Select Page



‘If I Don’t Protect Them, I am Nothing': The Man Who Discovered Down Syndrome

Commentary: International Women's Day & 'Unprotected' on Campus

International Women’s Day: Time to End Violence Against Pregnant Women

Women’s Leader Littlejohn Takes Battle Against Sex-Selection Abortions to UN

If The Holocaust Was Worse Than We Thought… What About Abortion?

“Abortion Battles” Video Showed Students “Killing Babies,” Applauding

Surgery on Unborn Baby at 20 Weeks Removes Orange-Sized Cyst

Mother Told by Doctors to Abort Quadruplets Celebrates Their 1st Birthday

All North American Children in Two-Parent Homes Do Better in School

Abortion and Food Stamps Don’t Elevate the Black Community 

COMMENTARY: Viewpoint: Pro-Life and Feminism Aren’t Mutually Exclusive

On This Day in 2012, Sebelius Said: Fewer Babies Born Will Save Health Care Costs

Analysis: NARAL Pro-Choice America Tries to Hide Medical Information from Students

10 Eye-Opening Quotes from Planned Parenthood’s Founder Sanger

Being Pro-Life is Fun

Judge Unseals Lawsuit This Week Alleging Planned Parenthood Fraud

72 Members of Congress Call for Investigation of Planned Parenthood

Web Awareness & Arkansas Billboard Campaign Expose Planned Parenthood Targeting Blacks...

‘If I Don’t Protect Them, I am Nothing': The Man Who Discovered Down Syndrome

Editor's note: March 21, was World Down Syndrome Day. brings you the inspiring story of the genius who is credited with first discovering the syndrome and the moment that made him campaign for the right to life, even at great personal cost

FRANCE, March 21, 2013 ( – The world was his oyster. Not only was he a young, handsome medical researcher passionate about improving human lives, but he was the first to make the genetic breakthrough that Down syndrome is caused by the presence of an extra 21st chromosome.

Fame, glory, and prestige were heaped upon him for his discovery. He was splashed across the front pages of national newspapers. He became an advisor to the president. He received the highest award in genetics. He shot to distinction as a scholar, teacher, and researcher.

But Dr. Jerome Lejeune of France was also a man of truth, committed to his principles.

One day national television showed a film about a woman pregnant with a Down syndrome child. The mother wanted to abort her baby, but the laws at the time favored life. A debate followed the film, during which people he perceived as strong and powerful advocated for aborting these children.

The day after the show, a young boy with Down syndrome burst into Dr. Jerome’s busy practice, his distraught face streaked with hot tears.

“Why are you crying,” Dr. Jerome asked him.

The boy, about 10, could not collect himself so the boy’s mother replied: “He saw the movie, and I couldn’t stop him crying.”

At that moment, the boy threw himself into the doctor’s arms and managed to say between sobs: “You know…they want to kill us…And you have to save us, because we are too weak…and we can’t do anything.”

Dr. Jerome’s daughter, Clara Lejeune Gaymard, remembers this as the day her heroic father became a voice for the voiceless.

Clara recounted, in a 2011 interview with Leticia Velasquez, that day her father came home for lunch. She remembers his face being ashen white as he recounted to his family what had just occurred in his practice.

He then spoke words that his daughter will forever remember: “If I don’t protect them, I am nothing.”

Clara said that from this moment onward, Dr. Jerome became outspoken against abortion, a champion for life in the womb.

Because of his public position against abortion, Dr. Jerome’s career immediately began to be attacked by those who had only recently bestowed praise upon him. He lost grants to continue his research.

“He was like a pariah, and so on, but he accepted that because he thought he was doing that which was his duty,” recounted Clara.

“Here is a man who, because his convictions as a physician prohibited him from following the trends of the time, was banned from society, dropped by his friends, crucified by the press, prevented from working for lack of funding,” Clara wrote in her 1997 biography of her father titled Life Is a Blessing, A Biography of Jerome Lejeune.

Despite hostility and ostracization from medical colleagues, Dr. Jerome fearlessly continued to speak out frequently against abortion, not only in France, but in Europe and abroad.

As an expert witness in a 1989 abortion-related court in the U.S., Dr. Jerome testified: “I know there are babies, there are human beings in the fridge, this is the only thing I know.”

“And I would say that science has a very simple conception of man,” he said. “As soon as he has been conceived, a man is a man.”

As a scientist committed to truth, Dr. Jerome knew that all the evidence pointed to the new life in the womb being a unique unrepeatable human being. His scientific knowledge would not allow him to condone the destruction of any human being.

Dr. Jerome continued to fight on behalf of Down syndrome children. He was heartbroken to see his genetic discovery being used to test unborn children for the syndrome so that they could be aborted.

Stats indicate that about 90 percent of children with Down syndrome are rejected and destroyed by their parents, just

because they have one extra chromosome.

“They brandish chromosomal racism like the flag of freedom,” he once wrote. “That this rejection of medicine—of the whole biological brotherhood that binds the human family—should be the only practical application of our knowledge is beyond heartbreaking.”

But Dr. Jerome saw all life as a blessing. He knew that people with an extra chromosome had something extra special to give the world. Stats show that 99 percent of person’s living with the syndrome report being happy and enjoying fulfilling lives. A staggering 97 percent of families who have children with chromosomal abnormalities report that these children “enriched their lives,” irrespective of the length of their lives.

Dr. Jerome died in 1994 at age 67…

“He was a man of science who lived his Christian faith in his professional work, heroically, showing his faith with a simplicity and joy, serving life with a full devotion and complete disinterest,” said Cardinal Angelini at that time.

Advocates for Down syndrome children are urging people today to follow the example of Dr. Jerome by not being afraid to embrace those with an extra chromosome.

“Authentic and effective Down syndrome advocacy must begin by embracing and advocating specifically for the baby with Down syndrome in the womb,” wrote Monica Rafie, co-founder of Be Not Afraid Ministry, an outreach to parents grappling with prenatal diagnosis.

As Dr. Jerome would often tell people about his stance for life: “I have to tell the truth. I’m not judging anyone; I’m not saying anything else besides the truth of the science, and I have to testify about that.”
[21 Mar 13, Peter Baklinski, ]




Commentary: International Women's Day & 'Unprotected' on Campus

In case you missed it, 8 March was International Women's Day, "a global day celebrating the economic, political and social achievements of women past, present and future."  On that day, the Center for Bioethics & Human Dignity launched HER Dignity Network from Washington, D.C.  Partners in the network hold two ideas in common: "first, that women's dignity is ultimately about human dignity, and, second, that female bodies and health are essential aspects of both her dignity and our common humanity."

I was unable to travel to D.C. this month, so I celebrated by ordering and reading a book about a particular facet of women's health care:  mental health clinics on college campuses. It was a sobering exercise . . .

Daring to Speak Up:  Unprotected on Campus

Dr. Miriam Grossman's  Unprotected:  A Campus Psychiatrist Reveals How Political Correctness in Her Profession Endangers Every Student (New York:  Sentinel, 2006, 2007) was such a compelling read that I finished it in one sitting.  The book is important enough to justify every parent of a college-age student purchasing a copy and devouring its contents.  Here is why.

Dr. Grossman first published the book in 2006 under the name, Anonymous, M.D.  A week later, Dr. Laura Schlessinger interviewed her and gave the book a "12" on a scale of 1-10 (Preface, xi.).  The following year, the book was re-released under Dr. Grossman's name.  Why the secrecy?  After all, there is an epidemic of mental health difficulties on college campuses.  

The author quotes Robert Gallagher's 2005 study which found 90% of campus counseling centers have witnessed an increase in students with serious psychological problems

Doubling of psychiatric patient hours — 91% campus counseling centers "hospitalized a student for psychological reasons" (Preface, xvi.)
 >36% campus counseling centers had one or more suicides  (Preface, xv-xvi)

What is behind all of this angst?  Dr. Grosssman has a list, supported by solid evidence, and contrasts that list with requirements for health care professionals facing other, less politically driven issues.  

The persons "named" in her book are typical of many, but not personally identifiable.  They are all worthy of our time, but in this space, we will consider only three:

Heather is a 19-year-old with feelings of worthlessness, and sudden episodes of moodiness and crying jags.  Strangely, these began AFTER she formed a "friendship with benefits" with a guy, which, upon consideration, is neither a friendship nor beneficial for her.  It turns out that oxytocin is a powerful mediator of attachment; it is part of the "biochemistry of bonding" (p. 6) for females.  Why isn't she taught this "difference" about her gender?  

Stacey is a model student athlete.  She swims in the early morning; works out in the afternoon; drinks no soda; uses no alcohol, drugs, or tobacco; and she is a vegetarian.  She presents in crisis because she has been told she has Human Papillomavirus, HPV, a sexually transmitted disease (STD).  How did this happen?  She used protection.  Should she tell her four partners about this?  Her parents?  

Students like Stacey are repeatedly given information about "safer sex," but who tells them that latex does not protect against HPV, some forms of which can cause cancer?  No one informs the Staceys on campus about "safer smoking."  

Why are they being misled about sexual health?  Dr. Grossman suggests a course in truth-telling.  "Tell them 20 million people in our country have HPV, mostly women and minorities, and that doctors, drug companies, and corporations are making billions" (p. 30).  She calls "safer sex" a delusion; a psychiatrist would know what a delusion is.  

The only people safe from such diseases are those who, along with their spouses, wait for marriage, and remain faithful in that marriage.  You won't find that sort of advice on Go Ask Alice.

Brian has a boyfriend, and they meet up with other guys for casual sex, because, after all, monogamy is difficult.  Brian never uses any protection.  Dr. Grossman really wants Brian to have a test for HIV.  His behavior places him at high risk for infection.  If he is positive, he could be infecting others.  But HIV testing is completely up to Brian, and pamphlets available to students state that, among the factors to consider regarding testing, is "'one's ability to emotionally handle a potential positive result.'" (p. 54).

If Dr. Grossman suspected tuberculosis (TB) in a student, she could by law have him not only tested, but treated.  In fact, she is required to report suspected TB, and faces stiff penalties for not doing so.  But "HIV has had a special status among infectious diseases:  voluntary and anonymous testing, no partner notification." (p. 63).

Dr. Grossman takes to task the mental health professions responsible for counseling college students — paid for by students' tuition and fees.  She quotes the American Psychological Association's Career Counseling of College Students, where the authors "explain that 'al

l professional activities are political acts' and argue that counselors who do not advocate for social change are implicitly maintaining an oppressive status quo, because their work does not attempt to challenge a society built on unequal access to power and privilege." (pp 129-30). 

Dr. Grossman counters that for every student who faces harassment or discrimination, she sees fifty young women who have the "education/degree/career thing down"; it's the "love/marriage/family thing that she can't get right." (p. 130).

