Life Advocacy Briefing

November 16, 2020

Senate Control Not Yet Set, Either / Sweet Success
Tennessee Persisting on Waiting-Period Law
Time to Rally for Pregnancy Centers / Nobel Prize for Ignoble Pursuit
How Could They? / Brace Yourself

Senate Control Not Yet Set, Either

THE U.S. SENATE COULD BE HEADED FOR A TIE – or for a 52-to-48 GOP majority – depending on the outcome of two run-off elections Jan. 5, both in Georgia. North Carolina’s Senate election has finally been called, with the re-election of Sen. Thom Tillis (R), and Alaska has at last reported final Senate results, declaring GOP Sen. Dan Sullivan the victor by more than 50,000 votes.

GOP Senators David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler are being challenged for re-election by pro-abortion radicals Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock (both Democrats).

Results of these two run-off elections will determine whether the Senate rules and agenda continue to be led by pro-life Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) or whether the Senate is divided by party; if one incumbent Republican Senator falls on Jan. 5, a tied Senate would empower the next Vice President to break tie votes and could, if the Biden/Harris ticket prevails in post-election vote counting and recounting contests, unify the now-divided House Democrats and burst the dam against a potential radical takeover of our federal government. If both incumbents win, Republicans will have 52 votes, and all eyes will be on abortion advocate Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) and squishy Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK). Let us pray.


Sweet Success

AMONG THE MANY NOTEWORTHY PRO-LIFE VICTORIES in the US House races so far this month – in this seemingly never-ending election – is the re-election of Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), who won his first election in 2018 by one of the narrowest margins among House contests.

The outspoken pro-life conservative – seen as vulnerable by the Democratic campaign operation because of that squeaker margin – was challenged this year by former State Sen. Wendy Davis (D), who gained nationwide notoriety by personally and literally filibustering a post-20-week abortion ban, carrying on for 13 hours and winning herself heroine status in the Netflix film “Reversing Roe.” Following her 2013 State Senate-floor show, the Democratic Party unsuccessfully put her up against Texas Gov. Greg Abbott in 2014.

This time around – facing one of the abortion lobby’s darlings – Rep. Roy bested Ms. Davis by 30,738 votes in reported, unofficial returns.


Tennessee Persisting on Waiting-Period Law

TENNESSEE’s ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS APPEALED a recent federal district judge’s overturning of the state’s 48-hour abortion waiting period; that ruling canceled the law after it had governed the Tennessee abortion industry for five years.

The judge ruled Oct. 14, reports Charles Robertson for, “that the waiting-period law was unconstitutional.” The Tennessee state constitution, notes Mr. Robertson, “explicitly rejects ‘abortion rights.’”

But Detroit-based District Judge Bernard A. Friedman cited the “undue burden” standard outlined in the Supreme Court’s 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey ruling and “argued,” writes Mr. Robertson, “that the Tennessee law ‘unduly burdens a woman’s right to an abortion and is an affront to their “dignity and autonomy,” “personhood” and “destiny,” and “conception of [their] place in society.”’

“He rejected the state’s arguments,” explains Mr. Robertson, “that the waiting period favors more rational decision-making, calling those arguments ‘insulting’ and ‘paternalistic.’”

In filing his appeal motion on Nov. 5, Attorney General Herbert Slatery III, notes the LifeSiteNews report, “argued that following the law has not harmed abortion providers who have complied with the law for the past five years and that the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals will likely rule in the state’s favor.”


Time to Rally for Pregnancy Centers

NOT CONTENT WITH ITS GROWING LOCK on Virginia elections, the abortion cartel is now going after the commonwealth’s network of pregnancy care centers, according to a release from the National Institute of Family & Life Advocates (NIFLA), which networks and equips pregnancy centers across America.

The Virginia branch of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), a prominent abortion advocacy outfit, recently, notes NIFLA, published a “report entitled Fake Clinics Lie,” aimed at pregnancy care centers. “But the truth,” declares NIFLA, “is that the good work and positive impact of Virginia’s pro-life pregnancy centers is anything but ‘fake.’”

NIFLA goes on to urge the pro-life community to speak up on behalf of the caring work pregnancy centers do to aid expectant mothers facing challenges in unplanned motherhood. “Instead of allowing abortion industry advocates like NARAL to target the good names of these centers in pro-abortion smear campaigns,” declares NIFLA, “communities should rally behind pro-life pregnancy centers and medical clinics in gratitude for all the good they do for women and their families,” especially right now in Virginia.

This is not the first time the abortion lobby has gone after pregnancy centers – not by a long shot. But as we grow closer to the restoration of legal recognition of the right to life for all innocent human beings, the critical need for a robust network of pregnancy care centers becomes all the more vital. Hence the attacks – and the growing need for recognition of the centers’ value by people of good will.


Nobel Prize for Ignoble Pursuit

Oct. 12, 2020, BreakPoint commentary by John Stonestreet & Roberto Rivera

            The awarding of this year’s Nobel Prize for Chemistry to Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier has been heralded as an incredible step forward for women. For the first time, two female scientists have been honored for an accomplishment without being accompanied by a man. Also being heralded is the incredible potential of Doudna and Charpentier’s gene-editing technology, CRISPR. Announcing the award, the Secretary-General of the Swedish Royal Academy of Science gushed, “This year’s prize is about rewriting the code of life.”

            Doudna has used similar language to describe CRISPR technology, stating “the genome would become as malleable as a piece of literary prose at the mercy of an editor’s red pen.” And, so far, congratulations and praise from fellow scientists includes predictions and speculations that CRISPR will offer humanity new potential to combat all sorts of illnesses and make the world a better place.

            Not covered in all the press announcing the award is the danger that CRISPR poses to us all. For example, the incident in which a Chinese scientist uses CRISPR to edit the genome of embryos before implantation, a move that drew international criticism and gave the world a glimpse of just how this whole thing could go very wrong, was barely mentioned, if at all.

            CRISPR has been likened to a computer mouse or pair of genetic scissors. One researcher described, “You can just point it at a place in the genome, and you can do anything you want at that spot.” Of course, it’s not quite that simple. Still, the statement reveals the kind of hubris behind the drive to make this technology available, with virtually no ethical guidelines in place.

            There seems to be this assumption that, of course, scientists and researchers will “play nice” with the power CRISPR offers. History, of course, tells us that it’s nearly impossible to resist the temptation to “play God” instead. And that never ends well.

            Earlier this year, a team of researchers at the Francis Crick Institute in London used CRISPR to edit 18 donated human embryos, supposedly to study “the role of a particular gene in the earliest stages of human development.” The Crick Institute team did everything by the book. Still, despite their best efforts, around half of the embryos contained what researchers called “major unintended edits.” “Major unintended edits” is Newspeak for serious genetic damage, the kind of damage that can lead to birth defects or future medical issues, like cancer.

            How did this happen when researchers were so careful to play by the rules? One genetics researcher put it this way: “You’re affecting so much of the DNA around the gene you’re trying to edit that you could be inadvertently affecting other genes and causing problems.”

            If these sorts of problems come with researchers playing by the rules and acting out of good intention, what might happen when research is driven by greed or is done in some unregulated environment? Seeing the results from the Crick Institute researchers prompted one molecular biologist to call for “a restraining order for all genome editors to stay the living daylights away from embryo editing.”

            Now, a few months later, the Nobel Prize committee has put its official stamp of approval on the technology and its promise to “rewrite the code of life.” Absent regulations with real teeth, there will be no restraining order coming.

            There’s an ironic connection here to historic origins of the Nobel Prize. Alfred Nobel was the inventor of dynamite. He hoped and intended for his invention to be used for blasting rocks apart. Instead, it was used to blast people apart.

            When Alfred’s brother died, a French newspaper, mistakenly believing that it was Alfred who had died, proclaimed “The Merchant of Death is Dead!” Appalled by the reputation his invention brought to him, Nobel established the Nobel Prizes, including the Nobel Peace Prize, hoping his legacy would be a better world instead of death and suffering.

            By awarding the prize to the inventors of CRISPR, the committee is repeating Nobel’s history and turning his intentions on their head. Like dynamite, whatever legitimate potential CRISPR holds will operate alongside of even greater potential for harm. And, it’s not regulated anywhere near the degree that dynamite is.


How Could They?

Nov. 9, 2020, commentary by Jonathan VanMaren, published by

            Over 70 million Christians are alleged to have voted for Joe Biden for President. This is unfortunately not surprising, as many have been persuaded that it is acceptable to root for a candidate who advocates for feticide throughout all nine months of pregnancy by the media, by progressive Christians and by the hard work put in by alleged pro-lifers who claimed that a pro-abortion candidate could technically be more “pro-life.”

            I’m not going to bother to relitigate the Donald Trump question here again – I’ve written much on that subject already, and supporting a pro-abortion candidate is fundamentally immoral even if you reject the alternative (and vote third-party, for example). In short, there is absolutely no excuse to vote for someone who supports killing society’s most vulnerable members in the womb – period.

            Instead I’m simply going to point out to Biden voters whom they allied with when they cast their ballot. If voting for a man who has supported abortion for 47 years doesn’t make you uncomfortable, perhaps it might make you uncomfortable to discover that Planned Parenthood, an organization responsible for hundreds of thousands of pre-born deaths (many in minority communities) [every year] was celebrating with you: “You voted for change. You voted for your future. You voted for Joe Biden. The work is just getting started. Today, we celebrate; tomorrow, we get to work.”

