All posts by Lisa Graas

Lisa Graas is a single, disabled mom of four. Lisa has served as a board member for Kentucky Right to Life and as a crisis pregnancy counselor for the Archdiocese of Louisville. Lisa was previously a contributor at and is a current contributor for Lisa was voted the second best Catholic to follow on Twitter (after the Pope) at's 2013 "Catholicism" Readers' Choice Awards.

Obama gives in to Planned Parenthood on allowing kids to buy abortion pill

OThe Obama administration announced on Monday that it will no longer fight to restrict the sale of the Plan B One-Step abortion pill to children. In a statement gushing with political rhetoric, Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, called the decision “a huge breakthrough for access to birth control and a historic moment for women’s health and equity.”

In reality, as was clear back in April, the decision means that kids may soon be able to purchase abortion pills as easily as they can purchase a candy bar, depending only on how manufacturers decide to market them. It also means that the Obama administration has conceded that judges, not scientists, will ultimately decide whether a drug is safe enough for sale over the counter. This concession demonstrates how strong, perverted, and dangerous to our health Planned Parenthood’s power over the Obama administration is.

For those who believe that Barack Obama will do anything for Planned Parenthood – at every single turn, on every legal issue, and at every level of government – it is important to put prejudices aside in order to understand what has happened in this particular case. Why was the Obama administration, which is arguably the most pro-abortion administration in history, originally pitting itself against Planned Parenthood in fighting the sale of abortion pills to kids?

According to the Los Angeles Times, the Justice Department argued on the basis of separation of powers: that it is the role of the Executive Branch through the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and not the Judicial Branch to decide whether a drug is safe enough to be sold over the counter. Before Monday, the abortion aspect of this case was secondary to the administration. Separation of powers for the sake of the safety of the American people in drug policy was the focus. On Monday, however, after it became clear that the case could go to the Supreme Court, the Obama administration decided that the will of Planned Parenthood must prevail over public safety – even over the safety of our children.

Oddly, Judge Edward Korman had maintained that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius unilaterally decided to restrict the sale of Plan B to children and that her decision was “politically motivated.” This is a curious claim indeed.

Can anyone think of any example where Kathleen Sebelius, or any other top brass within the Obama administration, were “politically motivated” to oppose Planned Parenthood? Further, can anyone imagine Kathleen Sebelius having political motivations that contradict those of President Obama? Would he really allow her to act as his agent to advance a policy that is against his wishes?

Plan BThe fight to make sure that the FDA, not the courts, determines drug safety could very well be the first time this administration has ever opposed Planned Parenthood. In the end, however, Planned Parenthood won the battle, because the administration does not have the will to oppose them as far as the Supreme Court. The health of every human being who purchases over-the-counter medication in America is on the line, thanks to Planned Parenthood’s insistence that scientific research is secondary to their political issue of “access to abortion.”

If our courts decide whether drugs are to be sold without restriction, even to children, the FDA is neutered in its role of protecting us from unsafe drugs. Scientists, not judges, should determine if drugs are safe for children. With a “separation of powers” argument, the Justice Department was seeking to avoid the danger of allowing judges to make these decisions with no basis in science. Good for them.

Unfortunately for all of us, though, fighting Planned Parenthood at the Supreme Court is anathema to the Obama administration, regardless of consequences to public safety.

Today the New York Times alludes to the political impact if this case were to go to the Supreme Court. It would be covered in the mainstream press, which would mean that more Americans would be aware of it and discussing it.

The Justice Department appears to have concluded that it might lose its case with the appeals court and would have to decide whether to appeal to the Supreme Court. That would drastically elevate the debate over the politically delicate issue for Mr. Obama.

The administration has been forced to choose between offending Planned Parenthood by opposing their agenda at the Supreme Court level and offending the American people by refusing to stop the sale of abortion pills to children. Who is surprised that they went with Planned Parenthood on this?

As a mother of four, including two young daughters, I have a great deal of trouble with the idea that our president cares less about the health of girls than he does about the political support of Planned Parenthood. Take a look at the reasoning offered by Sebelius in April, and remember, this is the issue that the Obama administration is willfully giving up on this week, for Planned Parenthood’s sake.

