Ben Johnson

‘The Mob Doctor’ debuts with strong pro-abortion message

Ben Johnson
Ben Johnson

HOLLYWOOD, September 21, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com)—The Mob Doctor, the new medical drama on Fox, is such a derivative work I’m tempted to post a review of another program. The paint-by-numbers potboiler throws all Hollywood’s conventions into creating a thoroughly forgetful program unremarkable for anything – except its outspoken advocacy for abortion in its pilot episode.

The new series, which debuted this Monday, substitutes focus group-tested safety for creativity. Take a gusty heroine who is equal parts tenderhearted philanthropist and iron-fisted avenger; mix in medical issues; throw in a mafia plot line, sexual tension with a colleague, and an irritating mother who does not understand the joys of commitment-free sex. Then sandwich liberalism between pumping music and hazy-but-rapid scene transitions.

All that remains, in the words of The Simpsons, is to “be dangerous-but-warm and edgy-cute.”

Even the protagonist’s name, Grace Devlin, is an artificial construct – a little angel, a little devil. Get it?

The writers bring equal subtlety to their ham-fisted insertion of abortion propaganda into the pilot episode.

Devlin (Jordana Spiro) is a sympathetic character as a doctor who has offered her services to the mafia to save her brother’s life. This lends unearned credibility to her advice when she learns that one of her boyfriend’s patients is a family friend in trouble. Susie DeMarco, 14, is pregnant despite the fact that she and her boyfriend, Johnny, have never had sex. (“I’m not stupid,” she says.)

After learning she became a mother after having “outercourse”, Susie turns to her trusted friend in despair. “Grace, my dad is gonna kill Johnny,” she cries. “And I have a swimming scholarship next year to St. Catherine’s. If I’m knocked up, I lose it. What do I do?”

Having established Susie as a brilliant, hard-working, 14-year-old Catholic girl who hasn’t even had sex, the screenwriters reveal through Grace that “her dad works at the state penn”; “they don’t have a dollar to their name”; and “that scholarship is her one shot at making something out of her life.” To further reduce the audience’s objections Grace’s boyfriend, Dr. Brett Robinson (Zach Gilford), announces it is a ruptured ectopic pregnancy and the baby is “non-viable.”

The only problem left? Susie’s father has to sign a parental consent form.

The thought so enrages Grace’s sense of justice that she insists (she never suggests anything) that her boyfriend lie about the procedure, trick Mr. DeMarco into signing a form he has not read, then have another doctor falsify hospital records.

When Brett betrays the notion that he might have an independent will, Grace explodes that she must allow a 14-year-old middle school child to have an abortion behind her parents’ back.

“It gives her options, and you’re standing in her way,” she screams. “I don’t think you’re empathizing enough.”

(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

Eventually, Dr. Robinson goes through with the ruse, saving Susie from the backlash of a character who is presented as nothing other than a loving and devoted father.

The episode closes with a soliloquy about “choice” and the revelation that she was relieved to discover the corpse of her drunken, abusive father. “Finding him dead, it meant we were safe,” she said. Just the way a dead baby means Susie and Johnny are “safe,” presumably.

Thus did Hollywood try to stuff its opposition to parental consent laws down the nation’s collective throat, with a series of devices as tired as the rest of the series. The most sympathetic, angelic child will land on skid row if heartless, theocratic laws are enforced. Grace is a crusader and rescuer, trying to save her brother from a vicious mob boss who wants to kill him and a 14-year-old girl.

Only Brett seems to grasp the situation when he tells Grace, “You’re a bad influence.” Smiling suggestively, he said, “You’ll make it up to me.”

But who will make up 60 lost minutes to the viewer?

The episode might have one beneficial side effect its writers did not intend: It exposes the lies of Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion organizations that vouch for the safety of “outercourse.”

Planned Parenthood – which has a vested interest in getting adolescents sexually active as early as possible – calls outercourse “safe, effective, and convenient,” as well as “a great method of birth control” that “has no side effects.” Four stars! To make the practice of near-sex more accessible yet, the website has a how-to section. 

The Association of Reproductive Health Professionals presents outercourse as virtually the equivalent of abstinence. “Both abstinence and outercourse are free, always available, and have no side effects,” the ARHP lies. “To prevent pregnancy and [sexually transmitted diseases], you must use abstinence or outercourse all of the time.”

The ARHP’s contention-by-silence that herpes or HPV cannot be transmitted through genital contact is novel, to say the least.

Both websites recount that bodily fluids may be exchanged during the process, carrying a reduced chance of pregnancy or infection, but both drown this significant qualification out with misleading, blanket statements like those above.

The episode’s saving, well, grace may be that it helped young people realize Planned Parenthood and the abortion lobby are shameless liars. While Spiro said in an interview that her character possesses a certain “godliness,” this is not what she meant.

