Tag: Planned Parenthood

TV Networks Launch Disturbing Attack Against Pro-Life Film in Attempt To Stop Viewers from Watching

Major television networks are refusing to air commercials for pro-life film “Unplanned,” which tells the story of a former Planned Parenthood director who left the organization after witnessing the horrors of abortion firsthand.

The film made its debut Friday in over 1,000 theaters nationwide, but networks outside of Fox News don’t want their viewers to see the movie’s advertisements.

Marketers for “Unplanned” told The Hollywood Reporter that networks are denying their attempts to buy air time because of the film’s “sensitive nature.”

The marketers have been denied by the Travel Channel, Cooking Channel, HGTV, Food Network, Hallmark Channel and USA Network.

John Sullivan, a producer for “Unplanned,” explained that they are looking to spend money on air time, but networks are refusing to do business with them.

“We were looking to spend money, but they didn’t want to get involved,” Sullivan said.

Another producer for the film, Joe Knopp, explained that networks are refusing “Unplanned” on the basis of its “political” nature.

“Most of the networks didn’t go into detail beyond citing the subject matter of the film and that they didn’t want to get into politics. But we don’t believe we’re in the political category,” Knopp said.

It’s abundantly clear that “Unplanned” isn’t being refused because it’s too “political” or “sensitive” — networks wouldn’t have a problem airing a commercial for a film that portrays Planned Parenthood favorably.

As an example, Lifetime, which refused to air commercials for “Unplanned,” previously published a pro-abortion interview with Scarlett Johansson.

This was just the latest obstacle for the film. The film also has complications stemming from its “R” rating from the Motion Picture Association of America.

The film’s unjustified “R” rating for “some disturbing/bloody images” makes marketing even more difficult.

“Marketing Unplanned has been an uphill battle for a few months now, since the MPAA saddled the film with an R rating, which filmmakers say will chase away a key demographic: Christians,” according to The Hollywood Reporter.

“Indeed, Up TV cited the R rating when it also rejected the commercial, as did several Christian radio channels that also refused to air ads for Unplanned.”

RELATED: ‘Unplanned’ Star Hits Back at Hollywood Boycott Threat with Fantastic Response

The MPAA only found issues with three scenes that address abortion — the film has no profanity, nudity, violence, or drug abuse, according to an earlier report by The Hollywood Reporter.

It’s obvious that the establishment media doesn’t want people to see “Unplanned” because they are scared of what the film reveals about abortion and Planned Parenthood.

The media can try to stop people from viewing commercials for the film, but they can’t stop people from sharing the trailer and showtimes on social media.

Courtesy of https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/tv-networks-launch-disturbing-attack-pro-life-film-attempt-stop-viewers-watching/?ff_source=Email&ff_medium=CTBreaking&ff_campaign=breaking&ff_content=conservative-tribune

Democrats Pass First Bill After Taking Over House: Forcing Americans to Fund Planned Parenthood

In a vote late tonight, House Democrats passed a bill attempting to end the partial government shutdown that also funds the Planned Parenthood abortion giant. The vote on the bill came just hours after Democrats took over the House and installed abortion activist Nancy Pelosi as Speaker.

Democrats want to restore the $100 million President Donald Trump took away from Planned Parenthood when he defunded its International arm during his first week in office. The Trump policy prohibits taxpayer funding to international groups that promote and/or provide abortions overseas.

The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2019 repeals President Trump’s Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance policy, which stops U.S. taxpayer funding of the abortion industry overseas.

The House voted 241 to 190 for the bill with all Democrats voting for it and all but 7 Republicans voting against it.

Despite passing the pro-abortion measure, in a Statement of Administrative Position for President Trump, the White House said the president will veto the bill.

“If either H.R. 21 or H.J. Res. 1 were presented to the President, his advisors would recommend that he veto the bill,” it said.

The statement mentioned the pro-life concerns about the bill:

The Administration opposes passage of H.R. 21, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019, providing appropriations for the fiscal year (FY) ending September 30, 2019, for the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Justice, Interior, State, Transportation, Treasury, and for other purposes. The Administration also opposes passage of H.J. Res. 1, providing appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) through February 8, 2019, and for other purposes.