Why is it, that in a society in which we buckle our children into car seats, fit them repeatedly for bike helmets, and vote into being graduated driver's licensing programs, we leave our young people unprotected on college campuses? 

Why do the students, once on college campuses, not hear the truth about the consequences of their behaviors?  Dr. Grossman's conclusion gives some clues.  She met up with a long-term coworker one day, and they discussed their common concerns about the students who were their patients. 

The underlying problem they saw was that their concerns were "not politically correct":  
     We feared sharing our views in an atmosphere perceived as intolerant; we were not prepared to risk malignment or ostracism. . . .
. . . Open discussion is suppressed.  Those who dissent are intimidated and silenced.  Ideological diversity is nonexistent.  (p. 144).

The author calls on her profession and her readers, among other recommendations, to
— acknowledge the gender differences that exist
— "inform young people about HIV without distortion"
      (everyone is NOT at equal risk of contracting it);
      "convey the moral obligation to be tested." (p. 147).
— avoid promoting biotechnology as protection from
       "risky behaviors"

Finally, Dr. Grossman considers the influence of secularism upon students:
  When patients struggle with suicide, discussion of ultimate issues like meaning, purpose, and God are imperative. Acknowledge the benefits of self-restraint in areas other than diet, tobacco, and alcohol.  Self-discipline exists outside the cafeteria and the gym.
     And one last thing:  don't tell me how to speak and what to think–I do that just fine, thank you.  (pp. 149-150.)

And she does.  But don't take my word for it:  order it or check it out of the library — today!  We owe it to the next generation, to leave them unprotected no longer.

[18 March 13, The Tennessee Center for Bioethics and Culture is dedicated to promoting human dignity in the face of challenges to what it means to be human, and to informing and equipping people to face the vital bioethics issues of the 21st Century. D. Joy Riley, M.D., M.A. Executive Director]




International Women’s Day: Time to End Violence Against Pregnant Women

In commemoration of this year’s International Women’s Day, Americans United for Life reaffirms our commitment to protect pregnant women and their unborn children from violence. In 1975, the United Nations began celebrating March 8 as International Women’s Day. The United Nations’ theme for International Women’s Day 2013 is, “A promise is a promise: Time for action to end violence against women.”

AUL President and CEO, Dr. Charmaine Yoest commented, “AUL’s ‘Pregnant Woman’s Protection Act’ addresses the growing problem of pregnancy-related violence against women.


Women’s Leader Littlejohn Takes Battle Against Sex-Selection Abortions to UN

Women’s rights leader Littlejohn will be speaking four times this week at the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women. The UNCSW is a global policy-making body dedicated to the advancement of gender equality.

Littlejohn, the head of Women’ Rights Without Frontiers, talked about her activities.

The Holocaust Was Worse Than We Thought… What About Abortion?

The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum is less than two miles from Bound4LIFE’s headquarters in Washington, DC. I have visited it many times, and I have always been profoundly impacted by what I encounter there both mentally and emotionally—whether it’s standing in an actual train car once filled with Jews being transported to death camps or first learning about Aktion T4.

From 1933 to 1945 Eugenics research reached a quick and inevitable maturity in the form of Nazi Germany and their reign of terror.

We have long heard quoted the number of Jews murdered by the Nazis to be six million, all in the name of “racial hygiene.” We now call it a holocaust, but, ironically, Nazis credited America with having discipled them in eugenics theory and study.

Aktion (Action) T4 was a clandestine agenda enacted early on to euthanize the infirm and disabled throughout the nation. Nazis claimed it was the duty of German citizens to not waste finances on caring for such people. All for a stronger Germany! A Nazi propaganda poster reminded German citizens that it cost them 60,000 Reichsmark to care for a person suffering from hereditary defects throughout his lifetime. What a reasonable and fiscally sound position to suggest, right? Just look at the doctor in his nice white lab coat. Seems trustworthy, right? RIGHT?

Official Nazi records indicate that 70,273 people were legally euthanized through Action T4. Perhaps it was too bold and too sudden for the German people though. Loved ones and children alike who had been entrusted to medical institutions were disappearing, and the registration of ill children had begun. When the euthanasia program was uncovered, public outcry seemed to cause a halt to the brutal order. However, during the Nuremberg Trials, evidence was discovered that the work had secretly continued, and the program was responsible for perhaps 275,000 people being killed.

“More recent research based on files that were recovered after 1990 gives a figure of at least 200,000 physically or mentally handicapped people that were killed by medication, starvation, or in the gas chambers between 1939 and 1945.”1

Remember that these atrocities occurred in places characterized as hospitals and medical facilities. The lethal injections and gas chambers that were disguised as “showers” developed under the program were a foretaste of the killing methods Nazis would become infamous for using to achieve their Final Solution. The truth that was revealed after the war was that the actual number of deaths were far greater than anyone had initially realized.

On March 1st, The New York Times reported on a story that has stunned experts. Researchers from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum began in 2000 the task of documenting all ghettos, slave labor sites, concentration camps and killing factories established by Nazis throughout Europe. The sheer number of sites discovered h

as “shocked even scholars steeped in the history of the Holocaust.” When work began, lead researcher Dr. Geoffrey Megargee expected to find about 7,000 sites based on post-war estimates. The numbers quickly rose and continued to rise until reaching an overwhelming 42,500 sites.

