RELEASE: Governor Reynolds joins with colleagues on amicus brief defending states’ rights, the unborn

Jul 30, 2021 |
Governor Reynolds protects the unborn
Governor Reynolds protects the unbornDES MOINES – Today, Governor Kim Reynolds joined with 11 additional
governors to defend states’ authority to enact legislation that
protects the unborn.

“For years, democratically elected representatives in states like Iowa
have tried to defend innocent human life only to be stymied by the
Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade,” said Gov. Reynolds. “For too
long, this precedent has trampled on state sovereignty and destroyed
the lives of millions of unborn babies. I am proud to join with
governors from across the country to take a stand for life and
democratic self-government.”

Governor Reynolds signed onto an amicus brief, filed today, in Dobbs
v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The brief urges the Supreme
Court to reconsider its abortion decisions, including Roe v. Wade and
Planned Parenthood of Southeast Pennsylvania v. Casey, and instead
uphold the right of states to enact legislation on this important
matter.

“The Court should take this opportunity to correct the mistakes in its
abortion jurisprudence and recognize that the text and original
understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment have nothing to do with
abortion. Rather than creating a federal constitutional right, the
Court should leave regulating abortion to the States, where the people
may act through the democratic process. This Court should hold as
much—and in the process, help restore the constitutional (but
currently disrupted) balance between the Federal Government and the
States,” the governors stated in their amicus brief.

The following governors also signed onto this brief: Governor Henry
McMaster of South Carolina, Governor Kay Ivey of Alabama, Governor
Douglas A. Ducey of Arizona, Governor Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas,
Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida, Governor Brian K. Kemp of Georgia,
Governor Brad Little of Idaho,  Governor Michael L. Parson of
Missouri, Governor Greg Gianforte of Montana, Governor J. Kevin Stitt
of Oklahoma, and Governor Greg Abbott of Texas.

[You can read more about this important case here.]

Abortion isn’t the answer for unwanted children, adoption is

Jul 27, 2021 |
adoption is the answer to abortion

Some people claim that it is unfair to bring a child into this world who would be unwanted, and that abortion is the answer. Why would someone think that violent death (which is what abortion is) is preferable to an opportunity to live life to the fullest? No, death isn’t the answer, adoption is the answer to abortion.

You undoubtedly know good people who have lived wonderful lives who were adopted. Most quietly raised their family and contributed to their communities in ways that never made the news.

Famous adoptees

Some had a big impact, such as the founder of Apple Computer, Steve Jobs; John Lennon of Beatles fame; and Bill Clinton, 42nd president of the United States.

Ironically, Mr. Clinton has been an advocate of abortions rights. However, his belief that abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare,” is a far cry from his party’s current position that abortion should be unregulated for the full nine months of pregnancy; that Catholic doctors, nurses, and hospitals be compelled to provide them; and that taxpayers should pay for them.

A season of miracles

Perhaps the former president preferred rare abortions because he appreciated the value of adoption:

“We must work tirelessly to make sure that every boy and girl in America who is up for adoption has a family waiting to reach him or her. This is a season of miracles, and perhaps there is no greater miracle than finding a loving home for a child who needs one.”

The conversation that takes place in the video above provides you with a quick way to respond if you’re ever in that situation.

For the record, Iowa has an excellent track record when it comes to abortion. According to the National Council for Adoptions:

“In 2014, four states had Adoption Option Indexes three or more times higher than the national average-Utah (36.3), Arkansas (26.8), Montana (23.1), and Iowa (21.4). There were two to four adoptions for every 100 abortions plus births to unmarried women in these states. This suggests that in these states women may have more extensive counseling, services, and facilities to orient pregnant women towards adoption-among other factors.”

But at the national level, some 36 couples wait in line for every available infant child adoption, an especially tragic number in light of the millions of abortions that have taken place over the years in this country. Those children could have been adopted.

Adoption is the answer to abortion

adoption is the answer to abortionTwo million couples want to adopt a child and provide a loving home. And yet only 4% of women with an unwanted pregnancy place their children through adoption.

Interestingly, 61% of all children adopted by kindergarten were children of color, according to the Institute for Family Studies. In other words, familial love cuts across racial barriers.

The next time someone claims that it is unfair to bring a child into the world that is unwanted, remind them that two million couples are on their knees praying for God to bring them a child.

Adoption is the answer to abortion.

[Get all the answers to the most common pro-abortion arguments here.]

Will this case topple Roe v Wade?

Jul 23, 2021 |
Mississippi abortion law

Mississippi abortion lawShould the Supreme Court or the legislatures of the 50 states determine the extent to which abortion is allowed … or restricted? A new Mississippi abortion law provides the Supreme Court an opportunity to reconsider Roe v Wade.

The Mississippi abortion law restricts abortions after 15 weeks of gestation, with exceptions for the mother’s health and in cases of severe fetal abnormalities that would prove fatal to the child.

A lower court struck down the law for violating Roe. In response, Mississippi turned to the Supreme Court to reconsider the case. In May, the Court said yes, they would reconsider whether pre-viability abortion laws are constitutional.

The case is reframed to question the underpinnings of Roe

However, Mississippi Attorney General, Lynn Fitch, reframed the case to focus on the viability of Roe as sound legal jurisprudence. Says Ms Fitch in her brief:

“On a sound understanding of the Constitution, the answer to the question presented in this case is clear and the path to that answer is straight. Under the Constitution, may a State prohibit elective abortions before viability? Yes. Why? Because nothing in constitutional text, structure, history, or tradition supports a right to abortion. A prohibition on elective abortions is therefore constitutional if it satisfies the rational-basis review that applies to all laws.”

She lays out 4 reasons why Roe and Casey v Planned Parenthood are unsound:

1. A “right to privacy” does not protect a constitutional right to abortion.

2. Roe and Casey “do not provide persuasive support for a viability rule.”

3. Scientific advancements have occurred since Roe and Casey were handed down that have overtaken Roe factual assumptions.

4. The doctrine of stare decisis shouldn’t save Roe and Casey.

She even lays out an alternative path the Court could pursue if they’re willing to uphold the Mississippi law without completely overturning Roe.

Her brief is compelling. It provides hope for the pro-life community, although there’s no guarantee the court will be swayed.

The National Review provides a closer look at Lynn Fitch’s brief for those interested in more legal insights into this exciting case.

Let us hope a Mississippi abortion law is the catalyst to topple Roe.

[subscribe2]

Did you just take the abortion pill? It may not be too late to reverse it.

Jul 9, 2021 |
abortion pill reversal

Abortion pill reversal is reality. Many women immediately regret their decision to abort their baby after taking the first of two ‘medications’ (RU486) designed to end the human life in a mother’s womb.

The first pill starves the baby of oxygen and nutrients. The second pill expels the body.

The video above tells the story of a woman who immediately regretted “every single moment” after taking the first abortion pill. Big Abortion tells women there’s no going back. Not true, as this woman attests. Abortion pill reversal is very possible, but don’t wait.

If you, too, regret taking the abortion pill, you may be able do something about it. If you’re near Des Moines, Iowa, contact InnerVisions HealthCare immediately: 515-440-2273 for compassionate, authentic women’s healthcare.

Outside of Des Moines, contact: AbortionPillReversal.com or call their 24/7 Helpline at 877-558-0333.

Don’t give up. There’s hope.

Talk to people who authentically care about you and your baby.

[Wanna dance? Be sure to get your tickets to our upcoming summer dance under the stars on July 23rd!]

[subscribe2]

Two prominent Catholics speak out on abortion while another remains silent

Jul 1, 2021 |
Catholics speak out on abortion

It’s a simple question: “Does the president believe that a 15-week-old unborn baby is a human being?” This life-or-death question should elicit a quick, no-brain response from any Catholic, but the president’s press secretary, Jen Psaki, didn’t answer directly:

“Are you asking me if the president supports a woman’s right to choose? He does.”

 

President Joe Biden

America’s most prominent Catholic, President Joe Biden, didn’t correct the record. He has stated in the past that he accepts his church’s teachings on life, which suggests that he does believe a 15-week old unborn baby is, in fact, a human being. But he won’t sign any laws that prevent another human being from killing the little one in the womb, even in the most inhumane way.

While Mr. Biden ducks questions on the humanity of a 15-week old unborn baby, two other prominent Catholics are speaking out on the issue.

Justice Clarence Thomas

Catholics speak out on abortion

Clarence Thomas

On the judicial front, Justice Clarence Thomas, who spent 4 years in Catholic seminary, asserted that,

“The notion that anything in the Constitution prevents States from passing laws prohibiting the dismembering of a living child is implausible.”

Thomas was reacting to the Court’s decision last week not to hear a case about protecting unborn babies from dismemberment abortions. Alabama passed a law protecting babies from this inhumane procedure; the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against it; and last Friday, the Court refused to hear an appeal of that decision.

Thomas strongly dissented with letting dismemberment abortions stand in Alabama:

“Earlier this Term, we were confronted with lower court decisions requiring States to allow abortions based solely on the race, sex, or disability of the child. Today, we are confronted with decisions requiring States to allow abortion via live dismemberment. None of these decisions is supported by the text of the Constitution. This case serves as a stark reminder that our abortion jurisprudence has spiraled out of control.”

Because many prominent Catholics in the public square, such as President Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, aggressively promote unfettered abortion laws, many Catholic priests, bishops, as well as the laity, question whether these Catholics should receive communion.

Bishop Robert Barron

Catholics speak out on abortion

Bishop Robert Barron

In response, more progressive Catholics call for “dialogue” on this contentions issue. Bishop Robert Barron pushed back with a charitable, but somewhat pointed response published by the New York Post:

“But here is my honest question: What precisely is there to dialogue about? It’s a question I’ve posed to politicians in the past.”

Bishop Barron has a huge following. He was born into a Catholic Democratic family in Chicago in the late 1950s. He related his experience of speaking to the current crop of Democrats at the Library of Congress two years ago. He attempted to dialogue:

“Would they, I asked, consider the banning of third-trimester abortions? Absolutely not, came the reply.  Would they, I pressed, be open to restricting partial-birth abortion, the procedure by which a pair of scissors is inserted into the brain of a baby already in the birth canal? No way, they said.

All right, I wondered, would they be agreeable to supporting born-alive legislation, designed to protect the life of a baby who has miraculously managed to survive an abortion? No, they said.  And lest you think this intransigence was peculiar to this particular group, recall that, just a few months ago, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) made a born-alive proposal, and it couldn’t muster enough votes to break the Democratic filibuster.”

As Bishop Barron pointed out, ‘dialogue’ suggests a 2-way street. Sadly, the Democratic Party is intractable on this issue, and our Catholic president has placed his faith in the power structure of a political party at the expense of his soul.

[Wanna dance? Be sure to get your tickets to our upcoming summer dance under the stars on July 23rd!]

 

POLL: IOWA SUPPORT FOR PROTECT LIFE AMENDMENT ‘NECK-AND-NECK’

Jun 29, 2021 |
Protect Life Amendment poll

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 29, 2021

Survey of likely voters reveals race within margin of error.  

 Des Moines, IOWA – A poll of likely voters commissioned by the Iowa Coalition of Pro-Life Leaders and completed by Public Opinion Strategies earlier this month reveals support and opposition to the proposed Protect Life Amendment to the Iowa Constitution in a virtual tie – 45 to 47 percent, respectively, within the poll’s margin of error of plus or minus 4.38 percent.

When asked whether Iowans “should be given the opportunity to vote on the amendment,” however, an overwhelming 84 percent of voters said yes.

What’s more, when poll respondents had the opportunity to hear arguments in favor of the amendment, a significant number moved to support, resulting in a net 50-40 percent of voters favoring passage of the Protect Life Amendment. 

“This poll affirms what we have known for months,” said Maggie DeWitte, executive director of Iowans for Life and chair of the Coalition. “When Iowans have the opportunity to understand what’s at stake and what the amendment is actually about – protecting babies’ lives from efforts to legalize abortion to the day of birth and forcing Iowans to pay for it – they support the Protect Life Amendment. Everyday Iowans do not want unelected, activist judges turning our state into an extremist abortion destination.'”

“The Iowa Supreme Court’s 2018 radical decision in Planned Parenthood v. Reynolds laid a foundation to undo every protection Iowa mothers and unborn children have from unregulated abortion extremism,” added Bob Vander Plaats, president and CEO of The FAMiLY Leader, a Coalition member organization. “But as this poll affirmed, Iowans are appalled by painful and grisly late-term abortions. They can’t imagine being forced to pay for it. And if the courts are going to push that on us, then we will pass the Protect Life Amendment to ensure We the People, and not activist judges, determine what kind of state Iowa will be.” 

Public Opinion Strategies conducted the poll of 500 likely Iowa voters from June 1-3, 2021. An executive summary of the poll’s results revealed the following highlights:

  • Support for the Protect Life Amendment is neck-and-neck, within the margin of error.
  • A large majority of Iowa voters want to vote on the Protect Life Amendment.
  • 81% of Iowa voters indicate they believed there should be legal limits to abortion.
  • A significant majority of Iowa voters oppose taxpayer funding of abortions.
  • The data demonstrates ample low-hanging fruit in support of passage.
  • Passage has the intensity advantage.
  • The data suggests an information campaign would result in a significant increase in support for the measure.

The June 1-3 poll differs significantly from the Selzer & Co. poll conducted for the Des Moines Register/Mediacom and released in March, which polled general population Iowa adults (rather than likely voters) and did not poll the amendment’s actual language as passed by the Iowa Legislature. 

A copy of the executive summary from Public Opinion Strategies, including additional details on each summary highlight, can be downloaded here: http://www.thefamilyleader.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/210611-Protect-Life-Amendment-poll-summary.pdf 

For more information about the Iowa Coalition of Pro-Life Leaders, visit: https://iowaprolifeleaders.com/ 

Contact: Drew Zahn

Drew@TheFamilyLeader.com; 515-263-3495, ext. 109 (office), 515-835-9645 (cell)

Drew Zahn, Communications Director

The FAMiLY Leader

P.O. Box 42245

Urbandale, IA 50323

515-263-3495 x109 (desk)

515-835-9645 (cell)

www.TheFamilyLeader.com

[subscribe2]

Iowans for LIFE announces Natural Family Planning resources

Jun 25, 2021 |
Natural Family Planning

Natural Family PlanningMystery surrounds the term ‘natural family planning’ (NFP). And yet properly implemented, it is a healthier, more effective method for loving couples to embrace intimacy as they plan their future families with God’s help. Iowans for LIFE is proud to provide new Natural Family Planning resources on our website.

This blogpost provides you with a quick overview:

What is NFP? Natural Family Planning (NFP) is a science-based, natural and highly effective method that couples can use to either achieve or avoid pregnancy. It is a scientific method based on understanding the fertile and infertile phases of a woman’s menstrual cycle. Not only is it healthier, it is the ethical way to plan a family since it does not rely on artificial contraceptives, many of which act as abortifacients. (Meaning they kill the fetus)

Together, couples learn to read the signs of fertility, and then learn how to  apply this knowledge through a variety of methods.

Why is NFP a pro-life cause? Plain and simple, contraception increases abortion.

Contraception gives women a false sense of security. And that false sense leads to taking greater risks. Over half the women who go into the clinic for an abortion were using some kind of contraceptive method the month they became pregnant.

According to Maggie DeWitte, the executive director of IFL, “we will not get rid of abortion until we tackle the contraceptive culture.”  When it comes to the current abortion crisis we are in, contraception is “the first cause.”

Does NFP work? That’s the wrong question. NFP practitioners are open to life, where as contracepting couples are typically trying to suppress new life. As Catholic writer, Jen Fulwiler expresses it, “Both the pleasurable and procreative aspects of the sexual act are good; to intentionally sever either aspect is bad.”

Modern methods of NFP are rooted in a solid scientific understanding of the variations in fertility throughout a woman’s menstrual cycle which is key to managing pregnancy.

When learned and used consistently, these methods have been shown to be 95-99.5% effective for avoiding pregnancy(depending on the method).

And better yet, practicing NFP can also successfully aid couples who wish to achieve pregnancy.

Why not contracept? Contracepting involves profound ethical and medical considerations. Many couples don’t realize that some forms of contraception are abortifacients. In other words, they don’t just suppress fertilization, they change the endometrium, preventing implantation of the embryo, effectively killing a new human being. Medically, the World Health Organization, lists the Pill as a Group 1 cancer-causing agent. NFP is totally natural, totally safe, and ethically sound.

Iowans for LIFE is proud to present these comprehensive Natural Family Planning resources for couples interested in discovering the beauty of NFP.

[Wanna dance? Be sure to get your tickets to our upcoming summer dance under the stars on July 23rd!]

[subscribe2]

The Women’s Health Protection Act would make the U.S. more pro-abortion than China

Jun 18, 2021 |
The Women’s Health Protection Act

Senate Democrats have introduced the The Women’s Health Protection Act. If passed, the law would gut just about all existing state-by-state restrictions on the books, including those laws that previously passed Supreme Court scrutiny.

The Charlotte Lozier Institute highlights the devastating impact this bill would have on abortion laws already on the books:

  1. Could Be Interpreted to Impose a Heightened Burden of Proof on Many if Not Most Abortion Laws Ever Enacted
  2. Would Trump 20-Week Laws in a Very Large Percentage of Cases
  3. Would Create a Special Protection in Federal Law for Sex-Discrimination Abortion
  4. Would Jeopardize Laws Limiting Performance of Abortions to Licensed Physicians
  5. Would Authorize Federal Court Attacks on Abortion Clinic Health and Safety Standards that Protect Women
  6. Could Have the Effect of Deterring Health and Safety Inspections of Abortion Clinics
  7. Would Jeopardize Limits on Late Abortions
  8. Would Jeopardize Prohibitions on Taxpayer-Funded Abortion—Including the Hyde Amendment—as well as Abortion Training
  9. Would Jeopardize Health and Safety Regulations Governing the Use of Abortion Drugs
  10. Would Jeopardize Health and Safety Regulations Governing the Practice of Telemedicine Abortion
  11. Would Jeopardize Sonogram and Fetal Heartbeat Test Requirements
  12. Would Jeopardize Mandatory Reflection Periods that the U.S. Supreme Court Has Upheld
  13. Could Be Interpreted to Trump State and Federal Conscience Protections

The Women’s Health Protection ActEven if Iowa eventually passes the Protect Life Amendment (2 more steps to go), the dishonestly named Women’s Health Protection Act would gut current laws on the book, such as our ban on 20 week abortions, and shut the door on future regulation.

This law would leave the U.S. with one of the most permissive abortion climates in the world, surpassing even that of dictatorial nations such as China and North Korea. At least China has banned sex-selective abortions.

[Get your tickets to our summer dance today.] 

The racist underpinnings of banning the Hyde Amendment

Jun 17, 2021 |
the Hyde Amendment

the Hyde AmendmentThe Hyde Amendment is in the news. President Biden calls for ending it in his new budget proposal even though he supported it throughout his many years in the Senate. Iowans for LIFE supports the Hyde Amendment because it quantifiably reduces the incidence of abortion, especially within minority populations. Let’s take a quick look:

First of all, what does the Hyde Amendment do? It bars the use of federal funds to pay for abortions. The Amendment is actually a rider to appropriation bills and must be renewed each year by Congress.

How long has it been in effect? Since 1976.

Does it work? Yes. According to the Charlotte Lozier Institute, “the best research indicates that the Hyde Amendment has saved over two million unborn children” since 1976. The American Civil Liberties Union said with the implementation of the Hyde Amendment, Medicaid abortions immediately dropped from 300,000 per year to a few thousand.

Do abortion advocates agree? Yes. The Guttmacher Institute says their own studies show that if a state does NOT fund Medicaid abortions, the abortion rate for women on Medicaid is 1.6 times that of women who aren’t. However, when states do fund Medicaid abortions, the rate increases to 4 times that of women not on Medicaid. These results are consistent with other public policy: when you subsidize something, you get more of it.

Abortion advocates claim the Hyde Amendment is discriminatory. Is this true?  It is a matter of perspective. Yes, Hyde discriminates against women of color in the view of many abortion rights advocates. This is the view of Kathryn Kolbert, lawyer and co-founder of the Center for Reproductive Rights, and Julie F. Kay, a human rights attorney. Together, they authored, “Controlling Women: What We Must Do Now to Save Reproductive Freedom.” They wrote in the L.A. Times:

“A disproportionate number of those affected by the funding ban each year are women of color: Twenty-nine percent of Black women and 25% of Hispanic women of reproductive age were enrolled in Medicaid as of 2019, compared with just 15% of white women. The lack of funding uses the government’s power of the purse to put abortion out of reach for Medicaid recipients while still fully funding childbirth.”

So how can Hyde not be discriminatory? Using Ms. Kolbert’s and Kay’s numbers, you can see that a disproportionate number of Black and Hispanic babies will be saved thanks to restrictions on federally-funded abortions. Both groups have birth rates below replacement level, according to Statista. Preventing these racial groups from dying off due to abortion-driven extinction is a noble goal of any caring society that values diversity, tolerance, and inclusion.

So are you saying a Hyde Amendment ban is racist? We know that if Hyde ends, Black and Hispanic abortions will spike. The late Supreme Court Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, acknowledged the racist underpinnings of the abortion movement in a 2009 interview with the New York Times Magazine:

“Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding of abortion.”

Is there any evidence to support Ginsberg’s concern that Roe v Wade was motivated at least in part by racism, to reduce “growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of”? Yes. One of the attorneys, Ron Weddington, who successfully argued Roe v Wade admitted as much in a letter he wrote to then-president Bill Clinton in 1993:

“I don’t think you are going to go very far in reforming the country until we have a better educated, healthier, wealthier population…. Start immediately to eliminate the barely educated, unhealthy and poor segment of our country [through abortion]…. There, I’ve said it. It’s what we all know is true, but we only whisper it, because as liberals who believe in individual rights, we view any program which might treat the disadvantaged differently as discriminatory, mean-spirited and…well…so Republican. Our survival depends upon our developing a population where everyone contributes. We don’t need more cannon fodder. We don’t need more parishioners. We don’t need more cheap labor. We don’t need more poor babies.”

If President Biden is successful in getting Congress to abolish the Hyde Amendment, the result is predictable: a sudden, sharp increase in the number of black and brown babies who are aborted accompanied by a faster decline in African-American and Hispanic birth rates. What could be more ‘systemically’ racist than public policy that compels white taxpayers to fund black and brown abortions?

[Get your tickets to our summer dance today.] 

Pray the Rosary to help end abortion

Jun 11, 2021 |
abortion apologists

abortion apologistsMore readers of Iowans for LIFE’s blog shared their thoughts on the placards displayed by abortion apologists that say, “Keep your Rosaries off my ovaries.

Lisa, mother of three and grandmother of one, reacted like this:

“The pro-abortion protest slogan “Keep your rosaries off my ovaries” gives an apt glimpse into the misguided mindset of abortion apologists. Disrespect for prayer and Our Lady aside, it betrays the myth that pro-life supporters and Catholics presume to impose faith and pro-life values on others when nothing could be further from the truth. 

The fact is, that’s an unborn human life in a pregnant woman’s womb, and she is already a mother, whether abortion supporters choose to recognize or honor that life or not. 

It is flat out false to say that “pro-lifers only care about the baby” when it’s also a fact that in the U.S. alone thousands of pregnancy help organizations assist and support countless women and families facing unplanned pregnancy with material support and more, saving communities hundreds of millions of dollars every year. 

Another fact? There are consequences, temporal and eternal, for taking a life. Catholics and other pro-life advocates wish to save unborn life in the womb but also the eternal lives of all. It’s just a terrible shame that those swept up in the “choice” lie are unable or unwilling to see that. Provocative posters won’t save you from hell. We care about you, your ovaries, and every last part of you, body and soul – in the the same we care about the little girl who you may carry in your womb – who also has ovaries and a soul. “

Jeane, mother of six, and grandmother of a bunch more, said:

keep your rosaries off my ovaries“When I see a sign saying “keep your rosaries off my ovaries” I feel a profound sense of sadness about the confusion in the culture among many who believe the wrong things about both the Catholic Church and the dignity of women.  As the original Christian faith the Catholic Church has brought us the bible and all of its teachings from Jesus regarding the equality and dignity of women.  The living Catholic Church has brought both education and healthcare to millions of girls and women all over the world for centuries.  The consistent teachings of our faith regarding contraception and abortion have ONLY upheld women.  This beautiful faith informs women that their fertility is not something that needs fixing or canceling.  When women respect themselves men are much more likely to respect and honor the gift that a woman is.”

Another Jean, mother of 4 and grandmother of 6, had an entirely different reaction:

“One of the first things that came to mind was “Try it, you’ll like it”. The Rosary must be working for them to mention it specifically. When I pray the Rosary for the women contemplating an abortion, those who have had an abortion, and the babies aborted, I ask God and the Blessed Mother to envelop them into their loving arms and cradle them with the love only a Mother knows.

 I  came across this quote from Archbishop Fulton Sheen: “The Rosary is the best therapy for these distraught, unhappy, fearful, and frustrated souls, precisely because it involves the simultaneous use of three powers: the physical, the vocal, and the spiritual, and in that order.

-Archbishop Fulton Sheen

And another: “Say the Holy Rosary. Blessed be that monotony of Hail Mary’s which purifies the monotony of your sins!”

-St. Josemaria Escriva

“The Rosary is the ‘weapon’ for these times.” -Saint Padre Pio

***

Abortion apologists are misguided on so many fronts. What is the best thing you can do to help? Say a Rosary on their behalf.

[Read an earlier blogpost for more reactions. Don’t forget to get your tickets to our summer dance.]

[subscribe2]