Life Advocacy Briefing

March 23, 2020

Prayers / Shameless / Primary Loss in Illinois
Candidate Watch / In the States / Essential? Really?
Appealing Arguments / Shearing the Wolves
Sneak Attack Thwarted


WE PRAY TO OUR CREATOR that the viral “pandemic” will soon lift not only from America but from this world and specifically that He will protect our readers, our support team and all their families from the dangers inherent in this unexpected crisis. We rejoice in the knowledge that nothing takes the Lord God by surprise and that He’s “got this,” wherever it leads and however long it suppresses our way of life. Amen.




WITH MOST OF WASHINGTON FOCUSING ON THE NEEDS of the American people to mount effective challenges to the Wuhan viral epidemic, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-SanFrancisco) seized on the crisis as an opportunity to fund the abortion cartel.

“Multiple senior White House officials,” reports Christian Datoc for the Daily Caller, “alleged that while negotiating the [coronavirus economic] stimulus with US Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, Pelosi tried to lobby for ‘several’ provisions that stalled bipartisan commitment to the effort. One was a mandate for up to $1billion to reimburse laboratory claims, which White House officials say,” writes Mr. Datoc, “would set a precedent of health spending without protections outlined in the Hyde Amendment.

“‘A new mandatory funding stream that does not have Hyde protections would be unprecedented,’ one White House official explained. ‘Under the guise of protecting people, Speaker Pelosi is working to make sure taxpayer dollars are spent covering abortion – which is not only backwards but goes against historical norms.’” What was it ex-Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel once said? “Never let a crisis go to waste” in the service of ideological goals.

We publish further details of this treacherous episode in reprinting a commentary by Family Research Council president Tony Perkins at the close of this Life Advocacy Briefing. We hope our readers find it instructive, and we rejoice that alert and dedicated people were in the right positions on the Trump Administration’s side of the negotiation to thwart Mrs. Pelosi’s Trojan horse.


Primary Loss in Illinois

WE ARE SORRY TO SEE THE PRIMARY LOSS last Tuesday of veteran pro-life Democratic Congressman Dan Lipinski (IL) to a radical abortion fanatic, Marie Newman, who had challenged him unsuccessfully in 2018.  Mr. Lipinski is co-chairman of the House Pro-Life Caucus and frequently speaks at the March for Life.

He is one of only four House Democrats who vote even sometimes for the cause of Life; though his voting record in Life Advocacy Briefing’s index is a mixed one, he is consistent in final-passage substantive votes; he frequently votes with his party’s leadership on procedural motions. Most recently, he voted in favor of the motion by Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR) to send a bill back to committee to attach to it the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.

We thank Rep. Lipinski for what has proved to be a courageous stand for Life, and we wish him the best in future endeavors. His term ends when the new Congress convenes next January.


Candidate Watch

  • FRONTRUNNING DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE JOE BIDEN has issued an education plan which, reports Doug Mainwaring for, “includes a promise to expand visits by government specialists to homes with babies and young children in order to increase government ‘support.’ Biden’s proposal is a continuation of policies straight out of the Obama White House that aggressively sought to nudge Americans toward accepting ever-increasing government involvement in their private lives … Through the Affordable Care Act, Pres. Obama and Vice Pres. Biden funded voluntary home visiting programs, under which health and child development specialists make consistent, scheduled visits to help parents through the critical early stage of parenting. … Some authorities have warned,” notes Mr. Mainwaring, “that such measures are fraught with potential peril from government bureaucracies that do not trust parents to raise their own children without the government’s invasive guidance. Those concerns are heightened now that some jurisdictions have already moved to deny parental authority when a child, claiming to be ‘transgender,’ seeks to undergo sex-change medical treatments and procedures.”

  • RED FLAGS ARE BEING RAISED over the team of advisers assembled by Democratic Presidential candidate Joe Biden to counsel him on responses to the Wuhan virus epidemic. When the Biden campaign announced March 12 the creation of a “Public Health Advisory Committee,” reports Calvin Freiburger for, among the advisors listed is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, one of the principal authors of ObamaCare, who, according to Mr. Freiburger, “in 2014 … wrote that he ‘hope[s] to die at 75,’ because ‘living too long’ renders people uncreative, unable to work, ‘faltering and declining,’ and ‘transforms how people experience us, relate to us and, most important, remember us. We are no longer remembered as vibrant and engaged but as feeble, ineffectual, even pathetic.’” What an alarming choice by the potential next President to advise him about dealing with a virus which is thought to be of particular risk to senior Americans.

  • DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CHALLENGER SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (VT) recently unveiled “his plan to advance ‘reproductive health,’” reports Nancy Flanders for Live Action. “Sanders,” she notes, “believes ‘abortion is a constitutional right’ and, if elected, he vows to codify Roe v. Wade as federal law.” Here are his “plan’s” main points, as outlined by Ms. Flanders: “1) Institute taxpayer-funded abortions and birth control; … 2) Increase funding for Planned Parenthood; … 3) Expand funding for Title X family planning program, specifically excluding pro-life pregnancy centers; … 4) Restore funding to the UN Population Fund, which works to expand abortion overseas; … 5) Nominate judges who support Roe v. Wade; … 6) Restrict states from passing pro-life laws; … 7) Ban abstinence-only sex education.” What more do we need to know?


In the States

  • UTAH’s legislature has sent to Gov. Gary Herbert (R) “a ban on most abortions,” reports Calvin Freiburger for, “and a requirement that fetal remains be treated humanely.” The bill to ban abortions (except those targeting babies conceived in sex crimes, those with severe birth defects and those whose continued life presents a “threat of ‘substantial impairment’ to the mother’s health”) would take effect upon the overturning of the Roe v. Wade edict by the Supreme Court; it passed the State Senate 22 to 5 and the House 51 to 21. The fetal remains burial bill passed the Senate 22 to 6 and the House 58 to 14 and requires, reports Mr. Freiburger, “that aborted babies be either buried or cremated by the facilities that aborted them.”

  • OKLAHOMA’s Senate last week advanced, by a vote of 36 to 8, a bill to ban abortion once a fetal heartbeat or fetal brain waves can be detected, with no discriminatory exceptions. The bill next goes to the State House, which is overwhelmingly dominated by Republicans.

  • WYOMING’s legislature has sent to GOP Gov. Mark Gordon a bill to require healthcare providers to treat a newborn who survives abortion with the same care as furnished to newborns whose delivery is expected. A similar bill passed the Alabama House last week but must yet be considered by the Senate.

  • OHIO’s Senate has sent to the State House a bill to ban “telemedicine,” reports National Right to Life News, “for the purpose of providing abortion-inducing drugs.” The vote was 20 to 9.

  • CONNECTICUT Gov. Ned Lamont (D) has allocated $2.1 million in state funding for Planned Parenthood in his proposed budget, seeking to aid the abortion behemoth in replacing federal Title Ten funds from which the Trump Administration has disqualified abortionists.

  • MISSISSIPPI’s House has passed – by vote of 79 to 33 – a bill called the Life Equality Act, which bars abortionists from discrimination by killing prenatal babies because of race, sex or genetic abnormality. It must be taken up by the State Senate before it can be submitted to the governor.


Essential? Really?

HOSPITALS IN MASSACHUSETTS HAVE BEEN ORDERED to “cancel any ‘nonessential, elective invasive procedure’ to free up resources for the fight against the spread of the coronavirus epidemic,” reports Martin Burger for, but guess what doesn’t qualify as a “nonessential, elective invasive procedure?” You guessed it: abortion.

According to, quoted by Mr. Burger, a “memorandum of the Bureau of Healthcare Safety & Quality in Massachusetts stated … : ‘Terminating a pregnancy is not considered a nonessential, elective invasive procedure for the purpose of this guidance. However, the ultimate decision is based on clinical judgment by the caring physician.’” Right; the “professional” who stuffs the cash in his pocket in return for killing a developing human being. That “caring physician.”

The LifeSiteNews story goes on to report the handwringing emerging from the abortion cartel’s very own Guttmacher Institute, which, Mr. Burger writes, “is … worried that access to abortion might be limited in parts of the country. ‘Healthcare providers are being diverted to help address the epidemic,’” the Guttmacher Institute wailed, “‘while also being most at risk of acquiring the disease. This may create a shortage of clinicians who can provide sexual and reproductive health services and increase wait times for patients in need. … In places that already have a limited number of providers,’” Guttmacher went on in the LifeSiteNews story, “‘this will put an extreme strain on capacity to serve patients, especially for non-emergency care.’”


Appealing Arguments

THE CINCINNATI-BASED 6th CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS heard oral arguments last Wednesday in an abortion cartel challenge to Ohio’s 2017 statute barring abortion based on a prenatal diagnosis of Down Syndrome. Attorney Ben Flowers argued for the state, reports Martin Burger for, that “the law sends a message that these abortions ‘are so heinous and so inhumane that doctors can go to jail and lose their licenses’ for committing them.”

The US Dept. of Justice has filed a brief in support of the statute, arguing, reports Mr. Burger, “‘Nothing in Ohio’s law creates a substantial burden to women obtaining an abortion, … and nothing in the Constitution or Supreme Court precedent requires states to authorize medical providers to participate in abortions the providers know are based on Down Syndrome.’”


Shearing the Wolves

March 17, 2020, BreakPoint commentary by John Stonestreet & Shane Morris

            Euphemisms for abortion abound: “a woman’s right to choose,” “reproductive freedom” and “a private decision between a woman and her doctor.” The latest euphemism, one being increasingly used in political discourse, is “access to essential health care.”

            Recently, a listener sent us Planned Parenthood’s latest fundraising letter. Between pleas to fund their organization and fight the Trump Administration, abortion was referred to as either “healthcare” or “care” a dizzying 15 times.

            The American Civil Liberties Union has also embraced the phrase, particularly on the signs they provide for their protestors, including at the Supreme Court. Also, in a recent blog post savaging the pro-life policies of the Trump Administration by the ACLU of Northern California, the author insisted “Abortion is basic health care” again and again. …

            Another listener recently wrote in to let us know that Doctors Without Borders, one of the largest non-government providers of aid to victims of conflict and famine around the world, is now openly pushing do-it-yourself abortions in their work around the world.

            Alerted by a report from the Center for Family & Human Rights, this listener called Doctors Without Borders to find out if it was true. “Yes,” the representative said; abortion is part of the, you guessed it, “healthcare services” that Doctors Without Borders provides in numerous countries. 

            I wonder how many of their donors know about the partnership Doctors Without Borders established earlier this year with, an online [outfit] whose purpose is to educate and encourage people to use chemical abortions around the world.

            In an article explaining why they are so aggressively promoting chemical abortions worldwide, Doctors Without Borders slammed the Trump Administrations’ “Global Gag Rule” and insisted that “despite the stigma, abortion is a part of people’s lives and a key component of” – here it is again – “reproductive health care.”

            Our listener isn’t the first person I’ve spoken with who’s pulled support from Doctors Without Borders. One alternative for anyone wishing to support a group that provides only actual health care and medical expertise is the Christian Medical & Dental Assn., which currently has affiliates in over 60 countries.

            Labeling abortion as “health care” subverts the very essence of medicine, and it uses words to dodge the reality of what abortion is and does.

            If you find yourself in a conversation about this, needing to explain the problem with the “abortion is health care” euphemism, our latest “What Would You Say” video is phenomenal. Featuring my colleague Brooke Boriack, the video explains three critical things to remember whenever someone calls abortion “health care.”

            First, the purpose of health care is to heal and preserve life, not to end life. For centuries, doctors promised in the Hippocratic Oath to “do no harm.” Abortion fails that test. Unlike real health care, even including those procedures performed to save the life of the mother but that endanger the life of an unborn baby, elective abortion is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. That’s not only wrong, it’s certainly not health care.

            Second, pregnancy is not a disease to be cured. When a woman is pregnant, her body is working as intended. She’s not sick. Violently terminating pregnancy works against the body’s natural, healthy functioning. That’s not what health care does.

            Finally, slapping the healthcare label on abortion not only obscures the meaning of the [term] “health care,” it obscures the meaning of the word “abortion.” Anyone wishing to defend abortion should be forced to defend what it is and should not be allowed to cloak the violence using buzzwords.

            One step in making abortion illegal and unthinkable is unmasking the verbal tricks that obscure reality. It’s time to make abortion advocates tell the truth, and that begins with refusing to play the language game.


Sneak Attack Thwarted

March 16, 2020, Washington Update commentary by Family Research Council president Tony Perkins

            While lots of Americans are hunkered down at home, the US Senate is holed up in its offices – waiting for a crack at the House’s coronavirus bill. And while there’s a lot of uncertainty about what’s actually in the package, Republican leaders won’t have to contend with at least one thing: abortion funding.

            The version that passed Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s chamber in the wee hours of Saturday morning wasn’t what the House Majority was hoping for. After word leaked out that Democrats had tried to tack on a secret slush fund for abortion, even MSNBC couldn’t hide its shock. “What does that have to do with COVID-19?” host Joy Reid asked. What indeed, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) argued. With schools closing and most every gathering postponed, he couldn’t believe that Pelosi’s priority was getting more money in the hands of people who take life, not treat it. “Speaker Pelosi should be fighting the coronavirus pandemic, not politicizing emergency funding by fighting against the bipartisan Hyde Amendment,” he insisted. “We need to be ramping up our diagnostic testing, not waging culture wars at the behest of Planned Parenthood. Good grief!”

            When the White House got wind of the Democrats’ plan, Pres. Trump wasted no time warning House leaders what would happen to the bill if it got to him with that language: Absolutely nothing. Keeping a promise he made at the March for Life in 2019, the Administration made it crystal clear that he wouldn’t allow Pelosi to hijack the crisis with her radical plans to overthrow the Hyde Amendment. Emergency or no emergency. “As the House conducts its business,” the President wrote in a shot across the bow last January, “I urge that it respect and continue these other important pro-life protections. … I will veto any legislation that weakens current pro-life federal policies or laws – or that encourages the destruction of innocent human life at any stage.”

            The pressure worked. By the time the House voted, the language that would have compromised the Hyde Amendment was gone. In an interview on [Family Research council’s podcast] Washington Watch last Friday, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) cheered the Administration’s stand but warned that Congress isn’t out of the woods yet. “They removed the anti-Hyde Amendment provision. So we got that back and protected the unborn, at least … [but] we have to be vigilant – that’s for sure. … [There are] provisions that have nothing to do with the coronavirus basically being thrown into this thing. And that’s just par for the course for the activist Left.” …