Illinois Right to Life Committee
PRO-LIFE BLOG
Monday, August 31, 2009 -- Censorship of advertising by mainstream media First ABC television and now NBC television have decided to censor advertising that simply raises concerns about the Federal health care bill. The submitted commercial features a respected medical doctor who warns that the Obama-backed health care plan will decimate health care for seniors and others in need of life-saving medical procedures. The League of American Voters had planned to air the commercial that is already airing on local networks in 12 states. They were rejected outright by ABC. NBC is demanding the organization make revisions to the commercial because of concerns about factual claims. Since when are the networks responsible for deciding what is factual? Is this the beginning of government-conntrolled media? Apparently, if you have a message the current administration does not like at least ABC and NBC are willing to censor the opposition. Maybe it is time for the public to censor ABC and NBC!
Friday, August 28, 2009 -- Successful witness against abortion can be silent St. Francis of Assisi is known for the maxim “Preach the Gospel always and if necessary use words.” A report from this Thursday at Planned Parenthood in Waco, Texas offers an example of such success. John Pisciotta, Director of Pro-Life Waco, describes the scene, including a new truck billboard featuring Actress Jennifer O’Neil with the message “I regret my abortion” and a turnout of over 30 people standing for life. He continued: A young woman driven by a young man entered the abortuary parking lot a little after 7:30. They did not stop to talk to us, but had to see our pro-life witness and the message on the truck. She soon decided that she would not allow Planned Parenthood to destroy her young son. She then called her father to come and pick her up and take her home. Those standing for life were not aware of this courageous, life-saving decision. Then about 8:45am a man drove to Planned Parenthood and did stop to talk to us. With tears in his eyes, he thanked us for “just being there” and told us that his daughter had turned away from abortion and that his grandson would now live!!! There was much celebration at the sad location of 1827 Columbus Avenue. A big point I want to make about the grace-filled moments last Thursday is that not one person in our group said a word to the young mom. It was simply our being present at this location that helped save the life of a little boy and help save a mom and her family from a life of regret and turmoil. The same thing has happened in Chicago, even without the truck billboard and with less people present. If you have not come out to pray at an abortion clinic before, prayerfully consider joining such a witness for life, so you can preach in favor of life without using words.
Thursday, August 27, 2009 -- Morning-after pill: ineffective and abused Thanks to Jill Stanek for finding some revealing information about how pushers of contraception think. Jill reviews a remarkable August 21 article in RH Reality Check by Elizabeth Westley, Francine Coeytaux and Elisa Wells, originally published in the journal, Contraception. After admitting that emergency contraception (the morning-after pill) is both unreliable and often abused (overused as a frequent means of contraception rather than for "emergencies"), the authors plead for continued support for this unreliable and unsafe drug. They write: We urge the reproductive health and donor communities to not give up on emergency contraception just because it is not proving to be as effective at the population level as we had once hoped. … We also urge the reproductive health community to continue to learn from the experience of promoting EC. We need to find out more about what women like about emergency contraception and why they are willing to accept its lower effectiveness and high cost compared with other methods. ... In other words, they effectively maintain that women should be used as guinea pigs and to ignore the ineffectiveness of emergency contraception. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out why women choose a method that avoids going to a doctor (now that the morning-after pill can be purchased over-the-counter). They were already being irresponsible and now they are trying to cover it up. Contraception pushers do not care about the health or wellbeing of these women. They are perfectly happy to sell them ineffective and unsafe products that encourage them to go from one level of irresponsibility to another. It makes no difference if this chain of events leads to serious health problems or even death for the women who use these contraceptives.