“The numbers astound: 30,000 slave labor camps; 1,150 Jewish ghettos; 980 concentration camps; 1,000 prisoner-of-war camps; 500 brothels filled with sex slaves; and thousands of other camps used for euthanizing the elderly and infirm, performing forced abortions, ‘Germanizing’ prisoners or transporting victims to killing centers.”

Again, the take-away from this story is that the actual number of deaths were far greater than anyone had initially realized. Only now can we consider that history has woefully underestimated what really took place.

When I saw this report, I couldn’t help but think about the holocaust of abortion that we are facing. We’ve just passed the 40-year mark since Roe v Wade, and currently most pro-life organizations are quoting 54 million abortions total. We begrudgingly point to Guttmacher Institute currently reporting more than 1.21 million annual abortions in the U.S.2 I say “begrudgingly” because the preferred source of statistics is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Guttmacher Institute was the invention of Planned Parenthood Federation of America and is the primary tool used to justify their failing programs. Their namesake, Alan F. Guttmacher, was once the vice president of…drumroll please…the American Eugenics Society.

The CDC, however, only notes 784,507 abortions annually.3 That’s a discrepancy of almost half a million people. Why the huge difference? It’s because, as the CDC points out, not all states care to report their numbers. Namely California, Delaware, Maryland, and New Hampshire are not included in their most recent report. California has the most abortion centers of any one state at 522 providers,4 dwarfing even New York’s 249.5

The huge disparity in numbers created by the inability to accurately determine the true amount of abortions casts long shadows of doubt on the whole situation.

Now compound this with the reality of abortive birth control, and the mess grows to unimaginable proportions impossible to quantify. The numbers that most pro-life organizations are quoting, truth be told, are very very conservative. In other words, they’re low.

Even though it’s already difficult to wrap our minds around the legal murder of 54 million Americans, the truth is that those numbers are still tragically low.

Eugenics ideology is alive and well today, and we’re not really all that different from the Nazi physicians carrying out Action T4. Right now, a staggering 92% of babies prenatally diagnosed with Down syndrome are aborted.6 The culture calls the termination of their lives “merciful.” By definition that’s euthanasia—“mercy killing.” Hitler’s Euthanasie Programme at least created some public outcry, but virtually no one blinks an eye over the murder of these precious ones. God help us.

Action T4 was the abbreviation of “Tiergartenstraße 4.” That was the address in a Berlin borough of Tiergarten of the headquarters of the Gemeinnützige Stiftung für Heil- und Anstaltspflege. That translates as “Charitable Foundation for Cure and Institutional Care.” Under the guise of healthcare and medicine, Action T4 was carried out right under the noses of the German people. Consider today that the fact that Planned Parenthood uses the words “clinic” and “preventative care” doesn’t mean much. Just because the President or a congressman says the words “women’s healthcare” doesn’t mean that dark agendas aren’t really at work. Those buzz words are designed to strike all the right nerves, but they’re a thinly veiled attempt to calm us all down. I refuse to calm down.

“When principles that run against your deepest convictions begin to win the day, then battle is your calling, and peace has become sin; you must, at the price of dearest peace, lay your convictions bare before friend and enemy, with all the fire of your faith.” –Abraham Kuyper

The New York Times article concludes:

“In Berlin alone, researchers have documented some 3,000 camps and so-called Jew houses, while Hamburg held 1,300 sites. Dr. Dean, a co-researcher, said the findings left no doubt in his mind that many German citizens, despite the frequent claims of ignorance after the war, must have known about the widespread existence of the Nazi camps at the time. ‘You literally could not go anywhere in Germany without running into forced labor camps, P.O.W. camps, concentration camps,’ he said. ‘They were everywhere.’”

Currently, statistics show that by age 45 nearly one in three women will have had at least one abortion.7 This percentage makes one thing abundantly clear: Everywhere you go in America there is abortion. We cannot deny that it’s happening, or say that we don’t know about it. Like many well-meaning and upstanding citizens of Germany, will we feign ignorance? Will we choose to turn a blind eye and deaf ear?

Our issue with abortion is eerily similar to what is now being realized about all the deaths at the hands of the Nazis. Simply put: there’s more than anyone could have guessed. Can we not learn from past mistakes? Does no one see the parallels? Almost 70 years later new light is still being shed on the Holocaust. Will the day come when truth about abortion finally comes to light? I believe it’s worse than we thought.  A lot worse.

Matt Lockett, Bound4LIFE Director
“The T4 Euthanasia Program in Legal History of Germany.” Medpedia. 30 Mar 2011. Web. 4 Mar 2013. <>. “State Data Center. National Reproductive Health Profile.” Guttmacher Institute. n.d. Web. 4 Mar 2013. <>. Pazol, Creanga, Zane, Burley, Jamieson. “Abortion Surveillance — United States, 2009.”Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 23 Nov 2012. Web. 4 Mar 2013. <>. “State Data Center. California.” Guttmacher Institute. n.d. Web. 4 Mar 2013. <>. “State Data Center. New York.” Guttmacher Institute. n.d. Web. 4 Mar 2013. <>. Huget, Jennifer LaRue. “Will Down Syndrome Disappear?.” The Checkup. The Washington Post, 16 Sept 2009. Web. 22 Feb 2013. <>. “In Brief: Fact Sheet. Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States” Guttmacher Institute, Aug 2011. Web. 4 Mar 2013. <>.
[8 Mar 13, Matt Lockett,,]




“Abortion Battles” Video Showed Students “Killing Babies,” Applauding

There was such an outcry over an “Abortion Battles” baby-killing game video posted on YouTube by students at Hunter College in New York, New York, that they have removed it.

