Three justices are Jewish: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Elena Kagan. The only Protestant on the Court is Neil Gorsuch, who was raised Roman Catholic, but now attends an Episcopal church.
Amy Barrett is on President Trump’s short-list to replace Justice Kennedy. Interestingly, she also is a Catholic, which should be a non-issue. After all, religious litmus tests are un-Constitutional, and after all, the Court has confirmed a number of Catholics in recent decades.
And after all, the Senate confirmed her to the circuit court by 55-43 last October.
However, Judge Barrett’s Catholicism was a significant impediment to Democrats in her confirmation hearing last year. Their unspoken concern seems to be that she takes her Catholicism seriously. In other words, she appears to be a practicing Catholic who embraces Catholic dogma.
Member of “People of Praise”
As the Wall Street Journal points out this morning, she is also a member of a “parachurch” called People of Praise , which one Democrat has labeled as a cult (it’s not). The group cultivates small communities of faith around the world modeled on the Sermon on the Mount and animated by the Holy Spirit.
In other words, these are people of faith who sincerely try to live out their Christian faith in the public square by helping those who need help. They embrace the American ideal of God-given rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Watch the video below which describes their outreach.
Nine out of ten members are Catholic. But some Catholics have been critical of the group for being too ecumenical and not enough Catholic. Secularists have been critical since women don’t hold positions of authority in the group.
Democrats’ concerns towards Ms. Barrett come down to a single reason: Roe V Wade. The Left suspects she’s a raging pro-lifer. After all she has five biological children. Even worse, she adopted two more children from Haiti, exposing the lie promulgated by the Left that pro-lifers don’t care about babies after they’re born. Ms. Barrett shames these abortion zealots by modeling adoption as a better solution than abortion.
This is a woman who clearly cares about life. And she’s Catholic. And she lives out her faith.
Democrats are aghast
Senator Diane Feinstein uttered the clumsiest, most bigoted comment we’ve heard from a Senator in a long time:
“I think in your case, professor, when you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for years in this country.”
Ms. Barrett is too Catholic for the good Senator. Ms. Feinstein has no problem with dogma, since her party is dogmatic when it comes preserving human abortion. Catholicism’s pro-life belief system threatens liberal sensibilities since liberal judges tend to decide cases based on feelings and personal political views, not the substance of the law. They’re afraid she’ll do the same, despite her comments to the contrary:
“Judges cannot — nor should they try to — align our legal system with the Church’s moral teaching whenever the two diverge. They should, however, conform their own behavior to the Church’s standard. Perhaps their good example will have some effect.”
Barrett’s reaction to Roe V Wade
For her part, Ms. Barrett does not believe that Roe V Wade will be overturned, but that the issue ultimately comes down to who decides the issue, the feds or the states:
“It brings up an issue of judicial review: Does the court have the capacity to decide that women have the right to obtain an abortion, or should it be a matter for state legislatures?”
The pro-abortion group, NARAL, issued a dire warning regarding Judge Barrett:
“Barrett’s record speaks for itself: She is aligned with extreme, anti-choice organizations, and her writings make clear that she believes Roe v. Wade was incorrectly decided. With a lifetime appointment, Barrett can impose her extreme anti-choice ideology onto women and families for much longer than Donald Trump will occupy the White House.”
What is this extreme, “anti-choice” organization? The Roman Catholic Church. May the pro-life Catholic dogma be with you!
[Speaking of dogma, be sure to attend the Iowans for LIFE banquet called “A Clash of Creeds” on October 24th. Three “dogmatic” women, Margaret Sanger, Ayn Rand, and St. Mother Teresa of Calcutta will discuss their respective creeds. GK Chesterton will try to keep the peace!]
Facebook prevented Iowans for Life from “boosting” last week’s blogpost: “Pro-lifers don’t care about the mother or child after she gives birth. HOGWASH!” Did you read it? If not, read it now as background to today’s blogpost which reveals how Facebook censors pro-life messages.
For those of you not familiar with the process of boosting a Facebook post, publishers of content, such as IFL, can pay Facebook to promote our postings on the feeds of audiences we target.
Last week’s post highlighted the pro-woman and pro-child outreach of InnerVisions HealthCare after mothers give birth, a direct refutation of Big Abortion’s assertion that pro-lifers don’t care about the baby after she is born.
Our Facebook and website traffic skyrocketed.
When we went to boost the post, Facebook rejected it, deeming it “too political” in nature.
We’re not alone.
LifeNews has had their content blocked by Facebook. So has LiveAction, Birthright, Right to Life of Michigan, and Warriors for Christ. Even Academy Award winning actor, Jon Voight, had his crowd-funding campaign blocked. Why? He’s starring in a pro-life movie, “Roe V Wade: The Movie.” It’s not just Facebook. Multiple pro-life groups accuse Twitter of doing the same.
Facebook founder and CEO, Mark Zuckerberg testified before Congress in April regarding a variety of issues, including use of private data and censorship.
He was asked by pro-life Senator Ben Sasse,
“Can you imagine a world where you might decide that pro-lifers are prohibited from speaking about their abortion views on your platform?”
Here is Zuckerberg’s response. Read it carefully:
“I certainly would not want that to be the case.
SASSE: “It might really be unsettling to people who’ve had an abortion to have an open debate about that, wouldn’t it?”
ZUCKERBERG: “It might be, but I don’t think that that would fit any of the definitions of what we have but I do generally agree with the point that you’re making which is as we’re able to technologically shift especially towards having AI [artificial intelligence] proactively look at content, I think that’s going to create massive questions for society about what obligations we want to require companies to fulfill.”
“I do think that that’s a question that we need to struggle with as a country because I know other countries are and there putting laws in place. I think America needs to figure out and create the principles we want American companies to operate under.”
Facebook promises “transparency”
Facebook has put out new regulations which promise more “transparency” but which really restrict free speech by conservatives generally and pro-life causes specifically. In other words, it seems Zuckerberg told the Senate what he thought they wanted to hear in his first sentence, and then went ahead and disregarded his own testimony.
The news isn’t all bad. The Supreme Court overturned an anti free speech law (NIFLA v. Becerra) passed in California which compelled pro life health centers to advertise abortion services provided by their competitors. Even more, Anthony Kennedy’s retirement has raised hopes in the pro-life community for a new jurist who honors the pro-life principles enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution.
You can help
In the meantime, you can help us on social media platforms. Since Facebook provides us a very narrow range of acceptable content we can promote, it’s up to you to share the content on your personal pages. Can you imagine them allowing us to promote this post?
Iowans for LIFE is all about educating our culture on the dignity of human life from fertilization to natural death. Facebook is one platform we utilize to advance this mission.
When they say no to IFL, we need you to say yes. SHARE our message of hope.
[Iowans for LIFE invites you to attend the most provocative, fun, and celebratory pro-life fundraising banquet ever! Register today for “A Clash of Creeds.” Yes, it’s not until October 24th, but two-thirds of our tables are already sold! Don’t wait!]
Days passed. She had a change of heart and went to Planned Parenthood and paid them to abort her child.
A few more days passed and Mary deeply regretted her decision. Guess who she called for emotional support: Planned Parenthood or the pro-life health clinic?
You guessed it. She called InnerVisions HealthCare, also known as IVHCare, the unplanned pregnancy and STD medical clinic where she received her free ultrasound.
Iowans for LIFE are big supporters of IVHCare, because they are an authentic “women’s reproductive health clinic.” They have saved the lives of hundreds of babies by empowering women to make better health decisions when faced with unplanned pregnancies.
The rest of the story …
There’s more to the story with Mary. IVHCare told her to come in and talk about regrets, which ran deep. They listened to her. They cared about her as a human being and determined that the emotional trauma caused by her abortion required professional psychological counseling they didn’t offer. So, do you know what they did? They referred her to a licensed psychologist and paid for her first six sessions.
We’re sharing this real story in response to the unrelenting attacks from abortion rights supporters who claim pro-lifers and pro-life health clinics don’t care about the baby after he or she is born.
A melting pot of organizations comprise the pro-life movement locally and nationally, each with their own unique mission. Missions certainly overlap in this movement since they embrace common themes, such as authentic empowerment of women, authentic reproductive healthcare, and protection for our pre-born brothers and sisters. Each can offer rich stories on how they’ve helped mother and child after the baby is born.
IVHCare is a classic example of an organization that helps babies AND their mothers after the child is born, not just before.
Executive Director, Theresa Welch, and Director of Development, Bryan Gonzalez, told us that 90% of their efforts focus on helping the mother. ‘Empowering women’ is their mantra.
More examples of helping mother and child after birth
They met with a young woman with an unplanned pregnancy who contemplated an abortion. She explained that if she had a baby, she couldn’t work and afford to pay for her tuition at DMACC. Innervisions offered her a scholarship to solve the problem.
Can you imagine Planned Parenthood or any other abortion provider doing the same?
Innervisions has been known to help women find jobs after their baby was born.
Can you imagine Planned Parenthood or any other abortion provider doing the same?
Another IVHCare patient called up and told them her father died and that she didn’t have a car or any way to attend his out of town funeral. They bought her bus fare.
Even more, they got IVHCare supporters to donate furniture for her apartment. They even rented a truck and got volunteers to load and unload it.
Abortion clinics just don’t do that kind of thing. They’re done with a woman after her check clears, until her next abortion, that is.
IVHCare is all about relationship. And the relationship continues even long after when a client walks out the door. IVHCare follows up with three phone calls to see how she’s doing.
They offer one-on-one pre-natal education and vitamins to bolster a woman’s health during her pregnancy. When her baby is born, they call her up and invite her to come in to pick up a gift they have for her: a beautiful diaper bag stocked with diapers, footies, baby bottles and more.
They even offer free photo shoots for mom and baby.
IVHCare is but ONE pro-life organization helping mothers and babies AFTER the child is born.
Questions for abortion providers
In light of this remarkable, Christ-like outreach, it is certainly fair to ask:
- What are abortion clinics doing to help women recover from the psychological and physical wounds inflicted by abortion, like IVHCare has?
- How are abortion advocates helping women AFTER their babies are born, like IVHCare does?
You know the answer.
The eighteen year old girl had been perfectly healthy up to that moment. Before the day was through, she began experiencing cramping and constipation. Within a week, she was dead from septic shock.
All of this occurred in California a decade and a half ago when Holly walked into a Planned Parenthood clinic and met with their onsite doctor. They dispensed to her the RU-486 pills which induces human abortion. The girl was pregnant and thought this was a safe way to procure a human abortion.
She was tragically wrong.
The abortion pill lie is promoted by Planned Parenthood
Iowans for LIFE revisits Holly’s tragic death in light of Cecile Richard’s latest comment on the safety of RU-486, also known as the Abortion Pill. Planned Parenthood’s former CEO wrote in the LA Times:
“There is no medical or health reason for this ban on medication abortion. Approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2000, non-invasive medication abortion is safe by all measures — safer than Tylenol and Viagra, even.”
Yes, Viagra warns men to call a doctor if they experience a four hour erection. On the other hand, the Abortion Pill can cause 4 or more hours of heavy bleeding, vomiting, headaches, and abdominal pain.
The abortion pill lie downplays your potential for violent illness
In the case of another former Planned Parenthood employee, Abby Johnson, the side effects were nightmarish for far MORE than 4 hours:
“… I started to feel pain in my abdomen unlike anything I had ever experienced. Then the blood… was gushing out of me. I couldn’t wear a pad… nothing was able to absorb the amount of blood I was losing. The only thing I could do was sit on the toilet… for hours… bleeding, throwing up into the bathroom trashcan, crying and sweating. I used to watch shows about childbirth. I would see these women in labor… covered in sweat. I would always think, “Gosh, do they keep it hot in the delivery room, or what?” But at that moment, sitting on the toilet, I knew it wasn’t from heat… it was from pain.
“It looked like a crime scene”
“After several hours on the toilet, I desperately wanted to soak in the bath tub. …My bathwater was bright red. It looked like I was sitting in the middle of a crime scene …
“I stood up…. I began to sweat again and felt faint…. Then I felt a release… and a splash in the water that was draining beneath me. A blood clot the size of a lemon had fallen into my bath water. Was that my baby?…. Then came the excruciating pain again. I… sat on the toilet. Another lemon sized blood clot. Then another. And another. I thought I was dying. This couldn’t be normal. Planned Parenthood didn’t ever tell me this could happen…. I decided that I would call them in the morning… if I didn’t die before then. It was around midnight and I had been in the bathroom for a good 12 hours.”
Abby Johnson called Planned Parenthood the next day to ask if what she was going through was normal. Yes, they said that what she was experiencing was “not abnormal.” She experienced another 8 weeks of blood clots, cramping, and nausea.
For the record, the potential side effects of taking Tylenol include nausea, stomach pain, itching, rash, headache, loss of appetite, dark urine, and clay-colored stools.
Is Cecile Richards really serious when she nationally proclaims that a four hour erection or clay-colored stools is worse than a half a day of hell … and a dead baby?
No, she’s not. She just thinks you’re gullible. Dr. Donna Harrison of The American Association or Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG) doesn’t pull any punches:
The abortion pill lie is based on your gullibility
“The claim that medical abortion is safer than Tylenol is just plainly a lie. And what is even more heinous is that medical abortions are being pushed on poor and rural women, who don’t have access to emergency treatments. Those women are much more likely to die as a result.”
Just ask Holly Patterson.
[Tables for Iowans for LIFE’s annual banquet are selling shockingly fast. We’re down to only 15 tables left, and the banquet isn’t until October 24th. Don’t delay. Get your table today!]
The intrauterine device (IUD) is a fairly popular form of birth control that is inserted into a woman’s uterus. What many contracepting pro-life women don’t realize, is that the IUD is an abortifacient. It also poses health risks to the woman using the IUD.
Planned Parenthood’s website downplays these risks:
“Some people have side effects that bother them after getting an IUD, but these usually go away after a few months. Rarely, the side effects can be serious.”
Tell that to Tanai Smith, of Baltimore, Md. According to a report by Fox News, “her IUD forced its way up into her stomach and migrated over to her liver.” The complications were profound, causing her to lose her ovaries, uterus, and toes.
IUD risks to women
Ms. Smith’s medical disaster was clearly an unusual reaction to use of an IUD. More common risks include a chance of perforating the uterine lining when an IUD is inserted. Perforations occur once or twice per one-thousand women.
When conception occurs in a woman with an IUD, the chance of an ectopic pregnancy is 6 percent.
Most common of all, an IUD increases a woman’s risk of an infection in her uterus. This occurs in about one out of a hundred women in the first twenty days of insertion. According to Dr. Ben Janaway writing in “The Femedic” blog,
“Untreated infections can lead to pelvic inflammatory disease and infertility. One episode of untreated pelvic inflammatory disease carries a 12% risk of infertility, whereas three untreated episodes carry a 50% risk.”
Contracepting women using IUDs must be alert to these real health risks. Even more, they need to be alert to the way IUDs work, because an IUD is an abortifacient.
Why the IUD is an abortifacient
According to Maggie DeWitte, Executive Director of Iowans for LIFE,
“IUD’s are 100% abortifacient in that they work to thin the lining of the uterus so that the newly formed baby cannot implant and therefore dies. Unlike oral contraceptions that work in one of three ways (by preventing ovulation, thickening the mucus to prevent sperm from entering, and thinning the lining so the baby cannot attach to the uterus), IUDs work only one way: ending the life of a newly formed baby.”
IFL’s Women’s Reproductive Health Resource Book provides additional background:
FERTILIZATION is when a unique human life begins. This ‘conception’ process begins when a sperm penetrates an oocyte, creating a brand new human life.
A unique human person is now created, as highly regarded textbooks on embryology state:
Life begins “when the sperm and ovum, neither of which can sustain life or direct growth by itself, come together at fertilization. For the first time the new life has all 46 chromosomes and all the directions (DNA) it needs for the rest of life. The sex of the baby, the color of the hair, everything is already fixed.
Cells begin replicating at a dizzying pace, and human organs develop. And then the next step occurs:
IMPLANTATION is the attachment process of the now 5 to 7 day old baby to the lining of his/her mother’s uterus.
IUDs prevent this new, one-of-a-kind human being from implanting on the mother’s uterus, which aborts her child.
Scientifically speaking, this is an abortion.
Philosophically speaking, abortion is immoral.
As Dr. Peter Kreeft, professor of philosophy at Boston College, asserts in the video above,
“Everyone can agree that it is always morally wrong to deliberately kill an innocent person.”
What many women don’t fully realize is that is exactly what an IUD does, deliberately kill an innocent human being. Watch the video above for the philosophical case against abortion.
Many contracepting pro-life women just don’t realize the implications of what they are doing when they use an IUD: the IUD is an abortifacient.
[For more info on women’s reproductive health, call for a free copy of our Women’s Reproductive Health Resource Book at 515- 255-4113 or download a copy today.]
It’s hard to defend the abortion position. Abortion activists on college campuses have resorted to campus censorship against pro-life activists to avoid discussing the touchy subject of human abortion on its merits.
The Wall Street Journal ran a good piece on the subject a few weeks ago by Kristan Hawkins. Ms. Hawkins is president of Students for Life (SFL). Under Ms. Hawkins leadership, SFL has increased the number of campus and high school pro life groups from a few dozen to over twelve-hundred nationally.
Examples of campus censorship
She said pro abortion groups are furiously at work imposing campus censorship on pro-lifer’s free speech, often with the silent consent of the administration.
For example, pro-life groups have come up with a wonderful way to honor the humanity of our aborted brothers and sisters by creating a cemetery of the innocents, as you can see in the video above. Abortion groups regularly deface or destroy these sites, as you can see on the video below.
Here’s another desecration committed by abortion proponents:
Pro-life groups often use chalking to convey their pro-life message. As you can see in the video below, abortion proponents don’t like it and try to wash it away out of fear it might save a life.
According to Ms. Hawkins, however, California State University, Fresno, fined one of their professors $17,000 for encouraging pro-abortion students to join him in destroying these pro-life messages. There is hope!
Isn’t it interesting. Chalk messages don’t last. Foot traffic and rain will quickly and naturally erase these messages in short order, usually within a few days. But abortion groups have such little tolerance that they are driven to erase opposing thought before anyone else can be exposed to a fresh perspective.
The pro-life “tax”
Ms. Hawkins said universities sometimes try to impose a “tax” on pro-life groups by sending them a bill for extra security costs. Here’s what happens: abortion groups try to disrupt and threaten violence when pro-life groups bring in a speaker like Alveda King, Reverend Martin Luther King’s niece. At the University of Michigan, the administration sent a bill for $800 to the pro-life group for the cost of security reinforcement to protect against the intolerance of abortion supporters.
Talk about injustice.
Fortunately, the Alliance Defending Freedom intervened on the side of Students for Life with this statement:
“The government may not charge speakers for the security costs by listeners’ response to that speech.”
Campus censorship in Des Moines
Here in Des Moines, Roosevelt High school invited Ms. King to speak a number of years back. Two parents complained because of her pro-life position. The principal quickly caved and disinvited her, denying a pro-life message that many students wanted to hear. Campus censorship takes many forms.
Administrations commonly cancel pro-life events when abortion supporters threaten violence. At Cal State Fullerton, they didn’t cancel a pro-life speaker. Instead, the university forced Students for Life to move the location when Antifa threatened violence if the pro-life event was held.
The threat of violence works.
The university did nothing to hold Antifa responsible. To compound the injustice, they would not allow the pro-lifers to advertise the new date and location of their event. Again, campus censorship takes many forms. At its heart, it is grounded in intolerance and an inability to defend the violence that defines human abortion.
More Iowa examples of campus censorship
David Cordaro, who will speak in October at our “Social Justice Creed” Event, coordinates the upper Midwest region for Students for Life. IFL asked him to what extent anti-life intolerance has affected Iowa. He sent a link to a story out of Hampton, Iowa, where the principal refused to let a respect life group form. Students for Life quickly responded through their legal counsel, the Thomas More Society.
At Lewis Central High School in Council Bluffs, at least they have a pro-life group. The group worked hard to create a display that pointed out that “157 human hearts are taken by abortion every hour.” Anti-life students tore those words off the display, in a common form of campus censorship.
The unspoken ideological litmus test
Perhaps the most extreme form of campus censorship is the unspoken anti-life ideological litmus test placed on employment opportunities. A few years ago at the University of Iowa, a highly qualified female attorney was denied employment by their law school. Why? Because of her previous experience of working for pro life groups. Forty-six out of 50 of the professors in the department were registered Democrats and pro abortion. She would have been that highly rare professor in academia: a Republican … and pro-life.
An associate dean with the university admitted the department blackballed her “because they so despise her politics (and especially her activism about it).”
The university alleged the professor performed poorly in a video-taped job interview with other faculty members. They claimed one of her answers disqualified her from the job, which the conservative professor adamantly denied. The video tape that would prove her point had been ‘accidentally erased.’
The abortion movement’s adversarial relationship with free speech runs deep. The same people who spout words such as inclusion, tolerance, and diversity don’t mean it. Campus censorship of pro-life groups defines a movement that is afraid to publicly defend their deadly position.
[To learn more, be sure to register for our free “Social Justice Creed” Event on October 24th, 2018. David Cordaro from Students for Life will be one of our speakers.]
By Tom Quiner
Have you ever prayed outside of Planned Parenthood? I have countless times over the years. I’ve noticed something: pro-life supporters are joyful. Abortion supporters are enraged. Abortion breeds anger.
Both groups use their hands to react. Abortion supporters raise their middle finger. (I mistakenly thought that they were saying that we were #1!) Pro-life supporters raise their thumb towards Heaven.
Both groups use their car horns to react. Abortion supporters angrily blast their horn and don’t let up: “BREEEEEEEET!!!!!!!” Pro-life supporters offer quick taps in rapid fire succession: “Beep, beep, beep!” (Note that they usually come in a sequence of three taps, which I firmly believe is a sign of the Holy Trinity).
Both groups use their vocal chords to react. Abortion supporters might communicate with the words, “GO TO HELL!!!!!!” Pro-life supporters tend to say, “God bless yoouuuu!!!”
A big difference: no abortion supporter has brought us Krispy Kreme donuts or hot chocolate from Frederichs when we’re praying in a cold rain, and no abortion supporter has pulled over and handed us a twenty dollar bill to support the cause.
We all have issues on which we disagree. Pro-lifers can certainly get worked up talking about the carnage of human abortion, but I just don’t see the unfettered rage that so animates the abortion movement.
The Irish experience
John McGuirk eloquently captures the contrast between the two groups in a series of Tweets. Mr. McGuirk was the Communication Director for ‘Save the 8th,’ a leading pro-life group in Ireland, and as you know, Ireland just overwhelming voted to overturn legal protections for the pre-born. When abortion groups should be celebrating, they seem angrier than ever, says Mr. McGuirk:
“Rarely in my life have I seen people angrier about winning than the repealers. Cheer up folks, it’s not that bad. There’ll be something along shortly for you all to focus your never-ending anger on, I’m sure.
Today I went to Stonehall Wildlife Park in Limerick (which is brilliant – take your kids) and petted a parrot, and several rabbits and goats. I come home to another 2,000 tweets from the angriest, craziest people in Ireland. Your unhappiness will never be fixed by a vote, folks.
The problem is the 8th amendment was never what was making you angry in the first place. It’s not the schools or the hospitals, or the ban on euthanasia either. No social reform is going to make you people happy. You’re all looking in the wrong place.
Something is missing
The deep injustice many people feel, and the power to change the country that they now wield, is missing something – there’s no vision in it for how to make people feel happy. Once all the “oppression” is gone, they’ll have to confront the fact that their misery is their own.
It was never the journey that was lonely. It was never the country that was cruel. It was never the church that was oppressing you. The movement you are in won’t leave you fulfilled and happy. It will just leave you all angry in company.
In terms of the calls to silence me, or others – hah. You guys own the country now. You own the media, the political class, the culture. You can keep pretending that a minority voice is holding you back, or you can realise that it’s actually an oppression of your own making.
A symbolic victory?
One thing I kept hearing yesterday was that this was a “symbolic” victory. There are many more symbolic victories to be had – blasphemy, the role of women, the pre-amble. Lots more totems of the past to tear down. None of them will fix the problem.
Abortion leaves emptiness in its wake
The problem is that all of those victories are empty of meaning. Even this one. Having an abortion in Louth will not be more fun than having one in London. It remains an abortion. You’re not “free”. You’re just miserable, probably in greater numbers, closer to home.
The Irish liberal left has nothing to offer you whatsoever, beyond days like yesterday. A momentary feeling of togetherness. It can’t provide you with a good job, or a loving partner, or security. All it does is provide you with an enemy to hate.”
Thumbs up to Mr. McGuirk!
Beep, beep, beep!
“God bless yoouuuu!”
[Be sure to mark your calendar for Iowans for LIFE annual fundraising banquet on October 24th, 2018. You’ll be treated to a dramatic presentation of “A Clash of Creeds.” Reserve your table today!]
By Maggie DeWitte
And yet the Church’s position on abortion is crystal clear, as presented in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (2270):
“Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person – among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.”
By contrast, the largest mainline Protestant denomination in the U.S., the United Methodist Church, stakes out a softer position on abortion in their Book of Discipline:
“Our belief in the sanctity of unborn human life makes us reluctant to approve abortion.
But we are equally bound to respect the sacredness of the life and well-being of the mother and the unborn child.” (Book of Discipline ¶161.J)
The Church’s position on abortion is unwavering
Since Roe V Wade, the Catholic Church’s position on matters related to abortion have been unwavering. Sadly, the same can’t be said of those who self-identify as Catholics.
Surveys conducted by the Alan Guttmacher Institute claim that Catholic women of child-bearing years are 29% more likely to have an abortion than their Protestant counterparts. Here’s what Guttmacher had to say about Catholic abortion statistics:
The abortion index for Catholic women showed that their relative abortion rate was nearly the same as that for all women.
… evangelical Protestants had an abortion rate that was half of the national average.
This statistic is shocking in light of the clarity of the Catholic position on abortion, and the lack of clarity in many Protestant churches. It is shocking in light of Catholic dedication to religious education and the presence of nearly 7000 Catholic schools in the U.S.
Clearly, something is amiss with Catholic curriculum if Catholics are just as likely to have an abortion as the rest of the culture. Clearly, something is amiss with Catholic curriculum if Protestants, most of whom attend public schools, are far less likely to abort their child than a Catholic.
PEW Research sheds more light on the problem
According the PEW Research Center, 51% of Catholics say having an abortion is morally wrong compared to 54% for Protestants. And 31% of Catholics say having an abortion isn’t even a moral issue!
Iowans for LIFE has a solution
IFL has developed a respect life curriculum for Catholic schools through the 8th grade. It has been field-tested at the largest Catholic school in Iowa, St. Francis of Assisi in West Des Moines. It works because it is age-appropriate. Teachers and administrators love it because it is easy to implement.
Catholic dioceses establish benchmarks for Catholic schools which call on them to teach the Church’s pro life ethic. IFL provides the resources in the form of printed materials, training, and even audio visual presentations to fulfill this benchmark.
Over-burdened teachers have no need to re-invent the wheel and cobble together their own curriculum when IFL has done the work for them.
Kindergarten through 8th grade are formative years. The hodgepodge approach to respect life curriculum clearly isn’t forming a culture of Life. If we continue doing things the same way, we’re going to continue seeing 31% of all abortions committed by Catholics. [Source: Guttmacher Institute].
Iowans for LIFE proposes a new approach
IFL proposes a new approach, one that utilizes a respect life curriculum created by respect life professionals. It takes money. It takes you. Remember, IFL doesn’t receive a cent from any Catholic diocese. And yet we can transform the culture if we get this dynamic curriculum into the hands of Catholic teachers.
Our goal: to get Iowans for LIFE Respect Life curriculum into 5 Catholic schools and 3 religious education programs a year which costs us about $7500. Now is the time of year when presentations have to be made. As schools sign on, we need an assurance that we’ll have the funding to fulfill our commitments.
We need to raise $7500 NOW to be ready to launch this exciting initiative into five new schools by August. Can you help with your donation of at least $100? Simply go to our donate page today and enter your credit card. Thank-you for supporting the respect life movement.
Planned Parenthood of the Heartland is being absorbed by a larger affiliate in Minnesota and the Dakotas according to the Des Moines Register. The Iowa PP president, Suzanna de Baca, is stepping down, and Iowa operations will be directed from Minnesota. Is this a sign that Planned Parenthood is on the ropes?
Iowans for LIFE’S Executive Director, Maggie DeWitte, addressed the question with this quote. It appeared in the Star Tribune out of Minneapolis:
“Look at schools. Why do they consolidate? Because they don’t have enough students to fill a classroom. I think the same thing is happening with the Planned Parenthood clinics.”
Planned Parenthood of the Heartland closes 14 abortion clinics
As recently as 2012, Planned Parenthood of the Heartland operated 22 brick and mortar clinics in Iowa. The number fell to just eight last year. Like most of the country, Iowans are becoming increasingly pro-life, which is reflected in recent legislation.
Last year’s legislature passed the twenty week bill, which bans abortion at the point when a pre-born person can feel the pain of abortion.
This year, the legislature went further with passage of The Heartbeat Bill which bans abortion at the point when a heartbeat is detected.
Even more, they cut $2 million of Medicaid funding from Planned Parenthood, redirecting it to clinics that provide authentic reproductive health care.
All of this has taken a toll on Planned Parenthood of the Heartland at the state level.
National conditions are worse for abortion providers
If anything, conditions are worse at the national level for providers of human abortion. Yesterday, President Trump cut $60 million of Title X funds from Planned Parenthood. It will go into effect in sixty days.
But the problem for Planned Parenthood isn’t just the government. Their customers are giving them fits, too: They’re having fewer abortions. This is a huge problem for an organization whose fiscal health thrives on the backs of dead babies.
Planned Parenthood downsized authentic women’s reproductive healthcare under Cecile Richards
Under Cecile Richard’s tenure as CEO of Planned Parenthood, the organization doubled down on their abortion business at the expense of legitimate women’s reproductive healthcare.
Since her first year on the job in 2006, PP experienced a 23% decline in patient visits at the same time that abortions increased by 11 percent. What is striking about this number is that the national abortion rate sharply declined at the same time Planned Parenthood’s abortion business was rising. In other words, they provided more abortions but less authentic healthcare.
Abortion rate plunges
From 1981 to the present, the national abortion rate plunged 46.6 percent. According to Planned Parenthood partner, the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the abortion rate peaked at 29.3 human abortions per one thousand women in 1981 declining to 14.6 by 2014.
But at the same time that a growing number of Planned Parenthood’s customers were getting sickened at the thought of aborting their baby, PP backed away from authentic healthcare for these women. For example, the number of cancer screenings performed at PP dropped every year that Richards was president, with 200 percent more screenings taking place in 2006 than in 2017.
Planned Parenthood has another problem: the number of women having an abortion for the first time is dropping. This reflects the growing pro-life sentiments of younger women. So where is PP picking up the slack? With more abortions from repeat customers. But as these women age out of their fertile years, PP will be forced to find new revenue sources.
Planned Parenthood has formidable resources
So, is Planned Parenthood on the ropes? Probably not. They have tremendous political and financial clout.
The Democratic Party has made it a litmus test for their candidates to support public funding of human abortion specifically as well as any pro abortion legislation generally.
Iowans for LIFE knows they don’t reflect the pro-life leanings of a lot of rank and file Democrats. But for now, at least, one political party is in the tank for Planned Parenthood.
That much power and cash is formidable.
The courts are a huge factor
The courts also have a big role to play in Planned Parenthood’s future. The current president seems to be appointing more judges concerned with the original intent of the Constitution. But there are eight years of liberal judges appointed by President Obama who tend to favor abortion rights over the rights of the pre-born.
A word of caution. Yes, Planned Parenthood of the Heartlands has closed 14 clinics in Iowa in the past six years. This simply confirms that the clinics are not really about women’s reproductive healthcare. But they are picking up the slack with tele-med abortions.
The risk of tele-med abortions
Nobody knows for sure how many at-risk teenage girls get Planned Parenthood’s free app.
Nobody knows for sure how many order the RU-486 Abortion Pill on this app without their parents’ knowledge.
And nobody knows for sure how many of these girls abort their baby in the family toilet, thanks to the availability of the Abortion Pill from Planned Parenthood’s app.
That kind of data just isn’t available.
Iowans for LIFE cautiously joins the rest of the pro-life community in celebrating the downsizing of Planned Parenthood of the Heartland within our Iowa borders.
But let’s get real: our work is just beginning. If current trends continue, human abortion will take the lives of 30,000 more Iowa babies over the next decade. And that just counts surgical abortions.
We need your help more than ever.
[How can you help? Begin with prayer. Attend our banquet. Attend our Social Justice Creed symposium. Donate. We’ve gotten so much accomplished in the past twelve months. We need even more partners to go to the next level. We need you.]
In fact, a majority of Catholics quietly ignore the teachings of their own Church on the subject, teachings which were reiterated and clarified with shocking prescience fifty years ago.
Humanae Vitae said ‘no’ to artificial contraception
Blessed Pope Paul VI bravely presented to a hostile world what is perhaps the most profound encyclical of the modern age: Humanae Vitae (Latin for “of human life”).
In a nutshell, this teaching said NO to artificial forms of contraception, including the recently approved (1960) birth control pill. Natural family planning methods were the only acceptable forms of ‘planning for parenthood.’
Why? What could be wrong with artificial birth control? The Pope’s own commission investigating new forms of contraception recommended their acceptance.
Abortion advocates, eugenicists, and champions of population control were confident that the ancient Church was about to get in step with a modern world. In fact, the Pope said it was them, not the Church, that was out of step with the times. Even more, said the Pope, contracepting was “intrinsically evil.”
The Pope’s warning
Pope Paul VI warned that a contraception culture would produce dire consequences, such as:
- An increase in marital infidelity.
- A general lowering of moral standards.
- A loss of respect for women.
- Coercive government intervention in citizens’ reproductive lives.
Each warning has come to pass. They have come to pass because Pope Paul VI understood that decoupling sexual intimacy from its “procreative and unitive” basis is ultimately destructive. As Bishop Robert Barron put it,
“When we are permitted casually to separate love from procreation—or as one analyst had it, to sever the link between sex and diapers—we place ourselves on a short road to reducing sexual intercourse to a form of self-indulgent recreation.”
Divorce rates spiked after “The Pill” was approved
As you can see in the chart below, the divorce rate spiked after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the use of the Pill in 1960. Certainly, many variables influenced the shocking break-up of families. The contraception mindset laid the foundation for them all.
No one can deny the lowering of moral standards in our culture since the 1960s. No one can deny the lowering of respect for women from a culture that views them as sex objects more than ever since procreation has been decoupled from sex.
The “Me Too” movement and on-demand pornography is the culmination of a mindset that suggests self-indulgent sexual recreation is a right.
The ‘over-population’ creed
Ironically, another tome on human reproduction exploded on to the culture in 1968, “The Population Bomb,” by Professor Paul Ehrlich. Professor Ehrlich built on the creed of eugenicists who preceded him, such as Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger, that viewed over-population as the gravest threat to mankind. People were bad, in his view, because they destroy the environment and deplete natural resources.
Where Sanger viewed eugenics as a way to reduce the populations of “human weeds,” Ehrlich was more concerned with over-population in general.
The solution was to implement voluntary and coercive programs to reduce our population. His tools: contraception, sterilization, and human abortion.” Said Ehrlich:
“We must cut out the cancer of population growth. Coercion? Perhaps, but coercion in a good cause [population control] … We must be relentless in pushing for population control.
It is absolutely essential that we slow or halt population growth by making contraception and abortion available to all of the world’s women.
If we do not put the brakes on our runaway population, the use of coercion will be necessary in order to save the planet.”
Ehrlich advanced solutions which included putting birth control in our water supply, forced abortions, coercive sterilization, punitive taxes on people who have children, and other heavy-handed government solutions that violate civil liberties and human dignity.
“People are bad”
This idea that “people are bad” fed the notion that human abortion was a legitimate solution to save the planet. Ironically, liberal thinking that had always been defined as “looking out for the little guy” abruptly turned on the little guy, the pre-born. Mother Earth became more important to them than the future polluters residing in the womb.
His philosophy gained remarkable traction in the U.S. even though his predictions were grotesquely, even comically inaccurate, as you can see in the chart below. Rather than exploding population growth rates, the world experienced declining rates.
The Ehrlich/Sanger creed of radical population control is the antitheses of the creed of life pronounced by Blessed Pope John Paul VI in Humanae Vitae. Their creed has become the dividing line people the political Left and Right in the U.S.
Their creed asserts that abortion is a fundamental women’s right. But they try to soften their tone by suggesting that birth control reduces the potential for abortion.
Contraception increases the likelihood of abortion
They were wrong, as demonstrated by Roe V Wade. Despite the prevalence of affordable contraception, 60 million unique human persons have been aborted since 1973.
Contraception fails. When the beauty of procreation is decoupled from sexual intimacy, unplanned pregnancies are viewed as “mistakes” which are easily “fixed” with an abortion. Data provided by the Alan Guttmacher Institute confirms it. Fifty-one percent of women seeking abortion were using some form of contraception the month they got pregnant.
The coercive power of the state
The Pope’s final warning has been realized here in the United States with the imposition of President Obama’s HHS Mandate. It coerced people of faith to pay for contraception and abortifacients in their healthcare plans, even if they considered such actions “intrinsically evil.”
Although the current president undid the mandate, it can be easily re-imposed.
The Pope was right. Humanae Vitae has been validated by a half century of social pathology. A contraception culture that separates sex from procreation led to abortion, no-fault divorce, so-called same-sex marriage, and pathological sexual confusion.
Families have been destroyed.
Forty-three percent of children live in homes without their father.
Twenty-one percent of children live in poverty due largely to single-parent incomes.
Blessed Pope Paul VI called it.
[Be sure to mark your calendar for Iowans for LIFE annual fundraising banquet on October 24th, 2018. You’ll be treated to a dramatic presentation of “A Clash of Creeds.” Reserve your table today!]