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009 -- Disagreement with IRLC radio message I received a call today expressing disagreement with the IRLC radio message that expresses reservations about brain death diagnosis and organ donation. The caller was focused on how so many lives could be saved through organ donation so how could we not encourage it. This situation is another case where the end does not justify the means. If brain death is not a reliable indication of true death, then killing a person to obtain their organs for transplant is an immoral means to reach the end of saving lives. Consider the case a few years ago of a death row inmate who wanted to donate his organs. He proposed that he be allowed to donate his organs rather than die by lethal injection. Of course, the donation of his organs would kill him so his proposal was rejected because killing him prematurely would be wrong. It has become known that China obtains most of its donated organs from prisoners who are to be executed, presumably without their consent. They are doing what the death row inmate proposed, but most people see this approach as unethical or immoral.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009 -- Another serious flaw in the health care bill As most recently covered here on August 13th Planned Parenthood continues to demonstrate a pattern of breaking the law and reflecting an attitude that they are above the law. Would you trust such an organization with running health clinics located in the nation's public schools? Would you be even more concerned to learn that such clinics would have no accountability to the schools in which they were located? Provisions of the proposed health care bill would establish a new Federal program where the government would fund health clinics near or in the nation's public schools. The broad wording outlining the qualifications for participation opens the door for Planned Parenthood to operate these clinics in schools with no oversight and full Federal government support. No wonder Planned Parenthood is keeping in close touch with the Obama administration. They are aiming for the opportunity to gain direct access to the nation's children, fully paid for by the Federal government. Such a program would be a disaster for the wellbeing of future generations!
Monday, August 24, 2009 -- Unprecedented deception on health care provisions The scope of deception taking place to push a government takeover of health care has reached unprecedented levels. Over a recent weekend, President Obama and other members of his administration suggested that the public option in the health care bill was not a critical element, implying that it could be eliminated. That message was intended for the portion of the public that only tunes in on weekends. When Monday arrived, the public option was back. House Democrats confirmed the public option would remain in their bill. Conflicting statements are even more common with regard to abortion coverage and health care rationing in the health care bill. President Obama went so far as to call claims abortion funding is included in the health care bill a "fabrication" and "bearing false witness." His rhetoric does not square with the facts. FactCheck.org, a nonpartisan web site that routinely serves as a watchdog for public officials and the media, reports that Obama is wrong, showing that the current health care plans pending in Congress do authorize abortion funding. Even mainstream media reports indicate that abortion is covered in the proposed health care bills. Time Magazine and the Associated Press have printed articles explaining that abortion coverage gets government funding under the health care bills. There is also strong denial of any threat of health care rationing or euthanasia from the health care bill. These denials are also inconsistent with the facts. The Catholic Medical Association has expressed concern that the health care bill could promote assisted suicide and rationing by providing financial incentives that would influence how doctors evaluate care for their patients. Texas law already demonstrates the threat of "death panels" denying care to patients based on judgments it is futile. With Federal law already providing for government panels to decide on the cost effectiveness of various treatments, their decisions will certainly lead to denial of care to individuals who might benefit from those treatments under government-run health care.
Thursday, August 13, 2009 -- PP gets caught breaking the law again Planned Parenthood has been caught breaking the mandated reporting and parental involvement laws through the undercover work of Lila Rose. Now government investigators are charging Planned Parenthood for other ways they break the law. Planned Parenthood in Spokane, Washington has been fined $700,000 by the state health department after an audit by state officials showed it was routinely overbilling Medicaid for abortions as well as contraception and family planning services. Planned Parenthood's sole office in the state of South Dakota is in danger of losing its medical license after state officials discovered the abortion center is not following a new law that requires it to inform women about the consequences of abortion. Even though Planned Parenthood consistently demonstrates an attitude that they are above the law, they expect to get even more government money under the new health care bill in Congress. Is this a valid use of your taxes?
Wednesday, August 12, 2009 -- Name calling escalates if you disagree If you do not think the current health care bill in Congress is the right approach, Indiana Congressman Baron Hill considers you a “political terrorist.” Earlier, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called anyone who expresses opposition to the bill at healthcare town hall events “un-American.” Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid has now topped that, calling them “evil mongers.” The level of intolerance of opposing views by those who are supposed to represent the citizens of our nation is shocking. Do you remember the report from the Homeland Security Office of Intelligence and Analysis that included Pro-Life advocates within "right-wing extremism in the United States?” In response to that report, the conservative group Americans for Limited Government filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request demanding to know how DHS had arrived at that conclusion. The group calls the DHS response "stunning" because officials admit that they relied on a range of web sites, including those of abortion advocates, to compile the report. "As it turns out, Janet Napolitano’s DHS did not conduct even the most rudimentary research or investigation, and used no statistical analysis. The web site cited the most in the report is whatdoesitmean.com -- a conspiracy theory web site. Who lacks credibility here?
Tuesday, August 11, 2009 -- The public opposes taxpayer funded abortion With govenment-funded abortion coverage included in the current health care bill in Congress, the question is raised about current public attitude about such use of taxpayer funds. Polls have revealed consistent public opposition to taxpayer funded abortion. A 2008 Zogby poll showed that 71 percent of U.S. adults oppose taxpayer funding of abortion. In a 2006 poll 69 percent agreed with prohibiting Federal taxpayer funds from being used to pay for abortions while only 21 percent disagreed. A 2004 Zogby poll found that voters overwhelmingly opposed taxpayer funding for abortion 74 percent to 22 percent.
Friday, August 7, 2009 -- Lies, distortions, and lack of common ground Today's news demonstrates just a few examples of the radical steps supporters of government-run health care are willing to take. They are driven to pass health care that includes abortion on demand, but denies treatment for anyone with a low quality of life. Supporters claim the government plan must cover abortion because most private insurance plans already do. New statistics from Michigan reveal that only 1.8 percent of women relied in insurance coverage for their abortion while 98.1% paid themselves. Since there is no reason for health insurance in Michigan to be different than in other states, it becomes clear that this justification for including abortion in the health care bill is a serious distortion or outright lie. We also learned that Senator Harry Reid is suggesting that he will mis-apply procedural options in violation of long-standing Senate traditions if that is what it takes to pass the health care bill in the Senate. His approach would prevent any possible use of the filibuster by opponents of the bill. Lastly, we learned a little bit more about what common ground means to abortion advocates. It has now been revealed that the so-called common ground legislation, deemed to reduce unwanted pregnancies and abortions, would require tax-funded abortions nationwide. I guess common ground means give abortion supporters everything they want under the misleading claim that some common ground has been achieved as a means to satisfy public distaste for abortion with lies and distortions.
Thursday, August 6, 2009 -- Is the White House getting emails about you? Have you expressed concerns about the health care bill? Our government leaders want to know if you are criticizing this massive government takeover of health care. Oops, if I have not been snitched on already, that will probably do it! The White House web site states, "Since we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking for your help. If you get an e-mail or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov." Now, there are some really fishy things going on out there. How about Planned Parenthood arguing that abortion will not receive government funding under the health care bill? Why don't we all email the White House about that really fishy tale! Even though Associated Press corrected itself to admit the health care bill would produce taxpayer-funded abortions, CBS News calls that a myth. This CBS factcheck is pretty fishy when you consider the amendments that have been approved compared to those that were rejected. Just reviewing the stated positions of Obama appointees reveals an agenda for denying health care to those who are deemed to have a "low quality of life." Congress has also established the means to move many people into the "public plan" so govenment bureaucrats can dictate the benefit rules as they see fit. It seems to be pretty fishy that if you like your current insurance, you can keep it. Now you have a number of items that seem fishy to inform the White House about! Get started sending those emails.