As Donald Trump and J.D. Vance try to win over swing voters, some pro-life leaders are busy dispiriting pro-life voters. //

Now, I am not going to imply that Lila Rose is a communist, as James Lindsay did. But to suggest that the Trump-Vance ticket does not “stand for pro-life principles,” and that pro-lifers should withhold their votes, as Lila did, is equally outrageous. In an interview with Politico published on Thursday, Lila Rose said she “would not vote for Harris or Trump” if the election were held today and said there are “other candidates” and even “write-in candidates.”

Such comments are a priceless gift to Kamala’s campaign. Expect interviews on CNN, MSNBC, and other regime media to follow as they use Rose to demonize Trump and demoralize pro-life voters into staying home on Election Day.

Everyone needs to remember that this is the pro-life president who spoke at the March for Life rally in Washington, D.C., had many pro-lifers in top positions, and pursued a host of pro-life policies at home and abroad. This is the pro-life president whose Supreme Court appointments overturned Roe v. Wade. The federal government is no longer forcing the states to allow mothers to murder their children, and 22 have partial or complete bans in place.

Finally, this is the once-and-future pro-life president who is all that stands in the way of Kamala Harris. If she gets into office, she will pack the Supreme Court with pro-abortion justices, Roe v. Wade will be brought back, and abortion on demand up to — and beyond — birth will be the law of the land for another two generations. //

the practical politics of the matter are plain: Anyone who is still attacking Trump this close to the election is dispiriting the base, giving quotes to the opposition, and — it must be said — making Kamala Harris’ election more likely.

Is that what Lila Rose — or any pro-lifer — wants? Does anyone (besides Kamala) want pro-life voters so demoralized that they will wash their hands of the whole nasty business of politics, declare a pox on both their houses, and stay home on election day? Because that is the political effect of her reckless words. //

Just to be clear, the Republican platform is still pro-life, as it has been since 1984, although it could be stronger. Donald Trump is still the most pro-life president since abortion became a national issue, although he could be more resolute.

We need to pray as hard as we can for Trump and Vance’s complete conversion on the life issue. And we must work as hard as we can to get the most pro-life president in my lifetime back in office.

Currently, Missouri has one of the strongest laws against abortion — triggered immediately by the Dobbs decision in 2022. If Amendment 3 passes, that law will essentially be gutted. //

Indylawyer
8 hours ago
If I were rich, I'd donate a bunch of money to the groups trying to defeat these ballot initiatives. The idea that there can be a constitutional right to kill an innocent human being is disgustingly repulsive. At stake is not just the lives of many children who deserve protection from abortion, but also the very bedrock of our constitutional order - the right to life recognized by the Declaration of Independence as a "self evident truth." //

Indylawyer anon-g76i
7 hours ago
Or people with "dangerous ideas" or "oppressor" heritage, or low IQs or high risk of disease, who were born into slavery, or whatever defect the government wants to play up at a given time. If rights come from the government and can be allocated based on attributes other than our mere humanity, then all sorts of abuses become possible.

The “Yes on 4” campaign, which is responsible for promoting a proposed amendment that would effectively enshrine abortion through birth in the Sunshine State’s constitution and eliminate safeguards designed to protect women and children, featured information on its now-scrubbed “Resources” page that links to websites explaining how teens can obtain abortions without involving their parents, as mandated by Florida law.

An archived version of the page also warns girls and women away from life-saving pregnancy centers by claiming they are “fake clinics” that “may try to trick and shame you” and “use tactics to delay your decision-making until it’s too late to have an abortion.” //

The first link on the “Yes on 4” website takes users to Floridians for Reproductive Freedom’s (FRF) guidance, which boasts of connecting girls who “cannot involve a parent” with attorneys who can finagle a judicial bypass “without your parent’s involvement.”

Directly below FRF’s advice on how to skirt the state’s parental consent law, the pro-abortion group tells girls and women how they can obtain dangerous abortion drugs, which are responsible for a 500 percent increase in abortion-related emergency room, by mail.