The show’s clumsy pro-abortion propaganda is but one of the numerous failings, coincidentally the one largely overlooked by critics. TV.com notes, “Grace comes off as a rather unlikeable hypocrite.” The Los Angeles Times calls the program “uncomfortable to watch.” Perhaps the best line belongs to Gail Pennington of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, who wrote, “‘The Mob Doctor’ is going to have to get lots better to be mediocre…it would take The Godfather to pull me back in.” 

These are but a handful of a plethora of negative reviews.

Even the series’ co-creator, Josh Berman admitted, “It almost sounds like we’re just trying to…marry two formulas to create one new formula.”

Lucky for him the only place more disconnected from reality than The Mob Boss is Hollywood, where Berman – who has a track record of failure for Fox – will doubtless be rewarded with more opportunities to lecture and bore the public. 

This series should swim with the fishes.

This article originally appeared on TheRightsWriter.com and is reprinted with permission.

FREE pro-life and pro-family news.

Stay up-to-date on the issues you care about the most. Subscribe today. 

Select Your Edition:

Donate to LifeSiteNews

Give the gift of Truth.


Share this article

Advertisement
Hillary Clinton
Shutterstock
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

, , ,

For Hillary Clinton, abortion access trumps religious liberty

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins

WASHINGTON, D.C., May 1, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- For Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton, apparently abortion trumps religious liberty.

It may have gotten bipartisan support in the House of Representatives last night, but a spokesperson for the Democratic Party's leading presidential candidate says a resolution protecting religious liberty in the District of Columbia "overrule[s] the democratic process" and hurts women.

The vote, which saw three Democrats join the GOP majority and 13 Republicans stand with Democrats, was meant to protect pro-life and religious organizations in the District from the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Act (RHNDA).

RHNDA was signed by the mayor of the District of Columbia, Muriel Bowser, in January, and makes it illegal for any employer, including religious and pro-life organizations, to use a person's belief or actions about abortion in employment considerations. It also requires employers to provide abortion coverage.

The resolution now goes to the Senate, where it is expected to fail due to the Senate being on recess. Under existing federal law, the measure has 30 legislative days to be disapproved by Congress and President Obama. If this does not happen, it becomes law.

The 30-day window ends on Saturday. President Obama promised a veto of the resolution on Thursday, even though RHNDA was opposed by former District mayor Vincent Gray. According to Gray, while he "applaud[s] the goals of this legislation," the former mayor believes RHNDA could violate the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal treatment under the law.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

The statement by the Clinton campaign left no doubt that she stood with Obama and a majority of Democratic legislators. Spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri told CNN, "Hillary Clinton has fought for women and families and their right to access the full range of reproductive health care without interference from politicians or employers."

"Hillary will fight to make it easier, not more difficult, for women and families to get ahead and ensure that women are not discriminated against for personal medical decisions."

The remarks come a week after Clinton took criticism for saying that "religious beliefs" critical of "reproductive rights" must "be changed."

“Yes, we've cut the maternal mortality rate in half, but far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health,” she told the Women in the World Summit on April 23.

“Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper," said Clinton in her speech. "Laws have to be backed up with resources, and political will."

“Deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed,” said the candidate.

Advertisement
Featured Image
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

, ,

Social conservatives may be funding the destruction of marriage: corporate watchdog

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins

May 1, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- With over $55 million in annual revenue, the Human Rights Campaign may be America's most powerful LGBT activist group. And according to a conservative corporate watchdog, that's in part because social conservatives are funding it.

"Conservatives would be surprised to know that many of the dollars they spend every day are helping fund an agenda that seeks to destroy traditional marriage and undermine religious freedoms," said 2nd Vote National Outreach Director Robert Kuykendall. "Even when they purchase a beverage from a company like Coca-cola or Starbucks, their dollar is going to support HRC's liberal agenda to redefine marriage."

Less than 18 months old, 2nd Vote has graded hundreds of corporations on six issues -- corporate welfare, the environment, education, support for the Second Amendment, abortion, and as of two weeks ago, same-sex "marriage." Using their "scoring" system, 2nd Vote ranks corporations on their direct or indirect involvement with these hot-button public policy and cultural issues.

And according to them, some of America's favorite corporations are making the radical HRC agenda possible.

"HRC is the largest LGBT lobbying organization in the United States with reported revenues of over $55 million," Kuykendall told LifeSiteNews. "The redefinition of marriage and the undermining of religious freedom are major components of HRC’s policy agenda. To fund their policy goals, HRC has enlisted the help of many major corporations that we do business with every day to help fund. Over a third of the contributions received by HRC are listed as 'Corporate/Foundation Grants.'" 

Why should conservatives care about corporate donors to HRC? Kuykendall says the organization is both politically influential and publicly deceptive. "Last election cycle, HRC spent around a million dollars on electioneering activities and in support of liberal candidates willing to push their legislative agenda. HRC is responsible for spreading much of the misinformation regarding [Religious Freedom Restoration Act] laws and has also mischaracterized the protections provided by these laws."