Surgery on Unborn Baby at 20 Weeks Removes Orange-Sized Cyst

The surgery on unborn child Samuel Armas more than a dozen years ago received international attention thanks to the amazing picture of Samuel grabbing a doctor’s hand during the surgery.

Such pre-birth medical procedure are more common than most people think, but the way in which physicians can help unborn babies with medical problems in the womb is simply amazing.



Mother Told by Doctors to Abort Quadruplets Celebrates Their 1st Birthday

A British mother pressured by doctors to abort two of her four babies has just celebrated the quadruplets’ first birthday.

Doctors told 31-year-old Emma Robbins to abort two of her children in order to give the other two a better chance of survival after she beat 750,000-to-1 odds to conceive quadruplets naturally.

Despite what she described as “immense pressure” from her doctors, Robbins steadfastly refused to abort any of the children.  Now, she is celebrating the birthday of Zachary, Joshua, Reuben and Sam, who were born on February 29, 2012 and are now happy, healthy one-year-olds.  The four miracle babies who beat such enormous odds to be conceived naturally in the first place really outdid themselves with their leap day birth – odds of a leap day birthday are 3.5 million to one.

Robbins said she first consulted with doctors at ten weeks of pregnancy because she was so much larger than she had been with her previous, single birth.  She also suffered from extreme morning sickness.  She was worried that something was wrong, so her doctors ordered an ultrasound.

“The sonographer looked at both of us wide-eyed, turned the screen to us, then said she could see three amniotic sacs and not just two babies but four,” recalled Robbins.  “And not just quads but identical twins as well.”

Robbins said her husband Martin, 39, “looked numb and just laughed.”

The doctors “said we had three options,” Robbins told the Daily Mail.  “We could terminate the pregnancy, reduce the pregnancy by terminating some of the embryos, or carry on.”

The suggestion of abortion horrified Robbins.  “Instinctively I clutched my bump,” she said.  “An overwhelming sense of love rushed through me and I told him that we were keeping all four of them.”

Despite the Robbinses’ conviction that they wanted to keep their babies, doctors didn’t let up on the pressure to abort some or all of them.

At twelve weeks, said Robbins, “I’d just been scanned and had been told everything looked fine but now he was pointing out the risks again and asking me to consider aborting the twins for the sake of the other two. I was beginning to feel pressured and it didn’t feel fair. We’d already made our decision.”

Added Robbins, “All our babies were doing well. We’d seen their tiny outlines on the screen and we’d already begun to think of them individually.”

At 16 weeks into the pregnancy, the couple was once again told to consider aborting the twins. “By now I felt under immense pressure and I was getting angry,” said Robbins.

At the babies’ 18-week scan, doctors yet again urged Robbins to consider abortion, warning her that 20 weeks was the latest an abortion could be performed.

“[A]s soon as he’d finished,” said Robbins, “I told him it wasn’t an option and that was final.”

Said Robbins, “We didn’t know how we’d manage financially and practically but I felt it must have happened for a reason. I decided I’d do everything in my power to give birth to four healthy babies.”

That’s exactly what she did.  On February 29, two months before her due date, Robbins went into labor early and delivered all four babies by caesarean section.  Ruben was first, weighing 2 lbs., 14 oz.  Next came Zachary at 2 lbs. 8 oz. and his identical twin Joshua, who weighed 3 lbs. 1 oz.  Last was Sam, at 2 lb. 13 oz.

The boys stayed in the hospital for two months until they were big enough and strong enough to go home with the mother who fought so hard for their survival.

Robbins says raising quadruplets has been hard but worth it.

“Each night the babies would wake up one after the other and start screaming, which would wake [older brother] Luke up too,” she said.  “We had to turn our lounge into the nursery and would take in turns to sleep down there. With four breastfeeds to coordinate every four hours, day and night, as well as bottles, 30 nappy changes and endless baths, life was exhausting.”

Still, she calls the happy, healthy one-year-old boys her “little miracle Peter Pans.”
[Kirsten Andersen, Mar 04, 2013, Bristol, UK,



All North American Children in Two-Parent Homes Do Better in School

New research shows all North American children in two-parent homes do better in school: A new study examines four indicators of family well-being: family structure, family socioeconomics, family process, and family culture.

While there are many societal differences between the U.S. and Canada, the need for strong families to maintain society is one area in which researchers in the two countries can agree. The Institute of Marriage and Family Canada this year has launched a new annual study of family well-being around the world.

The World Family Map 2013 looks at the family as the core institution of society and examines four indicators of family well-being: family structure, family socioeconomics, family process, and family culture, as well as how family structures relate to children’s educational attainments. The report includes data on these categories in different countries representing all regions of the globe.

Much of the data revealed in this report supports the research published by the Marriage and Religion Research Institute.

For example, data published by MARRI highlights the association between living in an intact, married family and higher GPAs in school:

And this same sort of data is found in the “World Family Map” –

    A new, international report makes the claim that Canadian children score higher on literacy tests and are less likely to repeat a grade if — wait for it — raised by two parents.

    According to the World Family Map Project, released last week, “children living with two paren

ts had higher reading literacy scores and were less likely to repeat a grade compared to those living with either one parent or neither parent in all three North American countries included in the report.”

    The researchers go on: “This pattern is found even after accounting for the higher levels of poverty and lower levels of parental education among single-parent families.”