The Harris-Walz campaign and abortion apologists continue to deceive Americans, both about Trump’s pro-life positions and the consequence of abortion initiatives. //

The video of Trump stating his opposition to Amendment 4 made that point, but as Harris and the propaganda press quickly showed, they will nonetheless continue to deceive Americans, here, by pretending Amendment 4 is a ballot initiative about Florida’s six-week abortion ban. It is not.

To the contrary, the ballot initiative would add Amendment 4, entitled, “[l]imiting government interference with abortion,” to the Florida constitution. That provision states that other than parental notification laws, “no law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.”

If Amendment 4 passes, Florida’s constitution would prohibit the state legislature from passing any laws that “delay” or “restrict” abortions before 22 weeks of pregnancy, including informed consent laws or waiting periods. Further, even after the baby can survive on her own outside the womb, the Florida constitution will prohibit any ban on abortion.

Prolifers need to make this point, but only after first explaining the nonsense of the idea that a post-viability abortion is ever needed. Post-viability, the proper standard of care to treat a serious medical condition is the prompt delivery of the baby—not the prolonged late-term abortion procedure. The only purpose a post-viability abortion serves is to ensure you have a dead baby, instead of delivering a live one. //

the World Health Organization advises that “countries permitting abortion on health grounds should interpret ‘health’ to mean ‘a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.’” Thus, even economic strain or the desire to keep a partner happy provide a supposedly “health”-related justification for a post-viability abortion. //

In fact, the overwhelming majority of countries ban abortion on demand in the second trimester, with the United States “one of only 15 countries in the United Nations that permit abortion on demand past 15 weeks of gestation. . .” Polls also show that 65 percent of Americans believe that abortion should be banned at 20 weeks or before.

Standing up for unborn babies, no matter the circumstances of their conception, is on par with the pro-life movement’s long-held belief that humans are endowed with natural rights at conception.

Yet, GOP politicians and national pro-lifers alike have let Democrats goad them into a life-centered fight that distracts them from the task at hand. Many of them have taken soft or even sympathetic positions on reproductive technology. Others have become so preoccupied with Trump’s agenda that they’ve failed to gain ground in the battle to protect life on the state level.

Meanwhile, Democrats, with help from their allies in the corporate media, have taken advantage of pro-lifers’ inconsistency on IVF to make messaging and policy gains that benefit their abortion extremism. //

It’s the pro-life movement’s job to set the tone for the fight for life. Yet, a significant number of the movement’s biggest political champions are endorsing a procedure that no doubt kills more life than it creates. That’s a problem that would have been better remedied by prevention than intervention.

Now, committed pro-lifers are fighting an uphill battle against some of their biggest allies to explain to voters duped by Democrats’ deceptive narrative-setting and corporate media’s twisted polls why promoting and subsidizing IVF is wholly incompatible with protecting unborn babies or successfully curbing the industries that profit from the destruction of life.

An extreme pro-abortion amendment is supported by a majority of Florida Republicans due to the failure of the Republican Party of Florida to mount any effective opposition. //

Amendment 4 would allow abortion on-demand through the 25th week of pregnancy, which is the point of fetal viability outside the womb, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. More importantly, the amendment would allow abortion at any time with a decision by a “healthcare provider” that an abortion is “necessary to protect the patient’s health.” The measure would also eliminate the requirement of parental consent for a minor to have an abortion, but leave in place the requirement that parents be notified of a minor having an abortion.

If Amendment 4 passes, a Planned Parenthood “health care provider” (a term not defined under Florida law) could determine that an abortion is necessary to protect a woman’s health — even a minor’s health, and potentially her “mental health.” The determination could be based on “protecting” the woman from the normal risks of pregnancy and birth, anxiety over having a child, or the risk of post-partum depression.

That same “health care provider” might then perform the abortion, with no limit on how late in the pregnancy the abortion could be performed. And if the woman were a minor, the law would require only that her parents be notified.

