Defending the Indefensible

By Debi Vandenboom

I have spent the last fifteen plus years fighting for the cause of life. I have read books and articles from every side of the debate. I’ve watched interviews, documentaries, exposes and undercover investigations. I have spoken with, counseled, and come alongside girls who were pregnant and scared, young mothers trying to find their way, as well as women who deeply regretted their decision to abort. I have spent many hours sitting in legislative proceedings supporting pro-life legislation. And I have diligently prayed for hearts and minds to change.

In all of those years of experience, one of the things which never ceases to amaze me is the depths to which abortion advocates will go to defend the indefensible. They have developed a science out of using carefully crafted talking points, data manipulation and outright lies to defend “women’s health”, aka abortion. I have heard it so often that I can spot the spin within seconds of hearing or reading someone’s words. Abortion advocates fight for the “right” of a woman (or young girl at literally ANY child bearing age) to have access to abortion without notifying her parents if she’s a minor, without informed consent of the procedure or its risks, without meeting the doctor ahead of time, for any reason, at any stage of gestation, using the grisliest procedures, and preferably paid for with taxpayer dollars. If you dare to try to place even the tiniest, most reasonable restriction on abortion, then you clearly must be anti-woman and hate the poor. No exaggeration. I’ve heard it. I’ve seen it. It’s ugly.

But, it doesn’t end there. In order to defend the indefensible, abortion advocates must also take horrific stands on issues that don’t directly relate to women’s access to abortion. One of these is the issue of fetal homicide. This really came to light back in 2003 when Laci Peterson and her unborn son were murdered in California. There was much discussion about whether baby Conner had or had not been born prior to his demise. My question is, why should it matter? Laci Peterson was 8 months pregnant. Whether the baby died in utero, or post birth, he still died. And, his death was clearly, directly connected to his mother’s murder. However, pro-abortion groups like NARAL and NOW advocated to keep Scott Peterson from being charged with two murders. Despite the fact that pro-abortion organizations claim to support the choice of women who carry “wanted” babies, that support only goes so far. They could not risk having such a high profile case bring to light that an unborn baby is in fact alive and can in fact be murdered.

This happens in case after case. Tragically, murder is one of the top causes, sometimes listed as the number one cause, of death for pregnant women. According to WebMd, murder accounts for 20% of the deaths of pregnant women, as compared to 6% of the deaths of nonpregnant women. You might think that pro-abortion groups full of self-proclaimed feminists who supposedly champion women’s rights, would speak out against such atrocities. You would be wrong. If a baby in utero can legally be recognized as a fully alive human being capable of being murdered, it casts a giant shadow on the entire issue of abortion. Therefore, abortion groups are more interested in protecting abortion, and their own profit margin, than they are in actually protecting and advocating for women.

Another area where abortion advocates justify especially reprehensible acts concerns babies who “accidentally” survive an abortion attempt. It happens more often than you might think. When a child survives an abortion procedure at a clinic, he or she may simply be discarded in a bin or left to die on a metal table with no medical attention whatsoever. In Arizona, it has been the law since 1975 for babies who were born alive to receive care, and it has been federal law since the “Born Alive Infant Protection Act” of 2002. Yet we continue to hear about babies being left to die with no care at all. For example, recently in Arizona, a baby girl was born alive after an unsuccessful abortion at 22 weeks, and was left to die alone on a steel table with no medical care or assistance. She suffered alone for nearly an hour and a half before finally passing. This is heartbreaking. It only takes a simple Google search to see that this is not an isolated incident. You can find stories across the country of babies surviving abortion.

