This Election Proves the American Church Is in Even Worse Shape Than You Think

/0 Comments/in , /by

There’s been a lot of justifiable hand-wringing regarding the Christian vote in this election cycle. Unfortunately, the reality is even worse than the perception.

That’s because data suggests that what’s driving many believers to vote isn’t their beliefs as much as it is their racial/ethnic identity — just like the electorate at large. In other words, voters coming from the institution charged with preserving America’s vitally important moral foundation — the church — collectively aren’t approaching the ballot box any differently than the secularly-minded.

That’s bad news if you’re trying to conserve a society based on God-given (not government granted) rights, but more on that later. First, let’s permit the troubling data to speak for itself.

Let’s begin with Catholic voters, which are a crucial voting bloc for both Republicans and Democrats. Since Roe v. Wade, only once has either side won the presidency without winning the Catholic vote. And that was in 2000 when George W. Bush won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote, so that’s obviously an outlier.

How critical is this bloc of voters? Consider Obama won Catholics by three points in 2012, which mirrored almost precisely his national popular vote advantage (3.8 points).

While polls have shown Democrats with a decided edge among Catholics ever since the race was narrowed to Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, Trump doesn’t have a Catholic problem as much as he has a minority problem. Trump has narrowly led among white Catholics since last summer. However, that’s not enough to overcome Clinton’s astounding three-to-one lead among Hispanic Catholics.

The same pattern exists among evangelical protestants, but it’s even more striking.

LifeWay Research just published a fascinating survey drawing distinctions between voters who simply identify as evangelicals, and those who actually have evangelical beliefs. Overall, the survey found among whites who hold evangelical beliefs Trump overwhelmingly leads, 65-10. Meanwhile, Clinton holds almost the exact same lead among non-whites with evangelical beliefs, 62-15.

For the sake of its survey, LifeWay defined evangelical beliefs as the following:

Trusting in Jesus Christ alone for salvation.

Believe they have a responsibility to share their faith in Christ with others.

Believe the Bible is the final authority in their lives.

What’s unsettling is how those who claim they “believe the Bible is the final authority in their lives” could have such starkly different voting patterns. Especially because the Bible makes it clear the Christian is to set aside their worldly identity (race, ethnicity, gender, family legacy, nation of origin, etc.) in order to find his/her identity in Christ first and foremost.

Sadly, just the opposite appears to be happening with many voters.

Whites with evangelical beliefs are voting for a Republican whose lack of character and tendency to bully/demean flies in the face of what the Bible requires of our leaders. On the other hand, non-whites with evangelical beliefs are voting for a Democrat who is a staunch advocate for infanticide and sexual immorality, which are clearly condemned by the Scriptures. Not to mention Clinton’s willingness to have government violate the First Amendment to punish those who believe in Biblical morality.

Here’s why this trend spells certain doom for American Exceptionalism if it continues.

John Adams once said our Constitution establishing self-government was “meant only for a moral and religious people.” Many of his fellow founding fathers echoed similar sentiments. It’s no coincidence that as the culture has become more decadent the government has gotten bigger. The less moral restraint we have, the more government is needed to suffer the consequences of our actions.

Furthermore, those who fundamentally just believe in big government will seek to further incentivize immorality in order to justify their calls for more government. Thus creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. Either way, morality and limited government are hand-in-hand. You cannot have one without the other.

This is why great spiritual awakenings came before liberty in our history, and then later revivals were required to secure that liberty for future generations once it was established. Spiritual revival leads to a morally-restrained people. A morally-restrained people require less government to restrain them.

But if we are now living in a time, as this data suggests, when even those who have inherited that spiritual legacy will instead see things as racially polarized and ethnically balkanized like the general population does, then the last line of defense to preserve our heritage has also been lost.

Many of us long for a day when it seems the majority of Americans once more believe in the right things regardless of our political differences. Those days will not return if believers, who are required to set their cultural biases aside to serve a greater cause, are unable to do so. For if someone is unable to set what divides us aside to serve God, they’ll never do it to serve their fellow man.

This puts us in existential danger. Without a moral and religious people, good luck preserving the notion of God-given rights that empowers individual freedom and limits government intrusion.

Is it any wonder we’re mired in a depressing presidential action between, as 19-year-old Janae Petijean told the Boston Globe, a man who “is everything wrong with America’s culture” and a woman who “is everything wrong with our government,” given everything wrong with the church? (For more from the author of “This Election Proves the American Church Is in Even Worse Shape Than You Think” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

New Study: Human Heartbeat Detectable at 16 Days

/0 Comments/in , /by

A new British study says a human heartbeat may be detectable 16 days after a baby’s fertilization, based upon an analysis of fetal mice.

