By Tom Venzor
The Supreme Court of the United States recently issued two devastating blows to life and religious liberty.
First, in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt (“Hellerstedt”), by a 5-3 opinion authored by Justice Stephen Breyer, the Court struck down a Texas law that had required abortion clinics to meet the safety standards of ambulatory surgical centers and required doctors performing abortions to have hospital admitting privileges.
Second, in Stormans, Inc. v. Weisman (“Stormans”), the Court denied review of a Washington State regulation requiring a pharmacy to deliver all prescription medications (including abortifacient contraceptives), even if the owner of the pharmacy has a religious objection. Continue reading
If one produces enough abortion-related content, he will notice certain trends and patterns among the pro-choice responses. Certain arguments are made repeatedly and become regular talking points in discussions. Here are some of the arguments I’ve noticed recently, and a brief response to each:
1. Zygotes, embryos and fetuses are potential human beings. They are no more complete human beings that an acorn is a complete oak tree.
Second, we know that a zygote, embryo, or fetus is a living human being because it is growing. If it’s growing, it’s alive, and if it’s alive, it must belong to a species. That species is homo sapiens. Further, if it’s growing, that makes the zygote, embryo, or fetus qualitatively different from an acorn, a single sperm, egg or any entity that is not a unique, growing organism.
Third, a human embryo has a beating heart 21 days after conception and measurable brain waves about 45 days after conception. By 42 days the skeleton is formed and the brain is controlling the movement of muscles and organs. All that happens before the unborn human being is even classified as a fetus. At varying times between the fifth and 12th week after conception, the preborn baby will be able to suck his thumb, smile, squint, kick, roll over, make a fist, curl his toes, and grasp an object placed in the palm.
Read the rest of the article here.
As you’re probably aware, earlier this week the Supreme Court came down with its most important ruling on abortion in years. The ruling struck down a law out of Texas which required, among other things, that abortion facilities meet the same minimal health and safety standards as other ambulatory surgical centers and that abortionists have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.
It was arguably the most sensible law ever enacted related to abortion. It meant that abortion facilities could not be filthy wastelands, needed to meet fire codes, and had to be capable of wheeling an unconscious person outside to an ambulance in the event of an emergency. It meant that if a woman suffered a ruptured uterus during the procedure, the abortionist would need to be able to admit her to a hospital as expediently as possible.
But the law was struck down. The ruling – aside from being one more example of the federal government infringing on the rights of states to govern themselves – served to demonstrate just how entrenched abortion is in the modern political sphere.
There is no shortage of takeaways that one could glean from this, but here are three of the most important.
Read the rest of the article here.
Bob Hayes, who previously wrote an open letter to men suffering after an abortion, was on KVSS radio recently to share his story of post-abortion healing. Take a listen to hear Bob’s testimony.
In April 2011, I began working with the post-abortion ministry Rachel’s Vineyard. The ministry hosts weekend retreats for men and women who have chosen or been a part of an abortion. Over the years I have witnessed many amazing transformations in the lives of retreatants. Not only that, I have learned an incredible amount about faith, forgiveness, and the pain that abortion can cause in a person’s life.
The retreat weekends have a unique way of helping men and women come to know forgiveness and experience the loving acceptance of others who have also chosen to abort their children. The weekends offer a safe, non-judgmental, non-politicized environment for post-abortive persons to tell their stories, examine how abortion has affected their lives, and be heard.
But what makes the weekends so effective at bringing about healing and peace in a person’s life? Perhaps the secret lies in the importance of storytelling.
Read the article here.
The story of Jade Rees was making its way around the internet last week, and rightfully so. It was a tragic story of depression complicated by abortion that ultimately ended in suicide.
As the original story acknowledged, Rees was far from mentally stable before the abortion, having suffered from a history of depression and eating disorders. The abortion, by all accounts, is what pushed her over the edge. The story maintained that she was listening to an Ed Sheeran song about miscarriage while she penned her suicide note.
The other day a dear friend of mine (who also happens to be a Hillary Clinton supporter) and I were discussing the presidential candidates. She was saying that she doesn’t understand why so many people are supporting Donald Trump. She and I are on the same page as far as supporting the poor and the immigrant and Mr. Trump’s views do not seem to be in line with ours. I told her though, that if it comes down to Trump and Clinton, I will vote for Trump. I told her that I will always vote pro life which means I would never vote for Hillary Clinton, a person who supports abortion even into the third trimester.
My friend and I went back and forth having a civil discussion about it (a breath of fresh air in itself in this hot political environment). After our talk was all said and done, there was one thing lingered in my mind. She had asked, “Could you put the abortion issue aside and vote for the person who would be better for society in general?” Continue reading
Last week, the two remaining Democratic presidential candidates met in a town hall meeting in New Hampshire, making last ditch efforts to appeal to the state’s voters.
As Hillary Clinton was taking questions on issues of importance during the upcoming election, the topic turned to the nomination of Supreme Court justices. She was asked if she would employ any litmus tests for Supreme Court nominees, and embedded in her response was this:
“We’ve got to make sure to preserve Roe v. Wade, not let it be nibbled away or repealed.”
There you have it.
One of the most important considerations Clinton will give to a Supreme Court nomination is whether the person in question will continue to support a woman’s right to dispose of her child. She wants someone “rooted in the real world” who will continue to support abortion. This would be amazing if it weren’t so predictable.
It bears noting that this would have been a perfect time for Clinton to bring up the Constitution, freedom, or liberty. Unsurprisingly, none of those words appeared anywhere in the entire transcript from the Democratic town hall event, much less in her answer regarding the nomination of Supreme Court justices.
Read the rest of the article here.