Watch out for “quick fixes”; 40DFL campaign concludes; WMUR story of interest

Affirming life without “quick fixes”

Suggesting that a pregnant woman has to give up her child for adoption to make reparation for premarital sex is no different from the pro-choice mother imposing abortion on her daughter to make reparation for “unprotected sex”. Both attitudes are truly misogynistic and anti-life.

That’s from Béatrice Fodor in 400 Words for Women. In this thought-provoking post, she asks pro-lifers to take a fearless look at their own approach to women experiencing crisis pregnancies. Start your week by reading her short and challenging essay about the “quick-fix mentality.”

Another 40 Days for Life campaign wraps up …

Tune in next spring for the next 40DFL effort in your area. The international director, Shawn Carney, posted in an email this morning that 476 women are known to have chosen life for their children as a result of 40DFL prayer witnesses outside abortion facilities.

I hate seeing metrics used in this context. I hate scorecards and polls about pro-life work, as though standing up publicly for life should depend on whether the numbers keep going up. I understand why someone tracks the figures, though. In a way, those numbers force us to consider the actual women who make up that “476.” Each has her own story. The numbers may also provide a small measure of reassurance to the pro-lifers who ask if their participation makes any difference. Yes, your peaceful and patient witness matters.

Locally in southern New Hampshire, the Greenland and Manchester campaigns ended with special gatherings for the volunteers. My hat’s off to the 40DFL organizers in both places. Bob Melnyk and Jackie McCoy come to mind immediately, but I know there are many other dedicated people who kept the campaigns going. My thanks and respect go out to all of them.

… and there are still opportunities for prayerful witness

To stay up to date with the schedules for peaceful pro-life vigils outside abortion facilities in New Hampshire, the best source I know is NHRTL’s email alert list. You can email info@nhrtl.org and ask to be put on the list.

Tune in Wednesday for WMUR report on human trafficking in NH

I just saw a promotional spot on TV for this, and I’m sorry I have no further information – not even from the WMUR web site! WMUR-TV, the ABC affiliate in Manchester, New Hampshire, is presenting a locally-produced special report this Wednesday, November 6, on the 11 p.m. newscast. The subject: human trafficking in New Hampshire.

I haven’t previewed the report. In fact, I know nothing about it beyond what I saw in the brief promo. I’m pretty sure that I glimpsed Theresa Flores on the screen, as one of the people being interviewed. I have heard her speak about her own nightmarish experience as a victim of trafficking when she was a teenager. It was hard for me to believe that a teenager from a quiet suburb could be coerced into the sex industry without her parents’ knowledge, until I heard Theresa talk about what happened to her.

As a woman and a mother, few things make my skin crawl like realizing other women and other women’s children are caught up in human trafficking today, here in New Hampshire. I’d like to believe such things don’t happen, or if they do, that it’s only in big cities far away. Theresa ripped off my blinders. I’m going to watch WMUR’s report to hear what she and the other people interviewed – including local law enforcement officials – have to say about what’s happening.

I know that earlier special reports are available on the WMUR web site. Perhaps this one will be posted there as well after it airs.

I doubt WMUR’s report covers the nexus between human trafficking and the abortion industry. It’s left to reporters like the brave souls at Live Action to report on that.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Your move, Governor Lynch

Two pro-life bills were passed by the New Hampshire Senate today, and the sky didn’t fall. 

The NH Senate passed HB 1679 today on a straight party-line vote, agreeing with the House that it is not a good idea for New Hampshire to put out the welcome mat for practitioners who want to do late-term abortions by the “partial-birth” method, also known as D&X. Partial-birth abortion is as close to infanticide as can be managed. Banning the method saves no babies, and Roe is unscathed. Nevertheless, this is a momentous day. The New Hampshire legislature, for the first time since NH’s 19th-century abortion laws were repealed a few years ago, has said “no” to one abortion method.

A bill to collect abortion statistics (HB 1680) was amended and attenuated to the point where it now sets up a committee to study how to collect the stats. The House passed it, and the Senate today adopted it on a voice vote.

Three other bills fared less well in the Senate today, but got further this year than could have been hoped in earlier sessions. Women’s Right to Know (HB 1659, with a 24-hour waiting period before abortion) was killed by the Senate, but just hours later the House attached it as a nongermane amendment to another bill. That was fun. Not sure how the Senators will feel having it tossed back at them, but we’ll see. HB 1660, to stop abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, went to interim study. HB 228, the funding bill, was tabled.

Of course, WMUR tweeted “Senate blocks House-passed abortion bills.” No tweets about the passage of the partial-birth ban. New Hampshire’s news leader, I’m told …

Governor Lynch should weigh in on the two successful bills shortly. Place your bets.