Amid a major power grab by the United Nations World Health Organization (WHO) seeking to further empower the global agency, lawmakers and leaders across the United States are stepping up efforts to protect self-government, national sovereignty and the rights of all Americans. In fact, many in Congress and beyond say it is time for the U.S. government to defund and even withdraw from the WHO once again.

Last week, governments from around the world sent delegates to the annual World Health Assembly in Geneva. They will be meeting until May 30. The main objective of this year’s confab is to radically extend the organization’s power over healthcare and citizens under the guise of improving “health” and fighting future disease outbreaks in a coordinated global fashion. Critics say it is a dangerous plan to centralize power in a corrupt agency controlled by Beijing.

There are two primary methods of attack. First, using COVID and possible future pandemics as a pretext, the WHO is pushing for a new “International Pandemic Accord.” The scheme was being called a treaty until it became obvious to all involved it would never get two-thirds support in the U.S. Senate, as required for ratification of all treaties. The WHO hopes to have the details worked out by next year’s World Health Assembly.

The second prong in the attack involves amendments to the so-called International Health Regulations, or IHR. Because these are considered mere changes to an existing treaty, globalists at the WHO and in the Biden administration — not to mention the Communist Party of China lurking behind the scenes — also see this as a vehicle for empowering the global “health” apparatus without pesky interference from Congress.

But critics are working on ways to fight back. The Sovereignty Coalition, formed to fight the WHO assault on self-government, brings together a broad alliance of conservative leaders, organizations, and lawmakers united in the effort to preserve and restore national sovereignty. In fact, the coalition is calling for an American exit from the WHO entirely.

Signatories include hundreds of America’s most prominent conservative leaders as well as doctors and other medical professionals. Leading organizations in the medical freedom movement and the broader conservative movement also signed on including Daily Clout, Eagle Forum, Liberty Counsel Action, Tea Party Patriots Action, Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, ConservativeHQ, Act for America, and more.

Last week around 20 lawmakers and leaders held a press conference outside Capitol Hill calling for an end to the WHO’s scheming. Illinois’ own U.S. Representative Mary Miller, a Republican, was among those speaking out. “Our hard-earned taxpayer dollars should not support a globalist organization that is controlled by China, undermines our national sovereignty, and threatens our rights,” Rep. Miller said, echoing the concerns of many of her colleagues and constituents.

“President Trump made the right decision to cut all funding and participation in this organization, and it is foolish for the Biden Administration to place trust in an institution that repeated China’s deceptive narratives regarding the origins of the pandemic in Wuhan,” she added. “I stand proudly with my colleagues in calling for the United States to withdraw from the corrupt WHO. In Congress, I will always work to protect our nation’s sovereignty, preserve our rights and freedoms, and ensure the responsible use of taxpayer dollars.”

Other lawmakers who spoke at the press conference and denounced the WHO and Biden’s support for the power grab included U.S. Representatives Ralph Norman (SC-05), Ronny Jackson (TX-13), Chris Smith (NJ-04), Harriet Hageman (WY), Tim Burchett (TN-02), Brian Babin (TX-36), Andy Biggs (AZ-05) (sponsor of H.R. 79), Kevin Hern (OK-01), Thomas Tiffany (WI-07), Chip Roy (TX-21), Eli Crane (AZ-02),  Paul Gosar (AZ-09),  Lauren Boebert (CO-03), Eric Burlison (MO-07),  Anna Paulina Luna (FL-13) Rep. Dan Bishop (NC-08), Glenn Grothman (WI-06), Clay Higgins (LA-03), and more.

Watch the press conference here:

Sovereignty Coalition co-founders Reggie LittleJohn and Frank Gaffney were there, too. In a statement posted on their website, the leaders and the signatories noted that the WHO was effectively under CCP control and was being used to advance a “post-Constitutional-America and ‘global governance’ dominated by the Party.” “The CCP’s hegemonic ambitions have no place for a powerful United States of America, human freedom or personal sovereignty,” the group explained. The WHO is also doing the bidding of Big Pharma and billionaire population-control zealot Bill Gates, one of the outfits top financiers, the coalition said.

Speaking at the start of the WHO’s annual meeting, former communist terrorist and current WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus insisted that the organization needed even more power. “We cannot simply carry on as we did before,” said Ghebreyesus, who was installed with strongarm tactics by the CCP. “The pandemic accord that member states are now negotiating must be a historic agreement to make a paradigm shift in global health security, recognizing that our fates are interwoven.”

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, former leader of the Socialist International global alliance of communist and socialist political parties, echoed the call for a stronger globalist regime. “I hope the current negotiations on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response result in a strong multilateral approach that saves lives,” said Guterres, who has also been a vocal advocate of the World Economic Forum-led “Great Reset” being opposed by countless millions around the world.

Blasting the WHO’s response to COVID, the Sovereignty Coalition said it was “outrageous” that the Biden administration was scheming to hand over even more power—without even Senate approval. “These accords would effectively repose in Dr. Tedros the authority unilaterally to dictate what constitutes an actual or potential Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) and to order how affected nations must respond,” the coalition said in a statement, noting that these authorities would purport to allow America’s enemies to deprive Americans of their rights.

In light of all the problems with the schemes being negotiated as well as the systemic issues plaguing WHO, the Sovereignty Coalition said enough was enough. “The United States must end its membership in, cease funding of and submitting to the World Health Organization before the WHO is granted the authority effectively to compel compliance with the public health dictates of Dr. Tedros Ghebreyesus or any other unelected, unaccountable international bureaucrat,” the alliance declared.

At the state level, efforts to stop the WHO are gaining steam as well. A new bill in the South Carolina legislature, H.4246, would nullify the power grab by banning any state or local cooperation with the effort. “This is the rightful remedy,” SC Representative Josiah Magnuson told me, blasting the fact that Biden was not even planning to seek the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate as required by the Constitution of all treaties. “If this does go into effect, we’re going to have the framework here to resist.”

Former President Donald Trump removed the U.S. government from the WHO, but Joe Biden promptly rejoined when taking power. Republicans in the U.S. House, though, have the opportunity to defund the global body in the upcoming budget. With outrage surrounding the WHO and its leadership growing rapidly amid the attempted power grab, it may be tough for elected officials in the United States to continue supporting it. The next year will be critical in that battle.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to send a message to your U.S. Representative to encourage them to support legislative actions to withdrawal the U.S. from the The World Health Organization (WHO). This U.N. agency is effectively controlled by Communist Chinese Party and other subversive globalist interests, but it is actively seeking greater, totalitarian control over its member nations. This is a serious threat to our national sovereignty and our individual liberty.

Ask them to co-sponsor H.R. 79, the “WHO Withdrawal Act,” H.R. 343, the “No Taxpayer Funding for the World Health Organization Act,” and S. 444, the “No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act,” to stop the implementation and/or enforcement of the WHO’s proposed pandemic treaty.

Written by Penny Pullen

We cannot remain silent in our disappointment over the move by U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and U.S. Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ) to propose a federal ban on post-15-week abortions.

This proposal – introduced at a time when it has literally zero chance of passing – serves only to put pro-life candidates on the spot during an abortion-heated campaign season. Our candidates are being poorly served already by professional consultants brought in by the GOP leadership and campaign chiefs; dropping an unpassable proposal into the spotlight serves them even worse, pinning them to the wall.

Many states are already adopting stricter limits and even bans on abortion; a weaker federal proposal undercuts their pioneering efforts and state enforcement. And the response by DC sponsors that their bill will treat differently the lives of children in states with stricter policies calls into sharp question the constitutionality of such a proposal.

For so many inexcusable reasons, the proposal becomes a press-release bill, not a serious bid for serious reform. And it is inexcusably divisive within the pro-life community, just weeks before what will likely be a watershed election.

We suggest that if our federal lawmakers want to bring their pro-life convictions into a useful campaign for reform – even at this late date in the legislative process – they focus instead on such reforms as demanding that the Hyde Amendment be re-adopted as a no-compromise requirement for their votes on any spending measures.

And in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s having sent the right to life of unborn children to the states for their widely varying lawmaking, we urge that our federal lawmakers revive now the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act to protect the adolescents in states neighboring abortion havens. The disparate treatment of abortion law by the various states makes this long-languishing proposal now a matter of added urgency.

Another area our federal lawmakers should be addressing is the blocking of Biden Regime regulatory and bureaucratic schemes to push abortion through offering abortions at the VA – a federal issue – and the atrocious pressure coming from such bureaucracies as the Dept. of Health & Human Services, which is shredding conscience protections for medical personnel and finding contorted workarounds to put taxpayers on the hook for the killing of unborn children.

Let the states deal with abortion bans for now. There’s so much going on at the federal level – yes, on abortion – that you could be dealing with. Please, stay in your lane. If you do not rise up now on the Biden Regime’s undermining of the Dobbs ruling and of the right to life, which is in our nation’s founding charter, when will you? Leave the states to do their job. Please.

This article was originally published by Life Advocacy Project and is reprinted here with permission.

Written by Terence P. Jeffrey

Back in 1994, a worried Delaware taxpayer sent a message to his senator. “Please don’t force me to pay for abortions against my conscience,” he said.

Joe Biden sent an unambiguous response.

“I will continue to abide by the same principle that has guided me throughout my 21 years in the Senate: those of us who are opposed to abortion should not be compelled to pay for them,” he wrote.

“As you may know,” Biden continued, “I have consistently — on no fewer than 50 occasions — voted against federal funding of abortions.”

“(T)he government,” Biden said, “should not tell those with strong convictions against abortion, such as you and I, that we must pay for them.”

Today, Biden is the most powerful man in the United States government — and he is demanding that Americans “with strong convictions against abortion” must pay for them with their tax dollars.

This is the moral price Biden was willing to pay to become vice president and then president as the nominee of a party that will not tolerate leaders who insist on defending the innocent unborn.

When Biden ran for president in 2020, he made clear on his campaign website that he favored not only nationwide abortion on demand but also federal funding of it.

“Vice President Biden favors repealing the Hyde Amendment,” his website said. This is the amendment Congress has habitually added to annual appropriations bills over more than four decades to prohibit funding of abortions except in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is endangered.

“Biden will work to codify Roe v. Wade,” said his website, “and his Justice Department will do everything in its power to stop the rash of state laws that so blatantly violate Roe v. Wade.”

Roe, of course, is the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that declared abortion a “right.”

Biden — in 2020 — also said he would: “Restore federal funding for Planned Parenthood.” In 2019, according to its annual report, Planned Parenthood performed 354,871 abortions.

When Biden’s $1.9 trillion COVID-19 bill — the so-called American Rescue Plan — was being considered in the U.S. House, Reps. Jackie Walorski (R-IN), Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), and Virginia Foxx (R-NC), offered a Hyde-type amendment to prevent it from funding abortions. This amendment was co-sponsored by 203 of their colleagues.

“Without Hyde protections in the reconciliation package, over $414 billion in taxpayer dollars could potentially be used to pay for elective abortions or plans that cover elective abortions,” said a statement from Walorski’s office.

But Democrats on the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee rejected the amendment and the House Rules Committee refused to allow it to be considered on the U.S. House floor.

U.S. Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ), co-chair of the Bipartisan Congressional Pro-Life Caucus, then noted in the U.S. House debate on the bill how Biden had flip-flopped on federal funding of abortion. Smith demonstrated this point by quoting from and linking to the letter Biden had written to his constituent in 1994 and a similar letter Biden had authored in 1977.

“Mr. Biden once wrote to constituents explaining his support for laws against funding for abortion by saying it would ‘protect both the woman and her unborn child,'” Smith said.

“I agree,” said Smith.

But Biden no longer agrees with himself.

At the White House press briefing on Feb. 16, Owen Jensen of EWTN asked Biden press secretary Jen Psaki: “We know where President Biden stands on the Hyde Amendment, but that being said, can this administration right now guarantee, if the American Rescue Plan is passed, that no taxpayer dollars will go to the abortion industry?”

“Well, the president’s view of the Hyde Amendment is well known, as you have stated in your question,” Psaki responded in part of her answer.

“He’s shared his view on the Hyde Amendment,” she went on to say. “I don’t think I have anything new for you.”

Jensen pressed her for a direct answer. “Can the administration guarantee those tax dollars won’t be used for abortions?” he asked.

“Well, I think, Owen, as I’ve just noted,” she responded, “three-quarters of the public supports the components of the package, wants to see the pandemic get under control, wants to see people put back to work, vaccines in arms. So, I think that answers your question.”

Psaki would not directly state the plain truth: Yes, Biden’s COVID-19 bill will use tax dollars to pay for abortions.

But she could not deny it — because it does.

When the bill came up in the U.S. Senate on Friday, U.S. Senator James Lankford (R-OK), (for whom this writer’s daughter works) offered a Hyde-type amendment to prevent it from funding abortion. As a procedural matter, the amendment needed 60 votes. It won only 52.

Thus, the U.S. Senate version of the bill funds abortion, too.

As the U.S. Senate was considering it, Archbishop Jose Gomez of Los Angeles, the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, joined eight other leading bishops in issuing a statement.

“For 45 years, the United States Congress — whether controlled by Democrats or Republicans — has maintained that taxpayers should not be forced against their conscience to pay for abortions,” these bishops said.

“We ask all Members of Congress to include the same protections against abortion funding that have been present in every COVID relief bill to date, and every annual spending bill for almost half a century,” they said.

Biden, this nation’s second Catholic president, is now poised to sign a bill that defies this request and forces all American taxpayers to pay for abortions.

Terence P. Jeffrey is the editor in chief of CNSnews.com.
To find out more about him, visit the Creators Syndicate web page.

Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives will hold a vote on or around the anniversary of the murder conviction of late-term abortionist Kermit Gosnell on a marquee bill to ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy because unborn children feel intense pain in abortions. This is the second time Republicans have planned a vote on the major pro-life bill — and this vote is expected to take place this week, possibly Wednesday, the anniversary of Gosnell’s conviction.

U.S. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, a pro-life California Congressman, confirmed the vote to the Weekly Standard.

“Life is precious and we must do everything we can to fight for it and protect it,” said McCarthy, a California Republican. “Our commitment for the House to consider this important legislation has been steadfast and I am proud of the work of our members to prepare this bill for House consideration next week.”

Take ACTION:  Click HERE to send a message to your U.S. Representative asking them to support H.R. 36, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.

You can also call the Capitol Switchboard to ask to be connected to your U.S. Representative’s office at (202) 224-3121.

In January, Congresswoman Renee Ellmers led the charge to sabotage the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act — a move that ultimately forced Republicans to pull the bill from the House floor — because she disagreed with a requirement in the bill that rape be reported to a law enforcement agency before an abortion is performed for rape.

Republican leaders in the U.S. House had planned to hold a monumental vote on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade in January on the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, legislation that bans abortions after 20 weeks based in part on the compelling scientific evidence showing unborn babies feel intense pain at that point, if not earlier.

However, several Republicans who have pro-life voting records and voted for the bill the last time around, publicly led by Rep. Renee Ellmers, sabotaged the bill by objecting to the provision allowing abortions in cases of rape or incest only if the rape were reported to law enforcement. Ellmers and the lawmakers who worked with her, threatened to vote against the bill or kill it by siding with Democrats to kill it. Although Ellmers publicly indicated she would vote for the bill, privately she painted another picture and she and other members forced House Republican leaders to pull the bill and rework the language.

After months of wrangling over language, with Ellmers and some other members of Congress siding with her for language that was a more expansive rape exception, House Republicans have finalized the language of the bill in a way that has the support of Ellmers and her colleagues, the backing of pro-life groups and in a manner that should result in a strong pro-life vote that paves the way for Senate consideration.

According to pro-life sources who spoke with LifeNews, the rape exception language will be airtight by requiring some sort of documented medical treatment or counseling 48 hours prior to the abortion (so hopefully the mother has a further chance to weigh abortion alternatives). In addition, such treatment or counseling must be provided by physicians or counselors that are outside of the abortion industry. In cases of rape or incest of a minor, the abuse must first be reported to either social service or law enforcement.

As pro-life sources have informed LifeNews, other new provisions of the bill that strengthen in include a born-alive infant protection requirement that requires a second doctor be present and prepared to provide  care to the child if he or she is born alive and that the child must receive the same level of care as would any other premature infant. The baby must then be transported and admitted to a hospital.  The woman is also empowered with a right to sue if the law is not followed, and is provided with an informed consent form that notifies her of the age of her baby and the requirements under the law.

Abortionists are explicitly required to follow state mandatory reporting laws and state parental involvement laws.  Finally, abortionists are required to report any late abortions done under the exceptions to the Center for Disease Control and such data will be compiled into an annual public report to ensure accountability.

Top pro-life advocates are strongly supporting the final version of the bill up for a vote next week, according to the Weekly Standard. Two major pro-life groups have already signed off on the revised bill.

“We will have even stronger support than we did in the last Congress,” said Rep. Chris Smith of New Jersey, a leading pro-life advocate in the House. “It will be good to have a truly unified pro-life conference.”

National Right to Life Committee president Carol Tobias worked closely with Republican leadership staff members and met Thursday with McCarthy. “I felt very comfortable working with leadership staff,” said Tobias. “We were working as allies.”

“We are thankful to our pro-life allies on the Hill, including House GOP leadership and the Congressional Pro-Life Women’s Caucus, who have tirelessly worked to bring this bill to a vote,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List. “This process has yielded a strong bill which we expect to pass next week with enthusiastic bipartisan support.”

Sponsoring Congressman Trent Franks of Arizona says the bill has the potential to save thousands of babies from abortion.

In a statement, Franks told LifeNews: “More than 18,000 ‘very late term’ abortions are performed every year on perfectly healthy unborn babies in America. These are innocent and defenseless children who can not only feel pain, but who can survive outside of the womb in most cases, and who are torturously killed without even basic anesthesia.   Many of them cry and scream as they die, but because it is amniotic fluid going over their vocal cords instead of air, we don’t hear them.”

Douglas Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee says several states have already passed the bill.

“The Franks-Blackburn bill is based on the NRLC model legislation that has been enacted in 10 states, and it reflects a policy that is broadly supported in national public opinion polls.  In the new Congress, every member of the House and Senate will go on record on whether to permit the continued killing of pain-capable unborn children, in the sixth month and later,” he told LifeNews.

A national poll by The Polling Company found that, after being informed that there is scientific evidence that unborn children are capable of feeling pain at least by 20 weeks, 64% would support a law banning abortion after 20 weeks, unless the mother’s life was in danger.   Only 30% said they would oppose such a law.

A November 2014 poll from Quinnipiac found that 60 percent of Americans support legislation limiting abortions after 20 weeks, including 56 percent of Independents and 46 percent of Democrats.

During the hearing on the 20-week ban when the U.S. House approved it previously, former abortion practitioner Anthony Levatino told members of the committee the gruesome details of his former abortion practice and how he became pro-life following the tragic automobile accident of his child.

Another bombshell dropped during the hearing came from Dr. Maureen Condic, who is Associate Professor of Neurobiology and Adjunct Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Utah School of Medicine. She testified that the unborn child is capable of reacting to pain as early as 8-10 weeks. This is when most abortions in America take place.

The bill relies on the science of fetal pain to establish a Constitutional reason for Congress to ban abortions late in pregnancy. The science behind the concept of fetal pain is fully established and Dr. Steven Zielinski, an internal medicine physician from Oregon, is one of the leading researchers into it. He first published reports in the 1980s to validate research showing evidence for it.

He has testified before Congress that an unborn child could feel pain at “eight-and-a-half weeks and possibly earlier” and that a baby before birth “under the right circumstances, is capable of crying.”

He and his colleagues Dr. Vincent J. Collins and Thomas J. Marzen were the top researchers to point to fetal pain decades ago. Collins, before his death, was Professor of Anesthesiology at Northwestern University and the University of Illinois and author of Principles of Anesthesiology, one of the leading medical texts on the control of pain.

“The functioning neurological structures necessary to suffer pain are developed early in a child’s development in the womb,” they wrote.

“Functioning neurological structures necessary for pain sensation are in place as early as 8 weeks, but certainly by 13 1/2 weeks of gestation. Sensory nerves, including nociceptors, reach the skin of the fetus before the 9th week of gestation. The first detectable brain activity occurs in the thalamus between the 8th and 10th weeks. The movement of electrical impulses through the neural fibers and spinal column takes place between 8 and 9 weeks gestation. By 13 1/2 weeks, the entire sensory nervous system functions as a whole in all parts of the body,” they continued.

With Zielinski and his colleagues the first to provide the scientific basis for the concept of fetal pain, Dr. Kanwaljeet Anand has provided further research to substantiate their work.

One leading expert in the field of fetal pain, Dr. Kanwaljeet S. Anand at the University of Tennessee, stated in his expert report commissioned by the U.S. Department of Justice, “It is my opinion that the human fetus possesses the ability to experience pain from 20 weeks of gestation, if not earlier, and the pain perceived by a fetus is possibly more intense than that perceived by term newborns or older children.”

