‘Surrender is not an option’: pro-life leaders react to Obama re-election
November 6, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The man that pro-life leaders have called “the most pro-abortion president in U.S. history” has been re-elected, according to projections by major mainstream media outlets.
Obama snagged the race after apparently taking key swing states, including Virginia, Ohio, and New Hampshire. CBN News, CNN, Fox News, and the New York Times have all projected Obama as the winner.
Pro-life leaders took to Facebook, posting messages expressing their frustration at the outcome, as well as expressing hope that pro-life grassroots will continue to advance the pro-life cause despite a pro-abortion presidency.
“Our work to defend the lives of the most vulnerable and to promote human dignity is not dependent on an election,” said Live Action President Lila Rose. “This is a fight for each person, one person at a time. We will only work harder, hope and trust more, and ask God to make our lives a reflection of His love which never disappoints.”
“Time to pray, my friends,” wrote former Planned Parenthood clinic manager Abby Johnson. “Time to get involved in the prolife grassroots movement. We are disappointed, but not out of fight. We will still save babies, with God’s help. We will still save souls, with God’s help. We are sad…but we still fight…and we pray.”
“These are the times that will chisel boys into men, and girls into women. The next greatest generation is already here and being called upon to stand against tyranny,” said Troy Newman of Operation Rescue.
“I know many are going to bed very disappointed with the election results,” said Patrick Mahoney of the Christian Defense Coalition. “I know how you feel! It will take several weeks to analyze the data and get a sense of what happened. However, when I put my head on the pillow here is what I rejoice in:
“Exodus 15:2: ‘The LORD is my strength and my song; he has become my salvation. He is my God, and I will praise him, my father’s God, and I will exalt him.’ Christ is King. Blessings!”
The team at Personhood USA posted a message urging supporters to “renew your commitment to the preborn.”
“Regardless of the outcome of today’s election, we must all understand that the President of the United States is not going to abolish abortion for us,” they said. “We have to do it.
“We have to do it without compromise, and we have to do it NOW, because every day that passes marks the deaths of over 3,000 innocent human beings. Please join us in refusing to compromise on human life. We need to fight for 100% of the preborn babies, 100% of the time.”
Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life of America also posted a message. “I know many of us are still disappointed by last night’s results, but, this morning, I want to just remind you of one thing: Surrender is not an option,” she said. “And we must march forward, courageously, because, no matter who is President today or in January, abortion is still happening.”
Hawkins added, “With last night’s presidential election results in, we now know what our next step must be: De-funding America’s Abortion Goliath, Planned Parenthood. And we can’t rely on our President to help us. We must do it.”
In a message to supporters, Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of the Susan B. Anthony List, wrote: “Let me make one thing clear: the pro-life cause did not lose tonight, Mitt Romney did.
“It is with a heavy heart that I say that he ran a campaign purely on economic issues – and time and time again did not go on offense on our issue,” she said. “Polling this cycle and historical voting trends show that the pro-life issue isn’t only the right thing to do, but it is the winning thing to do politically. I’m afraid Mitt Romney and his team failed to recognize this. We will need to work on this too.”
Pro-life activists had described this race as one of the most important - if not the most important - in U.S. history. With an incumbent who has expressed support for abortion-on-demand through all nine months pregnancy, and a challenger who vowed to oppose abortion in all but the most extreme cases, the choice seemed clear. But in the midst of a major recession, abortion took a back seat to the economy. Romney himself, while far more to the right on abortion than Obama, was one of least vocal of the Republican primary candidates in articulating the pro-life position, instead opting to focus on economic issues.
Also at issue was religious freedom. Pro-life activists and Catholic leaders had banked upon a Romney administration scrapping the so-called HHS birth control mandate, which the country’s Catholic bishops have labeled an unprecedented attack upon freedom of religion. Despite widespread criticism, Obama has continued to defend the mandate, even in its current form without any meaningful religious exemption. Some religious leaders have warned that under the mandate, the future of Catholic health care as well as other charities is in jeopardy.
