LifeNews

To their great shame, there is a push by the radical and pro-abortion extremist Biden administration to bully the newly elected Guatemalan government to change their protective laws governing abortion.

A sudden influx of chemical abortions in countries like Guatemala would be disastrous. Chemical abortions pose serious health threats to women; four times the rate of immediate complications than from surgical abortions, while thirty-three percent of cases of second-trimester women whose pregnancies had been misdiagnosed required surgical intervention.

There are no hospitals or medical posts in many regions of Guatemala. How can this American government claim to have “deep concern” for women’s health? Guatemalan women have nowhere to go if they experience complications from abortion.

The abortion drugs’ impacts on maternal mortality cannot be ignored, and it would wreak havoc in developing countries like Guatemala. Why?

Guatemala is one of the poorest countries in the world. In fact, it’s the poorest country in Latin America and second-most poor in this hemisphere—only the people of Haiti are in more significant distress. Seventy-five percent of Guatemalans live below the poverty line, and more than 60% live in what the World Bank deems “extreme poverty.”

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

Access to healthcare is so dire the World Health Organization declares that “Preventable diseases often result in death; malnutrition is common among children and young adults, and infant mortality rates are high.” The few government-sponsored “health posts” are understaffed and have few medical resources and supplies.

Fifty percent of all girl children under the age of 5 show signs of “stunting” – a failure to physically develop at standard rates. Stunting is the most common indicator of chronic malnutrition, and additionally, one in four women of childbearing age suffer from anemia. Most live in shanties made of salvaged materials on dirt floors without toilets or running water.

The combination of severe poverty, malnourishment, and stunting has a devastating impact on women of childbearing age in Guatemala. These women often face higher risks during pregnancy and childbirth, including higher maternal mortality rates. Additionally, they may lack access to quality healthcare and support services, further exacerbating health challenges.

Although the newly elected administration in Guatemala offers much hope for the future, the women of Guatemala must have access to doctors, schools, adequate health care, potable water, and a nutritional safety net. What they do not need is an influx of unregulated abortion and toxic abortion drugs. To protect its women and girls, Guatemala must continue to keep its protective laws in its constitution.

Shame to the Biden administration for insisting on a policy that would put so many more women at risk.

LifeNews.com Note: Raimundo Rojas is the director of Hispanic outreach for the National Right to Life Committee. He is a former president of Florida Right to Life and has presented the pro-life message to millions in Spanish-language media outlets. He represents NRLC at the United Nations as an NGO. Rojas was born in Santiago de las Vegas, Havana, Cuba and he and his family escaped to the United States in 1968.

The post Joe Biden is Pressuring Pro-Life Guatemala to Stop Protecting Babies From Abortions appeared first on LifeNews.com.

The latest CNN poll is so bad for pro-abortion Joe Biden and so good for pro-life former President Donald Trump that you only imagine the tremors it sent through the Biden camp. Here’s a down and dirty summary, followed by a complete breakdown. The summary is from Byron York

New CNN national poll: Trump over Biden 49-43 in 2-way race, 42-33 in 5-way race. 55% say Trump’s presidency was a success, while 44% say it was a failure. 61% say Biden’s presidency has been a failure, 39% a success.

Momentarily we will also look at latest Gallup Poll which in some ways is even worse for President Biden. The headline is “Biden’s 13th-Quarter Approval Average Lowest Historically: Averages 38.7% job approva.l”

Back to the CNN poll. Jennifer Agiesta, CNN Polling Director, tries to softens the blow, but Guy Benson will have none of that:

Horror show of a CNN poll for Biden. Trump ahead outside the margin of error, up even bigger w/ expanded field.  Majorities see Biden’s presidency as a failure & Trump’s as a success. 60% disapproval for the incumbent.

According to CNN’s Agiesta

Negative views of Biden’s work in office have held for much of his presidency. In the new poll, 60% disapprove of his handling of the job and 40% approve, about the same as it’s been in CNN polling for more than a year. Even Biden’s strongest issue approval ratings in the poll are also in negative territory, with 45% approving of his handling of health care policy and 44% approving his handling of student loan debt. And his worst issue approval rating  – for his handling of the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza – yields 28% approval to 71% disapproval, including an 81% disapproval mark among those younger than 35 and majority disapproval among Democrats (53%).

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

What about the economy?

Biden’s approval ratings for the economy (34%) and inflation (29%) remain starkly negative, as voters say economic concerns are more important to them when choosing a candidate than they were in each of the past two presidential contests. In the new poll, 65% of registered voters call the economy extremely important to their vote for president, compared with 40% who felt that way in early 2020 and 46% who said the same at roughly this point in 2016. Those voters who say the economy is deeply important break heavily for Trump in a matchup against Biden, 62% to 30%.

Let’s get back to Gallup. First, its opening paragraph

WASHINGTON, D.C. — President Joe Biden averaged 38.7% job approval during his recently completed 13th quarter in office, which began on Jan. 20 and ended April 19. None of the other nine presidents elected to their first term since Dwight Eisenhower had a lower 13th-quarter average than Biden.

and then its “Bottom Line”:

With about six months remaining before Election Day, Biden stands in a weaker position than any prior incumbent, and thus faces a taller task than they did in getting reelected.

We’ve examined President Biden’s faltering numbers for well over a year. On his best days he garners in the low 40s. On his worst day—see latest Gallup and CNN numbers—President Biden’s job approval numbers hover in the mid-to-high 30s.

One other important survey, analyzed by NBC’s election analyst Steve Kornacki. Midway through his interview on “Meet the Press,” moderator Kristen Welker says, “And I stop here because competent and effective, that was President Biden’s, the crux of his campaign pitch back in 2020.”

KORNACKI: And we actually polled this question in 2020, and it was basically the exact opposite. It was Biden with about a ten-point advantage over Trump and, again, same with handling of crisis. Biden had the edge over Trump.

And how about this? It’s the former president vs. the current president. We don’t really see matchups like this. Well, now we can measure it. Who has the strongest record as president? And, again, Trump outpacing Biden on that front. And, again, you’ve got to mention this one, too. “Necessary mental and physical health.” We asked this four years ago, it was a wash. It’s now a clear liability for Joe Biden.

So these are all troubling numbers for Biden, but it’s not to say there aren’t warning signs for Donald Trump in this poll either.

Always in the background  but increasingly in the foreground are concerns about President Biden’s capacity to continue. Pew Research found poll

More than a third of voters say they are extremely or very confident that Trump has the physical fitness (36%) and mental fitness (38%) needed to do the job of president.

Far fewer say the same of Biden (15% are at least very confident in his physical fitness; 21% are extremely or very confident in his mental fitness). Majorities say they are not too or not at all confident in Biden’s physical and mental fitness.

Pew also did a demographic breakout:

• White voters favor Trump (56%) over Biden (42%) by a wide margin.
• Roughly three-quarters of Black voters (77%) support Biden, while 18% back Trump.
• Hispanic voters are more evenly divided – 52% favor Biden, while 44% back Trump.
• Asian voters favor Biden (59%) over Trump (36%).

In light of all this, it’ll be very, very interesting to see what the Democrat Party does going forward.

LifeNews.com Note: Dave Andrusko is the editor of National Right to Life News and an author and editor of several books on abortion topics. This post originally appeared in at National Right to Life News Today —- an online column on pro-life issues.

The post Joe Biden’s Polling Numbers Sink to Lowest Ever, Americans Want Him Gone appeared first on LifeNews.com.

I vividly recall the young woman, dropping to her knees in fervent prayer outside an Ohio abortion facility.

Her eyes were filled with tears as she made her entreaties to God. When she looked up, I walked toward her, thanking her for her prayers.

I learned that she had been badly emotionally scarred from her experience of having an abortion at that center. When she began to speak, the floodgates opened, and she shared with me the details of that terrible trauma.

I prayed for her to find healing, and she did—through a ministry program devoted to women who have suffered the loss of children to the abortion tragedy.

On this National Day of Prayer, I am reminded of that day, so long ago, when I was first exposed to the unbelievable pain of coerced abortion. The young woman’s mother had exerted tremendous pressure on her to abort, which severely damaged their relationship.

Abortion is ultimately a civil rights issue, representing the freedom of children to be born and the freedom of women to give birth to their babies in a loving, supportive environment. You can have no faith at all and be pro-life.

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

Yet many of us in the pro-life movement treasure a deep and abiding faith in an all-loving, all-merciful God who is the creator and sustainer of life. We see His providence at work, showering blessings on pregnant women, their babies, and their families.

I am reminded of a petite woman who was a giant in the pro-life movement—Mother Teresa. Despite experiencing an extended dark night of the soul, she continued to trust in God to provide for all her needs and the needs of those she served. Fueled by her faith, she made a bold proclamation, stating that she would take in any child who was threatened by abortion. She knew that her Lord would not turn away from the babies He created with a tender and loving heart.

My prayer this day is that all pregnant women will receive the support they need for themselves and for their offspring, and that we as a nation will rediscover the beauty and hope that human life holds. May you be richly blessed by the God who hears every prayer and consoles every heartache!

LifeNews.com Note: Maria Gallagher is the Legislative Director and Political Action Committee Director for the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation and she has written and reported for various broadcast and print media outlets, including National Public Radio, CBS Radio, and AP Radio.

The post On National Day of Prayer, Pray to End Abortion appeared first on LifeNews.com.

A pro-life organization seeking to ensure Indiana’s abortion industry follows state laws, contends that the state health department is shielding abortion providers from public accountability after the department decided it would no longer release abortion records. Represented by Thomas More Society attorneys, Voices for Life filed a complaint in Marion County Superior Court on May 1, 2024, against the Indiana Department of Health and State Health Commissioner Dr. Lindsay Weaver, for violating the state’s Access to Public Records Act.

Since 2022, Voice for Life has requested and reviewed Termination of Pregnancy Reports for potential violations of health and safety standards. Indiana law requires abortion providers to submit reports, without patient names or other identifying factors, each month to improve maternal health and ensure abortions are performed legally. In reviewing these reports, Voices for Life has discovered about 700 instances of illegal activity among abortion providers and filed complaints with the state health department and the attorney general’s office.

The state health department routinely complied with Voices for Life’s requests until last fall, when the organization requested the August 2023 records. After several months delay, the department responded that it would no longer release individual Termination of Pregnancy Reports, citing confidentiality of patient medical records. Instead, the department now only releases quarterly reports of aggregated data, which do not provide the necessary detail to identify potential violations or the licensed professional or facility performing the abortion.

Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita has argued that Termination of Pregnancy Reports are not exempt from public disclosure, noting that the reports have been available for public review for decades without contention that they are medical records. Rokita issued an advisory opinion critical of the health department’s refusal to release individual reports, and noted that concealing the data impedes his office from investigating complaints against abortion providers and effectively enforcing Indiana’s abortion laws.

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

Thomas Olp, Thomas More Society Executive Vice President, stated: “Voices for Life, other pro-life organizations and the attorney general’s office must be able to review individual records in order to ensure abortion providers do not ignore laws designed to protect Indiana women and children. Indiana’s abortion industry has a history of health and safety violations. Those who run afoul of the law must be held accountable.”

Benjamin Horvath, Thomas More Society Special Counsel, added: “Indiana citizens have a right to this vital information and to transparency in their state government. By refusing to comply with Voices for Life’s request for access to public records, the health department is depriving citizens of their role in petitioning the attorney general to investigate cases that suggest terminating a pregnancy was unlawful.”

Read the Complaint, filed May 1, 2024, by Thomas More Society attorneys in the Superior Court of Indiana on behalf of Voices for Life in Voices for Life v. Indiana Department of Health and Dr. Lindsay Weaver, M.D., here

The post Pro-Life Group Files Complaint Against Indiana Health Dept. Over Concealing Abortion Records appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs has signed the bill to repeal Arizona’s abortion ban, making it so babies will continue being aborted in the southwestern state.

In a gleeful message, Hobbs celebrated her own signing of the bill.

“With the stroke of my pen, the 1864 abortion ban is about to OFFICIALLY become a thing of the past,” she wrote on X (Twitter).

However, under the state Constitution, any law repeal doesn’t take effect until 90 days after the legislative session ends, and the end date can vary. For example, if this session ends in late July like last year, the repeal would only become effective in late October or early November.

This week, the Arizona Senate bowed to the pro-abortion mob by approving a measure to repeal the state’s new abortion ban before it ever reached implementation to begin saving babies.

With the ban repealed, babies would lose almost all protection in the state. A 15-week abortion ban would go into place that only allows protecting babies up to that point – meaning 90% of more abortions would become legal.

Two Republicans, T.J. Shope and Shawnna Bolick, sided with Democrats on Wednesday to deliver enough votes to pass House Bill 2677, which would repeal the pro-life law that made Arizona one of 19 states to protect babies from abortion.

Bolick described herself as pro-life but said she supported abortions in some rare circumstances. Instead of backing legislation to allow abortions in those very rare cases, she voted to subject every single unborn children to potentially be killed in an abortion.

State Sen. Jake Hoffman condemned the Republican members who voted in favor of the measure and other ARepublicans complained the bill was fast-tracked through the legislature instead of committees having time to evaluate the legislation and take public input.

SUPPORT LIFENEWS! If you want to help fight abortion, please donate to LifeNews.com!

The Arizona Life Coalition was saddened by the developments.

“This repeal signifies more than a legislative shift; it marks a profound loss for those who stand for the sanctity of every innocent human life from conception,” it told LifeNews. “Every abortion is a loss of a priceless human being and a failure to protect the most defenseless among us.”

“Arizona continues to operate under the current permissive law allowing abortions up to 15 weeks with certain exceptions beyond this period,” it said.

Beyond the immediate legal changes, the repeal signals a deeper erosion of cultural values in the state that once protected innocent human life at every stage. This decision reflects a societal shift towards valuing convenience over life and individual choice over responsibility to protect the most innocent and defenseless.

There is also a significant concern about the long-term consequences for women. Abortion not only ends a life but also exposes women to physical harm and emotional trauma, a perspective overshadowed in the broader public debate over individual freedom and rights.

As pro-life supporters grapple with this defeat, the focus turns to future battles, particularly the upcoming ballot measure that seeks to enshrine a “fundamental right” to abortion in the state constitution. This measure, if passed, would effectively legalize late-term abortions up to birth, leading to even more unborn children being killed every year, and potentially wiping out all existing common-sense healthcare protections for women.

The repeal of the abortion ban is not the end of the pro-life cause in Arizona, but a challenge to recommit to our foundational values. It serves as a motivation for those who believe in protecting both unborn children and women, to continue working towards changing culture and inspiring pro-life choices in all circumstances.

A leading pro-life group lameted the news.

“We mourn for the loss of the children who would have been protected, and the mothers who would have received life-affirming help to address their holistic needs, under Arizona’s strongest pro-life law. After months of confusion, the people of Arizona will soon have clarity on the state’s abortion laws: a 15-week protection for the unborn who can feel excruciating pain, with exceptions for life of the mother, rape, and incest,” said SBA Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser.

“Between now and November, the far Left and pro-abortion forces will spend tens of millions of dollars to muddy the waters, fearmonger, and sow confusion to advance an extreme abortion agenda. Their goal is to repeal Arizona’s 15-week abortion law and replace it with a constitutional amendment that would allow unlimited painful late-term abortions in the fifth, sixth, seventh month of pregnancy and beyond.

“Kari Lake and all GOP candidates and elected officials must bring clarity to Arizona voters by campaigning vigorously in support of Arizona’s 15-week protection with exceptions and in opposition to the extreme no-limits abortion amendment.”

The post Katie Hobbs Signs Bill to Repeal Arizona Abortion Ban, Celebrates Killing Babies appeared first on LifeNews.com.

This report compares gestational limits on abortion in the United States with gestational limits in other countries and serves as an update to the Charlotte Lozier Institute’s original study published in 2014.[1] The goal is to determine where the United States stands now that the Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade. In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Court returned abortion policy to the American people and their elected representatives.[2] When this report refers to the United States’ abortion policy, it is referring to federal law which lacks any gestational limit on abortion.[3]

The sample group for this project includes all 193 of the United Nations (U.N.) member countries. Of these 193 countries, 70 allow abortion without restriction as to reason, otherwise known as elective abortion or abortion on demand, until an unborn child reaches a specified gestational age. The remaining 123 countries specify designated reason(s) that must be present to obtain an abortion, ranging from the most restrictive (abortion is completely prohibited or permitted only when necessary to save the life of the mother), to least restrictive (abortion is permitted based on “socioeconomic grounds”), with various reasons in between (e.g., if the pregnancy poses risks to the mother’s physical and/or mental health).[4]

Overall, the U.S. is one of only eight countries that allows elective abortion with no gestational limit at the federal level. Since 70 countries allow abortion on demand up to some point in pregnancy, it is appropriate to research what gestational limits those are for the remainder of this paper. The remaining 123 countries demonstrate a clear public policy preference for protecting human life over abortion by permitting abortion only under specified circumstances.

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

This report finds that the United States is one of only 15 countries (among U.N. member countries) in the world that permit abortion on demand past 15 weeks. The findings suggest that recent proposals in the United States to restrict abortion on demand past 15 weeks, which should serve as a minimum gestational limit, at the federal level would move the United States away from the fringe, ultra-permissive end of the spectrum.

Terminology and Method of Comparison

Not all countries use the same terminology in statutes restricting abortion. When drafting a gestational restriction on abortion, the most common measurement of fetal age is “gestational age” or “gestation.” Gestational age marks the duration of pregnancy, which is most commonly and medically measured from the first day of the woman’s last menstrual period. This occurs approximately two weeks before conception or fertilization.

Over 80% of countries that maintain some restriction on abortion on demand use gestational age as the method of calculating duration of pregnancy. However, a minority of countries measure duration of pregnancy from “conception” or “fertilization.” One country (Austria) measures from the time of “implantation,” which occurs approximately one week after conception or fertilization or three weeks after a woman’s last menstrual period. Some statutes do not specify a method of measurement, using the vague term “weeks of pregnancy” without indicating a precise method of measuring the duration of pregnancy.

While conception or fertilization is the moment when an ovum and sperm unite to create a unique human being, few women know the exact date they conceived. Because the first day of the last menstrual period is a more ascertainable date, doctors generally add two weeks to a woman’s last menstrual period, when ovulation generally occurs, to approximate the unborn child’s gestation.

Using Gestational Age to Produce the Best International Comparison

For clarity, this report uses gestational age to compare restrictions on abortion on demand that are based on duration of pregnancy. For those countries that base limits on the weeks since conception, fertilization, or implantation, this study converts the limits into gestation, and for those countries that designate the limits in days and months, this study converts the limits into gestational weeks.

International Gestational Limitations on Abortion on Demand

As mentioned above, the sample group of countries for this project included all 193 U.N. member countries. Of these, 70 allow abortion without restriction as to reason (in most, until an unborn child reaches a specified gestation), otherwise known as elective abortion or abortion on demand.[5]

The remaining 123 U.N. countries require some reason to obtain an abortion, ranging from the most restrictive (abortion is completely prohibited or permitted only when necessary to save the life of the mother), to least restrictive (abortion is permitted for socioeconomic reasons), with various reasons in between (e.g., if the pregnancy impacts the mother’s physical or mental health).[6]

Of the 70 U.N. countries permitting abortion on demand:

• 7 countries limit abortion on demand before the 12th week of gestation[7]
• 38 countries limit abortion on demand at 12 weeks of gestation[8]
• 10 countries limit abortion on demand between 12 and 15 weeks of gestation[9]
• 15 countries permit abortion on demand past 15 weeks or have no gestational limit [10]
• Of these 15 countries, 8 countries permit abortion on demand with no federal gestational limit[11]

More than 65% of the U.N. countries permitting abortion without restriction as to reason do not permit abortion on demand past 12 weeks of gestation.

Only 21% (15 out of 70) of the U.N. countries permitting abortion without restriction as to reason permit abortion on demand past 15 weeks of gestation, and only 8% of the countries permit abortion without restriction past 15 weeks of gestation out of the 193 countries included in this study.

U.S. federal law and the laws in at least 29 states place the United States among the 15 countries that permit abortion on demand past 15 weeks. No matter how duration of pregnancy is measured, whether by gestational age, conception/fertilization, or implantation, all countries in this category pass the 15-week threshold. These countries – in order by gestational limit to no gestational limit – are:

• France – 16 weeks[12]
• Sweden – 18 weeks[13]
• New Zealand – 20 weeks[14]
• Iceland – 22 weeks[15]
• Netherlands – Viability[16]
• Colombia – 24 weeks[17]
• Singapore – 24 weeks[18]
• United States – The federal government does not place gestational limits on abortion and 29 states allow abortion on demand past 15 weeks of gestation.
• Australia – The federal government does not place gestational limits on abortion. The strictest limit is 16 weeks, and the Capital Territory of Australia (an internal territory) has no gestational limit. [19]
• Mexico – The federal government does not place gestational limits on abortion.[20]
• Vietnam – No restriction in law[21]
• South Korea – No restriction in law[22]
• Canada – No restriction in law[23]
• China – No restriction in law[24]
• Guinea-Bissau – No restriction in law[25]

European Abortion Laws by Gestational Limits

The United States has a far more extreme abortion policy than those found in Europe. Forty-six out of 50 European countries limit abortion after 15 weeks.[26] A more detailed breakdown of European countries’ policies is as follows:

• Three countries prohibit abortion altogether (Andorra, Malta, and Vatican City)
• Three countries prohibit abortion except to preserve the physical and/or mental health of the woman (Liechtenstein, Monaco, and Poland)
• Two countries permit abortion on broad socioeconomic grounds (Italy through 90 days and the United Kingdom through 24 weeks)
• 42 countries permit abortion on demand. However:
  • 6 countries limit abortion on demand after 10 weeks[27]
  • 26 countries limit abortion on demand after 12 weeks[28]
  • 6 countries limit abortion on demand between 12 and 15 weeks[29]
  • 4 countries allow abortion on demand after 15 weeks.[30] The country with the latest gestational limit is the Netherlands, which limits abortion after viability.
  • 0 European countries permit abortion on demand without gestational limits, as the United States does.

Implications

U.S. federal law does not place any gestational limits on abortion. Consequently, 29 states permit elective abortion past 15 weeks of gestation, and in at least 19 states, abortion drug prescribers are shielded from legal repercussions if they ship abortion pills into those states that restrict abortion from conception and/or that have health and safety requirements that apply to abortion-inducing drugs.

In 2022, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ) introduced bills in their respective chambers seeking to protect unborn babies by prohibiting abortion on demand after 15 weeks at the federal level (H.R. 8814/S. 4840). This bill is based on the scientifically supported premise[31] that at least by 15 weeks unborn children are capable of feeling pain.

Permitting abortion on demand past 15 weeks places the United States among the top 8% most   permissive countries in the world (15 out of 193) based on gestational limits on abortion. The United States should seek to move away from the ultra-permissive fringe policies of the 14 other countries that permit abortion past 15 weeks and aim to protect life at even earlier gestational limits, as 178 other U.N member countries do – ranging from complete protection of the unborn to protecting the unborn after 15 weeks of gestation.

Conclusions

In terms of gestational limits, out of 193 countries, the United States is one of eight countries that permits elective abortion with no federal gestational limit. Internationally, abortion is most frequently limited to the first trimester or earlier with even highly permissive countries establishing limits around 15 weeks of gestation.

[1] The original study can be found here: https://lozierinstitute.org/internationalabortionnorms/. When this study was published in 2014, the focus of the paper was comparing the U.S.’ current “federal policy… which allows abortion past 20 weeks and without restriction until viability” with the abortion laws of other countries. The study found that, because the United States Supreme Court restricted legislatures from enacting most pro-life laws, the United States was one of seven countries that allowed for abortion on demand after 20 weeks. In the wake of the Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade in June 2022, this update to the 2014 paper focuses on 15-week gestational restrictions that have been introduced at the national level. However, it is important to note that the United States remains one of only 12 countries that permit elective abortion past 20 weeks, as of April 2024, even as multiple U.S. states have enacted limits at varying gestations. Further, 29 states (and the District of Columbia) continue to permit elective abortion beyond 20 weeks.

[2] 587 U.S. 2015 (2022).

[3] While abortion policy has been returned to the American people and their elected representatives, states with statutory or state constitutional protections for abortion are circumventing pro-life states’ laws through “abortionist shield laws,” including protections for mailing abortion pills into pro-life states. An example of a comprehensive abortionist legal shield is NY Senate Bill S1066B, which was signed into law in June 2023. See Harned, Mary. Abortion “Shield Laws”: Pro-Abortion States Seek to Force Abortion on Life -Affirming States. August 2023. Charlotte Lozier Institute On Point, Issue 96. Available at https://lozierinstitute.org/abortion-shield-laws-pro-abortion-states-seek-to-force-abortion-on-life-affirming-states/.  Recent reports have also shown how interstate abortion commerce has skyrocketed since the Dobbs decision, meaning that residents of states with gestational limit protections for the unborn are obtaining abortions in states without them, such as Illinois, Kansas, and New Mexico. Currently, abortion remains unrestricted at the federal level as there is no federal legislative gestational limit. As a result, women in pro-life states can obtain an abortion at any time throughout her pregnancy in the 29 states (and D.C.) that allow elective abortion past 15 weeks or throughout a woman’s pregnancy.

[4] See https://www.fiapac.org/media/uploads/abortion_laws_around_the_world_sam_rowlands_rev_2022.pdf and https://reproductiverights.org/maps/worlds-abortion-laws/. Sixty-four countries prohibit abortion altogether or only permit it in cases to save the life of the mother. These countries include Andorra, Malta, Afghanistan, Antigua & Barbuda, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burma/Myanmar, Chile, Republic of the Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Gabon, Gambia, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Laos, Lebanon, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Marshall Islands, Maldives, Mauritania, Micronesia, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Philippines, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Syria, Tanzania, Timor Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela, and Yemen. Forty-eight countries prohibit abortion except in cases to preserve the health of the mother (physical and/or mental health).These counties include Algeria, Angola, Bahamas, Barbados, Bolivia, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Costa Rica, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea, Israel, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lesotho, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Malaysia, Mauritius, Monaco, Morocco, Namibia, Nauru, Niger, Pakistan, Peru, Poland, Qatar, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Seychelles, Swaziland, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Vanuata, and Zimbabwe. Eleven countries permit abortion for socioeconomic reasons. These countries include Belize, Benin, Eritrea, Ethiopia, India, Italy, Japan, Rwanda, Saint Vincent’s and Grenadines, United Kingdom and Northern Ireland, and Zambia.

[5] https://www.fiapac.org/media/uploads/abortion_laws_around_the_world_sam_rowlands_rev_2022.pdf; https://reproductiverights.org/maps/worlds-abortion-laws/; https://reproductiverights.org/sites/default/files/World-Abortion-Laws-Map.pdf; https://abortion-policies.srhr.org/countries/.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Namely, Guyana, Portugal, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Slovenia, and Serbia. Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbia limit abortion on demand past 10 weeks of pregnancy, so even if that converts to 12 weeks of gestation, they remain in this category.

[8] Namely, Albania, Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Norway, Russia, San Marino, Slovakia, Switzerland, Ukraine, Sao Tome and Principe, Thailand, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Cape Verde, Cuba, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mozambique, Nepal, South Africa, Tajikistan, Uruguay, and Uzbekistan. Three countries (Croatia, Macedonia, and Montenegro) limit abortion on demand past 10 weeks from conception. Converting this statutory language to gestational age, these three countries limit abortion on demand past 12 weeks gestational age. They therefore belong in the category of limiting abortion “at 12 weeks.”

[9] Namely, Austria, Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, Romania, Spain, Argentina, Cambodia, Mongolia, and Tunisia. Three countries (Belgium, Germany, and Luxembourg) limit abortion on demand past 12 weeks from conception. Converting this statutory language to gestational age, these three countries limit abortion on demand past 14 weeks and therefore belong in this category. Tunisia limits abortion on demand past 3 months gestation which converts to 14 weeks of gestation. According to the Austrian Criminal code, abortion is permitted on demand only up to 3 months. However, since pregnancy is defined as beginning at implantation, abortion is permitted somewhat later by gestational age. Patient information appears to indicate that abortion is permitted until the beginning of the 16th week of pregnancy, i.e. around 15 weeks.

[10] Namely, France, Iceland, Mexico, Netherlands, Sweden, Guinea-Bissau, South Korea, Colombia, New Zealand, Australia, Canada, China, Singapore, Vietnam, and parts of the U.S. In 2022, France liberalized its abortion policy and now permits abortion on demand through 14 weeks from conception, which converts to 16 weeks of gestation. A guide explaining France’s updated abortion law can be found here: https://abortion-policies.srhr.org/documents/countries/25-France-Voluntary-Interruption-of-Pregnancy-Guide-2023.pdf#page=3. Some countries, like China and Vietnam, have prohibitions on sex-selective abortion, but seemingly permit abortion for any other reason. Some provinces in China appear to have prohibited abortion, but the country as a whole still permits it. Mexico is included in this category because the country no longer has a national limit as a result of a 2023 Mexican Supreme Court decision. Twelve out of 32 Mexican states (including the capital Mexico City, though it is not technically a “state”) currently permit abortion on demand. This almost always has a limit of 12 weeks, or 13 weeks in Sinaloa. However, many states define gestation as beginning at implantation, which occurs 3-4 weeks after the last menstrual period. Hence the limit in these states is closer to 15-16 weeks of gestation (or perhaps 16-17 in Sinaloa), with an exact limit unclear since the date of implantation is not normally certain. Mexico’s official abortion guidance, by contrast, defines “gestational age” from last menstrual period. In addition to this complexity there is an ongoing dispute about the authority and scope of the September 2023 Supreme Court’s decision to decriminalize abortion nationwide. For this reason, although around a third of Mexican states have legalized abortion on demand, and their Supreme Court has dictated this position, most Mexican states through their legislatures have so far not complied. While it may not be the “norm” that elective abortion is performed past 15 weeks of gestation, Mexico is included in this paper’s count of countries permitting elective abortion with no federal gestational limit because of the country’s lack of gestational limit. Australia, while having a federal system and different abortion policies in every state and their capital territory, has no national gestational limit. Furthermore, the Capital Territory of Australia does not limit abortion on demand at any gestational point. For these reasons, Australia is categorized as allowing abortion on demand without gestational limits. Although other countries have federal systems, the only other countries with significant diversity in gestational limits are the U.S. (where 29 states and D.C. clearly permit elective abortion beyond 15 weeks and there is no federal limit), and Australia (where every state permits abortion on demand and the lowest limit is 16 weeks in Tasmania).

[11] Namely, Australia, Canada, China, Guinea-Bissau, Mexico, South Korea, United States, and Vietnam.

[12] See footnote 10.

[13] https://www.law.cornell.edu/women-and-justice/resource/abortlag_(1974_595_-_abortion_law).

[14] In 2020 abortion was made available during the first 20 weeks of pregnancy. After that, abortion is permitted if one health practitioner deems it “clinically appropriate.” See: https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2020/0006/latest/LMS237600.html.

[15] https://www.government.is/lisalib/getfile.aspx?itemid=60ae8fd2-0b91-11ea-9453-005056bc4d74.

[16] Viability in the Netherlands typically means the 24th week of gestation. See: https://www.government.nl/topics/abortion.

[17] In 2022 the Constitutional Court of Colombia legalized abortion up until 24 weeks of gestation. See: https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/21/americas/colombia-decriminalize-abortion-intl/index.html.

[18] https://abortion-policies.srhr.org/documents/countries/01-Singapore-Termination-of-Pregnancy-Act-1974.pdf#page=2.

[19] https://www.healthdirect.gov.au/blog/can-i-have-an-abortion-in-australia.

[20] See footnote 10 for more details on the current state of abortion policy in Mexico.

[21] Although some internet resources claim that Vietnam limits abortion after 22 weeks by regulation, the country’s statute does not include a gestational limit, thus making abortion on demand legal. See: https://reproductiverights.org/maps/provision/vietnams-abortion-provisions/.

[22] Abortion was decriminalized in South Korea in January 2021 by a 2019 order of the country’s Supreme Court. As such, abortion remains unregulated in the country and is available without gestational restrictions as bills seeking to limit abortion after 14 weeks of gestation did not pass. See: https://www.loc.gov/item/global-legal-monitor/2021-03-18/south-korea-abortion-decriminalized-since-january-1-2021/.

[23] The law or lack thereof in Canada is that abortion is legal throughout pregnancy, which is why
Canada is categorized in this paper as a country that allows elective abortion without gestational limits.

[24] https://reproductiverights.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/The_Peoples_Republic_of_China_on_Maternal_and_Infant_Health_Care_Revised_in_2017_Chinese-and-English_unofficial-document.pdf.