The author of the article goes one step further to point out that government would do well to pay attention to this research:

    Now this is awkward. Governments can pour money into education, but if children are not coming from stable homes, it’s like throwing money into the cold, Canadian wind. There is no quick government fix for family breakdown. But neither should politicians go to great lengths to avoid this research.

Here at MARRI and the Family Research Council, we couldn’t agree more.

World Family Map

This article originally appeared on the Family Research Council and is reprinted with permission.
– See more at:

[28 Feb 13,  Julia Kiewit, ]



Abortion and Food Stamps Don’t Elevate the Black Community 

Planned Parenthood loves its history. It’s why they will never repudiate it, but instead, repeat it over and over again. With undying devotion from mainstream media, Planned Parenthood increases its brazenness in pushing its brand of ideological slavery.




COMMENTARY: Viewpoint: Pro-Life and Feminism Aren’t Mutually Exclusive

From its early beginnings, feminism was a young women’s movement. Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Alice Paul, Charlotte Lozier and so many others began their suffragist work in their 20s. These women — the original feminists — understood that the rights of women cannot be built on the broken backs of unborn children. Anthony called abortion “child murder.” Paul, author of the original 1923 Equal Rights Amendment, said that “abortion is the ultimate exploitation of women.”

So the pro-life movement hasn’t changed the meaning of feminism, as has been suggested. It was the neo-feminists of the 1960s and ’70s who asked women to prize abortion as the pathway to equality.

Marjorie Dannenfelser, along with a group of mostly Democratic women, started the Susan B. Anthony List in 1992, the so-called Year of the Woman, when numerous pro-choice women were elected to Congress. Dannenfelser, then in her mid-20s, saw a need to support more pro-life women running for elected office. Twenty years since the organization’s founding, we now have two pro-life women in the Senate, 17 in the House, four in governorships and hundreds more in state legislatures.

Pro-life feminism has captivated a new generation of young women who reject the illusion that to be pro-woman is to be pro-choice. Gallup polling showed that among 18-to-29-year-olds, there was a 5% increase in those labeling themselves “pro-life” between 2007–08 and 2009–10.

The past few years have seen the emergence of young leaders like Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life of America, who is responsible for organizing more than 675 pro-life groups on college campuses across the nation, and Lila Rose of Live Action, whose undercover video work has forced the abortion industry to confront and amend practices it cannot defend, as well as dozens of other future leaders who have assisted our organization as staff members and interns.

During the past two summers we’ve had young female leaders join the SBA List from Stanford, Georgetown, the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee and the University of California, Berkeley. These passionate defenders of women and unborn children return to their campuses ready to lead pro-life groups and educate their classmates on the tragedy of abortion.

Not only does this young generation of pro-life women shun the notion that abortion somehow liberates women; it views abortion as the civil- and human-rights cause of our day. Abortion is an injustice that permeates our society. Forty years after Roe v. Wade, we realize that a third of our peers are not here to share our progress and our hopes. It is our loss as well as theirs.

In his letter from a Birmingham, Ala., jail, Martin Luther King Jr. wrote, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.”

It is in this same spirit of King and the original feminists that young pro-life women are rising up in increasing numbers to say abortion is a radical injustice that affects us all and must end.

Achieving this will require more efforts to extend our understanding of the equal rights of the disabled unborn, prevent rape and make this crime against women a thing of the past, expand adoption and make the benefits of modern prenatal care and specialties like fetal surgery more available, so that even younger and sicker children can be spared an early death.

Our fight transcends elections and legislative battles because our fight is in our hearts. This is why, 40 years after Roe, our movement is still growing. We won’t give up; we can’t give up. Our fight is for life.

[Jan. 03, 2013, Emily Buchanan,  Buchanan is the executive director of the Susan B. Anthony List. The views expressed are solely her own.]

On This Day in 2012, Sebelius Said: Fewer Babies Born Will Save Health Care Costs

At a hearing of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Secretary of HHS Kathleen Sebelius confirmed the fears of many pro-life advocates who worry that the recent HHS mandate requiring all insurance plans to cover contraception and sterilization, regardless of an employer’s moral objection, is just the beginning.

The same statutory authority of the Administration to mandate contraception could just as easily mandate abortion on demand. The Administration believes in essence that employers are not really paying for contraceptives or abortion since they would be cheaper than providing for prenatal care, childbirth or child care.

Analysis: NARAL Pro-Choice America Tries to Hide Medical Information from Students

A new sex
education curriculum in North Carolina has NARAL Pro-Choice America up in arms.

deception-truth-liesA bill has been proposed to establish a new curriculum for sex education classes in North Carolina schools. S132, which can be found here, sets guidelines for teachers. Along with requiring students to learn about first aid, nutrition, and drug abuse prevention, the bill requires that students be told that having an abortion can increase the risk of pre-term birth in a subsequent pregnancy. NARAL has mobilized its supporters to oppose allowing student to hear about this risk, denying that it exists.

According to their website:

    This bill calls for changes to our school’s health curriculum that have nothing to do with protecting our children’s health, and everything to do with spreading misinformation and stigmatizing abortion[.] … This bill is insulting and endangering. It forces teachers to lie to students. Young people need facts about their health – not political propaganda.

However, despite NARAL’s protests, the link between abortion and premature birth has been well-documented in the medical community.

An article by Brent Rooney, M.Sc.; Byron C. Calhoun, M.D., M.B.A.; and Lisa E. Roche, J.D. tracked premature births among African-Americans. Brent Rooney is the research director of the Reduce Preterm Birth Coalition.

This 2008 article highlighted seven studies showing a “significant” elevated risk of pre-term birth for women who had a prior abortion.

• Moreau C, Kaminski M, Ancel PY, et al: Previous induced abortions and the risk of very preterm term delivery: results of the EPIPAGE study. 2005;112:430-437. Abstract available here.

• Smith GCS, Shah I, White IR, et al. Maternal and biochemical predictors of spontaneous preterm birth among nulliparous women: a systematic analysis in relation to the degree of prematurity. 2006 Int J Epidemiol; 35:1169-1177.

• Lumley J. The association between prior spontaneous abortion, prior induced abortions and preterm birth in first singleton births. Prenat Neonat Med 1998; 3:21-24

• Stang P, Hammond AO, Bauman P. Induced abortion increases the risk of very preterm delivery: results of a large perinatal database. Fertility Sterilit 2005 (Sep): S159.

• Levin AA, Schoenbaum SC, Monson RR, Stubblefield PG, Ryan JA. Association of induced abortion with subsequent pregnancy loss. JAMA 1980; 243: 2495-2499.

• Lumley J. The epidemiology of preterm birth. Bailliere’s Clinical Obstet Gynecology 1993; 7:477-498.

• Behrman RE, Butler AS Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2007: Table B-5. Available here.

In 2012, two more well-researched studies showed a link between abortion and pre-term births. They appeared in the European journals Human Reproduction and The British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

The New York Times, a publication not known to be friendly to the pro-life viewpoint, reported on one of them, a study from Finland.

This particular study found that the risk of very pre-term birth (defined as a birth that takes place before 28 weeks) increased by 19% after one abortion, 69% after two abortions, and 278% after three abortions. The researchers also found an increase in births under 37 weeks and low birth weight in women who had had three or more abortions.

The other study was based on research gathered from Scottish women and was publicized in The Telegraph. It found that women who abort their first pregnancies have a significantly greater risk of future pre-term births. According to Prof. Siladitya Bhattacharya:

    We found that women who had had a previous induced abortion had a higher risk of a spontaneous pre–term birth in their next ongoing pregnancy, compared with women who had never been pregnant before.

In addition, a Canadian study done in 2013 found that, on average, women who had one prior induced abortion were 45% more likely to have premature births before 32 weeks, 71% more likely to have premature births before 28 weeks, and 117% more likely to have premature births before 26 weeks.

This research was carried out at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at McGill University in Montreal.

Infants born extremely premature suffer a 129-times-higher risk of cerebral palsy than infants born full-term. In fact, one in ten babies born before 37 weeks develops cerebral palsy and/or lung disease. Other health problems linked to pre-term birth include “mental retardation, autism, epilepsy, visual impairment, hearing disability, gastrointestinal injury, respiratory distress, and severe infections.”

Despite all this, NARAL opposes telling students about the very real risk of pre-term birth after an abortion. By rallying its supporters to oppose the truth, NARAL is making a blatant attempt to censor scientific information that can affect the lives of young people and their future children. NARAL, in assuring their supporters that there is no abortion/pre-term births link and calling it “lies” and “propaganda,” are doing no favor for women, much less for their children. Sadly, it is likely that most of NARAL’s supporters will accept the lies NARAL is spoon-feeding them and continue to deny the link between abortion and pre-term births. Pro-lifers need to do all we can to tell the real story.
[8Mar13, Sarah Terzo; Secular Pro-life first broke the story of NARAL and their opposition to the North Carolina curriculum;]


Investigative: 10 Eye-Opening Quotes from Planned Parenthood’s Founder Sanger
Margaret Sanger has been lauded by some as a woman of valor, but a closer look reveals that Planned Parenthood’s audacious founder had some unsavory things to say about matters of race, birth control, and abortion. An outspoken eugenicist herself, Sanger consistently promoted racist ideals with a contemptuous attitude. Read on to learn why Planned Parenthood hides behind a false memory of Sanger, and why, despite her extraordinarily prolific writing career, one rarely sees her quoted by Planned Parenthood leaders and apologists.

    The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.

Margaret Sanger

Woman and the New Race, ch. 6: “The Wickedness of Creating Large Families.” Here, Sanger argues that, because the conditions of large families tend to involve poverty and illness, it is better for everyone involved if a child’s life is snuffed out before he or she has a chance to pose difficulties to its family.

    [We should] apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.

“Plan for Peace” from Birth Control Review (April 1932, pp. 107-108)

    Article 1. The purpose of the American Baby Code shall be to provide for a better distribution of babies… and to protect society against the propagation and increase of the unfit.
    Article 4. No woman shall have the legal right to bear a child, and no man shall have the right to become a father, without a permit…
    Article 6. No permit for parenthood shall be valid for more than one birth.

“America Needs a Code for Babies,” 27 Mar 1934

    Give dysgenic groups [people with "bad
genes"] in our population their choice of segregation or [compulsory] sterilization.

April 1932 Birth Control Review, pg. 108

    Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race.

Woman, Morality, and Birth Control. New York: New York Publishing Company, 1922. Page 12.

    We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities.  The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.

Margaret Sanger’s December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Also described in Linda Gordon’s Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America. New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.

    A woman’s duty: To look the whole world in the face with a go-to-hell look in the eyes… to speak and act in defiance of convention.

The Woman Rebel, Volume I, Number 1

    [The most penetrating thinkers] are coming to see that a qualitative factor as opposed to a quantitative one is of primary importance in dealing with the great masses of humanity.

