The Pulse
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

Take five minutes now to stop PBS pushing late-term abortion doc ‘After Tiller’

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins
Image

Earlier this week, LifeSiteNews reported that PBS is going to be showing the pro-abortion movie "After Tiller" next week. The movie highlights late-term abortion doctors with the intent of convincing the American people to sympathize with their worldview and difficulties.

Blogger Jill Stanek now reports that abortion supporters are promoting the documentary on Twitter and is urging pro-lifers to hack their hashtags #AbortionAccess and #AfterTiller starting at 2:00 Eastern.

From Stanek:

So please help us keep abortion radicals from peacefully promoting the excruciatingly painful blood bath of older preborn infants, never mind the extra danger their mothers face (hello, Jennifer Morbelli, killed last year by After Tiller star LeRoy Carhart), by tweeting about the reality of late-term abortion – there is so much to say about it – beginning at 2p EST. Use their hashtags #AbortionAccess and #AfterTiller.

PBS pulled in millions in U.S. federal taxpayer funding in 2012. That's in addition to more than $500 million state and federal taxpayer dollars that went to Planned Parenthood for, among other things, abortions and abortion-causing drugs and devices.

With five minutes today, you can help stop PBS from further entrenching the awfulness that is late-term abortion -- and abortion in general -- in the minds of the American people. Tweet to your family, friends, politicians, and the media this afternoon.

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.


Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Alex Schadenberg Alex Schadenberg Follow Alex

South African judge approves death by lethal injection

Alex Schadenberg Alex Schadenberg Follow Alex
By Alex Schadenberg

May 1, 2015 (AlexSchadenberg.blogspot.ca) -- Justice Hans Fabricius of the South Africa High Court signed a court order approving the euthanasia death of Robin Stransham-Ford who was living with Prostate Cancer. 

Eyewitness News in South Africa reported that Robin Stransham-Ford died from his medical condition this morning. It is interesting that the timing of the court order was the same day as his death.

Justice Fabricius legislated from the bench by withdrawing protections in law from euthanasia and assisted suicide. Even though Fabricius claimed that this decision was exclusive to this situation, he in fact decided that judge's had the power to decide whether a person should be protected in law or allowed to be killed.

The court order states that Stransham-Ford, can:

be assisted by a qualified medical doctor, who is willing to do so, to end his life, either by administration of a lethal agent (euthanasia) or by providing the Applicant with the necessary lethal agent to administer himself (assisted suicide).

The court order continues by stating that doctors are not obligated to accede to the request but the doctor that does accede to the request shall not be subject to prosecution.

According to the Citizen News:

Mthunzi Mhaga, spokesperson for the Justice Minister, said the Minister intended would apply for leave to appeal against the ruling, but could only do so when Judge Fabricius gave reasons for his ruling on Monday.

Justice Fabricius claimed that his decision was an exception to the law, but his decision actually challenges the validity of the law.

Legalizing euthanasia or assisted suicide gives one group of people, usually physicians, the right in law to cause the death of another group of people. The law needs to equally protect every citizen, especially when they are in a vulnerable time of their life.

Reprinted with permission from Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

Sotomayor: We’re not taking away your liberty, because we won’t force you to marry a gay person

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson

One moment in the Supreme Court's oral arguments over same-sex “marriage” reveals what an embarrassment Sonia Sotomayor is as a justice.

John J. Bursch, who argued on behalf of marriage, said that the people, not five unelected justices, should be able to decide whether to redefine a pillar of society that predates the government and written history.

“This case isn't about how to define marriage,” he said. “It's about who gets to decide that question. Is it the people acting through the democratic process, or is it the federal courts? And we're asking you to affirm every individual's fundamental liberty interest in deciding the meaning of marriage.”

The “wise Latina” immediately interrupted him with the following non-sequitur:

“I'm sorry. Nobody is taking that [liberty] away from anybody. Every single individual in this society chooses, if they can, their sexual orientation, or who to marry or not marry. I suspect even with us giving gays rights to marry that there's some gay people who will choose not to.”

I'll pass over Sotomayor saying that “every single individual..chooses” his or her sexual preference. But don't miss the full illuminating brilliance of her argument: The Supreme Court is not trampling on the right of 50 million people in 35 states to settle their own law as long as straight people are not forced to “marry” homosexuals.

