Archive for March, 2011
The Case Against Abortion: Prenatal Development
New video from Abort73.com. See astounding images of 1st trimester baby.
Crosses for the Unborn … on steroids.
Photos reveals what each cross really means.
Check out the Crosses for the Unborn display at Eastern Kentucky University. Photos on each cross represent what each abortion really is … an act of violence that destroys a human being.
Without the photo, many passersby will reflexively conclude that each cross means that another woman has made a reproductive choice … no big deal. By challenging that conclusion, the photo gives the crosses real meaning.
Elijah House of the EKU Students for Life wrote to FAB about the impact of the crosses:
There was a young woman who came up to us while we were setting up yesterday and she stopped and thanked us for what we were doing. She proceeded to tell us that she had lost two nieces and nephew to abortion.
There was also a young man who stopped and he wasn’t aware that there was a pro life group on campus. He had gone to a Right to Life conference recently and was excited to get involved with pro life work on campus.
Unfortunately, last night someone pulled up all the crosses, broke several, and tore off most of the cards. One of my roommates put the crosses back up. It’s unfortunate to see how others vandalize First Amendment rights.
Unfortunate, perhaps, but it shows that people are conflicted about abortion. People still have a functioning conscience.
We’re scheduled to be at Eastern Kentucky with GAP next week! Please pray for our time on campus, as well as this time of preparation.
Crosses at Eastern Kentucky University feature an abortion photo on each cross.
Newest member of CBR family almost home from … Armenia?
Karine John Hardin
We are indebted to the Pro Life in TN blog for this story about the newest member of the CBR family! Four-year-old Karine is the latest arrival at the Hardin household, whose members are fixtures on the GAP circuit.
How many of those pro lifers ever adopt?
Well the Hardin family, whom I am proud to call friends, are as pro life as they come. Just take a look at their van covered in pro life stickers … their 8 home-schooled children … their entry into pro life oratory contests … avid and trained sidewalk counselors and in several pro life arenas … I can count on them to march in the parade and help with any pro life event.
They have worked and fund raised for over two years to raise the money to adopt this special needs child from Armenia who had never been outside her orphanage in her 4 years of life. While the prayed and waited for the bureaucracy to move, they almost lost her as Kathy Hardin received a call to make an emergency trip as their to be daughter, Karine was critically ill.
She was sick and down to only 15 pounds. The is hospital was without the basic necessities to treat her. I must admit when I received the broadcast email of what was happening, I was greatly discouraged. The Hardins have a strong faith and when they finished the email by telling us to take a front row seat and watch what God can do, I must admit I felt that she could not possibly survive even if they were able to raise the funds for an air ambulance from Armenia to Nashville.
Fast forward … they were able to get the adoption accomplished in an emergency period of time, fly home on a commercial flight, get her into Vanderbilt for the needed surgery literally in the nick of time. Yea God !!! … Slap me across the face for my lack of faith.
Channel 5 covers the story here, here, and here.
“For two weeks it was pretty touch and go and I was working on adrenaline,” Hardin said.
Karine suffers from Spina Bifida and lives with a shunt to reduce swelling in her brain. Just weeks before she was scheduled to make the journey, the Hardin’s said she underwent surgery to correct the shunt, then developed meningitis, and lost nearly 20 pounds when the Armenian hospital withheld pain medicine and antibiotics.
If you’d like to help with her medical costs, you can make a donation to the Karine John Hardin fund at the Hendersonville branch of Regions Bank.
You can also visit the following Facebook page for updates: http://www.causes.com/causes/588490-rescue-karine-hardin
Mommy, where do rights come from?
Sex education isn’t the only thing Planned Parenthood (PP) gets wrong. They also don’t know where our rights come from.
At a rally to support government funding of PP’s abortion business, Sen. Frank Lautenburg stated that pro-life advocates “don’t deserve the freedoms in the Constitution.” But, being the generous sort of fellow he is, he would “give it to them anyway.”
Did you catch it? To Sen. Lautenburg, Constitutional rights are granted by Government (i.e., himself and his cronies). Some people don’t deserve them, and he knows who they are. But because he’s such a good guy, he will consent to “give” those rights to pro-lifers. For now, anyway.
Whatever Government “gives,” it can later withhold. It can grant or deny rights to whomever it chooses. Lautenberg claims, for himself and his cronies, the power to choose who gets rights and who doesn’t.