Trump’s insistence that abortion should be left “up to the states” gives Democrats and abortion giants a free pass to target Republican strongholds like Florida with their extreme abortion agenda.

Trump’s “reproductive rights” rhetoric and Vance’s confirmation that the pair will veto federal pro-life protections are certainly reprimandable. But they shouldn’t be the ultimate focus of pro-lifers’ ire this November.

Nearly a dozen states face deceptive ballot measures that promise to protect abortion. If passed in November, these proposed amendments will not only enshrine abortion for any reason in red state constitutions, but will also prohibit those states from passing laws aimed at holding abortionists accountable for the harm they cause women and unborn babies.

These ballot measure campaigns are dangerous because, even though they are plagued with undefined terminology that can be easily construed to justify abortion for any reason and questionable signature-gathering practices, they are effective.

Time and time again, the pro-life movement has allowed abortion radicals to sneak their ballot measure schemes right past their Republican-controlled legislatures, governors’ mansions, and attorneys general offices. As a result, every single one of the seven state abortion referendums introduced since the fall of Roe v. Wade have ended with enshrining the “right” to murder preborn babies in state constitutions.

These constitutional amendments, which effectively hamper states from legislating on abortion, contraception, assisted reproductive technology, and the radical transing of children, are not easily undone.

Instead of talking about these ballot measures, however, pro-life figureheads and politicos everywhere are postulating about Trump’s position on abortion. //

The goal of the pro-life movement has always been to eradicate abortion. But hinging that goal on a federal abortion ban (which is only in the realm of possibility thanks to Trump and his first term) and a federal abortion ban only severely restricts pro-lifers’ effectiveness in the states where referendums on abortion are becoming routine.

Steve_J
15 hours ago
How much income will the national pro-life spokesmen lose now that the abortion issue has been returned to the States, where it should have been all along? //

RetiredNavyPM
9 hours ago
No, Trump is engaged in an optimization battle on abortion, aiming to minimize harm as much as possible. He doesn’t want to fight an absolute battle, where force is used to impose beliefs, even at the point of a gun. Absolutism may feel morally righteous, but because voters won’t resort to extreme measures, Trump loses, and this ultimately leads to more abortions. Under the current administration, pro-life protesters are being jailed for standing outside abortion clinics.

Choosing the path of optimization may tarnish one’s moral purity, but it saves more lives. If Trump wins, he could pardon these protesters, allowing them to continue advocating for life at the very place where it is most threatened. It’s a difficult and imperfect choice.

God gave us free will, allowing us to choose between good and evil. He could have created a world where abortions never happen, but He didn’t. Without God’s omnipotence and in the presence of free will, I believe the only way to stop abortion would be through force. However, since God chose not to use force and instead wants us to navigate these moral challenges ourselves (with the understanding that He will judge us in the afterlife), I cannot justify imposing my will on others by force. I can guide them toward the truth, but I cannot save their souls for them.

Trump’s approach—optimizing to reduce harm—keeps the difficult conversations alive, increasing the chances that more people will choose life. //

GBenton trapper
15 hours ago
It's also lazy. They want a quick Federal solution so they can bypass the ugly work of fighting the good fight.

There is a real Constitutional question here and they don't care, they want a quick authoritarian fix and are too dense to realize the next Democrat White House could just do the opposite if they set the precedent. //

Gregorian Chanter
16 hours ago
The all or nothing approach is more likely to achieve nothing than to gain all. Incrementalism on the part of courts and Democrats is what evolved Roe vs. Wade from Safe, Rare, and Legal to Anytime, Anywhere, for any Reason, at Taxpayer Expense. Incrementalism on the part of conservatives, as well as increasing the availability of prenatal and early postnatal care to struggling mothers, is a more powerful approach. Since the battle is now at statehouse, our warriors need to fight there. //

Berry
16 hours ago
yes pro-life people are upset. and yes this is a huge political mistake for Trump/Vance. It’s a big problem and it was an unnecessary error.

Most of the people who are pushing this narrative were never going to vote for Trump. The Holy Spirit will lead the rest.

