Lay

In his recent book, LIFE: My Story Through History, Pope Francis advocates for legal support of same-sex civil unions of “[homosexuals] who experience the gift of love.” In what sense, if any, is homosexual love a gift?

The mind of the Church is that it certainly cannot be a gift of God, neither natural (creational) nor supernatural (sacramental). According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the ultimate source of love is God himself. Quoting John Paul II’s 1981 Apostolic Exhortation, Familiaris Consortio, the  Catechism of the Catholic Church asserts:

God is love and in himself he lives a mystery of personal loving communion [eternally united in being, relationship, and love]. Creating the human race in his own image . . . , God inscribed in the humanity of man and woman [Genesis 1:27] the vocation, and thus the capacity and responsibility, of love and communion.

Francis’ remark, on its face, does not seem to regard homosexual “love” as an inherently disordered form of love. Does he think that the homosexual is able to live the vocation to chastity, and hence, of love in a same-sex relationship? How could the homosexual do so? The vocation of chastity involves sexual differentiation between a man and a woman, which according to Christian anthropology, means “the successful integration of sexuality within the person and thus the inner unity of man in his bodily and spiritual being.”

The Catechism explains, “Sexuality, in which man’s belonging to the bodily and biological world is expressed, becomes personal and truly human when it is integrated into the relationship of one person to another, in the complete and lifelong mutual gift of a man and a woman.”

Chastity, therefore, presupposes the sexual differentiation of male and female, such that only a sexual union of male and female persons makes bodies in any real sense “one flesh” (Gen 2:24), with the latter organic bodily union being a necessary condition for the existence of authentic conjugal love.

Homosexual love is not a gift, indeed, it is a false love, because it is incapable of fulfilling the vocation to chastity, of perfecting the being of the person and developing his existence; and hence of being ordered to the natural law, the order of Creation, and hence to God. As a disordered form of love, it not only lacks integration but is a counter-integration by virtue of being an offense against the vocation to chastity, making it unable to realize the integrity of the person and the integrality of the gift of self.

Christian anthropology must consider the reality of the human person, of man and woman, in the order of love. Why? Because, as Karol Wojtyla rightly states in his philosophical magnum opus, Love and Responsibility, the “person finds in love the greatest fullness of his being, of his objective existence. Love is such action, such an act, which most fully develops the existence of the person. Of course, this has to be true love. What does true love mean?”

The two angels visiting Lot’s house in Sodom strike blind the rapacious mob outside, engraving by P. Galle after Anthonie Blocklandt van Montfoort, c. 1580 [Wellcome Collection, London]

Love is an analogical concept, meaning thereby that there are different kinds of love: paternal love, the love of brothers and sisters, friendship, and, last but not least, the love between a man and a woman. (“The love of a man and a woman is a reciprocal relation of persons and possesses a personal character.”)

Briefly, love involves attraction to the sensory-sexual values, and spiritual or moral values, of the other person, for example, says Wojtyla, “to her intelligence or virtues of character.” There is also “need love,” or love as desire, and “benevolence.” “Need love” desires “the person as a good for oneself.” Love as benevolence is about desiring the other person’s good. “Benevolence is simply disinterestedness in love: ‘I do not long for you as a good’, but ‘I long for your good’, ‘I long for what is good for you’.”

Wojtyla then turns to the problem of reciprocity, which brings about a synthesis “of love of desire and of benevolent love.” Reciprocity involves the relation of “I” and “we.” And hence where an interpersonal community is formed:

Love finds its full being not merely in an individual subject only but in an inter-subjective, inter-personal relation. . . .The transition from “I” to “we” is for love no less essential than transcending one’s “I” as expressed through [attraction], love of desire, and love of benevolence.

Being inherently disordered, homosexual love is unable to form an inter-personal community where unity is manifested in the mature “we.” Finally, Wojtyla sees the fullness of love as gift love, or what he calls spousal love, which is giving oneself to the other person, entailing the reciprocal self-giving of persons. He adds, “The concept of spousal [gift] love possesses a key meaning for establishing the norm for all sexual morality.”

Since man – male and female – is created in and for love, accordingly, sexual ethics is unintelligible without love. This crucial point about finding in love the greatest fullness of his being must be applied to love between a man and a woman.

“Love is a union of persons,” says Wojtyla, an objective union in which a man and a woman constitute “one subject of action,” in a sense “one flesh.” (Genesis 2:24) This union may not be detached from its biological foundation in the organic differences between the sexes. This objective union is born of “a common good,” an “objective good,” that is, the good of the human persons, and a common end,” which binds [them].”

This end is procreation, progeny, the family, and at the same time the whole constantly growing maturity of the relationship between both persons in all the spheres brought by the spousal relationship itself.

Consequently, when the Catechism asserts that homosexual sexual acts are closed to the gift of life, it is because such acts do not have an objective union in the sexual differentiation of a man and a woman. “Under no circumstances can they be approved.” Such acts are “sin gravely contrary to chastity.” Hence, homosexual love is not a gift.

The post Homosexual “Love” a Gift? appeared first on The Catholic Thing.

Sorry for the lack of posts, I was traveling for work all week.

If you don’t get the 90s darkest of dark comedy reference, I’m sorry for you.

Australian police: "Police will be the source of truth, and not social media and misinformation."

When did Australia become such a dystopian hellhole?

This is the kind of statement I'd expect from a George Orwell novel, or North Korea.pic.twitter.com/eN2ZuxemCi

— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) April 19, 2024

Prominent philosopher of mind, apostle of Darwinism, and New Atheist writer Daniel Dennett has died.  I have been very critical of Dennett over the years, but he had two great strengths.  First, he wrote with crystal clarity, no matter how difficult the subject matter.  Second, as even we critics of materialism can happily concede, he could be very insightful on the distinctive nature of psychological modes of description and explanation (even if he went wrong when addressing how these relate metaphysically to physical modes of description and explanation).  It is also only fair to acknowledge that of the four original New Atheist tomes (the others penned by Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens) his Breaking the Spell, despite its faults, was the one that was actually intellectually interesting.  RIP

Campaigners are calling on MPs to reject a new amendment tabled by Labour MP, Stella Creasy, to the Criminal Justice Bill that would make extreme changes to abortion laws.

The amendment (NC40) proposes making the biggest changes to abortion laws since the Abortion Act was introduced in 1967.

The proposed change to the law  would make it more likely that healthy babies are aborted at home for any reason, up to birth, by removing key deterrents against performing an abortion at any point right through to birth.

The amendment would remove the possibility of custodial sentences for abortions after 24 weeks and by not suggesting any meaningful alternative sanctions, the amendment would remove a key deterrent against late-term abortions.

The amendment would also require the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) personally to approve prosecutions of women or abortion providers who perform abortions after the legal limit up to birth. This would introduce an extra hurdle before prosecutions can take place, which may deter police investigations, making abortions up to birth more likely. It would also likely lead to unreasonable pressure being placed on the DPP.

Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

These changes to the law would likely lead to a significant increase in the number of women performing late-term abortions at home, endangering the lives of many more women.

They would also likely lead to an increased number of viable babies’ lives being ended well beyond the 24-week abortion time limit and beyond the point at which they would be able to survive outside the womb.

Making it easier to cover up infanticides

Stella Creasy’s amendment would remove key deterrents against hiding the body of a dead baby included in Section 60 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.

Section 60 makes it an offence to conceal the birth of a child by hiding the dead body of a child after its birth, including in circumstances when the baby has been killed through infanticide. This law change could make it easier to cover up infanticides.

Removing a series of key safeguards provided by the Abortion Act

The amendment would also remove a series of key safeguards provided by the Abortion Act through to 24 weeks.