It reminds me of a conversation I had with a TV reporter at the University of Indiana. He pointed to a US flag flying nearby and said that no matter what we believe, “that flag gives all of us the freedom to speak out.”
We’ll give the reporter a D for his civics grade. Not quite as bad as Sen Lautenberg, who earned an F minus minus. At least the reporter did not claim for himself the right to grant/deny the rights of others. But he still didn’t know where our rights come from. He, too, thought our rights come from Government.
Our founders knew better:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
See the difference? The Founders recognized that rights come from our Creator. Not Government. Not Frank Lautenberg. No man may take them away. Governements are instituted by men, not to grant rights, but as an agent to secure rights already granted by “our Creator.” Big difference. Men in government are accountable not only to the people, but to the Creator, for the preservation of justice. Lautenberg and other Alinskyites believe they are accountable to neither.
So, do you still want Government educating your children?
Student reactions to Pro Life on Campus at University of West Florida
Pro Life on Campus at University of West Florida
On February 14-15, CBR took the Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) to the University of West Florida. The video below features students talking about the project.
Media coverage was extensive:
Abortion – One man’s pain
Seth Drayer
We are indebted to CBR’s Seth Drayer for sharing this encounter with a student at Florida State University.
“She called me up and told me she was pregnant, that she was going to keep the baby. Two weeks later, she called and told me she’d gotten rid of it.”
I looked at the young man standing before me. “How do you feel?” I asked.
“Oh, man . . . I don’t want anyone to feel what I feel.”
Moments before, I had withdrawn from GAP to catch my breath. The verbally violent protestors, the student playing the accordion loudly in front of me to stifle conversation: all of it was choking my love for the students at Florida State University.
After reflection and prayer, I returned to the display. And then I met Chris.
“Do you have pictures of an 18 week-old?” he asked.
Immediately, I knew why he was asking. “Yeah, follow me.” I led him to our prenatal development sign and pointed to the 18 week image: a close up of the baby’s face. “Is that how old your baby was?” I asked cautiously.
Chris nodded. His eyes began to water. “It’s not right,” he said. “I’m the kind of guy who always protects. And here, the one person I was supposed to . . .”
And then he asked me a question I did not want to answer: “Did he feel it?”
I wanted to tell Chris that the baby felt no pain during the abortion, to mask the barbarity of it and lessen Chris’s own suffering. But, he needed the truth. When I shared it with him, he could only shake his head in defeat.
Then, I told him that I know what it feels like to be a father stripped of his duty. I shared with him the empty powerlessness I had felt when Aubrie and I lost our own child by miscarriage. Fathers are meant to protect their children—yet neither Chris nor I had been able to do so.
“Remember this, Chris,” I told him, “you are and always will be a father.”
Chris returned the next day. His countenance had changed completely. He told me he had accepted the reality of his pain. He had brought a friend to show him the picture of “his” 18 week baby. He was even smiling.
Chris had needed someone to validate his pain. I had needed someone to remind me why I was there. I praise God for allowing us to meet.
Knoxville News Sentinel needed to dig deeper
I was disappointed in the Knoxville News Sentinel (KNS) editorial about sex education in Knox County Schools.
I’m not a KNS basher. Some of my conservative friends say it’s a liberal rag. I laugh because I remember what the Charlotte Observer was like, when I lived there in the late 1980s. That paper was comical, sort of a cross between the Washington Post and the old Pravda. But in all my time in Knoxville, KNS has covered my newsworthy activities faithfully and without prejudice. They have accurately printed my letters and I hope they will keep doing so.
But I was disappointed at the misstatements of fact in this editorial, as well as the failure to recognize and address the key issues. Perhaps it’s too much to expect. After all, I struggle to be competent on just one or two subjects. I can’t imagine having to become an expert on a new topic every day.
The most obvious error was the statement that Planned Parenthood (PP) “offers abortion services in some locations across the country but not in Knoxville.” In 2009, the KNS itself reported that PP “will dispense RU486, the ‘abortion pill,’ to women up to nine weeks pregnant.” On their website, PP lists “abortion services” as being offered in Knoxville.
Further, it has been widely reported that PP has directed all of their local affiliates to operate abortion clinics by 2013. That explains why PP’s former office at Downtown West was no longer big enough and they recently moved to a larger space.
Their status as an abortion clinic is a critical fact, because it means that PP stands to make a lot of money by marketing themselves in our schools. This is an outrageous conflict of interest that completely escaped the notice of KNS reporters and editors.
The editorial went on to say that PP’s website “linked to material that was inappropriate for the classroom and could be seen by some parents as offensive.” That’s an astonishing understatement that could have been written only by a person unfamiliar with the PP material. It would be like saying that Pat Summitt “has won a few ball games and could be considered by some fans as an adequate coach.”
Evidence of PP’s criminal behavior all over the US, including their institutional willingness to cover up sexual abuse of minor children, was completely ignored. Nor was it mentioned that PP routinely arranges for judicial bypasses that allow minors to get abortions behind their parents’ backs. Were these deliberate omissions or just plain sloppiness? No rational person could think them unworthy of mention.
The tone of the editorial suggested that the issue at stake was whether or not teens needed to know about sex. I don’t recall anybody on our side of the issue ever suggesting teens should be ignorant on matters of sex. We do, however, oppose the approach to sex that tells 13-year-old children that they might be ready for sex if they “trust each other,” “care about each other,” and “have fun together.” We object to PP’s “anything-goes” approach to sex. And I do mean anything.
To my knowledge, no KNS editor ever spoke with any of the parents about this matter. I don’t know if they interviewed the other side or not. Maybe KNS just takes at face value whatever Dr. McIntyre tells them. Maybe an ad hoc collection of parents just can’t overcome years and years of taxpayer-funded PP propaganda. Maybe KNS is a liberal rag and I’m too naive to see it.
I don’t know, but I have to think KNS could have written a more insightful piece had they bothered to do a little independent research. Speaking with some of the pro-family leaders who raised this issue might have been helped.
KNS, I love you, man, but you really needed to dig deeper on this one.
Error found at FAB
A commenter has brought it to my attention that the article I referenced in a previous posting has been retracted. Here is the retraction:
Author’s Note: I made a serious error in reporting this column that undermines the conclusion I drew. I compared statistics on contraceptive use from a January 2011 Guttmacher Institute fact sheet to a year 2000 study on the same issue. However, I did not realize that the 2011 fact sheet derived its statistics from the year 2000 numbers, so my argument was not supported by the data. I am deeply sorry for the error, which invalidates my piece.
First of all, thank you to the commenter for letting us all know of the error. We always want to get the facts right. We can’t make rational decisions based on myths and errors. As Daniel Patrick Moynhan is quoted as saying, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
I must point out, however, that some of the statements in the article itself are not without merit. For example, the statement that 54 percent of women who had abortions had used a contraceptive method in the month they got pregnant came directly from a Planned Parenthood information sheet. It’s still a sobering number for those who claim that handing out condoms to teenagers will make abortion “rare.” Yes, the statement is based on data gathered in 2000, but Planned Parenthood is still quoting this number today, so we have no reason to doubt that much has changed. I referenced this in my previous posting on the relationship between contraception use and abortion.
Pro Life on Campus: A First Amendment seminar
When CBR goes to school, we not only bring the truth of abortion, we also give a lesson on the First Amendment. Here is an article that appeared in the aftermath of our visit to the University of West Florida.
The “free-speech” zones, as applied at many universities, is without question unConstitutional, because it restricts speech on 99% of the campus, without any compelling state interest in doing so. “We like our speech bottled up where we can keep an eye on it” is not a compelling state interest. Neither is, “We’ve always restricted speech to this location.” What they are saying, in essence, is this: “We deny everybody’s First Amendment rights equally, so it’s OK.” Needless to say, that would get the university laughed out of court if they were foolish enough to make that argument.
After we explain the First Amendment to the most university attorneys, they generally accept our legal reasoning. Of course, the fact that we are ready and willing to take our case to court, if necessary, also helps them see the light.
Here’s what we say in our standard notification letter to each university to which we take our GAP project:
… pursuant to well-settled law, CBR enjoys an undisputed First Amendment right to conduct educational presentations in any public forum. “[A] principal purpose of traditional public fora is the free exchange of ideas,” Cornelius v. NAACP Legal Defense & Ed. Fund, 473 U.S. 788, 800 (1985), and other purposes include “assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions,” Hague v. Committee for Ind. Organization, 307 U.S. 496, 515 (1939). A college or university is “peculiarly the ‘marketplace of ideas.’” Healy v. James, 408 U.S. 169, 180 (1972). While we do not accept the proposition that free speech can be limited to designated areas, there is no serious doubt that “free speech” areas on your campus are public fora in which CBR’s rights cannot be limited unless certain standards are met.