Ms. Sebelius said at the time that she was basing her decision [to fight the sale of Plan B to kids] on science because she said the manufacturer had failed to study whether the drug was safe for girls as young as 11, about 10 percent of whom are physically able to bear children.

It seems that politics all too often trumps science where Planned Parenthood and the Obama administration are involved. Obama is demonstrating willful negligence for political gain as he refuses to fight Judge Korman’s decision.

When the courts are forcing the sale of potentially harmful drugs to children against the judgment of the FDA, we have crossed a fatal boundary in America. If there were ever a time to call out Planned Parenthood and the Obama administration for selfishly putting political power above science, good health, and children, that time is now.

While we are at it, we might also ask that our federal judges be stopped from allowing kids to be used as guinea pigs to be sacrificed on Planned Parenthood’s political altars.

Federal Appeals Court rules girls as young as 11 must have access to Plan B with no restrictions

On Tuesday, a federal appeals court ruled that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) must immediately make one form of the abortifacient Plan B, also known as the “morning-after pill,” available to children of all ages over the counter. In April, a “clearly furious” federal judge, Edward Korman, had ordered the FDA to remove all restrictions, including age restrictions, on the sale of Plan B, but the FDA appealed the ruling. Tuesday’s decision denies a stay that had been requested by the FDA.

In response to the April ruling, Lila Rose, President of Live Action, issued a statement calling for Judge Korman’s decision to be immediately overturned.

Selling a self-administered home-abortion pill over the counter to young girls, without even basic involvement of a parent or doctor, is the equivalent of selling guns off the shelf to any minor. The decision by a New York City judge ordering Plan B One-Step, an abortifacient with unknown risks and the power to kill, to be available over the counter, to anyone of any age, flouts both medical prudence and plain common sense.

Even pro-abortion Secretary Sebelius and the present administration recognize that the severity of the risks of Plan B are unknown, especially for young girls. Widespread and unregulated exposure to untested abortifacient drugs puts pre-born children at huge risk as well.

Forcibly excluding parents and doctors from decisions with profound implications for children’s health can only spell disaster for teens and pre-teens in our country. Judge Korman’s decision shows contempt for every established medical safety protocol, and it should therefore be overturned immediately.

The pro-abortion Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR), which bills itself as a “women’s group,” took the opposite view and fought the FDA’s request for a stay. Tuesday’s ruling reflects CRR’s desire that we view girls as young as eleven years old not as “children,” but rather as “women of all ages.”

Lowering the age limit “may reduce delays for some young women but it does nothing to address the significant barriers that far too many women of all ages will still find if they arrive at the drugstore without identification,” said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights.

Given that Plan B is already available on college campuses in vending machines, how long will it be until “women of all ages” (children) can purchase an abortion pill from the same machine where they would get candy bar? According to Tuesday’s ruling, that day will come just as soon as any distributor chooses to offer them.

This is what happens when “women’s groups” like CRR use terminology like “daunting and insurmountable hoops women are forced to jump through” and classifies girls as “women of all ages.” Such language may sound reasonable or harmless to many people, particularly those who are not paying close attention, but the practical result is abortion being marketed and sold to children like candy.

The cloaked language and the impact on children in the Plan B legal fight is hauntingly reminiscent of Planned Parenthood’s willingness to aid in sex-trafficking of children and refusal to debate Lila Rose. So it is with the Culture of Death. It is not enough for the pro-abortion movement that children in the womb are killed. Our born children, too, must be sacrificed for the sake of their agenda, and all appeals to reason and basic human compassion must be suppressed at every turn.

It is truly a dark time for America when federal judges angrily demand that abortion be offered like candy to children. The good news is that Live Action will continue to stand as one of the most powerful voices of reason and compassion for the innocent and vulnerable. With your help, we are making a difference in advancing a Culture of Life, not death. Thank you for standing with us in the hope that our country will seek to acknowledge the value and dignity of every human life.