Published on October 11 and conducted by Oxford University, the study utilized high-resolution live imaging to examine fetal mice. In their summary, the authors note that “The heart is the first organ to form and to begin working in an embryo during pregnancy. It must begin pumping early to supply oxygen and nutrients to the developing embryo.”

Coordinated contractions of specialised muscle cells in the heart, called cardiomyocytes, generate the force needed to pump blood. The flow of calcium ions into and out of the cardiomyocytes triggers these heartbeats. In addition to triggering heart contractions, calcium ions also act as a messenger that drives changes in which genes are active in the cardiomyocytes and how these cells behave.

By manipulating the calcium ions, the study’s authors were able to discern more information for the study, which was intended to better understand birth defects of the heart. Pro-life advocates, however, are highlighting the study’s finding that heartbeats were detected in mice at 7.5 days after conception, which is equivalent to 16 days after conception for humans.

Mary Ellen Douglas of the Campaign Life Coalition of Canada told LifeSiteNews that “science is catching up with what we always have known, that life begins with union of the sperm and ovum and what is in the womb after that is a human being with its own DNA, and with its own heart pumping its own blood.”

“It won’t change the thinking of pro-abortion people,” she added. “None is so blind as those who will not see. But this reinforces the fact that there is a human being in the womb directing its own growth and development. And that’s true even before the heart starts beating, from conception.”

Sidewalk activist Lauren Handy used the new study as part of her protests and prayer in front of Planned Parenthood’s new Washington, D.C. headquarters. “This is very helpful for sidewalk counseling,” she said, “The humanity of the baby begins at conception, but it touches the mother to know when her baby’s heartbeat can be detected.”

Carol Tobias of U.S. National Right to Life said, according to LifeSiteNews, “This will make it much more difficult [for abortion advocates] to pass off the unborn child as a ‘blob of cells’ if the heart is already beating.”

A number of bills have been introduced in state legislatures to ban abortions after a heartbeat is detected. One measure that became law in North Dakota was knocked down last year. (For more from the author of “New Study: Human Heartbeat Detectable at 16 Days” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

3 Ways to Expose the Truth About Planned Parenthood

/0 Comments/in , /by

Usually the century mark for a person, place, or thing is a momentous and joyous occasion. Not so this time.

On Sunday, Planned Parenthood turned 100. Both pro-lifers and pro-choicers are marking the organization’s birthday in hashtags: #100YearsOfAbuse and #100YearsStrong, respectively.

But the statistics that have emerged from that 100-year reign are staggering. The award for “most notable” goes to—more than 7 million abortions.

And Cecile Richards has claimed: “We’ve made incredible gains during our first century and we’re just getting started. We will build on our proud legacy and launch our second century with as much passion, courage, and conviction as our first.”

Planned Parenthood is likely here to stay (at least for the foreseeable future), but that doesn’t mean we stop having conversations about the organization and the truth behind its practices.

Here are three ways to talk to someone in your life about Planned Parenthood.

Common Ground

Whether pro-life or pro-choice, it’s safe to assume you want women to have access to quality health care.

The definition of “quality health care” is where the two sides diverge. It seems reasonable to claim that quality health care should include a safe and clean environment where nurses and doctors provide all the information to a patient. And if that patient is pregnant, the information provided includes an ultrasound with a detectable heartbeat.

But to start with common ground means to establish the low bar of quality health care as a right we can all support. Don’t wade into the bothersome details just yet.

Examples

Though Planned Parenthood has escaped the restriction of federal funds, the facts don’t lie and are hard to deny. It’s very important to cite the numerous other health care providers, what services they perform, and their accessibility.

First, there are 20 times as many federally qualified health care centers that serve women as Planned Parenthoods. The argument that closing Planned Parenthood clinics or restricting their funds will inhibit access to quality health care for women is ridiculous. Don’t we want women to have access to a health care provider in their neighborhood? Doesn’t proximity matter?

Second, The Daily Signal cited a few interesting numbers. Planned Parenthood claims about 30 percent of all abortions in the United States every year. Compare this outrageous number to the percentage of Pap tests performed (less than 1 percent) and breast exams (less than 2 percent).

If a woman needs a mammogram (which Planned Parenthood is not licensed to perform), why not remove the middleman that Planned Parenthood has become? Don’t we want clinics that offer access to every health service instead of just a few?

Third, we’re all aware of the horrifying videos released by David Daleiden that rasied questions about the selling of baby parts by Planned Parenthood for profit. (Planned Parenthood had denied any illegal activity.) Though the organization has avoided suffering any major consequences, the videos exist and those conversations are difficult to forget.

If we care about women, it’s important to point out that altering abortions (therefore putting a woman’s health in danger) in order to make a profit is not only illegal, but heartbreaking. Women deserve the truth, and they deserve better.

