Weekend reading, 4/15/16

Every Friday, I’ll offer you links to three posts of the week from other blogs and news sources to take you into the weekend. My favorite writers, a fresh take on a familiar topic, or just plain interesting stuff: look for the cream of the week’s crop right here (after you read Leaven’s posts, of course). 


Anika Smith on David Daleiden: “Courage is a good word when the abortion industry funds the campaign of the attorney general of your state.” (stream.org)

“Last year I met David Daleiden, the investigator behind the Center for Medical Progress videos exposing Planned Parenthood’s sale of human body parts from aborted babies. He had just received an award from The Federalist for his courageous journalism and told his eager audience that this was only the beginning: Season 2 of CMP’s ‘Human Capital‘ web series would be on its way in 2016.

“What Daleiden was doing was brave, and we all knew it. He was already the subject of harassment and lawsuits. And he also understood the risks and took them with clear eyes.” Read the rest of the post…

Reggie Littlejohn on the Pregnancy Non-Discrimination Act: “Can we credibly say that we stand for women’s rights without standing against the sex-selective abortion of future women?” (deaconforlife.blogspot.com)

According to a U.N. expert, up to 200 million women are missing in the world today due to gendercide, sex-selective abortion.   This number is greater than all the casualties of all the wars of the twentieth century combined.  This is the true “war on women.”

Sex-selective abortion is the ultimate violence against females.  Aborting a baby just because she is a girl is the ultimate act of gender discrimination.  It says that females are so worthless we don’t deserve to be born, to draw breath on this earth.  Can we credibly say that we stand for women’s rights without standing against the sex-selective abortion of future women?

Sex-selective abortion is strongly related to forced abortion.  Some say sex-selective abortion is protected by a woman’s right to choose to terminate a pregnancy for any reason.  This view ignores the crushing social, economic, political and personal pressures that trample women carrying girls in cultures with a strong son preference.  All too often, women in these cultures do not choose to abort their daughters.  They are forced. Read the rest of the post…

Massachusetts Citizens for Life: Dr. Mark Rollo speaks on abortion pill reversal (masscitizensforlife.org)

One of the more technical, but also most hopeful, presentations at our 2016 convention came from Dr. Mark Rollo, who enlightened the audience to the latest developments concerning abortion pill reversal. Dr. Rollo described new protocols to help women reverse RU-486 chemical abortions, a technique which uses two drugs: mifepristone (AKA RU-486) and misoprostol. In many cases, Dr. Rollo said, if massive dosages of progesterone are given after the mifepristone, but before the misoprostol, it is possible that the mother can bear the baby to term with no ill effects. Read the rest of the post…


Introduction: “Still Talking About This”

“I can’t believe we’re still talking about this.”
I must have heard those words fifty times in the past year in Concord, spoken by fellow citizens who style themselves “pro-choice” and are truly surprised that pro-lifers are still active.

Still talking about what? About abortion, how it became legal, and how it has grown into a lucrative business for abortion providers; about women facing challenging pregnancies and sometimes facing the aftermath of terminating those pregnancies; about paying for it and subsidizing the industry.  We’re still talking because there is no way to shut down a debate when lives are at stake.

To the great dismay of abortion advocates, New Hampshire legislators in the past year have taken up a number of bills that touch on abortion.  Every session has some abortion debate, but 2011-12 has been remarkable for the sheer volume of life-issue legislation. Most of the bills are consistent with U.S. Supreme Court decisions that are based on Roe. With the exception of two measures to ban late-term abortion and “partial-birth” infanticide, the bills provide mere regulation, long-overdue and badly needed. One bill is simply an attempt to get the state to order abortion providers to report statistics.

New Hampshire currently is the Wild West where abortion law is concerned. Women’s safety and public health policy would seem to call for a degree of regulation and oversight, even if one were to put aside the fact that each abortion takes a human life. Abortion advocates are  loud and angry over each and every one of the bills, however, drawing no distinction among parental notification (enacted over a veto), funding restrictions, statistical reporting, and a late-term ban. To them, it’s all one big attack on Choice, part of a larger effort to set women back.

This is worse than nonsense. What I see being set back are the rights of women and men who choose not to pay even indirectly for the operation of an abortion facility.  I see people lobbying to keep abortion undocumented, so that public health officials will continue to be in the dark about how many New Hampshire women make this “choice” every year. I hear testimony to the need for eugenic abortion, which is a throwback to one of the 20th century’s worst ideas. I hear women who should know better equate a 24-hour waiting period with an outright ban on abortion.

Both in New Hampshire and elsewhere, we need to meet this with more than hand-wringing and the occasional letter to the editor. I offer this blog as a tool and a guide to action for all who share my determination to bring an end to the carnage wrought by Roe. I will undoubtedly use the blog sometimes just to vent. At all times, though, I am mindful that if I do this right, I’ll be reaching people who disagree with me. Persuasion is always possible. Of course, I have no doubt that someone over on the other side is working to persuade me right back. Fair enough.

I write as a woman who came of age in the years shortly after Roe v. Wade. When I was in high school and a dear friend “had” to have an abortion, I chipped in with some friends for the $250 cost. I found the idea of abortion regrettable & uncomfortable, but it was after all my friend’s body & my friend’s choice. Over the following five years, many experiences combined to leave me incapable of denying the humanity of the child in uteroThe dignity of both mother and child are absolute, regardless of what any court may decide.

Just as the state rep who heads the Reproductive Rights Caucus is careful to mention that she’s Catholic, I should be candid about my religious background. While raised Catholic, I spent most of my adolescence shrugging off religion. Later, it wasn’t being Catholic that made me pro-life. It was recognizing the miracle of life that brought me back to professing the Catholic faith. This has been significant in more ways than I could have imagined when I was a young woman.

As for politics, I call myself a recovering Republican. I fall off the wagon now and then, but I am a registered “undeclared” voter, in New Hampshire parlance. The rest of the world knows me as “independent.” It is true that nearly every candidate I support runs as a Republican. It is also true that GOP leaders tend to take pro-life voters for granted. By not signing up with the party, I can help whatever candidates I choose, and the party need not get annoyed with me for failing to back every candidate on the ticket.

So yes, we’re still talking about this. Pro-lifers cannot be effective if they stay huddled together. I propose that we step out in faith and leaven the loaf of public discourse. Let’s begin.