'Selling Baby Parts Like Widgets on an Assembly Line': Pro-Lifers Blast P. Parenthood - CBN News Paul Strand

'Selling Baby Parts Like Widgets on an Assembly Line': Pro-Lifers Blast P. Parenthood

02-14-2017 CBN News Paul Strand

WASHINGTON -- Prominent pro-life speakers took on various issues concerning Planned Parenthood during this weekend's #ProtestPP rallies. Demonstrators gathered at some 200 locations across the nation to protest forced taxpayer funding of the abortion giant.

At a rally in front of a clinic in Orange, California, undercover investigator David Daleiden of the Center for Medical Progress blasted Planned Parenthood for its alleged trade in body parts of the unborn.

"This Planned Parenthood of Orange and San Bernardino County is one of the places – this exact clinic right behind me, this exact mega-center where they do abortions up to six months – this clinic is one of the places where for years and years they have been harvesting and selling the body parts of our unborn brothers and sisters, like so many widgets on an assembly line," Daleiden stated.

Related

---

'Not My Choice': Pro-lifers Protest Having to Fund Planned Parenthood

Teen Rape Survivor Has a Powerful Message for Abortionists

Not with Our Tax Dollars: Anti-Planned Parenthood Rallies Taking Place Nationwide

Powerful Video: Humanity of Pre-born Child Cannot Be Denied

---

Daleiden was part of the undercover investigative team that released shocking videos of Planned Parenthood employees talking about this gruesome practice of harvesting those body parts.

"We now know for almost eight years this Planned Parenthood clinic was partnered with DaVinci Biosciences and DV Biologics up in Yorba Linda, where every week, multiple times a week, their technicians would come into the center and harvest the body parts of late-term aborted children and then re-sell them to make half-a-million dollars every year," Daleiden charged.

He added, "Planned Parenthood knew that this was going on for eight years.  They received kickback contributions from DaVinci in exchange for the relationship.  And for eight years they used a fraudulent inaccurate consent form to try to coerce their patients to give consent for their body parts to be harvested and sold for profit against the law."

"They are an integral part of the criminal trade in the body parts of our unborn brothers and sisters and they must be held accountable to the law for their barbarism," Daleiden said.

Speaking at a rally in Aurora, Illinois, Jill Stanek of the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List talked about how Planned Parenthood dominates the abortion scene.

She spoke of Planned Parenthood's record of "killing one in three babies in the United States from abortion.  Their percentage of abortion increased from 20 percent to 34 percent in just six years."

Stanek also noted that the amount of taxpayer funding going to the abortion giant has soared in recent years.

"I'm sure that this is in line with President Obama being in charge: Planned Parenthood's proceeds from our tax dollars increased by 50 percent since 2007," she said.

At the same rally in Aurora, Eric Scheidler of the Pro-Life Action League blasted Terry O'Neill, president of the National Organization for Women Foundation, for her recent written critique of pro-life health care advocates.

"One of the things she complained about in her article was the website GetYourCare.org," Scheidler told CBN News.  

"When someone says, 'Well, how are women going to get their health care?' – they're going to go to GetYourCare.org and they're going to find health care that they need in their community.  O'Neill was complaining that that list of health care providers included dentists," he said.

"Some of them are dentists!" Scheidler gasped in a tone of mock outrage, then asked, "Show of hands: Whoever's been to the dentist?"

Every hand at the rally went up.

Then the pro-life leader asked, "Can you go to Planned Parenthood for dental care?  No.  Can you go to Planned Parenthood for the flu?  No.  Can you go to Planned Parenthood if you've got a broken leg?  No."

He continued, "Can you go to Planned Parenthood if you've got behavioral issues, depression, heart disease, if you've got a problem with sleep, if you've got back pain?  One of the most common problems Americans have: back pain.   Planned Parenthood?  Can't help you."

Referring again to the pro-abortion NOW Foundation president, Scheidler concluded, "Terry O'Neill thinks the only thing a woman needs to see a doctor for is an abortion or maybe some contraceptive pills.  Doesn't that show you their mentality?"

"That they would complain we're trying to connect women to dentists along with other kinds of health care," he continued. "We believe in comprehensive health care for Americans.   We want to provide that any way we can."

"And that's what GetYourCare.org is about," he concluded. "And that's the difference between the pro-life movement and the pro-death movement."

WATCH VIDEO

While you are here...