Dear @LilaGraceRose and @conservmillen
The messaging hasn’t been great- but remember God didn’t clear out the Promised Land for the Israelites instantly- it was little by little- (Ex 23:20) Trump is the best on abortion-please help him win this election and we will keep fighting

Harmeet K. Dhillon @pnjaban
·
Prolife activists who are trying to suppress Republican votes over prolife policy differences, enabling enthusiastic abortion cheerleaders to write the rules and appoint the judges and prosecute the journalists, are grossly irresponsible and destructive to the prolife cause.
3:08 PM · Aug 26, 2024 //

Peachy Keenan @KeenanPeachy
·
If you want women to have fewer abortions, the tool for this job is not DONALD TRUMP lol.

If Donald Trump is the only guy you are waiting on to deliver you the no-abortion utopia of your dreams, you might want to rethink your strategy.

Overturning Roe was about returning it to the States.

THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT and what the movement marched for - for decades.

Now your fight is in the state houses. Ohio, Kansas - lots of low hanging fruit out there!

Not as high-profile as fighting with Trump but it will get you farther.

Suggesting a Trump boycott is a full-throated call for Kamala and Roe4Evah.
7:46 PM · Aug 26, 2024 //

Harmeet K. Dhillon @pnjaban
·
Replying to @pnjaban
It’s almost as if their goal is increasing their own perceived power instead of saving the lives of innocent children.
3:15 PM · Aug 26, 2024 //

The alliances that Trump is forming with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard have nothing to do with rejecting conservative principles or becoming more Democrat: it's about saving the lives of America's children. The execution may not be to the liking of certain voices in the pro-life movement, but the goal hasn't changed. It is a tragedy that many of these self-proclaimed activists appear to have forgotten this or are so focused on their loss of perceived power that they no longer care to.

But for those not compelled by conscience, please consider the ramifications: If Kamala Harris wins, Democrats will pass a federal law which, at a minimum, makes Roe v. Wade (and not the more limited holding of Casey), the law of the land, preempting the pro-life laws currently in place in some states. Harris will hold the power to appoint federal judges and possibly replace one to three Supreme Court justices — and that’s if Democrats don’t expand and stack the high court. Harris will hold the bully pulpit and will only further dehumanize the unborn, making it more difficult to change the hearts and minds of Americans.

Trump may not govern as a pro-life president, but Harris will most assuredly be the most pro-abortion president ever elected. With Trump in office, the status quo can be maintained until four years from now, a primary battle can demand a candidate willing to fight for the sanctity of life. While society will still not be open to laws that protect all human life, a pro-life candidate can support a federal ban on late-term abortions while working to support pregnancy resource centers and promoting life.

It took us 50 years to get to where we are and it will take decades more to move society toward a place where the populace will agree to ban most abortions. But if Harris is elected, we may never have the chance to start changing hearts, minds, and laws.

There is currently a debate over the efficacy and safety of using progesterone to reverse the effects of Mifepristone, a drug used to induce abortions. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists referred to the procedure as “unproven and unethical.” //

On the other side of the debate, the Charlotte Lozier Institute discussed other studies showing that the treatment is safe and effective. //

DaveM
5 hours ago
I find it interesting that abortifacient agents intended to kill babies in the womb are considered "safe" but medications intended to stop the abortifacients from killing babies are considered "unsafe"

The group that submitted the petitions Friday did not submit an affidavit identifying paid canvassers by name, as required by state law, Thurston wrote in a Wednesday letter to Lauren Cowles, executive director of Arkansans for Limited Government, the ballot question committee supporting the proposed constitutional amendment.

State law also requires ballot question committees to provide “a copy of the most recent edition of the Secretary of State’s initiatives and referenda handbook to each paid canvasser” and to explain to canvassers the legal requirements for soliciting signatures before canvassing begins.

AFLG did not fulfill these requirements while the sponsors of other proposed ballot measures did, Thurston wrote. //

The AFLG appealed to the Arkansas Supreme Court, which ordered a recount of the signatures. That recount certified 87.675 signatures as legitimate and Thurston's decision was upheld. //

Today's ruling seems to have put the issue to rest for this election cycle.