The standard for content-based restrictions on speech is that any such regulation must be necessary to serve a compelling state interest and be narrowly drawn to achieve that end. Boos v. Barry, 485 U.S. 312, 321 (1988). Furthermore, such regulations “must be subjected to the most exacting scrutiny.” Id. Only speech such as obscenity, defamation, and fighting words has been found to meet that standard. See, e.g., R.A.V. v. St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377, 383 (1992). Your client will have no such “compelling” interests as to CBR’s speech.
The standard for content-neutral restrictions on speech is that any such regulations must be “narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest, and leave open ample alternative channels of communication.” Perry Ed. Ass’n v. Perry Local Educator’s Ass’n, 460 U.S. 37, 45 (1983) (emphasis added). The University undoubtedly has “significant interests” in speech on public property. Those interests are safety and traffic flow on streets and sidewalks and the opportunity for students to access educational services without substantial interference. Cf. Widmar v. Vincent, 454 U.S. 263, 277 (1981).
It is axiomatic, however, that the First Amendment is especially protective of speech which is offensive. In fact, offensive speech is the only speech which requires protection. See, e.g., Forsyth County v. Nationalist Movement, 505 U.S. 123, 134-35 (1992) (speech cannot be “punished or banned, simply because it might offend a hostile mob”); Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15, 21 (1971) (viewers who dislike a message have a responsibility to “avoid further bombardment of their sensibilities simply by averting their eyes”); Terminiello v. City of Chicago, 337 U.S. 1, 4 (1949) (free speech “may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger”). Therefore, the possibility that CBR’s photos or literature or remarks might offend passersby has no legal significance and cannot properly be used as a basis for restricting that speech.
As noted above, CBR is prepared to accept reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on its expressive activity and will make reasonable efforts to ensure that their conduct does not negatively affect legitimate interests of the university. But CBR will not accept unreasonable restrictions. An example of an unreasonable restriction would be any attempt by the university to minimize controversy by relegating CBR’s display to some obscure campus location.
Another young pro-life champion
Peter Ascik hosted GAP at U of Georgia in Fall 2010.
One of the best parts of my job is to meet, encourage, and (we hope, at some level) influence young pro-life activists. One such young pro-life champion is Peter Ascik. We first met Peter in 2008, when we took our Pro Life on Campus project (GAP) to Appalachian State U, where Peter was an undergraduate. Now he is in graduate school at the U of Georgia, where he serves as President of the Students for Life.
Peter and his group hosted GAP at the U of Georgia last Fall, and is currently preparing to bring the Justice for All (JFA) display this Spring. The JFA display features CBR abortion photos. In preparation for the display, he wrote this column in the U of Georgia student paper. He wrote:
We understand the pictures of unborn human beings destroyed by abortion are disturbing. But a critical thinker may ask why it is so disturbing to see them.
***
We believe these images are so disturbing because it is inconsistent for us to speak about human rights — while we ignore the rights of the youngest and most vulnerable humans.
For the entire column, click here.
To help us raise up and train more pro-life champions like Peter, click here and make a generous donation.
Pro Life on Campus at Florida Atlantic University
GAP at Florida Atlantic University
CBR’s Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) tour of Florida concluded at Florida Atlantic University (FAU) on February 23-24. Media coverage:
Planned Parenthood in schools: A betrayal of trust
Christine Lefebvre
Here are Chris Lefebvre’s comments before the Knox County School Board last week.
My name is Christine Lefebvre. I am a mother, grandmother and citizen of Knox County, and I am very concerned about Planned Parenthood’s influence in our schools and how that influence was gained! From what I have learned it appears that the parents of Knox County students and you, ladies and gentlemen who were elected to represent them, were all excluded from the decision making process that has allowed one of the most controversial organizations in the country free access to our kids, with at least some of the presentations being done without parental knowledge or consent!
Don’t you find that disturbing?
Someone made that decision and I am asking you to get some answers for us.
Who made that decision and were they not aware that undercover investigations all over the country had exposed Planned Parenthood’s systematic undermining of parents rights and the violation of mandatory reporting laws for sexual predators?
Did no one in the administration take the time to review the obscene materials on their teen websites like www.takecaredownthere.org with its “I Didn’t Spew” explicit video depicting a teen boy practicing oral sex on another teen boy? Did even the mention of that not make you cringe a little inside? Does it not bother you that our teens, as captive audiences in their own classrooms are being exposed to an organization with that kind of ideology?
Wasn’t anyone concerned about the obvious conflict of interest in allowing an organization that sells abortion into the classrooms of our county to talk to them about sex? And beyond that, doing professional development of our wellness teachers? And are there going to be any answers forthcoming about who those teachers are who have attended that type of program and whether they will be able to continue advancing that ideology in their classrooms. And what monies, if any, were used to pay for Planned Parenthood’s professional development of our teachers?
Did those decision makers not know that PP would be recruiting our teens for their “peer counseling” seminars to receive 40 hours of in depth sexuality training in the crass ideology that is Planned Parenthood and then PAID $100.00 a semester after they go back to their schools and make “100 peer contacts” to market that ideology… and the services PP provides? They will tell you it’s all about teens sharing “life-saving information” with their peers, but their rights based approach to sexual health and their advocacy for removing “ethical barriers,” their history and the services they sell are all of grave concern. The Boston Globe reported in November that “hundreds of high school students” came to the school board meeting demanding free condoms at all high schools and more comprehensive sex education. One student was even quoted as saying that it was “sad that schools would rather focus on things like books and tests.” This is a direct result of inculcating teens with that kind of ideology.
Doesn’t it bother you that the administration’s recent decision about this issue relied on a group of experts and does not appear to have involved board members or any concerned members of the community?
There is an even bigger issue at stake here, and that is the betrayal of public trust by this administration and the exclusion of board members and the community from this critical decision. The solution to teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases lies in more, not less, parental involvement. Something, this experience indicates is not a priority of the administration. Recently the Provincetown, Massachusetts School district approved distribution of condoms for students kindergarten through 12 stating that the district will not honor requests from parents that their children not be given condoms. Is that where we are headed?
You, ladies and gentlemen, may not have had an opportunity to do much about letting PP into our classrooms, but I trust that once you get the answers to these questions, you will do everything you can to ensure that such a betrayal of our trust and our values will never happen here again.
Even the Left can see the Planned Parenthood deception
NOTE: A commenter has brought it to my attention that the article referenced in this posting has been retracted. Here is the retraction:
Author’s Note: I made a serious error in reporting this column that undermines the conclusion I drew. I compared statistics on contraceptive use from a January 2011 Guttmacher Institute fact sheet to a year 2000 study on the same issue. However, I did not realize that the 2011 fact sheet derived its statistics from the year 2000 numbers, so my argument was not supported by the data. I am deeply sorry for the error, which invalidates my piece.
First of all, thank you to the commenter for letting us all know of the error. We always want to get the facts right. We can’t make rational decisions based on myths and errors. As Daniel Patrick Moynhan is quoted as saying, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
I must point out, however, that some of the statements in the article itself are not without merit. For example, the statement that 54 percent of women who had abortions had used a contraceptive method in the month they got pregnant came directly from a Planned Parenthood information sheet. It’s still a sobering number for those who claim that handing out condoms to teenagers will make abortion “rare.” Yes, the statement is based on data gathered in 2000, but Planned Parenthood is still quoting this number today, so we have no reason to doubt that much has changed. I referenced this in my previous posting on the relationship between contraception use and abortion.
ORIGINAL POSTING:
Even the Left is beginning to see Planned Parenthood’s deception. Here is an article entitled Busting the Birth-Control Myth, written by Kirsten Powers, a former member of the Clinton administration.
I’ll admit I bought the argument—it makes intuitive sense—and initially opposed cutting off [Planned Parenthood] funding for precisely that reason.
Then I did a little research.
***
It’s unclear whether Planned Parenthood officials simply don’t understand statistics or are so accustomed to having their claims unquestioned that they think if they repeat them often enough, the facts will disappear.
***
… their dishonesty in how they present their organization to the public, along with ignoring basic statistics about their area of expertise, makes you wonder what else they are hiding. It’s also hard to deny that they are at core a blindly ideological organization, not a run-of-the-mill charitable nonprofit.
Entire column here.
Planned Parenthood agrees to conceal sex trafficking and sexual abuse of minor children.
Jane Bullington
More media coverage for the controversy over the abortion industry in Knox County Schools:
Here are Jane Bullington’s remarks before the school board.
My name is Jane Bullington and I am the mother of 2 children who have gone through the Knox County public school system; I am a taxpayer and a very concerned citizen.
