect.

“We are expecting the Hobby Lobby decision any day now,” she said in an email to LifeNews. “In fact, we have been holding our collective breath for the last several weeks as the Supreme Court issues its Monday opinions.”

“As of today, according to several longtime observers of the Court, the expectation is that additional days will be added to the opinion calendar. We suspect that Monday, June 23, will be followed by several other days of announcements; and then, we will hear later that same week. Until then, we wait,” she added.

Arriaga says the decision is a long time coming.

“I think it is inherently unjust that the government has forced the Green family, the devout owners of Hobby Lobby, to face a two-year battle in court,” she explained. “As you know, the Greens grew their family business out of their garage. They now own stores in 41 states employing more than 16,000 full time employees. They have always operated their business according to their faith. In fact, the Greens pay salaries that start at twice the minimum wage and offer excellent benefits, as well as a healthcare package which includes almost all of the contraceptives now mandated by the Affordable Care Act. Their only objection is to 4 drugs and devices which, the government itself concedes, can terminate an embryo.”

“Their rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act should be protected by the government. Instead, the government has threatened them with fines and fought them all the way to the Supreme Court,” Arriaga added.

“The government has already exempted tens of millions of Americans from complying with the mandate that forces employers to provide certain specific drugs and devices. However, it refuses to accommodate the Green family because the Green family’s objections are religious.  We believe that the government’s position is not only extreme and unconstitutional; it presents a grave danger to our freedoms,” she continued.

The Obama administration says it is confident it will prevail, saying, “We believe this requirement is lawful…and are confident the Supreme Court will agree.”

“My family and I are encouraged that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to decide our case,” said Mr. Green, Hobby Lobby’s founder and CEO.  “This legal challenge has always remained about one thing and one thing only: the right of our family businesses to live out our sincere and deeply held religious convictions as guaranteed by the law and the Constitution. Business owners should not have to choose between violating their faith and violating the law.”

The Supreme Court is also taking the case of the Mennonite cabinet makers forced to pay for birth control and abortion-causing drugs.

In July, a federal court granted Hobby Lobby a preliminary injunction against the HHS abortion-drug mandate. The injunction prevented the Obama administration from enforcing the mandate against the Christian company, but the Obama administration appealed that ruling recently. The government’s appeal makes it highly likely that the Supreme Court will decide the issue in the upcoming term.

After the appeals court ruling, U.S. District Judge Joe Heaton issued a preliminary injunction and stayed the case until Oct. 1 to give the Obama administration time to appeal the decision.

In an opinion read from the bench, the court said, “There is a substantial public interest in ensuring that no individual or corporation has their legs cut out from under them while these difficult issues are resolved.”

Duncan says there are now 63 separate lawsuits challenging the HHS mandate. The Becket Fund led the charge against the unconstitutional HHS mandate. The Becket Fund currently represents: Hobby Lobby, Wheaton College, East Texas Baptist University, Houston Baptist University, Colorado Christian University, the Eternal Word Television Network, Ave Maria University, and Belmont Abbey College.

Hobby Lobby could have paid as much as $1.3 million each day in fines for refusing to pay for birth control or abortion-causing drugs under the mandate.

A December 2013 Rasmussen Reports poll shows Americans disagree with forcing companies like Hobby Lobby to obey the mandate.

“Half of voters now oppose a government requirement that employers provide health insurance with free contraceptives for their female employees,” Rasmussen reports.

The poll found: “The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 38% of Likely U.S. Voters still believe businesses should be required by law to provide health insurance that covers all government-approved contraceptives for women without co-payments or other charges to the patient.

Fifty-one percent (51%) disagree and say employers should not be required to provide health insurance with this type of coverage. Eleven percent (11%) are not sure.”

Another recent poll found 59 percent of Americans disagree with the mandate.

by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 6/16/14 10:27 AM

The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of a pro-life women’s group in a case regarding whether it has a First Amendment right to expose the pro-abortion records of political candidates.

The Susan B. Anthony List is petitioning the high court to allow their First Amendment challenge to Ohio’s “false statement” law to proceed on the grounds that the statute empowers a state agency to determine what constitutes true or false political speech.

In 2010, SBA List attempted to erect billboards to expose then Rep. Steve Driehaus for supporting taxpayer funded abortion by voting for the Affordable Care Act. SBA List was prevented from doing so because of the Ohio law, and was threatened with prosecution if it engaged in similar speech about Driehaus or other candidates in Ohio.