Nurses: Planned Parenthood administrators, Delaware regulators failed to address ‘meat market’ conditions

Two nurses are blowing the whistle on their former employer, Planned Parenthood of Delaware. Joyce Vasikonis and Jayne Mitchell-Werbrich, both of whom describe themselves as being supportive of a “right” to abortion, offered scathing testimony against Planned Parenthood at a State Senate committee hearing on Wednesday. The nurses described “meat-market assembly-line” conditions that pose a substantial threat to life for patients and for Planned Parenthood employees. Perhaps most disturbing, but certainly not a surprise to anyone familiar with Live Action’s investigations, is the revelation that their complaints to Planned Parenthood administrators, state regulators, and the office of Delaware Governor Jack Markell were continually brushed aside.

It seems an impossible task to adequately summarize the full testimony of Vasikonis and Mitchell-Werbrich. It includes a long litany of horrific details about the treatment women received from Planned Parenthood of Delaware while they were on staff. Also clear is that the nurses were given what Mitchell-Werbrich termed a “run around” from various agencies of the State of Delaware when they tried to report these dangers with the intention of saving lives.

Mitchell-Werbrich may have summarized the situation best in her concluding remarks:

I did my job but the State of Delaware has not done their job. I have spent almost a year begging for someone…..anyone to help me to help the patients at Planned Parenthood. I do not know where else to go for help. I am sharing my testimony in the hopes that someone will hear and warn the public not to go to Planned Parenthood for any service.

I have seen with my own eyes in 27 days what really goes on behind the closed doors of Planned Parenthood. I would not want my own daughter or anyone else’s daughter to seek any services from Planned Parenthood. People’s lives matter to me. I am a nurse and I really do care for my patients well being. Please help.

Not only are patients of Planned Parenthood at severe risk, according to the nurses’ testimony, but the health and lives of staff are in danger as well. Planned Parenthood reportedly places more value on saving money than on providing adequate protection and training for staff. Here is an example offered in Joyce Vasikonis’ testimony:

New staff was being thrown into the clinical setting with no orientation. I was no longer the manager so could not initiate any corrective actions. The new staff knew nothing about sterile technique. For the last three weeks I worked at Planned Parenthood of Delaware, I alone scrubbed and sterilized instruments because no one else knew how. The Dover office did not have impervious gowns which are required when in contact with potentially contaminated fluids. I repeatedly made Marcy Williams aware but she said the isolation gowns were cheaper. I put myself at risk for contracting any number of diseases. Nothing had changed as of my last day working.

On its website, Planned Parenthood of Delaware announces a new CEO, who assures readers that these claims are lies.

For those of you who may have heard speculation and falsehoods about our services in recent months, I want to provide clear information. Patients are our top priority, and we insist on the highest professional standards of care. Like all high quality health care providers, if we become aware of any deviation from these standards we take swift corrective action.

What makes this statement wildly unbelievable is that the two nurses who have testified have no political motivation whatsoever to end or even to limit abortion. Further, a core part of their testimony is in regard to the dangers of believing that Planned Parenthood can be trusted to regulate itself. Both are asking the Delaware State Legislature to understand the importance of requiring that “impartial,” “independent” investigators police Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood has proven to these “pro-choice” nurses, both of whom continue to be willing to assist in abortion, that the organization is concerned more with money than with women’s health.

Live Action has absorbed many arrows for using investigative journalism to expose both the brutality against children and the life-threatening dangers to women and girls behind the closed doors of Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide. We expect a certain amount of disbelief from the public because so many see abortion as a political issue. When people sense a political agenda, they often raise flags of caution.

While there is a time and a place for politics, some things, like life and dignity, must always transcend politics. So it is with the desire of these two former Planned Parenthood nurses in Delaware. Though they do not recognize the right to life of the child in the womb, they obviously place great value on the lives of women who visit Planned Parenthood.

When it is clear to any thinking person that no political ideology is driving criticism of Planned Parenthood for being a dollar-focused enterprise, it is time to listen, no matter your political persuasion. When the evidence shows that no one can reasonably argue that Planned Parenthood is concerned about the health and well-being of women, then it is time for “pro-choice” people to wake up and greet the light of truth.

Michelle Knight’s brother reports she wants to be reunited with son conceived in gang-rape

Kidnap and rape victim Amanda Berry is a recent high-profile example of a woman’s love for a child conceived in rape. Her fellow kidnap and rape victim, Michelle Knight, is reportedly another example. Michelle’s brother Freddie tells the New York Daily News that Michelle wants to be reunited with the son she had before she was abducted by Castro. He was born after Michelle was gang-raped by boys at school prior to her abduction.

