Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 1/31/14 

Nancy Pelosi will receive the Margaret Sanger award — the top honor given out by the Planned Parenthood abortion business.

Planned Parenthood Federation of America announced today that House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi will deliver remarks at the organization’s Annual Gala in Washington on march 27, where she will receive the award. Planned Parenthood is awarding Leader Pelosi the Margaret Sanger Award, the organization’s highest honor, “in recognition of her leadership, excellence, and outstanding contributions to” the pro-abortion movement during her career.

The president of the abortion business announced the award today, though she never mentioned abortion — instead couching her remarks in “women’s health.”

“On behalf of Planned Parenthood and the millions of patients we serve each year, it gives me great pleasure to announce that House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi will receive the Planned Parenthood Federation of America Margaret Sanger Award, our highest recognition of leadership, excellence, and outstanding contributions to the reproductive health and rights movement,” said Cecile Richards, President, Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

“No one is more deserving of this honor than Leader Pelosi, who has fought tirelessly throughout her career to protect and expand women’s access to health care. As the first woman to serve as Speaker of the House, Leader Pelosi recognized that women’s health is a mainstream issue impacting women and families. Her leadership in passing the Affordable Care Act and her ongoing commitment ensures that the promise of the law is realized for millions of women as the greatest advancement for women’s health in a generation,” said Richards.

Some of the previous Margaret Sanger award winners include Hillary Clinton, Katharine Hepburn, Bella Abzug, Justice Harry Blackmun, Dolores Huerta, and Dr. Ruth.

The award comes one month after Cardinal Raymond Burke, the former archbishop of St. Louis and now the chief justice at the Vatican’s highest court, said prohibiting Pelosi from receiving Communion”makes perfect sense.”

This isn’t the first time Burke has said she should not receive communion.

In a September interview with The Wanderer, a Catholic newspaper, Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke, prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura in Rome, sheds light on Pelosi and communion. He issued a call for pro-abortion politicians to be denied the sacrament — saying that Catholic Canon law must be applied to them.

In July, Pelosi was at it again — with another crass comment on the abortion issue. This time, she went after pro-life Republicans saying they need a lesson in Sex Education 101. She attacked pro-life legislators in state legislatures across the nation who are passing new pro-life laws to limit abortions in places like Texas and North Carolina, saying they needed a lesson on “the birds and the bees.”

The recent comments come after Pelosi put her foot in her mouth during a press conference, calling the battle to keep late-term abortions legal sacred ground.

by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 1/29/14 1:25 PM

The House of Representatives yesterday approved legislation that will put in place a complete ban on taxpayer funding of abortions that ensures abortions are not directly funded in any federal governmental program or department. The White House says President Obama would veto it.

The legislation combines several policies that must be enacted every year in Congressional battles and puts them into law where they will not be in jeopardy of being overturned every time Congress changes hands from pro-life lawmakers to those who support abortions.

The House voted 227-188 for the bill with 221 Republicans and 6 Democrats voting to ban taxpayer funding of abortions under HR 7 while 187 Democrats and one Republican voted against it.

According to the Washington Times, the president would issue a veto if the measure is somehow approved in the Senate or attached to legislation the Senate passes.

As a controversial bill banning federal abortion funding heads to the House floor this week, the Obama administration is threatening a veto if it reaches the president’s desk.

The measure, known as the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” would not only extend the longstanding ban on taxpayer-funded abortions, but go further and restrict Obamacare subsidies for those who purchase health-insurance plans covering abortions.

Supporters argue the legislation is needed to maintain the long-accepted principle that taxpayer money should not fund abortions, while critics allege the bill is simply another GOP attempt to thwart the implementation of the Affordable Care Act.

“The legislation would intrude on women’s reproductive freedom and access to health care. … Longstanding federal policy prohibits the use of federal funds for abortions, except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered,” reads a statement of administration policy released Monday night. “This prohibition is maintained in the Affordable Care Act. … [The bill] would go well beyond these safeguards by interfering with consumers’ private health care choices.”

The statement goes on to say that the president’s senior advisers would recommend he veto the bill, introduced by Rep. Chris Smith, New Jersey Republican.