It proposes making this law change by removing offences for women and doctors committed under sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act (OAPA) and the Infant Life (Preservation) Act (ILPA) through to 24 weeks.

As the Abortion Act was passed to create exemptions to sections 58 and 59 of the OAPA and the ILPA, removing such offences committed under sections 58 and 59 of the OAPA and the ILPA would make key safeguards provided by the Abortion Act 1967 redundant through to 24 weeks.

This means abortion would be available on demand, for any reason up to 24 weeks.

If the proposal becomes law, sex-selective abortion would become legal in England and Wales. Sex-selective abortion usually targets baby girls due to a preference among certain parents and some cultures for having sons. The Government maintains that, under our current legislation, abortion on the grounds of the sex of the baby is illegal because it is “not one of the lawful grounds for termination of pregnancy” set out in the Abortion Act, which stipulates that abortion can only be performed under specific grounds.

Under the proposed law change, the Abortion Act and the grounds under which abortion is permitted would effectively be made redundant up to 24 weeks, allowing abortion on demand, for any reason, including sex-selective abortion.

Section 1(3) of the Abortion Act restricts abortion to hospitals or places approved by the Secretary of State. Without this safeguard, there would be no legal restrictions on places where abortions could be performed up to 24 weeks.

The amendment would also result in there being no legal requirement that abortions take place under the care of a qualified doctor. Currently, the Abortion Act requires that an abortion takes place under the care of a registered medical practitioner (qualified doctor) who leads or directs the abortion process.

Under the proposed law change, there would also be no legal requirement that two qualified doctors certify an abortion. Section 1(1) of the Abortion Act requires two registered medical practitioners (doctors) to certify that an abortion is legal and is being performed under one of the grounds set out in the Abortion Act. Without this safeguard, there would be no legal requirement that two doctors certify an abortion up to 24 weeks.

Strong opposition from the public and medical professionals

Polling undertaken by ComRes, shows that only 1% of women support introducing abortion up to birth and 70% of women would support a reduction in the time limit from 24 weeks to 20 weeks or below. The same polling showed that 91% of women agree that gender-selective abortion should be explicitly banned by the law.

Polling published by the Daily Telegraph shows that more than half of the general public agree that it should remain the case that a woman is breaking the law if she has an abortion of a healthy baby after the current 24-week legal time limit up until birth. Only 16% disagreed.

Over 750 medical professionals have now signed an open letter to MPs opposing making extreme changes to abortion legislation part of the Criminal Justice Bill.

A number of high-profile commentators in the media, some of whom take a pro-choice position on abortion, have come out against making extreme changes to abortion legislation, saying the proposals go “too far”.

Major campaign launched to oppose abortion up to birth

Following the tabling of Stella Creasy’s extreme abortion amendment, pro-life organisation Right To Life UK, has launched a major nationwide No To Abortion Up To Birth campaign focused on defeating attempts to hijack the Criminal Justice Bill that would introduce extreme changes to our abortion laws.

Right To Life UK is encouraging members of the public around the country to urgently contact their MP using the tool at www.righttolife.org.uk/uptobirth to ask their MP to oppose the introduction of extreme abortion laws.

Right To Life UK spokesperson, Catherine Robinson, said: “These extreme changes to the law would remove key deterrents against performing an abortion at any point right through to birth. This would make it more likely that healthy babies are aborted for any reason, including sex-selective purposes, right up to and during birth”.

“It would likely lead to a tragic increase in the number of viable babies’ lives being ended through late-term abortions performed at home well beyond the 24-week abortion time limit, as well as the lives of many more women being endangered”.

“These extreme and radical abortion amendments have no place in the UK. Recent polling clearly shows that the public does not support these changes to the law. We are calling on MPs to reject these amendments and instead support Caroline Ansell’s amendment to lower the time limit, for which polling shows widespread public support”.

“We are calling on members of the public around the country to urgently contact their MP to ask them to oppose the introduction of extreme abortion laws”.

LifeNews Note: Republished with permission from Right to Life UK.

The post British MP Pushes Measure to Legalize Abortions Up to Birth in UK appeared first on LifeNews.com.

A feminist pro-life group has placed three billboards in the Pittsburgh area reminding readers of some significant realities about abortion.

“Abortion providers take your kid, your cash and give you tissues to cry it out. Thanks for nothing,” one of the billboards says.

The idea was prompted last fall as Feminists for Life hosted a billboard campaign to get the message out that women deserve support during an unexpected pregnancy, not an abortion, the group’s President Serrin Foster said.

“The number one reason women give for wanting an abortion is poverty,” Foster explained.

Feminists for Life of America is a nonsectarian, nonpartisan, grassroots organization that works for solutions to the challenges faced by women that could drive them to consider abortion, poverty being chief among them. Drawing upon core values of early American feminists who opposed abortion such as Susan B. Anthony, the group espouses justice, nondiscrimination, and nonviolence. One of the organization’s quotes is, “Abortion is a reflection that we have not met the needs of women,” and the perhaps most recognizable motto from the group is, “Women Deserve Better Than Abortion.”

Feminists for Life detailed the rationale for another of the billboards, noting in an email message to supporters how national statistics are skewed low because of inconsistent reporting.

“The most recent CDC report noted there were at least 4,070 abortions that took place at or after 21 weeks gestation when movement of the baby can be felt—and babies can feel pain,” the statement reads. “However, that report only counts 41 states and Pennsylvania, along with California, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, and Wisconsin did not participate in the reporting making the actual number of late-term abortions much higher.”

Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

“In Pennsylvania, abortion is legal up to 24 weeks gestation, or approximately six months into pregnancy,” it continues. “Feminists for Life asks, “are you ok with that?”

One of the billboards calls out those CDC statistics.

“In 2021, there were at least 4,070 abortions after 21 weeks or more,” it states. “They were kicking inside their mothers’ wombs. Are you OK with that?”

Earlier this year the Pennsylvania Department of Health released abortion statistics from 2022 revealing the highest number of abortions in the state in 10 years. The statistics also showed that abortion complications have tripled in Pennsylvania in the last five years.

According to the 2022 Pennsylvania Health Department findings, there were 510 abortions (1.5% of the total) performed between 21 and 23 weeks of gestation; no abortions were reported at 24 weeks or later. The city of Pittsburgh is in Allegheny County. That county had 3,583 abortions in 2022; 67 of them between 21-23 weeks.

In its email message Feminists for Life expressed the heightened need for support for women in the Black community, stating, “According to the CDC report, Black women underwent about 42% of all reported abortions, higher than any other race or ethnicity (as well as facing higher maternal mortality risks).”

“We know that lack of resources and support often drive women to abortion,” the group said. “Feminists for Life believes Black women deserve better—and their children are just as precious as any other.”

The third Feminists for Life billboard uses the group’s most common catchphrase, stating simply, “Women Deserve Better Than Abortion.”

It then offers encouragement to women with, “There is help,” and provides the number for Option Line, 1-800-712-4357.

Option Line is the bi-lingual contact center that provides pregnancy help 24/7 via phone call, text, chat, or email. Option Line is managed by Heartbeat International, the largest network of pregnancy help organizations in the U.S. and the world.

Foster said they chose to put the Option Line phone number on this billboard so that women are able to find the “better” in their unexpected pregnancy by locating a pregnancy help center for support.

Some pregnancy resource centers in Pennsylvania have been affected the commonwealth’s Democrat Governor Josh Shapiro defunding Real Alternatives in 2023. Real Alternatives is a non-profit, charitable organization that administers pregnancy and parenting support services for Pennsylvania and Indiana. Pregnancy help organizations continue to operate and provide compassionate care and support to women and families in Pennsylvania despite Shapiro’s action.

Feminists for Life believes many women across the nation, including Pennsylvania, know there are indeed alternatives to abortion.

The billboards have been in place in the Pittsburgh area since late March, and there has actually been one one complaint. Foster said Feminists for Life received an email filled with expletives claiming their organization “was not truly feminist.”

She did not let that one email upset her.

“Anger masks pain,” Foster said, and she added that she is hoping more people are drawn to the Feminists for Life website and learn more about women and true feminism.

“There’s nothing more important than being a mom,” said Foster.

LifeNews Note: Tabitha Goodling has been writing for media outlets for more than 20 years in her home state of Pennsylvania. She has served as a client services director at her local pregnancy center since 2018. She and her husband are raising four teenage daughters, which include a set of triplets. This column originally appeared at Pregnancy Help News.

The post Pro-Life Billboards Say “Women Deserve Better Than Abortion” appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Heartbeat International weighed in to defend women and their unborn children from chemical abortion in federal court this week. Heartbeat, alongside 23 U.S. states, numerous pro-life groups, and the West Virginia attorney general, asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit to uphold the state’s Unborn Child Protection Act (UCPA).

With limited exceptions (i.e.: nonviability, ectopic pregnancy and medical emergency), the UCPA makes it illegal to perform, induce or attempt to perform or induce an abortion, as Heartbeat’s brief in GenBioPro v. Raynes states, and further, it “expressly includes abortions performed or induced via “medicine” or “drug.””

Chemical abortion drug manufacturer GenBioPro is seeking in the case to invalidate West Virginia’s ban on chemical abortion by arguing that the state law is “preempted” by the FDA’s approval of mifepristone.

West Virginia replaced its earlier abortion regulation with the Unborn Child Protection Act in 2022 following the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade in the Dobbs decision. The Supreme Court ruled in Dobbs that states may regulate abortion for “legitimate state interests” including, among others, “respect for and preservation of prenatal life at all stages of development,” “the protection of maternal health and safety.”

West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, along with attorneys from Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), petitioned a federal district court in February 2023 to uphold the state’s UCPA and other pro-life legal provisions, ADF reports. In August 2023 the court partially dismissed the lawsuit, upholding the UCPA, and then GenBioPro appealed the case to the 4th Circuit.

HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

GenBioPro makes the generic version of mifepristone, the first of two drugs in the chemical abortion regimen. Mifepristone blocks progesterone in a pregnant woman’s system, depriving her unborn child of necessary nutrients. The second drug, misoprostol, taken a day or so later, causes her to go into labor and deliver her presumably deceased child.

GenBioPro, along with abortion pill manufacturer Danco, has funded groups behind clinical trials and studies of the abortion pill that claim the drug is both safe and effective, Live Action News reports.

Both drug companies have weighed in on the FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine case before the Supreme Court in which pro-life doctors are challenging the FDA’s questionable approval of mifepristone and subsequent loosening of its own safety standards for the drug, the drug manufacturers filing briefs or petitioning in support of the FDA and/or against the pro-life medical professionals seeking to protect women from chemical abortion drugs.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in FDA v. AHM March 26 and a ruling is expected before the Supreme Court breaks in June for the summer.

Heartbeat International, the largest network of pregnancy help organizations in the U.S. and globally, had filed an amicus brief in FDA v. AHM as well, arguing the FDA lowered the standard of care for women in relaxing its abortion pill safety standards.

Heartbeat’s General Counsel noted regarding GenBioPro v. Raynes how the abortion industry frames FDA authority to meet its needs in each scenario.

“Just a few weeks ago, we heard oral argument in FDA v. AHM, where those in favor of abortion contended that no one would have standing to challenge the FDA’s removal of safety protections for women,” Danielle White said. “Now, the abortion industry claims that those same unelected bureaucrats at the FDA can overrule a state’s elected representatives and prevent them from protecting women and their unborn children from the dangers of chemical abortion.”

“The Fourth Circuit should affirm the district court’s dismissal of this case,” White said.

Heartbeat, represented by legal non-profit Thomas More Society, argued in its April 15 brief for GenBioPro v. Raynes that the district court correctly determined that FDA regulations related to mifepristone do not preempt the UCPA and other state law, and that the FDA’s regulations leave significant gaps in protections for pregnant women, and asked the court to affirm the parts of the earlier district court’s ruling granting the State of West Virginia’s motion to dismiss.

Heartbeat International President Jor-El Godsey called on the courts to uphold the law over abortion special interests and to respect the right of states to protect women and children through the abortion regulation.

“We trust the courts will see clearly that we are the United States of America and not the United States of Abortion,” Godsey said.

“Big Pharma and Big Abortion are working hand in hand to thwart the will of the people,” said Godsey. “West Virginia, or any state in the union, should have the right to protect the health and well-being of its women and its smallest residents, the babies in the womb.”

LifeNews Note: Lisa Bourne is Managing Editor of Pregnancy Help News and Content Writer for Heartbeat International. This originally appeared at Pregnancy Help News.

The post Pro-Life Group Fights Abortion Drug Maker That Just Wants to Sell More Abortions appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Like many young married couples, Kansas residents Roy and Emily Schmeidler were excited to learn about Emily’s pregnancy, their first child. However, at the 20-week ultrasound, their excitement turned to fear and uncertainty. They courageously chose life for their child despite doctors’ recommendations for abortion.

“My husband and I were blessed to get pregnant, and at our 20-week ultrasound we got some pretty devastating news,” Emily recently told Pregnancy Help News.

The baby had a cyst on her brain and one arm appeared to be shorter than the other with the possibility of missing bones. Additionally, the medical team said they couldn’t tell if the baby had all her fingers. The cyst could be an indication of various difficulties, including intellectual disabilities.

“She was incredibly small,” Emily recalled. “She was in the fourth percentile of growth.”

The doctor was concerned about the possibility of the baby dying in utero or within the first year of her life. He asked Emily and her husband to consider abortion. They declined and the doctor referred them to a large children’s hospital in the area for further testing.

“The news was shocking,” Emily said, “but my composure was like, ‘I have to keep it together,’ but it was really hard. I wanted to just burst out crying.”

She and her husband returned to their car, absorbing the news together.

Click Like if you are pro-life to like the LifeNews Facebook page!

(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.10"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

“My husband and I left that doctor’s office and just wept together in the car,” Emily said. “You never think it’s going to happen to you and then it just does, out of the blue with your first child. All we knew what to do in that moment was to pray. It started a really hard road and journey for us.”

Referral and more testing

Upon transferring care to a different medical team, Emily underwent additional ultrasounds and a heart echocardiogram.

“Oftentimes if there’s something wrong with both arms, there’s a 99 percent chance the baby is going to have some pretty severe heart problems,” she explained.

However, no heart issues were discovered.

“That was shocking,” Emily stated. “So, we’re praying every day. We know we have to lean into God – we really didn’t know what else we can do.”

Others came alongside the couple, including family members, church friends, work colleagues, and one of Emily’s best friends, a nun with the Sisters of Life.

“She and her fellow sisters prayed for us … and [she] also prayed with me and spoke with me over the phone several times too. That was such a gift!” Emily said.

“She and her fellow sisters prayed for us … and [she] also prayed with me and spoke with me over the phone several times too. That was such a gift!” Emily said.

Emily Schmeidler Emily Schmeidler

Emily went to the hospital every week for an ultrasound. Soon, improvements began to be seen, including the disappearance of the brain cyst.

“I only connect that to God – it miraculously disappeared,” Emily told Pregnancy Help News. “It can disappear in some babies but the fact that everything else was going on and it just disappeared – that was pretty crazy.”

Abortion was again presented due to the uncertainty of the baby’s physical and mental setbacks and her survival chances, even outside the womb. Again, Emily and Roy declined.

