Life Advocacy Briefing

September 5, 2022

The Biden Abortion Obsession / Thwarted
Michigan Courts Siding with Abortion Cartel
Victory for Medical Conscience / Tennessee Abortion Free
Fewer Children Mean Fewer Customers
Nazi Science in White Coats / Voters’ Priorities

The Biden Abortion Obsession

THE BIDEN REGIME’s ‘HEALTH’ BUREAUCRACY suffered a setback Aug. 23 in a northern Texas courtroom, when federal District Judge James Wesley Hendrix “issued a preliminary injunction,” reports Dave Andrusko for National Right to Life (NRL) News, “prohibiting the [US] Dept. of Health & Human Services from enforcing the July 11 Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act (EMTALA) Guidance & Letter in Texas.”

The cited federal law was enacted in 1986 and, notes Mr. Andrusko, “requires stabilizing treatment for any conditions that would jeopardize ‘the health of the individual (or, with respect to a pregnant woman, the health of the woman or her unborn child).’”

Little did the Congress know at the time that the law they were enacting would be used in an attempt to circumvent a state’s law against abortion, but, as noted by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, whose letter is quoted by Mr. Andrusko: “‘Texas law has long permitted doctors to perform abortions when the life of the mother is at risk. That is still the law. EMTALA does not empower the federal government to change that. EMTALA requires hospitals to treat patients the same regardless of their ability to pay; it does not authorize the federal government to commandeer the practice of medicine. … [But] the Biden Administration’s Abortion Mandate,’” declared Atty. Gen. Paxton, “‘has the effect of requiring doctors and hospitals to choose between performing abortions in violation of state law or caring for women as they always have while incurring fines and the loss of federal funding.’”

So, let’s summarize: The Biden Regime, through its massive, politicized health bureaucracy, is threatening to withdraw federal funding and impose fines on medical institutions whose doctors – in the case of Texas and several other states, obeying state law – refuse to commit abortions under the excuse of “health.”

Atty. Gen. Paxton declared, reports Mr. Andrusko, “‘While the Biden Administration continues to make up rules that are unconstitutional, I will keep holding them accountable. I will not allow the Biden Administration to threaten doctors and hospitals with this unlawful mandate and put millions of Texans’ access to [actual] health care on the line.’”

Said the judge, quoted by NRL News, “‘That [HHS] Guidance goes well beyond EMTALA’s text, which protects both mothers and unborn children, is silent as to abortion and pre-empts state law only when the two directly conflict. Since the statute is silent on the question, the Guidance cannot answer how doctors should weigh risks to both a mother and her unborn child. Nor can it, in doing so, create a conflict with state law where one does not exist. The Guidance was thus unauthorized.’”



MICHIGAN PRO-LIFERS HAVE BEEN HOLDING THEIR BREATH over a potential ballot proposition to install a “right” to abortion in the state constitution. Fortunately, their lawyers have been at work, and it now appears likely – though not certain – that the bullet has been dodged.

The state board which rules on ballot propositions deadlocked last Wednesday on the objections filed on behalf of pro-life citizens of Michigan, and that deadlock will prevent the question from being placed on the ballot. Two of the four panel members agreed with objectors that it would be wrong to place into the constitution a provision which is – because of the sloppiness of the petition drafters – laden with typographical errors. (If ratified by voters, the proposition would be cemented into the state constitution exactly as presented in the ballot petition, which contained more than 60 typos, including frequent and confusing running together of words.) 

The proposition sought to add a right to abortion to the state constitution and specifically blocked  any legislative attempt to regulate the baby-killing practice in any way, specifically ruling out even any parental involvement law or restriction on late-term abortion, and mandating taxpayer funding of the baby-killing practice.

Prayers are now being offered to secure the decision in an anticipated abortion-cartel appeal to the state supreme court. But for now – close to the date by which ballots are to be printed – pro-lifers are breathing a sigh of relief in this too-soon-after-Dobbs heated political environment.


