The U.S. House of Representatives has scheduled an October 3rd vote on H.R. 36, a bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks up until the time of birth. The U.S. House passed a similar bill in 2015. During the debate on the bill, Congressman Sean Duffy (R-WI) gave one of the most impassioned speeches for protecting the lives of innocent pre-born children.

“This is not a debate about abortion or even non-abortion, pro-life or pro-abortion,” Duffy said. “Those who are even pro-abortion agree that these tactics are unacceptable. They have no place in our society, and that federal tax dollars should actually go to fund an institution that harvests baby body parts for sale is absolutely asinine.”

“What do we stand for in this institution if we do not stand-up for the most defenseless and voiceless among us?” concluded Duffy.

According to Lifenews:

During the hearing on the last bill, 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.

Sadly, when it was brought to a vote in the Senate (where the Democrats then held a majority) it was defeated via filibuster.

U.S. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy hosted a press conference yesterday providing details of when the House will vote on the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 36). McCarthy was joined by pro life U.S. Representatives Diane Black (TN-06), Trent Franks (AZ-08), Vicky Hartzler (MO-04), and and other pro-life leaders such as Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser.

The family of Micah Pickering was also present at the press conference, according to Lifenews. Micah Pickering is a miracle baby who survived after being born prematurely at 20 weeks. Today, Micah is a happy, healthy five year old.

SBA List Marjorie Dannenfelser stated the faces like Micah help bring this issue to life in many people’s minds.

“Micah really is the real face of this issue,” she urged. “Because it’s really easy to talk about it, the abortion issue, in abstract theoretical terms. But when you really have come across … and see a young man running around full of energy and love, you realize this is not any other political issue.”

U.S. Representative Trent Franks made similar references to Micah, according to Lifenews. “When Micah stands there,” he said, “you can’t ignore him. He’s as real as it gets.”

In a post press conference interview with MRC Culture Associate Culture Editor, Katie Yoder, Representative Franks also stated:

“I understand that mothers are in a great challenge in these circumstances and my heart is so deeply with them, but there’s nothing liberating about taking the life of a child. It doesn’t liberate the mother. It only puts her in a deeper heartache in the long run.

I’m convinced that if America will look at this as it is, and say ‘Okay, what’s the real question here? Does this thing kill a baby or not?’ If it doesn’t, then okay, it’s no big deal,” he concluded. “But if it really does kill a little helpless human baby, and it’s done that 60 million times now, isn’t it about time we changed direction?”

Representative Franks introduced the legislation back in January, and also proposed legislation in July in an effort to try to save the now deceased Charlie Gard.

Take ACTION:  Click HERE to send a message to your U.S. Representatives to ask him/her to support H.R. 36, the 20-week abortion ban, also known as the “Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.”  The U.S. House is scheduled to vote on the bill on Tuesday, October 3rd.

It is inexcusable, in the light the pain these babies feel and the broad public support for such bans, that such a federal ban does not already exist.

IFI depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

-and, please-

It’s one of those issues that many lawmakers and perhaps even Governor Bruce Rauner don’t want you to think about. That is, state taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood. But life activists are keeping Planned Parenthood on the moral and political radar with protests that call attention to the organization’s big abortion business which includes the harvesting and sale of aborted baby body parts. And just think, its all subsidized by your paycheck.

Ray Comfort’s short movie 180 continues to influence people to turn away from abortion.

180 is the story of eight people who were all for abortion, but in a matter of minutes or seconds change their views to become pro-life. The movie has impacted the lives of many people throughout the world, and is now in 20 languages. Ray Comfort of Living Waters Ministries tells OneNewsNow about a woman who viewed the film and was inspired from that to go to a Tempe, Arizona, abortion mill and try to convince women not to abort.

“She was wearing a 180 t-shirt and she talked to a young lady who was going to have an abortion,” Comfort says. “That woman changed her mind after talking with her and went ahead and had twins, and it’s so exciting to see this lady sitting their holding those twins as she wears a 180 t-shirt.”

Comfort says because of the movie and God’s grace there is a mountain of stories of babies saved and people converting to the cause of life rather than death.

“Last time I checked, the page had nearly 4.3 million views,” he notes.

He is reminded of the tremendous impact of the Billy Graham crusades, with all the logistics of getting perhaps 100,000 people into a stadium, the hard work and expense in accomplishing it.