For Sotomayor, apparently anything short of judicially mandated sodomy is within the justices' constitutional prerogatives – a view that would surprise any of our nation's founding jurists, whether Jeffersonian or Hamiltonian.

This would be a laugh line if the Left didn't keep saying it with a straight face. (No pun intended.) The Obama administration made a similar argument about the HHS mandate. In February 2012, then-HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said that the conscience-destroying provision of ObamaCare strongly upheld individual freedom. “It's important to note that our rule has no effect on the longstanding conscience clause protections for providers, which allow a Catholic doctor, for example, to refuse to write a prescription for contraception. Nor does it affect an individual woman's freedom to decide not to use birth control.” (Emphasis added.)

Sebelius basically said, “Hey, be happy we're not stuffing birth control pills down your stupid Catholic face!” Coming from an administration whose Science Czar John Holdren has justified “compulsory abortion” for American women, that comes as cold comfort, indeed.

Advertisement
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
Jill Stanek Jill Stanek Follow Jill

,

I just signed a declaration against labeling unborn babies as ‘incompatible with life.’ You should too.

Jill Stanek Jill Stanek Follow Jill
By Jill Stanek

April 28, 2015 (JillStanek.com) -- I’ve just signed something important called the Geneva Declaration on Perinatal Care. It reminded me of why I became involved in the pro-life movement in the first place.

The Declaration, which can be signed by medical practitioners and researchers, is part of a new initiative by a group of parents under the banner Every Life Counts. They want medics (and everyone else) to stop using the phrase “incompatible with life” when giving a diagnosis of a life-limiting condition for an unborn baby – and with good reason.

They argue that the phrase is not a medical diagnosis, and they are right, it’s not. It doesn’t tell the parents anything about the baby’s condition, and it doesn’t inform families or help them deal with this devastating diagnosis.

As these parents point out, the phrase has become a label, and they compellingly argue that attaching this “incompatible with life” label to an unborn baby with a severe disability can have “lethal consequences.”

The lethal consequence before birth is an often relentless push towards abortion when conditions such as anencephaly and Trisomy 13 are diagnosed. Every Life Counts spokeswoman Tracy Harkin quotes research published in the American Journal of Medical Genetics that shows almost two-thirds of parents in these situation felt under pressure to abort their babies. She also refers to the findings of the Bruce Inquiry in Britain, which found parents felt pressure to abort after a disability was diagnosed, and they were not given information about palliative care and support for them and for their baby.

There can really be no disputing these findings when we consider the horrific reality of the percentages of babies with a disability who are aborted before birth – and these are almost always late-term abortions. Up to 90% of unborn babies with Down Syndrome are aborted and the numbers are depressingly similar for babies with conditions such as anencephaly.

These shocking rates may be, as Harkin says, because more positive alternatives such as perinatal hospice are not shared with families, and the most up-to-date research on these conditions is not relayed to them, such as the study published in Pediatrics which showed that 97% of families who brought their children with Trisomy 13 or 18 to term described their children as a happy children. Parents also reported these children enriched their families irrespective of the length of their lives.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Every Life Counts argues that language matters, and that late-term abortion is often justified as a “treatment” for these babies, whose short lives should be filled with love and their parents given support.

I know that’s true. I’ve seen how this sort of language – and the attitude that accompanies it – has changed medical practice for the worse.

Many of the second and third trimester abortions I observed or heard about at Christ Hospital were for reasons of disability. I have no doubt some of the children who survived abortion and were left to suffer and die in the soiled utility closet had been described as “incompatible with life.”

But they were alive and kicking when they received that diagnosis. Abortion, not their condition, is what took their lives away.

Some 380 medical practitioners and 37 disability and advocacy NGOs have already signed on to the Geneva Declaration on Perinatal Care, presumably because they know that medical professionals need to get behind this initiative for change if we are to bring about an end to lethal discrimination against unborn babies with disabilities.

I’m glad to be one of them.

If you are a medical professional or researcher you can sign the Declaration here.

Reprinted with permission from Jill Stanek

Share this article

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook