by Steven Ertelt
A Planned Parenthood abortion patient has filed suit against the abortion business for botching an abortion so badly that it left part of the body of the unborn baby inside her afterwards.
Attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom, a pro-life legal group, filed suit on behalf of a Colorado against Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains and one of its doctors. The mother says the abortion facility forced her to undergo an abortion without anesthesia and then left part of her baby’s body inside of her.
The lawsuit alleges that 40-year-old Ayanna Byer changed her mind about the abortion after Planned Parenthood in Colorado Springs could not provide her with the agreed-upon intravenous anesthesia for pain, but the abortionist proceeded with the abortion anyway. ADF informed LifeNews that, once the abortion was complete, Byer was sent home but ended up in an emergency room two days later because the abortionist had botched the procedure.
“A woman’s life is more important than Planned Parenthood’s bottom line,” said Alliance Defending Freedom allied attorney Doug Romero of Denver. “What Planned Parenthood did to Ayanna is beyond the pale. They clearly put her through extraordinary cruelty and jeopardized her life. Their actions were intolerable.”
According to a statement provided by the on-call emergency room doctor who assisted Byer, she “was septic with a high fever and elevated white count. She required an immediate high-risk surgery to remove the remaining tissue that had been left during the previous procedure done at Planned Parenthood. Because of the continued pain and heavy bleeding, I was concerned that the patient might have had an ectopic pregnancy. I called Planned Parenthood the following day to inquire about pathology results to only learn that no pathology is done on abortion patients. The doctor performing the abortion ‘looks’ at the tissue and makes a diagnosis.” Read the rest:Planned Parenthood Botched Abortion, Left Part of Baby Inside Woman | LifeNews.com.
This post from Rebecca Hamilton is a must read. You have to ask yourself, where does it stop? Already the courts have decided that women are exempt from the same laws that men are punished for. As if they somehow are endowed with more intelligence and caring so that what ever decision they would make would be for the good of the child that she carries in her womb. Evidence has shown that this is simply not true and the callous killing of their babies that horrifies so many of us, if now being extended in so many places. Who, in this new world, will be granted the ability to decide who is worthy of life and who is unworthy?
In case you were wondering, the devil is at work all over the world, not just here in America.
One case in point is a suggested revision to Dutch statutes that I mentioned in an earlier post to allow medical personnel to euthanize minors and Alzheimer’s sufferers. Ironically, these are two groups of people who are considered incompetent to make most legal decisions for themselves. The proposed law was drafted in part by Senator Philippe Mahoux.
Our world is so spiritually sick that we try to parse and channel legalized murder. We have laws that point to one group of people and say in effect, “you may kill them with impunity” then, we have other laws that point to another group of people and say “if you kill them it is an atrocity.”
Well, which is it? Is it an atrocity to kill the innocent, or is it something we may do with impunity? Read the rest from Rebecca Hamilton at Public Catholic at Patheos.com!
A new article from a writer at the liberal online publication Salon is one of the most extreme pro-abortion diatribes ever written. It is so in-your-face that it is already sending shockwaves through the Internet just hours after its publication.
The content of the article, some of which is excerpted below, needs no words to show how shocking the content is from Mary Elizabeth Williams, who starts her piece saying, “So what if abortion ends a life?”
“I believe that life starts at conception. And it’s never stopped me from being pro-choice,” she writes.
Of all the diabolically clever moves the anti-choice lobby has ever pulled, surely one of the greatest has been its consistent co-opting of the word “life.” Life! Who wants to argue with that? Who wants be on the side of … not-life? That’s why the language of those who support abortion has for so long been carefully couched in other terms. While opponents of abortion eagerly describe themselves as “pro-life,” the rest of have had to scramble around with not nearly as big-ticket words like “choice” and “reproductive freedom.” The “life” conversation is often too a thorny one to even broach. Yet I know that throughout my own pregnancies, I never wavered for a moment in the belief that I was carrying a human life inside of me. I believe that’s what a fetus is: a human life. And that doesn’t make me one iota less solidly pro-choice.
Here’s the complicated reality in which we live: All life is not equal. That’s a difficult thing for liberals like me to talk about, lest we wind up looking like death-panel-loving, kill-your-grandma-and-your-precious-baby storm troopers. Yet a fetus can be a human life without having the same rights as the woman in whose body it resides. She’s the boss. Her life and what is right for her circumstances and her health should automatically trump the rights of the non-autonomous entity inside of her. Always.
When we on the pro-choice side get cagey around the life question, it makes us illogically contradictory. I have friends who have referred to their abortions in terms of “scraping out a bunch of cells” and then a few years later were exultant over the pregnancies that they unhesitatingly described in terms of “the baby” and “this kid.” I know women who have been relieved at their abortions and grieved over their miscarriages. Why can’t we agree that how they felt about their pregnancies was vastly different, but that it’s pretty silly to pretend that what was growing inside of them wasn’t the same? Fetuses aren’t selective like that. They don’t qualify as human life only if they’re intended to be born. Read the rest at:
It is fairly easy for those who feel no real responsibility for their actions, or those who don’t believe that they will have to face judgment someday, to tell the world that life does not begin at conception and that the baby in the womb is just a bunch of cells. What they neglect to tell is the rest of the story and that is that we are all a bunch of cells but that life itself is scientifically established with the dividing of those cell, at least human life is. They like to convince people that abortion is acceptable not because they don’t believe in life, but because they don’t believe in anything but themselves. To admit to something greater would be to admit to the possibility that they might have to take some responsibility for their actions at some time. They prefer to live a life that is simply filled with whatever they desire, the mentality that says if it feels good, do it. If there is an unwanted reaction to that lifestyle, it is easier to dispose of if you can deny the reality of it. These same people will also argue the worth of life or the quality of life. As if by some accidental arrangement of their brains, they have the right to decide who is worthy and what quality of life they have. They would like to be able to euthanize the disabled, the elderly or simply those that they find burdensome. These are the lawless of our society. The ones who want to do as they will, if they can change the laws they will, if they can not, the laws are something to be gotten around. Their only value on life is what it brings them. They would rather treat the Word of God as a history book that doesn’t fit todays lifestyle, rather than a book by the Creator that emcompasses all of creation itself and warns regularly of the consequences of our actions. Please take time to visit the site and consider the book written by Tommy Mitchell MD and God bless! An excerpt is below!!!
Who Is More Human?
Life is a continuum. From the season of growing in the womb to being born, from playing as a child to growing older, each stage of life seems to blend gracefully (or not so gracefully in my case) into the next. Life progresses and time passes, culminating in death. Death, a very visible end point, is more easily defined than the point at which the continuum of human life begins.
Where is the starting point? If life is indeed a continual process, can we not just work backward to its beginning? There are a variety of opinions about life’s beginnings. Many say life begins at conception. Others argue strongly that life does not start until implantation in the womb. Still others say that human life begins only when the umbilical cord is cut, making the newborn child an independent agent. How is fact separated from opinion?
Perhaps another way to ask the question is, when do we become human? Certainly a child sitting on grandpa’s knee or a fully grown adult would be considered human. Is the adult more human than the child? Of course not. No reasonable person would consider the child to be less human. At what point along the journey did this child become human? Was it at conception, somewhere during his development, or at birth?
Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
Random House Webster’s College Dictionary to kill means:
- to deprive of life; cause the death of; slay.
- to destroy; do away with; extinguish.
And life means:
- (n.)the general condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, a means of reproduction, and internal regulation in response to the environment.
Who decides when it is appropriate to end the life of a being? In a civilized society it is a matter for those who are responsible for enforcing the law, to decide if the crime a person has committed rises to the level of ceding their lives for their crimes. We are no longer living in a civilized society!!!
Somehow we have passed beyond the thin veil of civilization into a degenerate and lawless society where death is appropriated simply on the whim of those doing the killing. And these degenerate ideas spawn the infantile excuse that somehow, just for the fact that you are born a woman, you have some greater empathetic knowledge on who is justified to live or die. All on the very thin excuse that a woman should be able to decide what is best for their own welfare, body and future.
It is simply such a stupid argument, I wonder at the intelligence of those who state it and those who accept it as if it must be true. If a woman was that intelligent, she would never have gotten to the place where she has the choice to make. After all, she is the one who invited the action in which she became pregnant. I am not talking about rape and incest here. I am talking about the women who think that they can sleep with any man who comes along and either not get pregnant, or rid themselves of the product of their carelessness by simply disposing of it like it is so much waste to be flushed down the toilet or tossed with the trash. And yet these are the same people who tell us that they have the right to decide what to do with their body. They seem to think that this is a sign of intelligence. If these same women were foolish enough to get an arm cut off or a permanent mark on their body, these things they would have to live with and explain how foolish they were in their actions.
So how did we get here? We got here by a Supreme Court that made a foolish decision, and gave every woman that comes along and makes a bad mistake, the opportunity to kill. Shall we start saying at some point that these women now have the right to decide that their children don’t have the right to exist if they are handicapped or if in someway they are just a burden to them? Should we give men this same right? If not why not? If you come down to it, the life that begins in a woman’s womb would not be possible without the input from the man. Should that not give them just a much right in the decision? If they decide that a baby is not in their interests, should they not have the right to make that decision?
Or is the woman somehow so much more intelligent and caring? Again I say, for most of them, they wouldn’t be in the position they were in if these were the deciding factors. So since we can say these are not applicable, we take away their reasoning for them to be in the position to make that decision , don’t we?
Abortion is not about the life of the woman, it is about the death of the baby and the denying of the responsibility of the woman for her own actions. Truly, if you follow this argument through, what you will find is that the woman if displaying a lack of intelligence and therefore cedes the very responsibility that she argues gives her the right to make a life and death decision.
I read this the other day and it haunted me:
“Can it be that women know something very deep inside, even deeper than fear and shame? Can it be that women know it is their responsibility to decide when to bring new life into this world? Women are not the enemies of our children–even those we decide not to bring into the world.”
– Quoted in “Good Women have Abortions,” which appeared on the pro-abortion sitewww.rhrealitycheck.org/node/21883
Truly sad, and yet this is the argument that they use!!!! Do they think that they know more than God then? Are they somehow so smart and empathetic that they just somehow know? If this sounds foolish, it is because it is foolish. As foolish as your child telling you that it isn’t their fault that they did something wrong, somebody else started it. Because that is the real excuse this woman is using, it isn’t her fault because some man impregnated her. She was just minding her own business. When do we stop listening to the excuses our children and hold them accountable for their actions?
We must quit letting women murder their own children in order to escape the responsibility of their own actions…
Whether you believe Mr. Romney or not, he is the first Presidential hopeful in some time who has had the courage to make this statement. It would be a big step in turning this country in the right direction. We have spent the last four years with a pro death culture in control of this country. It is time to choose life!
In an interview with the Columbus Dispatch newspaper, presidential candidate Mitt Romney said, once again, that he wants the Supreme Court to overturn the infamous Roe v. Wade decision that has paved the way for 55 million abortions.
Romney wants states to be able to protect unborn children and, in his interview with the newspaper, indicated overturning Roe was more possible in the current political climate than a Human Life Amendment.
“That’s not where America is now,” he said. “I would love us to be in a situation where the American people decide let’s not have abortion. But that’s not where we are. That’s why I think the most effective next step is to have the court return the decision with regards to abortion to the American people and their elected representatives.”
“And it is my preference that would return to the states and to the people and their elected representatives the issue of abortion as opposed to having the federal government impose, the Supreme Court impose its view on a one-vote majority. But that’s something that will be up to the court. That’s not something I can decide as president, that’s something which the court would have to decide,” Romney continued. Read the rest at Life News.com
I have a few questions for people that promote abortions and make the claim that if pro-life people have their way that women will die in back alley abortions. How do you reconcile the fact that women die now in supposedly nice clinics with Dr. available to take care of them? How many of these clinics are even inspected? Abortion proponents don’t even want their premises inspected and when some government agency finally gets around to doing the job of protecting women, the conditions that they find are often so horrific that even if they are pro choice, they are disgusted and sickened by the conditions that they find. If they were truly interested in the lives of the women, perhaps they would truly consider the health of the women that go to these places instead of turning a blind eye. They truly seem more interested in killing the babies than they are life in any form. Please read the article from Life News.com:
When Planned Parenthood Kills Women Too: A Two for One Deal?
Planned Parenthood is in the killing business. They perform approximately 324,000 abortions per year, using various methods on women at various stages of pregnancy.
For example, during a first trimester abortion, they usually suction out the child, or pieces of the child, through a tube inserted into the uterus. But during a second-trimester abortion, where the child has become too large to be killed and then sucked through a tube, Planned Parenthood performs a cervical dilation that allows them to get sharp instruments into the intended safety of the womb and kill the child so that it can then be “evacuated.”
It’s an ugly, immoral job, but by using phrases like “termination of pregnancy,” “pro-choice,” and “women’s health,” Planned Parenthood has been able to maintain both a quasi-respectable public image and their killing fields—all at the same time.
But for many, that all changed in July when 24-year old Tonya Reaves bled to death after an employee at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Chicago aborted Tonya’s baby in the second trimester. Read the rest of the story at Life News.com!
ESPN airs a weekly show called “E:60.” This investigative hour-long show highlights stories – often personal, touching, and sometimes tragic ones – related to sports. On October 1, ESPN posted a segment of “E:60″ called “Perfect” to YouTube. “Perfect” is nothing less than a gripping, life-changing tale.
Heath White, a military man, marathon runner, and all-around success story, was suddenly faced with a choice. During his wife’s second pregnancy, Heath discovered that his new daughter would be born less than perfect, to his way of thinking. Heath admits that he pressured his wife to have an abortion, yet she bravely refused. Read the rest of the story at Life News.com and watch the video!
E:60 – Perfect
So many people try to make the excuse that abortion is okay because:
- Life does not begin at conception
- The Fetus is nothing more than a collection of cells
- A woman has the right to decide what happens to her body
- A baby doesn’t have a soul until it is born
Quite frankly there are a lot of other excuse they make but lets stop at these four.
Let me start with that last one first, “a baby doesn’t have a soul until it is born.” I frankly cannot see the logic in this, the Bible tells us that God knew us from before we were formed in the womb, Jeremiah 1:5 If this is true, you have to accept the fact that we have a soul before we are even in the womb. A lot of people who try to make this argument do not believe in God or the Bible in the first place, so it is mostly a false argument tending to distract and excuse and unexcusable act.
Now the argument that a woman has the right to decide what happens to her own body. Now there is a truly debateable position isn’t it? Does a woman really have the right to decide what happens to her own body? If a woman decides to start cutting her body in pieces, does society say this is okay? Or do they say this is out of the norm and institutionalize her for a mental illness? And yet these very same people will make the excuse that to kill the infant growing in her womb is somehow her right to do! They do not even bother to make the argument most of the time, that it is not a life, simply that it is her decision to make. It is truly insane to suggest that simply because she is a woman, that she has the right to decide to kill. Why? Is there something about being a woman that gives you more insight to whether life is precious and deserves existence? Tell me where that leaves women like Lizzie Borden? Does being a woman somehow excuse their murders? Does killing only count if the person is old enough to defend themselves? If they are innocent it doesn’t count? Do we say the same thing to the pedarest and child molesters?
Now the argument that the fetus is nothing more than a collection of cells. You could make that argument with anything. The brain itself is nothing more that a collection of cells. But that does not make it less important or not life. We surely can’t cut out our brains and yet they make this senseless argument in order to deceive and placate those that are looking for an excuse. Perhaps there are some that are truly ignorant, but others use that ignorance in order to degrade human life, and to dissuade those who know instinctively that they are killing. People who want to be blind will use any excuse to remain that way. However, if we allow ignorance to forever excuse a crime, where will it ever stop?
Life does not begin at conception is the first argument that you hear from many, again the Bible and science both tell us something totally different. Science itself and the wonderful technology we have allow us to see the process. No matter how hard people try to argue differently, they are the very ones that show their own ignorance.
Now for those that argue that rape and incest are excuses for women to kill the unborn! This is the most grotesque excuse there is. What you are trying to say is that the baby is responsible and will forever remind you of the crime that has been committed against you. I have a question for you, will committing a crime against someone even more innocent than you make you feel better? Two wrongs do not make a right. And for those who say that if the mother’s life is in danger that the mother is more important than the baby, I have to ask, How do you know? What about all the mother’s that have made different decisions?
Let me start off by saying that I do not know Mr. Akin, nor have I contributed to his campaign, or am able to vote for him since I live in a different state. Nor is this designed to be in support for him. What this is a an attempt to show a different look at what Mr. Akin said and the sad state of affairs when a person is maligned and mocked for his use of words and it is made to look as if what was said was totally illogical and out of line.
How many times in the news have we heard of people who claimed to be raped and it turned out that they were lying for whatever reason? Are these cases of legitimate rape? Or have these people committed the crime of false accusations?