One would think that signs of life such as a heartbeat, gasps of breath, or umbilical cord pulsation would be enough to cause someone with medical training to jump into action without being forced to do so. Unfortunately it is not. So, at the federal level, legislation was introduced this session which would strengthen protection for abortion survivors. In Arizona, Governor Ducey just signed SB1367 into law which further clarifies the state’s existing born alive law. During and after this bill’s passage, the pro-abortion nonsense abounded in the newspaper, on social media, and in legislative hearings. Among the most incredulous things I personally heard was that it was “inhumane” to provide “intrusive” medical care to a baby who would not survive anyway. Inhumane? As opposed to treating a living baby like discarded medical waste? A baby may be considered too young to survive at a certain gestational age, until one defeats the odds and does survive. I’ve personally met 2 young women who were so tiny and premature at birth that their parents were given no hope of survival. They are now 20 and 21 years old. Life has a tendency to defy all odds. And even if that baby truly cannot survive, she still deserves to be treated as a human being and at least given basic care, rather than being left untreated in a steel medical bin. But, here lies the problem for Planned Parenthood and other radical abortion advocates. Once an abortion has failed and you are dealing with a living breathing infant, then abortion should no longer be relevant. Born alive laws have absolutely nothing to do with abortion access. However, if a baby at 20 weeks, or 22 weeks, is a human being in need of medical care, then what is an in utero fetus at 20 weeks or 22 weeks? In almost every state, including Arizona, abortion is legal up to 24 weeks, and in some states even further. A living breathing abortion survivor throws a giant monkey wrench in to the “clump of cells” sales pitch. So again, in order to protect abortion and to protect their bottom line, abortion advocates will defend the truly indefensible. Abortion, at it’s most fundamental level is inexcusable and horrific. We have literally made an industry out of destroying life at its most vulnerable stages. So, abortion advocates must attempt to justify abortion at its most extreme levels, such as fighting fetal homicide rulings or born alive protections, in order to be able to justify it at all. If they don’t, the whole house of cards will come tumbling down around them. That is why it is important to shine a light on some of the most horrific aspects of the abortion argument. We can’t be squeamish. We must continue to shine light into this darkness, until the last card falls.

Center for Arizona Policy: Abortions Decrease 3.7% in Arizona

CAP

Statement from Center for Arizona Policy President Cathi Herrod

PHOENIX – “Arizona leads by example in the national effort to protect the health and safety of women and preborn children – and the numbers again prove it.

The recently released Department of Health Services annual abortion report shows that 501 fewer abortions were performed in Arizona in 2014 as compared to 2013, a decrease of 3.7%. Since 2011, there are now 1,500 fewer abortions performed annually for a decrease of 10.7%! This is encouraging news to everyone who values life, and it is also a testament to what the thriving pro-life movement in Arizona has been able to accomplish.

We continue to see that through strategic public policy and a commitment to loving and serving women with pregnancy resource centers, we can save lives.

Although this is yet another encouraging report, it is clear that the abortion rate in Arizona remains too high. Women considering an abortion deserve better. Our efforts to safeguard women and to ensure that every preborn child has the right to pursue life, liberty, and happiness are far from over.

The shocking videos from the Center for Medical Progress, exposing the barbaric quests of Planned Parenthood executives to sell baby body parts, further prove that we still have a long way to go to ensure that every life is protected and respected. I am more resolved than ever to do what is necessary to protect women and preborn babies from the dangerous and deadly practices undertaken by Planned Parenthood and the rest of the abortion lobby.”

Center for Arizona Policy promotes and defends the foundational values of life, marriage and family, and religious freedom. For more information, visit azpolicy.org.

Abortion: Seeing Is Believing

By Jason Walsh

August 2015 – On August 22nd all throughout this country, thousands of people will gather in solidarity to protest the barbarity of abortion and the heinous practices of Planned Parenthood. The main catalyst behind this great show of outrage has been the wide publication of pictures of what abortion actually looks like. In the great history of social reform movements, uncluttered visual images of injustice have always changed hearts and minds like nothing else. Finally, Planned Parenthood has been stripped of all of its euphemisms and has revealed its cold, callous and calculating ways. Tomorrow, as we stand united against the hellishness of abortion, let us remember the words of Martin Luther King Jr., “Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.”

AZRTLD&E

Jason Walsh serves as the Executive Director of Arizona Right to Life. You can read his blog here.

Arizonans Call for Defunding of Planned Parenthood

This past Saturday, approximately 5,000 Arizonans joined in protests at six Planned Parenthood locations across the state. These protests were in response to the gruesome videos exposing Planned Parenthood’s harvesting and selling of baby body parts.

At 342 protests across the country, tens of thousands stood for life and against Planned Parenthood’s barbaric actions towards innocent life in the womb.

Here in Arizona, we organized these protests to highlight what is happening inside of Planned Parenthood clinics, to call attention to the federal taxpayer dollars that are allocated to Planned Parenthood, and to encourage the media to bring to light the atrocities that have been covered up for too long by the abortion lobby. Any taxpayer dollars to Planned Parenthood for any services helps to support their position as the state’s largest abortion provider.

These peaceful protests featured many pro-life community leaders, religious leaders and elected officials as speakers. Thousands of women, men, children, mothers and fathers, and grandparents came together to present an alternative to abortion, and to communicate the beautiful narrative of life’s preciousness.

Most of the protesters left their locations Saturday, vowing to continue the fight for the preborn. For many, Saturday’s protests marked the first time they have participated in the pro-life movement. The winds of change are swirling in this country, and Saturday’s protests highlighted that fact.

We’d like to thank all the members of law enforcement who protected our First Amendment rights to peaceably protest and for all those who rallied together for life.

Christine Accurso
Lisa Blevins
Linda Rizzo
Vanessa Tedesco
Anita Usher

Parental Warning: DuVal Wants Your 14 Year Old Daughter to Have An Abortion All By Herself

Fred DuVal Denies Rights of Parents 

Candidate for Governor Would Deny Rights of Parents to Counsel Their 14 Year-old Child — An Expectant Mother — About Abortion
 
PHOENIX – This morning Arizona voters learned more about candidate Fred DuVal’s disregard for parental roles in the raising of their own children when he admitted in this video that even 14 year olds should have unrestricted access to abortion without the knowledge or even consent of either parent.  DuVal is a Democrat and candidate for governor of Arizona and the video was released by the Republican Governors Association.
“Fred DuVal is denying the role parents have in raising and loving their own children.” said Arizona Republican Party Chairman Robert Graham. “Fred DuVal is a candidate who has an incredible disregard for family life as we know it.  Forget everyday political issues like taxes and budgets and tuition costs — Fred DuVal is the worst thing that could happen to families in Arizona.”

“Mr. DuVal’s position to remove parents from a decision of life and death is completely reckless,” said Pastor Jose Gonzales Q, of Harvest Bible Church.  “Regardless of your position on abortion, we cannot possibly leave these types of decisions to developing minds.  We are entering an age where parental involvement is increasingly important, but to even suggest that a minor – much less a 14 year-old – can intelligently comprehend the long-term impact of such an action is absurd.”

Graham pointed voters to a video of Fred DuVal at a public forum here.

Pro-Life Voter Warning on “Republican” Primary Candidates

Prior to an election I always like to vet candidates on a number of issues including life, liberty and other rights enshrined in our Constitution. The sanctity of life – protecting innocent human life – has always been the top issue for me because if a candidate or elected officials waffles on life, it reveals where they stand on all other rights.

Part of my vetting process looks at whether or not the candidate filled out certain surveys, their answers, public statements, their involvement on the issues and even who is pushing for their election. I also look at who is donating to their campaign and what people and organizations who are opposed to my values are saying about the candidates.

Because of my involvement in the Pro-Life movement for many years, naturally I look at who Planned Parenthood or other high profile pro-abortion organizations and individuals have said about certain candidates. By looking at the donations of “true believers” in a cause, one should get a sense of the value system of the recipient. It would be akin to looking at the donations of Wayne LaPierre. You wouldn’t expect him to donate to an anti-2nd Amendment candidate.

One particular organization and its people I’ve looked at is the Arizona WISH list. WISH stands for Women In the Senate and House. Their fundamental goal has always been to elect “pro-choice” Republican women as the GOP version of EMILY’s list (the Democrats pro-abortion women’s group).

On their national board of directors sat an Arizonan named Deborah Carstens. Although it doesn’t appear that AZ WISH is active or that she currently serves on the national board of directors, Carstens continues to remain active in elections through her donations primarily to candidates who have declared themselves to be “pro-choice” or refuse to state their position on the sanctity of life. These have typically been Republican candidates who define themselves as more moderate but tend to vote liberal on social issues.