It includes $700 million more than requested for the United Nations, including restoring funding for the United Nations Population Fund. The bill would also undermine the President’s Mexico City Policy (Presidential Memorandum of January 23, 2017), which prohibits the funding of foreign nongovernmental organizations that promote or perform abortions.

The Democrats’ bill doesn’t just force Americans to fund the abortion giant Planned Parenthood:

SUPPORT LIFENEWS! If you like this pro-life article, please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

The bill also would increase funding by $5 million for the United Nations Population Fund, to $37.5 million. Anti-abortion organizations oppose the program because they say it participates in coercive abortions and involuntary sterilizations.

Democrats plan to vote on two separate bills Thursday to fund the federal government, one of which will focus on homeland security as they refuse to meet Trump’s demands for $5 billion to fund a border wall between the U.S. and Mexico.

The bills face dim prospects in the GOP-controlled Senate. The federal government has faced a partial government shutdown for 12 days and Democratic leaders announced Wednesday that they still had not been able to reach an agreement with Trump.

The International Planned Parenthood Federation performed more than 1 million abortions in 2016, an increase of 13.5 percent over 2015, and received more than $27 million in U.S. government grants in 2015-2016 under pro-abortion President Barack Obama.

The new Trump administration policy did not cut any international funding either, meaning more funds are available to groups that provide true medical care to struggling communities across the globe.

The policy only hurt the abortion industry. It has affected just four groups out of more than 700 that receive international aid, according to a report by the U.S. Department of State. IPPF and Marie Stopes International, a British-based abortion chain, are two of the four that refused to comply.

In May, Reuters reported IPPF shut down 22 programs in sub-Saharan Africa as a result of the policy. Marie Stopes International also shut down several of its programs in Africa.

The two pro-abortion groups received millions of American tax dollars under Obama to push abortions in Africa. Most African countries prohibit the killing of unborn babies in abortions.

Marie Stopes has been accused of doing hundreds of illegal, unsafe abortions in Africa. And late last year, parents and community leaders in Kitui, Kenya were outraged after learning that Marie Stopes workers allegedly came into their children’s school and implanted long-lasting contraceptive devices into girls as young as 14 without their parents’ knowledge or consent.

The Mexico City Policy was in place during the entirety of the Bush administration, but President Barack Obama rescinded it during his first week in office. Named for a 1984 population conference where President Ronald Reagan initially announced it, the policy made it so family planning funds could only go to groups that would agree to not do abortions or lobby foreign nations to overturn their pro-life laws.

Courtesy of https://www.lifenews.com/2019/01/03/democrats-pass-first-bill-after-taking-over-congress-forcing-americans-to-fund-planned-parenthood/

Twitter Restricts Pro-life Advertisements Again, Backtracks Amid Media Scrutiny

Twitter has again suspended a pro-life organization from running ads on its site only to then backpedal upon receiving questions from conservative media about their actions.

The Daily Caller reported Wednesday that they contacted Twitter after it became known that the social media giant had removed three ads from the pro-life group Human Coalition. Twitter placed the nonprofit organization’s advertising privileges “under review” because they had supposedly violated the company’s policy forbidding “inappropriate” content.

Twitter reportedly told Human Coalition that they would be notified by email upon completion of the review. Last Thursday Human Coalition received that email informing them they were suspended from running any advertisements on Twitter.

One of three ads that were moved contained messages explaining that abortion is not healthcare and intentionally killing another human being contradicts the Hippocratic oath. Another mentioned how abortion is the leading cause of death in the African-American community but almost never comes up in the national discourse about racism, and that 80 percent of Planned Parenthood clinics operate in racial minority neighborhoods.

The third removed ad mentioned that Planned Parenthood aborts more than 900 babies daily and argued that there is “no moral, social, cultural, or health reason” for the abortion giant to exist.

Earlier this week the Daily Caller contacted Twitter to inquire about the suspension and asked why Planned Parenthood was not banned from running ads while the Human Coalition was restricted.

Only two hours after the conservative news outlet made the request, Twitter contacted Human Coalition to tell them they had lifted the suspension and that their tweets were approved.

“Twitter claims to believe in ‘free expression’ and to think that ‘every voice has the power to impact the world.’ I believe Twitter does think that every voice has the power to change the world — and I believe that is exactly why they suppressed Human Coalition and others who proclaim the pro-life worldview,” Human Coalition spokesperson Lauren Enriquez said in a statement.