Words

Words are one of the best defenses you have in this conversation. It’s “baby” vs. “fetus,” and neither side can change what terms they use because both risk losing the argument. So, stick with “unborn baby/child.” Humanize the life the other side refuses to.

Also, talk about rights. Pro-choicers love to talk about the human right to do with your body what you want. But their opinion of when the same rights do/don’t apply to an unborn child are loose (at best), and are usually defined by convenience. So, fight back.

Steal the word “rights” to talk about the unborn child and their right to dignity and respect. As medical advances show more clearly when life begins, the battle for the word “rights” becomes more important.

Just make sure that when talking about Planned Parenthood and abortion you don’t demonize the women who’ve chosen this option. Many have been lied to and felt like they had no choice. To win this argument is to show compassion—for the mother and for the baby growing inside her.

Planned Parenthood has been around for 100 years, but that doesn’t mean the organization will celebrate another century of “success”—especially with the rise of health care technology, social media, and your willingness to have a conversation about the true nature of its practice.

Gather your facts, establish common ground (remember: this is a conversation, not a shouting match), cite examples, and choose your words wisely. (For more from the author of “3 Ways to Expose the Truth About Planned Parenthood” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Planned Parenthood Abortionist: ‘I Provide Abortions Because I’m a Christian’

/0 Comments/in , /by

October 16, 2016 marks the 100th anniversary of Planned Parenthood’s founding by racist eugenicist Margaret Sanger. Her self-described goal was to exterminate blacks and sterilize “idiots,” “morons” and the “feeble-minded.” In one revealing letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, Sanger described how to handle the issue of black extermination:

We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.

One of her more famous quotes makes the stomach churn:

The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.

Perhaps there are those who still feel that way. Is it possible that there are abortionists who feel that they perform an act of mercy when they kill babies? The following story concerns an abortionist who believes just that.

Dr. Sarah Wallett

There are times in life when, as a Christian, we read or hear something sinful so couched in a mist of Christian ideology that our knee-jerk reaction is one of revulsion. The juxtaposition of faith and sin causes a gut-wrenching and heartsick effect and we want to correct the misunderstanding of Christian faith immediately. Such is my reaction to the story of Dr. Sarah Wallett, a self-proclaimed Christian who performs abortions because she believes “it is the most important thing that I will ever do.”

In early August, Dr. Wallett wrote in her jarring column at Refinery29 that her Christian faith is precisely why she kills unborn children. For an abortion provider to claim that ripping an unborn baby limb from limb is Christ-like is repulsive and couldn’t be further from the truth.

She described her childhood in a Christian home where her family attended church regularly, said prayers before meals and where she was taught “that it was my duty to help people in need and leave the world a better place than I found it,” and added, “The patients I see every day are so clearly people in need — and the medical care I provide them is both life-changing and, in many circumstances, life-saving.”

It calls into question the Christian teaching she actually received — where did she learn that murder was a Christ-like attribute?

She then offered up a list of complaints about the stigma she faces as an abortion provider (“there are no positive images of abortion providers or the value in the work that we do”), legislators who work to revise abortion laws (their “sole goal is clearly to make this work more difficult … create laws that interfere with the medical care I provide, because they do not like the work that I do”) and her concern about abortion laws in other states (“similar to the horrific one in Texas”).

She blasted the laws in her state of Tennessee that “do nothing to keep my patients safe,” such as OB-GYNs like Dr. Wallett having admitting privileges in a local hospital, working in an ambulatory center or providing patients with information about abortion and requiring them to have two visits to the health center prior to having an abortion. Dr. Wallett wrote that “many of these laws, in fact, harm the same women they’re supposedly intended to help,” although it isn’t clear how having access to a hospital or receiving medical information harms the patients.

The abortion provider claimed over and over again that she implements her faith throughout her work of taking tiny human lives — providing compassion and empathy to her patients who have chosen to have an abortion and feel the need to justify it to her, “a task no one should ever have to do.” “My faith teaches me to withhold judgment and to extend acceptance to all,” Dr. Wallett said as she described patients who suffered through the experience of having friends and family beg them not to have an abortion.

One can only imagine the scene of loved ones imploring a pregnant woman to choose life, that they would adopt her baby. But she ended up in the office of a compassionate and accepting killer.

Her patients also have strong faith, she said, and “[g]ood, moral women have abortions every day,” adding that it’s her duty to provide a positive “counterpoint” to the shame and misinformation pregnant women experience and hear that causes pain.

What kind of upbringing was this? How can anyone look at Scripture and believe that God would have us murder the most innocent and vulnerable among us?

