August 2008 Archives

Julia Giacopuzzi, age 15, was rushed by a police officer, had her arms twisted behind her back, lifted up off the ground and then cuffed. Her crime? Sidewalk chalking that Obama is a pro-abortion candidate.

Three Pro-Lifers were arrested and thrown in jail for this heinous crime, even though they had a permit issued to them by the police and the city of Denver.

Click here to continue reading and to view the videos at ProLifeNews.tv

On July 31, 2008 I wrote here about Sarah Palin and agreed that she would be an exciting energizing pick.

Well, this thought was not lost upon the McCain camp. In a masterstroke that highlights the core principles of the best of the American tradition, McCain has chosen a person who is living proof of the American dream made reality. Sarah Palin is pro-family, pro-life, populist. She is a reformer who took on the establishment in her home state. She is a believer in the 2nd Amendment, believes that we should be energy independent, and knows what the average American deals with every day. She is a working mom. She can relate to Americans across this nation whether they work in the boardroom or the stockroom.

I liked her comments this morning. She acknowledged her husband and mentioned that they have been married 20 years and today is their anniversary. she told them about their oldest son who is serving our nation in the u.S. Army in Iraq. She introduced her children to the sound of resounding applause at the event in Dayton, Ohio. She recognized the challenge ahead.

I have spoken with friends all over the country. The base is energized. Now is the time for all of us to come to the aid of our country (I love that line). One person said that she was so excited because it showed that McCain was listening to the grassroots.

I like it that the choice has completely taken the media and the press by surprise.

Thank you, John.

Now on to victory in November.

What's a major difference between Obama and Palin? McCainPalinforLife.com has the answer.

Blogger and author Dawn Eden has the answer as well:

"Palin chose life for her baby with Down syndrome. "

"Obama relegated these babies to death despite testimony that at least one aborted-alive Down's baby had been abandoned to die in a hospital soiled-utility room."

Visit McCainPalinForLife.com today...

John Mccain will announce is pick for Vice President from Dayton, Ohio today (no, he won't text you!). Tim Pawlenty won't be there:

Gov. Tim Pawlenty said this morning that he will he not be in Dayton, Ohio, today and strongly suggested that he won't be John McCain's running mate.

"I'm going to be at the [Minnesota] state fair," Pawlenty said on WCCO just minutes ago.

"I will not be in Dayton, Ohio, so I think that's a fair assumption," he added in an interview with the Twin Cities radio station, when asked if this was an indication that he would not be chosen.

He added: "It was an honor to be considered."

Asked if he was relieved "that the whole thing was over," he joked: "I'm glad you guys will quit following me around so much."

Gov. Mitt Romney expects to be in Dayton, Ohio tomorrow, having been asked there by the McCain campaign, a reliable source close to Romney says.

Sources told FOX News that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney will not be McCain's choice, even though Romney is scheduled to appear at the Dayton rally.

Gov. Sarah Palin has chartered a plane ... Is it really Palin? Frankly, Palin is an excellent choice.

Update: Drudge says Palin!

HT: The Corner

Thanks to Erick Erickson of Redstate we know this about Tim Pawlenty:

• Recognized as a pro-life leader by "Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life"


• Has appointed judicial conservatives to the bench, and recently drew praise from pro-life advocates for his appointment of Eric Magnuson as Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court


• Fought for and signed pro-life measures including: Woman's Right to Know (requiring 24 hour waiting period and required information be provided before an abortion), a fetal pain awareness act (requiring notice and information regarding pain experienced by fetuses) and positive alternatives to abortion act (providing funding and support for organizations promoting alternatives to abortion).


• Believes life begins at conception


• Strong desire to overturn Roe v. Wade


• Opposes embryonic stem-cell research while supporting adult stem cell research

The latest buzz is that the choice for the Republican vice president will be Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota.

This is a solid choice, a positive choice and one that will not hurt McCain. It will help in the Midwest and surrounding regions. Pawlenty is very likable, intelligent and can work under adverse situations.

John fund of the Wall Street Journal wrote an interesting story on him today.

While I liked the idea of Gov. Palin from Alaska, Pawlenty brings a lot to the table without some of the baggage of the other contenders.

Two thumbs up.

Cross-posted: jakubczyk on life

Feigning greatness through a poetry of words, rock star Barack Obama stepped into the limelight and onto a pedestal to formally accept the party of death's nomination for President of the United States.

The crowd chants "yes we can" and "Obama" responds with "profound gratitude and great humility" against the failed policies of George W. Bush.

His speech was inspiring, filled with anecdotal stories and memorable slogans. Obama articulates promises for "defining moments", emotive change and compassionate programs to redistribute the wealth of some for consumption by the many.

The people love him. Perhaps you do too.

Obama yells "enough!" as he attacks his political opponents while the crowd goes wild. He's a celebrity who loves his children and measures progress by new jobs. He'll end our addiction to oil from the Middle East and pay for every new program by stripping tax breaks from the undeserving.

Fireworks, chants, tears and confetti fill the stadium while 85,000 worshippers cheer the stunning spectacle of this agent of change.

But Obama falls flat on his face and is rendered speechless when measured against the epic yardstick of justice. His words mock the sanctity of human life by proclaiming a moral obligation to give every child a "world class education" while rejecting the moral obligation to protect every child's life. In Obama's eyes, not even newborns have achieved a level of humanity worth notice and there is no point in time when unborn children are safe from abortion.

Conservative pundits will no doubt take issue with Obama's re-packaged style of socialism and sale of an empty anti-republican vision.

I take issue with Obama's failure to recognize human dignity as the foundational principle for freedom and prosperity. Obama doesn't get it.

Who will John McCain choose as his running mate? Could it be Sam Brownback? That would earn Jay's vote, "which, as of now, you ain't gettin'."

Others are speculating it's Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, Governor Tim Pawlenty (see Pawlenty vs Romney) or Mitt Romney (David Frum says "no!").

Note that John McCain has reportedly confirmed he will not be picking a running mate who takes a pro-abortion position and has ruled out former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge - LifeNews

Big mistake: passing up Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee.

One would think that the advisers to he Democrats would realize that bringing up the abortion issue does not win them votes among Catholics as a rule. So why is it that someone has not talked to Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi and explained it to them.

Old Joe probably would not understand. After all he knows the baby is alive not by science but by faith.

And ...Well... with the Speaker, perhaps it is because she knows everything.

After being gently rebuked on Monday for the stupid remarks she made on Meet the Press, Pelosi fired back today through her spokesman again citing Augustine as her support.

Ironic that tomorrow August 28th is the Feast of St. Augustine and that today is the feast of his mother St. Monica.

Well for those who want to understand the issue, here is the thumbnail version. Abortion was condemned by the Catholic Church since the beginning and remains to this day a mortal (very serious grievous) sin. The early church fathers did not care whether the soul had "animated " the fetus or not. It was still a serious evil. Augustine was applying 4th century medicine to understand the question. He did not have 4d ultrasound at his disposal. Can anyone including Nancy Pelosi look at a 4d ultrasound of an 11 week old unborn baby and NOT tell me the baby is alive?

Maybe we need to put 4d ultrasound movies of 11 week old unborn babies on television so that everyone, including Nancy Pelosi, will know that the unborn baby is alive and kicking?

do you think that if St. Augustine could view an ultrasound, he would agree that the baby is alive?

Since he opposed abortion even without knowing the scientific and medical facts that we now know, do you think that his opposition to abortion would increase to include as culpable all who are aware of this evil and do nothing to stop it?

Controversy surrounding embryonic stem cells has consumed an elicit amount of time and unethical research in this area has been unabashedly promoted on the basis of hype and ill-formed promises. An amazing breakthrough involving adult stems cells ought to silence those in favor of harvesting cells from early humans:

Scientists have transformed one type of fully developed adult cell directly into another inside a living animal, a startling advance that could lead to cures for a variety of illnesses and sidestep the political and ethical quagmires associated with embryonic stem cell research.

[snip]

The experiments, detailed online yesterday in the journal Nature, raise the prospect that patients suffering from not only diabetes but also heart disease, strokes and many other ailments could eventually have some of their cells reprogrammed to cure their afflictions without the need for drugs, transplants or other therapies.

Earlier this, ESCR received (another) fatal blow by published research which concluded that human embryonic stem cells are rapidly rejected by the immune system. Of course, the FDA has yet to approve any clinical trial with embryonic stem cells because these cells (whether growing or even pre-differentiated) have a nasty tendency to form cancerous tumors (FRC Blog).

Unfortunately, the technological failures and identification of a replacement for ESCR doesn't resolve the clash of worldviews and divergent moral standards that remain at the heart of the issue.

Americans United for life is working hard to help Republicans and Democrats embrace the sanctity of human life and define their party platform accordingly... great job!

WASHINGTON - As the Democratic Party officially nominates pro-abortion Senator Barack Obama for president and pro-abortion Senator Joe Biden for vice-president during the third day of their convention in Denver, the Republican Party Platform Committee, meeting in Minneapolis, adopted the strongest and most explicit support of life ever expressed by a major political party.

"We applaud the Republican Party, and especially the members of the platform committee representing grassroots pro-life Republicans across the country, for making such a strong and unequivocal stand supporting life at all stages," said National Right to Life Political Director Karen Cross from Minneapolis. "The work of the platform committee makes clear, in no uncertain terms, that the Republican Party is the pro-life party."

The platform, as approved today, states in part:

Faithful to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence, we assert the inherent dignity and sanctity of all human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment's protections apply to unborn children. We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity and dignity of innocent human life.

We have made progress. The Supreme Court has upheld prohibitions against the barbaric practice of partial-birth abortion. States are now permitted to extend health-care coverage to children before birth. And the Born Alive Infants Protection Act has become law; this law ensures that infants who are born alive during an abortion receive all treatment and care that is provided to all newborn infants and are not neglected and left to die. We must protect girls from exploitation and statutory rape through a parental notification requirement. We all have a moral obligation to assist, not to penalize, women struggling with the challenges of an unplanned pregnancy. At its core, abortion is a fundamental assault on the sanctity of innocent human life. Women deserve better than abortion. Every effort should be made to work with women considering abortion to enable and empower them to choose life. We salute those who provide them alternatives, including pregnancy care centers, and we take pride in the tremendous increase in adoptions that has followed Republican legislative initiatives.

Respect for life requires efforts to include persons with disabilities in education, employment, the justice system, and civic participation. In keeping with that commitment, we oppose the non-consensual withholding of care or treatment from people with disabilities, as well as the elderly and infirm, just as we oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide, which endanger especially those on the margins of society....

"The Democrats have gone out of their way to alienate America's pro-life majority by embracing the radical pro-abortion agenda of Barack Obama," said National Right to Life Co-Executive Director Darla St. Martin. "The Republican Party has once again demonstrated that it is completely in line with the majority of Americans who oppose the vast majority of abortions."

Source: National Right to Life

The United Nations has defined sex-selective abortion as the intentional killing of unborn females. It ought to be called It ought "female genocide." Joe Carter reports that the technology that brought a window to the womb is also the eugenic villain's weapon of choice:

The widespread use of sonogram technology--coupled with liberal abortion laws--has made it possible for women to identify the sex of their child so that those without a Y chromosome can be killed before they're even born.

Do remember the words Barack Obama spoke about the National Right to Life?

Well and because they have not been telling the truth. And I hate to say that people are lying, but here's a situation where folks are lying.

[snip]

So for people to suggest that I and the Illinois medical society, so Illinois doctors were somehow in favor of withholding life saving support from an infant born alive is ridiculous. It defies commonsense and it defies imagination and for people to keep on pushing this is offensive and it's an example of the kind of politics that we have to get beyond.

It's quite remarkable that Obama is the Democratic Party's candidate of choice for President.

Any information that defies killing an unborn child is apparently considered false by a UK bill that would imprison individuals who give information that "causes or is likely to cause the average pregnant woman to take a decision in relation to the termination of her pregnancy she would not have taken otherwise."

More information: Society for the Protection of the Unborn

Recall Barack Obama's now famous non-statement:

whether you are looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade."

Despite the strong pro-abortion positions of the Democratic platform and the party's imminent nominee, Sen. Barack Obama, pro-life voices are anything but silent in Denver during this week's Democratic convention. Last night, FRC Action's own Peter Sprigg joined several thousand people in Denver's Martin Luther King Park for a pro-life rally, followed by a peaceful prayer march around a new Planned Parenthood abortion facility that targets minorities.

Featured speakers included Dr. Alveda King, niece of the late Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who declared that life is "the civil rights issue of our day." Also featured was the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Denver, Charles Chaput, author of a just-published book on the relationship between religion and politics titled Render unto Caesar.

Young people in the crowd-those born after the 1973 Supreme Court decision-wore t-shirts declaring, "I Survived Roe v. Wade." At the Democrats' official interfaith prayer gathering on Sunday, the crowd reportedly went silent when the keynote speaker, Bishop Charles E. Blake of the Church of God in Christ, expressed the "moral and spiritual pain so many of us feel because of this disregard for the lives of the unborn." Sen. Robert Casey (D-Penn.), who speaks at the convention tonight, calls himself pro-life-we hope that his message tonight will be strongly and comprehensively pro-life one. (Source: Family Research Council)

Despite the overwhelming rebuttal she received (more here and here), Nancy Pelosi stood firm on her blatantly false statements concerning the beginning of life.

What you have to understand is that the beginning of life really doesn't matter to Pelosi anyway. Even if she were to agree that life begins at conception, she covered her bases by asserting, "it shouldn't have an impact on the woman's right to choose." The the "right" to kill an unborn child is sacred to Pelosi's twisted brand of religion. The sanctity of human life is not.

Wouldn't it make a lot of sense for John McCain to select Mike Huckabee as his running mate? Of course, some think that all four of Lowry's reasons that Huckabee could help McCain are equally
achieved by Sarah Palin, and she has many other benefits as well without the
risks.

Sponsored by American Right to Life Action, this massive (world record setting) sign has brought a sobering message to the Democratic National Convention.

HT: Jill Stanek

How does one properly describe another who would -- for purely selfish political reasons and with deliberation -- intentionally refuse a thirsty child water or a hungry child food?

More specifically, what does one call a lawmaker who would condemn to death the child survivor of a botched abortion by permitting doctors to refuse that child, once born alive, potentially life-saving medical treatment and nutrition?

A number of things come to mind. Mr. President isn't one of them.

As the nation considers the presidential aspirations of one Barack Obama, the quoted article above is worth a read. Note that the term "Obamacide" carries with it the definition "Killing the newborn survivor of a botched abortion through a deliberate act of omission."

WASHINGTON - A pro-abortion "who's who" kicks off tonight's primetime line-up at the 2008 Democratic National Convention, putting the party's extreme abortion agenda front and center. Anchored by Michelle Obama, and featuring NARAL president Nancy Keenan and a number of pro-abortion members of Congress including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri, the Democratic Party continues to alienate and marginalize the pro-life members of its party.

In addition to an array of pro-abortion advocates and politicians who will appear during the four-day convention, the party's proposed platform, which was presented to delegates today, states, in part, that the party "strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade...and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right." Gone are former references of the Democratic Party's desire to see abortion as "rare."

So pro-abortion is the party's platform, that the Democratic Party felt a need to go out of its way to state that the party "also strongly supports a woman's decision to have a child...."

More than forty percent of Democrats oppose the vast majority of the nearly 1.3 million abortions performed annually in the United States. A poll conducted in June by the Polling Company found that 42% of those who identified themselves as Democrats (as well as a 54% majority among all respondents) oppose all abortions; oppose abortion except to save the life of the mother; or oppose abortion except to save the life or the mother or in cases of rape or incest.

"Once again, the pro-abortion leadership of the Democratic Party demonstrates an allegiance with the extreme pro-abortion lobby and continues to show that it is out of step with a large number of its own membership and out of step with the majority of the American people," said National Right to Life political director Karen Cross. "Pro-life Americans can plainly see the pro-abortion agenda being promoted this week in Denver."

Two weeks ago, National Right to Life exposed the extreme pro-abortion nature of the Democrat's presidential nominee, Senator Barack Obama, when it released documents from the Illinois State Senate showing that then-state Sen. Obama voted against the Illinois Born-Alive Infants Protection Act - even when it was made virtually identical to a federal measure that became law in 2002 - and then misrepresented his opposition in subsequent years. More information about the Obama cover-up, including the relevant documents can be found at: www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/Obamacoveruponbornalive.htm.

"We may be on the verge of a turning point in the battle against abortion," said David Bereit, national campaign director of 40 Days for Life. "Response to our call for communities to participate in this fall's 40 Days for Life campaign has exceeded our wildest expectations." More than 170 cities will take part in this effort from September 24 through November 2.

The community-based 40 Days for Life campaign features 40 days of prayer and fasting, round-the-clock peaceful vigil outside an abortion facility and grassroots educational outreach. Simultaneous campaigns will be conducted coast-to-coast - and internationally - as part of a unified outreach in some 170 communities. In a number of those communities, peaceful vigils will be conducted at multiple abortion locations.

Pro-life activists from everywhere have descended upon Denver to remind Democrats what their party stands for. - Jill Stanek in Denver

Clearly, unequivocally, and no possible doubt whatsoever, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is either a babbling idiot who makes claims and says things with no thought whatsoever as to the validity of her statements, or she callously and blatantly lied on Meet the Press today while attempting to spin the Catholic doctrine on human life. - Hyscience

If McCain picks Joe Lieberman as his running mate, the Republican vice-presidential nominee will be to the left of the Democratic one on abortion policy. - The Corner

Obamacide -- What Makes Barack Worse Than His Fellow Abortion Proponents - LifeNews

As the "Truth Truck fleet" rolls through the streets of Denver, CO, Operation Rescue's President, Troy Newman, will be producing brief daily video reports of all the action.

In the video below, abortion survivor "Randy" is introduced to a crowd, presumably of protesters and convention attendees.

While Barack Obama dodged questions concerning human life and abortion, Nancy Pelosi simply asserted that the life of an unborn child doesn't matter.

Update: scroll down for the video

Asked to help Barack Obama understand when life begins, Nancy Pelosi asserted that the answer has no impact on whether or not the abortion of an unborn baby is morally justified. Here's the interview from NBC's Meet the press:

MR. BROKAW: Senator Obama saying the question of when life begins is above his pay grade, whether you're looking at it scientifically or theologically. If he were to come to you and say, "Help me out here, Madame Speaker. When does life begin?" what would you tell him?

REP. PELOSI: I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition. And Senator--St. Augustine said at three months. We don't know. The point is, is that it shouldn't have an impact on the woman's right to choose. Roe v. Wade talks about very clear definitions of when the child--first trimester, certain considerations; second trimester; not so third trimester. There's very clear distinctions. This isn't about abortion on demand, it's about a careful, careful consideration of all factors and--to--that a woman has to make with her doctor and her god. And so I don't think anybody can tell you when life begins, human life begins. As I say, the Catholic Church for centuries has been discussing this, and there are those who've decided...

Michelle Malkin attended an abortion protest at the new Planned Parenthood mega-facility in Denver yesterday. The People's Press Collective has more.

Taylor Armerding of the Eagle-Tribune rightly criticizes Barack Obama's recent "clever line" about human life following Rick Warren's question, "At what point does a baby get human rights in your view?" Here are a few excerpts of his excellent editorial:

(...) So, if he really meant what he said, then being president is very much above his pay grade. Indeed, being a senator -- even a state senator -- is above his pay grade. Because legislators vote and decide on exactly those kinds of things. Obama has voted on such things.

(...) If you want an unambiguous answer to Rick Warren's question, just ask the abortion lobby. Obama will do whatever they tell him to do.

(...) But these people are just as passionately "single-issue" on abortion when it comes to their own preference. It wouldn't matter how qualified, how brilliant, how anything a nominee to the Supreme Court might be -- if that nominee gave even the slightest inclination of being pro-life, they would oppose his or her confirmation with every weapon they had.

Don't pick on Barack, he is a democrat and you're in the media. Get with the program, put down the microscope and stop sniffing around where you don't belong. Repeat after me, "He is not the droid you are looking for".

Now go rip republicans like you're paid to do.

Brian Fitzpatrick (onenewsnow) asks:

How could a U.S. presidential candidate have opposed a bill that protected the lives of innocent, fully born babies, a bill so incontestably in the moral right that the most ardent pro-choicers in the U.S. Senate supported it unanimously? Is Barack Obama even more radically pro-choice than NARAL? Would Obama deny medical care to living, breathing infants just to reinforce the abstract right of mothers to decide whether their children are to live or to die?

From Sen. John McCain's weekly radio address:

In 2002, Congress unanimously passed a federal law to require medical care for babies who survive abortions - living, breathing babies whom Senator Obama described as, quote, "previable." This merciful law was called the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. IL had a version of the same law, and Barack Obama voted against it.

At Saddleback, he assured a reporter that he'd have voted "yes" on that bill if it had contained language similar to the federal version of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. Even though the language of both the state and federal bills was identical, Senator Obama said people were, quote, "lying" about his record. When that record was later produced, he dropped the subject but didn't withdraw the slander. And now even Senator Obama's campaign has conceded that his claims and accusations were false.

HT: Jill Stanek who has more ...

Given his radical support for abortion, the news that Barack Obama has selected Joe Biden as a running mate is not much of a surprise. What is a surprise is that some actually consider Biden to be moderate on issues related to the dignity of human. The Family Research Council has put together that following summary of his voting record which shatters this myth:

On Roe v. Wade

"I strongly support Roe v. Wade. . . That's why I led the fight to defeat Bork, Roberts Alito, and Thomas." 2007 South Carolina Democratic primary debate, MSNBC April 26, 2007

Voted against defining the unborn child as eligible for SCHIP: Amends the definition of the term "targeted low-income child" to provide that such term includes the period from conception to birth, for eligibility for child health assistance. S.Amdt. to S.ConRes.70, Senator Allard Amendment, Roll Call 08-S81, March 14, 2008

Voted against stopping ne'er-do-well adults taking minors across state lines for an abortion: S.Amdt 4335 to S.Con.Res. 70, Roll Call 08-S71, March 13, 2008.

Voted against parental notification of minors who get out-of-state abortions: S.403, Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act, Roll Call 06-216, July 25, 2006

Voted against the Unborn Victims of Violence Act: Bill makes it a criminal offense to harm or kill a fetus during the commission of a violent crime. S.1019/H.R. 1997, Unborn Victims of Violence Act, Roll Call 04-63, March 25, 2004

Voted for the Partial Birth Abortion Ban: S. 1692, Partial Birth Abortion Ban, Roll Call 99-340, October 21, 1999 (He did not vote on the one that became law in the 108th Congress.)

Barack Obama has an ongoing controversy over his vote against an anti-infanticide bill. His pick for VP (Joseph Biden) has a similar track record (LifeNews):

[Biden] received a pro-life voting record of 0 percent from the National Right to Life Committee for 2007-2008.

Before that, Biden compiled records of 0 percent, 16 percent, 0 percent, and 22 percent with the pro-life group in previous Congressional sessions. His support for a ban on partial-birth abortions represented the only time he voted with the pro-life side -- with Biden voting repeatedly to force taxpayers to fund abortions at home and abroad.

Biden threatened to filibuster Samuel Alito's supreme court hearings over abortion rights while applying a different standard to the nomination of forthrightly pro-abortion Justice Ginsburg.

I suppose birds of a feather flock together ...

Quite simply, Barack Obama took a pro-abortion position to the left of even NARAL when voting against identical legislation overwhelmingly passed on the federal level and then covered up his vote for 4 years until National Right to Life caught him last week. (Jill Stanek)

Now that tapes of Obama arguing against giving medical attention to aborted babies have emerged, it's time to attack the messenger and obfuscate the facts.

Stanek detractors refuse to acknowledge the shocking extremism of Obama's position -- giving infanticide the nod over compassion and life. They are too busy attacking the nurse who witnessed the atrocity Obama did not see fit to end.

Fortunately for me the abortionist was not in the clinic when I arrived alive, instead of dead, at 6:00 a.m. on the morning of April 6, 1977. I was early, my death was not expected to be seen until about 9 a.m., when he would probably be arriving for his office hours. I am sure I would not be here today if the abortionist would have been in the clinic as his job is to take life, not sustain it. Some have said I am a "botched abortion", a result of a job not well done.

"As I always say, if abortion is merely about women's rights, then what were mine?" - Gianna Jessen

HT: Team New Zealand

Yes, he is an avid supporter of abortion who four years ago established a record of unmitigated liberalism in the Illinois state senate. And yes, as a state senator he was the sole opponent of a bill that banned killing babies who are born alive (more here). That hasn't kept these misguided emergent Catholics, Protestants, Pentecostals, and Evangelicals from supporting Obama (the family man).

The fruit of Brian McLaren's postmodern theology is truly evident here. 50 million dead children can be overlooked as meaningless in the interest of promoting change. - Slice of Laodecia

Inquiring minds want to know.

Update: Why do we ask? The short list includes Romney. (It's Romney say "GOP sources")

Yes, I remember his pro-life conversion and subsequent disqualification.

From the ARRA News Service:

John Edwards has been banned from making a speech at the democratic convention for having an affair and lying about it.

In his place Bill Clinton will be speaking.

Barack Obama hid behind agnosticism when Rick Warren asked him when life begins. But was he being intellectually honest or was his answer a ploy to hide his presuppositions about the unborn? Jay at the LTI Blog comments:

If candidate Obama honestly appeals to agnosticism on when life begins, he is obviously allowing for the possibility that the unborn may in fact be human beings and people in every true sense of the word. But he does not know that for certain, and so he supports the most radical agenda imaginable in the name of reproductive freedom. Even if a child survives an abortion, there can be no legislation enacted to protect that child from the medical staff following the mother's decision to its grisly conclusion. He defended his position by saying that there was already legal protection for children, as if he were unaware that these particular children in question were not seen as newborns but the product of failed abortions. A terrible reminder of what happens when human value is determined subjectively.

Operation Rescue has launched a web site, ObamaWantsYou.com, as part of a multi-faceted campaign to expose Sen. Barack Obama's fanatical abortion views.

I have some great news to share with you - a small but growing amount people from around the nation are bearing witness to the Gospel of Life at the doors, parking lots, and streets of their local churches!

And as news about Obama's extreme record on abortion and infanticide is made know to people of faith - thanks to the efforts of Jill Stanek and others - their support for him is dropping! Just today Pollster John Zogby noted that there was an 11% drop in support for Obama among Catholics!

With your help, we can continue to erode his support among both Catholics and non-Catholics alike.

Will you please take a second to sign up at prolifewitness.com, download the fliers on the website, and commit to spending a few hours between now and election day being a witness for life?

Let me share some recent highlights of the project:

* April from North Carolina, told me how her mom withdrew support for Obama after hearing Jill Stanek's testimony - and who is now planning to get the fliers on the website distributed at her parish. "but I heard her speak on the Hannity Show & that's all I needed to tell my mom to get her to change her vote. Her testimony was very moving....Speaking of my mom, she is on the parish council & is going to ask our new pastor if we can get the fliers you are talking about
& having them at church."

* Sue from Texas, was looking for a flier that she could hand out in front of the Churches in her neighborhood, something that would "include Catholic teaching regarding voting, moral obligation in the electoral process...with a picture of a beautiful baby and a picture of an aborted baby?" The project was able to put her in touch with people who had such a flier - the same flier that can now be downloaded from prolifewitness.com.

* This past weekend, the Suvivors of The Abortion Holocaust led a pro-life witness at the Saddleback Civil Forum, where Rick Warren held a forum with Sens. Obama and McCain. Since I wasn't able to go out there and lead a pro-life witness as I had wanted to, I inquired if the Survivors would - and they did. But let me give credit where it is due - this group of dynamic pro-life youth were already giving Obama a hard time on the campaign trail, and Saddleback was was a continuation of that effort.

* Others have signed up as well - for example, this past weekend, a member of a popular online political forum accepted the project's challenge to distribute literature in their community. This person informed me that they had last participated in this type of activity back in 1992 - and after being invited to do so again, they not only signed up but also downloaded the flier to distribute in their community!

Now, the question I have for you is, will you help to prevent Obama - the "Abortion President" - from getting elected by being a pro-life witness in your community?

Will you spend a few hours distributing literature at your local houses of worship?

Will you take one minute to sign up at prolifewitness.com and to download the fliers? (Please note, you will need Adobe Reader to view and print the fliers).

Time is running out, and Obama still has an excellent chance at winning the election - but not if you get involved and shine a light on his heinous record!

And please, if you do distribute the fliers - the ones on our site or your own - please let share your story so that together, we can encourage others to get
involved.

Finally, sign up today at prolifewitness.com so that I can send you details about September's teleconference that will feature some well known, high profile leaders from the pro-life movement (who will speak as individuals, and not on behalf of any organization they may be affiliated with).

Space is limited, so if you want to participate in this teleconference, sign up today!

Ruben Obregon
ProLifewitness.com

In this audio, Barack Obama coldly claims two doctors helping a baby born alive after a botched abortion would be a burden for the aborting mother, as he argues against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act at the Illinois state legislature in April 2002:

**** good video that really nails Obama for his strong support of Infanticide! He can punt on the question from Rick Warren, but he can't hide from his record.

In other Obama-related news: Obama calls himself president again in new ad.

McCain's radio response to Obama's ad is here (MUCH better ad - even though its only audio)

Related articles:
Sen. Obama continues to hide opposition to Born Alive Infants Protection Act
Obama Campaign Admits Infanticide Vote Lie

Cross-posted: Hyscience

Barack Obama's problem is not the mistakes he has made but rather the beliefs upon which he acts:

The federal "Born Alive Infant Protection Act" sailed through the Senate in 2001 on a vote of 98 to 0. The bill was supported by Senator Barbara Boxer, the body's leading pro-choice spokeswoman, and was not opposed by the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League. By getting his facts wrong, Mr. Obama is now in the difficult position of trying to explain why he voted against a bill that the legislative record shows addressed infanticide rather than abortion. - John Fund

The most adamant pro-abort will at least agree babies acquire human rights when they have completely delivered. But Barack Obama couldn't bring himself to say, "At birth." He wouldn't confer human rights to newborns. Jill Stanek

Pro-lifers were subjected to horrible abuses and there's an almost complete media blackout.

Washington, DC (20 August 2008) On Aug. 1, 18 pro-lifers were falsely, brutally arrested on bogus charges by Maryland state police officers. Most were scared, crying teenage kids. They weren't told the charges for which they were being arrested and they weren't read their Miranda Rights. The girls were humiliatingly searched, and all were locked up. Most weren't allowed to see their lawyers and were denied their phone calls.

This is one of the largest mass arrests of pro-lifers since the days of the clinic rescue movement which ended in the early 1990s. It's a clear violation of First and Fourth Amendment rights.

It's being ignored in a massive media blackout.

"This type of harassment has been used against peaceful protestors in the past and never have these tyrannical methods been acceptable," said Jen Catelli, director of media relations at American Life League. "The pro-life community needs to stand up and demand media attention for these heinous abuses."

Defend Life's Maryland Face the Truth Tour had one final stop to make in Hagerstown, Maryland. They peacefully set up their signs along a stretch of highway and began to pray. State police officers soon showed up and demanded they take down their signs. The pro-lifers complied and moved to a different area.

State police followed and began making arrests.

"They violated all our rights," said Jack Ames, president and founder of Defend Life. Ames spent the night locked in a cell with the other pro-lifers. Ames and his fellow pro-lifers spent the night praying and singing the Lord's Prayer, the Ave Maria and Tantum Ergo. The next morning officials released the pro-lifers. Charges have since been dropped.

"American Life League is committed to making sure these people get the attention they deserve," Catelli said. "This kind of blatant disregard for pro-lifers' rights on the part of Governor Martin O'Malley's state police won't be tolerated. If these pro-lifers were pro-abortion activists or PETA protesters, this would have been on the front page of every newspaper on the East Coast."

"As more information surfaces about this mass arrest, ALL will ensure that everyone in the pro-life movement hears about these heroes," Catelli continued.

At just 23-weeks, this baby was pronounced dead by doctors but later revived after spending hours in a hospital refrigerator:

"We unwrapped her and felt she was moving. We didn't believe it at first. Then she began holding my mother's hand, and then we saw her open her mouth," said 26-year-old Faiza Magdoub, the baby's mother.

The baby was pronounced dead several hours earlier, after doctors at Western Galilee hospital in northern Israel were forced to abort her mother's pregnancy because of internal bleeding.

However, I couldn't help thinking about Barack Obama's infamous vote against protecting children in this situation. In the process of justifying his opposition to the IL infanticide ban, Obama opposed this statement:

A live child born as a result of an abortion shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law

Update: Paul Ibrahim had the same thought.

Barack Obama said that National Right to Life is lying about his position on the Born Alive Infant Protection Act that he opposed while an Illinois Senator. He opposed this Illinois bill in 2001, 2002, and 2003. Why did Obama oppose the bill? In 2001, he spoke against the bill saying it "would essentially bar abortions."

Recently at the presidential candidate forum at Saddleback Church in California, Barack Obama stated the following: "I am pro-choice. I believe in Roe v. Wade and come to that conclusion not because I'm pro-abortion, but because ultimately I don't think women make these decisions casually. I think they wrestle with these things in profound ways -- in consultation with their pastors or their spouses or their doctors and their family members. And so for me, the goal right now should be -- and this is where I think we can find common ground, and by the way, I have now inserted this in the Democratic Party platform, is how do we reduce the number of abortions ..."

Jill Stanek exposed the practice of infanticide in a Chicago hospital and the Illinois legislature crafted a bill that would protect babies who are born alive during an abortion. As an Illinois state legislator, Barack Obama spoke out against the measure that would have protected children in this situation. Ramesh Ponnuru explains:

Obama did not want the gap filled. He did not want pre-viable fetuses/infants to have any legal protection. In the Illinois legislature, he argued that providing them with legal protection would both be unconstitutional in itself -- a violation of the Supreme Court's abortion jurisprudence -- and undermine the right to abortion.

Obama was wrong about these points. The Supreme Court's abortion jurisprudence treats the location of the young human organism, not its stage of development, as the key factor in whether it can be legally protected.

Here's the latest from Hannity and Colmes (HT: JillStanek):

Note that Obama supporters continue to assert that he could not have supported the legal right to commit infanticide because he is a "proud father" of former infants. Ponnuru notes that this makes "no logical sense". Those daughters are also, after all, former fetuses.

Update 1: Pro-abortion absolutists should be pleased with Obama. There has never been a presidential candidate more demonstrably committed to their deadly cause. - Terrence Jeffrey

Wow! The Washington Post now reports what Obama previously said was a lie:

As a committee chairman in the state Senate in 2003, Obama supported GOP efforts to add language to the act, copied from federal legislation, clarifying that it would have no legal impact on the availability of abortions. Obama then opposed the bill's final passage. Since then, he has said he would have backed the bill as it was written and approved almost unanimously the year before.

Update 2: One of the most basic responsibilities of the government is to protect the innocent. As an Illinois state senator, what did Barack Obama do to stop the practice of infanticide in his state?

Let Her Live has placed this pro-life billboard directly across the street from an Atlanta, GA business center that contains Abortion Advice Services, Summit Medical Associates (an abortion clinic), and Atlanta SurgiCenter (another abortion clinic). For any mother planning an abortion, this billboard is a final look at God's beautiful gift of life.

The phone number is "answered by the dedicated folks at the Pregnancy Resource Center of Gwinnett (http://www.prcgfriends.org) who operate a state-wide call center to help women in crisis pregnancies find pro-life counsel and help."

Your donations can help keep the billboard up beyond August (click here).

Anyone who keeps up with the many pro-choice demonstrations in the United States cannot help but see on pro-choice placards and buttons a drawing of the infamous coat hanger. This symbol of the pro-choice movement represents the many women who were harmed or killed because they either performed illegal abortions on themselves (i.e., the surgery was performed with a "coat hanger") or went to unscrupulous physicians (or "back-alley butchers"). Hence, as the argument goes, if abortion is made illegal, then women will once again be harmed. Needless to say, this argument serves a powerful rhetorical purpose. Although the thought of finding a deceased young woman with a bloody coat hanger dangling between her legs is -- to say the least -- unpleasant, powerful and emotionally charged rhetoric does not a good argument make.

The chief reason this argument fails is because it commits the fallacy of begging the question. In fact, as we shall see, this fallacy seems to lurk behind a good percentage of the popular arguments for the pro-choice position. One begs the question when one assumes what one is trying to prove. Another way of putting it is to say that the arguer is reasoning in a circle. For example, if one concludes that the Boston Celtics are the best team because no team is as good, one is not giving any reasons for this belief other than the conclusion one is trying to prove, since to claim that a team is the best team is exactly the same as saying that no team is as good.

The question-begging nature of the coat-hanger argument is not difficult to discern: only by assuming that the unborn are not fully human does the argument work. If the unborn are not fully human, then the pro-choice advocate has a legitimate concern, just as one would have in overturning a law forbidding appendicitis operations if countless people were needlessly dying of both appendicitis and illegal operations. But if the unborn are fully human, this pro-choice argument is tantamount to saying that because people die or are harmed while killing other people, the state should make it safe for them to do so.

Source: Answering Arguments for Abortion Rights, Francis J. Beckwith

Yes, Barack Obama lied about his opposition to legislation that would have banned infanticide in Illinois. The MSM remains silent but pro-life news sources and bloggers are responding.

Barack Obama and National Right to Life went head-to-head over Obama's abortion record, and Obama blinked. The Democratic presidential candidate now has backed off his claims that pro-life advocates were "lying" over his vote to kill a bill that would have prevented infanticide in Illinois. Obama's campaign now acknowledges he "misrepresented" his position. - LifeSiteNews

Barack Obama accused pro-lifers of lying about his position on the Born Alive Infant Protection Act over the weekend. Classic case of pot calling the kettle black. - Michelle Malkin

... Where is the media reporting this admission of an outright lie? Why have they not pounced on Obama with sharpened talons exposing his lie? StoptheACLU

New documents show the excuse Barack Obama gave for opposing a bill that literally stops infanticides was a misrepresentation. But one media observer points out that the mainstream media hasn't touched the new wrinkle in the story about the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. - LifeNews

In what could easily be looked upon as the quickest about face on an issue this election cycle, Barack Obama's campaign has admitted the presumptive Democratic nominee misrepresented the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, only 24 hours after Obama himself accused his critics of lying. - Constitutionally Right

Obama was caught red-handed in his attempt to deceive the American people when NRLC released these official documents. - Susan Armacost, Legislative Director for Wisconsin Right to Life

Complete coverage: Jill Stanek

NRLC Explains Obama's Web of Lies:

Senator Barack Obama's four-year effort to cover up his full role in killing legislation to protect born-alive survivors of abortions continues to unravel.

In the most recent developments, Senator Obama himself, in a videorecorded interview Saturday night with David Brody of CBN News (subsequently broadcast on both CBN and CNN), said three times that National Right to Life was "lying" in asserting that he had voted against a state bill virtually identical to the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act. He did not directly address newly uncovered documents that had been released by NRLC on August 11 -- documents that proved that he had done exactly that, contradicting four years of the Obama cover story.

In response, on Sunday, August 17th, we issued a challenge to Obama to either declare the newly discovered documents to be forgeries and call for an investigation of the forgery, or admit that he had misrepresented his record on the live-born infants legislation (not just once, but for four years), and apologize to those he's called liars.

We don't have an apology yet. But now there is this, in a news story posted on the New York Sun website on the evening of August 17th: "Mr. Obama appeared to misstate his position in the CBN interview on Saturday . . . [Obama's] campaign yesterday acknowledged that he had voted against an identical bill in the state Senate . . ."

http://www.nysun.com/national/obama-facing-attacks-from-all-sides-over-abortion/84059/

Here is a summary of what came before:

The controversy at hand concerns Barack Obama's record and whether or the candidate has been truthful concerning his vote against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, an Illinois state bill aimed at stopping infanticide following a botched abortion.

Obama on Saturday rejected criticism that he opposed the bill as an Illinois state senator:

Well and because they have not been telling the truth. And I hate to say that people are lying, but here's a situation where folks are lying.

[snip]

So for people to suggest that I and the Illinois medical society, so Illinois doctors were somehow in favor of withholding life saving support from an infant born alive is ridiculous. It defies commonsense and it defies imagination and for people to keep on pushing this is offensive and it's an example of the kind of politics that we have to get beyond.

Previously, the NRLC posted documents which prove Obama misrepresented his record (more here).

As noted by Jill Stanek and reported by the Sun, the Obama campaign yesterday admitted that the candidate misrepresented his Born Alive vote. Jill comments,

Little did Obama know his own words would so quickly condemn him. He admitted what he did "defies common sense and it defies imagination." In fact, it was heinous.

After Obama's appearance at Saddleback, CBN's David Brody had a chance to interview him on camera. David asked him about NRLC's charge that Obama is misrepresenting his own record regarding the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

In the interview Obama accused NRLC of lying, despite the strong evidence that his own campaign is guilty of misrepresenting his record. See Jill Stanek's blog for strong evidence on Obama's misrepresenation of his record on the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

This issue is starting to cause Obama real trouble, and it's is starting to get under his skin - and this issue is only going to intensify in the coming weeks as pro-lifers around the nation help to expose his radical record.

It seems that those who favor Obama know he is vulnerable on the issue of abortion. Their attempts to block Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust's signs at Saddleback reveal two things - first, they don't really believe in free speech, and second, they are afraid that this issue will hurt Obama.

(See the commotion at 1:38 of the video..)

And it will hurt Obama, because Saddleback is not the last Church that will receive a pro-life witness - in the coming weeks, pro-lifers across the nation will bring such a witness to Churches across the nation by leafleting Church parking lots, using large posters and banners, and simply talking with people entering and exiting the Church about Obama's extreme record.

And as Christians learn the truth about his heartless record, their support for him is sure to drop.

But this can't happen without your involvement - sign up now at prolifewitness.com to find out how you can be a pro-life witness to churches in your community. Time is short, so sign up now!

Visit http://www.prolifewitness.com for more information.

And finally, kudos to Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust for their efforts to shine a light on Obama's extreme record!

Obama sympathizers try to cover up a large picture of an aborted baby.

Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust bring a pro-life witness to Saddleback

Another pictures of the Survivors..

Absurdity reigned as Barack Obama suggested a question by Rick Warren on human rights was just too tough for him:

"Forty million abortions since Roe v. Wade, stated Warren. "At what point does a baby get human rights in your view?"

Obama replied, "... whether you are looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade."

On the other hand, John McCain was crystal clear:

...a baby's human rights began "at the moment of conception ... I have a 25-year pro-life record."

According to the latest news, Pastor Rick Warren is going to ask Obama and McCain about abortion tonight during their appearance tonight at Saddleback, his mega church.

But what exactly is he going to ask them? And is he just going to simply toss some softball questions?

Now, what kind of questions can be considered softballs?

1. Asking if the candidates if they are for reducing abortion - who is going to admit, on the record, being against reducing the demand?

2. Asking how they plan to reduce abortion - you just know contraception is going to be touted as the solution to abortion, when history shows, at least among unmarried teens, contraception has only exacerbated the abortion problem.

3. Asking what they personally think about abortion - see #1 - who is going to admit they haven't seen an abortion they didn't like?

4. Asking if there is common ground on this issue - of course there is common ground, but based upon his record, Obama is not the candidate willing to actually find it, despite what he says.

Softballs aren't the only potential problem - so are "free passes" on the issue of abortion/infanticide. Here are some ways Warren can grant them...

1. Not asking about protecting our youngest and newest citizens - that is, infants who survive abortions but who are not offered any medical treatment or legal protection.

2. Not asking Obama to clarify his misrepresentation of his record regarding protecting infants born alive.

3. Not asking why our future President won't recognize infants who survive abortion as citizens - when indeed they are, abortion not withstanding.

4. Not asking why Obama is in favor of repealing every restriction on abortion, despite the fact they have helped to lower the rates?

5. Not asking McCain about his support for unethical stem cell research - enough said.

6. Not asking the candidates about taxpayer funded abortions.

The fact that Warren had to be cajoled into bringing up abortion is not a good sign at all. I would be surprised if all he does is toss some softballs and offer some free passes - but I'm hoping I'm wrong.

Stop by the Quick and the Dead.

From Charmaine's blog:

Charmaine Yoest, Ph.D., a well-known pro-family leader, author, and media commentator, takes the helm of Americans United for Life (AUL) as president and chief executive officer on August 11, 2008.

Robert Harvey, Chairman of the AUL Board of Directors said, "Dr. Yoest's experience in pro-life issues, in political strategy, and in organizational communications make her the ideal person to lead the team at AUL in taking on challenges and capitalizing on opportunities in the present legal and political climate."

The U.S. Supreme Court's 2007 Gonzales decision upholding the Federal Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act marked the beginning of a new era in the battle over life issues. In short, the decision dramatically opened up new doors for protecting life through the law.

Allan Parker, President of The Justice Foundation, announced that 100 scientists, medical and mental health professionals, based on their training and experience, have released a joint statement today saying abortion hurts women. They issued the following statements:

The United States Supreme Court stated in Gonzales v. Carhart that "it is unexceptionable that some women will come to regret their choice to abort the infant life they once created and sustained ... severe depression and loss of esteem can follow." Abortion is a difficult and complex decision, because it has deep impact upon the woman, her own mental health and well-being, her physical health and well-being, her relationship with the child in utero, her relationship with her husband and/or relationship with her sexual partner, other family members, as well as society as a whole. As a scientist, medical professional or mental health professional, I agree with the following conclusions about abortion:

THE FACTS

1) It is common for women to experience feelings of anger, fear, sadness, anxiety, grief, or guilt after abortion. The United States Supreme Court is correct that "some women come to regret their choice to abort the infant life they once created and sustained... Severe depression and loss of esteem can follow."1

Over the years since Roe v. Wade, many have stated that they are against abortion unless it's for the health of the mother. This exception is common when legislation concerning abortion is debated. What does "health of the mother" really mean? In the case of Doe v. Bolton in 1973, the Supreme Court issued their opinion about it. In this companion case to Roe v. Wade, the Court stated that a woman may obtain an abortion after viability, if necessary to protect her "health." The Court defined "health" as:

"Whether, in the words of the Georgia statute, "an abortion is necessary" is a professional judgment that the Georgia physician will be called upon to make routinely. We agree with the District Court, 319 F. Supp., at 1058, that the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman's age - relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health."*

In other words, the "woman's health" aspect could cover almost any reason for abortion. A woman could say that her child would cause her stress, or she is not ready to have a family, and that would be sufficient.

By Ruben Obregon

As I mentioned in my prior post about home births and the ACOG, my wife decided to give birth at home..

This past week she's been having episodes of Braxton-Hicks contractions ("false labor"), and just this morning she complained of contractions and back pain, a tell tale sign of true labor. That's not to say these aren't Braxton-Hicks contractions, after all, sleeping in a bad position can result in a sore back.

But stay tuned, little Judah, who's already been in the world for the past 38 weeks, could be born tonight. Stay tuned for some pictures...

SEE THE CURRENT POST FOR THE MOST RECENT NEWS ON INCREASED DEATHS FROM THE GARDASIL VACCINE.

WHAT FOLLOWS IS THE AUGUST 14, 2008 POST:

As Many As 18 or 19 Girls Dead After Using GARDASIL (the cervical cancer vaccine against HPV) Since March 2007 (this is a short PDF, for a change, and easily skimmed through quickly)

In response to one of our commenters, I've modified this post but do not agree it should be removed. Thank you for pointing out what I didn't have time to review: there were edited secondary reports among the cases in that first link and so there are only 18 or 19 actual women or girls reported. The Judicial Watch report summarized as follows:

Gardasil is still in the testing stages, and will not be fully evaluated for safety until September 2009. VAERS reports show that as many as eighteen people have died after receiving Gardasil.

Also, there were several reports by licensed medical professionals who were not or may not have been the attending physicians, yet the FDA felt that since they weren't just "someone who 'heard from a friend'", but were licensed medical professionals who heard from other trusted, licensed medical professionals, that they were important enough to document and record. It would seem grossly unwarranted to dismiss them if the FDA does not.

If a qualified and employed licensed nurse practitioner, physician's assistant or any medical professional is reporting to the FDA that someone died sometime after taking a still not-fully-tested vaccine, I would take that as a "reliable report" and so does the FDA. I don't understand why our commenter does not.

Further, while official Causes of Death (COD) are usually listed, for example, as "sudden cardiac death and pulmonary embolism [blood clot]", the incidence of these things occurring in otherwise healthy females within hours or days of taking Gardasil is still newsworthy.

We stand corrected that a few women did appear to have had prior history of some health issues. However, it is also cautionary that while some girls had prior conditions (heart problems, colds and flu, diabetes, history of seizures, or had also taken a meningitis vaccine recently, as many college-bound students are required to do), the addition of Gardasil to their systems could very well have been a factor in their deaths and cannot be ruled out at this time. The fact does appear to be that they had been able to survive these existing conditions prior to taking Gardasil.

Imagine how many girls going off to college are getting both the meningitis and the Gardasil vaccine, or already have done so this summer?

Imagine, too, the horror of the mother (on page 22 and 25 of that PDF report) who

did not want to agree to the vaccine [for her own 17 year old daughter who just died after receiving it] because her friend's daughter died after receiving it.

The fact remains: this is still 18 girls or young women dead in 18 months' time, one of which was 11 years old, three of which were 12 years old, and one of which was 15.

I think I could safely say that their mothers and fathers don't give a rat's patoot that anyone thinks their daughter's taking the Gardasil vaccine was "just coincidence."

[The Judicial Watch information is "based on new documents obtained from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, detailing reports of adverse reactions to the vaccination for human papillomavirus (HPV), Gardasil."

The Judicial Watch press release is found here. The PDF file of their full report is here.]

The Democrats continue to play word games with the sanctity of life, suggesting that they're seeking "common ground" on the abortion controversy.

But all the while they support as much as ever: 1) the unqualified right to abortion; 2) the elimination of all restrictions on abortion; 3) the promotion of abortion overseas; 4) abortions performed in military hospitals; 5) the funding of abortion through tax dollars; and 6) the insistence of the immoral (and demonstrably counter-productive) Planned Parenthood-style "sex education" programs in schools and government sponsored agencies.

So who is foolish enough to buy into this claptrap?

http://www.prolifewitness.com

For decades, religious leaders have been afraid to challenge their congregations to vote for pro-life candidates. Church leaders have been cowered into political inaction by pro-abortion legal advisers.

From the pulpit, less urgent - but still important - social justice issues have been given a higher priority than the lives of the unborn. As a result, the faithful have been lulled into inaction and apathy on the most urgent issue of our time - and have been lured into voting for candidates who won't even offer the most minimal protection for the unborn!

But you can help to change this by being a pro-life witness in your community!

It's time to shine a light on the darkness by exposing the extreme abortion positions of candidates like Senator Barak Obama, a man who as an Illinois Senator offered more protection for horses than to infants born alive during "live birth" abortions.

It's time to challenge Christians to vote for the candidate who will best defend the unborn - and it's not Barak!

But how can the faithful be reached if their own Church won't reach them with such a strong message? By giving witness to the Gospel of Life outside of the Church!

How does one give witness to the faithful outside of the Church? It can be done through the the use of flyers, large vinyl banners, giant posters, and personal contact with Church members - and done with a smile and a friendly demeanor.

But how can you get more information on how to be a pro-life witness to your community? It's easy - simply visit the prolifewitness.com website and sign up to participate in the September teleconference! (Speakers and dates to be announced shortly).

And if you live in Southern California, join Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust and Operation Rescue as they bring a strong pro-life witness to the Saddleback Civil Forum on Saturday, the 16th of August. Click here for more information.

Don't wait to sign up for the teleconference - space is limited to the first 1,000 registrants!

Don't delay - sign up at prolifewitness.com today!

"The Pill Makes Women Pick Bad Mates", By Jeanna Bryner, Senior Writer, LiveScience.com, 12 August 2008

Not only is this study's publication brand new this week, its findings apparently have already been observed and published after being "fully peer-reviewed to the highest standards," quietly and without any media coverage I'm aware of, 11 years ago.

Read the actual abstracts and full texts for yourselves. These are clearly not biased, "pro-life" sources.

How should a civil society treat innocent human beings that remind us of a painful event? May we kill them so that we can feel better? - Scott Klusendorf, Pro-Life 101: a Step by Step Guide to Making Your Case Persuasively

Society frowns on the birth of a child whose conception was rooted in an ugly crime. Perhaps this is why some politicians have successfully garnered pro-life support despite voting for legislation that includes exceptions to child killing. As reported by LifeSiteNews,

Most countries, even some who have otherwise strong legal protections for unborn children, allow abortion for pregnancies due to rape.

HT: LifeSiteNews

Last week Doug Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee drew my attention to a previously unnoticed January 2008 article by Terence Jeffrey stating Barack Obama actually did vote against a version of the IL Born Alive Infants Protection Act that was identical to the federal version, contrary to multiple public statements Obama or his surrogates have made to rationalize his opposition to the IL bill for the past 4 years.

Since then we have found 2 separate documents proving Barack Obama has been misrepresenting facts.

In fact, Barack Obama is more liberal than any U.S. senator, voting against identical language of a bill that body passed unanimously, 98-0. In fact, Barack Obama condones infanticide if it would otherwise interfere with abortion.

Here is the statement with documentation released by NRLC this morning:

New documents just obtained by NRLC, and linked below, prove that Senator [Barack] Obama has for the past four years blatantly misrepresented his actions on the IL Born-Alive Infants Protection bill.

Summary and comment by NRLC spokesman Douglas Johnson:

Newly obtained documents prove that in 2003, Barack Obama, as chairman of an IL state Senate committee, voted down a bill to protect live-born survivors of abortion - even after the panel had amended the bill to contain verbatim language, copied from a federal bill passed by Congress without objection in 2002, explicitly foreclosing any impact on abortion. Obama's legislative actions in 2003 - denying effective protection even to babies born alive during abortions - were contrary to the position taken on the same language by even the most liberal members of Congress. The bill Obama killed was virtually identical to the federal bill that even NARAL ultimately did not oppose.

In 2000, the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act was first introduced in Congress. This was a two-paragraph bill intended to clarify that any baby who is entirely expelled from his or her mother, and who shows any signs of life, is to be regarded as a legal "person" for all federal law purposes, whether or not the baby was born during an attempted abortion. (To view the original 2000 BAIPA, click here.)

In 2002, the bill was enacted, after a "neutrality clause" was added to explicitly state that the bill expressed no judgment, in either direction, about the legal status of a human prior to live birth.

(The "neutrality" clause read, "Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being 'born alive' as defined in this section.")

The bill passed without a dissenting vote in either house of Congress. (To view the final federal BAIPA as enacted, click here. To view a chronology of events pertaining to the federal BAIPA, click here.)

Meanwhile, Barack Obama, as a member of the IL State Senate, actively opposed a state version of the BAIPA during three successive regular legislative sessions. His opposition to the state legislation continued into 2003 - even after NARAL had withdrawn its initial opposition to the federal bill, and after the final federal bill had been enacted in August 2002.

When Obama was running for the U.S. Senate in 2004, his Republican opponent criticized him for supporting "infanticide." Obama countered this charge by claiming that he had opposed the state BAIPA because it lacked the pre-birth neutrality clause that had been added to the federal bill.

As the Chicago Tribune reported on October 4, 2004:

Obama said that had he been in the U.S. Senate two years ago, he would have voted for the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, even though he voted against a state version of the proposal. The federal version was approved; the state version was not....

The difference between the state and federal versions, Obama explained, was that the state measure lacked the federal language clarifying that the act would not be used to undermine Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court opinion that legalized abortion.

During Obama's 2008 run for President, his campaign and his defenders have asserted repeatedly and forcefully that it is a distortion, or even a smear, to suggest that Obama opposed a state born-alive bill that was the same as the federal bill. See, for example, this June 30, 2008 "factcheck" issued by the Obama campaign, in the form that it still appeared on the Obama website on August 7, 2008.

The Obama "cover story" has often been repeated as fact, or at least without challenge, in major organs of the news media.

(Two recent examples: CNN reported on June 30, 2008, "Senator Obama says if he had been in the U.S. Senate in 2002, he, too, would have voted in favor of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act because unlike the IL bill, it included language protecting Roe v. Wade." The New York Times reported in a story on August 7, 2008, that Obama "said he had opposed the bill because it was poorly drafted and would have threatened the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade that established abortion as a constitutional right. He said he would have voted for a similar bill that passed the United States Senate because it did not have the same constitutional flaw as the IL bill.")

NRLC and other pro-life observers have always regarded Obama's "defense" as contrived, since the original two-paragraph BAIPA on its face applied only after a live birth; the "neutrality clause" added in 2001 merely made this explicit, and therefore the new clause did not change the substance of the original bill.

Moreover, the overwhelming majority of liberal, pro-abortion members of the U.S. House of Representatives did not embrace the initial NARAL position that the original bill was an attack on Roe v. Wade. The Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee, then as now, were a solidly liberal group, yet only one of them voted against the original BAIPA without the "neutrality clause," and he cited a different reason.

Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), who supported the bill, and who described himself as "as pro-choice as anybody on Earth," argued that under his understanding of Roe "if an abortion is performed, or a natural birth occurred, at any age, [even] three months, and the product of that was living outside the mother, and somebody came and shot him, I don't think there's any doubt that person would be prosecuted for murder."

When the original bill - with no "neutrality clause" - came up on the House floor on September 26, 2000, it passed 380-15.

These facts should give pause to those who have unskeptically accepted Obama's claim that the IL BAIPA bills that he opposed in 2001 and 2002, which were modeled on the original federal BAIPA, were crafted to attack Roe v. Wade.

For the moment we can set that debate aside, however, for this reason: Documents obtained by NRLC now demonstrate conclusively that Obama's entire defense is based on a brazen factual misrepresentation.

The documents prove that in March 2003, state Senator Obama, then the chairman of the IL state Senate Health and Human Services Committee, presided over a committee meeting in which the "neutrality clause" (copied verbatim from the federal bill) was added to the state BAIPA, with Obama voting in support of adding the revision. Yet, immediately afterwards, Obama led the committee Democrats in voting against the amended bill, and it was killed, 6-4.

The bill that Chairman Obama killed, as amended, was virtually identical to the federal law; the only remaining differences were on minor points of bill-drafting style. To see the language of the two bills side by side, click here.

To see the official "Senate Committee Action Report" on this meeting, click on one of the links below. (The document is dated March 12, 2003, which is the day that the committee convened, but Chairman Obama recessed the meeting until March 13, which is the day that these votes actually occurred.)

Here are links to the official document that records these votes, in three different formats.

Senate Committee Action Report in HTML (web browser) format
Senate Committee Action Report in JPG (photo) format
Senate Committee Action Report in PDF (Adobe document) format

In this report, the left-hand column shows the roll call vote on adoption of "Senate Amendment No. 1," which was verbatim the neutrality clause copied from the federal bill. The right hand column shows the roll call by which Obama and his Democratic colleagues then killed the amended bill - the bill that was virtually identical to the federal law that Obama, starting in 2004, claimed he would have supported if he'd had the opportunity.

To view the text of SB 1082 as it was originally introduced (without the neutrality clause), click here. To view the text of Senate Amendment No. 1 (the neutrality clause copied from the federal law), which Obama and his colleagues added to the bill at the March 13 meeting (before killing the bill), click here.

NRLC has also obtained two additional documents that report information on these events that is fully consistent with the Senate Committee Action Report.

To see the "Senate Republican Staff Analysis: Senate Bill No. 1082," click here. (If this Word document requests a password, simply hit "cancel" and it will be displayed.) The first portion of this analysis was written before the March 12-13, 2003, meeting of the committee that Senator Obama chaired. The committee's actions, amending the bill to exactly track the federal born-alive law, and then defeating the bill, are reported on the bottom half of the second page.)

Finally, to see an Associated Press dispatch dated March 13, 2003, reporting on the 6-4 committee vote that killed the bill, click here.

Less than two years after this meeting, Obama began to publicly claim that he opposed the state BAIPA because it lacked the "neutrality" clause, and that he would have supported the federal version (had he been a member of Congress) because it contained the "neutrality" clause.

His claim has been accepted on its face by various media outlets, producing stories that have in turn been quoted by the Obama campaign and Obama defenders in attacking anyone who asserts that Obama opposed born-alive legislation similar to the federal bill. It has also been forcefully repeated by advocacy groups such as NARAL (see, for example, this June 30, 2008 "alert" from NARAL).

It appears that as of August 7, 2008, only one writer - Terence Jeffrey, a contributing editor to HumanEvents.com - had correctly reported the essence of this story, in a column posted on January 16, 2008 (read it here), but his report was ignored by the Obama campaign and overlooked by others at the time.

Now, the uncovering of the Senate Committee Action Report and the contemporary Associated Press report shed new light on Senator Obama's four-year effort to cover up his real record of refusing to protect live-born survivors of abortion.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:

"Index of Documents Regarding Obama Cover-up on Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Bill" (will be updated as new items come in)

Timeline of important events in the history of the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act

NRLC archive on the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act

NARAL press release, July 20, 2000, expressing strong opposition to the original federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (H.R. 4292).

The official report of the Judiciary Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives, explaining the intent of the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (H.R. 2175), and explaining why such legislation was necessary (August 2, 2001)

"The first thing I would do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act!" - Sen. Barack Obama states to a group of Planned Parenthood supporters

Amazingly, the American public does not know Senator Barack Obama's extreme position on abortion. Obama is a radical abortion-on-demand guy and his voting record is simply brutal. Barack Obama had the chance to support legislation to ensure that babies who survive abortion are afforded the same legal protections as those who are spontaneously born prematurely. In fact, he had three chances, but he refused to vote in favor of protecting these vulnerable lives all three times. Since his election to the Senate in 2004, Obama has compiled a 0% voting record on prolife issues scored by the National Right to Life Committee. By contrast, he has a 100% rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America.

How do you feel about the "none of the above" call that some are making? Will it be better for America and mankind if we just stay home on election day & allow Obama to be elected, just because he isn't the perfect Republican?

John Jakubczyk wrote on his blog that:

Such action on the part of such voters could prove disastrous for the country and the future of our children and grandchildren.

and:

In this political season, there are tremendous opportunities to expose the hypocrisy of the Democrats by discussing the abortion issue with them. Also, it is an ideal time to initiate a discussion about abortion with someone who normally may not think about it. If a Democrat is asked why they vote that way or what the party stands for, a few items usually come up. They will often state that the Democrat Party stands for the little guy, human rights and tolerance.

Some questions to ask them are:

Do Democrats support the little guy? Why do Democrats almost uniformly believe we should destroy the littlest guy in the name of abortion?

Do Democrats believe in human rights? What groups in this world should have basic human rights? Should terrorist prisoners of war have rights? Should the incarcerated in this country have a right to be treated humanly? Do you believe the unborn should have basic human rights, especially the right not to be killed?

Do the Democrats believe we should tolerate certain groups or lifestyles? Why do the Democrats not always tolerate the unborn children group?

Many Democrats vote as they do because of family tradition or an affiliation of a particular group, such as a union. Unions, in general, say that they represent the little guy and his rights in the workplace. The Democrat then can be asked about the aborted unborn who will never have a right to even live, let alone workplace rights.

On Nov. 8, 1994, Pastor Scott Willis and his wife, Janet, started the day by voting in Illinois' general election. One vote they cast was to re-elect Secretary of State George Ryan.

They then commenced a road trip to Milwaukee with the youngest six of their nine children, ranging in age from 6 weeks to 13 years.

On Interstate 94 a truck in front of them suddenly dropped what was later determined to be a 6-by-30 inch metal brace weighing 30 pounds.

Having no time to swerve or stop, Scott ran over the brace, which hit the gas tank.

The van instantly exploded into an inferno. Scott recalled:

It was just roaring flames coming up on both sides. I was yelling to get out of the car. Janet and I had to consciously put our hands into the flames to unbuckle the seat belts and reach for the door handles.

Janet fell out the door while the car was still moving. Benny was in the midst of the burning; his clothes were mostly burned off by the time he got out. The five youngest children, who had been asleep, died instantly.

Only they didn't die instantly....

Continue reading "Cold and calculating - that's Obama" at WorldNetDaily.com.

Is it against the law to hold a sign showing what abortion/pre-natal murder really is? Bel Air Maryland apparently thinks it is.

Imagine, there you are, standing quietly on the side of the road, holding a sign, and suddenly, like communist China, police pull up, put everyone in handcuffs and haul you off, no formal charges, no reason and no Miranda rights read to you.

Click here to continue reading and to view the video at ProLifeNews.tv

David Bereit, National Campaign Director of the 40 Days for Life campaign spoke recently at the annual Defend Life Face the Truth tour.

Are you going to participate in the 40 Days for Life campaign? Click here to continue reading at to take the poll at ProLifeUnity.com.

MaryMeetsDolly reflects on the consequences of prioritizing one class of humans over another in her comment, "...we abandon the human embryo to the whims of researchers at our own peril. By protecting the human embryo, we protect all of us that are of the same species. If humans are valuable because of their characteristics or usefulness it becomes quite easy to call out a group who are below par and not worthy of life. In the case of pre-born humans, we've seen the application of irrational and arbitrary measures of worth based upon the potential burden of the child, genetic predisposition, level of development, pressures of society, whims of the parents, etc.

The valuation of human life on the basis of a characteristic, quality or contribution inevitably leads to the oppression of the "undesirable"; those whom others find "inconvenient" or of little worth. The "slippery slope" is simply the extent to which those who have adopted this view are consistent with their fundamental view of human value.

In his expose of Darwinism, Ben Stein does a remarkable job of driving this point home while questioning historians about Hitler and his death camp doctors Given the despicable crimes against humanity Stein asks, "Wasn't Hitler insane?" No. He has consistent but certainly not insane.

Humans are intrinsically valuable based upon what we are, regardless of our characteristics, intelligence, health, developmental status or abilities. The abandonment of any member, regardless of his or her size or development, does indeed imperil all.

Beginning yesterday, those using Internet Explorer 7 experienced problems loading prolifeblogs and numerous sites that use Sitemeter. We're not sure what caused the problem but note that others have reported the same issue and Sitemeter's homepage crashes as well.

Join us today for the The Monthly Call for Life at MonthlyCallForLife.com. Today is the first Saturday after the first Friday. Go to an abortion mill in your area and pray, stand with a sign, or whatever you want to peacefully do for a couple of hours. Click here if you want to print out flyers, Life Cards or the sign that we use.

No matter what, go to the abortion mill, even if all you do is stand there. Women drive by & see if there is a Pro-Life person standing there. If there is, some continue driving & don't come back.

Many of you said that it is difficult for you to participate in an outside event on Friday, so here is your chance! Go to MonthlyCallForLife.com & click on Calendar to find a picket or location to pray near you. If you want to start your own or are already picketing or praying at a location, email us at events@prolifeunity.com and we will post it on the calendar.

If you are in the Washington D.C. area you can join us in Falls Church, Virginia from 09:00 am to noon at 900 South Washington Street, 16th street Planned Parenthood or go to the many other abortion mills where people are praying.

Go to ProLifeNews.tv for up to date news on our events & to send information & pictures about your events.

MonthlyCallForLife.com

United we stand - Divided they die - Pass it on

This just in, Joe Healy, the Associate Director of Defend Life - DefendLife.org, reported that 18 individuals were arrested today in Maryland while showing the true face of abortion. In his Email, Healy had this to say about what happened:

This is Joe Healy in for Jack Ames, who is one of 18 of my pro-life friends who were arrested in Bel Air, MD, this evening while peacefully holding pro-life signs on the side of the road. They were not told what they were being arrested for, nor were they read their rights during arrest.

Click here to continue readng at ProLifeNews.tv

There is an article in today's Washington Times which discusses the prospects of John McCain considering a woman for the vice presidential spot. One candidate that has excited a lot of people throughout the country is Alaska's current governor Sarah Palin. Palin is Alaska's first woman governor - taking office in 2006. She has an interesting biography which you can read here.

So where does she stand on our issues?

She is strongly pro-life. But only is she pro-life in her politics, she lives it. A Mirror of Justice blog cites a Nat Hentoff article that talks about what Governor Palin did when she was told her baby would be Downs Syndrome. The article calls upon John McCain to choose Governor Palin as his vice-president . And there are a lot of blogs talking about her credentials.

My thoughts.

I like the idea.

Here are the reasons.

1. Pro-life commitment. As a women no one from the other side could touch her on the subject. She has lived through a difficult pregnancy and chose life for her baby. That's courage. If the pro-abortion extremists try to attack her, it will look really bad.
   
   
2. Administrative experience. Face it. The job of the VP is to be ready for the unthinkable. In Palin, one gets someone with executive experience.
   
   
3. Reformer. Not part of the old guard or old boys network in Alaska, she has been relentless in challenging the corruption that has raised its ugly head again in the indictment of Sen. Stevens. She has been an ardent opponent of Stevens. This plays to the McCain reform theme.
   
   
4. Energy awareness. Coming from Alaska,she can speak with an expertise about the energy issues and discuss the importance of being self reliant as we move toward developing additional means to provide energy to this nation.
   
   
5. Youth. She gives a nod to the next generation while reflecting the time honored traditions that have made this nation strong.
   
   
6. She is a woman. Her presence on the ticket gives women another good reason to support McCain. She will attract those women who do not warm up to Obama as well as those who were supporting Hillary in the primary.
   
   
7. Maverick. She has a reputation for taking on the tough issues with a certain independent flair and that is what the people in this country want.
   
   
8. Excitement. She will bring some excitement to the race.
   
   
9. Conservative principles. Pro-gun, pro-marriage, pro-life. This can excite the base and get them out of the doldrums.
   

ABORTION

A Is for Agony, not for just how my body felt, but longer still, my soul, when I fully realized the life of my unborn baby had been taken from me whole.

B Is for Beloved, which is how my baby would be to me, but now I have not even a photo, of my child whom I long to see.

O Is for Obligated, or pressured, as others helped to make me to choose to solve the "problem" quickly- my infant's precious life to lose.

R Is for deep Remorse, for yielding to the deceptiveness of sin, not just sex before marriage but even worse, taking my baby's life from him!

T Is for the Time, 12 years, I've lost with the son or daughter I should have had, times lost of joy and even sorrow often make me sad.

I Is for Ignorance -- mine and others -- about what the consequences of abortion really are, of the damage it causes women both near and those that are afar.

O Is for the Ongoing hurt that the abortion left me- of an emotional hole in my heart and persisting physical pain- all for acting not like a Mary but for murdering as a Cain.

N Is for No. The word I should have said, when asked to kill my baby. If only from the Bible had I read! Of the Christ who came- gave Himself for you and me, that by faith in Him we could walk in victory.

And though I am sorry for that which was done in sin, how glad I am for Jesus and the redemption and life that is in Him!

Testimony Poem by Leslie Gydos: Read at Alamance County NC RTL vigil 1/22/08

Friends of the unborn, it's the first Friday of the month and it's time for us to call and/or Email our representatives to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves.

Think of it, a million unborn children stand a chance of living this year if we speak for them.

Go to MonthlyCallForLife.com for all you need to know, like who to contact and what you might want to say.

Remeber to click the "Tell a Friend" link in the middle of the page, & pass it on!

-----

Abolish Abortion in '08!

Bold? Brash? Not possible?

If you believe these things, then I have to ask, how big is your God?

ProLifeUnity.com - Click the "Abolish Abortion in '08" link

-----

Web site links and Action Code

Do you have a website or blog? Consider helping us get out our Action Calls and/or linking to ProLifeUnity.com or MonthlyCallForLife.com.

What are Action Calls? When a Pro-Life group has an action effort coming up, we post it in our Action Calls area of the website. This automatically updates all ally websites instantly with the newest Action Call. Click here to go to the Action Calls page of ProLifeUnity.com and see many of the allies who are currently participating. Our current estimate has us reaching over 1 million people per month with this effort. Join us. Sent an email to Join us. Click here to contact us, or download the Action Code here:

http://www.prolifeunity.com/files/actioncode.zip

Almost 30 web sites are listing the Action Code, and about 60 web sites are linking to us. Join the Pro-Life technology revolution today!

-----

Prayer Pivot

Join the Prayer Pivot at PrayerPivot.com Every Month on the first Friday, for 24 hours prayers are said for the unborn and for the culture of life around the world. The Prayer Pivot starts at 12:00 AM Eastern and continues through all the time zones until 12:00 AM the next day. Click here to contact Gail for more information and to sign up for a time slot. Pick a time zone and pray for LIFE!
-----

New Members of Pro-Life Unity

We'd like to welcome our newest members and thank them for their efforts.

-----

ProLifeNews.tv

We were at the Supreme Court last week to participate in the Mercy Seat, a Bound4Life event. Our first interview with Matt Lockett, the Executive Director is up at ProLifeNews.tv.

-----

Pro-Life Action Efforts

Do you know of an action effort that needs to go into the Pro-Life Calendar? If so, click here to contact us

-----

Thank you all for doing what you can for the unborn. They only have us, and if we are silent, they die alone.

MonthlyCallForLife.com

United we stand - Divided they die - Pass it on