Today, the Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, ruled the pro-life group has standing to continue its First Amendment challenge to Ohio’s “false statement” law.

“Today’s decision by the court is a step toward victory for the freedom of speech and the broad coalition of groups who have supported SBA List throughout this case. The truth or falsity of political speech should be judged by voters, not government bureaucrats,” said SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser, in an email to LifeNews.

“It is beyond dispute that Obamacare contains multiple abortion-funding provisions,” continued Dannenfelser. “This reality will continue to be an issue in the midterm elections and future election cycles. As a result of the Supreme Court’s decision, SBA List is now one step closerin its quest to unleash the First Amendment from the constraints imposed by Ohio’s unconstitutional false speech statute. We are optimistic that the district court will rule quickly and will side with the First Amendment, so that we may proceed in Ohio – without fear of prosecution – with our ongoing efforts to inform voters that their elected representatives voted for taxpayer funded abortion.”

Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel David Cortman told LifeNews, after the decision: “The First Amendment forbids government from acting as a ‘truth commission’ on matters of public debate. The U.S. Supreme Court has rightfully upheld the freedom of Americans to speak in accordance with their views by allowing them to challenge laws that silence them. The Susan B. Anthony List’s warnings about abortion funding in Obamacare were objectively true. If that fact was part of what cost this congressman his job, that’s because his constituents, like most Americans, reject taxpayer-funded abortion.”

During the 2010 midterm elections, the Susan B. Anthony List helped defeat 15 out of 20 of the Democrats who failed to hold firm on their pro-life principles during the vote on the Affordable Care Act.

Since 2009 the SBA List, as well as Members of Congress like Reps. John Boehner (R-OH), Chris Smith (R-NJ), and Dan Lipinski (D-IL), along with other pro-life groups, and the United State Conference of Catholic Bishops, have argued that the Affordable Care Act permits taxpayer funding of abortion.

In 2010, then House Republican Leader John Boehner said, “The need for an Executive Order is evidence that this is true, and Congressional Democrats know it. Make no mistake, a ‘yes’ vote on the Democrats’ health care bill is a vote for taxpayer-funded abortions.”

In 2010, Cardinal Francis George, President of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB),said, “The statute appropriates billions of dollars in new funding without explicitly prohibiting the use of these funds for abortion, and it provides federal subsidies for health plans covering elective abortions… Stranger still, the statute forces all those who choose federally subsidized plans that cover abortion to pay for other peoples’ abortions with their own funds. If this new law is intended to prevent people from being complicit in the abortions of others, it is at war with itself.”

by Alliance Defending Freedom | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 6/13/14 

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys representing a Connecticut pro-life family filed a motion for preliminary injunction in federal court Thursday seeking to prevent Obamacare abortion surcharges and fines from being enforced against the family. In May, the family filed a lawsuit against the Obama administration because their current health plan will be cancelled in November, forcing them into the state’s health insurance exchange where every plan requires them to directly pay for other people’s abortions. If the Bracys do not comply, they will be subject to crippling fines.

Federal law forbids taxpayer subsidies for elective abortions. However, the Affordable Care Act requires that every plan that includes abortion offered on any Obamacare exchange must collect a separate fee used exclusively to pay for abortions. This abortion surcharge is not listed in the premium but is instead added in to the total premium. The Connecticut state health exchange only offers plans that include abortion coverage, and thus every plan on the exchange requires this abortion surcharge. Consequently, the Bracy family has two options: violate their conscience and faith by personally subsidizing the abortions of others or be penalized with steep fines.

People seeking coverage on the exchanges in Hawaii, Illinois New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wyoming may face the same dilemma.

“With Obamacare, if you like your current plan, you can’t always keep it, and you may be forced to pay for other people’s abortions in your new plan,” said ADF Senior Counsel Casey Mattox. “Neither the Constitution nor federal and state law allow for this type of government coercion. The Obama administration may not value constitutionally protected freedoms, but both federal and state law do. We are asking the court to stop Obamacare from violating this family’s rights.”

“No one should be forced to pay for other people’s abortions,” added ADF Senior Legal Counsel Matt Bowman. “In America, the government is forbidden from strong-arming citizens into participating in acts that violate of our deepest convictions. But coercion is a feature of Obamacare, so it must be stopped.”