“And here with a click of the button we can reach 4.3 million people,” he adds. “Also, we sold over a million DVDs of 180 that are being distributed into universities and learning institutions across the country.”

Pro-life counselors with portable units are showing the film to abortion clients and changing minds about abortion.

Watch the video now!  Click HERE.

 This article was originally published at the OneNewsNow.com blog.

The Pro-Life Action League Face the Truth Tour 2012 kicked off Friday, July 7, in Joliet and Shorewood with pictures representing the nearly 4,000 children whose lives are legally terminated through abortion every day. With its 13th annual tour, organizers say they are “eager for participants to join us on the front lines showing our fellow citizens the truth about abortion.”

 Face the Truth has spread across the nation since the League launched its first tour in 1999 in Wisconsin. Established under the inspiration of Pastor Matt Trewhella, pro-life activists across the nation have eagerly adopted this method of educating the public about the horror of abortion. 

Eric Scheidler, executive director of the Pro-Life Action League, reports that past Face the Truth tours have generated immediate positive results.

“We’ve had women come to us and thank us,” he explained. “With their abortions already scheduled, they saw our pictures and it changed their hearts.”

Scheidler said that is why the Pro-Life Action League continues to organize what he calls, “an important public education campaign.”

The Pro-Life Action League uses graphic pictures to get out its message. Some people express concern that the images may cause emotional harm to young children.

“We too wish it were possible for children to be shielded from the reality not only of abortion but of so many of life’s tragedies,” the Pro-Life Action League website states. “Many of us who hold these pictures first saw them as children. We found the pictures gruesome and saddening, but their only lasting effect was to impress us with a deep sense of the injustice of abortion.”

Scheidler notes the organizations controversial tactic has consistently generated some level of offended opposition. 

“The reality is that if people see the horrible truth of abortion it makes them uncomfortable and upset, and they are more likely to do something to try and prevent it,” said Scheidler.

Pro-life witnesses will line the roads at selected locations through the month of July, displaying pictures of healthy newborn babies juxtaposed with huge graphic photographs of aborted babies, visually exposing the tragedy of their tiny broken bodies.

See www.prolifeaction.org/truth/tours.php for a complete list of tour locations in Illinois and elsewhere in the U.S.

Stand With Us

Your support of our work and ministry is always much needed and greatly appreciated. Your promotion of our emails on Facebook, Twitter, your own email network, and prayer for financial support is a huge part of our success in being a strong voice for the pro-life, pro-marriage and pro-family message here in the Land of Lincoln.  Please consider standing with us.

Click here to support Illinois Family Action (IFA). Contributions to IFA are not tax-deductible but give us the most flexibility in engaging critical legislative and political issues.

Click here to support Illinois Family Institute (IFI). Contributions to IFI are tax-deductible and support our educational efforts.

You can also send a gift to P.O. Box 88848, Carol Stream, IL  60188.

When a doctor hands your child a death sentence, and the family must make a decision about the future, nothing is more personal or traumatic. It is every parent’s nightmare, and increasingly it has become more common.

With all the blessings of testing and technology, comes with it, information that is not always welcome or accurate.

The closest brush I have had with this type of situation was through a close friend. I hadn’t heard from my friend Julie for several months, when she called, I could feel her pain through the line. She told me through tears, how she had just returned from her prenatal appointment. That afternoon the doctor informed Julie that her baby had Trisomy 13, a defect, he said, that would leave the baby so badly deformed he would not survive birth; if he did, he would not live but a few hours longer. He warned that the financial and emotional toll on the family would be devastating. There was obviously only one answer: abort the baby as soon as possible.

Due to the complication of being a few months into the pregnancy, the doctor offered to drive Julie across state lines to have the abortion. The pressure Julie and her husband experienced was intense.

This was not her first pregnancy. The experiences of having a child grow inside of her, then give birth and hold a miracle in her arms and to her breast, made the thought of losing this child unbearable but destroying him, unthinkable.

The couple drew a line in the sand; there would be no abortion. The compromise: there would be no medical intervention if the baby got into trouble during the birth process. After all, he was expected to die.

Another mother chose not to take the doctors advice, Pam Tebow, mother of Tim Tebow, the prize-winning quarterback for the University of Florida. Although, we don’t yet know exactly what his mother was told, we do know, what she was advised–to have an abortion.