The closest analogy from Scripture regarding killing one’s young is the child sacrifice to the pagan deity Molech, which was practiced by the Ammonites and later, the Israelites (1 Kings 11:1-8). God called this practice an “abomination,” and forbid the Israelites to observe the barbaric ritual. “You shall not give any of your children to devote them by fire to Molech, and so profane the name of your God: I am the Lord” (Lev. 18:21). Any Israelite who practiced the child sacrifice was to be put to death (Lev. 20:2).

On the contrary, the Bible is replete with scriptures telling us how much he loved and wanted us before we were born. God called us and named us when we were still in our mother’s womb (Is. 49:1). He formed us with purpose (Ps. 139:13). The Lord says children are an inheritance and a reward (Ps. 127:3). He also tells us that while a mother may not have compassion on the baby in her womb, He will never forget him or her (Is. 49:15).

Slaughtering innocent unborn children has nothing to do with Christianity. It goes against all biblical teaching of protecting human life and the most vulnerable among us. It directly violates the sixth Commandment: “You shall not kill” (Ex. 20:13).

If Dr. Wallett takes pleasure in her work of taking innocent lives, she will answer to God for that. But she cannot tie abortion to the Christian faith in any logical or truthful way. (For more from the author of “Planned Parenthood Abortionist: ‘I Provide Abortions Because I’m a Christian'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Where Abortion Stands Legally Today

/0 Comments/in , /by

As giant abortion provider Planned Parenthood celebrates its 100th anniversary this week, pro-lifers led by The Stream are commemorating #100forlife to remember all who have died due to abortion.

It comes forty-three years after the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion in Roe v. Wade — permitting abortions during the three trimesters of pregnancy, and allowing greater regulatory power by states during the second and third trimesters. To come up with this odd, three-tier ruling, the court relied upon a tortured interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, finding in the “penumbras” of the Constitution a right to privacy fundamental to the concept of liberty.

While abortion remains legal in the U.S., the laws governing it have changed significantly in recent years. Some of those modifications are state laws that impose additional requirements before having an abortion, or restrictions on when or how an abortion may be procured. Most of the laws came as the focus of the pro-life movement expanded from abortion center protests and sidewalk counseling to include passing state and federal legislation.

The movement was emboldened to take this route by Gonzales v. Carhart in 2007, in which the Supreme Court upheld a nationwide ban on partial-birth abortions.

These laws, which added new requirements and regulations for abortions, have successfully resulted in the shutdown of abortion centers. Five states now have only one abortion facility. According to the abortion rights research organization Guttmacher Institute, in the late 1980s, there was a high of 705 centers nationwide. By 2011, that number had dropped to 583, and others have closed since.

The laws may also be contributing to a decrease in the number of abortions. The Guttmacher Institute reported a high of 1,590,750 abortions in 1988. That number has declined almost every year since then, to 1,058,490 in 2011, equivalent to the level in the mid-1970s shortly after abortion was legalized.

Significant Supreme Court Victories That Reversed the Abortion Trend
Since Roe v. Wade, there have been several Supreme Court decisions that struck down or upheld state laws regulating abortion — overall, in balance favorable to the pro-life movement. In the 1980 decision Harris v. McRae, the court upheld the constitutionality of the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits most federal funding of abortions, except in the case of rape, incest or danger to the mother’s life.

Nine years later, in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, the court upheld Missouri’s ban on the use of public facilities and employees for abortions, and the state’s requirement that doctors test for fetal viability at 24 weeks.

A Supreme Court case in 1992 dealt the biggest blow to Roe v. Wade. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the court backed off from the convoluted, messy Roe precedent prohibiting states from regulating abortion during the first trimester. It permitted states to implement laws requiring such things as pre-abortion counseling, waiting limits and parental consent, so long as the requirements did not impose an “undue burden” on women.

A Legal Setback in 2016

Despite years of strides, the pro-life movement suffered a significant defeat in June when the high court struck down two abortion center regulations in Texas. In Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, the court invalidated laws that required abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals and held abortion facilities to the standards of outpatient surgical centers. The court held that the onerousness of the regulations outweighed the state’s interest in regulating health.

Will the Generally Pro-life Trend Continue?

The Supreme Court ultimately has the final say, rightly or wrongly, on abortion laws. Whether pro-life advocates will be able to continue the trend of stripping away parts of Roe v. Wade depends on the future makeup of the Court. If Democrat Hillary Clinton becomes president, she will appoint left-leaning justices who will make up a majority of the court and strike down pro-life laws. If Republican Donald Trump wins the election, he has promised to appoint mostly right-leaning justices who will have the opposite effect. (For more from the author of “Where Abortion Stands Legally Today” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

What One Woman Is Doing to Take Down Planned Parenthood

/0 Comments/in , /by

While Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider, is celebrating its 100th anniversary Sunday, one organization is working tirelessly to put Planned Parenthood out of business.

CEO Brandi Swindell founded Stanton Healthcare in 2006. According to the Stanton Project’s website, it has branched out from a room in a doctor’s office to an international affiliate program.

Stanton Healthcare is a nonprofit medical facility that provides pregnancy tests, ultrasounds, client advocacy, and other life-affirming programs that respect the “dignity of both mother and child.”

‘Replace’ Planned Parenthood

“Planned Parenthood is coming up on their 100th anniversary and we are coming up on our 10th. We are looking to replace and outlast Planned Parenthood,” Swindell told The Daily Signal in a phone interview.

“I founded Stanton Healthcare in 2006,” said Swindell. “I had been doing pro-life work for 16 or 17 years prior and had worked on the national level and co-founded Generation Life.”

Swindell said the pro-life mission has been a driving force in her life, but a realization of the horror of abortion came during her college years.

“This cause has been a passion of mine. I was raised with an understanding of the dignity of human life. However, the realization of what abortion was really hit me in college when my roomate got pregnant and had an abortion,” Swindell said. “Through this I really understood what abortion was and that Planned Parenthood leaves a legacy of tragedy.”

In 2011, five years after opening her first office, Swindell opened another medical clinic, Stanton Healthcare Boise, next door to a Planned Parenthood clinic.

Swindell said that she faced opposition from Planned Parenthood immediately after opening Stanton Healthcare Boise.

“When we opened our doors in Boise, Planned Parenthood was not happy to see us there. We exposed their heart that they are not about true choice. Planned Parenthood claimed that we were violating HIPAA [Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act] laws and confidentiality,” Swindell said.

hen covering this confrontation, a reporter approached Swindell and asked to hear about Stanton Healthcare’s position on confidentiality and HIPAA.

“I showed the reporter a plaque prominently displayed on our waiting room office wall that says, ‘We voluntarily comply with HIPAA regulations.’ This claim from Planned Parenthood was comical because our stance in regards to both HIPAA and confidentiality was posted for all to see,” Swindell said.

A ‘Life-Affirming’ Clinic

Looking to expand Stanton Healthcare to other areas, the very first Stanton mobile unit opened in 2013, meeting the needs of women living in rural and immigrant communities throughout the state of Idaho. Modeled after the very first Stanton mobile unit, the Stanton Alabama mobile unit will soon be serving the communities of Birmingham.

Swindell established the Stanton International Affiliate Program in 2014 with the goal to reach as many women as possible with care that respects both mother and child.

The purpose of this program is to “replace abortion businesses around the world because we believe that women deserve access to quality, coercion-free cared, and compassionate alternatives to abortion,” according to the program’s website.

Along with the training center that Stanton Healthcare is working on establishing, it will also be opening a mega-center in Idaho where women can receive first-class care.

“Our center opening up in Meridian will be the first-ever life-affirming mega-clinic. We are also working on developing a Stanton Healthcare conference center where we will be training staff from across the country and around the world,” Swindell said.

Besides offering the typical services that clinics provide, Stanton Healthcare’s Meridian location will also be offering an 18-month support program that includes “options counseling, doctor referrals, parenting classes, practical support, and encouragement. Our clients and their babies get a chance at a brighter future.”

This 18-month support program is already offered at Stanton Healthcare Boise and will be expanded to all of Stanton’s affiliate clinics around the nation.

With these services available, Stanford Healthcare’s goal, according to its website, “is to be the first choice for every abortion vulnerable woman in Idaho and beyond.”

To Swindell, Stanton Healthcare is not only about providing quality health care to all women but also protecting and preserving human rights. She said:

I am primarily pro-life because I believe in human rights. Abortion has no business being in women’s health care. Planned Parenthood has sabotaged women’s health care. I founded Stanton Healthcare because I believe that Planned Parenthood has failed us and failed women.

A New Pro-Life Generation

Swindell believes that youth especially have a critical role to play in the pro-life movement.

“Stanton Healthcare has a heart for the emerging generation. Millennials are part of the Stanton revolution,” Swindell said. “We have students coming to us from across the nation that want to be part of the Stanton mission.”

The goal of Swindell and Stanton Healthcare is to reach all women with health care that respects both mother and child.

“Our goal at Stanton Healthcare is to be where Planned Parenthood is. We are setting up next to their clinics and are building a presence in Washington, D.C., and the U.N. We are the true, authentic genuine voice in women’s health care,” Swindell said.