Michigan Courts Siding with Abortion Cartel

MICHIGAN COURTS ARE CONTINUING TO INTERFERE with the execution of a 1931 statute outlawing abortion. Adding to a preliminary injunction by a judge who is a donor to Planned Parenthood, Oakland County Judge Jacob Cunningham ruled Aug. 19, reports Cassy Fiano-Chesser for Live Action News, “that allowing prosecutors to enforce the law creates ‘real, clear and dangerous’ harm to women.”

After the previous judge issued a temporary injunction in May, a group of county prosecutors, writes Mrs. Chesser, “asked the Court of Appeals to rule on the issue. Some prosecutors said they planned to enforce the law,” reports Live Action, “while others said they would not.”

Radical abortion advocate Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) “filed her own lawsuit,” writes Mrs. Chesser, “attempting to have the law overturned.” She used the Cunningham ruling as an opportunity to call the 1931 law “‘draconian,’” reports Mrs. Chesser, declaring she and her “‘team’” would “‘remain vigilant in protecting reproductive freedom.’”

In his ruling, Detroit-area County Judge Cunningham “said abortion will, for now, remain legal in Michigan,” despite the law on the books. That law, enacted in 1931, updated an abortion ban enacted in 1846. “‘A person [Note: the term “woman” is no longer being used by the Left] carrying a child has the right to bodily autonomy and integrity as well as a safe doctor-patient relationship free from government interference,’” writes Judge Cunningham, quoted by Live Action, “‘as they have been able to do so for nearly 50 years,’ he said. He also,” notes Mrs. Chesser, “engaged in a great deal of pro-abortion rhetoric in his ruling, making it clear that he sees abortion as a force for public good, and chided prosecutors willing to enforce the law, saying they should focus on other crimes.”


Victory for Medical Conscience

THE 5th CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS on Aug. 26 ruled that the Biden Regime cannot force Franciscan Alliance, reports Matt Lamb for LifeSiteNews, “to commit abortions or provide transgender drugs and surgeries,” rebuking the ACLU in its opinion.

Becket Law counsel Joseph Davis, who represented the Franciscans, in a news release quoted by Mr. Lamb, termed the decision “‘a major victory for conscience rights and compassionate medical care in America. … Doctors cannot do their jobs and comply with the Hippocratic Oath if the government requires them to perform harmful, irreversible procedures against their conscience and medical expertise.’”


Tennessee Abortion Free

TENNESSEE’s THREE REMAINING ABORTUARIES HAVE CLOSED as of Aug. 25, reports Matt Lamb for LifeSiteNews. The closures follow the state’s enactment of a “trigger” ban on abortions, taking effect with the Supreme Court’s June 24 Dobbs ruling overturning Roe v. Wade.

A spokesman for Students for Life Action, Kristi Hamrick, who lives in Tennessee, “celebrated the news of the facilities closing,” notes Mr. Lamb. “‘For too long, Tennessee has been an abortion destination, which makes this closure even more exciting.’”

She noted that “abortion vendors” had sited their shops near Tennessee’s “premier universities.” And recent shifts in population toward Tennessee had expanded their customer base.

According to Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, notes Mr. Lamb, the Tennessee “ban on abortion could save nearly 10,000 babies every year.” The state’s abortion death toll as reported by the CDC in its abortion statistics chart was 9,719 in 2019, the most recent year for which statistics have been published.


Fewer Children Mean Fewer Customers

WALMART HAS JOINED THE PARADE of major corporations pledging its employees, reports Emily Mangiaracina for LifeSiteNews, “it will now cover the cost of abortion and related travel expenses in cases up until the point of ‘fetal viability.’ …

“While the point of fetal viability is not clear-cut and has shifted down in recent years due to technological advances,” notes Ms. Mangiaracina, “medical consensus now sets it at 23 to 24 weeks.” It appears Walmart will get to decide on a case-by-case basis.