This happens with every crime that is committed. There are cases of false accusations for child abuse, murder, theft, anything, and yet those who are mocking Mr. Akin for his use of words are seemingly implying that every person who accuses someone of rape is legitimate. This is quite simply untrue and those who are attempting to make it true are using this as an opportunity to destroy a man and this is a sad state of affairs if they are allowed to do this. If a person is judged on a few words instead of their life and actions, there is no one in politics who needs to be there, and there is no one in media who deserves to be there. We have seen too many recent examples of the media manipulating the words of people to give us a false impression, and we have seen very few politicians who are known for truth.
As far as his statement that women’s bodies can prevent impregnation, this is both false and true. It has been known to happen in some cases but is not the general rule, in this it seems that Mr. Akin has been falsely advised and he is guilty of failure to verify his information. You may rightly judge him on that. But that is truly beside the point.
The media is using this as an opportunity to say that anyone who is against abortion and is for life of the baby, is ignorant and therefore wrong. If we let this lie continue and withhold support for someone who is actively pro-life be brought down for something that is less important that the rest of their life’s work, we do a disservice to all of those who have put their lives on the line. We must not let the media define this issue in this way. Please take time to consider the results and do not let the media to manipulate your attitudes. God bless you
At one time I thought that most people would automatically stop to help someone who was hurt or dying. There have been many stories lately of people that instead of stopping and helping, just walk on by. Or even sometimes steal from them or abuse them in some way.
I truly believe that this is one of the worst facets of our current culture of death. How can we expect people to respect life and consider the importance of that life, when it is treated with such disregard by a large portion of our society? How can people who are convinced that it is quite okay to kill an unborn baby, believe that life is sacred. How can they believe that life matters when it doesn’t seem to to all the people that they know?
We are facing a generation who have no concept of the importance of life, and worse, we have leaders who actively embrace this culture of death. These leaders are at the highest level of our government, from the President on down. And besides their own beliefs, they are determined that those of us who believe in life, must give in to their desires and encourage and promote death. They believe that we should even pay for it and will go to any lengths to force us to do so.
This is the ultimate battle between life and death. Unfortunately, death seems to be in the ascent at this time. It is important that we work together to change this trend. It will be something that God will consider when judgment day comes, because if you are not opposed to this, you are saying that it is okay. There is no fence that you can sit on here. There is no middle of the road. Either you choose life, or you are supporting death. There is an election coming up, and we know that those who are in charge now, support death, I would encourage you to investigate their positions yourself and choose life.
Biltrix has a post up this morning that was inspiring and a wonderful question for all those who would rather pretend that life does not begin at conception. Please take time to visit their site and read this and other important posts.
by Alan Sears
When Congress passed ObamaCare in March 2010, then Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Cal.) admitted she didn’t know what was in the bill, but promised constituents and fellow politicians, “We’ll find out what’s in it once we pass it.” Talk about a harbinger of things to come.
And in the two years since the bill’s passage the American people have not only found out what’s in it, they’ve discovered that part of the legislation purposely hides the fact that ObamaCare covers abortions. (This although politicians supporting ObamaCare repeatedly told the American people that abortion would not be covered.)
When looking through the pages the healthcare overhaul, specifically Sec. 1310(b)(3), on page 781, one finds the “Secrecy Clause.” This clause outlines how ObamaCare both demands that insurance companies pay for abortion and that they co-operate with the White House by keeping this coverage secret. Read the rest at LifeNews.com
If this is true, it is horrifyingly unspeakable! Evil and an abomination. The people who are doing this have no respect for life, and are quite literally, dealers of death.
Charge: U.S. selling aborted baby body parts
by Charlie Butts
After an investigation by Life Dynamics revealed the practice, Investigate Magazine, a New Zealand-based current affairs publication from a conservative Christian standpoint, went on to determine that a Maryland brokerage firm has been arranging the sale of parts of American aborted babies to the University of Auckland medical school in New Zealand for experiments. Read the rest of this at One News Now
This is not good news for those of us who are pro-life. If we were looking for Catholics to turn against Obama because of the HHS ruling, it seems that we have been outfoxed by evil again. This is what happens when you make compromises for years. Then when the final push comes, people are so accustomed to compromising their values, that they see no problem in going the next step. God help us, because He is the only one who can. I pray that He intercedes for us as a country and enough people are willing to listen and understand the precipice that we are on. Because if they do not, the destruction of this country and the freedoms that we have enjoyed, will simply cease to exist for all practical purpose.
This is in response to a commenter on The Tree of Mamre who said
“In the secular world the abortion is considered a medical procedure and should not be invaded by the church house as it belongs only in the state house.”
This person was making the comment on the post of Santorum not running for pastor in chief. He also made the statement that Jesus didn’t try to change the laws, as if they made the laws okay, the following is my response.
“No, He didn’t go to the Roman Senate to get laws changed, that was not the reason that He came to earth, He came to die for our sins that we might be forgiven by God for them.
By your reasoning, if the secular world says that it is okay for your neighbor to come and chop off your head and take your possessions, that is fine. Personally, I think that leads to anarchy. Our country is based on the laws of Moses, if you don’t believe it, do the research yourself, it is pretty easy to find the ten commandments online. As far as abortion, even the medical profession should be constrained by moral laws, if they are not, what is to stop them from cloning individuals and farming out their body parts. By your reasoning, these would just be simple medical procedures. What, in your mind, is the difference from a baby and a fetus? Medically, the only difference is that one is in the womb and the other not, what then of abortionist who deliver live babies during the abortion process? Should they be allowed to kill them as Mr. Obama has advocated for? They are medically considered babies! Or how about abortionist that do kill those live babies by clipping their spinal cords or sticking scissors in the backs of their necks? When is the murder of babies a crime? If it is just in the womb, why? Dead is dead, whether it is in the womb or out. It amazes me that the same people that throw hissy fits at people killing animals for food, think that the killing of a baby is okay. Do you know the reason? It is because if they can kill a baby, they can evade the responsibility for that baby, if they can prevent someone else from killing an animal, they have power. Jesus didn’t come to end the laws, He came to fulfill them, until He comes back at judgement, we will be responsible for our actions, murder of the defenseless is a terrible thing that those who do it will have to answer for. Giving government that right, takes the responsibility away from the person and that is not a good thing for society or humanity.”
I want to re-emphasize what I started with, “Abortion is not just a medical procedure.” It is in point of fact, a willful and deliberate ending of a life. This is simple truth and undeniable. No matter whether you agree that it is human or not, it is life. For all those who believe that the taking of life bears responsibility, those that choose this are responsible for their actions.
- Abortionist Knows He is Killing: Spinning Scripture to Make Abortion Right with God (erasetheneed.wordpress.com)
- Late-Term Abortion Practitioner: “Yes I am Killing” Babies (via Life News) (loopyloo305.wordpress.com)
by Michael Fragoso | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Board of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ABOG) are restricting opportunities for healthcare professionals to object to abortion and contraception on grounds of conscience. This will accelerate the growing problem of physician shortage.
Against the backdrop of current debates about health care and conscience protection, a federal judge for the District of New Jersey has issued a temporary restraining order against the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey (UMDNJ) that prohibits them from forcing twelve nurses to assist in abortions against their conscientious objections. While much has been written on medical providers’ conscience rights as a moral imperative and as a means of maintaining diversity within the profession, the potential relationship between conscience and the supply of medical providers–in particular, obstetric specialists and nurses–should make the issue salient to anybody interested in health care reform, especially those seeking to expand access and reduce costs.
The contours of physicians’ conscience rights and their correlative obligations have been contested for decades. Indeed, the last half century has seen profound changes in both the practice of medicine and the state of law that necessarily implicate the position of the physician vis-à-visthe patient and the procedures that the physician may be asked to provide. As Azgad Gold notes, increasingly “the medical field became more ‘subjective’ than ‘objective,’ as reflected by the shift to measuring outcomes of treatments by ‘quality of life’ parameters rather than the traditional objective ‘morbidity’ and ‘mortality’ parameters.” This, coupled with the liberalization of abortion following Roe v. Wade, has increased internal and external pressures on the medical field to see abortion as simply another valid medical choice to which the patient is subjectively entitled, regardless of the ethical–or medical–views of her attending physician.
Nevertheless mainstream medical ethics maintains that physicians have the right to refuse service to patients. It is a professional prerogative that covers everything from a disagreement over the soundness of a requested procedure to wanting to avoid notorious bill dodgers. Furthermore, on atraditional understanding, “hospital employees have the right to refuse to participate in performing an abortion, and a hospital cannot dismiss the employee for insubordination. An employee can abstain from assisting in an abortion procedure as a matter of conscience or religious conviction.”