“The fact that Twitter ideologues actively suppress Human Coalition’s pro-life expressions betrays their fear of how we are changing the world. And we don’t plan to stop changing the world any time soon.”

Human Coalition is not the first pro-life group to have its content regarded as offensive and censored.

Pro-life investigative group Live Action and the pro-life political action committee the Susan B. Anthony List have both tangled with Twitter for the ability to run ads containing messages opposed to abortion and Planned Parenthood.

Likewise, as The Christian Post previously reported, Rep. Marsha Blackburn, a Republican from Tennessee currently vying to replace retiring Bob Corker in the U.S. Senate, faced similar issues in October. In her introductory campaign ad she highlighted her role in leading the Congressional investigation into Planned Parenthood, speaking specifically how they “stopped the sale of baby body parts—thank God.”

When Twitter pulled the ad they insisted she remove the Planned Parenthood reference because it was “inflammatory,” but Blackburn refused and demanded an apology. Twitter ultimately relented and allowed the ad amid outcry.

Follow Brandon Showalter on Facebook: BrandonMarkShowalter

Follow Brandon Showalter on Twitter: @BrandonMShow

Courtesy of https://www.christianpost.com/news/twitter-restricts-pro-life-advertisements-again-backtracks-amid-media-scrutiny-222260/

Liberty Counsel Condemns the Inhuman Treatment of Unborn Children

ATLANTA, GA — Today Liberty Counsel files an amicus brief in the case of West Alabama Women’s Center v. Miller defending the Alabama law that prohibits dismemberment abortions of live unborn babies, known as Dilation and Extraction (D&E), based on the medical evidence of their ability to feel intense pain.

Liberty Counsel’s brief lists ample evidence that unborn babies feel pain. “[I]t is entirely uncontested that a fetus experiences pain in some capacity, from as early as 8 weeks of development.” testified Dr. Maureen Condic before U.S. legislators. Early on in fetal development pain transmitters in the spinal cord are abundant, but pain inhibitors are sparse until later, according to Dr. Colleen Malloy. This medical information shows that premature infants have greater pain sensitivity than do full-term infants. Another demonstration of this is how premature babies actually require greater concentrations of medication to maintain effective anesthesia during surgery than full-term babies, as explained in the book Neonatal Pain.

If the vilest criminal has human dignity that protects him from an inhuman, painful punishment, then how much more should our laws protect an innocent unborn child that science proves is inherently human and experiences significant pain? Dr. Condic states “[I]gnoring the pain experienced by another human individual for any reason is barbaric.”

Doctors performing the D&E abortions are acutely affected by the child’s humanity and experience deep emotions and even nightmares. One deeply pro-choice abortionist was brought to tears when her own unborn child kicked at the exact same time that she severed another’s foot in a D&E abortion. “Instantly, tears were streaming from my eyes” said Dr. Lisa Harris. “It was an overwhelming feeling – a brutally visceral response – heartfelt and unmediated by my training or my feminist pro-choice politics.”

“We give our pets greater legal protections than we provide to the future citizens of America who have proven their humanity and their sensitivity to pain,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel.  “Alabama’s law is a common sense solution to a barbaric and gruesome procedure,” said Staver.

Liberty Counsel is an international nonprofit, litigation, education, and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family since 1989, by providing pro bono assistance and representation on these and related topics.

Do Women Deserve the Highest Standards of Care? Not if You Ask Planned Parenthood

PLANNEDPARENT

“At Planned Parenthood, we work every day to make sure women receive the high quality health care they need in a safe, respectful environment- including abortion care. Ensuring the health and safety of our patients is central to our mission and fundamental to every person who works at Planned Parenthood.”

So said one Planned Parenthood executive in a cut-and-paste comment last year, the kind you’ll see – nearly or perfectly verbatim – from the abortion giant’s various affiliates across the country.

Indeed, another affiliate (after parroting the exact quote above) boasts of its “rigorous medical standards and guidelines” and “rigorous standards and training for staff as well as emergency plans in place, because women’s safety is our first priority.”

Admirable aspirations, signifying a commitment to patient care that transcends all other concerns and animates the very soul of the organization, right?