Barth and Abbie Bracy had insurance through a private insurer until Obamacare forced the company to cancel the policy. Forced on to the Connecticut Obamacare exchange, the Bracys discovered that every plan offered there included a mandatory surcharge that is used to fund the elective abortions. Ironically, Barth Bracy is executive director of The Rhode Island State Right to Life Committee and has warned people of exactly the problems his family is now facing. The lawsuit also challenges secrecy clauses within Obamacare which forbid Americans from being told prior to enrollment whether the plans they would purchase on an exchange will include abortion coverage and thus require an abortion surcharge.

Michael DePrimo, one of more than 2,400 attorneys allied with Alliance Defending Freedom, is serving as local counsel on behalf of the Bracys.

by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 6/12/14

With some news reports indicating Meriam Inbrahim may be days or weeks away from a brutal pre-execution flogging because of her refusal to backtrack on her Christian faith, pro-life Sen. Ted Cruz and leading pro-life groups staged a rally outside the White House today on her behalf.

Meriam Ibrahim is not sentenced to die for her Christian faith for two years, until such a time as her newborn baby girl Maya is weaned, but she could be flogged within days if her appeal of her death sentence is thrown out. LifeNews recently covered the terrible nature of the flogging she will have to endure and how it will literally take her skin off of her body.

SIGN THE PETITION! Save Meriam Ibrahim, Don’t Hang her to Death for Her Faith

Meriam’s case has drawn international outrage. Meriam was jailed in September despite the fact she was pregnant, because she married a Christian – when authorities claim she is Muslim. Sudanese leaders suggested she may be freed weeks ago as international outrage grew – but there is still no sign of her release. She was forced to give birth to daughter, Maya, in prison, shackled to bed.

Now, human rights advocates have released a video of another woman flogged in public to highlight her case. In the video, dated 2010, the woman begs for mercy as police laugh and joke.

Responding to concerns about a potential flogging and knowing the Obama administration has done very little to support her plight, the Family Research Council and Concerned Women for America led a Save Meriam rally today.

“Today we are here to talk about Meriam Ibrahim, who is being imprisoned for her faith, specifically because she is a Christian. And not just her, but also her two children, one of which she gave birth to in chains.  As Christian women, we are talking today about Sudan but also pointing to the plight of women around the world. Women of faith are being persecuted and little girls are forced into marriages at very young ages. Meriam shines a light on this corruption and persecution,”Penny Nance, president of CWFA, said.

She added: “CWA members are here today wearing chains to remind us of the torture that she is being put through. So today I’m here to tell the President to stop going around the world apologizing for us. We are an exceptional nation, we love our country, we believe in our values, especially religious freedom and we want everyone to share in that God given right, not from the White House, but from our Creator. We are standing here today to speak for someone who is our sister in Christ who cannot speak for herself. We also pray for the Nigerian girls. Hashtag diplomacy is not enough. We want to see results.”

Nance concluded: “I am mortified by what is happening to this woman and I am calling today on our President and our State Department to rescue Meriam Ibrahim. She deserves our support. Why are we allowing her to be tortured?”

Below are some of the pictures from the rally, including a photo of Senator Cruz and one of Congressman Trent Franks of Arizona. All pictures come to LifeNews from CWA and FRC.

by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 6/10/14 5:43 PM

Caitlin and Emily Copeland were born as conjoined twins, but because they were fused at the chest, liver and bile ducts – and not the heart — doctors were able to successfully perform a separation surgery. Once they were separated at 10 months of age, the twins then began to prosper.

Now, they have graduated at the top of their class and are headed to college.

Here is more from a local news report on their incredible story:

For a set of Texas twins, being joined at the hip is not just a cliche — that was basically the first 10 months of their life.

On Tuesday, Emily and Caitlin Copeland, who were born conjoined at the liver, are celebrating their 18th birthday by enjoying the success of a separation surgery that has allowed them to lead normal lives and graduate as co-valedictorians from Lutheran High North in Houston.

“I think for anyone it’s exciting to get to 18, but in particular for us I think it’s just a really big blessing that we got to 18, considering what could have happened,” Caitlin said.

Crystal Copeland, the twins’ mother, nods. She will never forget the day she learned she was pregnant with conjoined twins, a phenomenon that occurs once in every 200,000 live births. Between 40 percent and 60 percent are stillborn, and some 35 percent survive one day.