Because I have my suspicions on a handful of candidates, I decided to check out a few resources to clarify their positions and to see if Carstens had donated to their campaigns.

Here’s what I found:

Scott Smith was the only gubernatorial candidate to receive a donation from Carstens in the amount of $500. Scott Smith also took the most liberal position on abortion of all the GOP candidates (survey)

Michele Reagan has received a total of $1,250 from Carstens as the only Republican candidate for Secretary of State. Reagan also avoided answering questions on the Center for Arizona Policy voter guide.

Carsten also donated $160 to Terry Goddard, the Democrat running for Secretary of State and $250 to Felecia Rotellini the Democrat candidate for Attorney General. Neither Democrat responded to the Center for Arizona Policy questionnaire – which is very typical of Democrat candidates.

When it comes to state legislative races, Carstens has donated to Republican incumbents and challengers.

In LD-11, Jo Grant received $150 from Carstens in her house race. On CAP’s survey, Grant to answer the question on abortion.

Diane Landis running for House in conservative district 13, also received a donation of $100 from Carstens. Surprisingly, Landis did answer the question on CAP’s survey.

No surprise, Heather Carter pocketed $500 from Carstens in her re-election bid in LD-15. Carter dodged filling out the CAP survey altogether.

Effie Carlson received $100 as a challenger in the LD-23 house race. Carlson did respond to the CAP survey but with qualifiers.

Finally, Kate Brophy-McGee in LD-28 took at $270 donation from Carstens in her house re-election race. Brophy-McGee also evaded the CAP survey.

Another quick check for pro-life endorsements revealed that none of these candidates were endorsed by the Arizona Right to Life PAC.

One interesting pattern among the incumbents who are running for re-election is that they also supported the Obamacare Medicaid expansion vote in 2013. And one may recall that an amendment was attempted on that bill that would have prohibited tax dollars from going to abortion providers. That amendment failed thanks to these incumbents – Carter, Coleman & Brophy-McGee (see vote).

For those of you who remain committed to electing candidates who will protect innocent human life, hopefully this has been informative and an exercise in how to cross-reference candidates and their supporters. Please use this information wisely as you vote in the Primary Election.

9th Circuit Court Puts Hold on Arizona Law: Disregards District Court

By Joanne Moudy

There was a time when states had rights and could count on the sovereignty of their own state constitutions and laws.  But with the ever-growing overreach of our tyrannical federal government and liberal judges, that time is long past.  In fact today, as fast as states pass laws to distance themselves from the insanity of unlawful federal mandates and regulations, higher court decisions reverse those efforts.

So it doesn’t come as a huge shock that the 9th Circuit justices issued an injunction against Arizona’s law pertaining to abortion drugs, but it does seem odd that the justices don’t feel obligated to follow federal FDA guidelines on pharmaceutical issues.  I guess all those inconvenient rules are meant to be bent, twisted, and broken as often as necessary to further the socialist agenda.

In 2012, HB 2036 was passed by the Arizona State Legislature and signed into law by Governor Jan Brewer.  The law, which took effect in April, 2014, was an important step in tightening regulations on abortion providers to ensure that the medical care they provide to pregnant women is in compliance with federal guidelines and not based upon what’s best for the clinic’s profit margin.

But no sooner had the law taken effect than Planned Parenthood and the Tucson Women’s Center filed suit seeking an injunction against it on the grounds that it puts an “undue burden” on women seeking an abortion.  However, U.S. District Court Judge David Bury refused to grant an injunction and rejected their argument, stating the law was put in place to protect women from “dangerous and potentially deadly ‘off-label’ uses” of abortion drugs.

But even before Judge Bury could rule on the legal issues, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals slammed down their collective heavy-handed gavel on Tuesday and granted a temporary stay.  Apparently they have no respect for the lower court’s legal process or deliberation, because they stepped right in and took the case away from the District Court.

ru4864

image credit: LifeNews

The absurdity is that the portion of the law in question simply mandates that the abortifacient drug, RU-486, Mifeprex, be used only per the guidelines of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA).  Seems pretty straight forward to most physicians, but Planned Parenthood wants permission to do something no other doctor or hospital in the country can do.  They want to operate outside government rules and collect your tax dollars while doing it.

According to the Center for Arizona Policy, when the FDA approved RU-486, it did so under Subpart H, a much more restrictive section of the FDA’s rules specifically set aside for potentially dangerous drugs.  Out of almost 1800 new drug applications approved by the FDA between 1992 and 2011, only 70 were approved under Subpart H.

The drug itself comes with precise prescribing information, labeled uses, and a lengthy warning list, and the licensing under Subpart H simply reinforced the manufacturer’s intentions.  Clearly, the FDA believed the side effects of using the drug “off-label” – hemorrhage, ruptured uterus, sepsis and/or cardiac arrest – constituted serious threats to the patient.

RU-486 blocks the hormone progesterone, thereby causing the fetus to be starved of all nutrients, die, and detach from the uterine wall.  The manufacturer intended for the drug to be used up until 49 days of gestational age, and not beyond.

“On-label” dosing is for the woman to take 600 milligrams of RU-486 orally at the clinic and then return two days later and take 400 micrograms of Misoprostal in the presence of a licensed healthcare provider.  Misoprostal causes the uterus to contract and expel the dead fetus and any remaining contents.  The idea is that the woman be observed while she expels her uterine contents, on the off chance something goes wrong (other than the obvious).

The FDA also recommends that the woman return to the clinic a third time for a follow-up exam to ensure there are no complications (fragments of the baby still inside, etc.) from the chemical abortion.

As a side note, Arizona State Law requires that all women seeking an abortion must be given a counseling session, followed by a 24-hour waiting period before proceeding with an abortion.  That includes ingesting abortifacient drugs.

But Planned Parenthood wants to skip the initial counseling session and the 24-hour waiting period.  They also want to be able to give the RU-486 up to 63 days gestational age, when the fetus is significantly larger and more difficult to expel.

Planned Parenthood’s normal modus operandi is to do a cursory ‘exam’, convince the woman to swallow the RU-486 and then send her home with instructions to take the second drug at home.  As a matter of fact, they frequently advise their clients to not return to the clinic for a recheck after the abortion and bleeding are finished.

And here’s the rub.  Planned Parenthood dispenses RU-486 in one-third the normal dose (200 milligrams), claiming it’s cheaper and safer for the woman.  Naturally it’s cheaper – it’s one-third the dose.  What Planned Parenthood forgets to mention is that the lower dose also means the baby dies more slowly.

What they also fail to mention is that the dose of the second drug, Misoprostal, – the one the woman will take at home, is double.  So when the uterus starts to violently contract and/or the woman is bleeding heavily, she will be alone, unsupervised and without benefit of medical care.

Since medication abortions now account for 41 percent of all first-trimester abortions performed at Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide, they have a vested interest in making certain they can do as they please, regardless of the risk to the mother.

At least fifteen deaths have been attributed to RU-486 since it was licensed and many more women have had complications serious enough to warrant total hysterectomies.  Regardless of Planned Parenthood’s propaganda, RU-486 is not a benign drug without risk.

Aside from the Court’s reaction, it’s also interesting to see how some of the Arizona candidates from two key races responded.

Chuck Wooten, GOP candidate, U.S. Congress, AZ D-2 said, “Abortion is tragic enough without coupling it with reckless, unsafe “medical” practices.  The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling categorically invalidates and marginalizes scientific, FDA precautions that are designed to protect the health of the women involved in ingesting abortifacient drugs.  As Americans have watched for far too long, liberal judges, particularly in the 9th Circuit are legislating from the bench at the peril of women, many of whom are already in a crisis situation.”

According to the Arizona Republic, as of May 27th, his opponent in the primary, Martha McSally, had no comment this issue, and the democratic incumbent, Ron Barber, ardently supports Planned Parenthood and abortion on demand.

Wendy Rogers, GOP Candidate, U.S. Congress, AZ D-9 told the Republic, “I’m 100 percent pro-life, because life is a precious gift from God.  We need to help young women understand they have options beyond abortion.”

Although her GOP primary opponent, Andrew Walter, did not respond to the Arizona Republic, Walter is on record as being Pro-life.  The democratic incumbent Kyrsten Sinema supports abortion on demand, up to full-term.

Considering that the 5th and 6th Circuit Courts of Appeals have already upheld similar laws in states within their jurisdictions, it seems likely that this battle isn’t over.  The tragedy is that one case at a time, the higher federal courts are rendering states impotent to enforce their own laws and stomping on their unique sovereignty.

Despicable Steve Benson

First, kudos to Greg Patterson for catching this one and posting on EspressoPundit. (Glad to see you’re back posting on a regular basis.)

I admit, I don’t run to the Arizona Republic first thing in the morning to read what the left-of-center media is disseminating so I missed this horribly despicable cartoon by Steve Benson that ran on May 10th.

SteveBensonCartoon

It’s probably a good thing that I’m no longer the Communications Director at the Arizona Republican Party because I would have had a hard time letting this one go until Benson and management both apologized AND Benson was summarily terminated.

For starters, Benson dragged politics into a horrifying criminal situation by showing just how insensitive the left can be injecting their political agenda into a criminal matter. By Benson’s logic, abortion should have been safe and accessible for Ariel Castro to continue covering up his evil crimes – “destroying the evidence.”

Secondly, Benson is so far removed from the real world of what happens among conservative people of faith who personally put their time, talent and treasure to work helping women in real-world crappy situations through crisis pregnancy centers, domestic violence shelters, homeless shelters, foster care, the list goes on. Benson, we really do put our money where our mouth is.

This type of trash by Steve Benson  is wrong, beyond civility, insensitive and even evil. He needs to go away permanently where he can no longer pollute our political discourse.

Phoenix Abortionist Laura Mercer & Family Planning Associates Medical Group Exposed for Late Term Abortions

This ought to make your blood boil!

This is happening in Arizona right now.

Pro-Life activist Lila Rose just released the following video showing late term abortions AND possible infanticide taking place right here in Arizona!

As we watch shocked and disgusted the trial of baby and woman killer Kermit Gosnell, we are now on notice that this practice is taking place right here in Arizona!

Here is the press release put out by Live Action a few days ago:

Phoenix, AZ Late-Term Abortion Center Exposed

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: APRIL 28, 2013

Third Undercover Video Investigation Exposes Abortion Doctor and Clinic Worker Who Would Leave Babies Born Alive from Failed Abortion to Die

Six-Month Investigation Reveals Illegal, Inhuman, and Gruesome Practices at Abortion Centers across the Country

Arlington, VA: Live Action today released a third undercover video exposing Phoenix, AZ late-term abortion doctor Laura Mercer and an abortion center counselor who would leave a newborn, struggling for life after a failed abortion, to die. This is the third in a series of undercover videos, found at www.liveaction.org/inhuman, involving the illegal and inhuman practices of late-term abortion centers, as well as describing in horrific detail what happens to the mother and baby in a late-term abortion.

When asked by the undercover investigator what would happen if the baby were to survive the abortion, Linda, an abortion center counselor, admits they would not help the baby:

Sometimes they are [alive], yeah. But it doesn’t–it doesn’t necessarily mean that it will come out whole. ‘Cause they use suction, plus they use instruments so sometimes the fetuses don’t come out–you know, it’s not complete…

Investigator: But if it does come out whole…I mean, are–will they resuscitate it? Like, will I have to take care of it?

Linda: Uh-uh… No… They do not resuscitate.

“This video is just the latest evidence of a disturbing and horrifying trend occurring inside America’s abortion industry,” said Lila Rose of Lila Action. “The horrors of the Kermit Gosnell trial are a widespread problem in this industry. Dismembering and destroying innocent children, leaving born babies to die, injecting poison into the chest of a tiny child so that he slowly dies in his own mother’s womb – this is all standard operating procedure in the abortion industry. But these children are human beings. They have the same basic human rights and deserve the same protections all of us enjoy.”

Doctor Mercer tells an undercover Live Action investigator who is 24 weeks pregnant:

We do the injection, which is a quick poke through your belly, um, and that stops the fetal heart, so that makes it so, if you were to deliver, there shouldn’t be movement. There shouldn’t be any of those things… Yes we induce a demise–an intrauterine demise… Um, death.

Then the Live Action investigator asks whether an ambulance should be called if the mother goes into labor during the two-day procedure. Dr. Mercer instructs the investigator not to call:

No, call us first…if you showed up in an average emergency room with an emergency room physician who’s not a gynecologist, probably has never seen or done a termination, they will treat you as though you are somebody with a desired pregnancy…

Investigator: So they would basically like try to take care of it.

Dr. Mercer: Right they would intervene and do all kinds of crazy things that you don’t need tohave done to you…

Live Action President Lila Rose condemned the “barbaric, inhuman, and deeply disturbing” practices espoused by Dr. Mercer and the late-term abortion center staff at Family Planning Associates Medical Group. “The testimony we’ve documented in this abortion facility strongly suggests that staff there are committing infanticide,” said Rose. “The Family Planning Associates Medical Group needs to be investigated immediately, and delicensed. Women are at risk during these brutal procedures, and this is a matter of life and death for these children.”

Earlier in the week, Live Action released videos (www.liveaction.org/inhuman) of a Bronx, NY abortion counselor describing how a born-alive baby would be placed in a jar of toxic “solution” to ensure death, and of a D.C. doctor who would leave a baby born alive after a botched abortion to die. The videos are part of Live Action’s six-month undercover investigation shedding light on the illegal, inhuman, and gruesome practices of numerous abortion centers throughout the country.

Rose is calling for Attorney General Eric Holder and the U.S. Attorney’s office to investigate and prosecute Dr. Mercer and the Family Planning Associates Medical Group, who admit they violate federal law. Rose also called on local health and law enforcement officials to investigate Dr. Mercer and Family Planning Associates Medical Group and put an end to illegal and inhuman practices.

From the letter to General Holder: “We urge you, as the U.S. Attorney General, to speak out against this injustice, and to see to it that Dr. Mercer and the Family Planning Associates Medical Group are duly investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law… I hope that you will do everything in your power to speak out for victims of infanticide – both the children and the women – and to protect the human rights of our weakest citizens.”

Live Action is a youth-led movement dedicated to building a culture of life and ending the human rights abuse of abortion. The group uses new media to educate the public about the humanity of the unborn and investigative journalism to expose threats against the vulnerable and defenseless. More information at LiveAction.org.

Funding Abortion Providers: Prop 204’s Unintended Consequences

Center for Arizona Policy and Arizona Right to Life announced opposition to Proposition 204 today due to vague and ill-defined language contained in the proposition that could allow up to $100 million of taxpayer dollars to be given to abortion providers annually.

While the proposition has been billed as an education measure, it creates a $100 million slush fund that a governor could allocate for “family stability” and “basic needs” that “lead to family stability”. These terms are not clearly defined in the proposition, leaving the door open for chief executives to use this section to funnel monies to abortion providers.

“Center for Arizona Policy typically does not get involved in tax policy. In 2010, we were neutral on the temporary one-cent sales tax. But after our legal analysis, we found that Prop 204’s vague language could be abused by future governors to subsidize an industry that ends the lives of preborn children and hurts thousands of women every day,” said Cathi Herrod, President of Center for Arizona Policy.

Herrod released an online advertisement explaining her opposition to Prop 204 today.

“Voters are getting more than they bargained for under Prop 204,” said Erik Twist, board chairman of Arizona Right to Life. “This is truly a Trojan horse. What’s being sold as an education proposal is actually a $1 billion permanent sales tax increase that could be used to finance abortion providers under the guise of funding “basic needs.”

Under section 41-113 in Prop 204, a “Family-stability and self-sufficiency fund” is created, which according to section 42-5029.02, is appropriated $100 million every year. Besides the fact that this section has nothing to do with putting more money into Arizona classrooms, the obscure language in 41-113 could be exploited by a pro-abortion Governor.

Read the ballot language here.

For more information, contact Aaron Baer, 602.424.2525, go to www.azpolicy.org, or www.azrtl.org.

Center for Arizona Policy promotes and defends the foundational values of life, marriage and family, and, religious liberty.

Arizona Right to Life is the state’s oldest, largest and strongest pro-life organization, committed to preserving, protecting and promoting the sanctity of life from conception to natural death.

###