Hardly. This is Planned Parenthood. And today the mask slips again.

The U.S Supreme Court announced that it would hear Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole, a case out of Texas which will be the first major abortion case before the high court in nearly a decade.

At issue is a Texas law known as House Bill 2 which requires abortion facilities to meet the same health and safety standards as ambulatory surgical centers. For example, hallways at abortion businesses must be wide enough to maneuver a gurney, should a women in medical distress need to be moved through the facility.

The law also includes a provision that protects women against cut-and-run abortionists by requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at a local hospital. As it stands, if a woman is the victim of a botched abortion or needs hospital care as a result of one of numerous potential post-abortion complications, the abortionist without admitting privileges washes his hands of the patient and leaves her to seek care with another medical staff in another medical facility which receives the woman sight unseen and unfamiliar with necessary details of her progress to this urgent state. A knowledge gap like this can be a matter of life and death.

ADF, along with several pro-life allies, filed a brief with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit explaining that the “focus of the constitutionality [of the law] is on the treatment of women . . . . Texas, as many other States, has clearly recognized the risks associated with both surgical and medication abortions and has taken steps to regulate these abortions to minimize these known and potential risks and to protect women’s health and safety. Texas now is (and should continue to be) permitted to do so.”

In its opinion, the Fifth Circuit agreed, writing that the evidence demonstrates that “the State truly intends that women only receive an abortion in facilities that can provide the highest quality of care and safety—the stated legitimate purpose of H.B. 2.”

You’d think that Planned Parenthood, for all its talk of “women’s safety” and “rigorous medical standards,” would be the sponsors of this law and vigorous advocates of its affirmation in federal court.

Again, this is Planned Parenthood. Instead of celebrating the Texas legislature’s common sense move to make sure that women seeking abortions aren’t entering another Kermit Gosnell house of horrors, Planned Parenthood and its allies pressed play on its favorite talking points mix tape: “Cut off access”…“hurt women”…“#undueburden”…“attack”…“draconian law” (not sure they know what “draconian” means)…“forcing these women to carry their pregnancies to term against their will”… and so on.

Planned Parenthood and the rest of the abortion-industrial complex have insisted, all the way up to the Supreme Court, that abortionists should not be held to the same standards as everyone else . . . and that the women who enter their doors don’t really deserve the highest level of care.

Let’s hope that when the Supreme Court hears the case in the spring and decides it by the beginning of summer it rules that states can protect women, even over the protests of the abortion industry.

Planned Parenthood, for its millions in marketing and meticulous corporate message control, is having a harder time passing itself off as the tender-hearted, indispensable women’s health champion. Its opposition to a common sense law that says all women deserve the highest standard of safety and care (even in an abortion clinic where no one is truly safe and cared-for) and that holds abortion businesses to the same standards as other medical clinics again exposes the irreconcilability of Planned Parenthood’s words and actions.

Courtesy of http://www.adflegal.org/detailspages/blog-details/allianceedge/2015/11/16/do-women-deserve-the-highest-standards-of-care-not-if-you-ask-planned-parenthood

 

Planned Parenthood: How Much Longer?

full_planned-parenthood-how-much-longerIn one sense, there are really just two types of people when it comes to the topic of abortion: those who think it is okay to kill unborn babies, and those who think it’s wrong. If you don’t think you’re in one of these categories, you still are; you’re just confused.

Confusion, though, isn’t the most terrible thing. It means there is still hope, and in fact, this hopeful condition likely characterizes the general public of the United States. Most people don’t have a deep conviction about unborn babies. Most people don’t even think about unborn babies unless it’s an election year or the news runs a story. Even most who support abortion could only repeat the rhetoric they’ve heard from devotees.

And therefore, if confusion is what’s really popular, the question becomes:

What will it take for abortion activists to convince the general public that their position is a psychotic threat to humanity?

When will the rhetoric about women’s health and women’s rights be exposed for what it truly is (since, of course, by women’s “health” and women’s “rights” they must not mean the near 28 million girls aborted since 1973)? What will it take? Where is the tipping point when the truth of Planned Parenthood can no longer be ignored by the popular conscience?