“Women deserve better than the cold doors of an abortion facility. Pregnancy resource centers respect the dignity of every mother and child by empowering women facing difficult situations with life-affirming options,” said Melanie Israel, a research associate for the DeVos Center for Religion & Civil Society at The Heritage Foundation. (For more from the author of “What One Woman Is Doing to Take Down Planned Parenthood” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

As Planned Parenthood Celebrates Death, Pro-Life Groups Promote Life

/0 Comments/in , /by

Sunday is Planned Parenthood’s 100th “birthday.” Founded by an anti-abortion woman who believed that contraception empowered women’s liberty, the organization has morphed into America’s largest abortion company, ending over 300,000 unborn babies’ lives each year.

Planned Parenthood has launched #100yearsstrong in an effort to promote its history and its work. Pro-life groups have responded with their own hashtags, fact-based analyses of Planned Parenthood’s practices and prayer. Three efforts are highlighted below.

#100ForLife

Since Wednesday, The Stream has highlighted the horrors of abortion, the hope seen in those Planned Parenthood hasn’t killed and prayerful efforts for national and individual conversion. We’re grateful to our many individual partners in this effort, and the Family Research Council for working with us to spread the truth about abortion.

Our hashtag is #100ForLife. Our weapon is God.

#100YearsOfAbuse

A coalition of pro-life groups is exposing Planned Parenthood’s many examples of wrongdoing – not just to the unborn, but also their mothers, and taxpayers.

Member groups include: Alliance Defending Freedom, Americans United for Life, Civil Rights for the Unborn, Family Research Council, Life Legal Defense Foundation, March for Life, Media Research Center, Pro-Life Action League, Radiance Foundation, Students for Life of America, and Susan B. Anthony List.

Here is their group statement:

“Planned Parenthood’s 100-year anniversary is a tragic milestone for our nation and a reminder of the millions of unborn children who will never have a birthday. We mourn these children, as well as the women who have been hurt and exploited by the nation’s largest abortion chain. Planned Parenthood was founded by the notorious Margaret Sanger, who advocated for the eradication of poor and disadvantaged, whom she considered less-than-human “weeds.” And Planned Parenthood continues to call this villain their hero by naming its highest award after her.

“In the last three years alone, Planned Parenthood has committed nearly one million abortions while receiving a total of $1.5 billion from the American people, against our will. We represent the growing number of Americans who oppose Planned Parenthood’s extreme abortion agenda and seek to defund this abortion giant.

“On its 100th anniversary, Planned Parenthood is losing ground. Business is drying up as women are empowered to choose life for their babies. Last year Planned Parenthood closed 33 facilities in 18 states, and for the first time, the United States Senate sent a bill defunding Planned Parenthood to the President’s desk. Thanks to undercover investigators from the Center for Medical Progress, who exposed the ugly truth that Planned Parenthood not only aborts children, but sells those aborted babies’ organs, more people than ever are learning the truth about the scandal-ridden abortion chain. The #100YearsofAbuse campaign is the next opportunity for us to educate the public about Planned Parenthood as we work to put them out of business and ring in the pro-life century.”

Their hashtag is #100YearsOfAbuse. Content can be seen here.

A Way Out Through Prayer

The Pro-Life Action League is sponsoring over 100 prayer vigils nationwide to combat Planned Parenthood, and to save lives. As told to The Stream:

The Pro-Life Action League has organized prayer vigils at over 100 Planned Parenthood centers, at which they’ll offer prayers of mourning for Planned Parenthood’s unborn victims. Scheidler explains: “To acknowledge the humanity of these unknown, unnamed, faceless and abandoned children is a very positive thing to do. The abortion industry and their allies in government and the media want us all to forget about these kids, but we won’t.”

Pro-Life Action League Executive Director Eric Scheidler told The Stream that in addition to prayer, his group is offering abortion industry employees a way out – to convert from dealing death to supporting life. They’ve sent “birthday” cards that include a graphic image of an abortion victim to every Planned Parenthood nationwide, and told employees that if the image bothers them, to call Scheidler.

“It would be easy to demonize people working at Planned Parenthood, aiding and abetting the nation’s largest abortion business,” Scheidler told The Stream. But, he argues, employees “are regular people, whose consciences are often deeply troubled by what goes on behind the doors of Planned Parenthood’s 631 facilities.”

Planned Parenthood’s Corporate Sponsors

Corporate watchdog 2nd Vote listed 37 corporations as “direct” donors to Planned Parenthood. The graphic comes from the Family Research Council.

(For more from the author of “As Planned Parenthood Celebrates Death, Pro-Life Groups Promote Life” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Pro-Life Groups Fight Obama Administration’s ‘Parting Gift’ to Planned Parenthood

/0 Comments/in , /by

Pro-life groups are taking action against what they call the Obama administration’s “parting gift” to Planned Parenthood.

“This is a political judgment, a parting gift,” Chuck Donovan, president of the Charlotte Lozier Institute, said of the new rule that could make it more difficult for states to defund Planned Parenthood clinics. “It’s part of the devotion to big abortion.”

The Department of Health and Human Services’ proposed rule came in response to several states’ attempt to defund Planned Parenthood after the nation’s largest abortion provider was featured in a series of undercover videos last year.

Under the rule, states would be prohibited from blocking Planned Parenthood from receiving Title X grant money for reasons “unrelated” to its ability to provide family planning services.

Created in 1970, Title X provides grants to health organizations for family planning services such as birth control and sterilizations. The manner in which states distribute federal Title X funds varies, but grants are typically allocated to health agencies and private networks. Sometimes, it is up to the state to allocate the grant money, and other times, private entities can decide.

After the Center for Medical Progress released several undercover videos last year that raised questions about whether Planned Parenthood illegally profits off the sale of tissue from aborted babies, states—including Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Louisiana, Kansas, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin—moved to block the group from being eligible to receive family planning funds.

Planned Parenthood denied the allegations, and was cleared in multiple investigations.

In justifying the new rule that it released in September, the Obama administration claims the state effort to defund Planned Parenthood has decreased the number of Title X providers from 48 to 36, and also decreased the total number of Title X clients served.

In response, groups like the Charlotte Lozier Institute, Susan B. Anthony List, Family Research Council, and Alliance Defending Freedom are filing comments with HHS opposing the proposal.

“The question isn’t whether states should fund Planned Parenthood,” Steven H. Aden, a lawyer with Alliance Defending Freedom, told The Daily Signal. “All of them do, to my knowledge. The question is whether the states should be permitted by the Obama administration to shepherd limited public health dollars in a way that most effectively delivers primary and secondary health care to women.

“What the proposed rule does is define success under Title X solely on the ability to provide the most contraceptives to the most women. That’s Planned Parenthood’s business model and unfortunately, that’s this administration’s idea of women’s health care. But Title X is much broader than that.”

A summary of the proposed rule, as described by the Department of Health and Human Services, states:

Since 2011, 13 states have taken actions to restrict participation by certain types of providers as subrecipients in the Title X program based on factors unrelated to the providers’ ability to provide the services required under Title X effectively. In at least several instances, this has led to disruption of services or reduction of services where a public entity, such as a state health department, holds a Title X grant and makes 21 subawards to subrecipients for the provision of services. In response to these actions, this proposed rule requires that any Title X recipient subawarding funds for the provision of Title X services not prohibit a potential subrecipient from participating for reasons unrelated to its ability to provide services effectively.

“Explain to me why a woman going to a federally qualified health center that has the Title X grant is gaining access because the grant just went away and went to the Planned Parenthood 5 miles away. That’s what they’re saying,” Donovan said.

Federally qualified health centers provide comprehensive health care to millions of uninsured, working poor, and jobless Americans each year. In addition to providing obstetrician-gynecologist services, federally qualified health centers offer a variety of primary and secondary services. For this reason, Donovan argues women are better off visiting one of these centers to obtain comprehensive health care.

“It certainly is a pro-life issue because Planned Parenthood is so identified with abortion,” he said, “but it’s also much more than that.”

The Daily Signal contacted the National Association of Community Health Centers, which represents 1,200 health centers across the U.S., but the organization declined to comment.

Donovan said he can’t explain why community health centers wouldn’t want to speak out about the grant money they stand to lose but said he “would hope we hear more complaints by them.”

Groups like the American Academy of Family Physicians, American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists all came out in support of the Obama administration’s proposal, arguing the rule is “consistent in their efforts to ensure effective and accessible reproductive health care for all populations.” (For more from the author of “Pro-Life Groups Fight Obama Administration’s ‘Parting Gift’ to Planned Parenthood” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

James Robison: Unwanted and Nearly Aborted but God Takes Him Beyond His Dreams

/0 Comments/in , /by

In 1943, James Robison’s mother was a single 40-year-old whose job was caring for a sick, elderly man. One day, the elderly man’s alcoholic son forced himself on James’ mother and raped her — and James was conceived. James’ mother went to a doctor to get an abortion for this child, this product of rape. The doctor, however, refused to perform an abortion and sent James’ mother on her way.

Shortly after his birth on October 9, 1943, James’ mother — not believing she could care for an infant — put an ad in the paper advertising for a Christian couple to raise her newborn son.