TN state law TCA 49-6-1302 mandates teaching abstinence-based sex education and that the teaching party be “of good public standing”. I believe both of these requirements were violated in Knox County. Parents were excluded from any input into what is being taught, who is doing the teaching. Why is there so much secretiveness around this issue? If any of us called our School Board member, or our Administration offices or our schools, to ask about the history curriculum or associated guest speakers, we would be answered immediately. Why can’t we get any straight answers about what is being taught to our students about sex, who is teaching our students about sex, who is training those who will now be teaching our students about sex? Who is profiting from the teaching of sex education in our schools? Planned Parenthood has been presenting, and Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in America; I think we know the answer to the last question.
Trusting the written curriculum depends on the honesty of those developing the curriculum, teaching the curriculum and training the teachers—and I am here to say this organization is not trustworthy. PP should not be trusted with the health, safety, or morals development of our children. I am vehemently opposed to an organization with documented legal violations, with an obvious agenda, and with such a gross conflict of interest having access to our students. The curriculum is essentially a sales pitch for Planned Parenthood’s “services”. It’s called “social marketing” and attitude molding. Michael McGee, VP of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, writes about it in an article called “Social Marketing for Sexual Health”.
Let me show you something about this organization. This national map pinpoints the locations of the Mona Lisa Project videos, done by Live Action. The Mona Lisa Project videos document Planned Parenthood’s willingness to repeatedly violate mandatory reporting laws for statutory rape. A series of hidden camera investigations, collected by a team led by Lila Rose in summer 2008, provide the inside story about Planned Parenthood, the abortion industry and its national abuses. Despite a consistent pattern of lawlessness and abuse, Planned Parenthood receives over $363 million from taxpayers each year. This tax-exempt “nonprofit” netted $100 million last year including revenue of over $120 million directly from performing over 305,000 abortions. Lawlessness, money, and abortions are words that define the organization approved to conduct our students’ sexual education.
In 2011, the emphasis of Live Action investigations changed to Planned Parenthood’s involvement with sex trafficking of young girls. Here are just a few of the recent headlines:
- 2/10/2011 – DC Planned Parenthood Staffer Counsels Sex-Trafficker How Underage Girls Can Get Abortions And Testing, — No Questions Asked
- 2/8/2011 – Bronx, NY Planned Parenthood Staffer Tells “Pimp” He Can Pose As Guardian To Get Tax Payer Funded Services For Underage Sex Workers
- 2/4/2011 – Pattern Emerges: Three More Virginia Planned Parenthood Clinics Caught On Tape Willing to Aid and Abet Sexual Exploitation of Minors
Additionally, there are lawsuits all across our country, including one in Memphis, that expose the “character and agenda” of Planned Parenthood. Here are a few:
- An Indiana Planned Parenthood was forced to suspend a counselor shown advising what she thought was a 13-year-old girl to cross state lines for an abortion without informing her parents
- Two Planned Parenthood clinics in Phoenix, AZ were caught on tape concealing statutory rape.
- At the Idaho Planned Parenthood, a caller pretended to be a racist donor who wanted to reduce the number of black people. The Planned Parenthood employee was “excited” to take the donation.
Misappropriation of funds runs rampant in this organization. Allow me just one example: In NJ, Audits by the United States Inspector General (IG) uncovered Planned Parenthood has improperly taken Medicaid reimbursement for family planning services for a total of almost $3 million.
Closer to home, on April 20, a counselor at Planned Parenthood in Memphis, TN was caught on hidden camera coaching a 14-year-old girl how to lie to a judge to receive a judicial bypass for an abortion without her parents’ knowledge. She was coached to keep her alleged boyfriend’s age from the judge … 31 years old.
The list could go on, but I will stop here. I ask you to look at this map, and see the number of problems that I have pinpointed. Why is the School Administration so determined to have PP either inside our schools or influencing those who teach inside our classrooms? What is their agenda? Why do they promote an organization that separates children from parents? Planned Parenthood consistently lobbies against parental rights legislation. Why are parents being left out when it comes to teaching sex ed to their children? Too many unanswered questions—-and that makes me very nervous.
Pro Life on Campus at Florida International University
Free speech board at Florida International University
CBR’s Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) tour of Florida universities continued at Florida International University (FIU) on February 21-22. Media coverage was sparse and slow in coming, but here it is:
Here’s a surprising comment by Oren Reich, an FIU law student:
I’m pro-choice, but think the exhibit was honest, compelling and non-offensive. Comparisons to genocide are appropriate considering their beliefs, and gory imagery is appropriate as well, just as I would use it for an anti-war demonstration.