And in late 1996, surgery and imaging were not as advanced.

“At the time, if you Googled conjoined twins all you got was circus acts and babies that died,” Copeland said.

It was a Friday when Copeland first spoke to Dr. Kevin Lally, surgeon in chief at Children’s Memorial Hermann Hospital in Houston. He promised to provide an honest assessment of the chances for survival.

The babies were kicking. Copeland had seen them in an ultrasound. To her, they were alive and well. That weekend, she said, was the hardest in her life.

On Monday, the Copelands got the best news they could have hoped for.

“They were joined at the liver, not at the heart, which would have been, you know, fatal,” Copeland said. “He thought there were good opportunities for separation where they would both be able to live basically normal lives,” she added.

The complications after the twins were born were worrisome. One was born with a blocked intestine, and surgery had to be conducted when they were just 2 days old. Lally wanted to separate them at that point, but when the surgery began doctors discovered they were not only conjoined at the liver but the organs were discharging through only one twin. So doctors decided to wait for them to get bigger for the separation surgery.

by Dave Andrusko | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 6/9/14 12:36 PM

We’ve collectively been so inundated with the “fact” that abortion is a “woman’s decision” that it’s difficult to remember that this is absurd on a gazillion different levels.

No one is evading the truth that carrying a baby to term is not easy under the best of circumstances, or that care of that child most often falls disproportionately on the mother. But it doesn’t follow that the father ought not to have a voice in the fate of a child that is his as well as hers.

Next week NRL News Today will re-post a story we first ran in 2008—“Second Reclaiming Fatherhood Conference Draws Much Media Attention.” Here are a few thoughts in anticipation.

Vicki Thorn reminds us that the simple-minded, one-dimensional stereotype of the boyfriend/husband who can’t wait to abort an unplanned pregnancy, while obviously true in some instances, doesn’t account for many men, let alone all the other possibilities. (Note to pro-abortionist feminists, life is rarely simple.)

Thorn does not photoshop out the villains, for example, the men who coerced the women in their lives—including their daughters—into having abortions. Her point, my point, however, is that this does not exhaust the range of possible behaviors, nor does the failure of some to act as they should exclude all men from any voice in any and all abortions.

Consider…

There are men who oppose the abortion from the beginning but have no ability to save their child. Read their stories of powerlessness and you will have a tough time sleeping.

There are men—a LOT of men—who’ve been told that they should not engage their hearts or their minds. Their “job” is exclusively to support the woman’s decision to abort. To do otherwise, it’s implied when not stated flatly, is to try to impose your will. If in his heart a man knows that he has a responsibility to the child AND the mother, he is, at best conflicted, at worst an emotional basket case. (This overlaps with what Thorn is describing when she talks about the men who “seem” not to care.)

Thorn talks about the men who really didn’t care, or who were happy to see this “inconvenience” swept away. “But years later, when they are ready to be fathers, the reality of what happened hits them hard,” Thorn writes. I’ve personally known more than a few men who’ve looked back at their younger selves with great bitterness.

What almost never gets talked about is how a sister’s abortion affects a brother. We tend to overlook how deep the bonds can be between siblings and how much one sibling can hurt when another is terribly distraught.

Likewise, as Thorn reminds us, “There are men whose wives had abortions before they met, who get caught up in the vortex of her pain.” Talk to any counselor, as I have, and you hear how this unresolved pain and grief about an abortion she likely has not told her husband about, is almost too much to bear. And if they are unable to have children, the impact is multiplied.

There are lots of arguments one can make that easily dismantle (or at least show the inconsistencies of) the argument that men are, at best, irrelevant to the abortion issue, at worst power-hungry intruders.

But my desire here is simply to show that abortion does not forever change the destinies of women and unborn children alone, but husbands, boyfriends, brothers, grandfathers, even uncles and cousins. If you think the latter is a stretch, I can tell you from personal experience what a difference my father’s care and compassion for my unwed, pregnant cousin made in her decision to carry her baby to term and to find a loving home for that child—and how it shaped my attitude forever more.

Women and men are in this together, never more so than in the case of an unplanned or crisis pregnancy.

LifeNews.com Note: Dave Andrusko is the editor of National Right to Life News and an author and editor of several books on abortion topics. This post originally appeared at National Right to Life News Today.