            That “work” they’re referring to? That’s expanding the abortion industry. That future they’re talking about? It’s the abortion industry getting tens of millions of your tax dollars to fund feticide. This is the sort of celebration that could accurately be described as “grave dancing” – and there you are, arm in arm with them. Strange bedfellows? Maybe not.

            Ilyse Hogue, the head of NARAL Pro-Choice America (who once announced her abortion to cheers at the Democratic Convention), also celebrated with Biden’s Christian voters. She posted a photo on Twitter depicting a paraphrased quote from Dr. King: “Seize THIS moment to bend the moral arc back toward justice.” Her caption read: “[W]e’ve been granted opportunity. Let’s use it wisely.” Whom does Hogue mean by “we”? She means the abortion industry. They see Biden’s presidency as an “opportunity.” They plan to “use it wisely.” If they get their way, it will mean the end of the Hyde Amendment, which has saved up to 2.4 million lives.

            NARAL, for the record, posted this on Twitter: “BREAKING: @Kamala Harris just made history, as the first woman, first Black woman and first Asian-American woman elected as Vice President! She’s always been a champion of reproductive freedom, and we can’t wait to have her fighting for all of us.” When they say she’s always been a “champion of reproductive freedom,” they mean abortion (an obvious point, I know, but millions of Christian voters didn’t seem to get that). Harris has happily used her political powers to target pro-life journalists like David Daleiden in the past as well – so that’s something else to look forward to.

            Cecile Richards, former head of Planned Parenthood and America’s most carnivorous abortion activist, actually had the gall to post: “Excited for all the babies this year who will be named Kamala!” If her people have their way and get the government funding they’re hoping for, a whole lot more babies will die in the womb before being given any name at all (and you can bet Planned Parenthood is hoping to increase its profit margins over the next few years). Richards, I’m sure, is thankful for all those Christian voters who joined her in voting for a future that includes far fewer children but a whole lot more profit cash for the abortion industry.

            So to those Christian Biden voters who are celebrating today: Just know what you are celebrating, and whom you are celebrating with. You are celebrating with Planned Parenthood, with NARAL Pro-Choice America, with Cecile Richards and Ilyse Hogue, and with the abortionists who are prepared for their industry to be flush with government cash – your cash. You knew that this was going to happen, too – Joe Biden told us all what he was going to do to expand the abortion industry and roll back any existing protections for pre-born children in his online platform for everyone to see. [See “Brace Yourself” at the close of this Life Advocacy Briefing.]

            At the end of the day, that’s what Joe promised you – and that’s what you voted for.

[Life Advocacy Briefing editor’s note: We publish the above commentary despite its use of the pronoun “you.” We do not assume that any of our readers have made this grave mistake, but we believe the detailed information in Mr. VanMaren’s presentation might be of assistance to some of our readers in prayers and conversations with fellow voters who may claim affiliation with Christianity.]


Brace Yourself

The Democratic National Platform on “Securing Reproductive Health, Rights & Justice”

            Democrats are committed to protecting and advancing reproductive health, rights and justice. We believe unequivocally, like the majority of Americans, that every woman should be able to access high-quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion. We will repeal the Title X domestic gag rule [Pres. Trump’s Protect Life rule] and restore federal funding for Planned Parenthood, which provides vital preventive and reproductive health care for millions of people, especially low-income people, and people of color, and LGBTQ+ people, including in underserved areas.

            Democrats oppose and will fight to overturn federal and state laws that create barriers to reproductive health and rights. We will repeal the Hyde Amendment, and protect and codify the right to reproductive freedom. We condemn acts of violence, harassment, and intimidation of reproductive health providers, patients, and staff. We will address the discrimination and barriers that inhibit meaningful access to reproductive health care services, including those based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, race, income, disability, geography, and other factors. Democrats oppose restrictions on medication abortion care that are inconsistent with the most recent medical and scientific evidence and that do not protect public health.

            We recognize that quality, affordable comprehensive health care; medically accurate, LGBTQ+ inclusive, age-appropriate sex education; and the full range of family planning services are all essential to ensuring that people can decide if, when, and how to start a family. We are proud to be the party of the Affordable Care Act, which prohibits discrimination in health care on the basis of sex and requires insurers to cover prescription contraceptives at no cost. These efforts have significantly reduced teen and unintended pregnancies by making it easier to decide whether, when, and how to have a child.

            We believe that a person’s health should always come first. Democrats will protect the rights of all people to make personal health care decisions, and will reject the Trump Administration’s use of broad exemptions to allow medical providers, employers, and others to discriminate.