“Abortion wasn’t an option for us,” she said.

She often fought discouragement, however.

Emily Schmeidler

“The culture of death was very imminent around me, and it was honestly really hard as a pro-life person to continue to remain positive and trust in God and keep going,” Emily said.

Eventually, growth was detected via ultrasound.

“She got to the 11th percentile and then to the 14th percentile, which is no longer growth-restricted,” Emily said.

Another medical transfer and more miracles

Emily grew weary of listening to the medical providers constantly talking about risks, ‘want-ifs,’ and termination of the pregnancy. So, she asked friends and family for other hospital and doctor recommendations.

“I was tired of having people tell me ‘There’s something wrong with your baby, you have to be afraid of all of these things that could happen,’” Emily said. “I just wanted to have a somewhat normal birth, where people were going to give me choices and be with a doctor that was going to be just a little bit more understanding of what I was going through … and be pro-life as well.”

She transferred to a regional hospital when she was 31 weeks along. Her original due date was given as February 11, 2023, another sign she and her husband embraced.

“It’s the Feast of Our Lady of Lourdes, who is known for miraculous healings,” Emily said.

Emily Schmeidler

Emily’s labor was induced, and after 36 hours of labor, she needed a C-section because the cord was wrapped around the baby’s neck. Emily called her daughter “perfect.” She and her husband named their baby Juliette Lourdes Schmeidler.

“The only thing different is that her right arm only has one bone in her forearm instead of two, and it’s a little bit shorter and she only has two fingers on that arm – it kind of looks like a peace sign,” Emily said. “Her left arm is normal length, and she has a thumb and her pointer finger and her middle finger.”

“So, she does have some differences … but she is so determined!” said Emily. “When she was first born, her shorter arm just kind of hung there, and as she continued to grow, we praise the Lord for free occupational therapy from the state, and now she likes to use her shorter arm as her dominant arm. She can do everything with that arm! She can’t really grasp things so that’s one downside to it, but she is just thriving as a baby.”

Emily Schmeidler

Juliette is now a toddler at just over a year-old, and her presence impacts people, Emily said.

“She has been the most social little baby! She smiled so early. She does not know a stranger,” Emily shared.

Emily Schmeidler

Prior to the pregnancy, she was hired by Choose Life Marketing, a pro-life marketing company that works with pregnancy resource centers and other pro-life organizations. After Juliette’s birth, Emily traveled to conferences with her daughter and shared the amazing story of her child with others.

“This is God’s story,” she said. “Juliette is a light to so many people and is always smiling. She is such an inspiration to me as a mom to see so clearly that she is going have a purpose on this earth. She has a story, and she’s going to share that story because she’s so spunky and determined.”

LifeNews Note: Gayle Irwin writes for PregnancyHelpNews, where this originally appeared.

The post Couple Chooses Life for Disabled Baby Despite Pressure to Have Abortion appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Planned Parenthood’s 2022-2023 annual report is out. Unlike last year’s annual report, now we’re finally able to see how the 2022 Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade is affecting Planned Parenthood’s abortion numbers and bottom line.

Spoiler alert: Abortions and government funding are at all-time highs. Actual health care for things such as cancer screening and preventive care continues to decline. More affiliates than ever are providing “transgender services.”

Here are the key takeaways:

In the medical data section, Planned Parenthood reported:

• 392,715 abortions, an all-time high, and up from last year’s 374,155 abortions.
• 410,272 breast cancer screenings and Pap tests, down from 470,419 the previous year.
• 129,216 preventive care visits, down from 187,234 the previous year.
• 1,721 adoption referrals, down from 1,803 the previous year and less than half of the 4,279 reported just four years ago.
• 2,250,913 million contraceptive services, down from 2,348,275 the previous year.
• 2.05 million unique patients, down from 2.13 million the previous year.

Planned Parenthood performed 228 abortions for every one adoption referral.

In a nod to the reality that women in pro-life states are still traveling out of state to get abortions, Planned Parenthood reports that demand in pro-abortion states rose up to 700%. Some 33,000 people have gotten travel and financial assistance.

In the long term, the trend of more abortions and fewer health services is even more stark. Pro-life scholar Michael New points out that “in the past 10 years, the number of abortions performed by Planned Parenthood has increased by 20%. Meanwhile, cancer screenings fell by more than 58%, and prenatal services declined by more than 67%.”

After going all-in on “gender-affirming hormone therapy” starting in the 2015-2016 reporting year, Planned Parenthood reports an all-time high of 45 clinics offering such services. Planned Parenthood buries the specific number of services in an “other” category in the medical data tables. We can reasonably infer that gender services drove a noticeable spike in the category. It went from 8,153 in 2015 to 177,237 in this year’s report.

HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

Now take a look at the financial side of things. Planned Parenthood reported:

• $2.5 billion in net assets, up from $2.3 billion the previous year.
• $699 million in government funding, up from $670 million the previous year.
• $2 billion in total revenue, up from $1.9 billion the previous year.
• $178.6 million in excess revenue (calculated by subtracting total expenses from total revenues), a decrease from $204.7 million the previous year.
• $977.5 million in private contributions and bequests, including from 576,000 active individual contributors. Last year in those categories, Planned Parenthood reported $694.9 million and 727,000, respectively. That means that fewer people are contributing, but the ones who are writing checks are writing very, very big ones.

The sobering reality is that Planned Parenthood is swimming in cash and aborting more unborn children than ever before.

That’s despite more than a dozen states protecting unborn children with beating hearts, despite abortion clinics in pro-life states closing up shop or moving to abortion-friendly states, and despite Planned Parenthood laying off roughly 100 employees in the national office.

The pro-life movement has racked up lifesaving wins since Dobbs. But Planned Parenthood’s cold, hard data shows that the pro-life movement still has a lot of work to do to build a culture of life.

Take Planned Parenthood’s government funding, for example. Why such a dramatic increase? One culprit is the federal Title X family-planning program.

The Trump administration issued a regulation that required, among other things, that participants physically and financially separate any abortion activity from Title X activity. Rather than comply with the rule, Planned Parenthood clinics sided with abortion and pulled out of the program. But the Biden administration changed the regulation, and starting in 2022, Title X funding flowed to abortion providers, such as Planned Parenthood, once again.

Government funding isn’t the only place executive action is having an impact. Why are Planned Parenthood’s abortion numbers continuing to rise despite nearly two dozen states passing robust pro-life laws after the Dobbs decision? Planned Parenthood can thank the Food and Drug Administration.

In the spring of 2021, under the cover of containing COVID-19, the FDA stopped requiring that chemical abortion drugs be dispensed in person in limited health care settings, opening the door to telemedicine abortion and abortion pills being shipped by mail.

Then, in December 2021, the FDA announced it would make that policy permanent and create a process for retail pharmacies to dispense these pills without a doctor’s visit. In January 2023, the FDA officially updated the regulations for the abortion pill.

What does this mean in practice for an organization like Planned Parenthood?

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s latest abortion numbers, abortion pills are now used in at least 56% of all abortions. And thanks to President Joe Biden and the FDA, it’s never been easier for Planned Parenthood to get dangerous do-it-yourself abortion pills into the hands of women and girls across the country.

These executive policy choices should not go unanswered. Congress’ federal role over the power of the purse provides a path forward. Congress can and should defund Planned Parenthood and redirect funding to real women’s health care.

It should restore the Trump-era pro-life Title X rule. It should prohibit the FDA’s reckless disregard for women’s health and safety that opened the door to dangerous DIY abortion pills.

All of this could be accomplished through the appropriations process through policy riders. In fact, each of these solutions was proposed for fiscal 2024 appropriations, but didn’t make it across the finish line. For the sake of women, girls, and unborn children everywhere, let’s hope pro-life policymakers in Congress hold the line as Congress begins considering fiscal 2025 appropriations.