“Walmart previously covered the cost of abortions only in the case that the health of the mother ‘would be in danger’ if she carried her child to term,” reports the LifeSiteNews writer, “or in the case that the child ‘could not survive the birthing process or death would be imminent after birth,’ according to the company’s employee handbook.” But now that the Supreme Court has determined there is no constitutional right to an abortion, Walmart is moving to expand its coverage.

One face-saving note: Walmart, according to Ms. Mangiaracina, is “multiplying its financial support for adoptions, from $5,000 to $20,000,” as was revealed by the same memo which promised abortion coverage to its workforce.


Nazi Science in White Coats

Aug. 23, 2022, LifeSiteNews commentary by Jonathan VanMaren

             In 2005, Hollywood released a film titled The Island, a dystopian story about a group of people who live their strictly regimented lives in a facility. The story focuses on a worker named Lincoln Six Echo, who, through a series of coincidences, discovers the horrifying truth about the facility he lives in and the fate he and his fellow residents face: They are clones created for the purpose of organ harvesting, should those who paid for their creation ever need it. They are human beings, yes – but the sole purpose for their existence is to be a supply of spare organs and body parts.

             A few years ago, a pro-life leader noted in an interview that the film carried inherently anti-abortion messages. As it turns out, The Island could turn out to be prophetic, too.

             The Israel-based biotech firm Renewal Bio is hoping to create “synthetic” human embryos for the explicit purpose of harvesting their organs for both transplanting as well as treating infertility, aging and genetic diseases. According to the New York Post, Renewal Bio has “claimed that it successfully used advanced stem cell technology and artificial wombs in order to grow mouse embryos which continued to develop for several days.”

             Now that the process has worked with mouse embryos, which the MIT Technology Review says stayed alive “until they developed beating hearts,” blood flow and the beginnings of a brain, researchers want to use the same process to create human embryos. Jacob Hanna of the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel and the founder of Renewal Bio published the results in the journal Cell. He is enthusiastic about the potential. “The embryo is the best organ-making machine and the best 3D bioprinter – we tried to emulate what it does. Remarkably, we showed that embryonic stem cells generate whole synthetic embryos, meaning this includes the placenta and yolk sac surrounding the embryos.”

             What Hanna is proposing sounds very much like a small-scale version of what the villains did in The Island – bringing new human beings into existence for the explicit purpose of pillaging them for their parts to sustain other, older human beings. Hanna told the Guardian that: “We are truly excited about this work and its implications.” Human embryos, Hanna believes, will essentially be a renewable resource that can be used to “treat medical ailments” and reverse “declining birth rates and fast aging populations.”

             As Renewal Bio’s website puts it: “To solve these complex and compounding issues, Renewal Bio aims to make humanity younger and healthier by leveraging the power of the new stem cell technology.” In fact, Hanna insists that these new, “synthetic” embryos – which are created without fertilized eggs – are “an ethical and technical alternative to the use of [natural] embryos.” According to Hanna: “In Israel and many other countries, such as the US and the UK, it is legal, and we have ethical approval to do this with human-induced pluripotent stem cells.” …

             Some ethicists are already concerned by these experiments and have called for government oversight “to ensure that the advancements in technology that enable replicating human embryos isn’t abused.” Geneticist Paul Tesar of Case Western Reserve University admitted that there are always risks involved. “There will always be a gray area,” he told StatNews. “But as scientists and as a society, we need to come together to decide where the line is and define what is ethically acceptable.”

             Perhaps there is some way to use stem cells to create organs without killing human beings created for that purpose. But at the moment, it very much sounds as if a biotech firm is planning to create individual human beings at the earliest stages of development for the purpose of utilizing them for spare parts.

             That is not ethical ground. That is Frankenstein territory.

[Life Advocacy Briefing editor’s note: Frankenstein – and that 2005 Hollywood film The Island – are fiction. Nazi science is history. Who can observe this venture into artificial creation as anything short of Nazi science and an abomination before our Creator? We thank Mr. VanMaren for bringing it to our attention, and we beg our public officials to stop it now.]