This year’s Super Bowl Sunday will air a commercial of Tim’s mother’s story. Although no one has been able to see the ad, abortion advocates have come out in full force to decry the injustice this commercial will do to women’s reproductive rights.

Here’s the thing–Julie’s baby didn’t die. He didn’t even need the doctors to save him. The boy was born healthy. Her right to choose to ignore the doctors advice and give birth preserved Julie’s reproductive rights.

I purpose it’s time to take a stand on what it really means to have the right to choose and stand for real reproductive rights. The right to choose is a right to actually choose in favor of a child’s life.

Julie was told that there are no survivors of Trisomy 13. One would assume that the diagnosis of her son was wrong. Surprisingly, there are hundreds of other cases where the diagnosis was right, and the baby was born. They are wonderful examples of the joy that comes with life–if not only to their parents, to everyone they meet.

Are these children going to follow in Tim Tebow’s shoes? Probably not. But that does not make them any less valuable.

Pam Tebow’s story is a message to every woman being pressured to end a pregnancy that the doctor doesn’t want. It’s a message of hope, strength and courage, far greater than anything we will see played out on the field that day.

Help expand our reach by forwarding this email to like-minded family and friends.

Click HERE to make a donation to the Illinois Family Institute.

The wife of the highly controversial late-term abortionist Kermit Gosnell has plead guilty in the performance of ghastly illegal abortions on viable unborn children at a Philadelphia abortion clinic.

Pearl Gosnell entered guilty pleas in federal court on charges of participating in an illegal late-term abortion, conspiracy, and participating in a corrupt organization.

Gosnell’s husband was indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of first-degree murder in the killing of seven viable preborn children and the death of a woman who underwent a botched abortion.

Gosnell, who has no formal obstetrical training, has been accused of delivering viable children alive in the sixth, seventh, and eighth months of pregnancy. He then allegedly killed the children by using a scissors to sever their spinal cords.

Federal prosecutors described Gosnell’s Women’s Medical Society clinic as a “house of horrors.” Investigators discovered the remains of aborted children in milk jugs and cat food containers. They also found shelves lined with jars containing the severed feet of unborn children. They also found blood-stained floors and furniture, and said the facility smelled of urine.

Gosnell’s wife acknowledged that she assisted Gosnell with abortions on Sundays. She admitted that she “helped do the instruments” in the operating room despite having no medical training. Pearl Gosnell joins six other employees who have plead guilty to various charges involving the late-term abortion mill.

One of those employees, Tina Baldwin, plead guilty to having her fifteen year-old daughter administer anesthetics to women receiving abortions despite the fact that neither one had any medical training.

Yet another employee who plead guilty, Lynda Williams, was hired by Gosnell to clean operating room instruments. Soon she was performing ultrasounds and anesthetizing abortion patients. She was charged with administering lethal doses of Demerol and other drugs to Karnamaya Mongar, who died of cardiac arrest.

Gosnell’s clinic had not been inspected by Pennsylvania health officials for seventeen years. The Pennsylvania General Assembly has advanced new legislation to strengthen regulation of the state’s abortion facilities.

LifeNews.com reports that one of the legislators, Pennsylvania State Representative Margo Davidson (D-Upper Darby), offered some personal testimony during the debate. Representative Davidson shared that her 22-year old cousin, Semika Shaw, died as a result of another botched abortion at Gosnell’s clinic.

This is why it is so very important to support legislation to require that abortion clinics in Illinois meet basic safety regulations of other similar outpatient treatment centers.  (They have never been regulated.)

Click HERE TO SUPPORT Illinois Family Institute.
As little as $60 goes a long way toward protecting your values in Illinois!
Sign up as an IFI Ministry Partner for just $60/year, which is just $5 per month.

A new national opinion survey reveals growing support for the pro-life viewpoint on the subject of abortion. That survey, conducted by the Gallup Organization, shows a decisive majority believe that unborn children should be protected under the law.

Sixty-one percent of those surveyed said they believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances or legal only under certain circumstances. Thirty-seven percent of respondents believe abortion should be legal under all circumstances or most circumstances.

Under the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions, abortion is currently legal in the United States under all circumstances.