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009 -- Health care reform bill has many underlying problems Some Pro-Life advocates seem to be suggesting that if only abortion can be removed from the health care reform bill, they could support it. I have many additional concerns about the current attempt at health care reform so I sent the following email message: As both a Catholic and a person professionally involved in the Pro-Life movement, I am very concerned about the mixed messages that are being conveyed to Catholics and the public in general about the current health care "reform" being pushed through Congress. So many provisions of the current health care "reform" bill are so flawed that they are beyond repair, and that is assuming anyone would even be willing to accept any repair. Based on all of the Pro-Life amendments that have already been rejected, it seems that the culture of death is totally in control of this over 1100-page health care monstrosity. While many statements from Catholic leaders have strongly demanded that coverage of abortion be excluded from the health care bill, even that point gets diluted when phrases like "abortion-neutral" get used. Where are the demands for complete conscience protection, not just of individuals, but of Catholic and other health care organizations that are not willing to accept medical procedures deemed standard by the culture of death crowd (e.g. abortion, terminal sedation, "safe" sex, embryonic stem cell research, etc)? I listened to the Raymond Arroyo interview of Richard Doerflinger. I agree with the points of concern raised by Raymond Arroyo and find Richard Doerflinger's responses weak in many cases. I think one key problem is Doerflinger's opening statement endorsing "universal health care." To me that implies government-run health care. Any government-run health care means reduced choices and administrative delays in both coverage and treatment. We already have horror stories from the supposedly better health care provided by the government in places like Canada and Britain. Government run health care may exist in many places, but that does not mean it works better. Later in the interview I heard Richard Doerflinger state support for health care for everyone, including illegal aliens. Talk about something to encourage illegal immigration! How can the taxpayers be expected to provide health care for people who are not even citizens and who will obviously not be paying for coverage under the plan? It seems the authors' of the current bill in Congress have the answer. It's called encouraging "end of life choices," but amounts to endorsing euthanasia to save money to pay for coverage for illegal aliens. Much analysis of this euthanasia threat has already been performed by people who are willing to read the bill: Palliative
Care's Merciless Twist (Judie Brown) Beyond this very serious concern, there is the warning from Deal Hudson
(Why Catholics Will Not Get Abortion Out of the Health Care Bill Preventing these evils, including: subtle but deadly euthanasia, abortion, violation of conscience, loss of freedom to choose health care coverage and treatments, the inefficiency of government programs, and one-size-fits-all government mandates, should override any perceived value from this current health care bill! Preventing these abuses of human life and freedom requires complete opposition to the current attempt at health care reform. The authors of this bill started from a bad premise, and compromise is not possible without giving away the store. There are too many administrative loopholes buried in this bill so that "culture of death" administrators will have ample opportunity to accomplish their agenda, regardless of potential amendments that are not likely to be adopted anyway. Opposition to this bill, in total, needs as clear and united a voice as opposition to FOCA has had, which is effectively buried in this bill anyway. That voice is needed now, not this mixed message that is giving the culture of death cover to deceive the public in hopes of getting this radical change for the worst enacted into law.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009 -- IL parental notice takes effect, with a 90-day waiver Even though many parents never knew they had no right even to be notified before their daughter got an abortion, effective today they finally have that right in the state of Illinois. The Federal injunction against enforcement of the Parental Notice of Abortion Act of 1995 has been removed. Unfortunately, many parents may still not be notified in the next 90 days because the Illinois State Medical Disciplinary Board has given abortion providers a 90-day period "to institute new procedures and protocols and to educate staff about the Act's notification requirements and exceptions to ensure compliance with the Act." During these 90 days abortionists who do not provide notice "shall be deemed to have done so in good faith and shall not be subject to discipline for unprofessional conduct." How many abortionists do you think will notify any parents with that waiver in effect? How long does it take to teach staff that they need to contact a parent at least 48 hours before the abortion is scheduled to occur? Maybe they should consult with other medical providers who are already familiar with this process because they need to it for every medical procedure. Will the 90 days be devoted to finding ways to evade the intent of the law?
Monday, August 3, 2009 -- Euthanasia concerns grow with review of health care bill The more details that are revealed about the health care reform bill in Congress, the more concerns are raised about the threat of euthanasia. Below are links to articles that address issues that offer such a wide spectrum of interpretation that they can , even if in a subtle way, deter patients from obtaining care that they both want and need: Palliative
Care's Merciless Twist (Judie Brown)
|