The bottom-feeders at Planned Parenthood are apparently rooting around for “hard cases” to illustrate the supposed need for [federally-funded] abortions.

“Help us tell the real story. Your story. Right now. Congress needs to hear from women who have experienced wanted pregnancies where there was a sever health risk to the fetus, causing the women to choose abortion…. This is just the type of real and compelling story to illustrate how an abortion ban would affect women all over America.”

I have 305,310 compelling abortion stories; each is the story of a child killed by a Planned Parenthood abortion in 2007.

Everyone is aware that people suffer. Planned Parenthood and other pro-aborts are hardly tilling new soil there.  But the idea that alleviating suffering justifies the killing of another is untenable. The case of R v. Dudley and Stephens has some great language for this discussion. The case involved murder charges against survivors of a shipwreck who, after supposedly casting lots, ate the cabin boy who was a fellow castaway in the lifeboat. When reading the case for criminal law, I was struck by the following language, which is an great response to the “hard cases” in bioethics (emphasis mine):

It must not be supposed that in refusing to admit temptation to be an excuse for crime it is forgotten how terrible the temptation was; how awful the suffering; how hard in such trials to keep the judgment straight and the conduct pure. We are often compelled to set up standards we cannot reach ourselves, and to lay down rules which we could not ourselves satisfy. But a man has no right to declare temptation to be an excuse, though he might himself have yielded to it, nor allow compassion for the criminal to change or weaken in any manner the legal definition of the crime.

Courtesy of Yahoo news, the billboards in Georgia are getting people to talk among African American women. My personal favorite is the woman who claims that taking away the right to choose when to have children hearkens back to slavery.  She makes me laugh.  Way to play the race card, lady. You know white people can’t fight the slavery card.

Well this manages to pretty neatly encapsulate everything that is wrong with our culture.

“I’m doing this to de-mystify abortion,” she says. “I’m doing this so other women know, ‘Hey, it’s not nearly as terrifying as I had myself worked up thinking it was.’ It’s just not that bad.”

These are the words of Angie Jackson, a blogger and mother of a 4-year-old son. Her IUD birth control failed; she is four weeks pregnant and writing about her abortion on YouTube, her personal blog, and on Twitter under the hashtag #livetweetingabortion.

Last Thursday, Jackson visited a Planned Parenthood where her doctor gave her the first dose of RU-486, the abortion pill. (Note: The abortion pill is not the same as the morning-after pill.) She had to take four more pills — swallowing two and letting two others dissolve in her mouth—on Friday and Saturday.

She hasn’t taken to her various media platforms to show the graphic parts of her abortion. Instead, Jackson is chronicling how her abortion feels physically and emotionally — as she puts it on YouTube, “It’s just not that bad.” It’s almost like guerilla sex ed.

An optimistic part of me thinks that the woman’s callous disregard for human life and the way that she is acting in the public square will actually hurt her cause.  Instead of de-mystifying abortion, she offers an extreme example of self-absorption and selfishness.

Well, that’s what I tell myself to keep from weeping.

By the way, I find the comments of the person blogging about this to be hysterical.

I think it’s brave of her to share something that will make her a bulls-eye for anti-choice activists.

Oh yes, what a brave woman.  She will have to endure the slings and arrows of hundreds of furious blog comments (like this one) that she most likely will never read.  It certainly takes a brave individual to swallow a few pills in order to “do away with a problem” rather than take responsibility for one’s actions.  She’s a real warrior that one.

Apparently in Atlanta the pro-life groups have been garnering the support of African-Americans by appealing to their sense of racial injustice.  The article, here, has a picture of a billboard that says “Black Children are an Endangered Species.”

“It’s ingenious,” said the Rev. Johnny Hunter, national director of the Life Education and Resource Network, a North Carolina-based anti-abortion group aimed at African-Americans that operates in 27 states. “This campaign is in your face, and nobody can ignore it.”

The billboards went up last week in Atlanta and urge black women to “get outraged.”

In your face? That’s for sure.  I’m still shocked.  Thoughts?