The Reverend and Mrs. H.D. Hale from Pasadena, Texas responded to the ad and for the next five years raised him as their own. He knew them as Mommy and Daddy, and when his mother unexpectedly showed up one day to take him back, he was confused and didn’t want to go. James’ mother did not have a solid plan for raising her son, or even getting him back home. They ended up hitchhiking 175 miles to Austin, and James spent the next 10 years bouncing from place to place with his mother, living in poverty, not feeling like he had a home anywhere. Constant moving and poverty left James feeling like an outsider, and as a result, he was an extremely shy, insecure kid.

When he was 14 years old, James had an opportunity to move back with the Hales. It was a life-changing experience for two reasons — one, with the love and support of the Hales, James encountered Christ and asked Him to be His Lord and Savior; and two, he met Betty Freeman, whom he married in 1963. By the time he married Betty, James’ evangelistic ministry was well underway. Within a couple of years, James had over a thousand invitations to preach in 27 states.

It is estimated that during the 21 years James Robison held crusades, he preached to 20 million people and saw two million of them receive Christ.

James and Betty went on to host LIFE Today, a talk show that spans across the globe, welcoming guests from various backgrounds to discuss relevant and current faith-related issues. LIFE Outreach International helps build fresh water wells, feeds the poor and hungry in Africa and supports local missionaries. Mission Feeding, another outreach, has saved 7 million starving children.

James stopped counting after 20 million people made professions of faith through his various ministries.

James Robison is a living example of Isaiah 49:15: “Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should have no compassion on the son of her womb? Even these may forget, yet I will not forget you.” And He didn’t. He raised up a child who would’ve been aborted, who lived in poverty, who felt abandonment and the sting of rejection — and yet … He became a man of God, who sought the Lord with all of his heart, who listened to God’s call on his life to evangelize and has won millions for the kingdom of God as a result.

For newly-pregnant mothers, those who are scared they cannot take care of a baby and are considering abortion, take to heart James’ story. God took a tragic situation and made it beautiful — and incredibly fruitful for His kingdom and His purpose. God can and will take a tragic situation and make it into something precious. (For more from the author of “James Robison: Unwanted and Nearly Aborted but God Takes Him Beyond His Dreams” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Will This Christian Woman Hang for Taking a Sip of Water?

/0 Comments/in , /by

It was June 14, 2009. A Sunday. It was hot and falsa berry season was in full swing. Asia Bibi decided to pick berries in a local field in exchange for 250 rupees — enough to buy flour to feed her family for a week, she recorded in a memoir about her ordeal.

It was backbreaking work, and when Asia took a sip of water from a well, the women she was laboring with refused to drink from the same source. Asia is a Christian, and the Muslim women insisted that the well was unclean after she drank from it.

An argument ensued, and the women accused Asia of blasphemy against the Islamic prophet Muhammad — an umbrella charge in Pakistan under which anyone can be accused of crime. Asia has consistently maintained her innocence.

A trial was held, and Asia was found guilty of blasphemy and sentenced to hang in 2010. There have been appeals through the years, but the judgment stood. In the meantime, Asia has been kept in solitary confinement in a cell so small her arms can span wall to wall.

Thursday, the Supreme Court of Pakistan will make a final ruling on Asia’s execution. Her torturous, nearly seven-year purgatory will finally come to an end. But will her life?

The German Deutsche Welle reports that “[l]egally, the judges have very little room under the blasphemy law to overturn their 2010 decision” to execute Asia, and that the “issue is no longer only religious; it is a sensitive political matter now.”

Two prominent, politically-connected men in Pakistan have been murdered for speaking publicly in defense of Asia —Salman Tasser (the former governor of Punjab and a Muslim) and Shahbaz Bhatti (former minority affairs minister, who served as the sole Christian in Pakistan’s cabinet). And a mullah previously put forth a reward for Asia’s murder.

There are voices all over the world — from Pope Francis to the European Parliament to hundreds of thousands of people in the online community — pleading with Pakistan’s government to spare Asia’s life and allow her to go back to her husband and five children. The mayor of Paris even offered refuge for her and the family.

Congressman Joe Pitts, R-Penn. (F, 52%) introduced a resolution to make the State Department prioritize the repeal of global blasphemy laws, noting that Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt sanction “particularly severe violations of religious freedom[.]” It never was brought up for a vote on the House floor.

Perhaps intense global pressure could sway the minds of Pakistan’s Supreme Court. Perhaps the justices fear the potentially deadly repercussions for freeing a Christian woman accused of blasphemy.

If the 2010 judgment holds and Asia Bibi is hanged, she will be the first person executed by the Pakistani government for blasphemy laws.

As people around the world await to hear Asia Bibi’s fate, the least we can do is offer up a prayer for her and her family. As Asia tells the world in her memoir:

“I’m asking you for help. Please don’t forget about me. I need you.” (For more from the author of “Will This Christian Woman Hang for Taking a Sip of Water?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.