We'd like to ask for your help. At CBN News, we strive to bring you the most current, pertinent and reliable news possible. We are able to bring you this important news from a Christian perspective because of the help of friends like you who know how vital it is to have an alternative to the news you hear from major media outlets. Would you help ensure that we can continue to provide this important service to you and our country by considering a special gift today? Or would you become a monthly partner so we know we can count on the resources we need to bring you the best news possible?

Thanks for being a part of the dynamic future of CBN News, as well as helping The Christian Broadcasting Network share the love of Jesus with hurting people everywhere.

Become a PartnerGive a special gift

Pro-Lifers on Supreme Court Abortion Case: 'We're Coming Back in Full Force' - LEAH JESSEN/THE DAILY SIGNAL CHARISMA NEWS

Pro-Lifers on Supreme Court Abortion Case: 'We're Coming Back in Full Force'

 6/28/2016 LEAH JESSEN/THE DAILY SIGNAL  charisma news

A pro-life protester with tape over her mouth demonstrates outside the U.S. Supreme Court before the court handed a victory to abortion rights advocates, striking down a Texas law imposing strict regulations on abortion doctors and facilities in Washington. (REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque)

Join us on our podcast each weekday for an interesting story, well told, from Charisma News. Listen at charismapodcastnetwork.com.

---

Members of the pro-life movement standing outside the Supreme Court on Monday were visibly discouraged by the 5-3 decision striking down a Texas law that imposed health and safety regulations on abortion clinics. But those activists showed no signs that they intend to back down from the battle over abortion in the United States.

"The pro-life generation is stronger than ever before," Maddie Schulte, a regional coordinator at Students for Life, told The Daily Signal outside the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. "I'm excited to see what comes next. We're coming back full force."

"We believe in life," added Anja Scheib, a programs intern for Students for Life. "Millennials," in particular, she said, "are becoming more pro-life."

The case before the Supreme Court, Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, involves a Texas law, known as H.B. 2. The law required abortion facilities to meet the same health and safety standards as other facilities performing similarly invasive surgeries. It also required physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at local hospitals, in the event that something went wrong during an abortion procedure.

The Supreme Court has previously ruled that while abortion is legal in the United States, states are allowed to regulate the procedure as long as those regulations don't pose an "undue burden" on women's ability to get an abortion.

With Monday's 5-3 decision, the justices decided that the medical benefits of Texas' law did not justify the burdens they impose on clinics.

In issuing the majority opinion, Justice Stephen G. Breyer cited a district court's findings that concluded enforcement of the admitting-privileges requirement forced almost half of Texas' 40 licensed abortion clinics to shut down. If the surgical-center provision were allowed to take effect, the lower court added, the number of abortion facilities would be reduced further, so that "only seven facilities and a potential eighth will exist in Texas." 

On the basis of these findings, among others, Breyer wrote:

We conclude that neither of these provisions offers medical benefits sufficient to justify the burdens upon access that each imposes. Each places a substantial obstacle in the path of women seeking a previability abortion, each constitutes an undue burden on abortion access, and each violates the federal Constitution.

Breyer was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan, Anthony M. Kennedy, and Sonia Sotomayor. Dissenting were Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Clarence Thomas, who said the decision "exemplifies the court's troubling tendency 'to bend the rules when any effort to limit abortion, or even to speak in opposition to abortion, is at issue.'"

Monday's decision is likely to affect other states with similar laws regulating health and safety standards for abortions. According to the Center for Reproductive Rights, more than 20 states have laws that impose health and safety standards on abortion clinics, although not all are as strict as the Texas law.  

Virginia is one of them.

"I had to be here to witness this," Rebecca Gotwalt of Virginia told The Daily Signal. Gotwalt, who identifies as pro-choice, arrived at the Supreme Court a little after 7 a.m.

"I know we're repealing our TRAP [Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers] laws in Virginia, so it was very important to see the Supreme Court do this on the national level, so individual states will stop punishing women."

Supporters of the Texas law said it was an attempt to improve the health and safety standards for women seeking abortions.

The law was enacted after the 2013 murder conviction of Dr. Kermit Gosnell, a Philadelphia abortionist who is serving a life sentence. The trial established that poor health and safety standards at Gosnell's clinic led to the deaths of multiple babies who survived botched abortion procedures, along with the death of a mother—in part because paramedics could not get a stretcher into the building.  