“We find that the secretary correctly refused to count the signatures collected by paid canvassers because the sponsor failed to file the paid canvasser training certification,” the majority wrote. //

Having lost the fight to create a US Constitutional right out of whole cloth, they are now working to enshrine the right to infanticide in state constitutions. There are nine other states with pro-abort constitutional amendments on the ballot in November: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, New York, Nevada, and South Dakota. A pro-abort amendment was added to the Ohio constitution in 2023. //

C. S. P. Schofield
42 minutes ago
While I believe that abortion should be legal, under clear restrictions, I fully expect to see it widely banned before I die, simply because the Abortion Establishment is arrogant. They had decades to persuade the public and instead condescended and relied on a SCOTUS ruling that any amateur student of Law could have told them was built on thin air.

Even since Roe was overturned, they have not realized that they must play by the rules. They preach to the choir and indulge in peruse fantasies like THE HANDMAID’S TALE, an unoriginal piece of thinly disguised Dom/Sub pornography that stole its central repressive theocracy from Heinlein’s future history.

If the Pro-Life forces can refrain from mirroring the arrogance of the Abortion Establishment, they will continue to win most of their goals, until legal abortion is available only in a few Deep Blue strongholds.

And, as the Kermit Gosnell scandal proved, there isn’t necessarily any great difference between a legal abortion clinic and the ‘back alley abortionist’ of legend.

What’s more difficult to understand and accept is how all of this is the inevitable consequence of a liberal worldview that the GOP has already accepted, which means what we’re seeing this week at the DNC we will eventually see at the RNC.

I don’t just mean that the Trump campaign and the Republican Party have softened their opposition to abortion in the post-Dobbs era. It’s not merely that abortion was all but removed from the GOP platform and the party’s previous position in favor of federal abortion limits was abandoned. It’s that Trump and his Republican Party would like very much to stop talking about abortion altogether now, as if the matter is settled and we can move on to more important matters, like the border and inflation.

That’s the same attitude they have about gay marriage, which, like abortion once was, is supposed to be a settled debate, not up for discussion anymore. The choice to take these issues off the table, or try to, is usually framed as pragmatic. We want a big tent, Democrats are radical, Republicans can present their side as reasonable.

But it doesn’t work like that. There’s a reason the Democrats went from talking about how abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare” in the 1990s to celebrating it with free abortions from the back of an RV in 2024. Once you cede the principle of the thing, once you accept the premise that it’s justifiable to kill the unborn under certain circumstances, the list of allowable circumstances will continuously expand.

This is of course true of any moral principle, which is why the left moved with alarming speed from arguing that gay marriage wouldn’t hurt or affect anyone to demanding that everyone actively endorse and celebrate it or face ruin. There is no limiting principle to the argument that consenting adults have a right to have their sexual arrangements officially recognized by the state. That’s why the rationale used in the gay marriage debates of the 2010s is exactly the rationale deployed today in the transgender debate, which will in turn eventually be successfully deployed on behalf of plural marriage, polyamory, and even pedophilia.

The point here is not to sow discord on the right or decry a big tent strategy for the GOP, but merely to point out that when you violate the moral principles on which a social order is based, you don’t get to say when enough is enough. The slippery slope does not cease to be slippery when you think you’ve had enough. You will go all the way down it.

Put another way, the time to say “no” was before the moral principle was violated, not after. Having accepted, for example, that abortion is morally licit in cases where the child is conceived through rape or incest, or that it should be allowed in the first trimester because that seems a reasonable compromise with the left, today’s Republican Party has lost the ability to object to abortion on any grounds whatsoever.

Either an unborn child is a human being, with the same right to life as an infant or a toddler, or it has no rights and can be killed with impunity. Compromising on this is incoherent. It is to admit defeat.

Trump War Room

@TrumpWarRoom
DISGUSTING: Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear wishes for a member of JD Vance's family to become pregnant due to rape.