Support for providing legal protection to preborn children was consistent regardless of age or gender. Sixty-one percent of men and 60 percent of women said all or most abortions should be illegal. Pro-life views were also expressed by 59 percent of those in the 18-34 age category, 58 percent of those aged 35-54, and 64 percent of those over the age of 55.

In its analysis of the results, the Gallup Organization provided this assessment: “The results make it clear that, despite their labeling of their own abortion views, a majority of Americans clearly not only oppose abortion and believe it to be a morally improper ‘choice,’ but they believe the legal status of abortions should change, and all or virtually all abortions should be prohibited.”

The Gallup organization even offered the pro-life movement some advice: “Pro-life groups need to educate Americans on what constitutes a pro-life position — and to encourage them to call themselves pro-life when they want all or almost all abortions made illegal.”

Help expand our reach
by forwarding this email to like-minded family and friends.

Click HERE to make a donation to the Illinois Family Institute.

NARAL Pro-Choice America, an infamous pro-abortion organization, is described by Fortune Magazine as “one of the top 10 advocacy groups in America.” NARAL Pro-Abortion America recently published its annual Status of Women’s Reproductive Rights in the United States report. According to this vehemently anti-life group, the United States received a “D” grade for so-called “reproductive rights.”

The report not only graded the nation but also graded states individually. The report card uses a point system based on a n assessment of governors, laws, access to contraceptives, access to abortions, spousal and parental consent, “post viability abortion restrictions” on abortions, state constitutional guarantees of abortion, “contraceptive equity” (a euphemism for state-subsidized contraceptives), and the codification of Roe v. Wadein state law.

The “D” given to our nation means that our federal laws tend to lean pro-life. Those of us who believe that life is sacred from conception to natural death look forward to the day that NARAL assigns the United States an “F.”

The report explains that both state restrictions and federal “anti-choice” laws determine the nationwide grade. These laws include the Federal Abortion Ban, signed into law in 2003 by President George W. Bush; the Federal Refusal Clause of the 2004 Abortion Non-Discrimination Act, which protects health care practitioners who oppose abortion; and abortion restrictions for U.S. military women.

This relatively good news, however, does not extend to the Land of Lincoln. In fact, NARAL lauds Illinois’ state constitution for providing “greater protection for a woman’s right to choose than the U.S. Constitution.” (The U.S. Constitution neither explicitly nor implicitly guarantees the “right” to abort an unborn baby.)

Additionally, NARAL lists our state’s top executive, Pat Quinn (D), as “pro-choice,” the Illinois Senate and Illinois House are listed as “mixed-choice,” however; the Illinois General Assembly is led by abortion supporters Senate President John Cullerton (D-Chicago) and Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan (D-Chicago).

NARAL enumerates several anti-life laws in Illinois, which include requiring health-insurance plans that cover prescription medication to provide the same coverage for contraception, requiring pharmacies to dispense birth control, and providing access to “family planning” to low-income women through Medicaid. The report also highlights the long-litigated case to enforce Illinois’ 1995 Parental Notification Act, which remains in legal limbo and unenforced.

The NARAL report underscores the unacceptable reality that Illinois’ laws and far too many lawmakers favor abortion. After the tabulation of points, NARAL ranks Illinois as the 19th most anti-life state in the nation — with North Dakota ranking 50th and California placing 1st in this dubious competition. NARAL also gave the state of Washington an “A+,” while Maine, Oregon, Maryland, and Connecticut received an “A.” States that received an “A-” are Alaska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York and Vermont.

The states that received a failing grade from NARAL, thus being the safest for the unborn, are Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Virginia.

Psalm 139:13-16: For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother’s womb. I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; marvelous are Your works, and that my soul knows very well. My frame was not hidden from You, when I was made in secret, and skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed. And in Your book they all were written, the days fashioned for me, when as yet there were none of them.

‘Some people say that life begins at birth. Others say that it begins at conception. But my God is so pro-life that He said “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb.”‘ – Pastor Luke J. Robinson

January 22, 1973 brought a sinister welcome to abortion on demand in America. The Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade was a wake up call for the church. Demonstrations and organizations sprung up like the spring grass. But, in the 37 years that have passed, it seems many don’t bother themselves with the disturbing fact that children are being murdered in our backyards. Protests take time. Volunteering to pray in front of abortion mills is embarrassing. Life Chain Sunday usually interferes with a good football game. And it is just too cold to march in January on the anniversary of the Roe decision.

To me, the apathy is appalling. Human life is precious. Most Christians say they are “pro-life,” but what are they doing to stand against the tide? Can we not see the impact of the proverbial “slippery slope” on our culture? How can we forget the demise of the children? Why do so many pastors ignore preaching on this issue? Who will defend the weak?

If we continue to ignore what is happening, there may come a day when doctors evaluate the value of live births. They may come up with a quantitative way to assess whether or not a child is worthy to live:

-A child’s home life (HL)
-Potential contribution to society (CS)
-Physical natural endowment and physical condition at birth (NE)

They may combine these factors into some bizarre mathematical equation and come up with a Quality of Life Index (QL). If a child scores above this mark, they may then be deemed worthy to live. Fall below that mark, and they will be left to die.

Science fiction? Think again. Such a formula [(HL + CS) * NE = QL] was used by Children’s Hospital of Oklahoma, in Oklahoma City from 1977 to 1982 to evaluate children born with Spina Bifida. During this period, 24 children were determined to be better off dead. And they were left to die.

This story is important to me. You see, my wife, Stacy, was born with Spina Bifida in the 60’s, the day after her birth mother, Ginger, turned sixteen. Ginger, was one of eight children-the oldest in the household. No doubt being brought up in a home full of little ones helped develop in this young mother an understanding and appreciation for the life growing within her womb-because when faced with a crisis pregnancy, what she chose for Stacy was life. Granted, the choice was made a little easier by the fact that it was still illegal to murder a child in the womb. But even in that day there were ways to “terminate a pregnancy,” code word for killing a child. But, Ginger chose life for the baby she carried!

Ginger was allowed to hold and rock Stacy during brief visits to the hospital during her infancy. My wife was even baptized in her birth mother’s christening gown. Sadly, because Stacy was so young, she has no recollection of these short meetings.

Stacy was placed into the family of her adoptive parents when she was two years old. By God’s grace, this young couple chose to take on a child who was past infancy, loaded with hefty medical bills, and facing future difficult surgeries. Yet, despite all that, they brought Stacy home and called her their own. Years later, when God captured the heart of my wife, He revealed to her the providential Hand that had protected and guided her throughout her life.

Soon after her twenty-first birthday, after a series of incredible events, Stacy was introduced to her birth grandparents and all of her birth mother’s siblings, nieces, nephews, aunts, and uncles. She even had the opportunity to know her great-grandmother. Stacy was not able to meet her birth-mother. Ironically, Ginger was twenty-one years old when she died in a tragic automobile accident – the same age Stacy was when she was reunited with her birth-family.

Since that time, not only has Stacy grown to appreciate her adoptive parents in new ways, she has also grown close to her birth family-especially her grandparents. When asked about her thoughts on God’s providential hand in her life, she says this:

“I stand amazed and humbled that God spared my life; and, by His grace, He gave me the chance to raise ten beautiful children for His glory.”

When I gaze upon our children, I marvel at the way God weaved His thread of Providence throughout the intricate fabric of Stacy’s life. And yes, I am thankful for the precious gift of that life-a gift that is continuing into future generations.

This gift of life, given by God, is stolen from so many. In our human deception, we are too often convinced by the Enemy that some precious souls are not fit to live. Some children are conceived during an “inconvenient” time of life; and, since the child is often not even considered human yet, murder is treated as a form of “birth control.” Other times, we are persuaded to believe that the life of the mother is more important than the life of the child, and a precious life is snuffed out. Other times, even live babies outside the womb-at least partially outside-are not safe, and children are butchered as they are being delivered.

May we continue to fight for the sanctity of all life. May we view it in the pre-born, the handicapped, the elderly, the helpless, and the infirmed as a gift from the Lord. It is the God-breathed spirit of our Heavenly Father (Genesis 2:7) that gives quality to life. Such worth is not determined by a doctor or by the state. And it cannot be stolen from them without consequence – for their blood cries out to God (Genesis 4:10).

This Sunday marks the annual Life Chain, a silent protest against the practice of abortion on demand. It only takes an hour of your time to stand, side by side, with others in prayer against this national holocaust. Are you willing to make this investment for life?

Those who will do anything possible to quash dissent regarding the issue of abortion were foiled once again on Wednesday, August 18, 2010. The case against David Avignone, an MBA student at Chicago’s Loyola University, was dropped by the City of Chicago. Avignone was originally charged with disorderly conduct due to his alleged violation of a controversial ordinance referred to as a “Bubble Zone”. The ordinance applies outside local abortion clinics to prohibit approaching within eight feet of a person to present a leaflet, sign or oral message to that person. Avignone was arrested while praying the rosary in front of a near north side Planned Parenthood abortion mill.

“We are pleased that for the second time, the City of Chicago has dismissed the false charges of disorderly conduct against a man who was properly and legally exercising his First Amendment rights on the public way,” said Peter Breen, in a statement issued by the Chicago-based Thomas More Society. Breen is the organization’s Executive Director and legal counsel.

“We hope these two baseless cases involving alleged ‘Bubble Zone’ ‘infractions’ show the Chicago City Council why it should repeal this controversial ordinance altogether and cease efforts to scare pro-life people away from Planned Parenthood,” continued Breen who defended Avignone in the case.

The Thomas More Society won an historic Supreme Court decision where abortion facilities attempted to restrict any kind of sidewalk counseling, demonstrations or expressions of First Amendment free speech near facilities which provide abortion services. In the case of NOW v. Scheidler, the nation’s highest court ruled that the Pro-Life Action, headed by Joe Scheidler, was not in violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. The Thomas More Society’s victory cleared the way for sidewalk counseling and protests in front of abortion clinics. However, many believe the City of Chicago with its “Bubble Zone” ordinance is attempting to circumvent the Supreme Court decision in the Scheidler case.

The case against Avignone is the third “Bubble Zone” case, all of which have been dismissed. The decision by the City of Chicago not to pursue the case against Avignone and two others who were previously charged with violating the “Bubble Zone” ordinance was a good one in the opinion of most experts in constitutional law.

The Gallup released the results of a new survey confirming, for the third time in the last year, that more Americans call themselves pro-life than “pro-choice” on abortion. That’s enough for the respected polling firm to say a pro-life majority is the “new normal” in the United States.

According to a May 3-6 Gallup poll, 47 percent of Americans say they are pro-life on abortion versus 45 percent who say they are “pro-choice,” supporting legal abortions.

This is nearly identical to the 47% to 46% division Gallup found last July, which was down from the 51-42 percent split favoring the pro-life position last May.

Because this is the third consecutive time Gallup has found more Americans taking the pro-life position, the polling firm calls the results “a real change in public opinion.”

Looking at the Gallup polling data dating back to 1995, the pro-life movement has been successful in changing public opinion on abortion — as Gallup found a 56-33 percent pro-abortion split in 1995. That 23 percent pro-abortion majority has shifted 25 percent towards the pro-life position to the pro-life majority the movement against abortion enjoys today.

Massachusetts Citizens for Life president Anne Fox credits that shift to the pro-life movement’s focus on legislation such as a partial-birth abortion ban that highlights how abortion kills unborn children.

“The battles we have had to fight at the legislative level, Partial Birth Abortion Ban and Obamacare among them, and at the political level (which provides our only chance to get abortion into the media) are the cause of these positive moves in public opinion,” she said.

“You and I are working to educate people about the value of every human life and we are succeeding,” she added.

The new Gallup poll presents other good news for the pro-life movement.

“All age groups have become more attached to the pro-life label since 2005, with particularly large increases among young adults and those aged 50 to 64 years,” the poll noted.

Meanwhile, men and women have also become more likely to identify as pro-life, with the increase among women coming mainly since 2008, whereas the increase in men started after 2006.

Conservative writer Ed Morrissey notes that the Gallup poll found 18 percent more Americans say abortion is morally wrong than say it is morally right.

He suggests the pro-life number is moving up because people are internalizing that through people they know who have experienced the pain of an abortion and are taking that message to heart.

“We are looking at a cultural shift on abortion, where its perceived morality (consistently rejected by majorities over the same period of time) has finally come into closer relationship with personal identification on the issue,” he said. “It’s not the political divide that’s driving these numbers – but it may be that the cultural shift has started to impact political identification as well. If so, pro-choice Democrats could find themselves in a minority party in the next several years.”

Gallup’s own conclusion is that politics are playing a role as Republicans an independents become more pro-life and Democrats more pro-abortion.

Republicans have become more likely to call themselves pro-life since polling conducted in 2003/2004, as have Republican-leaning independents since 2005/2006. Independents who lean to neither party also became more likely to call themselves “pro-life” between 2003/2004 and 2005/2006, but have since held steady.

Democrats’ self-identification with the pro-life position has moved in the other direction, declining from 37% in 2003/2004 to 31% in 2009/2010. Among independents who lean Democratic, there has been no movement in either direction.

“Barring evidence that Americans are growing more wary about the morality of abortion per se, the trends by party identification suggest that increased political polarization may be a factor in Republicans’ preference for the “pro-life” label, particularly since Barack Obama took office,” Gallup notes.

“Whatever the cause, the effect is that the pro-life label has become increasingly dominant among Republicans and to a lesser degree among independents, while the pro-choice label has become more dominant among Democrats,” the polling firm concludes.

College students travel to Springfield to lobby against “The Reproductive Health and Access Act”, deemed “Illinois FOCA”.

Springfield, IL – On Thursday, February 11, Illinois students will converge in Springfield for a lobby day hosted by Students for Life of Illinois, calling it “Cupcakes at the Capital”. Their lobbying efforts will focus on dissuading the Illinois General Assembly from passing “The Reproductive Health and Access Act”. The bill has been called the Illinois Freedom of Choice Act, due to its radical agenda to remove commonsense restrictions on abortion ranging from parental notification to right of conscience laws for health care providers.

Students will give cupcakes to the legislators with the message “Life is Sweet” written in the icing. “So often, people go into lobbying with a demanding spirit. We want to show our appreciation for our representatives, while at the same time boldly informing them of our stance on this crucial issue,” said John-Paul Deddens, Executive Director of Students for Life of Illinois. “Nothing in last year’s Illinois FOCA or what we expect to be introduced this year is meant to help women in need. It only tears down what few protections we have in Illinois.”

Students from over 13 different schools including University of Chicago, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Loyola University Chicago, Lewis University, Bradley University and Northern Illinois University will be lobbying Thursday in Springfield.

Students for Life of Illinois is an umbrella organization that exists to help college students bring about a culture of life on their campuses by providing resources, training and support. More on Students for Life of Illinois at www.ProLifeIllinois.com.

For far too long, far too many people of faith who hold conservative views on abortion have defended the right to abort preborn babies who are the products of rape or incest. The logical and moral error that this position represents must be exposed publicly. The position that abortion constitutes murder cannot be sustained if Christians continue to make exceptions for pregnancies that result from rape or incest.

The pro-life position depends on acceptance of the following assumptions:

• Life begins at conception.
• Humans are created in the image and likeness of God.
• All human life is sacred.
• All human life possesses infinite value.
• Incipient life has its own unique DNA, meaning that at every developmental stage, the baby is a unique individual, distinct from his or her mother.
• Dependency status (i.e., the state of being dependent on another) does not abrogate the right to life. The preborn, newborns, toddlers, the aged, and the infirm all share in common an inability to survive on their own. The physical location of the preborn is insufficient justification for abrogating its inherent right to life.

Given that pro-life people of faith accept and defend these propositions, how does the unjust manner of conception justify the deliberate destruction of the incipient life that is produced through this unjust manner of conception?

Those who defend exceptions in cases of rape and incest believe that compassion dictates such exceptions, but that position represents terribly misguided compassionate impulses. These misguided impulses depend on and reflect logical inconsistency and result in tragic moral error that ultimately undermines the pro-life position.

For anyone to conclude that compassion for the victims of heinous crimes permits slaughter of the unborn, who then suffer an even greater moral evil than the one that their mother experienced, means that they had to have rejected the assumptions they claim to believe.

One cannot truly believe that life begins at conception; that all humans are created in the image and likeness of God; that all life is sacred and infinitely valuable; that the product of conception is distinct from its mother; and that those who are dependent on others are equally deserving of life, while also claiming that killing a baby who is the product of a crime is morally defensible.

At least one cannot make that claim with any logical or moral consistency.

It is never morally defensible to extinguish a baby’s life* even if he or she is the product of a violent, horrific crime-a crime, of course, for which this baby bears no responsibility.

Could carrying an unwanted baby that is the product of rape or incest involve terrible suffering? Yes. But the noble ends of alleviating the suffering of girls or women who become pregnant through rape or incest must never involve the means of taking an innocent life.

Compassionate people of faith must come alongside the victims of rape and incest, praying with and for them; providing the emotional care and counseling they need; and providing for their physical needs.

Compassionate people of faith must never be complicit in communicating to victims of rape or incest that the destruction of innocent life is a morally defensible response to a terrible crime.

Preborn human life is precious and sacred. The babies who are produced by criminal acts should never become the victims of compassionate but misguided impulses and sloppy moral reasoning. When the baby’s right merely to exist-after all, a mother does not have to raise her baby-comes into direct conflict with the “reproductive rights” of the mother, existence must take precedence. The right merely to exist is a right of a higher moral order than reproductive rights. It is, in fact, the right upon which all others depend.

Christian blogger and book reviewer Tim Challies writes this:

It is my conviction that some evangelicals and pro-lifers have given away the moral high ground by making a false and irrational distinction between children who are conceived by choice (or at least by the choice to engage in sexual intercourse) and children who are conceived by rape or incest (though, of course, most incest is also rape)….The argument from Scripture is simple: a fetus is a human being. A fetus has the same “humanness” as an adult and thus has the same right to life. A fetus is fully human. A fetus is as fully human if she is conceived by choice as if she is conceived by brutal force. Of course I affirm that rape is a horrific crime-undoubtedly one of the worst crimes a person could commit and one whose full spiritual, physical, mental and emotional impact I am sure I cannot adequately understand. But the brutality of the crime does not change the fact that is indisputable from Scripture-even a child conceived by rape is fully human.

A moral life and a morally consistent life is a difficult life-a life of sacrifice that is ultimately richer, more satisfying and more God-pleasing. Please choose and defend life even in cases of rape or incest. And serve compassionately and sacrificially those mothers who choose to sacrifice their comfort in order to give life to their babies.

* Exceptions are morally permissible when the life of the mother is threatened by the continuation of a pregnancy to term.

Support IFI’s pro-family work in the culture and at the capitol.
Please consider making a special monetary gift to IFI today to help sustain our work and ministry.

Please prayerfully consider making a tax-deductible donation of $50, $75, $100 or $250. You may be able to give $500 or even $1000. Your donation will help us meet our monthly budget needs and be ready to meet the challenges ahead.

Please send your gift to Illinois Family Institute at the address below, or click HERE to donate online today!

Give by mail:

Illinois Family Institute
P.O. Box 88848
Carol Stream, Illinois 60188

Give By Phone:
Give a gift by phone with your Visa or MasterCard by calling 708-781-9328 during normal business hours.

We cannot do it without the support of people like you.

P.S. Please forward this email to your like-minded friends!

It was following California’s passage of Proposition 71 that Illinois felt the need to start funding embryonic stem cell research with taxpayer money. However, after five years, California’s budget-busting $3 billion embryonic stem cell research project has yielded no cures, no therapies and little progress, explains Investors.com.

The backers of Prop 71 are now admitting failure. “The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, the state agency created to, as some have put it, restore science to its rightful place, is diverting funds from ESCR to research that has produced actual therapies and treatments: adult stem cell research. It not only has treated real people with real results; it also does not come with the moral baggage ESCR does.”

The article accuses the backers of Prop 71 of using a classic bait-and-switch tactic by trying to take credit for discoveries and advances achieved by research that they once cavalierly dismissed. The Institute is attempting to do this by funding adult stem cell research. Nearly $230 million was handed out this past October to 14 teams, but notably, only four of those projects involved embryonic stem cells.

The article concludes:

Real promise is held in what are called induced pluripotent stem cells. In 2006, researchers led by Dr. Shinya Yamanaka of Japan’s Kyoto University were first able to “reprogram” human skin cells to behave like embryonic stem cells. They can do everything stem cells from destroyed embryos can do.

The National Institute of Health has said that this type of stem cell offers the prospect of having a renewable source of replacement cells and tissues to treat diseases like Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s, spinal cord injury, stroke, burns, heart disease, diabetes, osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis, to name a few.

It is ESCR researchers who have politicized science and stood in the way of real progress. We are pleased to see California researchers beginning to put science in its rightful place.

Source: California’s Proposition 71 Failure (Investors.com)