“She was a delightful girl, outgoing,” Deborah Knight, 62, told the Daily News. “She was very helpful. We just had a lot of fun together.”

But all that changed when three classmates “grabbed her by the arm and raped her at the school,” the great-aunt said. “That’s how she had Joey.” […]

[…] “She was, like, ‘Give me a hug,’” her brother said. “She was so freaking happy. I gave her a hug, but I couldn’t give her a bear hug because of all the things that happened to her.”

Freddie Knight said his sister has said little about her years in Castro’s prison. “She was just happy to see me,” her brother said.

After enduring so much torment, cruelty and isolation, Knight is now eager to make up for the decade she lost, and wants her son, who is 13, back.

How could any woman possibly want to carry to term, give birth to, and parent a child conceived in rape? We hear this question all the time on political soapboxes. It is a mantra that hurts women, because it rejects the idea that women will naturally love their children regardless of the circumstances of their conception.

In the real world, we see many examples of mothers desiring a loving, protective relationship with their children conceived in rape that is consistent with all that we treasure about motherhood. Amanda Berry and Michelle Knight are two shining examples of this. Society’s rejection of such children can cause many children, and their mothers, to fall through the cracks. This is what happened to Michelle.

Michelle Knight was brutalized long before she was kidnapped by Ariel Castro. First, she was brutalized by being gang-raped by boys at school. Then she was brutalized when authorities stripped away from her the child she had conceived as a result of that rape. There are indications that this action by authorities was taken at the urging of family members who would not support Michelle in caring for the child. Michelle is now reluctant to reunite with some in her family, reportedly because of a custody dispute she had with her family prior to her abduction.

It was after she was gang-raped and her child was taken from her that Michelle was abducted and brutalized by Castro. This included his murdering five children she conceived as a result of his raping her repeatedly. Michelle’s life, then, has been mostly made up of people robbing her of her most precious treasures: the treasure of herself and the treasure of her children. The boys from school who gang-raped her robbed her of herself. The community, including possibly her own family, robbed her of a relationship with her child. Since it is now clear that Michelle’s brutalization began long before Castro entered her life, we would all do well to understand the community’s role in that part of Michelle’s tragedy, just as we are trying to understand how we can do more as a community to recognize that our own neighbors can be people like Ariel Castro.

Few among us would not recognize that healing for Michelle will come partly through being reunited with the child who was taken from her against her will. Reaching out and supporting Michelle now is an opportunity, then, for societal healing. Community support for her now will help to make up for the community support that was lacking for her when her child was taken from her.

Our learning to understand, as a society, that it is natural for Michelle to desire a relationship with her child conceived in rape is an important part of healing for Michelle and others like her. Women like Michelle fall through the cracks that we fashion with our pickaxes in the law when we say that abortion should be an option for raped women “because it’s natural for a woman not to desire that child.” We have failed as a society to understand that it is natural for Michelle to desire that relationship. Attitudes like this bring about the lack of support that resulted in Michelle’s child being taken from her. It is time for us to heal the cracks that women like Michelle, and their children, fall through – cracks that are made by those who advocate for abortion in cases of rape.

Michelle Knight, as Amanda Berry, teaches us a great lesson about children conceived in rape. Such children are a balm on the wounds of their mothers, not a blight. We need to support women who conceive children as a result of rape by responding with love for both them and their children. We need to let them, and all women, know that the love that they have for these children is natural and, as such, can be healing for them in the process of healing from rape.

The reality of motherhood, that motherhood itself is a treasure in and of itself, is something that we all need to stand ready to embrace in our families and in our communities, especially when the tragedy of rape occurs. When we preach violence as a response to violence, women like Michelle become brutalized – first by the rape, and then by the rejection of her natural desire to have a relationship with her child. Just as the community participated in the brutalization of Michelle Knight by taking her child from her, the community participates daily in the brutalization of other women like her because their children conceived in rape are treated under the law as non-persons who have no inherent right to exist.

If it is true that Michelle Knight wants to be reunited with her son, then we all need to come together in supporting her in that, as a community, for her sake and for the sake of her child. Just as Amanda’s story teaches us that children conceived in rape can be a source of hope that inspires mothers to persevere, Michelle’s story teaches us that community support for women who conceive children as a result of rape should always be an important part of our efforts to bring healing to women who are victims of the violence of rape. It is only in understanding the dignity and value of all women and their children that society can experience healing from violence against women. If our society’s answer to these women is that they are disordered in some way if they love these children and desire a relationship with them, we fail them as we failed Michelle.

Ohio kidnap victim Amanda Berry desired life, education and freedom for child conceived in rape

In Ohio, friends and family of three kidnapped women are rejoicing. Amanda Berry, Gina DeJesus, and Michelle Knight are now reunited with the people who love them most. The young women had been held in captivity for a decade by Ariel Castro, a man who reportedly kept them in chains, raped them, and beat them in a dungeon-like area of his home. We learned on their day of freedom that in the midst of this tortured existence, there was also a light of hope. Amanda Berry gave birth during her imprisonment to a daughter, Jocelyn, whom she conceived as a result of rape. We have also learned that, despite everything, it was Amanda Berry who never lost hope that she, her fellow captives, and Jocelyn could be free and prosperous.

According to media reports, hopelessness took its toll on Gina DeJesus and Michelle Knight, who had both “succumbed” to the “reality” of captivity even as all three were forced to have sex with their captor. These rapes resulted in at least six pregnancies. Michelle was the victim of forced abortion and lost five babies at the hands of Castro. Jocelyn is the only child who is known to have survived.

As a mother myself, I understand that our kids need us, but we also need them. They keep hope alive in us at all times, even when things may seem at their darkest. Perhaps it was Jocelyn who kept hope alive in her mother, and now Jocelyn is herself free thanks to the perseverance of her mother.

Jocelyn had been delivered in the most deplorable conditions one could imagine, with the assistance of Michelle Knight. Remarkably, Castro reportedly threatened to kill Michelle, the victim of five of Castro’s forced abortions, if Amanda’s baby did not survive.

When Berry went into labor, Ariel Castro, now charged with kidnapping and rape, grabbed captive Michelle Knight and told her to deliver the baby.

The baby was born into a plastic tub or pool to contain the afterbirth and amniotic fluid.

When the baby was born, it stopped breathing and everyone started screaming, the source said, citing the girl’s account. Castro allegedly said, “if that baby dies, I’m going to kill you.”

“What’s most incredible here is that this girl who knows nothing about childbirth was able to deliver a baby that is now a healthy 6-year-old,” the source said.

It is impossible, perhaps, to imagine more horrific circumstances for a woman than to be held captive and raped. There are two main components in healthy sexual intercourse: (1) the unity of the two people involved in the act, and (2) procreation. Sex is fulfilling to a woman when she is offering her body willingly as a gift. Life springing forth from the gift of yourself to your husband is the ultimate fulfillment in being a spouse and a mother. A rape situation, then, is arguably the height of horror for any woman. To rape a woman is to rob her of the precious gift of herself. When Ariel Castro kidnapped Amanda Berry, he robbed her of her freedom, but when he raped her, he robbed her of herself. Castro placed himself in the position of total control of everything that belonged to her alone.

This is the evil of rape. It is also the evil of abortion. As rape robs a woman of the precious gift of herself, abortion robs children of the precious gift of themselves. The ultimate violence is to rob someone of himself. Rape and abortion both do that. The good news is that even from such deplorable circumstances, as is so often the case with woman who carry babies conceived in rape to term, Amanda was able to see in Jocelyn the joy in life and the hope of tomorrow. Children will naturally be sources of joy and hope to their parents, provided that we have not given up on ourselves and on their potential to do that for us. Children in the womb are not “potential life.” They are truly living human persons. What is “potential” about them is joy and hope for us. Provided that we let them live, we will know joy and hope in them. If we do not let them live, that joy and hope will never be.

What are we to make of Castro’s alleged remark, then? “If that baby dies, I’m going to kill you,” he reportedly said. From a person so committed to the evil of bondage and rape, it is no wonder that we would hear about a threat of death. Why would he want this baby to live, especially considering that so many others did not survive his brutality? This is a matter for much debate, but there is no doubt today that Amanda Berry loves Jocelyn and desired the best for her. It is reported that Amanda even home-schooled Jocelyn without the knowledge or approval of Castro.

Amanda Berry has heroically expressed a mother’s desire for life, education, and freedom for Jocelyn, despite the loathsome circumstances of her conception – rape. In the beautiful things that Amanda shared with Jocelyn while living tortured in a dungeon, there was much for both of them to rejoice in. No doubt, there will be much more for them to rejoice in tomorrow and in the days and years to come. This is our hope for them, and certainly, we should all find joy in Amanda Berry’s example, which reflects the light of hope for all – not just for a few in a dungeon.

Planned Parenthood looks to enshrine discrimination in Colorado “unlawful termination” bill

The legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. rightly remains embedded in our national consciousness whenever we are faced with issues of discrimination. It was Dr. King, primarily, who taught America to keep her promises in considering that all human beings are persons and that, as persons, we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights. He called on us to judge people by the content of their character, not by the color of their skin, because it is our moral failures that weaken us as a nation, and it is moral strength to view all persons as having inherent dignity.

Planned Parenthood Clinic SignPlanned Parenthood, unfortunately, has rejected this viewpoint in perpetuating the idea, with taxpayer funding, that moral failure is something to be celebrated, and that our laws should enshrine legal discrimination against unwanted children. Their backing of Colorado’s “Crimes Against Pregnant Women Act” and opposition to the “Brady Project” is a good example of their commitment to legal and taxpayer-funded discrimination against persons in the womb who are deemed unworthy to breathe free.

The Brady Project is a Colorado petition drive to support a state constitutional amendment backed by Heather Surovik, who lost her nine-month-old pre-born son Brady when they were hit by a drunk driver. The amendment would allow criminal prosecution of those who commit “criminal offenses and negligent and wrongful acts” that result in the death of a pre-born child.

Rational basis is given in the text of the amendment – specifically, that an unborn child is a “person” and, as such, merits protection by the law in those cases when a pregnant woman loses her child in the course of a criminal act such as the drunk-driving incident that took the life of Surovik’s son Brady. Planned Parenthood opposes the Brady Amendment because, as the nation’s largest abortion provider, the corporation relies on a rejection of the rational basis that pre-born children are “persons.” Instead, the people at Planned Parenthood are supporting “Crimes Against Pregnant Women” legislation so that pre-born babies can continue to be discriminated against based on whether they are “wanted” or “unwanted.”

According to Keith Mason, president of Personhood USA, the legislation backed by Planned Parenthood has serious legal ramifications for children in the womb.

“It was partly authored by Planned Parenthood. Not only does it remove every restriction for abortion that is on the books, but it intentionally and specifically denotes that anyone not born is not a person,” Mason told CNA.

If Colorado accepts Planned Parenthood’s “Crimes Against Pregnant Women” legislation and rejects the Brady Amendment, there should be no argument that Colorado will have indeed come full circle in rejecting Dr. King’s vision that we are created equal by virtue of our humanity alone.

Judge to Gosnell Jurors: “He has to share the specific intent to kill”

Jurors in the trial of abortionist Kermit Gosnell meet for deliberations again today (Thursday) in Philadelphia. Gosnell is charged with murder for killing four babies and one woman in his abortion mill. The judge’s instructions to the jury: “He has to share the specific intent to kill.” Did Kermit Gosnell “intend” to kill people? This question is at the heart of the abortion debate. Does anyone involved in promoting “choice” in abortion “intend” that people be killed? Let’s examine this.

Did Kermit Gosnell “intend to kill” people?

Some would say that the answer to the question jurors are asked to consider in the Gosnell case depends on how one feels about abortion. A pro-“choice” person would say that these particular human beings, at least while they are still inside the womb, are not “persons,” so the answer is no. It is not “killing” at all, to them. Whenever these “non-persons” (under the law) are accidentally born and show signs of life, even the President of the United States believes it is too much of a “burden” (to the law) to treat them as persons. Why should we expect any other pro-“choice” person to disagree with that?

Indeed, why should we expect any abortionist, who is actively, daily involved in procedures to ensure that fetal heartbeats stop, to disagree with it? One second, the abortionist is dealing with “tissue” that must be destroyed, and the next second he is expected to treat this “tissue” as a human person with a right to life that is equivalent in its sacredness to his own right to life? That transformation from a cold and pitiless doctor to a compassionate and life-saving doctor is the real “burden” to the pro-“choice” person, I would argue.

Do abortionists ever “intend” to kill people?

The answer to this question depends less on what is going through his/her mind than it does on whether human life is itself objectively sacred. We have learned this lesson, I hope, from our societal experience in dealing with serial killers who have been convicted of killing born persons. In Wichita, for example, Dennis Rader, who referred to himself as the “BTK” killer, terrorized the community for decades. There is no dispute that he intended to kill people and that he lived a double life so that he was able to fool even his own family into believing he was incapable of murder. He did this through “compartmentalization” and through dehumanizing his victims by referring to them as “projects.”

Psychopaths do not feel emotions the way normal people do. Consequently, when their guard is down, they may say or do things that reveal their lack of concern for others and their absence of conscience. This was the case when Rader described his victims as “projects” and calmly explained how he selected a victim, gave the “project” a code name and then researched and stalked her until he found the right opportunity to attack.

Rader is a very accomplished psychopath: his ability to carry on two very different lives attests to it. “I was pretty cold. I shot from the hip very quickly,” he told Larry Hatteberg of KAKE-TV. “Very compartmentalized. I can wear many hats; I can switch gears very rapidly. I can become emotionally involved. Be cold at it.”

When we look at pictures of Rader’s victims, we can say that even though we don’t know anything about these people, they are persons who had the right to continue living. Their humanity is evident, therefore their personhood is evident. While the pro-“choice” activist insists on referring to unborn children as “fetuses” and on denying personhood, the pro-lifer knows better. To the pro-life person, all human life is sacred. Just as we know that Dennis Rader “intended to kill” even though he attempted to fool himself by referring to his victims as “projects,” we know that abortionists “intend to kill” persons inside (and sometimes outside) the womb even though they have hardened their hearts to objective reality. We know from the life of Dennis Rader, and many other serial killers, that “compartmentalization” allows serial killers to live double lives. Regardless of what they may do in other areas of their lives, like Dennis Rader, abortionists kill behind closed doors. They “intend to kill” because they intend to stop fetal heartbeats. Though they may convince themselves that these are not “persons” with sacred value, objectively, they are persons with sacred value. This is why Live Action’s projects of investigation that expose what goes on behind closed doors are so important in awakening people to the reality of abortion. Abortion is intentional killing. It is not self-defense. It is not an “accident.” It is willful, direct and intentional killing.

Kermit Gosnell has committed far more than five murders. He “intended to kill” far more than five people. He is a serial killer. All abortionists are serial killers. As such, they all belong in prison, just as assuredly as Dennis Rader belongs in prison.

Late-term abortionist Curtis Boyd: “am I killing? Yes, I am”

In October, we told you about Medicaid paying for $9000 late-term abortions at Southwestern Women’s Options (SWO)  in New Mexico. Operation Rescue has since revealed that SWO is willing to do abortions as late as 30 weeks to kill unborn children with Down Syndrome at a cost to Medicaid of up to $16,000 per procedure. One of the abortionists on staff at SWO, Dr. Curtis Boyd, made a shocking admission to Austin local news channel KVUE in 2009: “Am I killing? Yes I am”

Continue reading Late-term abortionist Curtis Boyd: “am I killing? Yes, I am”

Pompeo: Sebelius may have “serious questions to answer” on destruction of documents related to Planned Parenthood prosecution

Mike Pompeo

As reported on October 25, the first ever criminal prosecution of Planned Parenthood ended with frustration for pro-lifers as it was learned that state officials had destroyed key evidence in the case.  Now comes news that Steve Six, who was Attorney General in the administration of then-governor Kathleen Sebelius, also destroyed copies of the same documents that were critical to the case. Considering that a potential cover-up to prevent criminal prosecution of Planned Parenthood may well have reached into the highest levels of state government in Kansas, Congressman Mike Pompeo (R-KS) has weighed in to call for the investigation to include questioning of Kathleen Sebelius:

“I am shocked to learn of today’s legal developments in Johnson County.  If in fact documents crucially important to an ongoing criminal investigation were destroyed by the Kansas Attorney General’s office, then it’s clear the rule of law has been deeply violated and I applaud Attorney General Derek Schmidt’s decision to seek a full investigation into the actions of his predecessor.  Since these illegal activities allegedly transpired under Governor Kathleen Sebelius’ administration—possibly even at the behest of her hand-picked Attorney General, Steve Six—Secretary Sebelius has some serious questions to answer.  I look forward to learning the results of the investigation into the destruction of these records and to hearing what Secretary Sebelius and former Attorney General Steve Six have to say for themselves.  The idea that this may go all the way to the top is astonishing,” stated Pompeo.

Continue reading Pompeo: Sebelius may have “serious questions to answer” on destruction of documents related to Planned Parenthood prosecution

Abortionists at KY clinic willing to cover up sexual abuse gave over $4000 to Governor Steve Beshear and Jerry Abramson

According to an online search at the Kentucky Registration of Election Finance, the two abortionists who are the principle officers of Louisville’s only freestanding abortion clinic, have contributed over $4000 to the political campaigns of Governor Steven Beshear and his running mate, former Louisville mayor Jerry Abramson. The clinic, EMW Women’s Surgical Center, was the subject of an undercover investigation by Lila Rose and Jackie Stollar of Live Action on June 23, 2008. In that investigation, Live Action found that EMW clinic staff were willing to help minors obtain a judicial bypass in order to avoid parental knowledge of a minor’s abortion even with the understanding that the child was in a sexually abusive relationship.

EMW Women’s Surgical Center

In the state of Kentucky, sex between a 14-year-old and a 31-year-old is rape in the third degree and would reasonably be considered sexual abuse of a child which must be reported to law enforcement immediately. The EMW clinic failed to ask the questions necessary to file a child sexual abuse report and did not communicate to Rose about the illegal or dangerous nature of her sexual relationship. The clinic also gave misleading information about fetal development, apparently in order to encourage Rose to have the abortion.

A review of online records showed that Dr. Samuel Eubanks, the “E” in “EMW”, has given $2750 since 2006 directly to Beshear’s political campaigns, including $1000 to the Beshear/Abramson campaign, and $400 directly to previous campaigns to elect Abramson to office. Dr. Ernest Marshall, the “M” in “EMW”, gave $1000 this year to elect the Beshear/Abramson ticket in Kentucky’s race for governor. Dr. Wolf, the “W” in “EMW”, is deceased.

Continue reading Abortionists at KY clinic willing to cover up sexual abuse gave over $4000 to Governor Steve Beshear and Jerry Abramson

Philadelphia abortion clinic worker admits to murdering baby, but how many more are guilty?

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” This quote, attributed to Irish statesman Edmund Burke, comes to mind as I consider the case of Dr. Kermit Gosnell’s “house of horrors” in Philadelphia where late-term babies were born alive and then killed by being stabbed in the neck with scissors. According to the grand jury report (.pdf) on this case, “Over the years, there were hundreds of ‘snippings'”, the term Gosnell used for the practice of cutting a baby’s spinal cord to “ensure fetal demise.” Gosnell’s employees, none of whom were doctors, are believed to have routinely killed babies in this manner, as well.

Everyone there acted as if it wasn’t murder at all.

Unfortunately, over those same years, far too many people in Philadelphia did nothing to stop it. We only learned about this “house of horrors” recently because good people finally “did something”.

Continue reading Philadelphia abortion clinic worker admits to murdering baby, but how many more are guilty?

Obama appointee blocks ultrasound law in North Carolina

U.S. District Judge Catherine Eagles, nominated in March of last year by President Barack Obama, has blocked (.pdf) certain provisions of North Carolina’s informed consent law, the Woman’s Right to Know Act. Specifically, Eagles blocked provisions that would have required abortion practitioners or their trained technicians to perform an ultrasound on women seeking abortion in their facilities, allow women to view the screen to see the ultrasound image, and provide an explanation of what they see on the screen. Eagles ruled that these requirements are in violation of the abortion practitioners’ freedom of speech.

Continue reading Obama appointee blocks ultrasound law in North Carolina