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.

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.

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.”

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."

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.

A Florida man who has pleaded guilty to tricking his girlfriend into taking an abortion pill, which allegedly led to a miscarriage, is awaiting sentencing as his lawyers are trying to prove that a single dosage could not have been enough to cause the death of the unborn baby.

Defense expert Rebecca Allen, arguing on behalf of 29-year-old John Welden, who faces 13 years and eight months in prison if found responsible for the unborn baby's death, has said in an affidavit that it is "impossible that one 200-microgram tablet of Misoprostol caused serious bodily harm to (Lee). At most, one 200-microgram tablet may cause slight nausea, diarrhea, transient fever/chills, or minor abdominal discomfort."

"It would be impossible with regard to causation, for any medical professional to definitely conclude that one 200-microgram tablet was the actual cause of any harm whatsoever," Allen added, according to The Tampa Tribune.

Two prosecution experts from the University of South Florida testified on Wednesday, however, that it is highly likely the Cytotec, another name for Misoprostol, caused the miscarriage.

"(The drug) did exactly what it was intended to do, and that resulted in the demise of the embryo," argued OB-GYN expert Catherine Lynch.

In May 2013, Welden was charged with murder under the "Protection of Unborn Children Act" after he tricked his girlfriend at the time, Remee Jo Lee, into taking an abortion pill after finding out that she was pregnant.

According to a report by Assistant U.S. Attorney W. Stephen Muldrow, the Florida man forged the signature of his father, a practicing OB/GYN doctor, on a prescription to obtain the abortion drug Misoprostol, after Lee told him she planned to raise the child on her own.

Welden is said to have acquired the drug from a local pharmacy, switched the label on it with the common antibiotic Amoxicillin, and had given it to Lee, telling her that his father wanted her to take the pill for a bacterial infection.

After taking the pill the next day, Lee began experiencing abdominal pain and bleeding.  By the time she got to the hospital, however, she found out that she had lost her six-week-old unborn baby.

"Quite frankly, your honor, this case shocks the conscience," Muldrow said about Welden's confession.

"This was a senseless crime. He had no reason to kill the baby – his baby. She had a name for the baby … This case is solid. The crime is heinous."

The 29-year-old man escaped a possible life sentence after he pleaded guilty in a Florida court in September. It was later revealed that Welden tricked Lee into taking the abortion drug because he did not want his other girlfriend finding out about the relationship.

"I woulda had my kid and I woulda been fine with that... woulda told my parents it was someone else's. I wouldn't have bothered you for money. I wouldn't have bothered you at all," Lee told Welden in a transcript of a conversation between them recorded by police.

Pharmacology expert Daniel Buffington has argued that Misoprostol can be safely used to treat gastric ulcers, but can cause miscarriages in early pregnancy. He added that no exposure to it is safe for women wishing to avoid abortion, and that the drug "contributed to or directly resulted in the termination of (Lee's) pregnancy."

U.S. District Judge Richard A. Lazzara has said it must be proven that Lee suffered harm before he can impose Welden's sentence.

Susan G. Komen suffered a 22 percent drop in donations last year, which may have been due to the controversy it recently had regarding its monetary ties to Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion provider.

A spokeswoman for the breast cancer awareness organization acknowledged a strong decline in donations, according to the Associated Press.

"Citing audited financial statements posted on its website this week, a spokeswoman for the Dallas-based breast cancer charity said contributions - including donations and corporate sponsorships - dropped from about $164 million from the fiscal year ending in March 2012 to $128 million in the year ending March 2013," reported the AP.

"Komen spokeswoman Andrea Rader attributed the drops to the Planned Parenthood controversy, in addition to economic uncertainty and other events vying for charity dollars."

In November 2011, Susan G. Komen's leadership voted to cut its financial ties to Planned Parenthood, partly due to the organization barring of funding from any group presently under investigation from the government.

News of the policy change was made public in late January 2012 and led to much controversy. Within days of the announcement, the charity reversed its decision and allowed for Planned Parenthood to receive funding once more from Komen.

The Christian Post reported in February 2012 that Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) had launched an investigation to see if the abortion provider was using public money improperly in providing abortions.

Subsequently, in February 2013, Reps. Diane Black (R-Tenn.), Pete Olson (R-Texas) and Senator David Vitter (R-La.) were among a group of more than 50 members of Congress who requested a report from the GAO on how taxpayer funding is specifically used by Planned Parenthood and other organizations that perform abortions.

Karen Handel, Komen's senior vice president for public policy, resigned in protest following the reversal decision. In an earlier interview with CP, Handel said that she believed in the near future Komen will again cut funding ties to Planned Parenthood.

"I believe that Komen will be at this crossroads again for the following reason: making or doing the best it can do with donor dollars," said Handel in December 2012.

"Being the best stewards of donor dollars is ultimately going to require that Komen shift those dollars because these are not impactful grants. Ultimately, donors are going to demand that."

This was not the first indicator of trouble for Komen due to the controversy. As reported by Pam Fessler of National Public Radio back in June 2012, participation for that year's Race for the Cure event had noticeably declined.

"Participation is down at some of the Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure events that raise money for breast cancer research and treatment," wrote Fessler, who claimed, "the foundation may be suffering from the fallout of its decision to stop funding Planned Parenthood programs."

Susan G. Komen did not return comment to The Christian Post by press time. 

The head of the Republican National Committee has announced that the political party's winter meeting will be delayed so that members can attend a major pro-life rally.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus stated that the RNC will delay its meeting so that he and other RNC members can attend the annual March for Life on Jan. 22 in Washington, D.C.

Raffi Williams, deputy press secretary with the RNC, told The Christian Post that the decision came in large part because the RNC was meeting in the nation's capital.

"This is the first time in years that the RNC has held the winter meeting in DC. This means it is also the first time the RNC has had the opportunity to send our members to participate in the March for Life as a part of the winter meeting," said Williams.

"The Republican Party is a pro-life party, it is in our platform and we will continue to fight for the life of the unborn."

Williams also told CP that the change "is basically the RNC delaying the start of the first afternoon a couple hours and chartering a couple of buses for members so they can attend."

"Since our winter meeting and the March for Life coincided we thought it only fitting for our members to attend the March with the thousands of activists who come from around the country to take part in the fight for the unborn," said Williams.

The March for Life is an annual large-scale pro-life demonstration held in Washington, D.C. on the anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court decisionRoe vs. Wade.

Each year, untold thousands of pro-life activists from across the country and abroad come to the national mall to hear speakers, music, and eventually to walk.

A spokesman for the March for Life directed The Christian Post to an official statement from the organization regarding the news.

"The March for Life welcomes the news from the Republican National Committee that they will postpone their winter meeting so that members may attend and participate in the March on January 22nd," reads the statement.

"We are pleased that the Chairman Reince Priebus recognizes the importance of the life issue and has given it priority in the Committee's calendar."

Other pro-life groups have also expressed their approval of the decision by Priebus to delay the RNC winter meeting.

Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the pro-life group Susan B. Anthony List, sent out a statement hailing Priebus' words as "great news."

"I met with Chairman Priebus to express my gratitude on behalf of our membership across the country," stated Dannenfelser.

"So today, we celebrate, and we look forward to building upon Chairman Priebus's willingness to stand up for the unborn. I hope to see you at the March!"