Pivot of Civilization, 1922. Here, Margaret Sanger speaks on her eugenic philosophy – that only the types of “quality” people she and her peers viewed as worthy of life should be allowed to live.

    Such parents swell the pathetic ranks of the unemployed. Feeble-mindedness perpetuates itself from the ranks of those who are blandly indifferent to their racial responsibilities. And it is largely this type of humanity we are now drawing upon to populate our world for the generations to come. In this orgy of multiplying and replenishing the earth, this type is pari passu multiplying and perpetuating those direst evils in which we must, if civilization is to survive, extirpate by the very roots.

The Need for Birth Control in America (quoted by Angela Franks.)

    Women of the working class, especially wage workers, should not have more than two children at most. The average working man can support no more and and the average working woman can take care of no more in decent fashion.
“Family Limitation,” eighth edition revised, 1918

[25 Feb 2013, Lauren Enriquez,   



Being Pro-Life is Fun

This week I was in San Diego, where the sun is shining and the beach glittering.
I spent the day meeting students, talking with principals, and encouraging pro-life unity within this diverse community. A thought struck me as I drove along with the beach: “Being pro-life is fun!”

I continued to think about this as I went through the day: what a gift it is to be a person who carries truth to dark and hopeless situations. It is an amazing feeling that pulses through your body as you hear a young mother say, “I will choose to carry this child,” or a young student admit they have never thought about abortion in that way. I have such a privilege and am so thankful for the students I am working with and the lives that are changing because of it.

I met a new group of high school students who are extremely active on campus, in the community, and passionate about life. When the group formed and began working on campus, it was not long before over 100+ students were participating in activities, praying at the sidewalk, sending red envelopes, or walking at the Walk for Life.

The “Crusaders for Life” did an event that I thought was just too amazing not to share.
On the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the “Crusaders for Life” planted 40 tulip bulbs in a garden on campus, and hung a sign by the garden reading the following:

Life is Beautiful Garden – In commemoration of the 40-year anniversary of Roe v. Wade, SJA Crusaders for Life planted 40 tulip bulbs in this garden.

"Just as the tulip comes from a bulb that grows hidden and nourished in the warm ground for months before we can see and hold the beautiful flower, so does the baby grow hidden in the warmth and nourishment of their mother’s womb before we can see and hold the beautiful baby. Life is a gift from God; it is precious and must be protected and cared for by all.”

Please take this idea, share it and spread the understanding of life to all.
Life is a gift and it is meant to be filled with hope, love, and fun!
Have fun when you stand for LIFE.
[Casey Vroman, West Coast Regional Coordinator, Students for Life, 6 Mar 13]



 Judge Unseals Lawsuit This Week Alleging Planned Parenthood Fraud

A lawsuit filed in 2011 alleging that the nation’s largest abortion seller submitted fraudulent claims, costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars, was released Tuesday.

Jonathan Bloedow, a Washington Realtor, filed the suit after discovering alleged fraud through a state open records request. Federal law protects “whistleblowers” with inside information who expose fraudulent billing by government contractors. These cases, by law, are filed under seal. These cases are not made public until federal authorities decide to join the case.

“Americans deserve to know, especially in economic times like these, if their hard-earned tax money is being funneled to groups that are misusing it,” said Michael J. Norton, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, ADF, representing Bloedow, who filed the suit under the federal False Claims Act.

The lawsuit alleges that the abortion seller submitted false claims to the state’s Department of Social and Health Services. The suit also alleges Planned Parenthood gave false claims to the state’s Health and Recovery Services Administration (HRSA), which runs its Medicaid program.

According to the lawsuit, Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest filed at least 25,000 false claims with HRSA for reimbursements exceeding the amount allowed for oral contraceptive pills. It also alleges the abortion seller filed at least another 25,000 for reimbursements for possible abortion-inducing drugs.

The suit is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington; total damages could be more than $377,000,000.

In 2011, ADF filed two other False Claims lawsuits: Johnson v. Planned Parenthood, alleging fraud by Texas clinics and Thayer v. Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, alleging fraud by Iowa affiliates.

ADF publically released a report to Congress in 2012 identifying almost $100 million in waste, abuse and potential fraud committed by Planned Parenthood affiliates and other providers.

“Compliance with the law should not be sacrificed for the sake of Planned Parenthood’s bottom line,” Norton explained. “They have cheated the American taxpayer for too long. It’s time the abortion giant is held accountable.”

Read the complaint in Bloedow v. Planned Parenthood —

Read the complaint in Johnson v. Planned Pa

renthood —

Read the complaint in Thayer v. Planned Parenthood —
[22 Mar 2013, Bethany Monk, ]




72 Members of Congress Call for Investigation of Planned Parenthood

Seventy-two members of the U.S. Congress have signed a letter to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) requesting updated detailed information about government grants to Planned Parenthood.

Leading the effort to uncover information about government money being funneled to Planned Parenthood are Representative Pete Olson of Texas and Representative Diane Black of Tennessee. The request asks for more information following a GAO report compiled and released in 2010 at the request of 31 members of Congress that raised more questions than it answered.



Web Awareness & Arkansas Billboard Campaign Expose Planned Parenthood Targeting Blacks

Arkansas Black Americans for Life has partnered with The Radiance Foundation to launch a new billboard/web abortion awareness campaign. The initiative, entitled “Gone”, educates the public about how racial targeting results in the alarming number of abortions in the black community.