"Abortionists shouldn't be given a free pass to elude medical requirements that everyone else is required to follow," Steven H. Aden, a senior counsel at the conservative Alliance Defending Freedom, said in a statement after the decision. He added:

We are disappointed that the Supreme Court has ruled against a law so clearly designed to protect the health and safety of women in the wake of the Kermit Gosnell scandal. The law's requirements were commonsense protections that ensured the maximum amount of protection for women, who deserve to have their well-being treated by government as a higher priority than the bottom line of abortionists. Any abortion facilities that don't meet basic health and safety standards are not facilities that anyone should want to remain open.

Opponents view the requirements as simply an attempt to abolish abortion in the U.S., and were pleased to see the law struck down by the court.

"In states across the country, we've seen TRAP laws shut them down," Amber Banks, director of programs and communications for NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland, told The Daily Signal. She added:

I remember when I was in college, I interned at the local Planned Parenthood ... because they had to have hallways a certain length and it mattered what their parking lot layout was. It just seemed really absurd because I know from talking to doctors and having doctors in my family, that that's not actually the kind of things that actually keeps people safe. It was just being used to force people to give billions of dollars for renovations or shut down.

Some supporters of the law, too, saw the case as part of bigger question of abortion in the United States.

"Abortion is—to me—an issue that is so near and dear to my heart and the hearts of millions of people across this country," Evan Stone of Louisville, Kentucky, told The Daily Signal. "It goes way beyond politics. We can disagree on taxes, immigration, whatever, but this is an issue that is central to who we are as a human civilization."

Stone, who is interning in Washington, D.C., this summer, said he spent the night outside the Supreme Court and started protesting at 6 a.m. Monday.

"Do we believe that human life has intrinsic value or not? That is the question at heart here," Stone said.

 

This article originally appeared on The Daily Signal. 

Draw closer to God. Experience the presence of the Holy Spirit every month as you read Charisma magazine. Sign up now to get Charisma for as low as $1 per issue.

Has God called you to be a leader? Ministry Today magazine is the source that Christian leaders who want to serve with passion and purpose turn to. Subscribe now and receive a free leadership book.

Pro-Lifers on 'Disappointing' Ruling: Next President More Important than Ever - CBN News Abigail Robertson

Pro-Lifers on 'Disappointing' Ruling: Next President More Important than Ever

06-28-2016

CBN News Abigail Robertson

WASHINGTON – In a controversial ruling, the Supreme Court struck down a Texas law requiring physicians who perform abortions to have hospital admitting privileges. The law also requires clinics to meet hospital-like safety stands for outpatient surgery.

Hundreds awaited Monday as the dramatic day played out at the high court.

The issue: the abortion and Texas access law that closed all but a handful of clinics in the Lone Star State over failure to meet state health standards. In ruling against the Texas law, pro-life advocates say the court missed an opportunity to protect women.

"It's extremely disappointing to see five unelected and unaccountable justices make this decision that hurts women," said Arina Grossu, director for the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council. "This case is about women's health and safety standards and they have refused to protect women. And this is going to mean that more women are going to continue to be hurt and even die in these abortion facilities."

Pro-choice advocates argue that facilities are safe enough and their concern is over access.

"I believe that the fact that the laws have made it so – there's so few abortion clinics – proves the fact that the laws are making a lower access to abortion versus making a safer abortion," one pro-choice advocate responded. "So I believe that access is really important and I'm really happy that we won."

Justices in the majority felt the Texas regulations pose an obstacle to women seeking abortions and could force women in dire circumstances to seek out unlicensed practitioners.

"Basically he said that these were new standards," Steve Aden, senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom, said. "He ignored the fact that they were consistent with the standards that [they] were applied by Texas to outpatient surgical facilities across the board, and he said they just simply closed too many clinics."

Lawyers for the Texas state law are discouraged by the ruling, but they think many clinics will remain closed because the overall demand for abortion is decreasing.  

"The reason that clinics are closing by and large across the country is because abortion is more and more unpopular. That's a wonderful thing," Aden said.

"We know that the majority of Millennials, my generation, the majority of college-aged women are pro-life and we're going to continue fighting for them," Jane Riccardi with Students for Life of America said.

The decision has spurred pro-choice groups to continue fighting for the lives of the unborn. They're planning to go after other states with strict clinic regulations.

"This is a rallying point for the presidential election," Concerned Women for America President Penny Nance said. "There are huge implications for the unborn in this next election and I call on every pro-life American to make sure they vote."

"We're going to work very hard to make sure we have better justices and overturn this decision," Nance said. "We're not done."

Pro-life leaders say this decision underscores the importance of electing a pro-life president in 2016 since the next president will appoint at least one new justice to the Supreme Court.