LifeNews Note: Melanie Israel writes for The Daily Signal, where this column originally appeared. She is a research associate for the DeVos Center for Religion & Civil Society at The Heritage Foundation.

 

The post Planned Parenthood Made $2 Billion Killing Babies in Abortions, It Doesn’t Need Our Tax Money appeared first on LifeNews.com.

While abortion advocates often claim that pro-life Americans don’t support adoption, it’s a pro-abortion Democrat governor who made it clear that she doesn’t support adoptive families and children.

Governor Laura Kelly’s abortion extremism was on full display today as she vetoed life-affirming tax policies in House Bill 2465.

That’s legislation that, had she signed it, would have promoted adoption in Kansas.

The Democrat governor used her veto pen to block existing resources giving financial relief to families longing to adopt children and support to organizations that assist moms who want to choose life for their babies.

HB 2465 would establish adoption savings accounts and increase tax credits for adoptive families, eliminate the sales tax burden for pregnancy resource centers, and create tax credits for donors to those organizations.

Get the latest pro-life news and information on X (Twitter). Follow @LifeNewsHQ//

Instead, Governor Kelly made it more financially difficult for families to provide loving homes for adoptive children.

Kansans for Life told LifeNews.com it was very disappointed with Kelly’s veto.

“By her heartless veto, Governor Kelly has shown once again that her only allegiance is to the profit-driven abortion industry, and not to vulnerable Kansas women, children, and families. KFL calls on legislators to override the governor’s veto of HB 2465 when they return to Topeka next week,” said Jeanne Gawdun, KFL Director of Government Relations.

The post Kansas Gov Laura Kelly Vetoes Bill to Support Adoptive Families, But Promotes Abortions Up to Birth appeared first on LifeNews.com.

392,715.

It’s just a number until you realize it is the number of abortions completed by Planned Parenthood according to their 2023 annual report.

When that realization sinks in one can’t help but wonder if 70-75% of those abortions were on Black women.

Why? Because in 2012, Protecting Black Life published information revealing that 78% of Planned Parenthood’s surgical facilities were within a two-mile radius of black and Latino neighborhoods.

25.

It’s just a number until you realize “… Planned Parenthood has located a stunning 86 percent of its abortion facilities in or near minority neighborhoods in 25 U.S. counties with the most abortions.”

Get the latest pro-life news and information on X (Twitter). Follow @LifeNewsHQ//

These 25 counties are just 1% of all the counties in America, but accounted for 30%  of all the abortions in 2014 and house 28% of all black Americans. In fact, in these counties nearly 25% of the targeted zip codes within 5 miles of a Planned Parenthood have an average black population of 55%. Planned Parenthood increased the number of their facilities in these 25 counties by 35% between 2010 and 2018.

34%.

Again, just another number until you realize it represents the $699.3 million taxpayer dollars of the over $2 billion dollars of revenue Planned Parenthood reported.  These numbers alone would not trigger alarm because they are just numbers.

But when you put them in context, they are not only alarming but rise to the level of genocide due to Planned Parenthood’s specific targeting of black women and their babies. As they carry out the tenets of the Negro Project their founder launched in 1939 these numbers represent the success of Alan Guttmacher’s (Margaret Sanger’s successor) efforts to legalize abortion in order to deal with the population explosion he saw on a Johns Hopkins segregated ward in the 1940’s.

Yes, Planned Parenthood has sought to control the black birth rate in America since 1939. They have pursued, shamelessly, black ministers, leaders, and politicians in their efforts to “exterminate” those they consider dysgenic. Cloaking their eugenic ideals in words that evoke an emotional response, they claim they are providing black women with access to what they call a woman’s right, what they call healthcare. Five decades of lies cannot make black children in the womb a disease, or objects to be gotten rid of. The lie stops here as we say no more.

LifeNews Note: Catherine Davis is the head of the Restoration Project.

The post Planned Parenthood Puts 86% of Its Abortion Centers in Black Communities to Kill Black Babies appeared first on LifeNews.com.

  Catholic Conclavehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06227218883606585321noreply@blogger.com0

The Nevada Supreme Court stopped a challenge to a state amendment that would allow abortions up to birth in the Western state. As a result of the ruling, Nevada voters will vote this November on the radical amendment.

The Nevada Supreme Court unanimously approved the pro-abortion language after a district court judge has blocked it from moving forward — finding that it contained multiple subjects and was misleading.

The supreme court reversed, claiming that the amendment only addressed “reproductive freedom.”

LifeNews is on GETTR. Please follow us for the latest pro-life news

The campaign must submit at least 102,362 signatures for it to appear on the ballot. If it passes, voters will have to approve it again in 2026 for it to appear in the state constitution.

In a decision handed down November 21, Judge James T. Russell concluded that a proposed ballot initiative that would have embedded abortion in the Nevada constitution is too broad, contains a “misleading description of effect” and has an unfunded mandate.

“This is probably the clearest case I have seen that I think there is a violation of the single-subject rule,” Russell said, according to KOLO-TV Reno. “I’ve seen a lot of them over the years and in respect to this particular matter, there are too many subjects. Not all of which are functionally related to each other.”

The post Nevada Supreme Court Approves Ballot Amendment for Abortions Up to Birth appeared first on LifeNews.com.

As previously reported, Operation Rescue has seen an increase in medical emergencies since the overturn of Roe v. Wade, especially in leftist cities and states that have turned into abortion destinations – such as Illinois.

This time, on-site pro-life eyewitnesses saw two emergencies on the same day at the University of New Mexico Center for Reproductive Health in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The information was provided by Abortion Free New Mexico.

First Emergency:

According to eyewitnesses, a woman was taken to an ambulance on a gurney around 2:30 p.m. on April 10, 2024. Another ambulance, a police car and a fire engine were also on the scene.

LifeNews is on GETTR. Please follow us for the latest pro-life news

Second Emergency:

That same day, less than two hours later, at around 4 p.m., a second ambulance was seen at the abortion facility to transport another woman to the emergency room.

Unknowns:

The condition of both women remains unknown.

Operation Rescue is trying to obtain 911 records for both emergencies from the city of Albuquerque and the Albuquerque Fire Department. Nevertheless, based on previous requests, a total or partial denial of records is expected. Operation Rescue’s team has seen this pattern in many abortion destination cities where the abortion cartel is not held accountable.

Over and over again, women are injured – or worse – by abortion. Yet what happens to them gets covered up, swept away, and quietly erased in a disappearing act. The public deserves to know how dangerous abortion is, and yet public records frequently are withheld, denied, or mysteriously missing.

This silence costs women and babies.

“We continue to see an increase in medical emergencies like these while the traditional media, liberal groups, and their allies remain silent,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. “Meanwhile women keep getting hurt. But we will move forward with our work exposing the truth of what the abortion cartel does not want the public to know about abortion. We pray for these women who were injured, though the condition of each remains unclear. And, we will keep fighting by all legal means for life.”

LifeNews Note: Ricardo Pinedo writes for Operation Rescue.

The post Abortion Clinic Sends Two Women to ER in Less Than Two Hours After Botched Abortions appeared first on LifeNews.com.

New polling is suggesting that former President Donald Trump is leading incumbent Joe Biden by a thin margin, but it may not be enough to secure a Trump victory in November. According to the latest Emerson College nationwide survey released on Thursday, 46% of voters back Trump, against 43% who back Biden, with 12% undecided. When undecided voters are asked which way they lean towards voting, Trump’s overall support increases to 51% and Biden’s to 48%.

