Of pro-aborts’ many charms, two often stand out: they’re never content with what they have, and their rhetoric is so euphemism-laden that it’s sometimes hard to decipher what they’re actually saying. Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for “Reproductive Rights,” displays both traits in a new open letter to Barack Obama. Fortunately, we here at Live Action are well-versed in Choicespeak-to-English translation.

She implores the president “to fulfill that promise” to fight for women’s “access to quality, affordable health care” and “right to make her own choices about her own health.” Normal English-speakers might assume that refers to, well, women’s health, in which case Ms. Northup would indeed be highlighting a promise Obama has failed to deliver—under ObamaCare, women will certainly face lost coverage, increased insurance costs, fewer choices, and worse care.

But later in the letter Northup lauds ObamaCare for “expand[ing] affordable access to family planning, prenatal and maternal care, and routine reproductive health check-ups to millions,” so her words can’t mean their plain meaning. No, the truth is that “women’s health” is just code for the legal privilege to have a doctor kill your developing child, with your fellow taxpayers footing the bill if necessary. Just coming out and saying that’s what they want would make the CRR’s job a lot harder, because then their communiqués couldn’t use gems like “drawing the line against the hostility, the cruelty” with a straight face.

Almost as preposterous is the premise that Obama needs to be told to keep appeasing the offspring disposal lobby. Abortion is effectively legal throughout most of pregnancy for any reason, often subsidized, and largely insulated from the democratic process. Not only is Obama committed to preserving that status quo, he’s on the record in favor of third-trimester abortions, has stuck his neck out for outright infanticide in the name of preserving abortion, has endorsed disenfranchising the states on the issue via the Freedom of Choice Act, and routinely lies to butter up pro-aborts and defame pro-lifers. What more could Northup want?

The rights of women—and their ability to exercise them—now depend on where they live, and whether their state legislatures have been overrun by politicians hostile to women, doctors, and the rights of both.

So the only way to not be “hostile” to women and doctors is by letting them dismember a baby with various sharp implements, and/or administer various poisons that starve or suffocate the baby, or stop his or her heart. Which doesn’t sound hostile at all. To say nothing of the fact that “women” is a curious catchall for a procedure the majority of women don’t use.

This is a crisis of constitutional proportions. Action by the federal government is needed right now.

Um, no. Different states making different laws on contentious issues is exactly what the Constitution was designed to facilitate, and is therefore the opposite of a “crisis.”

Specifically, Northup demands:

Continue to push for the broad expansion of affordable access to the full range of essential reproductive health services through the Affordable Care Act and other means—and to hold the line against attempts to thwart this progress through refusals on the grounds of personal and religious belief.

Translation: force taxpayers to subsidize abortion, regardless of the individual rights and religious beliefs of the taxpayers from whose pockets said funds will be taken.

Prioritize the appointment of judges to the federal bench who will uphold the constitutional protections due the full and free exercise of women’s reproductive rights.

Translation: abandon all pretense that the judiciary is a separate and distinct branch with an apolitical purpose, appoint judges who will fabricate constitutional rationales for usurping the people’s and the legislative branch’s rights and responsibilities on the subject of abortion.

Support the provision of comprehensive and accurate sex education in our public schools, improvements in prenatal and maternal care, the expansion of support for families in need, and other services that will benefit women and their families throughout their lives.

Translation: support greater promotion of underage casual sex and somehow produce results that are the opposite of the effect your healthcare plan will actually have.

Fittingly, the Choicespeak reaches its highest/lowest point near the end, as Northup justifies her stance thusly:

The federal government must ensure that the fundamental rights of all people are respected and protected, regardless of where they live.

Unless where they live happens to be in a womb. In that case, regard away. Their fundamental rights may be dismissed by a committee of one.

There is perhaps no other fundamental right that is under more ferocious attack than the right of reproductive choice—and we need you to help us fight back now.

Except maybe, oh, I don’t know, the right not to die. Think that might be just a smidgen more fundamental than the right to lethally cancel an almost-always-preventable nine-month condition?

Northup concludes by expressing how the CRR looks forward to “fighting alongside” Obama in the fake name of “reproductive rights.” And “fight” is right—the cause of abortion is not only a war on the unborn, but a war on facts and words themselves.

Download Audio MP3 | 00:28:00 Josh, Tim and Gabi discuss what it actually means to be open-minded, (it does NOT mean being wishy-washy,) and whether pro-life people should be open-minded too. Bonus Audio: After wrapping up four Life Report episodes, Josh, Tim and Gabi hung out to cover some material they didn’t have time to get [...]

Download Audio MP3 | 00:18:38 After wrapping up four Life Report episodes, Josh, Tim and Gabi hung out to cover some material they didn’t have time to get into earlier in the day. Those topics and questions for Tim include: You said, “Love does not insist on its own way; it does not need to [...]

Contact: Don Feder, 508-405-1337, don@worldcongress.org; The Howard Center for Family, Religion & Society, 815-964-5819, media@worldcongress.org SYDNEY, Australia, May 22, 2013 /Christian Newswire/ — World Congress of Families VII (Sydney, May 15-18, 2013) concluded on Saturday. The first Congress in the Asia-Pacific region, the first in the Southern Hemisphere and the first in an English-speaking country was judged an overwhelming success.
World Congress of Families VII was al Source: World Congress of Families

Yesterday, Parliament again voted on the government’s Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill. The vote was 366 to 161. Although saddening and damaging to the reputation of Parliament, this result was no surprise as the bill has the support of all three main parties in the House of Commons. It is good to note that substantial opposition to it has been maintained.

The number of MPs both supporting and opposing the bill dropped slightly, compared to the second reading vote in February (400 to 175).

Please check how your MP voted and thank those who opposed the bill. If your MP voted for bill (i.e. “X” on the listing), you might point out that the bill negates the main reason for having laws in support marriage – for the benefit and welfare of children. It was a vote of ‘no confidence’ by MPs in real marriage – the foundation for stable family life and the safe, happy upbringing of children.

Some MPs suggested that by copying other countries that have redefined marriage recently, they are on the cutting edge of progress. In fact these other countries are, like Britain, suffering the effects of weakening marriage. (Read SPUC’s What Happens To Marriage And Families Where The Law Recognises “Same Sex Marriage”? by Dr Patricia Morgan.)

Next stage of the campaign

The bill now goes to the House of Lords where it faces concerted opposition, and there is no guarantee that the government will be able to force it through, despite the government’s strength in the Lords.

Already, peers have expressed very strong reservations about the bill. We need to mount a strong campaign. The bill has no public mandate, and this means that peers cannot be asked to accept “the will of the electorate,” and let the government get its bill through. Please contact katherinehampton@spuc.org.uk to find out what you can do.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC’s other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC’s Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Let’s just get this out of the way: what is considered right or wrong in one culture is vastly different from any number of others. Morality is just conformity to standards of conduct, and can shift to opposite poles even within one generation. We are living in a generation where the world is changing at an exponential rate. Think about the moral fabric of this country. Most of you are constantly aware, especially in election years, how the values of this nation have so radically shifted in such a short amount of time. Who knows what changes even the next ten years will bring?

 Morality is not the same as, nor equal to righteousness. One is a widely interpreted, constantly changing set of commonly accepted rules determined by a society and culture, one is an everlasting standard determined by a being outside of humanity. One is possible to attain, one is impossible. One is worthless, one a treasure with incalculable worth. 

If you didn’t know, within the last several years, places in Mexico legalized abortion. Since then, the rate of abortion has only increased at an alarming rate. We find this to be true in many instances, and I would go so far as to say every instance: when abortion is legalized, more people have abortions. If something is legal people think it’s okay; that it is good to do. Laws change the shape of morality in a nation.

 The abortion debate is a battle often won under the guise of lowering maternal mortality rates yet it has never actually proved to do so. New data from a study done in Chile actually points to a clear correlation between abortion and the increase of maternal mortality rates. Abortion proponents like to paint DIY abortion as this global pandemic, responsible for the majority of all maternal mortality across the earth. They use this social issue which really is a problem the world wants to solve, and twist it to their purposes. If we don’t want unrestricted access to abortion we become the people who want poor mothers in Africa to die.

Let’s be real. The relevance of the, “safe, legal, and rare” smokescreen is long gone. Not only is it blatantly untrue as it applies to the intentions of the United States government and abortion proponents, it is simply impossible and offensive to the intelligence. We as a society consider murder wrong, so we want its occurrence to be rare, therefore we legislate against it and punish perpetrators to the full extent of the law. If we were to follow the same line of logic abortion proponents use, we would say, “we want murder to be safe, legal, and rare, so we will legalize it, remove repercussions and then most of the more gruesome murders will dissipate.” I bet that no matter where you stand on abortion, you would be pretty nervous to enact the same legislation applied to homicide.

Although America was founded with a pretty solid moral standing, we are now in a twisted, snowballing cycle of legislation. The rich, elite of society go to elitist, humanistic colleges where they are taught to rethink the foundations of society and morality itself. Considered some of the highest intellects in the nation, these graduates are put on the fast track to political office where they enact laws aligning with their now skewed views of morality. These unjust laws set a broken foundation on which the generations to follow build their skewed sets of standards. These then grow to go to the humanistic, leftist, elitist colleges to even further question the morality of the previous generation.

Our elite colleges are teaching students to ask like Pilate, “What is truth?” instead of how to recognize it when it is standing right in front of them, in a purple robe and a crown of thorns. Ivy League halls are emblazoned with the words “Lux et Veritas” which mean “light and truth,” but their professors are only succeeding in instructing students to dive into the depths of darkness and regurgitate what they there discover.

There are people so highly regarded by all of our society, their only job is to travel the country and promote their ideas in order to change our culture. Do you know what the philosophers and ethicists of our day are promoting? Infanticide (and here), self-induced abortion as “performance art,“ “non-voluntary” euthanasia, and universal sterilization resulting in ours being the last human generation to exist on planet earth, to name a few.

Pro-life leaders are getting choked up on the argument that “you can’t legislate morality” by the very ones who are doing exactly that. These are the people who are advising our lawmakers, and they aren’t shy about legislating their psychotic brand of morality.

Morality is not the same as, nor equal to righteousness.

In a world of culturally defined morality, there is no truth. There is a truth that stands before and beyond any man’s philosophy or reasoning. We can legislate morality, and if we legislate according to the judgements of the Lord, the people of the world will learn righteousness.

Not only can we legislate morality, we should.

“The judgements of the Lord are true and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than Gold, yea, than much fine gold; Sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. Moreover, by them Your servant is warned, and in keeping them there is great reward.” (Psalm 19:9-11)

Continue to bound4life.com for entire article

From 20-24 May, Stephen Shaw, Chairman of SPUC’s North and North East Scotland region, will hike along the challenging Speyside Way to raise money for SPUC’s work. For much of the route Stephen will be taking traces the River Spey from the coast to Aviemore situated in the Cairngorms National Park in the Scottish Highlands. The River Spey is famous for its salmon fishery, whilst the valleys of the Spey and tributaries such as the Fiddich, Livet and Avon are home to the highest concentration of malt whisky distilleries in Scotland.

This year’s event has a special purpose. As well as generating much-needed funds for SPUC’s existing pro-life work, I must ask for your help to fund our continuing battle against the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill which threatens to seriously undermine marriage and the family and put unborn children at even greater danger of abortion than they are today. Government statistics show that 80 per cent of abortions in England and Wales are carried out on unmarried women and this is telling us quite clearly that, as an institution, marriage is the greatest defender of unborn children. In countries where same-sex marriage has been legalised—such as Spain—real (heterosexual) marriage has declined. That is why it is so important that the Same Sex Marriage bill is stopped. Stephen will be sending out regular updates and photos of his walk. Below is today’s:

Stephen & Sheila at Boat O’Brig

Tuesday
Today, I was joined by Sheila, a member of the Banff & Buchan Branch from Huntly.

We set off from Fochabers in light drizzle along the minor road to Boat O’Brig where the Aberdeen to Inverness Railway and the B9103 from Keith to Rothes cross the Spey on adjacent bridges.  The drizzle soon stopped and some small areas of blue sky appeared by the time we reached Boat O’Brig.  At this point we caught up with two Germans (a different pair from Monday) and a couple from Stirling caught up with us.

Beyond Boat O’Brig, the Way climbs alongside farmland and provides lovely views of the valley in both directions.  It then enters the Ben Aigan Forest adjacent to the Speyside Gun Club.  The Red Flag was flying to warn us that firing was taking place, although we heard the gunfire long before we saw the flag!  The signs recommended that we did not stray from the marked path.  We obediently complied.  The climbing takes place in the first 2 or 3 miles of this section and leads onto a forest road with a picnic bench, where we stopped for our lunch.  We met the couple from Stirling again at this point.  They showed an interest in the sponsored walk and kindly made a donation to our funds.  By and large, the remaining 5 or 6 miles to Craigellachie were a gentle downhill walk on a forest road and then a minor road.

The last 2 miles of the day’s walk, from Craigellachie to Aberlour, followed the route of the former railway along the side of the river.  As the service is hourly, we made a special effort to reach the bus stop in Aberlour in time for the bus.  We just made it by the advertised time.  The bus, however, was 15 minutes late!

I would like to thank Sheila for accompanying me on this, which is one of the two more strenuous sections of the Speyside Way, and for her efforts in securing sponsorship in her parish.

Stephen

Please consider going the ‘extra mile’ with Stephen and help defend marriage, the family and our precious unborn babies in one or two of the following ways:

• Making a personal donation in lieu of sponsorship
• Gathering sponsors for the Speyside Way walk

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC’s other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC’s Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

I joined the pro-life movement 40 years ago this year, giving my first talk on abortion to schoolchildren in south London in 1973.

Actually, though, on reflection, I was unaware I had joined a “movement”. I was simply appalled at the injustice of abortion, having read Jack Scarisbrick’s little book “What’s wrong with abortion?” and I wanted to do something about it.

Every day that sense of injustice is renewed by reading, watching, or hearing something new … And I think: “Why isn’t every decent person in my church, in society, fighting this injustice?”

You don’t have to be in the pro-life movement to be fired by the injustice of abortion and determined to stop it.

You can be:

• a feminist
• a bishop
• a member of a justice and peace group
• a doctor
• a supervisor midwife – like Connie and Mary, the brave Glasgow midwives whom SPUC has been supporting in their fight for their right to conscientious objection

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC’s other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Like SPUC’s Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Save the Storks founder, Joe Baker, has a dream to equip the nation with mobile pregnancy centers that have the potential to provide women all over America with knowledge of their alternatives to abortion. By parking outside of abortion mills and providing free alternatives to the pricey services those centers offer (such as ultrasounds and pregnancy tests), as well as referrals for pregnant women to receive prenatal services while continuing their pregnancies, Save the Storks buses, which partner with local pregnancy centers, play a part in providing hope to a large portion of women may otherwise never know there are alternatives to abortion.

“There are a lot of vehicles out there that are like a massive RV, instead of saying ‘let’s make it as big as possible, we are saying let’s make it as small as possible.’ Massive RVs have things you don’t need, like a shower, but with Mercedes we are able to just start with a shell and add exactly what we need. We think the vehicle is better than an RV. If you want to park in front of an abortion clinic or anywhere near the city an RV can be too big. We have an exclusive partnership with Mercedes Benz for our buses.”

In 2011 Joe and his new wife, Ann, gave birth to the vision, and we became a nonprofit in 2012. “We’re a pretty new organization,” he said. “My wife and I build our own businesses to support us, so Save the Storks only has one employee named Marcie Little.”

When asked how people can help to spread the word about this new organization, Joe said: “People can’t even comprehend the impact of just spreading our name around the internet. Spreading our ads around is a tremendous way that people can help. If we’re going to put one Stork Bus in every NFL city in America it’s going to cost 2.5 million dollars, so another way people can help is by donating money.”

Why storks? The name “Save the Storks” might not conjure up the typical images we associate with the pro-life movement, such as ultrasound pictures. This was deliberate. Joe and Ann chose the stork imagery for several reasons. Here’s how they explain it:

The white stork is a graceful creature, not something to be afraid of. There is nothing mean or aggressive about them. Storks are gentle – so are we. They are whimsical animals. It’s hard to think about a disproportionate bird flying through the air with a baby in its mouth without a smile coming to your face. The stork branding speaks of the atmosphere we bring to an abortion clinic. As lively, gentle, graceful young people, we are there to love and not condemn.

God has given us a heart for expectant mothers who find themselves in crises situations. Through our partnership with pregnancy resource centers, these mothers can experience the love of Jesus and get the answers and support they need regarding abortion, adoption, and other life matters.

If you would like to learn more about saving storks, visit the Save the Storks website, and spread the word about their life-saving mission on social media.