[25] Guinea-Bissau appears to prohibit only “unprofessional” and forced abortions in its penal code, implying no legal limit on consensual abortions performed in sanitary conditions, but news reports suggest that this has resulted more in legal ambiguity than a clear legalization of abortion without restrictions: https://www.dw.com/pt-002/guin%C3%A9-bissau-especialistas-defendem-legisla%C3%A7%C3%A3o-espec%C3%ADfica-sobre-aborto/a-61249598.

[26] Kosovo and Vatican City were included in this section’s analysis of European gestational laws regarding abortion but not in the broader study as they are not U.N. members.

[27] Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Portugal, Serbia, Slovenia, and Turkey.

[28] Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Norway, Russia, San Marino, Slovakia, Switzerland, and Ukraine.

[29] Austria, Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, Romania, and Spain.

[30] France, Iceland, Netherlands, and Sweden.

[31] https://lozierinstitute.org/dive-deeper/prenatal-stress-and-pain/.

LifeNews Note: Mary Harned, J.D., is an associate scholar with the Charlotte Lozier Institute. Mia Steupert, M.A., is a research associate with the Charlotte Lozier Institute, where this column originally appeared.

The post America is 1 of Just 8 Countries Worldwide That Allows Abortions Up to Birth appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Women who experience an emergency during pregnancy continue to have access to lifesaving care under Florida’s heartbeat law, according to a rule announced by the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration Wednesday afternoon. The rule calls on hospitals to write policies for doctors who act under the pro-life law’s ‘life of the mother’ provision and includes examples of conditions that can require immediate treatment such as premature rupture of membranes, ectopic pregnancy, and trophoblastic tumors.

The guidance comes as Joe Biden, Kamala Harris and Democrats like state Sen. Lauren Book have falsely said “women and girls will die” because of a physician’s inability to treat life-threatening conditions under pro-life laws. Yesterday on X, Jason Weida, Secretary of AHCA, called out the misinformation on the heartbeat protection:

“The pro-abortion left is lying for political gain. The attempts to demonize standard healthcare for women make a physician’s job more difficult and can put a pregnant woman’s life at risk. The Heartbeat Protection Act protects women from life-threatening complications while protecting the life of the unborn.”

As the Texas Medical Board considers a similar rule on their state’s pro-life law, SBA Pro-Life America and the Charlotte Lozier Institute this week submitted comments encouraging Med Ed guidance to educate doctors. The comments emphasize the importance of doctors relying on their “reasonable medical judgment” and that the law does not require a health emergency to be immediate for a doctor to act, but that it allows for intervention when a serious situation is foreseeable.

In the comment from the Charlotte Lozier Institute, Dr. Ingrid Skop, M.D., FACOG, and a practicing OB-GYN in Texas, writes:

“Texas law does not require that a mother’s risk of death or ‘serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function’ be immediate. . . Physicians understand that it is difficult to predict with certainty whether a situation will cause a woman to become seriously ill or die, but all physicians know what situations could lead to these serious outcomes. At the time of diagnosis of a potentially life-threatening pregnancy complication, a physician must be reassured that the law allows intervention.”

Every state with a pro-life law allows women to receive emergency care. In March, South Dakota became the first state in the nation to establish a Med Ed law to end the confusion caused by the abortion industry through direct education to medical professionals. In addition to Florida and Texas, other states have taken similar steps administratively, including Oklahoma and Kentucky attorneys general who have issued advisory opinions.

Under South Dakota’s HB 1224, training materials will be established through the Department of Health and with input from the attorney general, medical professionals and legal experts. The video will cover the details of the state’s abortion law, the most common medical conditions that threaten the life or health of a pregnant woman, the standards of care for treating a pregnant woman in a medical emergency, and a practitioner’s ability to use reasonable medical judgment in all situations.

The post Florida Health Department Confirms Pregnant Women Still Receive Health Care Under New Heartbeat Law appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Joe Biden is not happy that Florida will protect babies from abortions. And he’s taking out his anger on Donald Trump.

Biden blames Trump for appointing the Supreme Court justices who issued the Dobbs decision that allowed states to pass laws protecting women and unborn children from abortions.

In his comments, Biden uses the tired old phrases that call killing babies in abortions “reproductive care” even though women still enjoy all reproductive care in Florida.

“Today, an extreme abortion ban takes effect in Florida, banning reproductive health care before many women even know they are pregnant. There is one person responsible for this nightmare: Donald Trump,” Biden said after the Florida pro-life law protecting unborn children with beating hearts went into effect.

“Trump brags about overturning Roe v. Wade, making extreme bans like Florida’s possible, saying his plan is working ‘brilliantly,” Biden added.

“He thinks it’s brilliant that more than 4 million women in Florida, and more than one in three women in America, can’t get access to the care they need,” Mr. Biden said. “Now he wants to go even further, making it clear he would sign a national abortion ban if elected.”

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

The pro-life law will save thousands of babies from abortions and end Florida’s status as an abortion destination in the southeast. Florida is surrounded by states with pro-life laws in effect that protect babies and help women and the abortion industry has been directing customers to Florida for abortions instead of helping women and unborn children.

As a result, thousands of babies are expected to be saved from abortion and will get a chance at life.

According to 2023 data from the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, about one-third of all abortions in the South occurred in Florida. The data showed more than 9,300 of those abortions involved people who traveled from other states. These babies will now be protected and their mothers can find pro-life alternatives.

The Heartbeat Law includes exceptions, such as rape, incest, and human trafficking, all of which must be officially documented. The law retains the exceptions from the 15-week law, such as: to preserve the life of the mother, which includes ectopic pregnancies; fatal abnormalities where the unborn baby is unexpected to survive outside the womb; and to “avert a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment or a major bodily function of the pregnant woman other than a psychological condition.”

In addition, before an abortion is performed under any of the exception categories, Florida abortion laws require giving a pregnant woman an option to view an ultrasound, a 24-hour reflection period unless there is an emergency, and informed consent.

The law also requires doctors to use more than just an ultrasound to determine the gestational age of an unborn child. Doctors are now required to utilize a more objective physical measurement with calipers to measure “crown to rump” length, or top of the head (crown) to the bottom of the buttocks (rump), which can more accurately determine the unborn child’s gestational age.

The Heartbeat Law will also provide $30 million in reoccurring state funding to support pregnant women and their families. This support includes:

• Clothing
• Cribs
• Car Seats
• Formula
• Diapers
• Pregnancy Testing
• Counseling (for mothers and fathers)
• Mentoring
• Education Materials
• Pregnancy Classes
• Parenting Classes
• Adoption Classes
• Life Skills Training
• Employment Readiness
• Wellness Services

Florida also has 167 pregnancy centers across the state where pregnant women and their families can receive aid and support.

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “On May 1, Florida will become a sanctuary for life. The Heartbeat Law will save countless lives, some of whom may become world leaders in science, medicine, and technology that will benefit the world. The Heartbeat Law protects the valuable lives of both the unborn child and the mother and provides a wide range of options and support for women. The Heartbeat Law will provide $30 million in public funds to help pregnant women and their children. Florida is now on the side of life.”

Implementation of the new pro-life law comes after the Florida Supreme Court upheld pro-life legislation.

On April 14, 2022, Governor Ron DeSantis signed HB 5, known as the “Reducing Fetal and Infant Mortality Act,” to protect the lives of Florida’s most vulnerable by prohibiting all abortions after 15 weeks of gestation. Florida Planned Parenthood affiliates and a group of independent abortionists sued the state on June 1, 2022. The complaint alleges that the 15-week ban violates a right to privacy within the Florida Constitution.

Later, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed legislation to save babies from abortions who have beating hearts.

DeSantis made Florida the next state to officially protect the lives of unborn children after Roe was overturned. Pro-Life Americans from across the country celebrated the new law, which protects babies whose heartbeats can easily be detected and whose lives have existed for a month and a half starting at conception.

The law would save tens of thousands of lives annually and provide $25 million in aid to women and families but it was held up by the same lawsuit.

Earlier this month, the state’s high court upheld both the 15 week and heartbeat laws. In a 6-1 ruling, the Florida Supreme Court upheld Florida’s law protecting preborn children from most abortions after 15 weeks. The decision paves the way for additional protections for preborn babies beginning at 6 weeks.

“This is a big win for life and the Florida constitution,” stated Lynda Bell, president of Florida Right to Life. “We salute the Florida Supreme Court for getting this right!”

Another pro-life group also applauded the ruling.

“Today’s victory for unborn children who have a heartbeat and can feel pain is in line with the views of the majority of Floridians who want to protect babies and serve mothers and families. As Florida faces what may be its biggest ballot fight yet, Gov. Ron DeSantis must be at the forefront of protecting Florida from Big Abortion’s attempt to eliminate the rights of unborn children, parents, women, and girls. Gov. DeSantis signed protections for babies who feel pain and have a heartbeat into law and now he must lead in defending those protections,” said SBA ProLife State Policy Director Katie Daniel of Tampa in response to the ruling.

Polling shows the heartbeat law is right in line with the views of Florida residents.

Not only do a majority of Floridians support protecting babies from abortion, they support the heartbeat law by a strong 62% margin.

Polling conducted by Ragnar Research for SBA Pro-Life America and the Florida Family Policy Council shows likely Florida voters strongly support protecting human life in the womb once a heartbeat can be detected. Almost three-quarters of voters oppose allowing abortion on demand up until birth. The poll, with a ±4% margin of error, surveyed 500 Floridians statewide from February 27-March 2.

Key poll findings include:

• 62% of Floridians support legislation to protect unborn babies when a heartbeat is detected, with exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother.
  • 61% of Independents and 58% of women surveyed support such legislation.
  • Hispanic voters were even more likely than others to support the legislation, at 76%.
• Only 22% of likely voters support allowing abortion until the moment of birth.

DeSantis signed the bill immediately so it could be defended in court. The bill would also provide $25 million in aid to women and families.

“We are proud to support life and family in the state of Florida,” DeSantis wrote in a statement. “I applaud the Legislature for passing the Heartbeat Protection Act that expands pro-life protections and provides additional resources for young mothers and families.”

The post Joe Biden Slams Donald Trump for Letting Florida Protect Babies From Abortions appeared first on LifeNews.com.

In early 2023, North Dakota passed legislation that required public schools to show “a high-definition video, at least three minutes in duration, showing the development of the brain, heart, sex organs, and other vital organs in early fetal development.” ND House Bill 1265 faced its share of scrutiny from the Left, as lawmakers across the country such as Iowa State Representative Jennifer Konfrst (D) claimed a video mapping out fetal development “is just politics” and “not scientifically correct.”

The video used as an example in the bill was produced by the pro-life organization Live Action and entitled, “Meet Baby Olivia.” In three minutes, it follows the development of a baby from conception to birth as the end of the nine-month “journey,” as the video describes. North Dakota State Senator Janne Myrdal (R), who referenced the Live Action content during hearings on HB 1265, said, “For me, it wasn’t a life issue. It was education.” She added that part of what stirred her to advocate for this legislation is because she found it “odd” human development wasn’t already part of some school curriculums. And roughly a year later, it would seem the state of Tennessee came to the same conclusion.

On April 23, a second state followed North Dakota’s lead, and Tennessee’s Republican Governor Bill Lee signed into law House Bill 2435, which also requires teaching this science to students. As The Christian Post reported, “The votes in both chambers came down along party lines, with all Republicans supporting the legislation and all Democrats opposing it.” As the bill text states:

“A family life curriculum that directly or indirectly addresses human growth, human development, or human sexuality must include the presentation of a high-quality, computer-generated animation or high-definition ultrasound of at least three (3) minutes in duration that shows the development of the brain, heart, sex organs, and other vital organs in early fetal development, such as ‘Meet Baby Olivia,’ a high-quality, computer-generated animation developed by Live Action that shows the process of fertilization and the stages of human development inside the uterus.”

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

Lila Rose, founder and president of Live Action, celebrated the momentum in a press release, “Tennessee is setting a precedent for other states to follow in prioritizing comprehensive education on human development by mandating state-of-the-art life-like animation explaining human development, like Live Action’s Baby Olivia video, in state education standards.”

She continued, “Tennessee has joined North Dakota in setting the standard for world-class education that ensures students are equipped with the knowledge they need. Tennessee has over 1 million public school students who will now be equipped with cutting-edge educational material on human development in the womb.” And as the statement from Live Action read, “Women are indeed less likely to choose abortion if they are shown the humanity of their children.”

Some have pointed out that the passage of this bill is significant as the gap between Republicans and Democrats increasingly widens on the issue of life. But in Tennessee, the House’s marginwas “an overwhelming 67-23 vote in March,” and a 21-6 margin in the Senate. And with HB 2435 to go into effect in the fall, Rep. Gino Bulso (R-Tenn.), lead sponsor of the bill, stated, “The fruits of including Meet Baby Olivia as a part of every family life curriculum used in Tennessee’s public schools will be long-lasting and widespread across Tennessee.”

Mary Szoch, director of Family Research Council’s Center for Human Dignity, told The Washington Stand, “The passage of TN House Bill 2435, the Baby Olivia Act, is a huge win for all Americans.” She explained that Alexis McGill Johnson, the president of the abortion giant Planned Parenthood, “recently noted that approximately 70% of the abortions carried out by Planned Parenthood are done using the abortion drug, mifepristone. Planned Parenthood describes this process as one where the woman takes the drug mifepristone, then takes misoprostol, then passes the ‘pregnancy tissue.’”

But according to Szoch, the reality is, “Countless women have described their horror at taking these drugs, experiencing horrific pain and bleeding, and then delivering what they were promised was a clump of cells or ‘pregnancy tissue’ but is visibly and recognizably their dead unborn baby into the toilet.” As such, the pro-life expert added, “Many of these women experience heartbreak and regret once they recognize that the abortion drug, mifepristone, killed a baby — their baby.”

This is why “legislation like the Baby Olivia Act” is needed, Szoch insisted, since it “will help many to recognize the biological fact that what Planned Parenthood refers to as ‘pregnancy tissue’ is actually an unborn baby and an abortion kills that child.”

She concluded, “The Baby Oliva Act will make certain both men and women know this BEFORE mothers and fathers experience the heartbreak of abortion. I hope more states follow this path!”

LifeNews Note: Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand, where this originally appeared.

The post New Pro-Life Laws are Teaching Students About Fetal Development appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Over the last few weeks, we have seen intense debate reignite over the role the federal government plays in limiting abortion. The backdrop to such debates is the upcoming presidential election, as well as the cultural reverberations around the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022.

There has been some confusion about the Dobbs decision. It did not simply “return abortion to the states.” Rather, it returned the power to protect the unborn to the voters, who can exercise this power through both their state and federal elected officials.

The Dobbs decision empowers states to enact pro-life laws that cover the period before viability — that is, approximately 22 weeks into a pregnancy or earlier. Under the Roe regime, states were not able to enforce such laws. Thankfully, many states have now implemented life-protective laws since the decision came down. To date, 24 states protect women and unborn children prior to viability. (Three of these are currently in litigation.)

Of course, the reverse is also sadly true. Twenty-six states currently have few or no protections for unborn babies, even at the stages where their hearts are beating, where they suck their thumbs or where they can feel pain. Seven of these states, along with Washington, D.C., have virtually no limits on abortion — not even a prohibition on painful dismemberment abortions.

This is why the U.S. must enact some form of a federal limit that protects unborn children nationwide. Otherwise, we continue on our deadly path, where over half of the country is exposed to the harms of abortion, and the human rights of the unborn are ignored.

Follow LifeNews on the MeWe social media network for the latest pro-life news free from Facebook’s censorship!

It can be hard to comprehend that the most developed country in the world, the U.S., permits late term abortion in more than half of our states, even though 65 percent of Americans consistently believe that abortion should be illegal at least after the first trimester (about 12 weeks), and 80 percent believe that it should be illegal after the second trimester (about 24 weeks).

Our nation is in shameful company with its lack of protections for the unborn. Only seven other countries allow late-term abortions, including some of the worst international violators of human rights such as China and North Korea.  In comparison, 47 out of 50 European countries have stronger protections for the unborn, limiting elective abortion to 15 weeks’ gestation or earlier.

Even pro-choice Americans know that a seven-pound baby, almost fully formed, who has not yet been born, deserves the right to live. But the law does not reflect this reality.

Pro-abortion rights activist groups are relentlessly fighting against this truth. The American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood are pushing to increase the number of states with a right to abortion in their state constitutions through lavishly funded abortion ballot initiatives that are often confusing, full of euphemisms and deceptively worded to hide their true meaning.

Their efforts have successfully turned even pro-life states like Ohio into abortion destinations, and they are set on doing the same this fall in Florida, Arizona, Colorado, Missouri and numerous other states.

National pro-life protections are critical as these pro-abortion rights activists continue to fight for extreme abortion legislation at the federal level, such as the abortion lobby-backed Women’s Health Protection Act, which goes even further than Roe, nullifying the commonsense protections in place in pro-life states and allowing abortion everywhere until the moment of birth.

Biden has explicitly supported the passage of that bill, saying, “Put it on my desk, so I can sign it into law.”

We cannot be naive. Abortion activists and elected officials have coalesced into a formidable, unified force that is laser-focused on legalizing abortion on demand, up until birth, in every state in the nation and enshrined at the federal level.

This radical vision for America will become reality if pro-life elected officials do not similarly unify around a strong federal stance to protect human life. In the face of this aggressive assault on life at both the state and federal level, we simply do not have the luxury of abandoning the federal fight.

We must remember our ultimate goal of saving unborn children, protecting vulnerable women and ultimately making abortion unthinkable — and we will keep Marching for Life in the nation’s capital, at the doorstep of our federal policymakers — until we have achieved this goal.

Ignoring the need for federal protections of unborn life will do untold damage: in actual lives lost, in women who regret being involved in abortion and in our culture at large. Mother Teresa once famously said of our country and abortion laws, “America needs no words from me to see how your decision in Roe v. Wade has deformed a great nation….Human rights are not a privilege conferred by government. They are every human being’s entitlement by virtue of his humanity. The right to life does not depend, and must not be declared to be contingent, on the pleasure of anyone else, not even a parent or a sovereign.”

The cultural stakes are high; the world is watching to see if our great country, land of the free and worldwide arbiter of human rights, will remove itself from the radical ranks of China and North Korea on abortion policy, and instead embrace a culture of life.

LifeNews Note: Jeanne Mancini is the president of the March for Life.

The post We Need a Law to Protect Babies From Abortion in Every State appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Our pro-life pregnancy ministries in New York are facing an existential threat at the hands of the Empire State’s pro-abortion Attorney General, Letitia James.

Last week, NY AG Letitia James blitzed at least a dozen pregnancy help organizations—like our clients Heartbeat International, CompassCare, and other pregnancy centers—with a “Notice of Intention to Sue,” threatening ruinous prosecution that could shut down every pregnancy center in New York.

Her threat letter falsely accuses New York’s life-affirming pro-life ministries of “repeated and persistent misleading statements and omissions” about Abortion Pill Reversal.

AG James gave our pro-life clients only 5 business days to respond to why the hammer shouldn’t be dropped on them for “false advertising.”

They face $5,000 in fines for every violation: that’s $5,000 for every time that Heartbeat and our brave centers take a phone call from a desperate pregnant woman trying to save her baby or say anything to the public about Abortion Pill Reversal.

We didn’t wait 5 days… We immediately jumped in to defend our pro-life ministries and their constitutional rights. We’ve just gone on the offensive and filed a hard-hitting lawsuit for an immediate injunction against Attorney General James.

Follow LifeNews on the MeWe social media network for the latest pro-life news free from Facebook’s censorship!

It’s unconscionable that Letitia James and the New York government protect abortionists and celebrate abortion on demand up until birth. 

On behalf of Heartbeat, CompassCare, and a dozen pregnancy centers in total across the Empire State, we moved at rapid speed, launching a frontal assault to stop Letitia James in her tracks and block her threatened prosecution.

This latest threat could bankrupt New York’s pregnancy centers and shut down the pro-life movement’s efforts to help pregnant moms with counseling and assistance so they will choose life for their babies.

As you may remember, California Attorney General Rob Bonta came after Heartbeat and California pregnancy centers late last year, suing them to censor their right to help women save their babies through Abortion Pill Reversal, or “APR” for short…

We’re proudly defending Heartbeat in that case, to protect their right to help these pregnant mothers and their babies. Now, Letitia James is copying Bonta’s playbook wholesale and turning up the heat, by targeting Heartbeat and a swath of pregnancy centers.

Here’s the truth: APR works—Heartbeat has records of thousands of pregnancies saved and babies born because of APR.

If Letitia James succeeds, pregnant mothers who are in the middle of a chemical abortion—and immediately regret it—will have nowhere to turn. Our pro-life pregnancy centers would be censored from providing these mothers the urgent access to Abortion Pill Reversal that they need.

In these moments, every minute and every hour counts. If our pregnancy centers are not able to help these mothers, their precious babies will die.

The abortion lobby and their allies in government, like Letitia James, want to force pregnant mothers to complete dangerous chemical abortions they do not want—even if the abortion was started against these mothers’ will, by force or by trick. We’re going to court to make sure she doesn’t get her way. 

Letitia James claims that offering Abortion Pill Reversal or sharing information about it is “misleading” and “false advertising.” But the truth is, she and her allies at Planned Parenthood are the ones actually deceiving women about the dangerous effects of the abortion pill—and misleading women about the real success of Abortion Pill Reversal…

Our lawsuit aims to combat her vindictive attack on all fronts. We will defend the right of our pregnancy help organizations to provide free, charitable, loving support to pregnant mothers and their babies.

Here are the facts:

• More than 5,000 women have had successful abortion pill reversals, and that number grows higher each day.
• The First Amendment protects the right of our non-profit pro-life ministries to help pregnant mothers—free of charge—and continue sharing critical information about Abortion Pill Reversal.
• Even the U.S. FDA concluded that the abortion pill “is antagonized by progesterone allowing for normal pregnancy and delivery.”

The facts speak for themselves. While we can’t guarantee a result, we are confident in our legal position and the quality of our ace Thomas More Society attorneys.

Letitia James’ assault on pregnancy centers would be a death knell for our pro-life ministries in New York.

Please pray for our brave pro-life ministry clients as we go into court to fight on their behalf and for our legal team on the frontlines of this battle.

LifeNews Note: Peter Breen is the Executive Vice President & Head of Litigation for the Thomas More Society.

The post New York AG Letitia James Declares Total War on Pro-Life Pregnancy Centers appeared first on LifeNews.com.

South Dakota could be the next state to vote on an amendment that would make killing babies in abortions a supposed state constitutional “right” up to birth.

Yesterday, the sponsoring group filed a petition with 55,000 signatures to place the radical pro-abortion amendment on the November ballot. Abortion activist Rick Weiland presented the petition at a press conference at the Downtown Library in Sioux Falls on Wednesday.

The Life Defense Fund, a pro-life group, announced it will challenge the legitimacy of the abortion amendment and say there is a lack of transparency in the petition signatures. The pro-life group confirms it gathered evidence that circulators failed to distribute the required circulator handout information to petition signers and encouraged signing the petition twice.

Please follow LifeNews on Rumble for the latest pro-life videos.

Jon Hansen, Co-Chair of the Life Defense Fund says one of the things they’ve observed is people asking to sign the petition to repeal the sales tax on food, who were given the abortion petition instead.

The post South Dakota Amendment Would Make Killing Babies in Abortions a “Right” Up to Birth appeared first on LifeNews.com.

A trio of pro-life congressmen, led by Rep. Josh Brecheen, R-OK, penned a letter to the Biden administration’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) this week, demanding accountability for the in-vitro fertilization (IVF) industry’s destruction of human lives.

In the Tuesday letter to CDC Director Mandy Cohen, Brecheen was joined by Rep. Matt Rosendale, R-MT, and Rep. Andrew Clyde, R-GA. Rosendale is Catholic.

CatholicVote is among the pro-life groups in support of the letter.

“Our nation’s birth certificate, the Declaration of Independence, clearly recognizes the government’s role in securing the natural right to life,” the congressmen wrote.

“In spite of this, the IVF industry has long operated under the radar of lawmakers in the United States,” they continued.

The three lawmakers noted that “other Western countries prohibit clinics from practicing eugenics or carelessly destroying human life.” However, “the U.S. does not even require clinics to be transparent about their participation in these activities.”

“This carelessness has earned the U.S. the title of the ‘Wild West’ of assisted reproductive technology,” Brecheen and his two colleagues added.

They specified:

[IVF] Clinics are not required to disclose the total number of embryos they create, how many they store indefinitely, or how many they destroy and for what reasons. Shockingly, clinics are not even required to disclose statistics on their application of genetic screening, which more than 70% of fertility clinics utilize for sex-selection.

Please follow LifeNews on Rumble for the latest pro-life videos.

“Congress cannot allow clinics to continue concealing these activities, which carry significant moral and ethical implications, from the public,” emphasized the trio of Republicans.

Later in their letter, the congressmen asked the CDC if the agency “is aware of” the number of embryos “created in total each year through the process of IVF?”

They also asked for the number of embryos destroyed each year, as well as the number of embryos “currently in storage,” and “[t]he average length of time an embryo created through IVF is kept in storage.”

Furthermore, the lawmakers asked for the number of embryos subject to genetic screening – and the number of embryos destroyed after such screening.

“Does the CDC maintain any moral or ethical concerns regarding the use of genetic

screening to select embryos based on genetic abnormalities, sex, or physical attributes?” Brecheen, Rosendale, and Clyde went on to ask:

Does the CDC maintain any moral or ethical concerns regarding the intentional creation and destruction of excess embryos during the process of IVF?

Does the CDC maintain any moral or ethical concerns regarding the indefinite storage of embryos created through IVF?

The CDC is an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). HHS is led by Secretary Xavier Becerra, a self-professed Catholic who supports abortion and the LGBTQ movement.

Co-signer Rosendale stated in a Tuesday press release: “Human life should be respected as a miracle from our Creator, not treated as a fully customizable luxury vehicle.”

“Just because society can, does not mean it should alter the genetics of the Lord’s already perfect work,” added the Catholic congressman. “We should be working towards the protection of every human life, not finding more ways to toss away human embryos like they are undesirable parts.”

The Daily Signal’s Mary Margaret Olohan noted that the congressmen’s letter “comes as Republicans grapple with both messaging and legislating on IVF … given the expendable way in which human embryos are often treated.”

Olohan continued:

Following the Alabama Supreme Court ruling in favor of protecting embryonic human life, Republicans on Capitol Hill have suddenly found themselves being asked to state their position on IVF, a nuanced subject matter tied closely to the dignity of the human person and the fight for life.

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

The post Pro-Life Members of Congress Say Human Beings Killed in IVF Need Protected Too appeared first on LifeNews.com.

The Biden administration is under fire for selectively prosecuting pro-life advocates who protested abortion inside abortion centers while ignoring hundreds of pro-abortion attacks on churches, pro-life groups and pregnancy centers.

Heather Idoni is one of the dozen pro-life advocates who have been charged or convicted of violating the bogus FACE law that denies free speech rights to pro-life Americans. As LifeNews reported, the pro-life advocates have been found guilty of violating a federal law protecting abortion centers and now face the possibility of 11 years in prison.

That political persecution is bad enough, but recent reports indicated Idoni was placed in solitary confinement for 22 days for sharing food with fellow prisoners. https://www.lifenews.com/2024/04/29/pro-life-advocate-placed-in-solitary-confinement-for-22-days-for-sharing-food/

Now, a new report indicates Idoni has suffered a stroke as a result of the cruel and unusual punishment.

Idoni was reportedly “rushed to the hospital this week after suffering a stroke while being held at Northern Neck Regional Jail in Virginia. She is reportedly stabilized and will be taken back into custody to await sentencing on May 17.”

LifeNews is on TruthSocial. Please follow us here.

“In an exclusive interview, she said that she received this punishment for sharing food with fellow prisoners. Idoni alleged that she was allowed to walk outside her cell only for two hours in the middle of the night each day and that the lights of her cell were continually kept on. Idoni has been in prison since she was convicted last autumn,” the report says.

Idoni’s attorney says the federal prison should be following international human rights standards for the humane treatment of prisoners and there is concern tat those standards are being abrogated in her case.

Idoni has been treated shoddily while in prison and was shackled like a death row inmate during a court appearance – and was subjected to 22 days of solitary confinement for sharing food with other prisoners.

In an exclusive interview, she said that she received this punishment for sharing food with fellow prisoners. Idoni alleged that she was allowed to walk outside her cell only for two hours in the middle of the night for two hours each day and that the lights of her cell were continually kept on. Idoni has been in prison since she was convicted last autumn.  

Fellow pro-life advocate Cal Zastro, who joined Idoni in another traditional pro-life rescue in Tennessee and has also been convicted of violation of the FACE Act, told LifeSiteNews that when Idoni was brought into the courtroom for a trial in Nashville, the U.S. marshal had the middle-aged woman shackled at the wrists, waist, and feet, as if she were a dangerous criminal. 

Zastro said that, upon entering the courtroom, the shocked judge ordered the shackles removed. Initially the marshal agreed to remove the shackles from only one wrist to allow Idoni freedom to write, a concession necessary for her to take notes, as she was then representing herself in court. Only at the insistence of the indignant judge were the shackles of both wrists finally removed, although the marshal left the bars around her waist and feet. 

According to the report, Idoni is relying on her faith in God saying that, despite the prison hardship “God is going to be glorified” and she has “never not felt His presence.” 

Idoni and the other pro-life advocates are appealing the bogus convictions.

The post Pro-Life Advocate Suffers Stroke After She’s Placed in Solitary Confinement for 22 Days appeared first on LifeNews.com.

MPs will be given the opportunity to vote on lowering the abortion time limit in an historic vote that will take place on Wednesday 15 May.

This morning, the Leader of the House of Commons, Penny Mordaunt MP, announced that Report Stage of the Criminal Justice Bill will take place on Wednesday 15th May.

A cross-party group of over 40 MPs have signed a landmark amendment to the Government’s flagship Criminal Justice Bill ahead of Report Stage that would lower the abortion time limit from 24 to 22 weeks in line with advances in medical science.

The group of MPs led by Caroline Ansell includes former health minister Maggie Throup, ex-shadow cabinet Labour minister MP Rachael Maskell, ex-shadow Labour minister Marie Rimmer, ex-Cabinet Minister Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg and Miriam Cates.

Parents of children who were born at 22 and 23 weeks gestation along with a large group of MPs delivered a petition, signed by 102,573 people, to the Prime Minister at 10 Downing Street calling for a reduction to the abortion time limit.

Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and videos.

Over 750 medical professionals have also called on MPs to back the amendment to the Government’s Criminal Justice Bill, in what would be the biggest change to abortion law for a generation.

A 24-week abortion limit is now beyond the point when many babies survive, double that of the most common time limit among European Union countries and represents a contradiction at the heart of our abortion law.

Originally set at 28 weeks, the abortion limit was lowered in 1990 to 24 weeks gestation. Improved survival rates for extremely premature babies between 24 and 28 weeks was one of the key considerations that motivated this change.

By the same logic, and informed by the improved survival rates for babies born at 22 and 23 weeks gestation, MPs are now calling for the abortion time limit to be updated.

In the decade to 2019 alone, the survival rate for extremely premature babies born at 23 weeks doubled, prompting new guidance from the British Association of Perinatal Medicine (BAPM) that enables doctors to intervene to save premature babies from 22 weeks gestation.

Research published in November 2023 by academics at the University of Leicester and Imperial College London indicates that a significant number of babies born at 22 and 23 weeks gestation can now survive outside the womb. According to this research, there were a total of 261 babies born alive at 22 and 23 weeks, before the abortion limit, who survived to discharge from hospital in 2020 and 2021.

This is compared to the Government abortion statistics, which show that in 2021 alone, 755 abortions were performed under Section 1(1)(a) of the Abortion Act when the baby was at 22 or 23 weeks gestation (the vast majority of abortions are permitted under Section 1(1)(a) of the Abortion Act, for which there is currently a 24-week time limit).

This leaves a real contradiction in British law. In one room of a hospital, doctors could be working to save a baby born alive at 23 weeks whilst, in another room of that same hospital, a doctor could perform an abortion that would end the life of a baby at the same age.

Our 24-week time limit is also out of step with the majority of European Union countries, where the most common time limit for abortion on demand or on broad social grounds is 12 weeks.

Countries with 12-week limits for abortion on demand or on broad social grounds include Germany, Italy and Belgium as well as the more “liberal” Nordic countries Denmark and Finland. Even Sweden has a time limit for abortion on demand or on broad social grounds that is much lower than the United Kingdom at 18 weeks.

Lowering the abortion time limit is supported by a large majority of the British public. Polling undertaken by Savanta ComRes shows that 60% of the general population and 70% of women support a reduction in the time limit to 20 weeks or below.

Caroline Ansell MP, who is leading the group of over 40 MPs who have tabled the amendment, said:

“The increase in survival rates for babies born at 22 and 23 weeks gestation is one of medical science’s great success stories in recent years. More and more babies born at these ages are able to survive thanks to the hard work of neonatal teams”.

“As in 1990, when our laws were last changed to reflect similar increases in survival rates, it is time our abortion time limit was updated. Our current time limit is an outlier compared with our European neighbours and my hope is this amendment will command widespread support across the House”.

Mischa from Surrey, mum to Amaya, who was born at 23 weeks and five days said:

“Our beautiful Amaya was born at 23 weeks and 5 days. She’ll be turning 3 years old in the summer and has come such a long way. She’s the most expressive baby and it is so fun to see what silly face she may pull next, always showing her emotions!” 

“She is such a waterbaby and adores her swimming lessons. I’ll never forget bringing her home for the first time and as I opened the ambulance door, the whole family was there cheering and clapping to welcome home my baby. She has brought so much light to so many lives”.

“It’s not easy to raise our premature baby. Every day was a fight; she has been fighting so hard. But we wouldn’t change it for the world. My little one was born at 23 weeks – why does she get to live while a 24-week baby in the womb could still be aborted?”

“The UK abortion law is out of date with medical science – my daughter is living proof of that. She’s a baby, just like others in the womb at 22 or 23 weeks. We hope to see this law changed to bring it in line with modern science so babies in the womb, the same age as my little fighter when she was born, are treated the same”.

Right To Life UK spokesperson, Catherine Robinson, said:

“The UK abortion time limit is double the average among EU countries, which is 12 weeks gestation, a point in pregnancy when the NHS website describes the unborn baby as ‘fully formed’”. 

“At the moment, a baby at 22 or 23 weeks gestation could be born prematurely and have a dedicated medical team provide expert care to try to save his or her life, while another baby at the same age could have their life deliberately ended by abortion in the same hospital at the same time. This is a contradiction in UK law”. 

“Polling demonstrates widespread public support for a time limit reduction, with support for this reduction strongest among women”.

The post British Parliament Will Vote on Measure to Save Babies From Abortions appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Kamala Harris delivered a pro-abortion campaign speech in downtown Jacksonville, FL Wednesday – the same day Florida’s pro-life law protecting most unborn children after six weeks gestation went into effect.

During her remarks, she repeatedly referred to the “heartbeat” law – and other state’s pro-life laws – as a “Trump abortion ban.”

Florida voters are set to decide the fate of Amendment 4 – a measure that seeks to add a so-called “right to abortion” into the state’s Constitution – on November 5, the same day as the presidential election.

In her speech, Harris said that the overturning of Roe v. Wade “happened just as [former President] Donald Trump had intended.”

“Now, present day, because of Donald Trump, more than 20 states have abortion bans,” she added. “More than 20 Trump abortion bans.”

“And today, this very day, at the stroke of midnight, another Trump abortion ban went into effect here in Florida,” the vice president went on:

As of this morning, four million women in this state woke up with fewer reproductive freedoms [sic] than they had last night. This is the new reality under a Trump abortion ban.

Starting this morning, medical professionals … could be sent to prison for up to five years, for providing reproductive care [sic] even earlier in pregnancy.

“Florida became subject to an abortion ban so extreme it applies before many women even know they are pregnant,” the Democrat continued. “Which by the way tells us the extremists who wrote this ban either don’t know how a woman’s body works or they simply don’t care.”

“Trump says he wants to leave abortion ‘up to the states,’” Harris stated, making air quotes with her hands.

“So, here’s how that works out,” she added. “Today 1 in 3 women of reproductive age live in a state with a Trump abortion ban. Many with no exception for rape or incest.”

WJXT reported: “If 60% of voters approve Amendment 4, the right to an abortion would become a constitutional right in the state of Florida. [Republican] Gov. Ron DeSantis is against it.”

DeSantis signed Florida’s six-week Heartbeat Protection Act into law in April 2023. The Florida Supreme Court allowed it to go into effect – with a 30-day hold – on April 1, the same day it allowed Amendment 4 to proceed to Florida’s November ballot.

In March, Harris became the first sitting vice president to visit a facility that performs abortions when she toured a Planned Parenthood branch in Minneapolis.

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

The post Kamala Harris Celebrates Abortion: Killing Babies is “Freedom” for Women appeared first on LifeNews.com.

An Indiana judge today blocked a common sense law that stops people from trafficking teenage girls to other states for secret abortions without their parents knowing.

A U.S. District Court judge ruled today – implementing a permanent injunction against Indiana’s aid-or-assist law prohibiting persons aiding minor girls in obtaining abortions out of state.

Indiana Right to Life President Mike Fichter told LifeNews he was very disappointed by the ruling.

“This ruling today by U.S. District Court Judge Sarah Evans Barker is an outrage — undercutting parental rights and endangering young girls. This ruling places young girls at risk of predatory abortion providers, coerced abortions, and abortions without informed consent,” he said.

“It also opens the door for Indiana abortion providers to sell abortions to young girls across state borders – all without parents knowing. We anticipate and applaud an appeal by Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita,” Fichter added.

Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and videos.

Indiana is one of almost 20 that currently protect unborn babies from abortions. But that doesn’t stop people from taking teens to other state for secret abortions without their parents knowing. the law makes it a criminal offense for an adult who is not the parent or guardian of a minor child to assist the minor with concealing or obtaining an abortion.

The importance of this legislation has become even more urgent as the abortion industry has come up with ways to get around the laws in pro-life states like Indiana. Recently, Planned Parenthood was caught admitting that they assist underage girls (or adults associated with them) to skirt state laws and transport pregnant girls without the knowledge or consent of their parents. Although aborting children is a crime under most circumstances in Indiana That is not the case in neighboring states like Illinois.

Does this sort of thing happen to teenagers? The answer is clearly yes.

Earlier this year, the Planned Parenthood abortion business and other abortion clinic representatives were caught on camera admitting that they take teens to other states for secret abortions without their parents’ consent.

The new Project Veritas expose’ shows Emily, Kansas Planned Parenthood Managing Director admitting, “We do help people get to these places.”

And in another clip, the undercover journalists asks if he needs any documentation about his relationship to a teen exploited for an abortion, and the abortion clinic staffer says no.

PV Journalist: “I don’t have to provide any documentation that I’m related [to the minor], right?”

Nurse, Maple Women’s Health Center, Dallas, Texas: “No.”

“In Part Two of our investigation into the nation’s largest abortion provider, undercover camera has further revealed Planned Parenthood’s nationwide scheme to traffic minors across state lines for secret abortions,” Project Veritas tells LifeNews. “An investigative journalist met with healthcare workers at various clinics in Texas, as well as Planned Parenthood employees in California and Kansas, to further investigate the elaborate lengths the abortion giant will go to facilitate, and help conceal, abortions for minors.”

“As revealed in Part One, Planned Parenthood’s abortion-trafficking services include setting up hotels, arranging inter-state transport, providing doctor’s notes to the child’s school, and even paying for the abortion are all common services they offer to minors without parental knowledge. In Part Two, Texas nurses revealed to our journalist that Planned Parenthood is the go-to collaborator when minors in abortion-outlawed Texas desire to terminate a pregnancy without parental consent,” it added.

In this new video, one Planned Parenthood staff admits they the abortion business does secret abortions on teens in a way “parents won’t find out.”

In addition, Emily, a Planned Parenthood Managing Director in Kansas, confirms to Project Veritas that her clinic frequently sees out of state patients and the organization also helps arrange transport for these abortions: “We mostly see Texas and Oklahoma patients. If you want to go further, you got to go to Illinois. You got to go to Colorado. I think the latest one is Washington, DC, and we do help people get to these places.”

The post Indiana Judge Blocks Law to Stop Trafficking Teens to Other States for Secret Abortions appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Despite little public support, the Scottish Parliament has voted in favour of abortion buffer zone legislation at Stage 1 that would make it illegal to offer assistance to women seeking an abortion within 200m of any facility that performs abortions, and could even fine people for displaying pro-life signs in their own homes.

Yesterday, MSPs in Holyrood voted in favour of Gillian Mackay MSP’s Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill at Stage 1, despite the fact that a Scottish Parliament consultation on the Bill showed that 77% of respondents were opposed to introducing buffer zones in Scotland. The Stage 1 vote was held to approve the general principles of the Bill, which will now be further scrutinised.

John Mason MSP, who voted against the Bill progressing to the next stage, said that “women should not be harassed or intimidated, but I also say that there is very little evidence of harassment or intimidation near abortion facilities”.

“With the number of abortions in Scotland having risen to more than 16,000 in 2022, it does not appear to be the case that people are being put off by vigils or protests”, he added.

LifeNews is on TruthSocial. Please follow us here.

Sandesh Gulhane MSP, who voted in favour of the legislation, raised concerns about the potential of this Bill to criminalise thought and silent prayer.

“Are we asking the police to determine whether the law is breached by a bystander who might be engaged in silent prayer? Are we criminalising thought? We must be clear how we police this, given that, during evidence at the committee, the police were clear that they would not ask somebody why they were at a buffer zone, and they clearly said that they were not the thought police”, he said.

Police Scotland has not called for new powers in order to be able to deal with vigils offering help to women outside abortion clinics. The consultation response summary, which revealed the lack of public support for the Bill, notes that this “was confirmed by Police Scotland’s submission, which stated that they considered existing legal powers to be sufficient”.

Gulhane also made clear that he supported the right of other kinds of peaceful demonstration outside of hospitals.

“I defend the right of patient groups to demonstrate peacefully outside a hospital—for example, on the closure of services or if there were patient safety issues, such as in the case of NHS Tayside’s Professor Eljamel. I would also not seek to restrict the right of trade unions to protest. However, given that, during evidence at the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, the police told us that that might happen as an unintended consequence, I seek reassurance that that is clear in the bill”.

The most extreme abortion buffer zone legislation in the world

If the Bill becomes law, it will introduce the world’s most extreme buffer zone law in Scotland.

The Bill proposes an extreme law change in Scotland that would create a minimum of 200m ‘safe access’, or buffer, zones around any facility that performs abortions where offering support to women would be criminalised. The 200m is a minimum, as abortion providers can apply for the zone to be extended, with the Bill giving the Scottish Government the power to extend any buffer zone beyond the 200m if they judge that the existing zone “does not adequately protect” women seeking an abortion. There is no limit on the size of the buffer zone that can be created under this power.

The minimum size of the buffer zones introduced by this law extends further than the minimum size of any other buffer zones in the world. For example, the Public Order Act 2023 in England and Wales sets the limits of the buffer zones at 150m and the legislation does not give the Government the power to extend buffer zones beyond 150m. Most buffer zones in Northern Ireland are 100m, half the size of what is being proposed in Scotland.

Within these zones, it will be illegal to influence a person in regard to their decision “to access… the provision of abortion” in an abortion clinic or a hospital. These provisions would make offers of help to women seeking an abortion illegal within a buffer zone, and could criminalise silent prayer.

Anyone who commits an offence can be fined up to £10,000 on a summary conviction, or an unlimited fine on indictment.

The provisions of the Bill apply to anything that is “visible or audible” within a buffer zone, even if these relate to private buildings. This means it may be illegal for pro-life signs to be displayed from a window within a private home or outside a place of worship if the signs are within the boundaries of or visible to a buffer zone. Similarly, conversations in private homes or outside churches may be included if they are audible inside a buffer zone. Referring to private dwellings, Mackay herself told the Committee “it is essential that such premises are covered by the legislation”.

Spokesperson for Right To Life UK, Catherine Robinson, said “Despite overwhelming opposition to the Bill from respondents to the consultation, and polling that shows that only a small percentage of the population in Scotland support the introduction of nationwide buffer zones, MSPs voted to support the principles of this extreme legislation anyway”.

“Many women have been helped outside abortion clinics by pro-life volunteers who have provided them with practical support, which made it clear to them that they had another option other than going through with the abortion”.

“The proposed law change would mean that the vital practical support provided by volunteers outside abortion clinics will be removed for women and many more lives would likely be lost to abortion”.

“Sandesh Gulhane’s comments are especially relevant because they reveal that this debate is essentially about viewpoint discrimination. He, along with other MSP colleagues, is clear that he wants to ensure other types of activity outside of hospitals, such as trade union protests, are not restricted by this legislation, but being publicly pro-life and offering help to women considering abortion is. Given that trade union protests could inadvertently cause alarm to women seeking abortions, it is clear that this legislation is really just about censoring pro-life speech”.

“This is a truly draconian piece of legislation that reaches into the homes of ordinary people. It creates an offence for being publicly pro-life. It is direct viewpoint discrimination”.

“No one else is penalised for hanging the flag of their favourite football team from their window, or having a ‘Vote Labour’ sign, but if an individual or a church wants to display a sign, from within their own property, which says ‘Pregnant? We can help’, they may be guilty of violating this buffer zone legislation”.

“This legislation is not only a direct attack on free expression and public association based on viewpoint, it is entirely unnecessary insofar as harassment and intimidation are already illegal. Wherever they occur, existing legislation can and should be used to put a stop to them”.

The post Scotland Votes for Radical Bill That Criminalizes Silent Prayer Outside Abortion Centers appeared first on LifeNews.com.

“As a movement, it is time to aggressively add virtual ministry outreach through telecare and telehealth,” Jor-El Godsey, president of Heartbeat International, told attendees of the organization’s 53rd Annual Conference on Thursday, April 25.

Without minimizing the need to continue opening more brick-and-mortar pregnancy help centers to give women in-person, ongoing compassionate care, he said that alone won’t address the abortion industry’s changing business paradigm: delivering “death-dealing chemicals … right to their doorsteps.”

“There’s a more immediate way to take on Big Abortion’s paradigm shift, their business model, and that’s by leveraging our skills and compassion, not just inside the brick-and-mortar, but to engage her where she’s at when she’s seeking answers,” Godsey said. “And those moments are increasingly outside of our regular weekday business hours.”

“Today, barely 2% of our movement is engaged in telecare and telehealth,” he said. “This is simply not enough to battle the giant that is Big Abortion. We cannot let the abortion industry be the only one who can help her in that moment when she’s looking.”

“We as a movement must do more to incorporate virtual outreach as an integral method to champion lifesaving ministry, just like we did when we added mobile unit outreach,” said Godsey. “Our best opportunity is for each of our organizations to envision a new team of virtual missionaries.”

Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and videos.

Godsey cited service delivery stats across the movement that show “it takes us around two days to get her from there to where we are with our compassionate people and our ultrasound equipment.”

“But with chemical abortion so readily available, that is no longer working as well as it has been,” he said.

“We need to move that first engagement to the woman who, apart from our intervention, might never have the chance to darken the door of a pregnancy help center,” Godsey said, adding, “We need to increase our speed of service, which is really our speed to care. And greater speed to care will mean greater speed to success.”

New tools for virtual, off-hours service

Heartbeat International has anticipated this need, according to Godsey, and worked to upgrade its Next Level Center Management Solution to augment pregnancy centers’ current level of care. He revealed a new tool to help accomplish this.

“We’re excited to announce the PHC in Your Pocket upgrade that allows pregnancy help to happen anywhere you are so that you can reach her anywhere she is,” he said. “Imagine that moment of decision before her, where we can reach into her situation with loving compassion and begin that caring relationship with her right at that moment.”

“You can add to your brick-and-mortar the ability for every team member, every advocate, every coach, every nurse to create that relationship the moment she connects with you and continue that relationship wherever they are,” said Godsey. “And all of the information you need is with you wherever you are. Our Next Level 2024 has a fresh look and new features that can be a part of making this new paradigm a reality for your lifesaving mission.”

Godsey was quick to add that his aim was not to sell Next Level software, but that he hoped other software companies would also roll out similar functionality.

“This is about going into the next generation of this movement,” he said.

Option Line and Abortion Pill Rescue response teams are hearing from increasing numbers of women who are even then sitting with the abortion pill, sometimes prescribed without any medical screening, sometimes given to them by a friend or purchased at the back of a local grocery store.

“She needs the LOVE Approach in that very moment,” Godsey said. “She needs to hear what we know well: that the God of the universe is in this with her and can help her through these moments.”

“Envision a new team of virtual missionaries”

“To do this we’ll need new learning and cutting-edge practices like PHC In Your Pocket. We’ll need new metrics that create better analysis so we can find this new era of effective impact. Our friends at Life on Belay have been helping us develop those.”

“We’ll need new team members to join us for this type of specialized outreach,” he said. “Even just adding a few hours each week through virtual outreach will be a major step toward adapting to the new abortion landscape.”

When it comes to staffing to cover virtual interventions for women seeking urgent pregnancy help outside regular business hours, Godsey saw good news in recent events.

“The good Lord arranged a global training event just a few years ago for all of us to get oriented to video interactions and remote relationship,” he said, referring to the COVID-19 pandemic.

That unexpected training season “exploded a new level of a remote-based workforce and I believe that among these are those God will call into this very type of outreach,” Godsey said. “Their new workspace…allows them to give their time right where they are and where they’re most used to doing so: in their own homes.”

“That makes them flexible to be in the new non-business-hours outreach,” he added. “That is going to be critical to meet the challenge that Big Abortion has set before us.”

Building on a history of adaptation and innovation

Godsey pointed back to the pregnancy help movement’s more than 50-year history of commitment to doing whatever it takes to serve women in crisis. He recalled the earliest days when answering a personal landline offered the first line of defense for women, and pregnancy testing was done on “first morning urine samples” carried in by clients.

Educational materials became available on VHS and then DVD and then by streaming. When pregnancy tests could be easily found at every Dollar Store, ultrasound services arose, growing from use in four centers in 1992, to over 2000 (roughly three-fourths of centers) 30 years later. Mobile clinics helped centers take their services on the road to meet women where they were, far beyond the neighborhood of a brick-and-mortar location.

In that same spirit of innovation, “We need to adapt, but it simply cannot take 30 years,” Godsey said. “We have to move faster so we can reach more [women] and not let the abortion industry’s avarice box us out from the intervention window.”

Godsey concluded with a reference to Habakuk 2:2: “Inscribe the vision so that those that read it can run.”

“The vision is before us,” he said. “We can see the destination, if not, all of the path. We only need to take those first steps. Can you see it with me?

“It is time for a new expansion of our impact by expanding our brick-and-mortar ministries into digital outreach,” Godsey said. “The trends are clear…We can’t leave her in the tyranny of urgency Big Abortion has created. We can’t not be there when she’s being pressed into a life-changing decision in her bedroom, in her dorm room, or her bathroom. Can you see it with me?”

“Our history, our heritage is to adapt our methods and our methodology so that we can continue to be effective,” he said. “Our mission is sure, but the methods and methodologies need to change. It’s time for all of us to make history again. Can you see it with me?”

LifeNews Note: Karen Ingle writes for PregnancyHelpNews, where this originally appeared.

The post Pregnancy Centers are Helping Women Choose Life in a Climate of Easy Abortion Pill Access appeared first on LifeNews.com.

A radical pro-abortion ballot initiative nullifying all common-sense protections for the unborn will appear on the November ballot.

There are several reasons why it should not — primarily because it is a political ruse to enshrine abortion on demand into the Florida constitution on the pretext that it is necessary for women’s “health” when, in fact, it harms women. I can testify from my own experience as a board-certified OB/GYN with over 16 years of experience and my current practice in Florida that this ballot initiative is both unnecessary and dangerous — especially since Florida law already protects women’s health and safety.

The so-called “Amendment to Limit Government Interference with Abortion” stipulates that: “No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s health care provider. This amendment does not change the Legislature’s constitutional authority to require notification to a parent or guardian before a minor has an abortion.”

There are several red flags in this language.

First, the amendment’s heavy-handed support from radical abortion interest groups Planned Parenthood and the anti-parent American Civil Liberties Union is telling. These organizations were behind the damaging passage of initiatives in Ohio and Michigan that enshrined abortion on demand, up until birth, into their states’ constitutions and now allow minors to receive abortions and sex change operations without parental consent. Tellingly, Planned Parenthood and the ACLU refused to support another abortion ballot initiative in South Dakota because it didn’t go far enough. Their support for Florida’s proposed ballot initiative should deeply concern all Floridians who want reasonable protections for women and children.

SUPPORT LIFENEWS! If you want to help fight abortion, please donate to LifeNews.com!

Secondly, the language of the proposed Florida initiative is intentionally vague to allow for unrestricted abortion on demand. For example, the amendment would allow abortions after viability if a “health care provider” — it doesn’t specify whether a doctor or even a nurse — deems it necessary for a woman’s “health.” Abortionists often exploit the ambiguous word “health” to justify abortions at any point for physical, mental, or even emotional “health” reasons. In the words of the infamous late-term abortionist Dr. Warren Hern, “Pregnancy is not a benign condition. Every pregnancy is a threat to that woman’s life … “

Moreover, many abortionists have no qualms interpreting “viability” however they’d like. In the words of Dr. Colleen McNicholas, chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood for the St. Louis Region and Southwest Missouri: “There is no particular gestational age. There are some pregnancies in which the fetus will never be viable … My practice includes abortion care through the point of viability and as we previously discussed that could be at any point.”

Similarly, Dr. Hern agreed that “the viability of a fetus is determined not by gestational age but by a woman’s willingness to carry it.”

Yet even without the broad and intentionally vague language, the entire pretext for the ballot amendment is a sham. Proponents argue that the amendment is necessary to protect women’s health from abortion limits. Florida’s Heartbeat Bill, however, like literally every other piece of pro-life legislation in the books, already protects women by offering exceptions for the life of the mother. I know this firsthand from my practice as an OB/GYN in Naples, where the law allows me to treat every patient who comes to me — whether they are suffering a miscarriage, an ectopic pregnancy or worse.

The truth is Florida’s Heartbeat Bill not only protects babies with beating hearts, it also protects women from the physical and mental health risks of abortion and provides funding for assistance for expecting families. The Amendment to Limit Government Interference with Abortion, however, jeopardizes Florida’s women and children — all based on the offensive pretext that it’s necessary to protect women from Florida’s pro-life laws.

The post OBGYN Professor: Abortion “Harms Women,” It’s Not Necessary for Their Health appeared first on LifeNews.com.