‘Little miracles’: Mom gives birth to naturally-conceived quintuplets after refusing ‘selective reduction’
AUSTRALIA, February 5, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) -- A 26-year-old Australian mom has given birth to five healthy babies, all conceived naturally, after refusing the doctor’s advice that she must abort three of them in order to give the remaining two a better chance at life.
“After my initial ultrasound I was told I could consider the selection method to give 2 babies the best chance in life,” wrote mom Kim Tucci in a Facebook post last September.
“I watched a YouTube video on the procedure and I cried. I could never do that! Was I selfish for not giving two the chance of 100% survival? All I knew is that I already love them and that every heart beat I heard I connect with them more. For me life starts when a heart starts beating and all I know for sure is that I will do whatever it takes to bring them into this world healthy,” she wrote.
Last Thursday Kim and her husband Vaughn welcomed the five new members into their family — one boy and four girls —increasing the number of their children from 3 to 8. The babies were born at 30 weeks, 10 weeks early, due to insufficient space in Kim’s womb. They weighed on average about 2.5 pounds.
The quintuplets’ story began last March, after Kim and Vaughn had been trying for six months to conceive just one more child for their family. Due to health complications, Kim wondered if she would ever become a mother again.
After what she thought was an extra long cycle, she decided to take a pregnancy test.
“I was feeling tired and a little nauseated and thought I would take a pregnancy test just to get the ‘what if’ out of my head. To my shock and utter excitement it was positive,” she wrote on a Facebook post.
The parents got the shock of their lives when doctors confirmed in an ultrasound examination that there was not one baby, but five.
“After a long wait for the ultrasound we finally went in. The sonographer told me there were multiple gestational sacks, but she could only see a heart beat in two. I was so excited! Twins!”
“I was moved to another machine for a clearer view and had the head doctor come in and double check the findings. She started to count, one, two, three, four, five. Did i hear that correctly? Five? My legs start to shake uncontrollably and all i can do is laugh. The sonographer then told me the term for five is ‘quintuplets,’” Kim wrote.
Even though Kim began to feel stretched to the limit with all those human lives growing inside her, she chose to focus on her babies, and not herself, referring to them as “my five little miracles.”
“It's getting harder as each day passes to push through the pain, every part of my body aches and sleeping is becoming very painful. No amount of pillows are helping support my back and belly. Sometimes I get so upset that I just want to throw my hands up and give in.”
“Sometimes my pelvis becomes so stiff I can barely walk and my hips feel like they are grinding away constantly. I'm finding it hard to eat as I basically have no room left in my stomach, and the way it is positioned it's pushed all the way back with the babies leaning against it.”
“My skin on my belly is so stretched its painful and hot to touch. It literally feels like I have hives! No amount of cream helps relieve the discomfort. I have a lot of stretch marks now. Dealing with such a huge change in my body is hard.”
“Is it all worth it? Yes!!!! I will keep pushing through,” she wrote in one Facebook post days before the babies were born.
The newborns' names are Keith, Ali, Penelope, Tiffany, and Beatrix. They were born at King Edward Memorial Hospital in Subiaco, Western Australia. Mother and babies are reported to be doing well.
View CommentsClick to view or comment.
Share this article
UN rights chief tells Catholic countries to legalize abortion over Zika virus: bishops and cardinal react
GENEVA, February 5, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) -- The United Nations, following the lead of international abortion activists, is now urging Latin American countries hit by the mosquito-borne Zika virus to lift restrictions on abortion for pregnant women who have contacted the virus and whose pre-born children may be at risk for birth defects, including having smaller than normal heads.
The UN human rights office said today that it is not enough for South American countries to urge women to postpone pregnancy without also offering them abortion as a final solution.
“How can they ask these women not to become pregnant, but not offer… the possibility to stop their pregnancies?” UN spokeswoman Cecile Pouilly told reporters.
UN human rights chief Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein said that governments should make available contraception and abortion services.
“Laws and policies that restrict (women’s) access to these services must be urgently reviewed in line with human rights obligations in order to ensure the right to health for all in practice,” he said.