The current state of the economy, including jobs and inflation, seemingly play a significant role in which candidate voters prefer. Thirty-six percent of voters ranked the economy as their top issue going into November, ahead of 21% of voters who rated immigration as their top issue.

Seventy-five percent of those polled responded that they think the cost of living in the U.S. is rising. Of that 75%, 56% intend to vote for Trump and only 32% for Biden. Among voters who responded that the cost of living is “staying the same” (18%), 67% intend to back Biden and only 18% Trump. Among voters who responded that the cost of living is easing (7%), a staggering 94% intend to back Biden and only 6% intend to back Trump.

Trump also leads among voters who say that their family has an average (Trump at 46%, Biden at 44%), below average (Trump at 49%, Biden at 40%), or far below average (Trump at 50%, Biden at 32%) income. Biden leads Trump 50% to 42% among those who say their family has an above average income and 55% to 29% among those who say their family has a far above average income. Additionally, Biden leads Trump 51% to 38% among voters who say they work less than 20 hours a week, 52% to 37% among those who say they work 20 to 29 hours a week, and 45% to 43% among those who say they work 30 to 39 hours a week. Meanwhile, Trump leads Biden 50% to 38% among those who say they work 40 to 49 hours a week, 59% to 35% among those who say they work 50 to 59 hours a week, and a staggering 80% to 7% among those who say the work 60 hours a week or more.

LifeNews is on GETTR. Please follow us for the latest pro-life news

Another poll released Thursday, the Harvard Youth Poll, found that the economy was also the top concern for voters aged 18 to 29. “Make no mistake, this is a different youth electorate than we saw in 2020 and 2022, and young voters are motivated by different things,” said John Della Volpe, director of polling at the Harvard Kennedy School Institute of Politics. “Economic issues are top of mind, housing is a major concern — and the gap between young men’s and young women’s political preferences is pronounced.”

Although Trump’s share of young voters is expanding, Biden still commands a strong lead over the demographic. Among voters under the age of 30, 45% intend to vote for Biden in November and 37% for Trump, with 16% undecided. Among registered voters under 30, the margin broadens: 50% back Biden and 37% back Trump, with 12% undecided. Among voters under 30 who self-identity as likely to vote in November, 56% back Biden and 37% back Trump, with only 6% undecided.

Following a national trend, economic issues were the top concern for voters under the age of 30. Sixty-four percent of respondents rated inflation as a major concern, 59% named health care, 56% named housing, and 53% named jobs. Abortion was an issue of concern for 50% of young voters, according to the survey. Additionally, when pollsters asked young voters which of two particular issues was more important to them, inflation was ranked more important than every other issue named except for abortion.

The Washington Stand asked FRC Action Director Matt Carpenter for his insights on new polling data. “This election cycle is feeling a lot like 2016, in that we are seeing noticeable movement among key groups that will prove decisive come November. In 2016, it was noncollege white voters in the Rust Belt states that put Trump over the top,” Carpenter explained. “This election it looks like noncollege voters of all ethnicities, as well as Gen Z and Millennial voters, are behaving more like a swing vote that could go either way than a single voting bloc. If that’s the case in the fall, then Biden is in real trouble.”

“It’s likely young voters who prioritized things like climate change and social justice in 2020 have been stung by the reality of inflation and the overall crisis in affordability since the election of Biden,” Carpenter noted. “These voters might not switch to vote for Trump outright, but if they stay home or vote third party, they can damage Biden’s reelection effort substantially. At this point in the campaign Biden should be focused on winning independent voters. Instead, he is having to spend precious time and resources to keep his 2020 coalition intact.”

LifeNews Note: S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

The post Trump Leads Biden in Latest Presidential Polls as America Struggles appeared first on LifeNews.com.

As the Biden administration accelerates their strategy of promoting abortion as their go-to issue ahead of the November elections, a new poll is confirming the results of numerous previous polls showing that a supermajority of American voters oppose abortion after the third month of pregnancy — a view that is not in line with the Democratic Party’s public position of unrestricted abortion.

On Wednesday, Rasmussen Reports released the results of a poll revealing that 66% of American voters are opposed to late-term abortions beyond 12 weeks. These latest numbers are largely similar to polling results from the last 20 years, which show anywhere from 55 to 71% of Americans opposing second trimester abortions and 70 to 86% opposing third trimester abortions.

Notably, Democratic lawmakers in recent years have consistently refused to say if they would place any limits on abortion, even up to the moment of birth. The current Democratic Party platform makes no reference to placing any limits on the procedure, going so far as to say that the party would work to overturn any and all pro-life protections enacted by duly elected state lawmakers, as well as any federal protections: “Democrats oppose and will fight to overturn federal and state laws that create barriers to reproductive health and rights.”

The platform goes on to state that Democrats would force taxpayers to pay for abortions by “repeal[ing] the Hyde Amendment,” a position that is opposed by 60% of Americans. The platform further declares that Democrats will sweep away all state pro-life protections by “codify[ing] the right to reproductive freedom” in federal law, which the party has already attempted to do with the “Women’s Health Protection Act.”

REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.

Despite the Democratic Party’s unwillingness to show any moderation on abortion, Republicans in recent months have struggled to find their footing on how to message on the issue and have often not taken advantage of the contrast between public opinion on late-term abortion and the Democratic position. Former Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel has urged GOPers to point out the Democrats’ extremism in recent months. “We are the pro-life, pro-woman, pro-family party, and we can win on abortion,” she argued. “But that means putting Democrats on the defense and forcing them to own their own extreme positions.”

National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) Chairman Senator Steve Daines (R-Mont.) voiced similar sentiments, pushing candidates to “not run away from the issue” and to “confidently articulate” their pro-life positions.

In comments to The Washington Stand, Director of FRC Action Matt Carpenter contended that the Democratic Party is engaging in a money-centric strategy to overcome the discrepancy between their abortion extremism and public opinion.

“Across the nation, pro-abortion groups are pushing for ballot measures which would amend state constitutions to allow abortion through all stages of pregnancy, on the taxpayer dime,” he observed. “Liberal dark money groups are pouring campaign cash into these efforts, and Democrat political operatives are licking their chops at the thought of a super-charged pro-abortion turnout at the polls. Forgetting for a moment that poll after poll shows voters are concerned mostly about the cost-of-living crisis, rising crime, and the daily invasion at the southern border, the reality is voters are not supportive of second and third trimester abortions.”

Nonetheless, Carpenter went on to acknowledge that pro-life Republicans face challenges in educating voters on abortion ahead of November. “While the pro-abortion side relies on a phalanx of pundits repeating their euphemisms, the pro-life movement has their work cut out for them to educate voters as to the extreme nature of these measures which would prevent states from protecting unborn children from abortion in the second and third trimesters.”

Mary Szoch, director of the Center for Human Dignity at Family Research Council, also acknowledged the challenges in the current political climate but encouraged GOP candidates to be unafraid of making plain the Democratic Party’s position on abortion. “The tragedy of only 66% of voters opposing late-term abortion points to the prevalence of the culture of death,” she told TWS. “It demonstrates that our culture has become one that values people based on what they can do or accomplish as opposed to the fact that each person is a son or daughter of God. We have a lot of work to do building a culture of life.”

Szoch concluded, “That said — 66% of voters is a majority of Americans who agree that killing an unborn child after viability is a grave evil. Political candidates should recognize that speaking the truth about the Democratic Party’s views on life — their desire for abortion through (and even infanticide after) birth — is out of step with the American people.”

LifeNews Note: Dan Hart writes for the Family Research Council. He is the senior editor of The Washington Stand.

The post Poll Shows 66% of Americans Oppose Abortions After 12 Weeks appeared first on LifeNews.com.

On Thursday, April 18, 2024, the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Inspector General (IG) Michael E. Horowitz released his report on the FBI’s leaked memo targeting Catholics, and once again the loyal sons and daughters of the Catholic Church have been slapped in the face.

While the IG’s report notes that the memo “improperly conflated religious beliefs of activists with the likelihood they would engage in domestic terrorism,” it goes on to say that there was no evidence that “anyone ordered or directed” an investigation of Catholics because of their religious beliefs.

To say that no one ordered an investigation of Catholics because of their religion is about as persuasive as saying no one ordered an investigation of blacks because of their race.

Frankly, the IG’s report does little to bring this issue to a close. It is overly vague, ambiguous, and littered with contradictions. Catholics deserve a better accounting of the FBI’s and DOJ’s actions.

The IG insists that the memo grew out of the FBI’s investigation of alleged domestic terrorists. But if the intent of this investigation was to focus on right-wing nationalists, how did Catholics become the focus of the leaked FBI memo last year? Why did the FBI look into establishing sources and other contacts in the Church, instead of focusing on the stomping grounds unique to right-wing nationalists? The IG’s report has nothing to clarify these questions.

Further, the IG’s report admits that one of the woman authors of the leaked memo says she was “really interested in this resurgence of interest in the Catholic Church” by what the FBI claim are domestic terrorists. This statement alone contradicts the claim in the IG’s report that Catholics were just tangentially connected to the FBI’s investigation of genuine targets. From the jump, the authors clearly were “interested” in the Catholic Church.

Ultimately, the IG’s report does not put this matter to rest. Certain elements within the FBI and DOJ went rogue and have not been held accountable for their actions. For a year, they could have taken proactive steps to assure Catholics across the country that these renegades faced serious consequences; however, they have admitted they were “aghast” and even “appalled” by the leaked memo but took no substantive actions to resolve the matter.

SUPPORT LIFENEWS! To help us fight Joe Biden’s abortion agenda, please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

Therefore, I call upon the Congress, a co-equal branch of government, to exercise its oversight authority to get to the bottom of this once and for all. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has rightfully pointed out that the IG’s report glosses over the fact that critical files associated with the memo were deleted. This is a serious breach. These files are federal records and bureaucrats cannot just destroy them on a whim.

Additionally, Representative Jim Jordan (R-OH) has shown great tenacity in taking on the FBI. I would encourage him in the strongest terms possible to call for new hearings on this matter so we can hear directly from IG Horowitz to clear up the vagueness and ambiguities in his written report.

Last year, I sent several letters to Rep. Jordan with direct questions that would help allay the fears of Catholics regarding the FBI’s memo. Many of them remain unanswered. It is paramount we get the answers to these questions:

Was it someone from outside the FBI that crafted this egregious abuse of power?

Has there been a broader internal investigation of the FBI seeking to learn if other agents have also been spying on Catholics?

How common is it for FBI agents to infiltrate houses of worship—of any religion—employing “tripwire sources”?

What did they intend to do with the information once they completed their probe?

Without new hearings and concrete efforts not only to resolve the lingering questions but also to hold these rogue agents accountable, Catholics will rightly remain skeptical of the FBI and DOJ. We are not walking away from this, and I will have more to say on this in the future.

LifeNews Note: Bill Donohue is the president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.

The post Biden Admin Report Tries to Exonerate FBI for Targeting Pro-Life Catholics appeared first on LifeNews.com.

The Catholic bishops in Poland are calling for citizens of the eastern European country to set aside a day of prayer to save babies from abortion. While the call is for the EU nation to rally in prayer, there’s no reason why Christians across the globe can’t join in to pray for unborn children to be spared from the terrible tragedy of abortion.

“I warmly encourage you to make the coming Sunday a day of special prayer in defense of the unborn,” Archbishop Tadeusz Wojda, the chair of the Polish Episcopal Conference, said in a statement. “I ask that in all churches in Poland, at every holy Mass, we pray for this intention.”

“Life is a gift of God and as such is an inalienable right of every human being; therefore, it must be protected and supported at every stage of its development,” the archbishop said. “Respect for life, which belongs to the most important values, is one of the fundamental duties of every human being.”

As CNA reports, the call for prayer comes as Poland is dealing with radical pro-abortion bills.

Lawmakers on Friday advanced four pro-abortion bills to be considered by a special committee in the Sejm, which is Poland’s lower legislative body. This was the first major action on abortion taken by the new coalition government led by Prime Minister Donald Tusk after voters ousted the Law and Justice party from leadership of the country.

REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.

Two of the bills would legalize abortion through the 12th week of pregnancy, which would be a sharp departure from the country’s strong pro-life laws. Under current law, abortion is only legal when the mother’s life is at risk or when the pregnancy occurred from illegal sexual activity, such as rape or incest.

A third bill would decriminalize abortion. Although women who procure abortions do not face criminal penalties under current law, anyone who assists a woman in carrying out an abortion could land up to three years in prison. The proposal would eliminate those criminal penalties for abortionists and other accomplices.

The fourth bill, which was proposed by the center-right Third Way party, would maintain most of the current abortion laws but expand legal abortion to instances in which the unborn child has a fetal abnormality.

Thousands of pro-life advocates recently marched in Poland against abortion to protest the legislation.

Thousands of pro-life advocates March for LIFE in Poland! pic.twitter.com/e45YEpLuTv

— LifeNews.com (@LifeNewsHQ) April 15, 2024

The post Catholic Bishops Call for Day of Prayer to Save Babies From Abortion appeared first on LifeNews.com.

A group of left-wing and far-left members of the U.S. House released a policy agenda Thursday partly aimed at boosting support for President Joe Biden in November.

NBC News reported that the new agenda from the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) “doubles as a blueprint of political advice for how it believes President Joe Biden can win over progressives and young voters who are uninspired by his re-election bid.”

The CPC’s “seven-point agenda is heavily focused on economics and lighter on cultural issues,” NBC added.

Still, one of its planks emphasizes “advancing justice” through pro-abortion, pro-LGBTQ, and pro-illegal migrant policies – as well as support for “national policing standards.”

CPC Chairwoman Pramila Jayapal, D-WA, stated: “The way we came to this agenda is to say that we were going to put into this agenda things that were populist and possible … and affected a huge number of people.”

Jayapal underscored that left-wing voters are crucial for Biden’s chances of securing a second term this year.

“If the progressive base is not excited and enthusiastic — and if they don’t feel like we are trying to earn their votes and that they are important — then I think the horrific idea of a second Donald Trump presidency could become reality,” the leftist lawmaker told NBC.

“We have to excite our base,” she continued. “We have to show them what the path forward is — not just say, ‘This is the most important election of your life, and we expect you to vote.”

SUPPORT LIFENEWS! To help us fight Joe Biden’s abortion agenda, please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

Also in her comments to NBC, Jayapal seemed to acknowledge the fact that Biden has been trailing Trump in most recent polls.

“We are not seeing the momentum that we would like to see,” she pointed out. “We’re going to have a tough election.”

An Emerson College poll released Thursday showed Trump three points ahead of Biden nationally.

The Hill indicated: “Trump leads Biden 46 percent to 43 percent, according to the poll.”

“Support for Biden dropped 2 percentage points since the previous Emerson College poll in early April, while Trump’s polling stayed at 46 percent,” The Hill added.

However, the incumbent president particularly seems to be struggling with attracting the support of younger voters in his re-election campaign – compared with his initial race against Trump four years ago.

Per POLITICO, “Biden leads Trump, 45 percent to 37 percent, among people ages 18 to 29 in a Harvard Youth Poll released Thursday, with 16 percent undecided.”

“That 8 percentage point margin is much smaller than at this point in the 2020 election,” POLITICO noted.

Many observers agree that this relatively dismal showing among young voters for a Democrat jeopardizes Biden’s chances of remaining in office.