“The neural pathways are present for pain to be experienced quite early by unborn babies,” explains Steven Calvin, M.D., perinatologist, chair of the Program in Human Rights Medicine, University of Minnesota, where he teaches obstetrics.

Dr. Colleen A. Malloy, Assistant Professor, Division of Neonatology at Northwestern University in her testimony before the House Judiciary Committee in May 2012 said, “[w]hen we speak of infants at 22 weeks LMP [Note: this is 20 weeks post fertilization], for example, we no longer have to rely solely on inferences or ultrasound imagery, because such premature patients are kicking, moving, reacting, and developing right before our eyes in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.”

“In today’s medical arena, we resuscitate patients at this age and are able to witness their ex-utero growth and development. Medical advancement and technology have enabled us to improve our ability to care for these infants…In fact, standard of care for neonatal intensive care units requires attention to and treatment of neonatal pain,” Dr. Malloy testified. She continued, “[t]hus, the difference between fetal and neonatal pain is simply the locale in which the pain occurs. The receiver’s experience of the pain is the same. I could never imagine subjecting my tiny patients to horrific procedures such as those that involve limb detachment or cardiac injection.”

This article was originally posted at the LifeNews.com website.

Nurses in a New Jersey hospital who refused to participate in abortions will be able to keep their jobs under an agreement reached in federal court. The twelve nurses had been threatened with termination from their jobs by the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey if they failed to assist in abortion procedures. TheAlliance Defense Fund (ADF) had filed suit on behalf of the pro-life nurses in defense of their conscience rights under federal law.

Under the agreement reached with hospital administrators, the nurses will no longer be required to undergo abortion training or assist in any way in the performance of abortions. They will only be called upon to be involved in an abortion procedure if a mother faces a life-threatening emergency. The University of Medicine and Dentistry may not discriminate or retaliate against the nurses because of their pro-life convictions by replacing them or reducing their hours.

In September the group of nurses were abruptly informed without warning that they were to undergo abortion training in order to assist in abortion procedures. When they objected to having any involvement in the destruction of unborn children based on moral grounds, they were informed that their religious convictions were of no consequence.

Fe Esperanza Vinoya, who spoke out on behalf of the nurses, says they were heartbroken by the edict. “We don’t consider nursing our jobs, we consider it our calling. Ours is a profession of caring. We felt betrayed–we felt a great sense of sadness in all of us.”

Vinoya was further repulsed when she was curtly told by one of her supervisors: “All you have to do is catch the baby’s head. Don’t worry, it’s already dead.” Vinoya found the explanation revolting. “As a Christian, I don’t believe in abortion. I think it’s murder.”

Pro-life U.S. Representiative Chris Smith (R-NJ) applauded the outcome. “[The hospital’s] coercive abortion policy was a blatant violation of the civil rights of its health care professionals. The right to conscience is a federally protected fundamental right that cannot be abridged, undermined or violated in any way.”

Federal laws prohibit any health care facility which accepts federal funds from compelling any medical professional from participating in abortion if it violates their individual conscience. New Jersey state law also includes similar conscience protections.

U.S. Rep. Smith commended the nurses for putting their jobs on the line to stand up for their personal convictions. “Due to the brave voices of these twelve nurses, the hospital has finally agreed to respect their rights. These nurses may now continue to provide
compassionate life-affirming care without being complicit in the destruction of innocent human life.”

Not surprisingly, the American Civil Liberties Union isn’t happy. A spokesman for the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project says they do not support civil liberties for medical professionals. Brigitte Amiri says that nurses have a responsibility to place their duties over any personal “ideology,” and that failure to perform abortions amounts to “discrimination” against women.

U.S. District Judge Jose Linares had issued a temporary injunction prohibiting the University of Medicine and Dentistry from requiring the nurses to assist in abortions or taking any adverse employment action against them for their refusal to do so. Linares says he will retain jurisdiction over the case to ensure that the agreement is enforced.

The nurses expressed relief over the settlement. “I’m a nurse so I can help people, not help kill people,” said Beryl Otieno-Negoje. “No health professional should be forced to choose between assisting abortion or being penalized at work.”

Vinoya says she was sustained through the ordeal by the prayers and support of her fellow church members at Life Christian Church. She says she was especially encouraged by her own children. “The day we received the new orders my eight year old son was learning about the Ten Commandments in church. He recited the Sixth Commandment — that we are not to kill anyone. I just cried. I knew that God had given me hope and that He was on our side.”

Vinoya says she was also encouraged by her thirteen year-old son who was working on a school project on the subject of religious freedom. “I realized that that was exactly what this was all about, and that it was being violated right in front of us. We knew this would be a David versus Goliath battle. But we all know who won.”

A great way to help IFI protect the time-honored values such as the sanctity of life, natural marriage and religious liberty is to become an IFI Sustaining Partner. By pledging $10, $25, $50 or $100 a month (or whatever you can afford) to IFI, you will be ensuring that our work and ministry stays strong so that we can staunchly defend and strengthen your values in the Land of Lincoln.

Click HERE to make that pledge.

Thank you!

On March for Life, Eve of State of the Union, Pro-Life Leader Calls for Grassroots to Seize Momentum in 112th Congress

WASHINGTON, Jan. 24, 2011 /Christian Newswire/ — Today, in her first annual State of the Unborn video address, Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser called the 38th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court Roe v. Wade decision a unique opportunity for pro-life America. The address, available at www.sba-list.org/stateoftheunborn, coincides with the annual March for Life in Washington, DC.

“It’s not just a movement anymore. All the polls show this is pro-life America now,” Dannenfelser said. “It’s time for us to flex the muscle that we just flexed in this election and do everything we can in this Congress to protect human lives… I invite you to go to our website, www.StopAbortionFunding.com, and, if you’re not marching today, please take a moment to pray and act. Then, tomorrow night, watch that State of the Union message. See if the president decides to follow up on his promise [that tax dollars not be used to fund abortion in health care] because right now is the moment, a moment in time which we have not seen since 1973, where we have the momentum. We have the power. We have all the ability to save children’s lives by stopping the funding of their deaths. When he gives his State of the Union message, it should certainly include how he has or has not lived up to that promise.”

Dannenfelser’s address comes on the heels of the introduction of three bills aiming to end taxpayer funding of abortion – the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” sponsored by the Co-Chairs of the Congressional Pro-Life Caucus, Reps. Chris Smith (R-NJ) and Dan Lipinski (D-IL), the “Protect Life Act,” sponsored by pro-life champion Rep. Joe Pitts (PA-16), Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health, and the “Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act,” sponsored by Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN).

The “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act” creates a government-wide statutory prohibition on taxpayer funding of abortion. The bill also codifies the Hyde amendment which ensures that no federal funds pay for abortion under the Labor Health and Human Services Appropriations Bill along with several other pro-life riders that currently have to be considered every year. The “Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act” ensures that tax dollars are not sent to abortion providers under Title X family planning grants. The “Protect Life Act” amends the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) to ensure that no federal funds pay for elective abortion, prevents any federal agency from mandating abortion and protects the conscience of healthcare workers.

More than 40,000 pro-life activists have signed the SBA List’s Stop Abortion Funding petition lobbying to end taxpayer funding of abortion and abortion providers.

Dannenfelser will be available for comment on-site during the annual March for Life on Monday, January 24. Contact Kerry Brown at 703-470-1926 if you would like to speak with her.

The Susan B. Anthony List spent $11 million during the 2010 midterm election cycle. Overall, the SBA List was involved in 90 races including 62 wins and 28 losses. Successes included: defeating 15 of 20 so-called “pro-life” Democrats who voted for abortion funding in the health care reform bill; increasing the number of pro-life women in the House by 70 percent; filling the void of pro-life women in the U.S. Senate and increasing the number of pro-life women governors from one to four.

For further information, please contact Kerry Brown at (703) 470-1926

Introduce IFI to your friends, church or civic group

Serve as a contact person by receiving information from IFI and distributing it to others or posting it on bulletin boards. You can keep current by signing up for IFI E-Alerts and IFI E-Newsletters and be registering and checking in on our Take Action center.

Host a gathering of friends for a private evening with the IFI team.

Staff members are available to speak at your church or group function about IFI’s work at the Illinois Capitol, with parents working against liberal indoctrination at their public schools, and a variety of other issues including marriage, fatherhood, and current family policy initiatives.