Congressman Chris Smith, a New Jersey Republican who is the lead sponsor of the bill, spoke on the House floor during debate and said it would help hold President Barack Obama accountable by ensuring no taxpayer funds are used to pay for abortions.

A majority of Americans object to the use of taxpayer money for funding abortion, according to numerous polls — including a survey CNN conducted in early April showing Americans oppose public funding of abortion by a margin of 61% to 35%.

The bill will also mitigate concerns about abortion funding in the various loopholes in the Obamacare national health care bill that various pro-life organizations warned about during debate on the law. The legislation did not contain language banning funding of abortions in its provisions and the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act would fix that problem.

The National Right to Life Committee sent a letter to House members urging support for the legislation that explains how the bill will help:

“Regrettably, however, the 111th Congress enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). During consideration of that legislation, language was proposed (the Stupak-Pitts Amendment) to apply the principles of the Hyde Amendment to the multitude of programs created by the bill, and the House initially approved that language – but no such provision was part of the enacted law, due to opposition from President Obama and the Senate majority. Consequently, the enacted PPACA contains multiple provisions authorizing funding of abortion and funding of health plans that cover abortion.”

The National Right to Life letter also commented on another lesser-known provision of the tax-funded abortion ban — it’s language to protect health care professionals who don’t want to be involved in abortions.

“The bill would codify the principles of the Hyde-Weldon Amendment, which has been appended to the original Hyde Amendment on every Health and Human Services appropriations bill since 2004. This provision would solidify important protections for health care providers who do not wish to participate in providing abortions – which is especially important in light of the Obama Administration’s February 23, 2011 action rescinding the conscience protection regulation issued by the Bush Administration.”

A new Kaiser Foundation study found that 6.1 million women will gain elective abortion coverage under Obamacare through the Medicaid expansion and new federal premium subsidies. H.R. 7 would essentially codify the executive order used in 2009 by President Obama to secure the final votes needed from pro-life Democrats in order to pass the health care overhaul.

The pro-life group CatholicVote also supports the bill as do many other pro-life groups including Americans United for Life, the Susan B. Anthony List, Liberty Counsel and Family Research Council.

“This critically important legislation is called the No Taxpayer Funding of Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act,” Brian Burch of CatholicVote said. “This legislation has been updated to deal with the horrible expansion of abortion that began with the implementation of Obamacare. The House is ready to lead. If they pass this bill, the pressure will be on Senate Democrats up for election this year in red states like Alaska, Arkansas, Louisiana, and North Carolina.”

UPPER MARLBORO, Maryland — Pro-Life activists argued that loneliness drives women to abortion, so addressing abortion as a social justice issue involves befriending women and helping them during and after a crisis pregnancy. A panel at the 2014 National Students for Life Convention introduced this idea, and two groups at the event prioritized it in their work.

"Abortion is a reflection that we've failed to meet the needs of women", said Cathy Ruse, senior fellow for legal studies at the Family Research Council.

Ruse cited the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute, saying that 92 percent of women who have abortions choose abortion for two overarching reasons – a lack of practical or emotional support. "They need help and they need friends," Ruse suggested. "They don't have them, so they turn to abortion." She challenged the 2,500 pro-life activists at the 2014 National Students for Life Convention to develop "a radical solidarity with women in need."

In discussing the term social justice in a panel at the conference, Ruse explained that "social" has to do with relationship, and "the most basic human need for relationship." She quoted Mother Theresa who said "being unwanted, unloved, and uncared for is a much greater poverty than the person who has nothing to eat."

"Love means being willing to give even when it hurts," explained the moderator, Kathryn Lopez, editor-at-large of National Review Online. She argued that abortion takes away both the mother and the father's chance to learn what love truly is.

Joseph Koterski, associate professor of philosophy at Fordham University, urged the pro-life audience to "go out in evangelization, go out in charity, go out to those really and truly in need, and you will speak values." Only by reaching out in love will their arguments actually convince other people.

WASHINGTON — The 41st annual March for Life in Washington, D.C. focused on the theme of adoption as an alternative to abortion. Large numbers of pro-lifers braved the bitter cold to listen to speakers and march up Constitution Avenue to the Supreme Court.

"For every one baby that's adopted," March for Life President Jeanne Monahan explained to The Christian Post as she marched, "there are 64 that are aborted."

By focusing on adoption, she added, March for Life is "trying to get at that huge discrepancy" and encourage "mothers facing an unexpected pregnancy to choose adoption."

Temperatures were in the teens, or below zero when factoring in the wind chill.

Monahan said she was not expecting as large a turnout as last year due to the extreme weather. No official count was taken, but her impression was that even more people were present than last year.

"I'm overwhelmed by the turnout," she said.

Monahan was also impressed by the fact that most of the marchers appeared to be 25 or younger.

"This is the pro-life generation," she said. "So delightful to see their smiling enthusiastic faces. I think young people are going to end abortion in their generation. I really do."

Karen Oliver arrived from Springfield, Va., with her sister and four of her six children. (Her two oldest children were at the march with their high school youth group.)

When asked if she considered staying home because of the extreme cold, she quickly replied, "Never." Oliver has been to every March for Life since the birth of her first child, who is now 15. "Nothing is going to stop us," she added.

One of Oliver's sons, I.J., explained that he is "marching for the lives of babies."

One marcher came dressed as George Washington. When asked why he came to the march, he replied, "George Washington on the third of July in the year of our Lord 1776 said the fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the conduct and courage of this army. So as the general of this army, this is where I must be to be with the other soldiers fighting for the unborn millions of Americans to be."

Even though winter storm Janus has closed down federal government offices and cancelled more than 2,000 flights in the Northeast, tens, if not hundreds of thousands of pro-life advocates are in Washington, D.C. for the 41st annual March for Life event on Wednesday.

Notable speakers at this year's march include Dr. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, and his adopted son, Ryan, and Molly Ann Dutton, who was elected as Auburn University's 100th homecoming queen last fall and is using her inspirational story to advocate for adoption, which is the theme of this year's event.

There will also be an expanded social media presence at the march on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter and use of 360 degree cameras so that people watching online from home can see those who are walking in the march. There's also a March for Life iPhone app, mobile phone text updates, and people can also share their photos and messages by using#WhyWeMarch and #MarchforLife.

Last year, it was estimated that 500,000 pro-life advocates demonstrated against abortion on the 40th anniversary of the Roe. vs. Wade decision. Even though Jeanne Monahan told The Christian Post on Friday that the park service no longer keeps track of those numbers, she does know that it takes hours for the last group of marchers to walk past the Supreme Court building, and estimates attendance numbers to be in the hundreds of thousands.

"We haven't had a formal estimate conducted in quite some time … we don't have an actual count to give, but we believe that we're in the hundreds of thousands. And those who know more about this have viewed estimates, informal estimates, and they say that we're well into the hundreds of thousands," Monahan said.

"Last year it was packed, especially the part where people are walking up Constitution Avenue and pass by the Supreme Court. I can tell you that, being at the front of the march, I crossed over near the Supreme Court right at about 1:45 p.m. and it was close to 4 p.m. when the final marchers crossed by."

More than 400 students from Benedictine College of Atchison, Kan., and its pro-life group, Ravens Respect Life, will be leading the march this year, having traveled in eight chartered buses to make the 48-hour round trip to march on behalf of their generation of peers who lost their lives to abortion.

Kathryn Brown, a Benedictine College student who coordinated the trip to attend March for Life told CP on Saturday the students were selected to lead the front of the march after sharing the group's long tradition of participation at the event with Monahan. Sixty students from the school will be carrying the March for Life banner at the front of the march.

Brown emphasized the importance of the march for her generation, which she believes is more pro-life than previous generations, because they have been greatly impacted by abortion.

"I think one big reason is because our generation is the one who is missing so many people because of abortion," she commented. "There are many people, college aged, who have siblings who were aborted. There are people missing in our lives because they were never given the chance to live – siblings, friends, maybe even people we would have married. We mourn them and we resolve to stand up for their God-given right to life so that others will not share that same fate."

According to Monahan, among the reasons people -- especially those in millennial generation -- are witnessing a cultural shift toward supporting the pro-life movement opposed to advocating for abortion, are the advances in technology and the human aspect – the personal stories of men and women who've been harmed by the aftermath of abortion.

"Years ago, it was the case that advocates for abortion would talk about the 'thing' growing in a woman's womb as a lifeless blob of tissue," Monahan explained. "And I think our advances in sonography and ultrasounds, and even our understanding of fetal development has dispelled those myths. … We know that, from the moment of conception, a baby has all of its DNA that it needs for the rest of its life. It has everything inherent that it will need for later on. Really, the only difference [between the preborn and adults] is in size and development."

She continued: "I also think young people tend to gravitate toward good issues and have got the enthusiasm to do good things. And this is the human rights issue of today. And, I think young people are well aware that they're missing a whole population of their siblings, their peers, to abortion. We've lost 56 million Americans since Roe was decided.

Monahan also noted that peer reviewed studies and meta analyses have shown that "women who undergo abortion struggle more with emotional issues, such as anxiety, sometimes substance abuse, suicidal thoughts and depression."

But, more importantly than the science and research, she said, are the people she has met who wish that someone had told them the truth about abortion before they made that decision. "I'm a strong believer that abortion hurts one, and takes the life of another," she added. "And whatever we can do to help any woman or man who's suffering from having made this decision is critical."

"I like to always mention, anytime that I'm public speaking or at the march, that there's always hope and healing. There's no situation that is beyond help or beyond hope–ever. These folks need to hear it, because often they're caught in the slavery of grief and guilt after having made that decision. "

March for Life is the largest annual event in Washington, D.C. and is held every year on the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade. The organization is bi-partisan and therefore the list of speakers also includes politicians from both parties, including House Majority Leader Eric Canton, (R-Va.), Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.), and Washington state Sen. Roger Freeman (D).

In an interview with The Dallas Morning News, Texas gubernatorial candidate and pro-choice activist Wendy Davis admitted that some of the facts she has presented of her biography were "loose" on the details. The article suggests Davis has been more concerned about her career than the well-being of her children.

Davis, a Texas state senator, was propelled to national stardom after filibustering a 20-week abortion ban. She used her newfound celebrity to fundraise and launch a bid to become the Democratic nominee for governor of Texas.

During the filibuster and her numerous media interviews, she presented herself as a struggling single mother who was able to work hard and achieve financial success.

The bio on her campaign website reads: "Raised by a single mother with a sixth grade education, Wendy began working after school at age 14 to help support her mom and three siblings. By 19, she was on her way to becoming a single mother, working two jobs just to make ends meet.

"... Wendy enrolled at Tarrant County Community College. After two years, she transferred to Texas Christian University. With the help of academic scholarships, student loans, and state and federal grants, Wendy became the first person in her family to earn a bachelor's degree, graduated first in her class, and went on to Harvard Law School."

That narrative, though, is misleading by leaving out important details. It suggests that Davis was able to complete a Harvard law degree while raising her children alone. Davis was married, though, at age 24 and her husband both cared for her two daughters (one from her first marriage) and paid for her education.

"My language should be tighter," she told The Dallas Morning News. "I'm learning about using broader, looser language. I need to be more focused on the detail."

Davis left her first husband when she was 19. They divorced when she was 21.

The part of her narrative that is true is that between ages 19 and 24 she was a single mom, working two jobs and attending college. She struggled financially in those years.

Wendy Davis met and began dating Jeff Davis when she was 21. They married when she was 24.

Jeff, who was making a six-figure salary, paid for her final two years at Texas Christian University, then cashed out his retirement account and took out a loan to pay for her to attend Harvard Law School.

Their two daughters lived in Texas with Jeff while Wendy attended Harvard in Massachusetts. After Harvard, Wendy moved back to Texas and began her law and political career.

She left Jeff in 2003 after he paid off her student loan.

"I made the last payment, and it was the next day she left," Jeff told The Dallas Morning News.

Wendy told The Dallas Morning News that the notion that she waited until the loan was paid to leave her husband is "absurd."

When they got divorced, their oldest daughter was 21 and in college and their youngest daughter was in ninth grade. Jeff was given custody and Wendy was ordered to pay child support.

According to Jeff, Wendy approved of giving him custody and told him, "It's not a good time for me right now."

A former colleague of Wendy who preferred to remain anonymous told The Dallas Morning News that she cared more about her political ambitions than her children.

"She's not going to let family or raising children or anything else get in her way," he said.

While adding that "she'd be a good governor," the source said that the narrative of Wendy Davis' biography presented by her campaign is mostly false: "She's going to find a way, and she's going to figure out a way to spin herself in a way that grabs at the heart strings. A lot of it isn't true about her, but that's just us who knew her."