I’m a pretty big sports fan, but I had never heard of Sean James, until I saw this commercial only moments ago. Al Joyner, I’ve heard of, but only because of his talented late wife, Florence Griffith Joyner, and sister, Jackie Joyner-Kersey.

But here’s my take on this: if you have to tell people you’re a famous athlete, you’re probably not a famous athlete. I can’t imagine, for example, Michael Jordan saying, “Hello, I am Michael Jordan. I am a former professional and college basketball player, and a two-time Olympic gold medalist. I was also a member of six NBA championship teams in the 1990s.”

The Washington Post’s Sally Jenkins destroys the National Organization of Women for their opposition to Tim Tebow’s ad. For those who don’t follow Jenkins, she is both a staunch feminist and pro-choice. The whole column is a must-read. Here is the red-meat section:

I’m pro-choice, and Tebow clearly is not. But based on what I’ve heard in the past week, I’ll take his side against the group-think, elitism and condescension of the “National Organization of Fewer and Fewer Women All The Time.” For one thing, Tebow seems smarter than they do.

Tebow’s 30-second ad hasn’t even run yet, but it already has provoked “The National Organization for Women Who Only Think Like Us” to reveal something important about themselves: They aren’t actually “pro-choice” so much as they are pro-abortion. Pam Tebow has a genuine pro-choice story to tell. She got pregnant in 1987, post-Roe v. Wade, and while on a Christian mission in the Philippines, she contracted a tropical ailment. Doctors advised her the pregnancy could be dangerous, but she exercised her freedom of choice and now, 20-some years later, the outcome of that choice is her beauteous Heisman Trophy winner son, a chaste, proselytizing evangelical.

Pam Tebow and her son feel good enough about that choice to want to tell people about it. Only, NOW says they shouldn’t be allowed to. Apparently NOW feels this commercial is an inappropriate message for America to see for 30 seconds, but women in bikini selling beer is the right one. I would like to meet the genius at NOW who made that decision. On second thought, no, I wouldn’t.

In October, while I was visiting Franciscan University in Steubenville, Ohio, I taped an episode of the EWTN program, Franciscan University Presents. For those who missed the broadcast on Sunday evening, January 31, EWTN will be repeating the broadcast twice more this week: Tuesday, February 2 at 1:00 PM ET and 10 AM PT, and Friday, February 5 at 4:00 AM ET and 1 AM PT.

I discussed my 2007 book, Defending Life: A Moral and Legal Case Against Abortion Choice (Cambridge University Press), which, as of Monday evening, was the #1 ranked book in the category of “abortion and birth control” on Amazon.com.

(Originally posted on the Return to Rome blog)

A woman got a twofer at a New York abortion clinic (i.e. “a one-stop gynecology and plastic surgery clinic”) which killed both the her and her child during an abortion.

An employee at the clinic … insisted that everything had gone well at the second-floor medical facility.

“The patient was transferred to the hospital, she didn’t die at the clinic,” said the woman, who refused to give her name. “Nothing happened here.”

(emphasis added)

Just another day at the office.

Although the article does not mention the child, I presume it was ably killed it as well.

Today is the March for Life, an event I hope to attend at least some of later in the day.  It is also the 37th anniversary of one of the most atrocious Supreme Court decisions ever handed down by our Overlords in black, and Red State has a terrific editorial today that is a definite must read on the topic.

It is heartening that we have made some small strides through the years.  Opposition to abortion has increased, and we’re seeing some signs that the youth of today are embracing the culture of life.  But we still have far to go, as evidenced by the actions of the Montgomery County (Maryland) Council.

The Montgomery County Council is considering a regulation that would require pro-life pregnancy resource centers to tell new clients that the information they provide is not intended to be medical advice and to turn to other providers before “proceeding on a course of action regarding [her] pregnancy.” The regulation would impose a fine of up to $750 per day for not doing so.

The bill singles out pregnancy resource centers only because of their pro-life mission. If approved, the Montgomery County regulation would impose government-compelled speech on a non-profit organization that does not receive public funding simply because the organization declines to provide or refer for abortion. The regulation does not apply to “family planning” clinics, which the County government funds, or to abortion clinics.

