Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds

Purchases of Bibles or searches for “MAGA” and Trump were considered indicators of “extremism”

Republicans in the House of Representatives have sent letters to 13 financial institutions they suspect of colluding with the FBI and the Treasury Department to spy on Americans without a warrant in relation to the 2021 Capitol riot.

Supporters of then-President Donald Trump had stormed the legislature just as Republican lawmakers were starting to register objections to certifying the 2020 election in favor of Joe Biden. Democrats labeled the unrest as an “insurrection” and sought to arrest over 1,000 people involved in any way.

Some of these people were apparently targeted by financial institutions working with the FBI and Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), according to the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, led by the Judiciary Committee chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).

“The Committee and Select Subcommittee remain concerned about how and to what extent federal law enforcement and financial institutions continue to spy on Americans by weaponizing backdoor information sharing and casting sprawling classes of transactions, purchase behavior, and protected political or religious expression as potentially ‘suspicious’ or indicative of ‘extremism’,” said a letter from Jordan, which the Daily Mail obtained exclusively on Thursday.

Jordan has pointed to evidence that the FBI and FinCEN instructed banks to look for purchases of Bibles or search terms such as “Trump” or “MAGA,” the acronym for the 45th president’s campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again.”

Congress was already investigating Bank of America, Chase, US Bank, Wells Fargo, Citi Bank and Truist. Thursday’s letter was sent to Charles Schwab, HSBC, Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, PayPal, Santander, Standard Chartered and Western Union. That makes 13 banks or financial institutions potentially involved in the dragnet.

Bank of America alone sent data on 211 individuals to the FBI and FinCen by January 17, 2021. However, its Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) was sent after the federal agencies asked banks to look for “extremist” purchases. Four of the 211 were tagged for a follow-up and visited by FBI agents. None of them ended up being charged with anything.

“This kind of warrantless financial surveillance raises serious concerns about the federal government’s respect for Americans’ privacy and fundamental civil liberties,” Jordan wrote in a separate letter to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, also obtained by the Daily Mail.

Since 2021, the FBI has targeted “radical-traditionalist Catholics” as well as parents who spoke up at school board meetings – on issues such as mask mandates or critical race theory – as potential domestic terrorists. Both programs were officially denounced after being revealed by whistleblowers.

An overwhelming majority of Michigan voters support retaining provisions of Michigan law related to abortion which, while maintaining access to abortion, safeguard the health and safety of women, minors, parents and taxpayers. These provisions include parental consent for minors and a 24-hour waiting period to allow for informed consent before having an abortion procedure, according to the MRG, LLC-commissioned Spring 2024 Michigan Poll®. The statewide survey of 600 registered voters was conducted April 8-11.

“Even with a woman’s right to choose being codified in the Michigan Constitution via Proposal 3, a vast majority of voters – including those who consider themselves to be pro-choice – still support certain regulations surrounding the procedure,” said Jenell Leonard, owner of MRG, LLC. “The protection of the patient, minors, and taxpayers are still important considerations across the state and beyond political spectrums.”

68% of all voters support parental consent

Sixty-eight percent of all voters support the current requirement that minor-age children must have the consent of a parent before having an abortion, while only 22% oppose the regulation. This protection is supported in every geographical area of the state (including 79% of Detroit voters), among all demographic groups tested including women, pro-choice, and pro-life supporters, and across the political spectrum of Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters.

Download Press Release

The post 68% of Michigan Voters Support Parental Consent and Waiting Period Before Abortion appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Today, Wisconsin Right to Life, Wisconsin Family Action, and Pro-Life Wisconsin joined together to block Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin’s pursuit to find a right to abortion in the Wisconsin Constitution. They are being represented by The Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) and the Thomas More Society.

There is no right to abortion in the Wisconsin Constitution, and it is the role of Wisconsin’s elected legislature to create policy on abortion.

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

All three pro-life organizations have been working for years to offer alternatives to abortion and help Wisconsin women make life-affirming decisions.

In response, Heather Weininger, Executive Director of Wisconsin Right to Life stated, “We celebrate the overturning of Roe v. Wade and the opportunity to address the question of life at a state level through our elected state legislature. While we as pro-life advocates are fighting for protections for preborn children and their mothers, radical pro-abortion providers are trying to bypass the legislative process and weaponize the court system to enshrine abortion access on demand. They are putting the lives of Wisconsin’s most vulnerable at risk.”

Christine File, President of Wisconsin Family Action stated, “Planned Parenthood invites the Wisconsin Supreme Court to flout Dobbs, usurp the state legislature’s role to create law, and ‘find’ a novel constitutional right to abortion. Wisconsin’s history and law has protected women and pre-born babies since before statehood. The purpose of government is to secure rights, including the foundational human right to life. Scientifically, it is undeniable that there are two lives at stake here: the woman’s and the pre-born baby’s. The Supreme Court is not the proper venue to create health and safety law nor the proper mechanism to add a constitutional amendment. The legislature is the proper body to weigh the policy considerations and create law, not the Court.”

Dan Miller, State Director at Pro-Life Wisconsin stated, “Finding a right to abortion in our state constitution, where there clearly is none, would be the most extreme form of legislating from the bench. Tens of thousands of lives are at stake. All our common-sense pro-life laws, including an ultrasound requirement and 24-hour waiting period, that protect women and their preborn children would likely fall. The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled in Dobbs that there is no federal constitutional right to abortion. Nothing in Wisconsin’s constitution or the history of our state would remotely suggest such a right. We implore the Wisconsin Supreme Court to reject Planned Parenthood’s radical and self-serving plans.”

The post Pro-Life Groups Oppose Measure to Make Abortion a “Constitutional Right” in Wisconsin appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life (MCCL) and others spoke Thursday against a proposed measure to enshrine unlimited abortion in the Minnesota Constitution (the so-called Equal Rights Amendment). MCCL also discussed a 7-figure media campaign launched this week, which includes a TV and digital ad currently running (titled “Way Out There”).

“Minnesotans across the state are having new conversations about the truth of abortion.  The truth about abortions on viable babies.  The truth about abortions on babies who can feel excruciating pain,” said MCCL Co-Executive Director Cathy Blaeser. “And they are stepping forward with us to say, “No. This is not our values. This is not who Minnesota is.”

“I am deeply concerned that the new Equal Rights Amendment being proposed says nothing about religious or conscience rights,” said Mohamed Amin Ahmed, the communications director for the Republican People of Color in Minnesota.  “These are very important to all people of faith, and to all Muslims.”

“Latino families and Latino women love their children, born and unborn,” noted Cristina Zaczkowski, who does Latino outreach with MCCL. “We think it is doubly offensive to put [abortion] in an Equal Rights Amendment, which is supposed to protect women. … Latinas and all people in our culture will fight for the children we love, for the values we treasure.”

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

“I want to say, as an Ojibwe person, we do not believe in abortion,” said Donna Bergstrom, the deputy chair of the Republican Party. “In Ojibwe there’s not even a word for abortion because the concept doesn’t exist for us. We are people that respect the Creator, and the Creator has given that life to that mother.”

“We have abortion in this state legal up to and including the day of birth,” added Rep. Peggy Scott (R-Andover). “It’s not fiction. And I just really feel like that’s not where women of this state are.”

Minnesota law already allows abortion without limits, but the version of the ERA proposed by groups like Gender Justice and ERA Minnesota would enshrine it into the Constitution and prevent future lawmakers from enacting even commonsense abortion policies. The proposal also excludes language safeguarding conscience and religious rights, removing protection for “creed” that was included in a previous version.

Find responses to common questions about Minnesota’s abortion policy, including questions about abortion late in pregnancy, on MCCL’s website.

The post Minnesota Citizens Speak Out Against Amendment Allowing Abortions Up to Birth appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Pedro Sanchez says he needs a time-out as his wife faces inquiry over influence peddling

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has suspended public duties to “stop and reflect” on whether to remain in the job, after a court opened a preliminary inquiry into alleged illegal activities by his wife.

The prime minister issued a four-page letter on Wednesday, saying he was taking a five-day break from public duties and would announce his decision to stay or quit on Monday. Sanchez has been in office since 2018 and last year secured another term for his Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE) as leader of a minority coalition government.

“I urgently need to answer a question that I keep asking myself: Is it worth it for me to remain [in office] in spite of the right and far-right’s mudslinging?” the PM wrote, explaining the decision on what he called “unprecedented slander and harassment.”

The announcement came hours after Spanish media reported that a Madrid judge had launched a preliminary investigation into whether the PM’s wife, Begona Gomez, had used her government connections to further her private business interests.

Carta a la ciudadanía. pic.twitter.com/c2nFxTXQTK

The court did not give details of the accusations against Gomez other than to say it had begun investigating allegations of influence peddling and corruption on April 16.

The complaint against Gomez was raised by anti-corruption campaigners Manos Limpias, or Clean Hands, who have taken part in a number of high-profile court cases in recent years. The platform is reportedly led by a man linked to the far right.

Manos Limpias put out a statement on Thursday acknowledging that its allegations might be false, because they were based on online newspaper reports. “If they are not true, it will be up to those that published them to take responsibility for the falsehood,” the platform claimed.

According to media reports, Madrid’s prosecuting authority on Thursday requested the dismissal of a corruption case against Gomez.

Sanchez said his wife would defend her honor and work with the judiciary to make clear there is no substance to the allegations against her.

Pedro Sanchez says he needs a time-out as his wife faces inquiry over influence peddling

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has suspended public duties to “stop and reflect” on whether to remain in the job, after a court opened a preliminary inquiry into alleged illegal activities by his wife.

The prime minister issued a four-page letter on Wednesday, saying he was taking a five-day break from public duties and would announce his decision to stay or quit on Monday. Sanchez has been in office since 2018 and last year secured another term for his Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE) as leader of a minority coalition government.

“I urgently need to answer a question that I keep asking myself: Is it worth it for me to remain [in office] in spite of the right and far-right’s mudslinging?” the PM wrote, explaining the decision on what he called “unprecedented slander and harassment.”

The announcement came hours after Spanish media reported that a Madrid judge had launched a preliminary investigation into whether the PM’s wife, Begona Gomez, had used her government connections to further her private business interests.

Carta a la ciudadanía. pic.twitter.com/c2nFxTXQTK

The court did not give details of the accusations against Gomez other than to say it had begun investigating allegations of influence peddling and corruption on April 16.

The complaint against Gomez was raised by anti-corruption campaigners Manos Limpias, or Clean Hands, who have taken part in a number of high-profile court cases in recent years. The platform is reportedly led by a man linked to the far right.

Manos Limpias put out a statement on Thursday acknowledging that its allegations might be false, because they were based on online newspaper reports. “If they are not true, it will be up to those that published them to take responsibility for the falsehood,” the platform claimed.

According to media reports, Madrid’s prosecuting authority on Thursday requested the dismissal of a corruption case against Gomez.

Sanchez said his wife would defend her honor and work with the judiciary to make clear there is no substance to the allegations against her.

“Saint Mark, writer of the Gospel and first bishop of Alexandria, was the missionary companion and amanuensis of Saint Peter, the first pope. The third-century theologian Saint Hippolytus (and repentant anti-Pope) claims that Mark was one of the seventy disciples sent forth by Christ, meeting up with Saint Paul (he is likely the ‘John Mark’ mentioned in Acts, cf., 15:37), before joining Saint Peter. Tradition also has him as the ‘young man’, described in his own Gospel, who ‘went away sorrowful’, after Christ’s invitation to ‘leave everything and come follow Him’. Later, the same ‘young man’ watched the tragic events in the Garden of Gethsemane, and ‘ran away naked’ when the authorities tried to arrest him also, but grabbed only his garment (signifying in a vivid way his forced detachment from material things – for some have poverty, like celibacy, thrust upon them).

“Saint Mark, after a few years writing down Peter’s sermons (which comprised the basis for his Gospel), in the year 43 went to Alexandria, thereby founding the Church in Africa, before, as one tradition has it, his martyrdom by the populace by being dragged through the streets, around the time of Saint Peter’s own witness (68 A.D.). He is also connected with Venice, where his relics were transferred, according to historical legend, in 828 to save them from desecration by the Saracens – a tale which makes for some intriguing reading. They now reside in the magnificent basilica dedicated to him.

“Saint Mark’s Gospel seems written in a hurry, like the young man who ran away, and as befits a treatise composed in the tense situation in the nascent Roman Church, where the Christians, who had yet even to be called Christians, faced the imminent threat of persecution and martyrdom under the demonic regime of Nero. The Greek adverb eutheos, ‘immediately’, ‘right away’, occurs forty-one times in this shortest of the Gospels. Mark’s symbol is, after all, a winged lion.

“But this term can also mean ‘fitting’, or ‘well-placed’. All in all, it seems, well, fitting for this Gospel composed with the help of the first Vicar of Christ, whose mission was to found the Church that would govern all the Churches:  As comes across in the very first pages of Acts, the indecisive, wavering Peter had now become courageous, bold, sure, swift and to the point.”

The sarcophagus of Saint Mark –https://anastpaul.com/2021/01/31/the-translation-of-the-relics-of-saint-mark-the-evangelist-31-december/

https://catholicinsight.com/the-immediacy-of-mark/

On Wednesday the Arkansas Senate passed S.B. 64 by Sen. John Payton (R – Wilburn).

The measure passed overwhelmingly without a single senator voting against it.

S.B. 64 is a good bill that provides $2 million in state funding for pregnancy help organizations — including pregnancy resource centers, maternity homes, adoption agencies, and other organizations — that promote infant and maternal health and provide women with pro-life alternatives to abortion.

The bill clarifies that pregnancy help organizations can promote infant and maternal wellness and reduce infant and maternal mortality by:

• Providing nutritional information and/or nutritional counseling;
• Providing prenatal vitamins;
• Providing a list of prenatal medical care options;
• Providing social, emotional, and/or material support; or
• Providing referrals for WIC and community-based nutritional services, including but not limited to food banks, food pantries, and food distribution centers.

The measure includes language preventing state funds from going to abortionists and their affiliates.

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

S.B. 64 now goes to the entire Arkansas House of Representatives for consideration.

Family Council appreciates the Arkansas Senate passing this good measure. S.B. 64 will make a tremendous difference in Arkansas.

Below is a breakdown of how each senator voted on S.B. 64.

The Following Senators Voted FOR S.B. 64

• J. Boyd
• J. Bryant
• Caldwell
• A. Clark
• Crowell
• B. Davis
• Dees
• J. Dismang
• J. Dotson
• J. English
• Flippo
• Gilmore
• K. Hammer
• Hester
• Hickey
• Hill
• Irvin
• B. Johnson
• M. Johnson
• F. Love
• M. McKee
• R. Murdock
• J. Payton
• C. Penzo
• J. Petty
• Rice
• Stone
• G. Stubblefield
• D. Sullivan
• D. Wallace

The Following Senators Voted “Present” on S.B. 64

• G. Leding
• C. Tucker

The Following Senators Did Not Vote

• L. Chesterfield
• S. Flowers
• B. King

LifeNews Note: Jerry Cox is the president of the Arkansas Family Council.

The post Arkansas Senate Votes to For $2 Million to Fight Maternal and Infant Mortality appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Civilian oil platforms could be modified into supply depots and missile launchers

An American military contractor wants to repurpose unused oil rigs as mobile bases that would help resupply US Navy vessels in the Pacific and host missile launchers.

Gibbs & Cox, a naval architecture subsidiary of Leidos, presented the Mobile Defense/Depot Platform (MODEP) concept at the Sea Air Space 2024 exhibit in Washington, DC earlier this month.

“Our target here is to find a solution to help the challenging problem of having capacity issues in the Western Pacific. For not enough cells, not enough missiles, not enough of being able to keep those ships in the forward station,” Dave Zook, a solutions architect and combat systems department manager at Gibbs & Cox, told Naval News.

The MODEP concept refers to “a large floating island base” capable of positioning itself “at an ideal distance from shore” and independently operating for almost six months. It would be configured for either a supply function or missile launching.

The US Navy currently lacks the capability to reload its missile launchers at sea. The supply MODEP would solve this by having two cranes capable of lifting 100 tons each.

The missile base version could hold up to 512 Vertical Launch System (VLS) missile cells, or up to 100 new Large Missile Launchers (LML). The concept also “reduces risks and costs associated with land-based defense systems,” Leidos and Gibbs & Cox also said. Japan has considered using converted oil rigs as an alternative to its canceled Aegis Ashore missile defense program.

Both variants could travel at speeds of 5-8 knots to cover about 200 nautical miles a day and maintain stability even in waves up to 60 feet (20 meters) tall.

The concept calls for the MODEP to have a range of 4,000 nautical miles without refueling, generate between 6-20 megawatts of power, hold up to 2.3 million gallons (8.7 million liters) of fuel and host a maintenance and repair shop for warships.

The best part, according to Gibbs & Cox, is that there are up to six commercial oil rigs that could be converted to military use at a relatively low cost due to an “oversupply in the oil market.” The platforms could be ready within as little as two years, the company said.

Neither the Pentagon nor the Navy have officially commented on the proposal.

Civilian oil platforms could be modified into supply depots and missile launchers

An American military contractor wants to repurpose unused oil rigs as mobile bases that would help resupply US Navy vessels in the Pacific and host missile launchers.

Gibbs & Cox, a naval architecture subsidiary of Leidos, presented the Mobile Defense/Depot Platform (MODEP) concept at the Sea Air Space 2024 exhibit in Washington, DC earlier this month.

“Our target here is to find a solution to help the challenging problem of having capacity issues in the Western Pacific. For not enough cells, not enough missiles, not enough of being able to keep those ships in the forward station,” Dave Zook, a solutions architect and combat systems department manager at Gibbs & Cox, told Naval News.

The MODEP concept refers to “a large floating island base” capable of positioning itself “at an ideal distance from shore” and independently operating for almost six months. It would be configured for either a supply function or missile launching.

The US Navy currently lacks the capability to reload its missile launchers at sea. The supply MODEP would solve this by having two cranes capable of lifting 100 tons each.

The missile base version could hold up to 512 Vertical Launch System (VLS) missile cells, or up to 100 new Large Missile Launchers (LML). The concept also “reduces risks and costs associated with land-based defense systems,” Leidos and Gibbs & Cox also said. Japan has considered using converted oil rigs as an alternative to its canceled Aegis Ashore missile defense program.

Both variants could travel at speeds of 5-8 knots to cover about 200 nautical miles a day and maintain stability even in waves up to 60 feet (20 meters) tall.

The concept calls for the MODEP to have a range of 4,000 nautical miles without refueling, generate between 6-20 megawatts of power, hold up to 2.3 million gallons (8.7 million liters) of fuel and host a maintenance and repair shop for warships.

The best part, according to Gibbs & Cox, is that there are up to six commercial oil rigs that could be converted to military use at a relatively low cost due to an “oversupply in the oil market.” The platforms could be ready within as little as two years, the company said.

Neither the Pentagon nor the Navy have officially commented on the proposal.

With much wisdom comes much grief: and he that increases knowledge increases sorrow” (Ecc. 1:18). Long have I pondered the meaning of your enigmatic words, O Solomon. Why should the possession of wisdom and knowledge bring me to grief? If, as the Proverbs say, “Wisdom will come into your heart, and knowledge will be pleasant to your soul” (Prov. 2:10), then in what sense is knowledge sorrowful? How can its attainment be a source of both delight and distress?

The degree to which wisdom brings delight or distress is relative to one’s spiritual orientation. Here is manifest the great duality of the human experience, which the Scholastics used to say is lived in statu viae—“in a state of journeying.” For we are not yet what we shall become (cf. 1 John 3:2); so long as we sojourn on this earth, we are wanderers straddling the boundary between two worlds. Of the flesh, we live in the spirit. Born of earth, we long for heaven. We pilgrimage towards “a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God” (Heb. 11:10). Behind us is the City of Man, before us the City of God. We have one foot in each world, like the angel of the Apocalypse who “set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth” (Rev. 10:2). While we are in the flesh we must satisfy the obligations of both worlds, until the Day of Judgment commits us irrevocably to one City or the other, and the wheat is separated from the tares.

Here we see why the attainment of wisdom can bring joy and sorrow, for the City of God and the City of Man are in antithesis. They are not only divergent destinations, but each have their own contradictory value systems as well. What makes one great in the City of God is despised in the City of Man, and what brings success in the City of Man excludes one from the City of God. Money is the currency of the City of Man, while prayer is the currency of the City of God. Power is esteemed in the former, meekness in the latter. Pride motivates in one, humility in the other. The City of Man is built upon selfishness, the City of God upon sacrifice.

Thus, if we grow in the virtues that are valued in the City of God, we will find less comfort in the City of Man. With each passing day our status as pilgrims will become more evident. We feel more profoundly our position as outsiders in this world. With Christ, we learn to say, “My kingdom is not of this world”; with St. Paul, we profess that “here we have no lasting city” (John 18:36; Heb. 13:14). We imbibe these words deeply, appropriating them to our own experience and making them the pulse in our veins. The things of this world make less and less sense to us. We perceive life as “this, our exile,” as the classic Marian hymn Salve Regina calls it. The greater our orientation towards the Kingdom of God, the greater our estrangement from the things of this world.

Alternately, if we adopt the values of the City of Man, the things of God are repugnant to us. The Gospel seems like foolishness. Christian ethics are misunderstood or scoffed at. Prayer and spiritual things appear silly. Seeking God feels like a waste of time. The deeper we enmesh ourselves in the ways of the world, the less relevance the Gospel of Christ appears to have to our lives. It seems an embarrassing relic from an age deemed less sophisticated. Such are those oriented towards the City of Man; these persons cannot be expected to appreciate the spiritual richness offered in Christ Jesus. For, “the carnal man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Cor. 2:14).

In the myths of ancient Greece, we read of the prophetess Cassandra. She was given the gift of prophecy by the god Apollo, but the same god capriciously cursed her for resisting his amorous advances, decreeing that she should prophesy truly but nobody would believe her words. Cassandra was thus blessed and cursed: blessed with the ability to know the truth but cursed by its constant rejection by those with whom she shared it. Is this not like the dilemma faced by those who seek the Kingdom of God? For the very act of drawing closer to God estranges us further from the world. Like Cassandra whose gift of prophecy ensured she was ignored, our commitment to the Gospel becomes an occasion of mockery to the world, the more so to the degree we advance in the spiritual life. Those who love Christ are all Cassandras in this world.

Now the meaning of Solomon’s words become apparent. The wisdom of God brings us delight insofar as we progress towards the City of God, but the estrangement from the world it engenders also saddens us. But why does it sadden us? “To get wisdom is better than gold” says Solomon elsewhere (Prov. 16:16). If this is the case, should we not rejoice in the wisdom of God? Why should estrangement from the world bring us grief?

There are four senses in which estrangement from the world brings us grief as we draw closer to God.

First, at the beginning of our conversion, we grieve because we struggle to let go of the delights that bind us to our old life. We are accustomed to living according to our passions; we miss the pleasures of worldly living, even as the Israelites longed for the fleshpots of Egypt during the Exodus (cf. Ex. 16:3). Our friends continue to live in the manner they are accustomed, but we can no longer do so in good conscience. We must put distance between ourselves and our old life, but this also distances us from old friends. Sometimes there is resentment., “The way of the Lord is unfair” (Ezk. 18:29) we may say, as we see the wicked prosper, or the dissolute live lives of given over to pleasure with no apparent consequence. We feel stretched, longing for the kingdom of God but still feeling the seductive pull of the kingdom of man. This grief is a kind of trial, the outcome of which determines whether we advance in the service of the Lord or whether we are one who “puts his hand to the plow and looks back”, proving we are unfit for the kingdom of God (Luke 9:62).

The second type of grief is the sadness we feel at our own shortcomings. We have walked with the Lord for some time, we have made some progress in the spiritual life. The impetus of our original zeal has carried us a little way. But we have also experienced considerable setbacks; we have come to fully internalize the Lord’s saying, “The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matt. 26:41). With St. Paul, we cry out, “I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate…I can will what is right, but I cannot do it. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do” (Rom. 7:15,18-19). Often this type of grief arises from disappointment with ourselves, emerging out of the chasm between what we are and what we wish to be. In more enlightened souls, this grief becomes less about falling short of our own ideals and more about falling short of God’s standard. Fortunately, this kind of grief is purifying, as it nurtures our humility and teaches us to lean not on our own strength, but on the Lord.

The third grief occurs when we find ourselves frustrated at the unbelief, irreverence, and perversion we see in the world. We desire the glorification of Christ and His Church and are deeply saddened at the world’s rejection of Him. Sometimes our grief is a burning indignation, and we are tempted, with the disciples, to say, “Lord, shall we call down fire from heaven and consume them?” (Luke 9:54); other times it is more of a weeping lament for the stubbornness of the world, like our Lord expressed when he wept over Jerusalem (cf. Matt. 23:37). We have tasted and seen the goodness of the Lord and we desire nothing more than that the whole world should do the same; their refusal to do so is a source of pain to us. This is the grief of the saints who wept for the sins of men and offered tearful prayers of reparation for offenses against God.

The fourth grief comes from the persecutions and trials that are heaped upon us. St. Paul warned Timothy that “all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted” (2 Tim. 3:12). When we think of persecution and martyrdom, we usually think of authoritarian governments, or the Roman tyrants of old. But most persecution a Christian faces in his day-to-day life comes not from the government, but from his friends and family. Either through ignorance, insensitivity, or hostility, it is those closest to us who wound us most. Did not our Lord warn as much? “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s foes will be those of his own household” (Matt. 10:34-36). We recall the words of Zechariah, “These are the wounds I received in the house of my friends” (Zech. 13:6). We grieve at the sarcastic comments, the little barbs, the misunderstandings, insults, and dismissiveness that comes from those we love. How we wish they would see what we see! How we grieve that we could not all be united in a single love. “How good and pleasant it is when brethren dwell in unity!” (Ps. 133:1) That it cannot always be so is a source of continual grief. We would die of sadness if it were not for our Lord’s promise that we who suffer such things for His sake are blessed (cf. Matt. 5:10)

Thus are the four griefs of Christian life that accompany those who grow in wisdom. Aside from the first (which passes as we mature), these griefs will all only intensify proportional to our closeness to the Lord. As we grow in the wisdom of God, the duality of living in two worlds pulls upon us, and in that tear is found grief.  “With much wisdom comes much grief, and he that increase knowledge increases sorrow.”

+AMDG+                 

Planned Parenthood released its annual report last week, and among the numerous sinister statistics which the abortion giant boasts of are numbers showing the expanding reach of Planned Parenthood Global, the organization’s international program. Pro-lifers are familiar with Planned Parenthood’s dubious campaign for abortion expansion (which they profit from) in the United States, but the organization’s portfolio also targets vulnerable women across Latin America and Africa.

Planned Parenthood Global is not to be confused with International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), which is a separate internationally-focused organization founded by Margret Sanger and Lady Rama Rau in India and is now headquartered in London. Planned Parenthood Global, as an arm of the American organization, has access to the $699,300,000 in U.S. taxpayer dollars that Planned Parenthood received in Fiscal Year 2022. Money is fungible, so whether this global initiative is specifically allotted taxpayer money or not, funds are freed up to be used abroad.

Notably, 90% of Planned Parenthood’s global efforts focus on countries where unborn babies have strong legal protections from abortion. In FY22, it partnered with 80 organizations in nine countries and trained 28,000 people to promote their agenda of killing unborn children and boasted of 24 events that were held throughout Africa and Latin America.

Planned Parenthood Global worked not only to raise up and indoctrinate local pro-abortion activists abroad, but it also worked to change government policies in other countries. In FY 2022, it bragged about weakening 112 policies that protected the unborn in eight different countries. In one example, Planned Parenthood worked to chip away complete protections for the unborn in Mexico. The abortion giant claimed that due to its efforts, unborn babies in Quintana Roo can now be killed through abortion up to 12 weeks gestation.

This is a perfect example of ideological colonialism. It’s abusive for a powerful and well-funded organization like Planned Parenthood to enter poor, vulnerable countries with legitimate needs and coercively work to dismantle pro-life protections instead of offering practical help.

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

And sadly, Planned Parenthood’s target countries are places where women actually need real health care. According to the U.N., improvements in maternal mortality have stagnated in Latin America and the Caribbean, and 70% of all maternal deaths are located in sub-Saharan Africa. The maternal mortality rate globally improved from 2000-2016; however, from 2016-2020, these trends stagnated — and in some cases — even reversed.

Planned Parenthood Global has promised to provide care “no matter what,” but it doesn’t choose “focus countries” in an effort to provide actual health care. Pregnancy isn’t a disease, and abortion isn’t a cure.

When Planned Parenthood works to remove pro-life protections, they have a profit-driven motive to do so. They are a direct service provider, which means that they can make money from the abortions that happen when pro-life policies are reversed. When Planned Parenthood reports 112 policy victories, that is 112 places that they can rake in more money. Planned Parenthood may paint its efforts as benevolent humanitarian work, but make no mistake: this is a business — a deadly one that should not be exported abroad.

While Planned Parenthood works to advance the culture of death globally, pro-lifers should take a similar globally-minded strategy. But while pro-lifers have many resources to offer, they also have much to learn from where a culture of life has continually been fostered. The people in these countries do not need Americans telling them how to be pro-life — they are already pro-life. Efforts to undermine protections for the unborn haven’t risen organically in these countries — they have been brought in by Americans who believe they know better.

What these countries need is actual health care, sanitary conditions, clean water, food, and help stopping ideological colonizers from invading their country. Pro-lifers can work to ensure the organizations fulfilling the real struggles developing nations face are ones willing to respect the life-affirming cultures of those countries.

To start, we must ensure that no U.S. taxpayer dollars go to fund abortions or organizations that promote abortion around the world. That starts with defunding Planned Parenthood entirely. Polling shows that 67% of Americans either “oppose” or “strongly oppose” using tax dollars to support abortion abroad. Planned Parenthood is engaged in a deadly campaign of ideological colonialism that will result in the killing of millions of unborn babies around the world. Americans should not be forced to participate in this through their taxes.

LifeNews Note: Arielle Del Turco is Director of the Center for Religious Liberty at Family Research Council, and co-author of “Heroic Faith: Hope Amid Global Persecution. Mary Szoch is the Director of the Center for Human Dignity at Family Research Council. This column originally appeared at Washington Stand.

The post Why are Taxpayers Forced to Give $700 Million to Planned Parenthood to Kill Babies? appeared first on LifeNews.com.

The Israeli Prime Minister has denounced as anti-Semitic the growing surge of pro-Palestine protests at American universities

Pro-Palestinian protests sweeping across university campuses in the US are anti-Semitic and must be stopped, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said, claiming that mobs have been attacking Jewish students and faculty members.

His comments come after US police arrested more than 80 protesters on Wednesday in a crackdown on the pro-Palestine demonstrations taking place at some 21 universities in states like Massachusetts, California and New York, among others.

The students have been demanding that the US government cease all funding for the Israeli military and “stop giving them any more money to continue this genocide,” referring to the ongoing Israeli offensive against Hamas militants in Gaza.

In a video published on his X account on Wednesday, Netanyahu said that the protests on America’s college campuses are “horrific” and claimed that “anti-Semitic mobs have taken over leading universities” and are calling for “the annihilation of Israel.”

“This is reminiscent of what happened in German universities in the 1930s. It’s unconscionable. It has to be stopped. It has to be condemned and condemned unequivocally,” the prime minister said, in an apparent reference to the Nazi Student League, which persecuted German students and university faculty members who were not of Aryan descent or were considered political opponents of the Nazi regime.

The Israeli leader also slammed what he called the “shameful” response of some university presidents to the protests. “More has to be done,” Netanyahu urged, saying there has been an “exponential rise of antisemitism throughout America and throughout Western societies.”

The Israeli leader also claimed the student protesters “want to kill Jews wherever they are” and are chanting slogans like “Death to the Jews.”

Earlier this week, Rabbi Elie Buechler urged Jewish students of New York’s prestigious Columbia University to stay home, claiming they were no longer safe amid ongoing pro-Palestinian protests. That was after a group of Jewish counter-protesters on Sunday got into an altercation with demonstrators from a Gaza Solidarity Encampment on university grounds.

READ MORE: Rabbi tells Jews to leave prestigious American university

The White House has denounced any “calls for violence and physical intimidation targeting Jewish students and the Jewish community.”

Activists, however, have denied that the protests are anti-Semitic and say many Jewish students and organizations are involved in organizing the demonstrations. Hundreds of Columbia faculty members staged a walkout on Monday to criticize the university leadership and to express their solidarity with the protesters, after the university president called police to the campus.

History professor Christopher Brown branded the move as “unprecedented, unjustified, disproportionate, divisive and dangerous.”

A surge of demonstrations followed the deadly attack on Israel by the Palestinian armed group Hamas last October. The students are protesting Israel’s relentless retaliatory bombardment of Gaza, which has caused unprecedented destruction in the enclave and has left more than 34,000 dead, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry.

Environmentalist diehards reportedly manipulated experts’ conclusions to fit their own agenda

Top-ranking German government officials from the Ministry of Economic Affairs intentionally falsified experts’ reports to make it look like nuclear power was no longer viable in the country, Cicero magazine reported on Thursday.

Citing internal documents and e-mails it obtained via a court order, the media outlet claims that long-time Green Party proponents of a nuclear phase-out in high positions swept reports under the rug, or altered them, if they ran counter to their ideological convictions.

Following the disaster at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant in March 2011, Germany’s parliament voted in favor of shutting down all similar facilities in the country. In April 2023, Germany’s last three operational nuclear power plants were taken offline.

In the article, Cicero claims that Patrick Graichen and Stefan Tidow, then-undersecretaries at the Economy and Environment ministries respectively, played a key role in the effort to portray the prolongation of German nuclear power plants’ operational life as dangerous.

The two allegedly conspired to prevent their respective bosses from getting acquainted with any technical reports that refuted this assumption. According to the article, these documents dated March 2022 clearly pointed out that with starkly diminishing Russian gas imports, an “extension of the nuclear power plants’ operational life” could have alleviated the dire situation in Germany’s energy sector and prevented prices from skyrocketing in the coming winter.

However, the Green higher-ups, unhappy with this conclusion, allegedly rewrote the document, ramming home the message that any prolongation of the remaining nuclear power plants’ operation “is not tenable on technical-security grounds.”

Cicero claims that Economy Minister Robert Habeck most likely only saw the reworked version of the report, and not the original.

Faced with the threat of looming energy deficits, on October 17, Chancellor Olaf Scholz ordered the remaining three nuclear power plants to remain operational throughout the winter, despite warnings coming out of the Economy and Environment ministries. However, as Cicero notes, the overall trend toward the total phasing out of nuclear power-generation has remained unchanged.

READ MORE: German industry ‘moving abroad’ – Bild

With energy prices on the rise, Germany’s prized industrial sector has found itself increasingly at a disadvantage, with one in three manufacturers considering moving production overseas as a result, Bild reported in February.

Environmentalist diehards reportedly manipulated experts’ conclusions to fit their own agenda

Top-ranking German government officials from the Ministry of Economic Affairs intentionally falsified experts’ reports to make it look like nuclear power was no longer viable in the country, Cicero magazine reported on Thursday.

Citing internal documents and e-mails it obtained via a court order, the media outlet claims that long-time Green Party proponents of a nuclear phase-out in high positions swept reports under the rug, or altered them, if they ran counter to their ideological convictions.

Following the disaster at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant in March 2011, Germany’s parliament voted in favor of shutting down all similar facilities in the country. In April 2023, Germany’s last three operational nuclear power plants were taken offline.

In the article, Cicero claims that Patrick Graichen and Stefan Tidow, then-undersecretaries at the Economy and Environment ministries respectively, played a key role in the effort to portray the prolongation of German nuclear power plants’ operational life as dangerous.

The two allegedly conspired to prevent their respective bosses from getting acquainted with any technical reports that refuted this assumption. According to the article, these documents dated March 2022 clearly pointed out that with starkly diminishing Russian gas imports, an “extension of the nuclear power plants’ operational life” could have alleviated the dire situation in Germany’s energy sector and prevented prices from skyrocketing in the coming winter.

However, the Green higher-ups, unhappy with this conclusion, allegedly rewrote the document, ramming home the message that any prolongation of the remaining nuclear power plants’ operation “is not tenable on technical-security grounds.”

Cicero claims that Economy Minister Robert Habeck most likely only saw the reworked version of the report, and not the original.

Faced with the threat of looming energy deficits, on October 17, Chancellor Olaf Scholz ordered the remaining three nuclear power plants to remain operational throughout the winter, despite warnings coming out of the Economy and Environment ministries. However, as Cicero notes, the overall trend toward the total phasing out of nuclear power-generation has remained unchanged.

READ MORE: German industry ‘moving abroad’ – Bild

With energy prices on the rise, Germany’s prized industrial sector has found itself increasingly at a disadvantage, with one in three manufacturers considering moving production overseas as a result, Bild reported in February.

Myth: Abortion is 14 times safer than childbirth.

Fact: Studies from countries with better data show that a woman is at least three times as likely to die from any cause following abortion than after childbirth.

The false claim that abortion is 14 times safer than childbirth arose from a 2012 journal article by two vocal abortion advocates, Elizabeth Raymond and David Grimes (henceforth “R&G”).[1] Despite being debunked in the dozen years since,[2] it continues to be repeated by pro-abortion media advocates. Following are numerous reasons this statement is false and not data-driven.

1. This comparison is made using four disparate numbers, none of which can be calculated accurately (abortion-related deaths, legal abortions, maternal deaths, and live births).

Different denominators are being compared: Abortion-related deaths are compared to 100,000 legal abortions, whereas all maternal deaths are compared to 100,000 live births. The relevance of these facts to the R&G myth will be clarified below.

2. Even the former director of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Dr. Julie Louise Gerberding, demonstrated that a comparison between the two statistics is inappropriate. In 2004, she wrote that maternal mortality ratios and abortion mortality rates “are conceptually different and are used by CDC for different public health purposes.”[3]

3. The number of legal abortions in the U.S. is unknown.

• The estimated number of legally induced abortions is voluntarily provided by local and state health departments to the CDC. In 2020, the CDC documented 620,327 abortions.[4]
• The number of abortions is also estimated by the Guttmacher Institute, which directly surveys abortion providers, but a large disparity is seen between the two sources. In 2020, the Guttmacher Institute documented 930,160 abortions,[5] nearly 50% more abortions than the CDC reported.
• &G used Guttmacher-derived legal abortion numbers for their denominator rather than CDC numbers (even though they used CDC numbers for abortion-related deaths), allowing the larger numbers in the denominator to dilute the numerator.

4. Abortion-related deaths are undercounted. (See CLI paper “Handbook of Maternal Mortality” for extensive discussion.)

• The CDC relies primarily upon death certificate documentation or deaths that happen to come to its attention in order to detect abortion-related deaths, but there are many reasons that these deaths may not be documented.
  • Due to private payment for most abortions and women’s tendency to hide an abortion history, a prior abortion is often not known by the certifier.[6]
  • Abortion complication reporting is not required by federal law and ideologically driven individuals may misrepresent, hide, or fail to report abortion-related deaths.[7]
  • Deaths from mental health causes (suicide, homicide, accidents due to high risk-taking behavior, substance and alcohol abuse and overdose) are rarely documented as abortion-related on death certificates,[8] even though several meta-analyses have documented increased risks of mental health complications such as anxiety, depression, substance and alcohol abuse, and self-harm following abortion compared to childbirth.[9]

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

5. The total number of pregnancies in the U.S. is unknown because early pregnancy losses are not recorded.

• Thus, the CDC uses the denominator of 100,000 live births because this is measured by mandatory birth certificates. This becomes a “maternal mortality ratio,” not “maternal mortality rate,” because the denominator does not include all the “at-risk” individuals (those who have experienced a pregnancy).
• This causes maternal deaths that are associated with early pregnancy events (miscarriages, ectopic pregnancies, gestational trophoblastic disease, and induced abortions) to be represented in the numerator but not the denominator, artificially inflating the numerator. Only 2/3 of maternal deaths are associated with a live birth or fetal death (beyond 20 weeks of gestation).[10]
• It should also be noted that an abortion-related death is counted in both

6. Maternal mortality data is also inaccurate.[11]

• There are several disparate maternal mortality reporting systems in the U.S. using different methods of data collection and different temporal definitions.
  • CDC’s National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) determines pregnancy-related deaths based on death certificate ICD-O coding during or within six weeks of a pregnancy.[12]
  • CDC’s Pregnancy Mortality Surveillance System (PMSS) determines pregnancy-related death based on death certificate documentation of pregnancy within one year and review of the woman’s medical records to determine “pregnancy-relatedness” – that is, whether it was caused or exacerbated by the pregnancy or its management.[13]
  • Not surprisingly, given differing data sources and timelines, there is little correlation between the statistics reported by NVSS and PMSS.[14]
  • Using death certificates as the initial source of detecting pregnancy-associated deaths does not cast a broad enough net, because at least 38-50% of all U.S. maternal deaths are not documented on death certificates.[15]
  • In order to improve detection of pregnancy-associated deaths, the CDC recommended adding a “pregnancy check-box” to death certificates, but this was variably implemented by the states over a prolonged period, leading to non-comparable statistics for over a decade. Although more maternal deaths were detected, false positives were also noted to be frequent, leading to continued data deficiencies.[16]
  • Additionally, Maternal Mortality Review Committees (MMRC) have convened at local, state, regional, and federal levels to comprehensively review reported maternal deaths. Although these multidisciplinary committees will likely provide better quality data, the most recent collaborative report from 2019 only included the analysis of 36 such committees (failing to include data from 14 states and the District of Columbia), so a complete analysis of U.S. data from all states remains elusive.[17]

7. Higher quality data can be obtained from records-linkage studies since all abortions can be detected (usually through single-payer insurance coverage in European countries) and compared to all subsequent deaths within one year in reproductive aged women. R&G chose not to include international data and ignored the one U.S. study using this methodology. These better-quality studies demonstrate far more deaths in the year following abortion than childbirth, providing strong evidence that abortion is not safer than childbirth.

• A records-linkage study of California Medicaid recipients found that a woman was 62% more likely to die from any cause in the years following abortion compared to childbirth, 82% more likely to die in an accident, and 154% more likely to commit suicide.[18]
• A number of large studies from Finland found that the maternal mortality rate following abortion was 3-4 times the maternal mortality rate following birth.[19] The rate of suicide following abortion was six times the rate following birth, the rate of accidental death was five times the rate following birth, and the rate of homicide was over ten times the rate following birth.[20]
• The Finnish data demonstrate the inherent unreliability of utilizing death certificate documentation to detect maternal deaths. Despite meticulous record-keeping in that country, death certificate documentation alone detects only 26% of deaths after a live birth or stillbirth, 12% of deaths following miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy, and just 1-6% of deaths following induced abortion.[21]
• Additionally, two international Systematic Reviews comparing all available studies were available at the time R&G published their paper but were not referenced by these researchers.[22]
• A 2017 meta-analysis of available records-linkage studies documented the increased risk of death after abortion compared to birth. One study included in the meta-analysis documented a dose-effect, as each additional abortion increased a woman’s risk of dying by around 50%.[23]
• A records-linkage study using Danish data from 1980-2004 revealed that after a first-trimester induced abortion, a woman had twice the likelihood of death within 180 days, and a 331% increased likelihood of death within 180 days for second-/third-trimester abortion compared to childbirth.[24]

8. In the politically polarized climate following the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, reversing Roe v. Wade and allowing legislatures to regulate abortion, some have falsely stated that doctors may not be able to provide quality care for obstetric complications, even though all states with pro-life protections allow an exception if abortion is necessary in life-threatening emergencies. (See CLI articles, “Abortion Policy Allows Physicians to Intervene to Protect a Mother’s Life” and “Pro-Life Laws Protect Mom and Baby: Pregnant Women’s Lives are Protected in All States” for more discussion.)

9. Allegations have arisen that state limits on abortion will increase maternal mortality. Fortunately, there are many reasons to expect abortion restrictions to decrease, rather than increase, maternal mortality. (See CLI articles “Twelve Reasons Women’s Health and Maternal Mortality Will Not Worsen, and May Improve, in States with Abortion Limits” and “Response to Media Allegations that Abortion Restrictions Cause Maternal Mortality and Female Suicides” for more discussion.)

[1] Raymond EG, Grimes DA. The comparative safety of legal induced abortion and childbirth in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 2012;119:215–219.

[2] Calhoun B. Systematic Review: The maternal mortality myth in the context of legalized abortion. The Linacre Quarterly. 2013;80(3):264-276; Reardon DC, et al. Deaths associated with abortion compared to childbirth-A review of new and old data and the medical and legal implications. The Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy. 2004;20(2):279-327.

[3] Letter from Julie Louise Gerberding to Walter Weber, July 20, 2004. http://afterabortion.org/pdf/CDCResponsetoWeberReAbortionStats-Gerberding%20Reply.pdf.

[4] Kortsmit K, Nguyen AT, Mandel MG, et al. Abortion Surveillance — United States, 2020. MMWR Surveill Summ 2022; 71(No. SS-10):1–27. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.ss7110a1.

[5] Jones RK, Kirstein M, Philbin J. Abortion Incidence and Service Availability in the United States, 2020. Nov 2022. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 54(4):128-141. Available at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1363/psrh.12215.

[6] Desai S, Lindberg LD, Maddow-Zimet I, Kost K. The Impact of Abortion Underreporting on Pregnancy Data and Related Research. Matern Child Health J. 2021;25(8):1187-1192. doi:10.1007/s10995-021-03157-9; Udry JR, Gaughan M, Schwingl PJ, van den Berg BJ. A medical record linkage analysis of abortion underreporting. Fam Plann Perspect. 1996;28(5):228-231.

[7] Grossman D, Perritt J, Grady D. The Impending Crisis of Access to Safe Abortion Care in the US. JAMA Intern Med. 2022;182(8):793-795. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2022.2893

[8] Gissler M, Kauppila R, Meriläinen J, Toukomaa H, Hemminki E. Pregnancy-associated deaths in Finland 1987-1994–definition problems and benefits of record linkage. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1997;76(7):651-657. doi:10.3109/00016349709024605; Walker D, Campero L, Espinoza H, et al. Deaths from complications of unsafe abortion: misclassified second trimester deaths. Reprod Health Matters. 2004;12(24 Suppl):27-38. doi:10.1016/s0968-8080(04)24019-8

[9] Coleman PK. Abortion and mental health: quantitative synthesis and analysis of research published 1995-2009. Br J Psychiatry, 2011;199:180-186; Fergusson DM, Horwood LJ, and Boden JM. Does abortion reduce the mental health risks of unwanted or unintended pregnancy? A re-appraisal of the evidence. Aus NZ J Psych, 2013;47(9):819-827; Fergusson DM, Horwood LJ, Boden JM. Abortion and mental health disorders: evidence from a 30-year longitudinal study. Br J Psychiatry. 2008;193(6):444-451; Sullins DP. Abortion, substance abuse and mental health in early adulthood: Thirteen-year longitudinal evidence from the United States. Sage Open Medicine. 2016;4:1-11; Sullins DP. Affective and Substance Abuse Disorders Following Abortion by Pregnancy Intention in the United States: A Longitudinal Cohort Study. Medicina (B Aires) [Internet]. 2019;55(11):1–21.

[10] Horon IL. Underreporting of maternal deaths on death certificates and the magnitude of the problem of maternal mortality. Am J Public Health 2005;95:478-482

[11] M.F. MacDorman, et al., “Recent Increases in the U.S. Maternal Mortality Rate: Disentangling Trends from Measurement Issues,” Obstetrics & Gynecology 128:3 (2016): 447-455; Horon IL. Underreporting of maternal deaths on death certificates and the magnitude of the problem of maternal mortality. Am J Public Health 2005;95:478-482; Deneux-Tharaux C, Berg C, Bouvier-Colle MH, et al. Underreporting of pregnancy-related mortality in the United States and Europe. Obstet Gynecol 2005;106(4):684-692; Joseph KS, Lisonkova S, Boutin A, et al. Maternal mortality in the United States: are the high and rising rates due to changes in obstetrical factors, maternal medical conditions, or maternal mortality surveillance? Am J Obstet Gynecol. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2023.12.038

[12] Hoyert DL. Maternal mortality rates in the United States, 2021. NCHS Health E-Stats. 2023. doi:10.15620/cdc:124678

[13] Pregnancy Mortality Surveillance System. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Updated March 23, 2023. Accessed April 3, 2024. https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternal-mortality/pregnancy-mortality-surveillance-system.htm

[14] MacKay A, Berg CJ, Duran C, et al. An assessment of pregnancy-related mortality in the United States. Pediatric & Perinatal Epidemiology 2005;19:206–214; Hoyert DL. Maternal Mortality and Related Concepts. Vital & Health Statistics. Series 3, Analytical and Epidemiological Studies. 2007;33:1-13. Available at https://europepmc.org/article/med/17460868, accessed August 9, 2022.

[15] Horon IL, Cheng D, Chang J, et al. Underreporting of Maternal Deaths on Death Certificates and the Magnitude of the Problem of Maternal Mortality. AJ of Public Health. 2005;95:478-82; Dye TD, Gordon H. Retrospective maternal mortality case ascertainment in West Virginia, 1985 to 1989. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;167(1)72-6.

[16] Hoyert DL, Minino AM. Maternal mortality in the United States: Changes in coding, publication, and data release, 2018. National Vital Statistics Reports; vol 69 no 2. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2020; Joseph KS, Lisonkova S, Boutin A, et al. Maternal mortality in the United States: Are the high and rising rates due to changes in obstetrical factors, maternal medical conditions, or maternal mortality surveillance? Am J Obstet Gynecol. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2023.12.038

[17] Trost SL, Beauregard J, Njie F, et al. Pregnancy-Related Deaths: Data from Maternal Mortality Review Committees in 36 US states, 2017-2019. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services; 2022. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternal-mortality/erase-mm/data-mmrc.html.

[18] Reardon DC, Ney PG, Scheuren FJ, Cougle JR, Coleman, PK, Strahan T. Deaths associated with pregnancy outcome: a record linkage study of low income women. Southern Medical Journal, 2002;95(8):834-841.

[19] Gissler M, Berg C, Bouvier-Colle MH, Buekens P. Pregnancy-associated mortality after birth, spontaneous abortion, or induced abortion in Finland, 1987-2000. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;190(2):422-427. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2003.08.044; Gissler M, Kauppila R, Meriläinen J, Toukomaa H, Hemminki E. Pregnancy-associated deaths in Finland 1987-1994—definition problems and benefits of record linkage. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1997;76(7):651-657. Doi:10.3109/00016349709024605.

[20] Gissler M, Hemminki E, Lönnqvist J. Suicides after pregnancy in Finland, 1987-94: register linkage study. BMJ. 1996;313(7070):1431-1434. doi:10.1136/bmj.313.7070.1431; Gissler M, Berg C, Bouvier-Colle MH, Buekens P. Injury deaths, suicides and homicides associated with pregnancy, Finland 1987-2000. Eur J Public Health. 2005;15(5):459-463. doi:10.1093/eurpub/cki042; Gissler M, Kauppila R, Meriläinen J, Toukomaa H, Hemminki E. Pregnancy-associated deaths in Finland 1987-1994–definition problems and benefits of record linkage. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1997;76(7):651-657. doi:10.3109/00016349709024605

[21] Reardon DC, Thorp JM. Pregnancy associated death in record linkage studies relative to delivery, termination of pregnancy, and natural losses: A systematic review with a narrative synthesis and meta-analysis. SAGE Open Med. 2017;5:2050312117740490. Published 2017 Nov 13. doi:10.1177/2050312117740490

[22] Reardon DC, Strahan TW, Thorp JM, Shuping MW. Deaths associated with abortion compared to childbirth: a review of new and old data and the medical and legal implications. The Journal of Contemporary Health Law & Policy 2004; 20(2):279-327; Shadigian EM; Bauer ST. Pregnancy-Associated Death: A Qualitative Systematic Review of Homicide and Suicide. Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey. 2005. 60:183-190.

[23] Reardon D, Thorp J. Pregnancy associated death in record linkage studies relative to delivery, termination of pregnancy, and natural losses: A systematic review with a narrative synthesis and meta-analysis. Sage Open Medicine. 2017;5:1-17.

[24] Reardon DC, Coleman PK. Short and long term mortality rates associated with first pregnancy outcome: Population register based study for Denmark 1980-2004. Med Sci Monit 2012;18(9):71-76; Coleman PK, Reardon DC, Calhoun BC. Reproductive History Patterns and Long-Term Mortality Rates: A Danish population-based record linkage study. Eur J of Public Health. 2013;23(4):569-574.

LifeNews Note: Ingrid Skop, M.D., F.A.C.O.G., is Vice President and Director of Medical Affairs for the Charlotte Lozier Institute.

The post Studies Confirm Women are Three Times More Likely to Die Following Abortion Than Childbirth appeared first on LifeNews.com.