Many conservatives and pro-life activists are sharing the article on Monday, just two days before the annual March for Life.

"Having grown up with a single mom, I find Davis' fabrication of her story a total insult," conservative radio personality Dana Loesch tweeted.

By: Tyler O'Neil from Christian Post

Americans United for Life, a nationwide pro-life legal team, released its 2014 "Life List," which includes a ranking of the various states on how well their laws defend life, from conception to natural death.

"Real pro-life momentum is reshaping the country as legislators craft protections for both mother and child, the victims of an avaricious abortion industry," AUL President and CEO Charmaine Yoest said in a statement to mark the "Life List." In an interview on Friday with the Christian Post, AUL Media Consultant Kristi Hamrick emphasized a few state initiatives in particular.

Hamrick praised the state of Texas, one of the Life List's "most improved" states, and home of the controversial pro-choice activist Wendy Davis, whose filibuster against the 20-week abortion ban gained her national attention last June. Texas legislators "have been creative and determined in protecting women from abortion industry abuses post-Gosnell," Hamrick said.

"What we saw in the Gosnell 'House of Horrors' trial is that even though there were protections on the books, politicians decided not to enforce them," the AUL spokeswoman explained. She was referring to the case of Kermit Gosnell, an abortionist found guilty in May of murdering three babies born alive in a Pennsylvania abortion clinic and one woman who died from abortion complications.

In July, Texas enacted legislation prohibiting late-term abortions, prohibiting "telemed" abortions, mandating abortion clinics meet patient care standards, and requiring that abortion providers have local hospital admitting privileges. These reforms pushed Texas into AUL's category of "All-Stars." Other "All-Stars" included Missouri, Alabama, Arizona and Arkansas.

"Each of AUL's All Stars enacted life-saving legislation to protect mother and child from an abortion industry more committed to its financial bottom line than protecting women from a dangerous procedure that is too often performed in substandard facilities," Yoest explained. Texas was the only state to rank among the "All Stars" and the "Most Improved," taking sixth place overall.

Hamrick also mentioned New York, the fourth worst state for life, which almost adopted the worst laws from an AUL perspective. "New York came very close to having the most draconian, anti-life laws in the country, but they failed," the spokeswoman explained. The Life List notes AUL's work to defeat Governor Andrew Cuomo's Women's Equality Act, which "would have elevated abortion to a fundamental legal right in the state, eliminated all existing legal protections for women considering abortion, and rescinded protections for unborn victims of violence."

AUL also helped defeat a pro-choice measure in Washington State. The bill would have mandated that health insurance plans which cover maternity care also cover abortions. Washington State ranked dead last on life issues, for the fifth year in a row.

Louisiana, the home state of the hit show "Duck Dynasty," ranked number one on AUL's Life List, also for the fifth year in a row. "Louisiana tops the list because of its decades-long history of enacting common-sense limitations on abortion," the list explained. The state "also comprehensively protects healthcare freedom of conscience and is one of only a small number of states that has enacted meaningful regulations on biotechnologies such as destructive embryo research."

In addition to Texas, Illinois, North Carolina, and Kansas made the "Most Improved" list.

In Illinois, a 2005 executive order forcing pharmacies to dispense "emergency contraception … without delay" was invalidated, and a parental notice requirement for abortion went into effect. North Carolina prohibited sex-selection abortions, limited Affordable Care Act funding for abortions, and regulated abortion facilities according to "ambulatory surgical center standards." Kansas limited state funding for abortion, prohibited sex selection abortions, and enhanced other limitations.

Hamrick praised states which finally enforced such regulations. She called NARAL's complaints that such laws "throw us back into the dark ages" laughable. "You would think that the abortion industry would be ashamed to argue for legal back-alleys of abortion which are unregulated, unmonitored, and unsupervised," she said.

6 Best States for Life

1. Louisiana
2. Oklahoma
3. Arkansas
4. Arizona
5. Pennsylvania
6. Texas

5 Worst States for Life

1. Washington
2. California
3. Vermont
4. New York
5. Connecticut

Most Improved

1. Texas
2. Illinois
3. North Carolina
4. Texas