"HRC organized a massive grassroots campaign in support of the legal battle to overturn state laws protecting marriage and influence the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges," said Kuykendall.

Marriage isn't the only issue on which conservatives may be at odds with HRC's corporate backers. "2nd Vote’s research into other issues such as life, the environment, and the 2nd Amendment shows that many of the companies supporting HRC have taken liberal stands on other issues as well,” he said. “For example, Apple, Citigroup, Microsoft, and Coca-Cola are Platinum Partners, the highest level of HRC’s National Corporate Partners, that have also funded the liberal Center for American Progress [CAP]."

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

"Bank of America, Google, Goldman Sachs, Starbucks, PepsiCo, and Morgan Stanley are also HRC Corporate Partners that have funded CAP. Furthermore, all of these companies signed the amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to overturn state marriage laws."

In Indiana, the state's religious liberty law was modified because of corporate pressure led by Tim Cook, Apple's gay CEO. Kuykendall says conservatives should not give up, though he acknowledges that "for too long, conservatives have let liberals and groups like HRC bully companies into not just going along with their agenda, but actively funding and promoting it."

"However, conservatives have also proven their ability to mobilize and use their dollars in support of traditional values as we’ve seen through the fundraising campaigns for the pizza parlor and wedding cake makers who have been attacked by liberals for their beliefs. Conservatives need to turn the tables on the left, and groups like HRC, and motivate companies to stop funding the liberal agenda through the power of their shopping habits."

Only nine companies have ranks of "five" or "four" on 2nd Vote's ranking system, indicating a pro-marriage perspective. They are outnumbered more than 10 to 1 by organizations that support redefining marriage.

Concerned citizens can download the app on 2nd Vote's website. The full list of corporation scores can be found here.

Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Fr. Mark Hodges

First graders exposed to book about transgender boy—without parental notification

Fr. Mark Hodges
By Fr. Mark Hodges

KITTERY POINT, ME, May 1, 2015, (LifeSiteNews.com) – Parents at one Maine school are upset that children as young as six were exposed to a book promoting transgender issues, in the name of "acceptance."

Parents were not only not consulted, they were never even notified of their children's exposure to transgenderism.

Horace Mitchell Primary School read the book I Am Jazz to first-grade students. The book is about a boy who identifies as a girl from the age of two, "with a boy's body and a girl's brain." He eventually finds a doctor who tells his parents, "Jazz is transgender."

Parents began to inquire about what was being taught at Horace Mitchell Primary after children came home with questions about their own sex and wondering if they, too, might be transgender.

One mother, upset that teachers would broach the subject of transgenderism with her little boy, said the primary school ignored her complaint. "I feel like my thoughts, feelings and beliefs were completely ignored...My right as a parent to allow or not allow this discussion with my child was taken from me," she told Hannity.com.

"When I spoke with the principal he was very cold about it," the mother continued. "It's amazing how thoughtless the school has been with this whole thing."

Only after Sean Hannity made national inquiries did Horace Mitchell Primary School suggest that teachers should have told parents ahead of time.

Allyn Hutton, the superintendent of the local district, said she supported reading the book but admitted that parents should have been given advance warning about the subject matter. "We have a practice of – if a topic is considered sensitive – parents should be informed. In this situation, that didn't happen," she said. "We understand that toleration is tolerating people of all opinions."

Horace Mitchell Primary School sent an e-mail, after the fact, to concerned parents, including a link to a blog post of the school's guidance counselor, explaining their motivation was "cultivating respect."

"Some may think primary school students are too young to worry about addressing issues surrounding gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning (LGBTQ) students. Not so, experts say,” the school's guidance counselor wrote. “It’s never too early to begin teaching children about respecting differences."

Homosexual activists say they support the teaching of transgenderism to first-graders, with or without parental notification. "The staff of Mitchell School is...shedding a light on [LGBTQ] issues,” said a column in Gay Star News.

The LGBT puublication goes even further, advocating homosexual propaganda be commonplace in elementary schools across the country. "LGBTQ issues should never be classified as a 'sensitive subject,' [because] there is nothing sensitive about the way we are born. Blonde hair, brown hair, gay, straight or somewhere in-between."

Brian Camenker of MassResistance commented on the infiltration of homosexual propaganda in children's schools. "We deal with parents and teachers a lot, and the idea that teachers would do this is unconscionable. It's like the people that promote this stuff are evil. It's demonic. You can't imagine adults that would do this to other people's children, and do it with such anger, and such vitrol.”

Camenker emphasized that this is “not an isolated incident with just one, rogue teacher. This happens because the whole administrative hierarchy buys into it.”

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

“The new generation of educators is very, very frightening,” he said.

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook