Skip to main content

Pro-Life Page

Thursday, January 23, 2014
BY NAPP NAZWORTH , CHRISTIAN POST REPORTER
January 22, 2014|5:17 pm

 

(PHOTO: THE CHRISTIAN POST/NAPP NAZWORTH)

March for Life, Jan. 22, 2014, Washington, D.C.

WASHINGTON — The 41st annual March for Life in Washington, D.C. focused on the theme of adoption as an alternative to abortion. Large numbers of pro-lifers braved the bitter cold to listen to speakers and march up Constitution Avenue to the Supreme Court.

"For every one baby that's adopted," March for Life President Jeanne Monahan explained to The Christian Post as she marched, "there are 64 that are aborted."

March for Life, Jan. 22, 2014, Washington, D.C.

By focusing on adoption, she added, March for Life is "trying to get at that huge discrepancy" and encourage "mothers facing an unexpected pregnancy to choose adoption."

Temperatures were in the teens, or below zero when factoring in the wind chill.

Monahan said she was not expecting as large a turnout as last year due to the extreme weather. No official count was taken, but her impression was that even more people were present than last year.

"I'm overwhelmed by the turnout," she said.

Monahan was also impressed by the fact that most of the marchers appeared to be 25 or younger.

"This is the pro-life generation," she said. "So delightful to see their smiling enthusiastic faces. I think young people are going to end abortion in their generation. I really do."

Karen Oliver arrived from Springfield, Va., with her sister and four of her six children. (Her two oldest children were at the march with their high school youth group.)

When asked if she considered staying home because of the extreme cold, she quickly replied, "Never." Oliver has been to every March for Life since the birth of her first child, who is now 15. "Nothing is going to stop us," she added.

One of Oliver's sons, I.J., explained that he is "marching for the lives of babies."

One marcher came dressed as George Washington. When asked why he came to the march, he replied, "George Washington on the third of July in the year of our Lord 1776 said the fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the conduct and courage of this army. So as the general of this army, this is where I must be to be with the other soldiers fighting for the unborn millions of Americans to be."

Wednesday, January 22, 2014

Participants in the annual March for Life rally pass the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C., Jan. 25, 2013. The pro-life marchers on Friday marked the 40th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade U.S. Supreme Court ruling legalizing abortion, and Pope Benedict expressed support for the demonstrators.

Even though winter storm Janus has closed down federal government offices and cancelled more than 2,000 flights in the Northeast, tens, if not hundreds of thousands of pro-life advocates are in Washington, D.C. for the 41st annual March for Life event on Wednesday.

Notable speakers at this year's march include Dr. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, and his adopted son, Ryan, and Molly Ann Dutton, who was elected as Auburn University's 100th homecoming queen last fall and is using her inspirational story to advocate for adoption, which is the theme of this year's event.

There will also be an expanded social media presence at the march on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter and use of 360 degree cameras so that people watching online from home can see those who are walking in the march. There's also a March for Life iPhone app, mobile phone text updates, and people can also share their photos and messages by using#WhyWeMarch and #MarchforLife.

Last year, it was estimated that 500,000 pro-life advocates demonstrated against abortion on the 40th anniversary of the Roe. vs. Wade decision. Even though Jeanne Monahan told The Christian Post on Friday that the park service no longer keeps track of those numbers, she does know that it takes hours for the last group of marchers to walk past the Supreme Court building, and estimates attendance numbers to be in the hundreds of thousands.

"We haven't had a formal estimate conducted in quite some time … we don't have an actual count to give, but we believe that we're in the hundreds of thousands. And those who know more about this have viewed estimates, informal estimates, and they say that we're well into the hundreds of thousands," Monahan said.

"Last year it was packed, especially the part where people are walking up Constitution Avenue and pass by the Supreme Court. I can tell you that, being at the front of the march, I crossed over near the Supreme Court right at about 1:45 p.m. and it was close to 4 p.m. when the final marchers crossed by."

More than 400 students from Benedictine College of Atchison, Kan., and its pro-life group, Ravens Respect Life, will be leading the march this year, having traveled in eight chartered buses to make the 48-hour round trip to march on behalf of their generation of peers who lost their lives to abortion.

Kathryn Brown, a Benedictine College student who coordinated the trip to attend March for Life told CP on Saturday the students were selected to lead the front of the march after sharing the group's long tradition of participation at the event with Monahan. Sixty students from the school will be carrying the March for Life banner at the front of the march.

Brown emphasized the importance of the march for her generation, which she believes is more pro-life than previous generations, because they have been greatly impacted by abortion.

"I think one big reason is because our generation is the one who is missing so many people because of abortion," she commented. "There are many people, college aged, who have siblings who were aborted. There are people missing in our lives because they were never given the chance to live – siblings, friends, maybe even people we would have married. We mourn them and we resolve to stand up for their God-given right to life so that others will not share that same fate."

According to Monahan, among the reasons people -- especially those in millennial generation -- are witnessing a cultural shift toward supporting the pro-life movement opposed to advocating for abortion, are the advances in technology and the human aspect – the personal stories of men and women who've been harmed by the aftermath of abortion.

"Years ago, it was the case that advocates for abortion would talk about the 'thing' growing in a woman's womb as a lifeless blob of tissue," Monahan explained. "And I think our advances in sonography and ultrasounds, and even our understanding of fetal development has dispelled those myths. … We know that, from the moment of conception, a baby has all of its DNA that it needs for the rest of its life. It has everything inherent that it will need for later on. Really, the only difference [between the preborn and adults] is in size and development."

She continued: "I also think young people tend to gravitate toward good issues and have got the enthusiasm to do good things. And this is the human rights issue of today. And, I think young people are well aware that they're missing a whole population of their siblings, their peers, to abortion. We've lost 56 million Americans since Roe was decided.

Monahan also noted that peer reviewed studies and meta analyses have shown that "women who undergo abortion struggle more with emotional issues, such as anxiety, sometimes substance abuse, suicidal thoughts and depression."

But, more importantly than the science and research, she said, are the people she has met who wish that someone had told them the truth about abortion before they made that decision. "I'm a strong believer that abortion hurts one, and takes the life of another," she added. "And whatever we can do to help any woman or man who's suffering from having made this decision is critical."

"I like to always mention, anytime that I'm public speaking or at the march, that there's always hope and healing. There's no situation that is beyond help or beyond hope–ever. These folks need to hear it, because often they're caught in the slavery of grief and guilt after having made that decision. "

March for Life is the largest annual event in Washington, D.C. and is held every year on the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade. The organization is bi-partisan and therefore the list of speakers also includes politicians from both parties, including House Majority Leader Eric Canton, (R-Va.), Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.), and Washington state Sen. Roger Freeman (D).

Monday, January 20, 2014
 
BY NAPP NAZWORTH, CHRISTIAN POST REPORTER
January 20, 2014|3:07 pm

In an interview with The Dallas Morning News, Texas gubernatorial candidate and pro-choice activist Wendy Davis admitted that some of the facts she has presented of her biography were "loose" on the details. The article suggests Davis has been more concerned about her career than the well-being of her children.

Davis, a Texas state senator, was propelled to national stardom after filibustering a 20-week abortion ban. She used her newfound celebrity to fundraise and launch a bid to become the Democratic nominee for governor of Texas.

During the filibuster and her numerous media interviews, she presented herself as a struggling single mother who was able to work hard and achieve financial success.

The bio on her campaign website reads: "Raised by a single mother with a sixth grade education, Wendy began working after school at age 14 to help support her mom and three siblings. By 19, she was on her way to becoming a single mother, working two jobs just to make ends meet.

"... Wendy enrolled at Tarrant County Community College. After two years, she transferred to Texas Christian University. With the help of academic scholarships, student loans, and state and federal grants, Wendy became the first person in her family to earn a bachelor's degree, graduated first in her class, and went on to Harvard Law School."

That narrative, though, is misleading by leaving out important details. It suggests that Davis was able to complete a Harvard law degree while raising her children alone. Davis was married, though, at age 24 and her husband both cared for her two daughters (one from her first marriage) and paid for her education.

"My language should be tighter," she told The Dallas Morning News. "I'm learning about using broader, looser language. I need to be more focused on the detail."

Davis left her first husband when she was 19. They divorced when she was 21.

The part of her narrative that is true is that between ages 19 and 24 she was a single mom, working two jobs and attending college. She struggled financially in those years.

Wendy Davis met and began dating Jeff Davis when she was 21. They married when she was 24.

Jeff, who was making a six-figure salary, paid for her final two years at Texas Christian University, then cashed out his retirement account and took out a loan to pay for her to attend Harvard Law School.

Their two daughters lived in Texas with Jeff while Wendy attended Harvard in Massachusetts. After Harvard, Wendy moved back to Texas and began her law and political career.

She left Jeff in 2003 after he paid off her student loan.

"I made the last payment, and it was the next day she left," Jeff told The Dallas Morning News.

Wendy told The Dallas Morning News that the notion that she waited until the loan was paid to leave her husband is "absurd."

When they got divorced, their oldest daughter was 21 and in college and their youngest daughter was in ninth grade. Jeff was given custody and Wendy was ordered to pay child support.

According to Jeff, Wendy approved of giving him custody and told him, "It's not a good time for me right now."

A former colleague of Wendy who preferred to remain anonymous told The Dallas Morning News that she cared more about her political ambitions than her children.

"She's not going to let family or raising children or anything else get in her way," he said.

While adding that "she'd be a good governor," the source said that the narrative of Wendy Davis' biography presented by her campaign is mostly false: "She's going to find a way, and she's going to figure out a way to spin herself in a way that grabs at the heart strings. A lot of it isn't true about her, but that's just us who knew her."

Many conservatives and pro-life activists are sharing the article on Monday, just two days before the annual March for Life.

"Having grown up with a single mom, I find Davis' fabrication of her story a total insult," conservative radio personality Dana Loesch tweeted.

Sunday, January 19, 2014

By: Tyler O'Neil from Christian Post

Americans United for Life, a nationwide pro-life legal team, released its 2014 "Life List," which includes a ranking of the various states on how well their laws defend life, from conception to natural death.

"Real pro-life momentum is reshaping the country as legislators craft protections for both mother and child, the victims of an avaricious abortion industry," AUL President and CEO Charmaine Yoest said in a statement to mark the "Life List." In an interview on Friday with the Christian Post, AUL Media Consultant Kristi Hamrick emphasized a few state initiatives in particular.

Hamrick praised the state of Texas, one of the Life List's "most improved" states, and home of the controversial pro-choice activist Wendy Davis, whose filibuster against the 20-week abortion ban gained her national attention last June. Texas legislators "have been creative and determined in protecting women from abortion industry abuses post-Gosnell," Hamrick said.

"What we saw in the Gosnell 'House of Horrors' trial is that even though there were protections on the books, politicians decided not to enforce them," the AUL spokeswoman explained. She was referring to the case of Kermit Gosnell, an abortionist found guilty in May of murdering three babies born alive in a Pennsylvania abortion clinic and one woman who died from abortion complications.

In July, Texas enacted legislation prohibiting late-term abortions, prohibiting "telemed" abortions, mandating abortion clinics meet patient care standards, and requiring that abortion providers have local hospital admitting privileges. These reforms pushed Texas into AUL's category of "All-Stars." Other "All-Stars" included Missouri, Alabama, Arizona and Arkansas.

"Each of AUL's All Stars enacted life-saving legislation to protect mother and child from an abortion industry more committed to its financial bottom line than protecting women from a dangerous procedure that is too often performed in substandard facilities," Yoest explained. Texas was the only state to rank among the "All Stars" and the "Most Improved," taking sixth place overall.

Hamrick also mentioned New York, the fourth worst state for life, which almost adopted the worst laws from an AUL perspective. "New York came very close to having the most draconian, anti-life laws in the country, but they failed," the spokeswoman explained. The Life List notes AUL's work to defeat Governor Andrew Cuomo's Women's Equality Act, which "would have elevated abortion to a fundamental legal right in the state, eliminated all existing legal protections for women considering abortion, and rescinded protections for unborn victims of violence."

AUL also helped defeat a pro-choice measure in Washington State. The bill would have mandated that health insurance plans which cover maternity care also cover abortions. Washington State ranked dead last on life issues, for the fifth year in a row.

Louisiana, the home state of the hit show "Duck Dynasty," ranked number one on AUL's Life List, also for the fifth year in a row. "Louisiana tops the list because of its decades-long history of enacting common-sense limitations on abortion," the list explained. The state "also comprehensively protects healthcare freedom of conscience and is one of only a small number of states that has enacted meaningful regulations on biotechnologies such as destructive embryo research."

In addition to Texas, Illinois, North Carolina, and Kansas made the "Most Improved" list.

In Illinois, a 2005 executive order forcing pharmacies to dispense "emergency contraception … without delay" was invalidated, and a parental notice requirement for abortion went into effect. North Carolina prohibited sex-selection abortions, limited Affordable Care Act funding for abortions, and regulated abortion facilities according to "ambulatory surgical center standards." Kansas limited state funding for abortion, prohibited sex selection abortions, and enhanced other limitations.

Hamrick praised states which finally enforced such regulations. She called NARAL's complaints that such laws "throw us back into the dark ages" laughable. "You would think that the abortion industry would be ashamed to argue for legal back-alleys of abortion which are unregulated, unmonitored, and unsupervised," she said.

6 Best States for Life

  1. Louisiana
  2. Oklahoma
  3. Arkansas
  4. Arizona
  5. Pennsylvania
  6. Texas

5 Worst States for Life

  1. Washington
  2. California
  3. Vermont
  4. New York
  5. Connecticut

Most Improved

  1. Texas
  2. Illinois
  3. North Carolina
  4. Texas
Friday, January 17, 2014

by Steven Ertelt | Birmingham, AL | LifeNews.com | 1/16/14 11:26 AM

Birmingham, Alabama is abortion free for now, as the sole abortion clinic there, run by Planned Parenthood, has temporarily closed. If it stays closed this is the second closure of an abortion clinic in 2014.

Local pro-life activist Fr. Terry Gensemer of CEC For Life tells LifeNews that sidewalk counselors report that the facility does not appear to have performed abortions since before Christmas. One counselor confirms that she has only seen a handful of patients show up in the past four weeks, none of which stayed long enough to have an abortion.

“But that’s just the start. On December 30th, after the facility was closed for several days, pro-lifers on the sidewalk witnessed the facility’s director being escorted from the building, followed by a repairman changing all of the locks. Three days later, a sign from Planned Parenthood Southeast (PPS) appeared stating that the facility would be closed until January 6th, 2014. After the 6th, sidewalk counselors say the facility did reopen, but only briefly,” Gensemer explained.

As of Tuesday, PPS posted yet another sign, now reading: “We apologize for the inconvenience, but this facility is temporarily closed.” The PPS website also removed the facility’s hours of operation schedule, as well as adding a note that reads: “Services at our Birmingham health center are temporarily slowed.”Gensemer hopes the closure will be permanent.

 
He told LifeNews, “This Planned Parenthood should have been closed long before today. It already has a lawsuit pending from a woman left infertile after the abortionist ignored her ectopic pregnancy and performed an abortion on her empty womb. Before that, the facility was caught in a round of scandal for allegedly covering up cases of statutory rape. For the sake of everyone this facility continues to harm, we are praying it remains closed.”
 

He said if the facility does remain closed, Birmingham will be the largest metropolitan area in the country free of abortion clinics – a prayer that many in the city have waited decades to see answered.

Ed Carrick, Director of Birmingham 40 Days for Life, comments, “We’ve done numerous prayer campaigns outside of this facility. The goal of any 40 Days campaign is to arrive at the start date and have no abortion facility at which to hold your campaign. A final shutdown would not only be an answer to many years of dedicated prayer, it would be a miracle for the city. We give God the glory for every day Birmingham remains free of these clinics.”
 

The Planned Parenthood website has removed all operating house for the Birmingham abortion facility and has noted the following:

Services at our Birmingham health center are temporarily slowed. Please call (205) 322-2121 for more information about our other locations.

“The term ‘slowed’ to them means ‘stopped’ to everyone else. In typical Planned Parenthood ‘new-speak,’ they just can’t admit they are closed and that their facility director was given the ‘perp walk.’ Obviously there are serious issues at the Birmingham Planned Parenthood and we are grateful for the respite in their grisly abortion business,” said Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue. “Planned Parenthood organizations around the country have a history of financial malfeasance, and I wouldn’t be surprised if that was the case in Birmingham, given the way the facility director was removed from the building.”

Other troubles have plagued the Birmingham Planned Parenthood abortion business. An incompetent abortion that left a patient unable to bear children and a series of deficiency reports noting conditions and practices that endangered the public prompted Life Legal Defense to file a complaint with the Alabama Department of Public Health in September 2012, on behalf of the CEC for Life, Operation Rescue, and Alabama Physicians for Life.

 

Thursday, January 16, 2014

by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 1/15/14 

The House Judiciary Committee today approved legislation that will put in place a complete ban on taxpayer funding of abortions that ensures abortions are not directly funded in any federal governmental program or department.

The legislation combines several policies that must be enacted every year in Congressional battles and puts them into law where they will not be in jeopardy of being overturned every time Congress changes hands from pro-life lawmakers to those who support abortions.

The bill has been around a few years but has only been approved in the House thanks to a pro-abortion Senate. On May 4, 2011, the House passed HR 3, the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, on a 251-175 vote with Republicans voting 235-0 for the bill and Democrats voting 175-16 against it.

The House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice will hold ahearing on H.R. 7, the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act” this week.

Congressman Chris Smith, a New Jersey Republican who is the lead sponsor of the bill, informed the House that a study by the Guttmacher Institute, the pro-abortion former research apparatus of Planned Parenthood, released a study noting that one-quarter of women who otherwise would have had abortions chose to give birth when taxpayer dollars were not available to pay for abortions of their children.

The Family Research Council is a strong supporter of the bill and FRC president Tony Perkins applauded Smith’s leadership.

“Chris Smith’s leadership in the cause of life has been historic. Most Americans, regardless of their view on abortion, oppose government funding for abortion. The ‘No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act’ will make sure that the Hyde Amendment applies across the government, including fixing the abortion funding provisions in Obamacare. H.R. 7 will restore government neutrality on abortion,” he told LifeNews.

“Abortion causes enduring pain to millions of American women, and the revelation that so many of them are so young is tragic. Bringing help and healing to America’s young women and their families has to be coupled with public policies that will curtail this victimization,” Perkins noted.

Smith spoke on the House floor during debate over the last version of the bill about what he said was growing public opinion against abortion. He also praised women who regret having terminated their pregnancies and speak out against abortions.

“For decades, a patchwork of short-term policies have prevented abortion funding in many programs authorized by Congress, but it is time for a single, government-wide permanent protection against taxpayer funding for elective abortion,” Smith said. “Abortion is lethal violence against children and exploitation of women. This legislation would establish a comprehensive policy prohibiting public funding for elective abortion in all federal programs.”

A majority of Americans object to the use of taxpayer money for funding abortion, according to numerous polls — including a survey CNN conducted in early April showing Americans oppose public funding of abortion by a margin of 61% to 35%.

The bill will also mitigate concerns about abortion funding in the various loopholes in the Obamacare national health care bill that various pro-life organizations warned about during debate on the law. The legislation did not contain language banning funding of abortions in its provisions and the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act would fix that problem.

The National Right to Life Committee sent a letter to House members urging support for the legislation that explains how the bill will help:

“Regrettably, however, the 111th Congress enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). During consideration of that legislation, language was proposed (the Stupak-Pitts Amendment) to apply the principles of the Hyde Amendment to the multitude of programs created by the bill, and the House initially approved that language – but no such provision was part of the enacted law, due to opposition from President Obama and the Senate majority. Consequently, the enacted PPACA contains multiple provisions authorizing funding of abortion and funding of health plans that cover abortion.”

The National Right to Life letter also commented on another lesser-known provision of the tax-funded abortion ban — it’s language to protect health care professionals who don’t want to be involved in abortions.

“The bill would codify the principles of the Hyde-Weldon Amendment, which has been appended to the original Hyde Amendment on every Health and Human Services appropriations bill since 2004. This provision would solidify important protections for health care providers who do not wish to participate in providing abortions – which is especially important in light of the Obama Administration’s February 23, 2011 action rescinding the conscience protection regulation issued by the Bush Administration.”

Also, before the vote in 2011, the White House said President Barack Obama would add to his lengthy pro-abortion record by vetoing the legislation. Obama would veto HR 3, the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, with the White House saying the president opposes the bill because it would supposedly make it tougher for women to obtain abortion coverage from private insurance companies thereby expanding the current Hyde Amendment, which only limits tax-funded abortions under Medicaid, beyond its current reach.

Wednesday, January 15, 2014

The annual National Memorial for the Pre-Born and Their Mothers and Fathers is an interdenominational prayer service taking place the morning of the March for Life in Washington, DC. With representatives from numerous Christian denominations and pro-life groups, this is the premier prayer event marking the tragic commemoration of Roe vs. Wade, which legalized abortion. We will gather in repentance and grief, but also in hope-filled, joyful determination and unity to bring an end to abortion once and for all!

We want to fill Constitution Hall with thousands of believers, and show the nation, and the media, that pro-life people are not going away, no matter how long the battle or how powerful the enemy! The prayers and message of this service will certainly convey that, and you won’t want to miss out on the inspiration. We are hoping for a good representation of people to show our love for the unborn and our commitment to ecumenism. 

The prayer service is sponsored by The National Pro-Life Religious Council, The National Pro-Life Center on Capitol Hill, Faith and Action, Priests for Life, and Gospel of Life Ministries.

The prayer service will take place from 8:30-10:30 a.m. on January 22, 2014 (the morning of the March for Life) at DAR Constitution Hall, Washington, D.C. This event is free, no tickets are required and large groups are welcome. 

For the convenience of Catholics, Mass will be held at 7:30am in the same location.

Wednesday, January 15, 2014

by Rose Trabbic | San Francisco, CA | LifeNews.com | 1/14/14 1:37 PM

Saturday, January 25 marks the 10th Anniversary of San Francisco’s Walk for Life West Coast. Each year, the Walk for Life West Coast finds a new way to get its message across in the sometimes-hostile city of San Francisco.

In 2009, organizers advertised the event with a billboard on US 80, which was seen by hundreds of thousands of drivers and was effective enough that opponents of the Walk defaced it with paintball guns. In 2010 organizers placed large ads on Golden Gate Transit buses, visible to hundreds of thousands of Bay Area residents. In 2011 it was the “Walk for Life Navy” — a yacht cruising the bay alongside the Walk’s then-route, cheering pro-lifers as they marched.

This year, organizers opted for banners along Market Street, San Francisco’s main thoroughfare, and the Walk’s new route. The banners proclaim the Walk’s message: “Abortion Hurts Women.” The banners went up on December 26, and have been seen by hundreds of thousands of people. Media outlets covered the banners when the pro-abortion “Silver Ribbon” campaign demanded that San Francisco’s Mayor Ed Lee have them removed.

As reported by the December 31 San Francisco Chronicle “A group called Walk for Life West Coast, which is organizing its 10th annual antiabortion march in San Francisco on January 25, has placed 50 banners along Market Street reading ‘Abortion hurts women.’ They will be flying for about a month….The Silver Ribbon Campaign to Trust Women wrote a letter to Mayor Ed Lee this week saying the banners contain ‘a false and hateful statement’ and demanded they be removed. Ellen Shaffer, director of the Silver Ribbon Campaign, said she considers the banners hate speech against women….”

Mayor Lee rejected Ms. Shaffer demand, citing the first amendment. But the outrageous demand received coverage in outlets ranging from California Catholic Daily to the left-wing Daily Kos.

Eva Muntean, co-chair of the Walk for Life West Coast said “We are delighted with the publicity our banners have already generated. We urge all people of good will to join us on January 25 as we march in defense of the littlest among us. Our opponents seek to censor our message ‘Abortion Hurts Women,’ not because it is false but because it is true. We invite San Franciscans to attend the rally and Walk so that they may judge for themselves.”

Tuesday, January 14, 2014
BY MELISSA BARNHART , CP REPORTER
January 13, 2014|4:52 pm

The Supreme Court on Wednesday will hear oral arguments challenging a 2007 Massachusetts law that prohibits pro-life advocates from approaching abortion clinic workers and potential clients past a regulated "buffer zone."

Currently, pro-life advocates are barred from standing within 35 feet of the front door of abortion clinics in Massachusetts. Outside some abortion facilities in the state, a painted yellow line clearly marks the parameters allocated for protesters who face potential arrest if they cross that barrier.

In the case, McCullen v. Coakley, the Court is being asked to decide whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit was right in upholding the state's law that makes it a crime for pro-life advocates to "enter or remain on a public way or sidewalk" within 35 feet of an entrance, exit or driveway to an abortion facility.

Eleanor McCullen, 77, and other pro-life advocates filed the lawsuit against the state because at Planned Parenthood locations in Springfield and Worchester, they are unable to make contact with clients because they must stand 35 feet away from the clinics' parking lots.

According to Massachusetts Planned Parenthood CEO Marty Walz, the former state representative who sponsored the "Buffer Zone Law" for Planned Parenthood and was subsequently hired by the abortion provider last year with a salary of $250,000, said the state's law is necessary to protect the rights of clients and the safety of their staff.

Speaking at her Planned Parenthood office in Boston, Walz told WBZ-TV on Friday that "Protesters would typically stand right in the doorway and shoulder to shoulder and it would be difficult for patients and staff to try to squeeze through to get in the door."

With the buffer zone in place, pro-life advocates assert that their First Amendment right to free speech is being inhibited, making it more difficult for them to share their life-saving message with girls seeking abortions.

Lorraine Loewen who protests at a local Boston Planned Parenthood on Fridays, told WBZ-TV that she cannot effectively carry out her right to free speech and attempt to save lives because of the Buffer Zone Law.

"Abortion hurts women," she said. "This is ridiculous here, we are probably the only group that doesn't have freedom of speech."

Liam Lowney, however, supports Democrat Attorney General Martha Coakley's effort to protect the Buffer Zone Law because his sister, Shannon, who was a receptionist at Planned Parenthood, was shot and killed inside the Boston abortion clinic in 1994 by John Salvi.

Lowney told WBZ-TV that his sister was passionate about her work at Planned Parenthood because she believed in its mission, and he aims to carry on her efforts.

"I see buffer zones as an important tool in ensuring women access to the important services that were available to them," he said. "That was important to my sister, and so it's important to me to continue that message."

Lawmakers ask Coakley to investigate Planned Parenthood-Walz connection

In a letter sent to Coakley last Thursday, Massachusetts State Reps. Marc Lombardo (R-Billerica) and James Lyons (R-Andover), are asking the attorney general to investigate Walz's ties to the nation's largest abortion provider since she was a leading sponsor of the abortion clinic Buffer Zone Law and was subsequently hired as its CEO, alleging that it's a violation of the state's conflict-of-interest law.

"The question we are asking is simple. Is there a violation of the conflict-of-interest law when a legislator sponsors a law on behalf of an organization, then that same legislator is hired to a position in that organization that has paid $250,000 per year?" according to their letter to Coakley.

The Court's decision to hear oral arguments in McCullen v. Coakley also coincides with Pope Francis' affirmation on Monday that he believes abortion is "horrific."

According to Reuters, in his yearly address to diplomats accredited to the Vatican, known as his "State of the World" address, the pope said: "It is horrific even to think that there are children, victims of abortion, who will never see the light of day."

Monday, January 13, 2014
 
BY MELISSA BARNHART , CP REPORTER
January 11, 2014|1:42 pm

Pro-abortion group NARAL Pro-Choice America is asking its supporters tosign a petition declaring their opposition to a Ft. Worth hospital's decision to keep a woman on life support as her baby continues to develop inside her body.

In the petition that will be sent to Republican Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, NARAL asserts, "Difficult personal decisions, like end-of-life care, belong to women and families—not politicians," which is in reference to the 1999 Texas Advance Directives Act that requires hospitals in that state to keep a mother alive until her baby can be delivered. 

This complex medical nightmare began for Eric Munoz and his in-laws, Ernest and Lynne Machado, at 2 a.m. Nov. 26 when Eric found his wife, Marlise Munoz, 33, lying unconscious on the kitchen floor. At that time, Marlise was 14 weeks pregnant with their second child.

Munoz told the Star-Telegram that his wife had gotten out of bed that night to check on their 14-month-old son, Mateo, who was crying. But when he later heard Mateo crying again, he got up to check on both of them, thinking that his wife had fallen back off to sleep in their son's bedroom.

When he found his wife body, Munoz said he administered CPR and then called 911. According to reports, Munoz said his wife's heart had stopped several times and she was resuscitated each time.

Munoz, whose wife continues to be on life support at John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth, as their pre-born baby begins to enter the gestational age of 21 weeks, told WFAA-TV that he and his in-laws just want his wife's body to stop.

"We've reached a point where you wish that your wife's body will stop," he said.

Both trained paramedics, Munoz said he and his wife had discussed and agreed on not being kept alive through life support. However, Marlise never signed a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) form; but even if she had, Texas' Health and Safety Code Section 166.049 states that "a person may not withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatment from a pregnant patient," even with a signed DNR.

"We both knew that we didn't want to be on life support. We knew what her wishes were," he told WFAA, reiterating his point that Marlise wouldn't want to be kept alive by a machine if she was ever diagnosed as being brain dead.

Similarly, Munoz also expressed concern that their pre-born baby might have also been injured when his wife collapsed on the floor, due to the blood clot that doctors believe might have traveled to his wife's lungs, leading to a pulmonary embolism. Munoz feels that oxygen and blood flow might have been cut from their pre-born baby when this occurred.

"They don't know how long the baby was without nutrients and oxygen," he said. "But I'm aware what challenges I might face ahead."

According to a WFAA report, at 18 weeks gestation, medical tests showed that the baby has a normal heart beat.

However, Jill Labbe, vice president for community affairs at John Peter Smith Hospital, told The Christian Post on Thursday that patient-specific information cannot be provided "because Mr. Munoz has not signed the release necessary for [the hospital] to speak about his wife's case."

Labbe was able to confirm that Marlise is a patient in the ICU unit of JPS, and was admitted on Nov. 26, and her condition is serious.

"In all cases," she continued, "JPS will follow the law as it applies to healthcare in the state of Texas. Every day, we have patients and families who must make difficult decisions. Our position remains the same; we follow the law."

Labbe also confirmed that Munoz has retained legal counsel to help his family navigate through this difficult situation.

"JPS is encouraged by this development because the courts are the appropriate venue to provide clarity, direction and resolution in this matter," she added. "JPS remains focused on providing compassionate care to all patients while also following the law as it applies to healthcare in the state of Texas."

One organization that is supporting the hospital's actions in this case is the pro-life group Texas Right to Life.

Melissa Conway, director of external relations for Texas Right to Life, an organization that believes in protecting life from conception until natural death, told CP on Friday that while the circumstances in this case are tragic, there are two lives that must be considered.

"Mrs. Munoz's tragic circumstance involves two patients who must be considered," she asserted. "Furthermore, we are greatly troubled by definitive tone with which physicians are concluding that Mrs. Munoz is brain dead since that term is often misused, and since the criteria to make such a determination varies from doctor to doctor and from hospital to hospital. The lack of objectivity in the diagnosis of brain death allows for misapplication."

Conway continued: "Based on the information made public, Mrs. Munoz is not experiencing multi-system organ failure or cell disintegration, and her body is supporting the growth of the child within her—all signs to indicate that her brain, though impaired or quiescent, is still ordering her physiological functions at some level. Texas Right to Life prays for the Munoz family and that they choose life for both patients during this very difficult time."

Munoz, who according to reports believes that his wife is not exhibiting any brain activity, never anticipated that he wouldn't be able to withdraw life support from his wife.

"I have yet to meet anyone who knew about this law, not a single doctor," Munoz said. "We want people to know because it has the potential of affecting others. People should have the right to make these decisions because they know the person better than some legislator down in Austin."

The next series of tests of the baby, according to initial reports, will be at 24 weeks gestation.

And until an autopsy has been completed by a medical examiner, doctors cannot say, with absolute certainty, that Marlise suffered a pulmonary embolism.

Lynne Machado, Marlise's mother, declined to provide comment to The Christian Post for this story, but said she might be speaking to the media again at a later date.