But Brazil’s bishops strongly asserted yesterday that efforts should be made to eradicate the virus, not the people who may be infected by it.
The disease is “no justification whatsoever to promote abortion,” they said in a statement, adding that it is not morally acceptable to promote abortion “in the cases of microcephaly, as, unfortunately, some groups are proposing to the Supreme Federal Court, in a total lack of respect for the gift of life.”
Honduras Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga has also come out strongly against the notion of “therapeutic abortions” as a response to the problem. Unlike Brazil where abortion is legal in the case of rape or health of the mother, abortion remains entirely illegal in Honduras.
“We should never talk about ‘therapeutic’ abortion,” the cardinal said in a homily at a February 3 Mass in Suyap. “Therapeutic abortion doesn’t exist. Therapeutic means curing, and abortion cures nothing. It takes innocent lives,” he said.
While the World Health Organization (WHO) declared an international public health emergency February 1 on account of concerns over the virus, critics have pointed out, however, that not one death as resulted from the virus. Even on WHO’s own website the virus is described in mild terms.
“It causes mild fever and rash. Other symptoms include muscle pain, joint pain, headache, pain behind the eyes and conjunctivitis. Zika virus disease is usually mild, with symptoms lasting only a few days,” the website states. “To date, there have been no reported deaths associated with Zika virus,” it added.
Critics suspect that the crisis is being manipulated to advance an anti-human agenda on the pre-born.
“Is Zika, actually, a hideous virus that threatens to spread uncontrollably across the world creating an army of disabled children with tiny heads and low IQ’s? Or might this be a willful misinterpretation of the scarce data to manipulate public opinion and legislatures?” wrote pro-life critic Mei-Li Garcia earlier this week.
“It becomes very clear that the publicity surrounding this story has a very little to do with medicine and a lot to do with a convenient crisis that is being used by those pushing for the legalization of abortion around the world,” she wrote.
View CommentsClick to view or comment.
Share this article
Hillary’s litmus test for Supreme Court picks: They must ‘preserve Roe v. Wade’
DERRY, NH, February 5, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) - Hillary Clinton has a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees - several, in fact. At a Democratic event on Wednesday, Clinton unveiled her criteria in selecting a judge for the nation's highest court.
“I do have a litmus test, I have a bunch of litmus tests," she said.
"We’ve got to make sure to preserve Roe v. Wade, not let it be nibbled away or repealed,” she said.
That echoes her recent call to arms speech before Planned Parenthood last month, when she stated that taxpayers must fund abortion-on-demand in order to uphold the "right" of choice.
“We have to preserve marriage equality,” Clinton said, referring to last summer's Obergefell v. Hodges case, a 5-4 ruling that redefined marriage nationwide. “We have to go further to end discrimination against the LGBT community."
Her views differentiate her from the Republican front runners. Ted Cruz has called the court's marriage ruling "fundamentally illegitimate," and Donald Trump told Fox News Sunday this week that he would "be very strong on putting certain judges on the bench that I think maybe could change things." Marco Rubio has said he won't "concede" the issue to the one-vote majority.
All Republican presidential hopefuls say they are pro-life and will defund Planned Parenthood.
Her husband, Bill Clinton, raised the makeup of the Supreme Court early last month in New Hampshire, saying it receives "almost no attention" as a campaign issue.
On Wednesday, Hillary said "the next president could get as many as three appointments. It’s one of the many reasons why we can’t turn the White House over to the Republicans again.”
Clinton said her judicial appointees must also reverse the Citizens United ruling on campaign finance and oppose a recent decision striking down a portion of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. In 2013's Shelby County v. Holder, justices struck down Section 4(b) of the act, which said that certain states and jurisdictions had to obtain permission from the federal government before changing their voting laws.
At one time, most politicians frowned upon any "litmus test" for judicial nominees, emphasizing the independence of the third branch of government. "I don't believe in litmus tests," Jeb Bush told Chuck Todd last November.
But with the rise of an activist judiciary in the middle of the 20th century, constitutionalists have sought to rein in the power of the bench.