Voters’ Priorities

Aug. 23, 2022, LifeSiteNews commentary by Calvin Freiburger

             For months, polls have signaled that Democrats are in for a rough time in this fall’s midterm congressional elections, but the abortion lobby is betting their checkbooks on “pro-choice” rage at the loss of Roe v. Wade being enough to reverse their fortunes. But how safe is that bet?

             Last week, Planned Parenthood announced that it plans to spend a whopping $50 million to help elect pro-abortion politicians, starting with advertising blitzes in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Those states’ residents can expect a lot of fear-mongering about “throw[ing] healthcare providers and pregnant people in jail and endanger[ing] the health and lives of pregnant people across the country,” in the words of Planned Parenthood Votes executive director Jenny Lawson.*

             Trying to maximize turnout of the voters one already has is one of the go-to moves of the current generation of political strategists, who have at least some polling data they can point to. On Tuesday, Pew released survey results finding that 56% of voters say abortion is “very important” to how they’ll vote this fall, with the share of Democrats who say so spiking from 46% to 71% since March, whereas the share of Republicans barely moved from 40% to 41% over that same period.

             Kaiser Health News, meanwhile, found in July that 73% of women age 18-49 consider abortion “very important” to their vote, and that 88% of those respondents will be voting to protect the practice.

             On the other hand, both Pew and Kaiser also find voters ranking a host of concerns – the economy, inflation, gas prices, healthcare costs, crime and gun violence – as more important to them, and those aren’t getting better for Democrats any time soon. That’s one of the perennial disadvantages of the Left: It’s much harder to cast a vote to signal one’s wokeness when that vote will also perpetuate direct, ongoing harm to one’s daily life. (Pro-lifers, by contrast, can advance their moral values and their fiscal interests with the same vote.)

             Further, while we’ve already seen in Kansas that pro-abortion fear-mongering can get results, it has another weakness: eventually reality fails to live up to the hype. It was one thing to make frightening predictions of what abortion bans would lead to when abortion bans were at most a distant possibility, but now people are living in a country where they’re actually taking effect. The more people notice that these laws aren’t resulting in an epidemic of dying mothers, prosecuted women or investigations for miscarriage, the less seriously they’ll take the hysterics.

             Between the issues, rapidly shifting events, voters’ well-being and the varied performance of individual candidates, elections rarely come down to any single variable. The post-Roe America is one of uncharted political waters, and it remains to be seen exactly how much the fears of misinformed voters will affect an election that by conventional measures should be a GOP blowout. But with the same polls that indicate heightened pro-abortion passion also showing voters continuing to prioritize the issues that affect them most directly, there’s no reason for pro-lifers to feel discouraged. As long as we spread the truth as clearly, as visibly and as often as possible, it won’t matter how much money the abortion lobby pumps into spreading fear.

*We continue to find of interest the communication policy Planned Parenthood has adopted in dropping their supposed advocacy for “women” in exchange for signaling to the tiny minority of so-called “transgender” Americans.

[Life Advocacy Briefing editor’s note: Among the challenges facing pro-life candidates is the age-old predilection among professional political consultants of playing down “the third-rail issue of abortion” and urging pro-life candidates to simply state their “pro-life” label and then move on, as though it is something shameful or embarrassing but unavoidable. From our personal experience in the abortion political battle and from our experience with other candidates, we could not disagree more. Pro-life candidates are benefited by declaring their advocacy for life, especially if they use specific issues such as parental involvement, late-term abortion bans and taxpayer subsidy issues to demonstrate the extreme position of the abortion-lobby-backed opposition candidates. An offense – not defense – approach is the more likely avenue to winning with Life. Oh, and one more thing: polls are general and dependent on labels. People make decisions on information when they have it, not labels and one-word harangues.]