On the other side of this debate, there is a sense that the principle of “patient autonomy” should be paramount, and what is conscientious objection to one person is burdensome refusal to another. Under this view,
The widely accepted ethical principle that patients are autonomous individuals with the right to make the final decisions concerning their medical care, along with the corresponding principle that appears in all medical professionals’ codes of ethics that the ‘patient’s interest comes first’ leads to the following general rule: patient care decisions should be based on patient autonomy, as mediated by the clinician’s conclusion that the requested therapy (1) is not medically contraindicated (since it is both medically effective and not considered unethical within the profession’s generally accepted concept of ethical practice) and (2) is not illegal. Read the rest at Life News.com http://www.lifenews.com/2011/12/06/acog-preventing-doctors-from-objecting-to-abortions/
Warning Graphic description!!!!
If you have ever questioned why you should keep on fighting the horror of abortion-on-demand, here is all the proof you need.
But I warn you — it’s awfully graphic.
You don’t want to have children near you when you read what I have to tell you.
Yet another of Gosnell’s employees, Tina Baldwin, pled guilty to charges of participating in a corrupt organization, conspiracy and corruption of a minor, when she allowed her 15-year-old daughter to work for Gosnell.
According to court documents, Baldwin’s daughter was made to work 50 hours a week after school until past midnight, during which she was exposed to Gosnell’s systematic murder of newborn infants.
Baldwin herself worked as a receptionist at the abortion mill, but also routinely assisted in abortions by anesthetizing abortion clients.
Baldwin confessed to investigators that she had seen Gosnell induce delivery of newborn babies hundreds of times and murder them in the most heinous way — while callously joking about it.
Gosnell, his wife, and his staffers face various charges — including eight charges for killing a patient in a botched abortion.
Believe me, I could continue with more of the abuse of the unborn and “jokes” about the killing.
But instead I want to close with a different point.
This is an example of the most extreme destruction the abortion industry perpetrates. But, in fact, children not as far along in development need protection too.
The unborn continue to need and deserve our help in every state and legislature — both in passing state laws restricting abortion and even more importantly enacting a National Life at Conception Act to overturn Roe v. Wade and end abortion-on-demand.
That’s why your continued support of NPLA is so important.
Director of State Legislation
by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com
More than a dozen nurses in New Jersey have filed a lawsuit against a hospital that has been pressuring them to assist in abortions. One of the nurses in the case has spoken out about the pressure she faced and shared a gruesome comment.
As LifeNews has reported, some of the nurses in New Jersey who have faced pressure to do abortions at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey have spoken out about their ordeal. of the nurses in New Jersey who have faced pressure to do abortions at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey two weeks ago.
“Can you imagine anything more horrific than being forced to “catch” a dead baby’s head? A baby who only minutes before was alive in its mother’s womb?” he said. “Pro-abort writers and bloggers are hysterically (I don’t use the word lightly) attempting to attack these women’s motives.”
He cited Erin Ryan of the pro-abortion blog Jezebel, who wrote, “From the way the complaint describes it, you’d think they were being ordered to line babies up and shoot them with a crossbow in front of their children.”
Thomas responded, “I won’t even repeat some of the other things I’ve seen written about these pro-life nurses.”
“I think the need by pro-abort writers to hysterically blow this story out of proportion is telling: they have to exaggerate because the actual reality of what these nurses have been asked to do is truly horrifying. No one is talking about shooting babies with crossbows, we are talking about crushing a baby’s skull while the baby is still inside his or her mother and severing it from its tiny body. Pro-lifers demand that all sides simply face the gruesome facts,” he said. “For a movement that claims to be for “choice”, pro-aborts absolutely cannot admit that pro-life nurses have a choice not to assist at abortions. But the more important choice facing advocates of abortion is whether or not they will agree to discuss and confront the reality of abortion.” Read the rest at Life News.com http://www.lifenews.com/2011/11/30/nurse-pressured-to-assist-abortion-just-catch-the-babys-head/
An Arizona law that has already cut abortions 30 percent and led to the shut down of Planned Parenthood abortion clinics in the state has survived a legal challenge from the abortion business and a lawsuit it filed.
Planned Parenthood has decided to end its legal attack on Arizona’s Abortion Consent Act, according to a court order issued Monday. Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund together with the Center for Arizona Policy, the Bioethics Defense Fund, and the Life Legal Defense Foundation defended the law. In August, the Arizona Court of Appeals lifted an injunction against the law and determined that it was constitutional.
“A woman’s right to make a fully informed choice is more important than Planned Parenthood’s desire to profit from abortions,” said ADF Senior Counsel Steven H. Aden, who argued before the Court of Appeals on June 14. “Without this legal roadblock, women will now be better protected–and so will pro-life medical professionals whom the law protects from being coerced into participating in abortions.”
“Everyone deserves full and accurate information before undergoing any medical procedure,” said Center for Arizona Policy Legal Counsel Deborah Sheasby, co-counsel and one of nearly 2,100 attorneys in the ADF alliance. “These types of protections have been repeatedly upheld and are overwhelmingly supported by the public.” Read the rest at Life News http://www.lifenews.com/2011/11/15/arizona-law-cutting-abortions-30-survives-legal-attack/
Please take the time to read the complete story at Life News and watch the video, then consider the context my friends. This is so wrong on so many levels, I don’t know where to start. 1) he is performing abortions on children as young as nine years old and yet the news department that is questioning him, never bothers to question if he reports these abuse’s of children. 2) he profess’s to be a man of faith and prays to God as he commits the murder(which he freely admits is murder), this is outrageous on it’s face, as if God is okay with the murder because it is babies. 3) the way that it is handled by the media as if he is just performing another service for the community. I am sorry friends, I could go on, but this is just beyond me. I am afraid that people are becoming morally numb because of the pervasiveness of this kind of attitude. Please read the story, watch the video, pass it around, bring it up in your families and churches, stop this madness. God bless you all, and keep these babies in your prayers!
n October, we told you about Medicaid paying for $9000 late-term abortions at Southwestern Women’s Options (SWO) in New Mexico. Operation Rescue has since revealed that SWO is willing to do abortions as late as 30 weeks to kill unborn children with Down Syndrome at a cost to Medicaid of up to $16,000 per procedure.
KVUE Anchors: A north Texas doctor who performs abortions is back in the spotlight this mid-day. His clinic shut down a while ago, but now he’s re-opened a surgery center. He is now the only doctor in the area who will perform late-term abortions, that’s for women who are up to six months pregnant. It’s not surprise that he’s been the target of protests, but as KVUE’s Jim Douglas shows us, there is a surprise in the doctor’s story.
Dr. Curtis Boyd: Am I killing? Yes, I am. I know that.
Reporter: It’s a jarring admission, especially from a doctor, and perhaps even more so from this doctor.
Boyd: I’m an ordained Baptist minister.
Reporter: He’s now Unitarian who says he prays often. Maybe not as often as members of the Catholic pro-life committee who gather outside his office hoping to stop his work, and certainly his prayers are different.
Boyd: And then I’ll ask that the spirit of this pregnancy be returned to God with love and with understanding.
Boyd is certainly not new to the abortion business nor to claiming divine endorsement for what he admits is direct killing. In an article for the pro-abortion publication Voices of Choice, Boyd admits to having been an abortionist in the Sixties prior to the Roe v. Wade decision which legalized abortion. He claimed that the decision to have an abortion is “responsible” and even more “moral” than the decision to choose life.
When a woman acts in a responsible way, doing what she believes is in her best interest and the best interest of her family, she’s being moral. This is a moral decision, and I believe in that. Even today they walk in my office and they think that what they’re doing is wrong and that they’re a bad person for doing it. And that’s really sad because what they’re often doing is showing a higher level of moral development than probably most anyone else. Read the rest at Life News.com
The Protect Life Act — expected to come up for a vote Friday — is sponsored by Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Joe Pitts with 145 co-sponsors. It would also protect the rights of health care providers and insurance companies to not cover abortions if it conflicts with their beliefs.
The Office of Management and Budget announced Wednesday that the president’s senior advisors will recommend that he veto the legislation should it reach his desk.
“During the debate over Obamacare, the president promised that no taxpayer dollars would be used to pay for abortions under the bill. Unfortunately, this is not the way things have played out,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said at the Values Voter Summit last week.