Life Advocacy Briefing

Adjustments Underway

AS AMERICA APPROACHES THE SUPREME COURT’s LIKELY ABANDONMENT of the Roe v. Wade abortion atrocity – any day now – the abortion lobby is facing some challenging choices in the rhetoric used by the industry and by its candidates.

For decades, the cartel has played on the American dream of freedom, claiming the term “choice” as their own term of choice. But they have a problem.

The same Left-leaning politicians who have trumpeted “choice” in their advocacy of abortion have spent the last two years pushing health-related mandates on the American people. “Privacy” doesn’t work too well anymore either, after clamoring for two years for requiring healthcare identification cards known as “vaccine passports.”

The dilemma reminds us of the shift we have observed over the past year or more on their abandoning “women” as their target audience. (Reports indicated at the time that Leana Wen, ex-president of Planned Parenthood, was fired because she insisted on continuing to use the term “pregnant woman” instead of “pregnant person.”) The embrace by the abortion lobby of the minuscule “transgender” faction is costing them their most useful rhetoric.

For pro-lifers, the appeal for mercy and compassion and family formation does not need to change, as the appeal is based on foundational American values and is based on truths such as the human nature of the unborn child, the pain inflicted by abortion and the American tradition of protection of the innocent.

The months ahead – in the event the Court acts as expected – will offer pro-life communicators a renewed opportunity to press for justice and compassion and will present a dilemma for those who have been shrouding their actual cause in euphemisms that they can no longer say.

Hysteria on Display

IT IS NOTHING NEW TO SEE THE ABORTION LOBBY LYING about facts involving their cause, but it is refreshing to see them called on it.

Planned Parenthood’s “director of news content, Kate Smith,” reports Tori Shaw for LiveAction, has been “telling Americans that women could be jailed for miscarriages if Roe v. Wade is overturned, erroneously,” writes Ms. Shaw, “using cases in El Salvador as examples.”

The Live Action writer reports a prominent Salvadoran doctor, the former director-general of the Dr. Roberto Masferrer Institute of Forensic Medicine of El Salvador, “deflated Smith’s accusations. He said,” writes Ms. Shaw, “she is ‘at best absolutely mistaken when she claims that in El Salvador women are imprisoned and harassed for induced abortions. … But even worse, that those who have suffered a miscarriage are also prosecuted and imprisoned by an infamous law. … I can assure you,’” said Dr. Leiva, quoted by Live Action, “that the foregoing is totally false; there’s not a single case of women imprisoned for that reason.’”

The Planned Parenthood communications specialist, notes Ms. Shaw, “predicted in an article for CNN that in a post-Roe United States, women will be investigated and jailed for miscarriages. She claimed that more than 140 women have been sentenced to as long as 35 years in prison for abortions since 1998 in El Salvador due to miscarriages.”

Not only is the claim about El Salvador untrue, but besides, since when do state lawmakers in the US look to El Salvador or any other foreign country to write our laws? And when did any state in the US ever penalize mothers for miscarriage? Hysteria, simple, lying hysteria.

Senators Speak Up for ‘Hyde’

FORTY-EIGHT G.O.P. SENATORS HAVE SENT A LETTER last Tuesday to Congressional leaders, LifeSiteNews writer Calvin Freiburger reports, “warning them not to touch the pro-life Hyde Amendment amid the Left’s current fervor to ‘codify’ abortion-on-demand.”

“Hyde” bars taxpayer funding of abortions and is renewed as an appropriations bill provision every year, but the current leadership of both houses of Congress has been deliberately leaving its protections out of the federal spending measures for the current and coming fiscal year. It is estimated, notes Mr. Freiburger, “to have saved more than two million lives since its adoption decades ago.”

The letter was drafted and circulated by Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) and Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) and was “addressed primarily,” Mr. Freiburger reports, “to Democrat Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York, reasserting ‘unwavering support for the Hyde Amendment and all other long-standing pro-life protections.’”

We thank the Senators and publish the text of the letter and names of the signers at the close of this Life Advocacy Briefing.

Demanding Answers

AS REPORTS CONTINUE TO BUILD CONCERNING INVESTIGATIONS of massive fraud in the pandemic-spurred “Paycheck Protection Program,” (PPP) we offer thanks to Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) for his persistence in nailing Planned Parenthood’s involvement.

In late April, Sen. Paul grilled the chief of the Small Business Administration (SBA), reports Matt Lamb for LifeSiteNews, as to “why the names of the staff who made the decision to send money to Planned Parenthood through PPP were not released to his office. … He also,” notes Mr. Lamb, “pressed her on why the communications from the abortion giant to the SBA were not released.

“The Trump Administration previously told Planned Parenthood that it is not eligible for the money because its affiliates are considered part of the larger organization. The SBA under Pres. Trump in 2020 told 37 Planned Parenthood affiliates to return $80 million in total loans received through the PPP,” writes Mr. Lamb.

“Sen. Paul also asked [SBA Administrator Sylvia] Guzman why the SBA had not explained its decision to reverse the Trump-era policy to not release loans to Planned Parenthood and if the abortion giant had ever returned the illicit loans. … [Ms.] Guzman denied that the Trump Administration’s determination represented binding policy.”

After further insistence on answers, Sen. Paul said, reports Mr. Lamb, “‘It is not a small thing to reverse that. Are you telling me that that was reversed with no discussion and no paper trail?’ [Ms.] Guzman again denied,” reports LifeSiteNews, “the federal government had a policy in place, though Sen. Paul pointed out that letters had been sent from the SBA to Planned Parenthood ordering it to return the money.”

Where it has gone and how it has been used is anyone’s guess.

Warning

A WARNING FROM A GROUP OF DOCTORS known as “America’s Frontline Doctors” could be of particular concern to expectant mothers and those who look out for them and their children.

In a Frontline Flash internet video posted in late March, reports Emily Mangiaracina for LifeSiteNews, “Dr. Peterson Pierre presented statistics showing that the rate of fetal death per vaccine administered in the US had, in fact, massively increased since the Covid shots were made available.

“Pierre noted that, according to the CDC,” writes Ms. Mangiaracina, “since the Covid shot rollout, there have been 550 million shots administered and 3,725 fetal deaths. This means, he pointed out, that for every 147,651 shots, there has been one fetal death. He contrasted this with statistics from the period between 2006 and 2019. During this time,” notes the LifeSiteNews report, “there were reportedly ‘four billion shots administered’ and ‘1,369 fetal deaths, which equals to’ one fetal death for about every three million shots.

“‘So if you do the math, you realize that since Covid shots have been available, there’s been a 1,925% increase in fetal deaths,’ he continued,” writes Ms. Mangiaracina.

Addressing expectant mothers, Dr. Pierre said, reports LifeSiteNews, “‘You need to look out for your own kids. You are their protector. You have a lot to think about. That decision,’” he said, “‘rests with you, not with anyone else.’”

The LifeSite story goes on with this disturbing news: “A stunning 23 of 32 pregnancies during which mothers received a Pfizer Covid shot resulted in ‘spontaneous abortions’ (miscarriages), according to Pfizer and the FDA’s forced response to the Freedom of Information Act request (32 is the number of pregnancies with known outcomes according to reports given to Pfizer), as was reported last year.”

The report also quotes former Pfizer vice president Dr. Michael Yeadon, “who told LifeSite that women of childbearing age, especially pregnant and nursing women, should entirely reject the Covid-19 gene therapy vaccines. ‘You never ever give inadequately tested medicines, medicinal products, to a pregnant woman,’ he stated,” writes Ms. Mangiaracina.

Foul Fruit of Fear

April 4, 2022, BreakPoint commentary by John Stonestreet & Timothy D. Padgett

             Fifty years ago last week, a government report lived up to the old adage that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

             On March 27, 1972, a document known to history as the “Rockefeller Commission Report on Population and the American Future,” called for zero population growth in America as a means to save the world. While we have no reason to doubt that those behind the document had “good intentions,” history has proven this paper a high mark of state-sponsored hubris. Not only did its proposed solutions make things worse instead of better, but it set a dark precedent for terrible crimes against humanity. 

             To “stabilize” America’s population, the paper called for increased regulation of immigration and, most notably given the Roe v. Wade decision just 10 months later, the legalization of and even encouraging of abortion. Still, as terrible as the consequences of the Rockefeller Commission report have been, they were the result of a fundamental misunderstanding of the value and nature of human beings. It assumed, as many do today, that human beings are a net loss to the global future, that, on the whole, we take more than we give to the world. 

             In the mid-to-late 20^th century, many elites grew concerned about the growing world population. Though it had remained in the hundreds of millions for thousands of years, the human population, with the rise of new technologies and social structures, topped a billion for the first time around 1800. Another billion was added by the early 1900s. By the time this report was written, the human population was approaching four billion. 

             Because the commission assumed that every new person meant another mouth to feed from a limited supply of global food, they also assumed that more people posed a problem that must be mitigated. The Rockefeller Commission didn’t so much find a solution to a real problem as it created a solution to an already assumed problem. To the chagrin of its devoted supporters even today, the Commission’s recommendations were not as widely implemented as many would have liked. What does remain from the report, however, is a mindset that validated both abortion and the assumption of overpopulation, even after the predictions of global disaster turned out to be as fictional as a summer blockbuster. 

             In fact, since the report’s catastrophic predictions, the world population has more than doubled, from 3.8 billion people in 1972 to an estimated 7.9 billion today. Yet, instead of mass starvations and increased conflicts over resources, crop yields have increased dramatically, more than keeping pace with the mouths to feed.  

             Humans simply didn’t prove to be the virus so many thought they were. Rather, they were proved to be creators of new resources and innovative solutions, which makes sense if they really were made to be co-creators by the One who created all things. Created to tend the Garden of this world, humans are not merely consumers. We are producers, tasked with cultivating what was made into more than it presently is. 

             It’d be nice if we could simply look back and chuckle at the folly of the ivory tower crowd and their bad ideas. But, as we often say, ideas have consequences; bad ideas have victims. The sort of thinking expressed in the Rockefeller Report had very real victims – tens of millions, in fact. 

             In the last 50 years, over 60 million Americans have been killed through abortion. In China, where the myth of the population bomb led to the horrific one-child policy, some 300 million babies were slaughtered, many against the will of their mothers. Instead of saving the planet, these vain ideas of population control have left the nations of the world with a birth dearth. Russia, China and Japan are notably struggling to maintain their numbers, even as their older population phases out of the workforce. 

             We are fast approaching another 50^th anniversary, which I hope and pray will be an empty one. Next January is the 50-year anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the miscarriage of justice that usurped state laws across the country and legally grounded abortion’s malign presence in America. With the Dobbs case being decided in a matter of weeks in the U.S. Supreme Court, next January’s anniversary could arrive with Roe a dead letter.

Follow the Science!

May 26, 2022, The Point commentary by John Stonestreet of BreakPoint

             A couple of weeks ago, an article by National Public Radio’s Sarah McCammon made the rounds on various public media outlets with this headline: “When Does Life Begin? Religions Don’t Agree.” Clearly, it was an attempt to warn pro-lifers against stubborn certainty on abortion.

             The central claim of the article is that not every religion holds that human life begins at conception. Of course they don’t, but why would they? Religions don’t agree on all kinds of essential matters, such as if there’s a God, who is God, whether Jesus was God, or whether we are God. And that’s just about God.  

             If disagreement among vastly different worldviews is somehow supposed to trivialize the convictions of pro-lifers, wouldn’t the same reasoning trivialize any convictions of religious abortion supporters, too? So, what’s the point?  

             Interestingly enough, even though religions disagree on whether life begins at conception, science doesn’t. Or at least, every embryology textbook is clear about when life begins. Honest abortion supporters, such as Peter Singer, acknowledge as much, that abortion takes a human life. So, should we follow the science, or not?

Insisting on ‘Hyde’

May 31, 2022, text of letter from 48 US Senators addressed to Sen. Schumer

             We write to express our unwavering support for the Hyde Amendment and all other longstanding pro-life protections. For more than 45 years, the Hyde Amendment has ensured that taxpayer dollars are not used to fund abortions, saving the lives of nearly 2.5 million preborn children. As you know, the Hyde Amendment is supported by both a substantial majority of the American public and a bipartisan majority of sitting United States Senators, and was most recently signed into law by President Biden in Public Law 117-103.

             Nevertheless, President Biden’s budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 once again proposes to eliminate the Hyde Amendment and other existing pro-life protections, while also increasing taxpayer funding for the abortion industry at home and abroad, including through massive funding increases for the Title X family planning program.

             On February 5, 2021, we wrote to you that “[w]e are committed to vote against the advancement of any legislation that would eliminate or weaken the Hyde Amendment or any other current-law pro-life protections, or otherwise undermine existing Federal pro-life policy.” We firmly renew this commitment for FY 2023.

             We are united in our resolve to preserve more than 45 years of consensus against taxpayer funding for abortion. We urge you to start where we finished by making a baseline commitment to maintain the same pro-life protections that were included in Public Law 117-103, and to eschew any taxpayer-funded giveaways that benefit the multi-billion-dollar abortion industry.

             The American people, born and preborn, deserve nothing less.

Signers of Hyde Amendment Letter

             Senators Steve Daines (MT) and James Lankford (OK), along with GOP Senators Richard Shelby & Tommy Tuberville (AL), Dan Sullivan (AK), John Boozman & Tom Cotton (AR), Marco Rubio & Rick Scott (FL), Mike Crapo & James Risch (ID), Mike Braun & Todd Young (IN), Joni Ernst & Charles Grassley (IA), Roger Marshall MD & Jerry Moran (KS), Mitch McConnell & Rand Paul MD (KY), Bill Cassidy MD & John Kennedy (LA), Cindy Hyde-Smith & Roger Wicker (MS), Roy Blunt & Josh Hawley (MO), Deb Fischer & Ben Sasse (NE), Richard Burr & Thom Tillis (NC), John Hoeven & Kevin Cramer (ND), Rob Portman (OH), James Inhofe (OK), Pat Toomey (PA), Lindsey Graham & Tim Scott (SC), John Thune & Michael Rounds (SD), Marsha Blackburn & Bill Hagerty (TN), John Cornyn & Ted Cruz (TX), Michael Lee & Mitt Romney (UT), Shelley Moore Capito (WV), Ron Johnson (WI) and John Barrasso MD & Cynthia Lummis (WY).