Abortion’s Self-Destruction

Mind-changing momentum is beginning to build, and to our surprise, it’s not so much from the direct work of pro-life advocates, but from the unmasked mishaps of abortion activists themselves. Yes, that’s right. They’ve ironically stumbled into a suicide mission.

What if, counter-conventional as it might seem, the greatest felt gains for unborn humans will come by the abortion industry’s self-destruction?

Last year there was the Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains reportedly awarded for exceeding their abortion quota. That is to say, in addition to other reports of such quotas, there was a certain number of abortions that the clinic was prescribed to perform and when they surpassed that number they were honored, all of which backfires against the language of abortions as safe, legal, and rare.

But that is really nothing compared to the recent video that exposes Planned Parenthood for selling the body parts of infant corpses. If the thought of abortionists high-fiving each other over surpassing their abortion quotas doesn’t unsettle you, just watch the video of Deborah Nucatola chomp her food and sip her wine as she talks about selling aborted baby heads. You can watchthe full two hours and forty minutes of conversation.

Apparently, according to Nucatola, Planned Parenthood’s Senior Director of Medical Services, not only is abortion “safe, legal, and rare,” but it’s a pretty big money-maker if you can keep those heads and livers intact as you extract the baby feet first.

How Much Longer, America?

Once again, we’re not supposed to know about this industry. Planned Parenthood doesn’t want us to know, especially since it’s illegal. But we do know. And if we open our eyes, we’ll never think the same way again about their organization and their little tagline, “Care. No matter what.” Care? They receive millions of taxpayer dollars, and our president tells them to keep up “the good work” — to butcher babies and sell their body parts? Care?

Sooner or later, Planned Parenthood, the conviction-less masses are going to start scratching their heads. Please, just keep talking. Just keep doing what you do. The lights are coming on, and you’ve got nowhere to hide.

The question for the rest of us is how long it is before we feel the cumulative effect. How much time will we give the abortion industry before they self-destruct? How much longer, America? How long are we going to let this go on?How many more conversations need to leak? How much more blood must be spilt? How many more body parts must be dismembered, packaged, and sold before we realize this whole thing is a nightmare? God, may it end soon.

Jonathan Parnell

http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/planned-parenthood-how-much-longer

ADF to Colorado Appeals Court: Stop Illegal Funding of Abortion

planned
DENVER – Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys filed their opening brief Friday in an appeal of a trial court’s decision that upheld $14 million of taxpayer subsidies to Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood. ADF attorneys represent former Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Jane Norton in the lawsuit, which is now at the Colorado Court of Appeals.

The trial court determined that no “specific abortion service” was proven to be state-funded even though a voter-approved state constitutional provision prohibits direct or indirect public taxpayer subsidies for abortion.

“Colorado bureaucrats should not use taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions, especially when the Colorado Constitution prohibits it,” said ADF Legal Counsel Natalie Decker. “The lower court should not have dismissed this case on a technicality since it agreed that $14 million of taxpayer funds flowed from state government agencies to Planned Parenthood and its abortion affiliate, presumptively in violation of the state constitution.”

In 1984, Colorado voters approved the Abortion Funding Prohibition Amendment and later rejected an initiative to repeal it. The Colorado Department of Public Health audited Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood and its affiliate, Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains Services Corporation, in 2001 and subsequently ended funding to them after finding that state funds were indirectly subsidizing their abortion operations. State officials later ignored that determination and resumed funding.

“The voters’ primary concern in enacting Colorado’s Abortion Funding Limitation was to establish ‘a public policy for the state of Colorado that public funds are not to be spent for the destruction of prenatal life through abortion procedures,’” explains the ADF brief in Norton v. Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood. “This is a legitimate policy goal as proponents of Colorado’s Abortion Funding Limitation did not want Colorado to lend its ‘imprimatur’ to the ‘direct or indirect’ funding of induced abortions.”

“The people of Colorado resoundingly voted against funding abortion either directly or indirectly,” added Barry Arrington, co-counsel in the case and one of more than 2,500 private attorneys allied with ADF. “We hope the Colorado Court of Appeals reinstates this case and affirms the people’s desire for their government to responsibly use their tax dollars.”

Alliance Defending Freedom is an alliance-building, non-profit legal organization that advocates for the right of people to freely live out their faith.