NBC stated that much of the CPC’s ambitious “agenda will have no realistic chance of passage unless Democrats sweep control of the White House, the House and the Senate this fall.”

“[I]n addition, Democrats would need 50 senators ready to pierce the 60-vote filibuster rule to get around likely GOP opposition,” NBC’s report pointed out. “That would be a herculean task, as Democrats face a daunting map in 2024 Senate races, defending a slew of seats in purple and red states.”

CatholicVote Director of Governmental Affairs Tom McClusky explained that the new CPC agenda provides American voters with insight into where the current Democratic Party stands on issues they emphasize less frequently than abortion.

“As Joe Biden only talks about his targeting of children for elimination it is helpful that the second-largest Democratic Caucus in Congress lays out the rest of his agenda,” McClusky said.

“It is an anti-business, anti-family, anti-parents, anti-US agenda that only Karl Marx could love,” he added. “When they state what they are FOR, it is also telling: pro-abortion, pro-crime and pro-illegal immigration.”

“The message is clear, ‘elect us and we will destroy America,’” McClusky stressed.

The over 30-year-old CPC currently boasts 96 House members – all Democrats.

One of its founders was socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-VT – who is currently the caucus’ only Senate member.

Some of the more notable CPC members include deeply controversial far-left Reps. Ilhan Omar, D-MN, Rashida Tlaib, D-MI, and Cori Bush, D-MO.

Tlaib made headlines last week when she declined to answer a reporter’s question over whether she supported “Death to America” chants in her district.

Rep. Jamaal Bowman, D-NY – best known for pulling a fire alarm on Capitol Hill last October – is also a CPC member.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-NY, a self-professed Catholic and socialist, is perhaps the most high-profile House member of the caucus.

All five of the aforementioned lawmakers are members of “the Squad” an informal grouping of far-left members of the House who hold controversial views on a variety of domestic and foreign policy issues.

“The Squad” is entirely within the CPC.

One former longtime member of the caucus was Rep. Ruben Gallego, D-AZ, now the presumptive Democratic nominee for the 2024 U.S. Senate Election in Arizona. According to the Associated Press (AP) “as [Gallego] prepared for a Senate run, he quietly left the group.”

LifeNews Note: Joshua Mercer writes for CatholicVote, where this column originally appeared.

The post Leftist Democrats Release Radical Pro-Abortion Agenda for a 2nd Biden Term appeared first on LifeNews.com.

I have great news. The California assisted suicide expansion bill (SB 1196) has been pulled.

This is great news, but let’s be clear, the language of SB 1196 is the goal of the assisted suicide lobby but the bill was determined to have gone too far too fast.

Based on the summary of SB 1196 by Senator Blakespear I stated that the bill would have:

1. Allowed euthanasia by IV (intravenous), as in Canada. Currently, California permits assisted suicide (lethal poison that a person takes orally at the time and place of their own choosing, with or without witnesses). This bill allowed for death by IV. This constitutes euthanasia/homicide.
2. Changed the criteria from terminally ill (6 month prognosis) to the Canadian model: “a grievous and irremediable medical condition.” Thus, there would be no time limit  and no terminal illness requirement.
3. Allowed people with early to mid-stage dementia to consent to assisted suicide or euthanasia, even though they have a condition that impairs their capacity to consent.
4. Removed the California residency requirement. California would join Oregon and Vermont, dropping their residency requirements and allowing for suicide tourism.
5. Removed the 2031 sunset clause in the California assisted suicide law.

I published an article on March 18, 2024, stating that the California bill would legalize medical killing. After the language of SB 1196 was released I further explained how SB 1196 would have expanded medical killing in California.

Please follow LifeNews.com on Gab for the latest pro-life news and info, free from social media censorship.

SB 1196 would have changed the law from requiring ingesting of the lethal poison to utilizing the lethal poison. Utilize was not defined in the bill but it could be defined as: “to make practical and effective use of.”

SB 1196 would have changed the law from requiring a terminal disease to a grievous and irremediable medical condition.

Terminal disease was based on a 6 month prognosis whereas grievous and irremediable medical condition had a long definition that essentially mean’t that the person has a serious chronic condition that will continue to decline.

The bill stated:

For purposes of this part, a “grievous and irremediable medical condition” includes a diagnosis of early to mid-stage dementia while the individual still has the capacity to make medical decisions.

How would early to mid-state dementia have been defined in practise?

SB 1196 permitted non-doctors to participate in the law. SB 1196 added the following: nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and registered nurses. SB 1196 removed the residency requirement in the California law by striking out the words – is a resident of California. SB 1196 allowed the use of an IV (intravenous) catheter to “utilize” the poison. SB 1196 stated:

death through ingestion, or through an intravenous pathway after a health care provider places an intravenous catheter if one was not already placed, to bring about the qualified individual’s own death.

This statement did not limit the use of the IV catheter to assisted suicide and may have allowed for euthanasia/homicide.

Later SB 1196, stated:

For purposes of this section, “assisting the qualified individual by preparing the aid-in-dying drug” includes a health care provider placing an intravenous catheter, so long as the health care provider does not assist the qualified individual in introducing the aid-in-dying drug into the qualified individual’s vein.

This statement inferred that the person must somehow utilize the IV catheter. The IV could be placed but the health care provider could not “assist”. This was intentionally confusing. There may also have been circumstances, such as ALS, where the person has difficulty “utilizing” the IV catheter without assistance.

On June 22, 2022, a California federal judge rejected a case designed to permit euthanasia within California’s assisted suicide act. Shavelson, a doctor that solely focuses on assisting suicide and Sandra Morris, who had ALS, argued that the state’s assisted suicide law discriminated against people who had difficulty self-ingesting the lethal drugs and to remedy the situation the state needed to permit euthanasia in those cases.

In that case, Shavelson argued that allowing the administration of lethal drugs by IV catheter when a person has difficulty self-administering the lethal drugs was necessary. Justice Chhabria rejected the argument and stated:

Chhabria ruled the case could not proceed on the theory that it violates the ADA because the accommodation they seek would cross the boundary created by the End of Life Option Act, “from the ability to end your own life to the ability to have someone else end it for you.”

Chhabria further ruled:

“Such an accommodation would ‘compromise’ the essential nature of the act, and would therefore fundamentally alter the program.’”

The judge said the law’s self-administration requirement is the “final safeguard” to ensure the act remains voluntary.

“A person seeking to end their life pursuant to the act can opt out at any point — after requesting or receiving the prescription, after the drugs are in their hand, after the feeding tube has been installed, after saying goodbye,” he wrote. “The accommodation that the plaintiffs seek would significantly undermine these protections by opening a window during which there would be no way of knowing whether the patient had changed their mind.”

If SB 1196 would have changed the California law by removing self-administer, removing the terminal illness requirement and allowing the utilization of an IV catheter, these changes would make it impossible to distinguish between an act of assisted suicide and an act of euthanasia/homicide.

Assisted suicide is receiving lethal poison and self-administer it for the purpose of causing death.

Euthanasia is when another person, usually a medical professional, administers the lethal poison for the purpose of causing death. Euthanasia is a form of homicide/murder.

Since SB 1196 did not require a “third/independent party” to witness the act, therefore SB 1196 would have enable euthanasia under the guise of assisted suicide and achieve for the euthanasia lobby what was denied to them by Justice Chhabria in 2022.

SB 1196 was a “Trojan horse” euthanasia bill.

SB 1196 is the end goal of the assisted suicide lobby.

LifeNews.com Note: Alex Schadenberg is the executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and you can read his blog here.

The post California Bill Dies That Would Have Expanded Assisted Suicide appeared first on LifeNews.com.