"Make him go through this."
Embedded video
9:59 AM · Aug 20, 2024 //

bk
6 hours ago
Imagine the press reaction if Vance suggested Beshear's daughter should be raped by an illegal released by the Biden administration so he could appreciate the problem of illegal immigration.

But it seems the Democrats are tone-deaf and have doubled down on their message to Blacks. That message: DIE. Allowing Planned Parenthood to roll out a "mobile health center" that offers free vasectomies and abortions in a city where Black deaths are at their highest is beyond savage, it's downright cold-blooded. To date in Chicago, there have been 353 homicide deaths, a majority of them young, Black males. But this is the Democrat Party, folks. Using vibes and tokenism as window dressing that they care about Blacks while they advocate for policies and positions that turn the dial of death to 11. //

Planned Parenthood Great Rivers
@ppgreatrivers
🧵 All free vasectomy and medication abortions are filled for our mobile health clinic in Chicago. Check back soon — we will share the interest form link again if we have cancellations.
Last edited
7:36 AM · Aug 18, 2024

In Chicago, where Black residents make up about 29% of the population, Black women disproportionately account for over 40% of abortions in Cook County. This raises important questions about why Planned Parenthood and the DNC might specifically target this community offering free abortions.

Molech would be proud.

There is no better way to give Blacks the middle finger than to offer up more ways to extinguish themselves. It is clear: Democrats hate life. Anyone who has abortion 13 times in their party platform but not one mention of God has no regard for the creator of Life or his creation, especially the Black ones. Democrats have shown time and again through their policies, and now they are just blatantly throwing the message in the faces of Black voters. We got the illegal vote now. Shut up and DIE.

It’s not just young adults: The Free Press cites insurance-claim data indicating that about 12,000 youths under age 17 sought gender-related care at PP clinics between 2017 and 2023.

Meanwhile, ever-more Americans have rightly focused on the distressing trend of children being put on hormones or undergoing surgical procedures in a fruitless attempt to change their gender.

Parents’ rights groups are fighting on behalf of mothers and fathers who’ve been kept in the dark about their own children’s mental health.

Alliance Defending Freedom, for example, has seven active cases representing parents suing school districts that secretly transitioned their children behind their backs.

Under 17 - these are children. They can't buy a gun or a beer, they can't sign a contract, they can't get a tattoo, but Planned Parenthood is allowing them to take permanent, irreversible hormonal treatments. The schools are allowing them to keep the secret from these kids' parents.

This is unconscionable. //

The Cass Review has shown that it is harmful, and research in the Netherlands has shown that the great majority of these kids outgrow any feelings of gender dysphoria - making the practice of rushing them into treatment for which they are incapable of informed consent all the more egregious.

While serving as California attorney general in 2016, Kamala Harris sent 11 California Department of Justice agents to raid the home of journalist and pro-life activist David Daleiden. Harris’ office seized Daleiden’s camera equipment and hard drives containing undercover videos allegedly exposing Planned Parenthood’s trafficking of aborted baby body parts. For eight years, much of Daleiden’s footage has been sealed and unseen until now.

In March of this year, Congress held a hearing on, “Investigating the Black Market of Baby Organ Harvesting,” which included footage subpoenaed from Daleiden’s Center for Medical Progress (CMP). In May, the San Francisco District Court ruled that CMP cannot be prevented from releasing the subpoenaed footage, and on July 30, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R- Ga., released full, unedited versions of the footage as an addendum to the congressional hearing.

The release of these new videos allows Daleiden to continue his journalistic work that began in 2015, uncovering Planned Parenthood’s alleged participation in fetal organ trafficking. His latest videos include alleged admissions from Planned Parenthood employees about their “financial incentives” and their own graphic descriptions about the process for procuring late-term fetuses to sell.