Maryland, which as a colony was a haven for Catholics, is now the state with the fourth highest abortion rate in the country, and had been one of the few states where the rate is increasing.

There is a critical need for offering alternatives to abortion. While the abortion rate declined 9 percent nationally between 2000 and 2005, the abortion rate in Maryland rose 8 percent in the same period. Our state’s abortion rate is now 38 percent higher than the national rate, with more than one-in-four Maryland pregnancies ending in abortion. There were 37,590 abortions performed here in 2005 – about 103 per day.  To even consider targeting centers that help women choose life is unconscionable in light of these tragic statistics, which represent an even more tragic reality.

Though there is growing opposition to this movement, the Montgomery City Council has not a single Republican member.  My wife has written to our Council member, but I fear our pleas will fall on deaf ears.  If you are in or around the Montgomery County area, please write your local representatives to fight this ideologically motivated attack on pregnancy resource centers.  There is more information on how to get involved here.

Today is the 37th anniversary of Roe v. Wade (1973), the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in which the court ruled that the Constitution’s right of privacy requires a right to abortion. Although prolifers decry this decision, few have rarely examined the logic of the opinion. For this reason, my 2006 article may be of interest: “The Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade, and Abortion Law,” Liberty University Law Review 1.1 (2006): 37-72. It is a revised and updated version of the previously published article, “Roe v. Wade: Its Logic and Its Legacy.” The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 7.2 (Summer 2003): 4-28. The Liberty article was again revised and updated when it was published as chapter 2 of my book, Defending Life: A Moral and Legal Case Against Abortion Choice (Cambridge University Press, 2007)

(Originally posted on the Return to Rome blog)

Senator Nelson has agreed to vote for the revised version of the “Health care” bill.  What it does as described by a Congressional aide:

The Manager’s Amendment does NOT contain language similar to the Stupak amendment approved by the House.  Instead the section on abortion (starting on page 38) adds a provision allowing states to opt out of providing abortion coverage through the exchange and adds further layers of accounting requirements.  The result remains the same, contrary to longstanding policy, the federal government will subsidize private health insurance plans that cover abortion, and Americans will facilitate abortion by making it more easily available.  The result will be more lives lost to abortion and more wounded mothers.

Why the sudden change? According to National Review:

The deal for Ben Nelson includes additional Medicaid funding for Nebraska and carve outs for physician owned hospitals in Nebraska — and Nebraska only. Uncle Sam will take the hit for 100% of the Medicaid expansion for Nebraska, forever. Nebraska is the only state to get this deal.

If the bill is good for America, then vote for it.  If not, then don’t.  Selling your vote in order to get special treatment for your state may be legal but it is morally bankrupt.  I have no problem with Congressmen trying to getting money for their state and even stating he will oppose the bill unless there is more for his state.  But when  you express moral opposition to a bill and that moral opposition suddenly evaporates when your state gets enough money – that is a whole different matter.  In Alabama, we have a word for a person who sells his self for money – a whore.

While the Chinese have no intention of reducing their emissions, they are more than willing to accept Western concessions and political cover.  In a brilliant bit of spin, the Chinese are now claiming a place on the vanguard of carbon reduction because of their unmatched efforts at ‘population control.’

They will find a sympathetic hearing in Copenhagen. What’s an unborn child worth in carbon offsets?

COPENHAGEN: Population and climate change are intertwined but the population issue has remained a blind spot when countries discuss ways to mitigate climate change and slow down global warming, according to Zhao Baige, vice-minister of National Population and Family Planning Commission of China (NPFPC) .

“Dealing with climate change is not simply an issue of CO2 emission reduction but a comprehensive challenge involving political, economic, social, cultural and ecological issues, and the population concern fits right into the picture,” said Zhao, who is a member of the Chinese government delegation.

Many studies link population growth with emissions and the effect of climate change….

As a result of the family planning policy, China has seen 400 million fewer births, which has resulted in 18 million fewer tons of CO2 emissions a year, Zhao said.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Planned Parenthood) today compared abortion coverage for women under Obamacare with Viagra coverage for men.  She noted that it was ‘the men’ who were responsible for the proposed amendment and asked why women were being ’singled out.’    No, Senator Boxer, it is the unborn, male and female.  A longer C-SPAN video is available here.

Confession: I get more “news”  than is probably goof for me from the Yahoo homepage.  I think they get their stuff from the Associated Press.

Anyway, I found this article interesting.  Bishop Tobin (RI) has asked Rep. Patrick Kennedy (son of Ted) to stop receiving Communion because of his stance on abortion. In the article, you have to read between the anti-religious lines, and the whole thing is kind of a waste of journalism but I’d like to see more bishops like Tobin.

I’d also like to see a knock-down drag-out fistfight between them.

From the AP:

Homeland chief warns against anti-Muslim backlash
(AP) – 8 hours ago
ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates — The U.S. Homeland Security secretary says she is working to prevent a possible wave of anti-Muslim sentiment after the shootings at Fort Hood in Texas.

Janet Napolitano says her agency is working with groups across the United States to try to deflect any backlash against American Muslims following Thursday’s rampage by Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a Muslim who reportedly expressed growing dismay over the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The shootings left 13 people dead and 29 wounded.

Napolitano was in the United Arab Emirates on Sunday for talks with security officials and a meeting with women university students in Abu Dhabi.

Now, let’s change the cast of characters:
(more…)

(HT: K-Lo at NRO)

From the KBXT.com website (Bryan / College Station, Texas):

Planned Parenthood has been a part of Abby Johnson’s life for the past eight years; that is until last month, when Abby resigned. Johnson said she realized she wanted to leave, after watching an ultrasound of an abortion procedure.

“I just thought I can’t do this anymore, and it was just like a flash that hit me and I thought that’s it,” said Jonhson.

She handed in her resignation October 6. Johnson worked as the Bryan Planned Parenthood Director for two years.
(more…)

I know I would be if I spun this wildly.

[Deal] Hudson argues that the public option will end up extending federal funding for abortion. He says that the courts will step in even if Congress doesn’t mandate abortion coverage in any such plan. Mind you, the courts have not stepped in to over-rule the Hyde Amendment lo these many years. The federal health insurance coverage that members of Congress enjoy does not include abortion coverage. Federal Medicaid funds do not support abortion. So, why would the federal option, which would be modeled after the insurance that members of Congress get, necessarily end up mandating abortion coverage? Hudson does not say. (more…)

According to Lisa Schiffrin at NRO:

Some people have noted that Barack Obama has not actually achieved peace, anywhere, or diminution of hostilities, or the destruction of even one nuclear weapon, (or even any of his domestic agenda). But, as the Nobel Committee announced, this award is about a new climate of hope.

Ironically, the fact that the unborn has not achieved certain powers and abilities it may only actualize in the future, and does not actualize in the present, is employed by some bioethicists to justify abortion. (See my critique of such arguments here and here). So, Obama’s potential gets him the Nobel Peace Prize, while the unborn’s potential, unfortunately, is not enough to avoid being awarded the prize of prenatal violence.

Today is Respect Life Sunday.  There will be Life Chains on major roads all across the country.  If you’re not joining folks from your parish/church, just hop out of the car for a few minutes at the first one you see.  Above all, pray for the unborn and the infirm, pray for us all.

(Click here to go to a full-size jpg. Edit:  And yes, the sketch is Leonardo da Vinci’s.)

Doug Kmiec, a law professor, pro-life advocate, former Reagan Administration official, and evangelical-Catholic-whatever, took a lot of heat from us usual suspects for endorsing Barack Obama, perhaps the most pro-choice major candidate ever.

“A black man; a caring man; a talented man. A man different from conservative self and yet calling me to find the best of that self.”

Professor Kmiec has now been appointed by President Obama as America’s new ambassador to Malta.

A scene from A Man for All Seasons comes to mind, where Thomas More confronts his betrayer, Richard Rich:

There is one question I would like to ask the witness.

But for Wales?

Or Malta.

“We must deceive them so as not to hurt them, and in that way, we honor them.”

This logical gem was employed by Dwight Shrute in an episode of The Office (“Casino Night,” for fellow enthusiasts) to justify hiding the presence of one woman at a party from another and vice versa. Unfortunately, such logical travesties are not confined to sitcoms, but are all too frequently used to justify killing unborn children. (more…)

Horrible news:

Local officials and state police are confirming that a pro-life advocate was shot and killed outside a high school in this Michigan town. The person, who is described as well-known but whose identity has not been released, was shot multiple times while protesting abortion outside Owosso High School.

Officials say the shooting occurred at 7:30 a.m. local time and most students were inside the school building at the time of the incident.

State police have also confirmed they apprehended a suspect about 8:15 a.m at the suspect’s home in this small community northeast of Lansing.

This will no doubt lead to a round of stories in the mainstream press about the inherent violence of the pro-choice movement and how we should look more closely at this group of would-be domestic terrorists.

Via Rod, reading this letter of the late-Senator Kennedy’s to a constituent on abortion always makes you ask, well, what happened? At the same time it should be a sober-reminder to pro-lifers that while many on the right and in the Republican Party might mouth support for life, their actions (or more realistically, inaction…) place them functionally closer to the late-Senator’s position than they’d like to admit: (more…)

But the art of “Borking” a judicial nominee is something for which our public square is much, much poorer. It is not a good thing that our Judiciary has become so divided and this Kennedy clip ought to live in infamy:

It occured to me with all these townhalls going on, that not enough people are REALLY hitting the Democrats from the left. In other words, the right is getting PWND by the mainsteam media for brining up death panels and abortion, but no one is asking these guys to really defend and zelously advocate for their belief in abortions. I’d love to see someone ask this question of a congressman:

”

Congressman X, enough is enough! I’m hearing all this about death panels and abortion and I think it’s high time we recognize abortion is here: why can’t we just be civilized and help a woman out who is in trouble and give her access to the services she needs? Isn’t that compassionate? Why are we afraid of all the boogeymen out there demogoguing on this issue? Isn’t this an important part of any compassionate and true health care?”

The question is, I believe, vague enough so that the person asking it doesn’t necessarily have to feel like he or she is advocating abortion (“services she needs” is certainly a euphemism, but it is one step back from “reproductive services”). I’d love to see one of these guys either a) vigorously defend a pro-abortion or proto-euthanasia regime; or, b) get real flack from their base for backing down.

Why not fan the flame? We didn’t start the fire.

This is video of a brief talk I gave yesterday at a gathering of conservative Republicans.

My talk to the RALC

When does one become a human being? Let us turn to White House Office of Science and Technology Policy director, John P. Holdren, for a clue.

John P. Holdren is director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. In 1973, he co-authored a book — “Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions” — with Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich.

…

On page 235, while making an argument for legalized abortion, the authors use language that on its face says a child “will ultimately develop into a human being” — after it is born.

“To most biologists, an embryo (unborn child during the first two or three months of development) or a fetus is no more a complete human being than a blueprint is a building,” they wrote. “The fetus, given the opportunity to develop properly before birth, and given the essential early socializing experiences and sufficient nourishing food during the crucial early years after birth, will ultimately develop into a human being. Where any of these essential elements is lacking, the resultant individual will be deficient in some respect.”

Did you go through the essential early socializing experiences, and were you given sufficient nourishing food during the crucial early years after your birth? If not, then you, though born, are not a human being.

This story is beginning to get a lot of play:

Brooklyn nurse claims she was forced to choose between her religious convictions and her job when Mount Sinai Hospital ordered her to assist in a late-term abortion against her will. The hospital even exaggerated the patient’s condition and claimed the woman could die if the nurse, a devout Catholic, did not follow orders, the nurse alleges in a lawsuit.

“It felt like a horror film unfolding,” said Catherina Cenzon-DeCarlo, 35, who claims she has had gruesome nightmares and hasn’t been able to sleep since the May 24 incident. The married mother of a year-old baby was 30 minutes into her early-morning shift when she realized she had been assigned to an abortion. She begged her supervisor to find a replacement nurse for the procedure. The hospital had a six-hour window to find a fill-in, the suit says.

This is EXACTLY why conscience protection is so desperately important to enact and keep in place.

Yet another compelling video from the folks at CatholicVote.org: