Pro-Life Page

Thursday, July 18, 2013

by KEN KLUKOWSKI 18 Jul 2013, 11:15 AM PDT 7POST A COMMENT

Today Texas Gov. Rick Perry signed into law a pro-life bill which will very likely be upheld by the Supreme Court. The law disallows most abortions after 20 weeks, the point by which an unborn child can fully feel physical pain and therefore would actually experience the agony of dying during the abortion procedure.

It also requires the doctor performing the abortion to be credentialed to admit patients at a local hospital, so if anything goes wrong during the abortion the doctor can personally get the mother immediate medical attention.

“This is an important day for those who support life and for those who support the health of Texas women,” said Perry. “In signing [this bill], we celebrate and further cement the foundation on which the culture of life in Texas is built.”

Pro-life advocates praised Perry and the Texas legislature. Family Research Council president Tony Perkins said, “We applaud the brave state leaders—including Gov. Perry—who refuse to back down from defending human dignity, even in the face of pressure and harassment.” He was referring to the nationwide efforts of abortion supporters who portrayed this law as a “war on women” by requiring a woman who wants an abortion to make that decision before she’s five months along in her pregnancy.

This law—or one of the other 20-week abortion laws that have recently been enacted and are being challenged in court—is very likely to be upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. In one of its most infamous decisions, the Supreme Court declared a right to abortion in its 1973 case Roe v. Wade, even though nothing related to abortion is mentioned in the Constitution.

Abortion had always been an issue that state legislators decided at the local level in accordance with the voter’s wishes, which is the constitutional norm in our democratic republic. Roe instead made this an issue to be decided by unelected judges.

In 1992, the Court revisited abortion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. By a 5-4 vote, the Court declined to overrule Roe, but held that although it is a right, abortion is not a fundamental right such as free speech, religious liberty, or the right to own a gun, and therefore opened the door for heavy regulations and restrictions on abortion.

The test for abortion cases is whether the law imposes an “undue burden” on a woman seeking abortion before the child could live outside the womb (which has been at 24 weeks in recent years, but with advances in medicine that line continues to move sooner in the pregnancy). After that point—called “viability”—Casey allows abortion to be completely banned so long as the pregnancy does not endanger the life or health of the mother.

Justices Sandra Day O’Connor and Anthony Kennedy were the key votes in Casey. Of the two, O’Connor was pro-abortion and Kennedy leans against abortion. With the solidly-conservative Samuel Alito taking O’Connor’s seat in 2006, the new reality is that any abortion restriction that is good enough for Kennedy should survive a court challenge.

This Texas law (or one of its counterparts in Wisconsin or another state) will show whether this theory is correct. If you carefully study Kennedy’s jurisprudence—not only regarding abortion but many other issues as well—it seems Kennedy does not like the idea of completely shutting the door on federal courts saying women can abort their pregnancies—but wants to leave the door cracked open, not wide open.

If that is true, this law and many other restrictions should be upheld. One of these laws should be before the Supreme Court in the next 18 months, with a decision by summer 2015.

Breitbart News legal columnist Ken Klukowski is senior fellow for religious liberty at the Family Research Council and on faculty at Liberty University School of Law.

Wednesday, July 17, 2013

by William Saunders and Mailee Smith | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 7/17/13 4:08 PM

So much for Free Speech. The City Council of Baltimore is currently entangled in litigation as it attempts to defend an ordinance forcing Pregnancy Resource Centers (PRCs) to speak in favor of abortion.

Such ordinances represent an agenda by the abortion industry to compel its “competition” in the pro-life community to advertise an abortion message. Smearing PRCs with false claims about the nature and accuracy of the information available at these centers, the abortion industry is pushing for the passage of these ordinances across the nation, requiring signs and pro-abortion speech inside the walls of PRCs.

Clearly, the abortion industry feels threatened by the success of PRCs. After all, every time an abortion-minded woman changes her mind and carries her child to term, the abortion industry loses money and loses the hearts of minds of more Americans.

Let’s consider some numbers to put this in perspective. In 2004, Focus on the Family (Focus) initiated a program to help convert PRCs into medical clinics that offer ultrasound – a window into the womb. Focus estimates that at least 133,000 babies have been saved since that time. Planned Parenthood estimates that an abortion costs between $300 and $950 in the first trimester. Assuming Focus’ estimate is correct and assuming even the lowest cost, Focus’ success represents a loss of almost 40 million dollars for the abortion industry.

And for an industry more concerned with profit than with women’s health, this number is a threat—hence the effort to thwart the good works of PRCs through draconian regulation.

Of course, the Baltimore ordinance is a clear infringement on the constitutionally-guaranteed free speech rights of PRCs and on their mission. A local Maryland PRC, the Greater Baltimore Center for Pregnancy Concerns, filed suit, and a federal district court struck down the ordinance as unconstitutional. The City of Baltimore appealed, and a Fourth Circuit panel initially affirmed the lower court’s decision. However, the City asked for the entire Fourth Circuit to reconsider the appeal—resulting in the Fourth Circuit’s recent decision to reverse the lower court based on a perceivedprocedural flaw in the court below.

The Fourth Circuit did not rule on the merits—so the lower court could still determine that the ordinance unconstitutionally interferes with the First Amendment rights of PRCs—but it did instruct the lower federal court to allow the City to scrutinize PRCs through depositions and other legal “discovery” (investigation processes) to get a better idea of whether the PRCs are entitled to heightened First Amendment protection.

This investigation, however, will only reveal that PRCs provide professional and compassionate care to their clients—both women and men who seek information about sexually transmitted diseases, pregnancy, abortion, and parenting.

National PRC umbrella organizations like Care Net, Heartbeat International, the National Institute of Family and Life Advocates, and others require compliance with comprehensive standards of care. In order for local PRCs to affiliate with these organizations, PRCs must abide by stringent guidelines in order to maintain affiliation. For example, PRCs must abide by a detailed ethical code of practice, entitled the “Commitment of Care and Competence,” which includes the following:

Clients are treated with kindness, compassion, and in a caring manner.
Clients always receive honest and open answers.
Client information is held in strict and absolute confidence.
Clients receive accurate information about pregnancy, fetal development, lifestyle issues, and related concerns.
All advertising and communication are truthful and honest and accurately describe the services offered.
A safe environment is provided through screening all volunteers and staff who interact with clients.
Medical services are provided in accordance with all applicable laws, and in accordance with pertinent medical standards, under the supervision and direction of a licensed physician.

The national organizations also provide hundreds of detailed forms for affiliates’ daily interactions with clients, staff, and volunteers, including the following: client appointment forms (reminding volunteers to explain that the first appointment lasts approximately 45 minutes); client “request for services” forms (alerting clients to the services provided, that volunteers provide peer counseling but not professional counseling, and that the PRC does not perform nor refer for abortion); client intake sheets (asking clients whether they may be contacted by the PRC); and client comment surveys.

But despite—or because of—the high ethical standards of PRCs, these centers have come under attack from pro-abortion forces.

These attacks will ultimately fail, and women will continue to benefit from the compassion and sound advice provided by PRCs. Forcing people to say something doesn’t make it true.

AUL has filed an amicus brief twice in the Greater Baltimore case on behalf of Care Net, Heartbeat International, National Institute of Family and Life Advocates, and local PRCs.

Tuesday, July 16, 2013

Cortney O'Brien | Jul 15, 2013

NOVA Women’s Healthcare of Fairfax County was one of the largest and most frequented abortion clinics in the state of Virginia. It performed more abortions than any other provider in the Old Dominion in the last few years, including 3,066 in 2012 alone. But, thanks to new abortion regulations in the state and a denied permit, it has seen its last patient.

It’s speculated that new Virginia regulations which require clinics to meet new hospital-grade standards had forced NOVA to find a new location. The clinic never got the chance though, for the city denied its permit for being one parking space short of city laws and therefore forced the business to close its doors.

NOVA is one of many clinics affected by new abortion regulations sweeping across the country. In Texas, the state legislature successfully passed HB2, which bans abortion after 20 weeks and requires an abortionist to have admitting privileges to a surgical center within 30 miles of the abortion clinic. Thirty-seven of the state’s 42 clinics fail to meet these standards and are therefore likely to be shuttered.

With NOVA’s closing, it is one of 30 to close so far this year, already doubling that of last year’s. Since 1991, the number has dropped from 2,176 to 625. As for crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs), which serve pregnant women and infants and do not provide abortions – their numbers are staying strong. There are 2,200 CPCs spreading a pro-life message across the country.

While it’s hard for many to stomach the number of abortions performed since Roe v. Wade, the statistical comparisons between abortion clinics and CPCs are figures worth celebrating.

Friday, July 12, 2013

BY OPERATION RESCUE STAFF

AUSTIN, TX, July 11, 2013 (Operation Rescue) - Sweeping new abortion legislation, which could close over 35 abortion clinics and protect babies after 20 weeks' gestation, was approved in a final vote in the Texas House yesterday and is now set for a showdown in the Senate on Friday.

After yesterday’s vote, mayhem broke out amongst pro-abortion protesters, forcing troopers to remove them from the gallery. Five of the boisterous protestors were arrested and held in custody for five hours but were not charged.

In a Facebook posting yesterday, the Texas Alliance for Life confirmed with Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst that the Senate would take up the abortion measure on Friday, July 12. The group has asked that pro-life supporters wear blue and arrive early to pack the gallery for the Senate debate and vote.

The bill, known as HB 2, would ban abortions after 20 weeks, tighten regulations on the dispensing of abortion-inducing drugs, require that abortion clinics meet ambulatory surgical center standards, and mandate that abortionists maintain hospital privileges within 30 miles of their clinics.

The legislation was brought in a second special session in response to revelations of illegal late-term abortions resulting in babies being born alive then intentionally murdered during the Kermit Gosnell trial in Philadelphia and allegations made by three former Houston abortion clinic workers that similar horrors occur in Texas by abortionist Douglas Karpen.

The Senate debate is being closely watched after a vote there during a previous special session was thwarted by a filibuster by pro-abortion Sen. Wendy Davis, followed by chaos created by an angry mob of abortion supporters who essentially rioted in the gallery.

“This legislation is so important that Gov. Rick Perry called a second special session to make sure that the women and babies of Texas are protected from Gosnell-like conditions and practices,” said Cheryl Sullenger, senior policy advisor for Operation Rescue, who was present in the Capitol in Austin earlier this week. “Closing dangerous abortion clinics that cannot or will not comply with basic safety standards only makes sense. It is shocking that some are working so hard to put convenience and profit above the lives and health of women and babies that can feel pain."

"This bill will save untold lives and spare women from being subjected to substandard conditions and barbaric practices,” she said.

Operation Rescue also uncovered widespread abortion abuses at Texas clinic during an undercover investigation in 2011, which led to fines and discipline. Operation Rescue exposed Houston abortionist Douglas Karpen and worked with four of his former employees who blew the whistle on his Gosnell-like late-term abortion practices and released photographic evidence that illegal late-term babies were being killed by having their heads twisted from their bodies.

Thursday, July 11, 2013

3:45 PM, JUL 11, 2013 • BY JOHN MCCORMACK

Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards held a small rally outside the U.S. Capitol Thursday joined by Minnesota senator Al Franken, Connecticut congresswoman Rosa DeLauro, and a crowd of 200 Planned Parenthood activists. Richards warned that new state and federal bills--including measures establishing late-term abortion limits--pose threats to women's rights.

The new legislation is being debated and voted on in the wake of the trial of Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell, who was convicted of murder in May for snipping the necks of babies after they were born. Following the rally, THE WEEKLY STANDARD asked Richards to explain the difference between the Gosnell killings and late-term abortions.

"I mean he was a criminal. And he's now going to jail," Richards replied. "It is very rare for a woman to need to terminate a pregnancy after 20 weeks. And quite often it's stories like ones we heard today where" the fetus is diagnosed with a dire medical condition.

But asked about late-term abortion when there isn't a medical problem (Texas's proposed abortion limit has exceptions for the physical health of the mother and severe "fetal abnormalities"), Richards refused to answer. Nor did she reply when asked if she supports any legal limits on abortion.

Here's the transcript of the exchange:

THE WEEKLY STANDARD: [Supporters of late-term abortion bans] say there's not much of a difference between what Kermit Gosnell did outside the womb to a baby at 23 weeks and a legal late-term abortion [performed] at 23 weeks on that same baby. What is the difference between those two?

CECILE RICHARDS: I mean he was a criminal. And he's now going to jail. As I think you heard Senator Franken say and many women who have written about their own personal stories, it is very rare for a woman to need to terminate a pregnancy after 20 weeks. And quite often it's stories like one we heard today where there is the decision of the doctor that this is the best way, the best for a woman. And the problem is when you have politicians begin to play doctor and make decisions about women's medical care. They aren't in that woman's situation.

TWS: But there has been research out of, I think, University of California-San Francisco about non-medical late-term abortions. These things do happen, even if they're a small number. I'm talking about that specific area. I mean if there were broader exceptions, would you--

AIDE TO CECILE RICHARDS: I know you're in a rush, so I can follow up to get you some more information.

TWS: Are there any legal limits you do support on abortion, Ms. Richards?

Though there was plenty of time for Richards to answer the questions as she walked toward a U.S. Senate office building, she remained silent after her aide tried to cut off questioning.

The president of Planned Parenthood isn't the only prominent pro-choice advocate unable to explain why it should be legal to abort a healthy baby 23 weeks into pregnancy but illegal to kill that same baby after birth. In June, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi was unable to answer the question when asked multiple times. "As a practicing and respectful Catholic, this is sacred ground to me when we talk about this," she said.

In the wake of the Gosnell trial, writers from across the political spectrum have argued that there isn't a significant difference between late-term abortion and the Gosnell murders. "The real reason [Pelosi] avoided the question is because there is no good answer," wrote Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker.

"[T]here's almost no difference between killing a baby accidentally born alive in a late-term abortion, as Gosnell stands accused of, and killing the same baby in the womb, as more skilled doctors can do," according to Bloomberg columnist Margaret Carlson.

"What we need to learn from the Gosnell case is that late-term abortion is infanticide," wrote Daily Beast columnist Kirsten Powers. "Legal infanticide."

Nearly two months since the conviction of Gosnell, the most prominent pro-choice advocates remain unable to explain the difference between infanticide and late-term abortion.

Wednesday, July 10, 2013

When the Rev. Thomas Vander Woude learned about a young couple planning to abort their unborn baby that had been diagnosed with Down syndrome, the priest reached out and offered a deal: Deliver the child and he would help find an appropriate adoptive family.

But he had to act fast.

The woman, who has not been identified for her privacy and her protection, was just shy of six months pregnant and lives in a state that prohibits abortions past 24 weeks — which meant he had a short time to find a family willing to make a lifelong commitment.

So Father Vander Woude, the lead pastor at Holy Trinity Catholic Church in Gainesville, Va., approached a volunteer who helped manage the church’s social media pages, and she posted an urgent plea on Facebook early Monday morning.

“There is a couple in another state who have contacted an adoption agency looking for a family to adopt their Down Syndrome unborn baby. If a couple has not been found by today they plan to abort the baby. If you are interested in adopting this baby please contact Fr. VW IMMEDIATELY,” the post read. “We are asking all to pray for this baby and the wisdom that this couple realize the importance of human life and do not abort this beautiful gift from God.”

The post asked people to call the church’s office after 9:30 a.m. Monday or to email Father Vander Woude.

No one expected the response they received.

“When we got in and opened up around 9:30, it was nearly nonstop. All day long, we were receiving phone calls from people who wanted to adopt the baby,” church staff member Martha Drennan said. “Father Vander Woude has gotten over 900 emails in regard to the baby.”

The offers were narrowed to three families, which the unborn child’s parents are reviewing with the help of an adoption agency.

Ms. Drennan said the church received phone calls from all over the United States and around the world, including from England, Puerto Rico and the Netherlands.

“I think it is a wonderful use of social media, that word can so quickly get all over the country and even to foreign countries and that the people who see the value of life are stepping up and saying, ‘I will take that baby and raise that baby as mine,’” Ms. Drennan said. “It was a beautiful witness all day long that so many people wanted this child and believed in the dignity of that child — Down syndrome or not.”

The president and founder of the International Down Syndrome Coalition, Diane Grover, stressed the importance of informing couples who are considering abortion for babies with Down syndrome that adoption is a viable option, pointing to the fast and overwhelming response her organization received about this one unborn child as an amazing example.

“When [couples are] in that position, a lot of people wonder if their child [with Down syndrome] would actually get adopted,” Ms. Grover said. “There’s a lot of people waiting, and we are happy to always help.”

David Dufresne, a seminary student who plans to become a priest next year, volunteered to help the overwhelmed church staff take calls.

“I was taking calls for about three hours straight, just talking to people who are willing to adopt this little baby they never knew about until that morning,” Mr. Dufresne said. “I mean, all day long, just receiving phone calls from people who were so generous and within a couple minutes made a life-changing decision. I was really inspired by the goodness of people and what they would do to save a life.”

Tuesday, July 9, 2013

BY CHERYL SULLENGER

Austin, TX, July 9, 2013 (OperationRescue.org) — Thousands of pro-life supporters jammed together in front of the Texas Capitol Building on yesterday's hot, muggy evening to hear notable speakers such as Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, Attorney General Mike Abbott, and Fox News personality former Gov. Mick Huckabee speak in support of a Texas abortion law that was thwarted by an angry pro-abortion mob two weeks ago.

The rally had a street-fair quality, with a sea of blue-shirted pro-lifers cheering and chanting, ”Pass the bill,” while abortion supporters sporting orange clothing occasionally recited mantras such as, “Separate Church and State.” The pro-abortion chants were generally ignored and drowned out by the enthusiastic throng, which took every opportunity to punctuate the speakers’ messages with hoots and cheers.

There was a palpable sense of history in the making.

As the pro-life rally progressed, abortion supporters congregated on the street in front of the Capitol, chanting and cheering at honking cars as they whizzed by, all under the watchful eyes of at least 15 motorcycle officers who lined a section of the street nearby.

Security was high and there were no noticeable incidents, at least as far as this writer could see.

It is sometimes difficult to measure a crowd of that size, but estimates were between 3,000 to 5,000 pro-life supporters rallied outside the Capitol, with hundreds more inside wandering the halls of the Capitol. Others jammed into several over-flow rooms to watch closed-circuit broadcasts of the Senate Health and Human Services Committee as they patiently endured a marathon of speakers who had signed up to speak both for and against SB1, the Senate companion bill to the House version known as HB2.

These bills would ban abortions after 20 weeks gestation and provide additional regulations, such as the requirement that abortionists must have local hospital privileges. If successful, it would close all but 5 out of 42 abortion clinics in Texas.

The Senate hearing was expected to last all night.

“We’ll stay here the rest of the week, if necessary, to hear witnesses,” said Republican Sen. Jane Nelson.

The testimony will continue round the clock until the last witness is heard. Literally thousands more registered their support or opposition to the bill by submitting a form in person outside the hearing room.

Sen. Nelson indicated that there would be no vote immediately following the hearing, signaling that the Senate may be content to move forward at a slower pace than the House, which heard eight hours of testimony last week and has scheduled a vote in the full House on Tuesday.

This is the second special legislative session called by Gov. Rick Perry to ensure passage of the pro-life law. Texas has a part -time legislature that meets only once every two years. Adding to the urgency of passing the abortion restrictions this year were recent allegations of three former abortion clinic employees that Houston abortionist Douglas Karpen routinely kills late-term babies born alive during abortions using practices similar to those of convicted murderer Kermit Gosnell. Operation Rescue released photographic evidence depicting two late-term babies that seems to support the women’s claims.

Operation Rescue will be Tweeting live from the Capitol Tuesday.

Monday, July 8, 2013

Carol Platt Liebau | Jul 05, 2013

This is the ad deemed "too controversial" to be run by MSM outlets like USA Today, the LA Times, and the Chicago Tribune. It seems that it is OK to write about abortion in the abstract, but completely unnaccetable to show who is being aborted, out of the womb.

A sad commentary.

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

Fred Barnes

July 2, 2013 7:55 PM

Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) today agreed to be the lead sponsor of a Senate bill to ban abortion after an unborn child is 20 weeks old. A similar measure passed the House last month and a state version is now being debated in the Texas legislature, where it is likely to be approved.

With Rubio’s presence, the bill is certain to gain enormous media attention and thus more national visibility for the issue of limiting late term abortions. Right-to-life groups have urged Rubio to take the lead on the issue, believing he would be the strongest possible advocate in the Senate. Several sources confirmed he’d agreed.

The bill faces an uphill fight in the Democrat-controlled Senate and a veto threat by President Obama. But win or lose, Republicans and the leaders of the pro-life movement regard the 20-week ban as an especially favorable issue for their cause – and one that might strengthen GOP candidates in the 2014 midterm election.

This is reflected in poll numbers. A Gallup survey in January found that 64 percent of Americans think an abortion in the second three months of pregnancy should be illegal. As for the last three months, 80 percent feel an abortion that late should be banned. A Texas Tribune poll found even more sweeping opposition among Texans to late term abortions.

Rubio’s decision to play a major role in the abortion debate is bound to stir political speculation. He is viewed as a likely candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.

But he’s recently prompted serious criticism by Republicans over his support for the immigration reform bill that passed the Senate last week. His front-and-center role on a key anti-abortion measure is likely to ease concerns about him among GOP voters.

The bill cleared House, 228-196. Six Democrats joined 222 Republicans in voting for it. Six Republicans sided with 190 Democrats in voting no.

Rubio is expected to announce his sponsorship of the bill after the July 4 congressional recess.

In Texas, the late term issue has boosted Governor Rick Perry, who is considering whether to seek another term next year or possibly run for president in 2016. Democrats accused him of “demonizing” women when he questioned the filibuster again a 20-week ban last week by state Democratic senator Wendy Davis. In truth, his statement was quite respectful. Polls now show him in a strong position for reelection against Davis or any other Democratic candidate.

The idea behind the anti-abortion bill is to ban abortion once the unborn child is viable – that is, able to survive – outside the womb. There is disagreement over when this occurs during a period of 20 to 24 weeks after fertilization.

At the very least, Republicans will benefit from having the Rubio-backed legislation take center stage, overshadowing controversial statements by Republican candidates in 2012 about rape and abortion. The bill provides an exception to the late term ban in the case of rape or incest and when a physical health condition puts the life of the mother at risk.

Monday, July 1, 2013

BY JOHN JALSEVAC

ALBUQUERQUE, NM, June 30, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – An abortion worker at a notorious late-term abortion facility in New Mexico tells a 27-week-pregnant mom to “just sit on the toilet” in her hotel room, and not to look down, if she should feel the urge to pass the body of her baby during the multi-day abortion procedure in the latest undercover sting video released by the pro-life group Live Action.

“If we can't catch it [delivery of the dead baby – the final stage of the abortion procedure] early enough, which has happened...then you'll want to unlock the door to the hotel room, get your cell phone, and just sit on the toilet,” the unnamed counselor at Southwestern Women's Options in Albuquerque, New Mexico tells an undercover investigator with Live Action. “You don't have to look at anything...you can stay on the phone with us until the doctor and nurse get there.” This baby was born at 27 weeks.

When the woman asks what the abortion clinic will do with the body of her baby, the counselor responds, “We wrap it up, and we bring it back to the clinic.” The counselor repeatedly urges the woman not to look into the toilet. “Don't look down. Don't look,” she says.

At 27 weeks a baby is fully formed. Most babies born at this age in the United States will survive if they receive medical attention.

Abortionist Dr. Carmen Landau echoes the counselor's advice, telling the Live Action investigator to "sit on the toilet"and "unlock the hotel room."

"Just sit there," Landau says, "and you would not move until we come and get you."

The video is the sixth video in Live Action’s latest undercover investigation series, Inhuman: Undercover in America's Abortion Industry. The videos depict employees at some of the nation’s most notorious late-term abortion facilities describing in graphic detail how late-term abortions are performed.

Previous videos have shown abortion workers at various clinics admitting that they would not work to save babies who are born alive during the abortion process, as has happened in the past. The federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act was passed to ensure that such babies receive medical attention after stories emerged of babies routinely being born alive and then left to die by abortionists.

In one video abortion Leroy Carhart, one of four late-term abortionists portrayed in a documentary that premiered at the Sundance Festival recently, told the Live Action investigator that after he killed her baby it would soften “like meat in a crock pot” before she expelled the baby’s body three days later.

In the lastest video, the abortion workers describe how they will inject the baby's heart with digoxin to ensure "fetal demise," and how the mother will eventually pass a "mass," i.e., her fully formed baby's body.

Live Action President Lila Rose condemned Southwestern Women's Options and what she calls the "abortion ethos."

"If these abortionists truly cared about women's health, they would keep their patients at the facility throughout the horrific multiday lateterm abortion,” she said. “But that would be too expensive for an industry obsessed with making money at the expense of human life, so women are left in a hotel room to endure a grueling, traumatic ordeal alone."

Southwestern Women's Options was a subject of another previous Live Action video in which Dr. Landau likened the lethal injection that kills the fetus to "a flu shot, really."

The new video also presents an abortion counselor offering misleading information on whether the 27-week preborn child will feel the lethal abortion injection. "[If the baby]'s bottom down, it'll insert through the baby's bottom, [and] if it's head down, it'll be inserted through the cranium."

"I don't know if it's developed enough to feel that," she says. "It might be."

The Live Action video references K.S. Anand, an expert on fetal pain, and the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (BJOG), showing that preborn children at 20 weeks and older definitely feel pain – likely more acutely than older children do.

The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed a ban on abortion past 20 weeks based upon the wealth of information suggesting that unborn children can feel the pain fo the abortion by that point.

"Abortion corporations like Southwestern Women's Options and Planned Parenthood will say and do anything to 'close the deal,'" Rose said. "Leaving a woman alone on the toilet in a hotel room and saying, 'Call us and we'll come get you' – at a time when seconds can make the difference between life and death – is profoundly irresponsible and negligent. We must never forget that abortion is a business first and foremost – a business willing to destroy a helpless, voiceless child for literally thousands of dollars.

“We cannot be surprised when they send women off in the middle of a dangerous procedure for 'roomservice abortions.' But we can be disgusted, and we can demand an end to it."

Dr. Curtis Boyd, who coowns Southwestern Women's Options, also runs Southwestern Women's Surgery Center in Dallas, Texas. The facility offers abortions up to 24 weeks, the state's legal limit.

Texas became an abortion battleground in June, with Governor Rick Perry calling a special legislative session to address allegations by former abortion clinic workers that Texas abortionist Douglas Karpen routinely murders babies born alive during abortions.

Live Action said it has sent letters including the complete New Mexico footage to elected officials in both New Mexico and Texas. Recipients include Texas Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst and the 20 state representatives who called for an investigation into the Karpen facility.

The pro-life group is demanding investigations in both states of Curtis Boyd and his staff.

"We're hoping prolife officials like New Mexico's Governor Susana Martinez will put an end to the inhuman and brutal practices going on in these facilities," Rose said. "And as Texas legislators seek to vote on a bill that would protect paincapable babies from an agonizing death, we pray that they will put an end to Curtis Boyd's bloody handiwork as well."