Ashley McGuire, senior fellow with The Catholic Association had this to say about Buttigieg's comment:

Buttigieg is just admitting what we have always known about abortion: that it empowers men to exploit women. Buttigieg’s male ‘freedom’ comes at the cost of women’s freedom. It creates a world where men are ‘free’ to use women and women are coerced into abortions they don’t want to have. That’s not authentic freedom. It’s just domination by another name.

President of the National Right to Life Committee, Carol Tobias, said:

Pete Buttigieg is recklessly suggesting that legal abortion makes men ‘more free’ as they can push a woman into having an abortion in order to shun responsibility. If men are part of creating a new life, they should accept the responsibility that goes along with caring for their child and the child's mother. //

As the media remains focused on Vance pointing out that Democrats should promote pro-family and pro-child values, Buttigieg said the quiet part out loud: Men will have more "freedom" if women are able to freely abort children. It is a disgusting statement made by Buttigieg and whether he will try to walk it back or not, it won't matter because people will not forget his way of thinking about abortion.

Despite talk of ’emergency abortions,’ there is never a circumstance in which the mother’s health would benefit from the death of her unborn child. //

Recently the Association for American Physicians and Surgeons filed a suit after multiple doctors were targeted by credentialing boards and the U.S. government for their anti-abortion stance post-Dobbs. Public ignorance and confusion over a “necessary” abortion continues to permeate political language and Biden’s rule is yet another coercive attempt to install national abortion “must-haves.”

An anonymous Food and Drug Administration committee determines “arbitrary safety standards” and what defines “emergency use” and “necessity,” said John Seeds, former department chairman of obstetrics and gynecology at Virginia Commonwealth University, and can then utilize those standards to hide and mislead the public on the point of abortion.

Seeds testified in favor of a bill in Virginia that would change Health Department standards for abortionists, requiring providers to report any significant complication of an abortion. //

Since the legalization of abortion 50 years ago, huge strides have been made in maternal and perinatal care, with viability improving from 27 to 22 weeks gestation, said Dr. John Bruchalski, a former abortionist who now runs Tepeyac OB-GYN, the largest pro-life OB-GYN practice in the nation.

“What these ‘emergency abortion’ laws are saying is if there’s another medical approach to the situation, like real medical treatment or stabilization to closely follow the course of disease in the patients … you still have to provide an abortion if a woman wants it,” Bruchalski said.

The two primary situations when a pregnancy must be induced before viability to save the life of the mother, first-trimester hemorrhaging and ectopic pregnancy, have clear treatments that do not require an abortion, Bruchalski said.

“In [catastrophic uterine bleeding] you’re targeting the placenta and its removal because that is the cause of bleeding, the preborn child is not your target,” Bruchalski said.

In the case of an ectopic pregnancy, an OB-GYN removes the diseased segment of the fallopian tube containing the embryo.

“This is intellectually and scientifically not a direct abortion,” Bruchalski said. “The definition and the intent of an elective abortion is to terminate the life of the fetus. The intention and truth matter not only to the profession and the doctor but to the patient.”

In the vast majority of cases of ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages, the preborn child has already died due to the disease, Bruchalski said. In either situation, targeting the child is never the intent and is therefore not an abortion, but abortion practitioners deceive physicians and patients by saying ectopic pregnancies, miscarriages, and elective abortions are all the same.

“This coercion is based on fundamental lies and half-truths, from beginning to end,” Bruchalski said. //

“There are sometimes reasons for early induction that require additional support for the baby, as the baby is not ‘ready’ to be born, but it’s essential for the well-being of the mother,” Johnson said. “However, there is never a circumstance that the mother’s health would benefit from the death of her unborn child. Even in true crash C-sections where mom has to be in the OR [operating room] literally within minutes, there is never a reason to end the baby’s life in the hope of saving mom.”

“The whole discussion of ER abortion of a healthy pregnancy is bogus,” Seeds said.

Kristi Hamrick, vice president of Media and Policy for Students for Life of America, told the Daily Caller News Foundation that the government is “not prosecuting the crime, they’re just prosecuting the point of view.”

The message is clear: If you are against abortion, then the government is against you – at least under the Biden administration.