Category

Sanctity of Life

Penny Nance at Protect Women Protect Life rally at Supreme Court

Abortion Extremism on Display at the Supreme Court

By | Blog, Case Vault, Legal, News and Events, Sanctity of Life | No Comments

June Medical Services v. Russo oral arguments at the Supreme Court.

This week the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in an important case where abortionists are challenging a Louisiana law that requires they keep admitting privileges at nearby hospitals within 30 miles of the clinic where they perform abortions.

Concerned Women for America (CWA) was there to represent you both inside the courtroom (where the arguments were happening) and outside (where dueling rallies represented the conflict for the media). Both settings presented us with the challenge of our time— an irrational, rabid, and extremely radical pro-abortion mob that promotes abortion as the ultimate good, rejecting even the most basic of parameters of human decency.

Recently, for example, the U.S. Senate rejected the Born Alive Survivors Protection Act which simply required doctors to provide standard medical care to a baby who is born alive after a botched abortion. That’s a baby who has already been born! But it didn’t matter to the pro-abortion loyalists, who unfortunately are many in the Senate. Today’s radical, pro-abortion syndicate cannot, will not, accept anything less than the celebration of abortion for any reason up to the point of birth (and beyond, depending on the desires of the mother), paid for and promoted by you and me, the taxpayers.

This radicalism was evident at oral arguments, too. Julie Rikelman, who represented June Medical Services, could not envision any circumstance in which a law requiring admitting privileges for abortionists could be constitutional. This is significant because, under the direct precedent of the Court in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, which (erroneously) invalidated a Texas law, the Court’s inquiry is entirely fact-based depending on the specific situation of each state where a similar medical requirement is enacted.

Chief Justice Roberts tried to establish this simple fact as a starting point for further discussion but found no common ground from Ms. Rikelman.

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Counsel, do you agree that the inquiry under Hellerstedt is a factual one that has to proceed state-by-state?

MS. RIKELMAN: Your Honor, I think that facts may vary, but what we know is that the district court held a trial here and found that there were no material differences between this case and –

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: No, no, I know, but if — if the issue, the statutes are on the books in other states, and if the issues are raised there, is the same inquiry required in each case? You have to have the district court examine the availability of specific clinics and the admitting privileges of doctors so that the litigation could be — the results could be different in different states?

MS. RIKELMAN: […] the burdens of a law may vary, but a law that has no benefits and doesn’t serve any valid state interest is much more likely to impose an undue burden.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, similarly, tried several different ways to ask for any scenario where a similar law could be upheld. If the law had no effect whatsoever on providers, could it be constitutional? The counsel for the abortionists danced around the issue as much as she could, but she was ultimately pushed to admit that they could never be constitutional.

JUSTICE KAVANAUGH: Can I follow up on the Chief Justice’s earlier question and mine as well? Are you saying that admitting privileges laws are always unconstitutional, such that we don’t have to look at the facts in — state by state? Or are you saying that actually you do look at the facts state by state, and in some states, admitting privileges laws could be constitutional, if they impose no burdens?

MS. RIKELMAN: Your Honor, the burdens may vary, but a law that has no benefit and serves no valid state interest, which is what this Court held in Whole Woman’s Health, is much more likely to be an undue burden.

JUSTICE KAVANAUGH: Could an admitting privileges law of this kind ever have a valid purpose, in your view?

MS. RIKELMAN: No, Your Honor.

Abortion extremists give not an inch. They demand no limits on abortion. Even accepted medical standards must be surrendered at the altar of “choice.”

In this case, Louisiana asks this same requirement of all doctors that perform outpatient procedures in the state. But somehow, according to “Big Abortion,” abortionists must be exempt from it.

Even Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was surprised by this fact as she approached the topic with Louisiana Solicitor General Elizabeth Murrill.

JUSTICE GINSBURG: What about a D&C after a miscarriage? As I understand it, these two procedures are very much alike. Are similar regulations, about 30 miles, and admitting privileges applicable to a D&C following a miscarriage?

MS. MURRILL: Under the ambulatory surgery center regs, yes. Under the office practice regs which do not regulate abortion clinics, a doctor who doesn’t have a — have a residency in the proper scope of care would have to have admitting privileges and would have to have them within a 30-mile radius of — of the clinic. So, it’s the same requirement.

JUSTICE GINSBURG: It is the same?

MS. MURRILL: Yes.

JUSTICE GINSBURG: I thought there was something in the record suggesting there was no such requirement for D&C following a miscarriage.

She thought wrong. Louisiana’s law is meant to protect women. The women of Louisiana supported it and helped pass it. According to a Knights of Columbus-Marist poll, 71 percent of women (both pro-life and pro-choice women) want doctors who perform abortions to be required to have hospital admitting privileges. But Big Abortion ignores women when it is inconvenient to their narrative.  To them, that law is simply an attack on its bottom line. Abortion profits motivate them, not women’s safety.

Let us pray the Court sees right through this conflict of interest and stands with the women of Louisiana by upholding this law. A decision is expected this summer.

YWA leader Lillian Knight speaking at Protect Women Protect Life rally at the Supreme Court

Pro-Life and Pro-Choice Demonstrators Meet outside the Supreme Court

By | Blog, Legal, Louisiana, News and Events, Sanctity of Life, SCOTUS | No Comments

One of our amazing Young Women for America college chapter presidents, Lillian Knight, LSU, participated in the Protect Women, Protect Life rally on the steps of the Supreme Court fighting to uphold a Louisiana law requiring abortionists to have hospital admitting procedures. She is quoted in the article in National Review.

“On the steps of the Supreme Court on Wednesday morning, hundreds of demonstrators gathered as the justices heard oral arguments in June Medical Services v. Russo, the first abortion-related case on the docket since Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the Court.

The case was brought by abortion providers against the state of Louisiana, challenging a law that requires them to maintain admitting privileges at a local hospital so women can get emergency care if necessary after a failed abortion procedure. Louisiana law currently requires the same of all other ambulatory surgical centers in the state; the Unsafe Abortion Protection Act aims to hold abortionists to the same standard.

Sources who attended oral arguments told National Review that seven of the nine justices asked questions. Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch were the two who did not.

Outside the Court, meanwhile, both the abortion-rights movement and pro-life advocates hosted rallies all morning, standing right beside each other underneath a perfectly blue and sunny sky, the abortion-rights crowd swathed in teal and the pro-lifers in a lighter shade of blue.

“My right, my decision,” read most of the signs on the pro-choice side. The signs were printed, and the rally coordinated, by the Center for Reproductive Rights, the abortion-advocacy group that argued against the Louisiana law this morning, representing June Medical Services and two unnamed abortionists.

One of the most prominent speakers for the abortion-rights rally was Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.), who directed part of his remarks at Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch. “They’re taking away fundamental rights,” he said. “I want to tell you Gorsuch, I want to tell you Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

Representative Rashida Tlaib (D., Mich.) also addressed the pro-choice crowd, opening her remarks by suggesting that “they are obsessed with our bodies,” as well as that abortion is an issue of “economic justice” and “racial justice.”

“We have every frickin’ right to fight for our lives and our bodies,” Tlaib said. Most of the remarks from speakers at the pro-choice rally didn’t touch on the substance of the Louisiana law at all, or they falsely claimed that it was intended to restrict access to abortion. But in fact, in a decision upholding the statute last fall, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that “the only permissible finding, under this record, is that no clinics will likely be forced to close on account of the Act.”

Much of the abortion-rights rally centered around common slogans such as permitting or trusting women to control their own bodies.

A poster that one of the abortion-rights demonstrators held read, “Hey Kavanaugh, keep your religion out of my health care. And yea, we still believe Dr. Blasey Ford.” Another, much larger sign said, “Thank God for abortion.”

On the pro-life side of the divide, meanwhile, most signs read, “Protect women, protect life.” The remarks from the slate of speakers in defense of Louisiana’s law focused almost entirely on the law itself, as well as the goal of ensuring that women are able to get emergency care.

Katrina Jackson, the Louisiana Democrat who sponsored the Unsafe Abortion Protection Act, addressed the pro-life crowd after exiting the Court following the hearing. “For so long, this nation has put the abortion industry before the health and safety of the women,” she said.

“We will no longer be quiet, because we love the child, and we love the woman. And Louisiana is all about love, even when someone doesn’t agree with us,” Jackson added. “We seek to protect them in their decisions. We seek to hold others accountable, and especially when a billion-dollar industry makes money off of that woman’s decision, they should be held accountable just as other doctors who treat us for other things.”

One young woman from Louisiana, who serves as a campus leader for Concerned Women for America, spoke to the group close to the end of the rally. “Twenty-two years ago, my mom went to a Louisiana Planned Parenthood seeking to know what her options were because she was in a crisis pregnancy,” she said. “She had no support from anybody in my family or from my biological father. They told her that my life was not worth anything and that her only option was to abort me, that she would not be successful in life, that she could not get an education, and that I would essentially ruin her life. Twenty-two years later, I think she begs to differ.””

Read the Entire Article in National Review Here:

CWA CEO and President Penny Nance speaking at the Protect Women Protect Life rally at the Supreme Court

Could Debate Over Louisiana Abortion Law have Implications for Kentucky?

By | Blog, News and Events, Sanctity of Life | No Comments

The following news story aired this week on Spectrum 1 Newschannels. Click link to watch the television broadcast or read the story below.

“Concerned Women for America President Penny Nance says it is her rural Kentucky roots that fueled her passion for the anti-abortion movement.

“I grew up the daughter of a pastor in Eastern Kentucky in Appalachia. My dad served for about 20 years in Paintsville. As a woman of faith, I learned my bible in Eastern Kentucky. We know that God knit us together in our mothers’ wombs,” said Nance.

Nance stood outside of the Supreme Court Wednesday as justices heard arguments on a Louisiana abortion law that would require doctors who perform abortions to hold admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of an abortion clinic. A similar Texas law was struck down by the high court in 2016, when the court decided the issue of admitting privileges was an undue burden on women.

Now the court is more conservative with President Trump’s appointments of Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.

Wednesday’s court proceedings suggest Chief Justice John Roberts will likely be the deciding vote.

“If it is going to follow its own precedent and if it’s going to follow things like the rule of law, we should not have a different result. The change in the Supreme Court should not change the decisions and certainly not so fast,” said Fatima Goss Graves, President of the National Women’s Law Center.

“We know that abortion is one of the safest operations in the country. Admitting privileges are not necessary but even so, we find that the hospitals are denying the clinics and the doctors admitting privileges because they are afraid of the violence. They are being bullied and terrorized and this is closing clinics down for us,” said Toni Van Pelt, President of the National Organization for Women.

There was perhaps no greater illustration of how culturally divisive abortion is than the two competing rallies happening simultaneously on the steps of the court with both sides convinced their argument will prevail.

“Decades of precedent don’t stand for much when the Supreme Court gets it absolutely wrong,” said Johnathan Alexandre, Senior Counsel for Liberty Counsel.

“If you love someone who is seeking an abortion, that is what you should lean into. You should lean into the values that guide and support the people you love,” said Goss Graves.

A decision should come by late June.

Several states including Kentucky have passed laws being challenged in federal courts that would ban abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected.

The decision in the Louisiana case could have consequences for the Kentucky case.

According to data from the Pew Research Center, just 36% of Kentuckians believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases.”

Watch the Entire TV Interview with Penny Nance here:

Concerned Women for America to add its voice to ‘Protect Women – Protect Life’ rally on steps of SCOTUS, Wednesday, March 4

By | Blog, News and Events, Press Releases, Sanctity of Life | No Comments

WASHINGTON — Penny Nance, CEO and President of Concerned Women for America (CWA), will join a broad coalition of pro-life groups and legislators on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court Wed., Mar. 4, for the “Protect Women – Protect Life” rally.

Pro-life citizens will join together in support of June Medical Services v. Russo, a Louisiana law that requires abortionists, like doctors at all Louisiana outpatient surgical centers, to maintain admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. The measure was enacted to ensure that women who experience a medical emergency during an abortion have access to proper care.

Remarkably, the bill’s fiercest opponent has been the abortion industry, with abortion doctors asking for exemptions from the law’s requirements.

“Abortion providers shouldn’t be able to erase a law that protects women’s health,” says Penny Nance, CEO and president of CWA. “There is no reason women seeking abortions should be treated with lower standards of medical care than other out-patient surgery centers. That’s why I, and hundreds of thousands of women I represent, stand in support of the women of Louisiana.”

Sancha Smith, a member of CWA of Louisiana, says being pro-life necessarily extends to protecting the life of a woman who chooses to have an abortion. “We cannot say all life is important and ignore the threat posed to women by an abortion procedure. I do not understand how the pro-choice lobby can claim to stand for women’s health while working for this bill to be overturned.”

The “Protect Women – Protect Life” pre-rally event will kick off at 9:00 a.m. Wednesday with a time for women to share their stories. The rally will formally begin at 9:30 a.m. and will end at 11:30 a.m.

For more information, please visit: https://www.protectwomenprotectlife.org/

Media: email [email protected] or [email protected] or call 202.810.5530 or 202.527.3434

U.S. Senators Debate and Vote on Two Pro-life Bills

By | Blog, Legislative Updates, News and Events, Sanctity of Life | No Comments

Tuesday was a dark day for America. The Senate failed to advance two desperately needed pro-life bills: the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act and the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. Pain Capable would protect unborn children from being aborted after 20 weeks, the threshold science definitively agrees unborn children feel pain. Born Alive requires doctors to provide the same standard of care to a child born alive after an attempted abortion as any other baby born at that gestational age in any other circumstances.

Although each of these bills received the support of a majority of senators, they needed to reach the 60-vote threshold to end a filibuster and pass the Senate. Pain Capable failed to advance by a vote of 53-44 and Born Alive failed to advance by a vote of 56-41.

It is discouraging that 44 senators can’t draw the line to protect human life at 20 weeks, and even more discouraging that 41 senators voted in favor of infanticide. However, there were several pro-life champions who took to the Senate floor to dispel myths on these bills and speak the truth (see list below.) Help us spread the word on what these bills actually do and watch and share these videos on social media and with your friends and family. Together, we can speak truth and life.

During the debate, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Nebraska) and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) had a sharp exchange regarding what the Born Alive bill would actually do. Sen. Sasse vociferously defended the Born Alive bill.

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Nebraska) sponsor of the Born Alive bill

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) sponsor of the Pain Capable bill,

Majority Leader McConnell (R-Kentucky)

Sen. John Thune (R-South Dakota)

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyoming)

Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R-Georgia)

Sen. James Lankford (R-Oklahoma)

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas)

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)

Sen. Steve Daines (R-Montana) led a colloquy with Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Nebraska) and Sen. Mike Braun (R-Indiana)

Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Oklahoma)

Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah)

To see how your senators voted on Pain Capable, click here, and to see how your senators voted on Born Alive, click here.

CWA CEO and President at 2020 March for Life with President Donald Trump

Women Lead the Pro-Life Movement

By | Blog, CEO, News and Events, Sanctity of Life | No Comments

President and CEO of CWA, Penny Nance, wrote the following article about the reality of abortion and how the pro-choice movement is not pro-woman:

It’s a staggering number: 56 million.

That’s the number of precious lives that have been lost to abortion since the Supreme Court’s ruling on Roe v. Wade in 1973.

On Wednesday, our nation marked the 47th anniversary of this tragically misguided decision. While many supporters of the pro-choice movement today uphold a woman’s right to choose as honoring to women, it is anything but.

As the president of the nation’s largest public policy organization for women, Concerned Women for America, I have talked with many women who have been devastated by their choice to abort. The entire latest episode of my podcast focused on this topic. Women have shared with me how their abortions sent them into relentless cycles of depression, anxiety, and addiction. They tell me how they constantly struggle with shame.

Women have abortions for different reasons. Some are young and afraid of the repercussions from parents or partners. Some face abuse. Some are in dire financial straits. But they all receive similar promises at abortion clinics. They are promised that having an abortion will give them their life back. They are promised that the procedure will be quick and painless. They are promised that their unborn child is just a mass of tissue.

They are being lied to.

 

Read more of the article on the Washington Examiner here.

Penny Nance: ‘Trump brings new energy to the pro-life movement’

By | Blog, News and Events, Press Releases, Sanctity of Life | No Comments

Contact: [email protected]
202.810.5530

WASHINGTON — Penny Nance releases the following statement after attending the March for Life rally with President Trump on the National Mall Friday:

“It was a profound privilege to literally stand with President Trump before hundreds of thousands at the March for Life rally in Washington. Like no president before him, President Trump has uniquely brought new energy to the pro-life movement and has delivered historic advances in the fight to protect life in America. There has never been a better champion for life in the White House.”

###

Roe’s Foundation of Lies

By | Blog, Kennedy, LBB, News and Events, Sanctity of Life, SCOTUS | No Comments

It is always sobering to stand and contemplate the destruction and devastation left along the pathway of “Hurricane” Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision that invented a right to abortion. It is worse than any of the modern-day disasters we have experienced. More than sixty million babies now lost. In a way, today is a day of mourning as we march for the 47th time to expose the injustice that is Roe.

The Supreme Court case was not only plainly an unconstitutional exercise in judicial activism, it was also the result of a wicked plan to deceive the public into something it never wanted. If you have never read the testimony of Norma McCorvey, the former Roe of Roe v. Wade, before the Subcommittee on the Constitution in June 23, 2005, you should take the time to read it today and discover the foundation of lies upon which the Roe scheme was concocted.

I believe that I was used and abused by the court system in America. Instead of helping women in Roe v. Wade, I brought destruction to me and millions of women throughout the nation. In 1970, I was pregnant for the third time. I was not married and I truly did not know what to do with this pregnancy. I had already put one child up for adoption and it was difficult to place a child for adoption because of the natural bond that occurs between a woman and her child. And after all, a woman becomes a mother as soon as she is pregnant, not when the child is born. And women are now speaking out about their harmful experiences from legal abortion. Instead of getting me financial or vocational help, instead of helping me to get off of drugs and alcohol, instead of working for open adoption or giving me other help, my lawyers wanted to eliminate the right of society to protect women and children from abortionists. My lawyers were looking for a young, white woman to be a guinea pig for a great new social experiment…

Everything about Roe is a lie. Norma McCorvey never even had an abortion, and in her testimony, she confessed about how she lied about her story to obtain sympathy and win public approval.

Abortion is a shameful and secret thing. I wanted to justify my desire for an abortion in my own mind, as almost every woman who participates in the killing of her own child must also do. I made up the story that I had been raped to help justify my abortion. Why would I make up a lie to justify my conduct? Abortion itself is a lie and it is based on lies. My lawyers didn’t tell me that abortion would be used for sex selection, but later when I was a pro-choice advocate and worked in abortion clinics, I found women who were using abortion as a means of gender selection. My lawyers didn’t tell me that future children would be getting abortions and losing their innocence. Yet I saw young girls getting abortions who were never the same. In 1973, when I learned about the Roe v. Wade decision from the newspapers, not my lawyers, I didn’t feel real elated. After all, the decision didn’t help me at all. I never had an abortion. I gave my baby up for adoption since the baby was born before the legal case was over. I am glad today that that child is alive and that I did not elect to abort.

This is something that is still being done to this day. The abortion industry uses women’s hurt to justify further damage through abortion. How many times do they bring up rape or incest in a debate about abortion, as if that were a common occurrence? In reality, they make about one percent of all abortions.

The hurt that Roe has caused millions of women could never be quantified, as even the Supreme Court has now come to acknowledge. As the Court acknowledges in Gonzales v. Carhart:

It is self-evident that a mother who comes to regret her choice to abort must struggle with grief more anguished and sorrow more profound when she learns, only after the event, what she once did not know: that she allowed a doctor to pierce the skull and vacuum the fast-developing brain of her unborn child. …”

But the abortion deception demands more and more lies in order to keep its house of cards alive. From their standpoint, the public must never discover that pro-life is pro-woman.

Thankfully, the majority of Americans are waking up to the many abortion lies that keep Roe alive and are rejecting them. Two-thirds (65%) say they “are more likely to vote for” a candidate who wants to limit abortion to the first three months of pregnancy. Sixty-two percent want the Court to revisit Roe v. Wade. It should. It is time for the lies to be exposed. It is time to end Roe.

CWA staff at 2019 March for Life

The Never-ending Impeachment

By | Blog, LBB, News and Events, Planned Parenthood, Sanctity of Life | No Comments

Impeachment Day 3 Recap

We continued to hear the same unproven allegations from the House managers as they presented their case to remove the President before the Senate on day two of their opening statements. And, the mindboggling thing is how long they have been preparing for this dud.

Vanity Fair, December 15, 2016: “Democrats are Paving the Way to Impeach Donald Trump.”

Washington Post, January 2017: “The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun.”

TIME, January 20, 2017: “There’s Already a Campaign to Impeach President Donald Trump.”

Washington Post, February 24, 2017: “Impeach Trump? Most Democrats already say ‘yes.’”

CNN, February 6, 2017: “Rep. Maxine Waters: Trump’s actions ‘leading himself’ to impeachment.”

INDEPENDENT, February 23, 2017: “Keith Ellison calls for impeachment investigations of Donald Trump.” 

This is not a serious process the Democrats entered into because of a phone call. To conclude otherwise is to ignore the clear evidence before us. However, the result of the political manipulation of such a powerful constitutional provision could be devastating to our country.

Check out today’s Impeachment Briefing to hear more about the dangerous rhetoric being used by House Managers that threatens the legitimacy of our elections. In today’s episode, CEO and President of Concerned Women for America Penny Nance joins us to comment on some exciting news and her take on impeachment.

CWA's Vice President of Field Operations Tanya Ditty at the Preborn Prayer Vigil at the Supreme Court

Remembering the Preborn Prayer Vigil

By | Blog, News and Events, Sanctity of Life | No Comments

January 22, 2020, marks the 47th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade and is known as the Sanctity of Human Life Day. CWA’s Vice President of Field Operations, Tanya Ditty, participated in the “Remembering the Preborn Prayer Vigil” as a speaker and several of our HQ staff joined in. During the vigil, 3,000 flowers were placed on the sidewalk representing the 3,000 unborn children killed each day by abortion in the United States.

See Tanya Ditty’s Remarks Here:


See Additional Photos from the Remembering the Preborn Vigil:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Join CWA at the 2020 March for Life!

By | Blog, News and Events, Sanctity of Life | No Comments

Join CWA at the 2020 March for Life!

When:

Friday, January 24th, with the March for Life theme of:

Life Empowers: Pro-Life is Pro-Woman.

Where:

The March for Life Rally will take place at 12th street on the National Mall and the march will be up Constitution Ave.

What time:

9:00 a.m. There will be breakfast and coffee at the CWA headquarters

9:30-10:00 a.m. Leave CWA headquarters and metro into D.C.

12:00 p.m. The Rally starts

1:00 p.m. The March begins

RSVP

If you would like to stop by the CWA headquarters that morning for breakfast and coffee, please email Carly Becker at [email protected] and let her know by Thursday, January 23rd at 5 PM. Please provide all the names of the people who will be attending the breakfast.

 

You are welcome to come to any and/or all of the events held that day. Head over to the March for Life website to learn more about the details, speakers, and to look at maps.

Woman and children in Africa

CWA Thanks President Trump, Secretary of State Pompeo, and Secretary Azar for their Defense of Life and Religious Liberty

By | Blog, News and Events, Religious Liberty, Sanctity of Life | No Comments

In three separate letters to President Trump, Secretary of State Pompeo and Secretary Azar, CWA CEO and President Penny Nance and our Vice President for International Affairs Dr. Shea Garrison send heart-felt thanks for their work to promote international religious freedom and defend life at the United Nations 74th General Assembly.

CWA Letter to President Trump

CWA Letter to Secretary of State Pompeo

CWA Letter to Secretary Azar

 

Defending Life at the United Nations

By | Blog, News and Events, Sanctity of Life, United Nations | No Comments

The Trump Administration is exhibiting unprecedented international leadership from the United States on behalf of life at the 74th United Nations General Assembly (UNGA).

The U.S. delegation’s message is cohesive and consistent from President Trump’s address to the UN General Assembly to Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Azar’s statements on behalf of the U.S. Government and the joint statement by 21 nations on Universal Health Coverage.

Below are some quotes from these momentous addresses. Never before has the U.S. used its sway to promote life so strongly.

President Trump’s Address to the 74th UNGA:

Americans will never tire of defending innocent life. We are aware that many United Nations projects have attempted to assert a global right to taxpayer-funded abortion on demand, right up until the moment of delivery. Global bureaucrats have absolutely no business attacking the sovereignty of nations that wish to protect innocent life. Like many nations here today, we in America believe that every child, born and unborn, is a sacred gift from God.

HHS Secretary Azar:

U.S. Government Statement at the UN High Level Meeting on Universal Health Coverage

Because we recognize that each nation has its own needs but shares the common goal of health, the United States deplores that some countries politicized the negotiation over this declaration by including language that has been used to promote abortion as healthcare and promote sex education that diminishes the protective role of the family in improving health.

This morning the United States was joined by 18 other nations, representing more than 1.3 billion of the world’s population, in issuing a joint statement respectfully calling on member states to join us in concentrating on topics that unite rather than divide on the critical issues surrounding access to healthcare.

We do not accept the terms “sexual and reproductive health” and “sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights” in this Declaration and note that only documents approved by the General Assembly may inform their understanding and implementation.

These terms must always include language, which some countries blocked, to remind U.N. agencies that each nation has the sovereign right to implement related programs and activities consistent with their laws and policies, and that these terms in no way imply that there is an international right to abortion.

Secretary Pompeo and Secretary Azar Joint Letter Results in 21 Countries Standing for Life:

The joint statement referenced above is the result of a joint letter by Secretary of State Pompeo and HHS Secretary Azar, the first of its kind, asking member nations to join with the United States in standing for life.

An excerpt of the July 2019 joint letter reads: The United States appreciates our longstanding partnership in many global health areas. As a key priority in global health promotion, we respectfully request that your government join the United States in ensuring that every sovereign state has the ability to determine the best way to protect the unborn and defend the family as the foundational unit of society vital to children thriving and leading healthy lives. We remain gravely concerned that aggressive efforts to reinterpret international instruments to create a new international right to abortion and to promote international policies that weaken the family have advanced through some United Nations fora…

Joint Statement on Universal Health Coverage at the UN:

Secretary Azar read the joint statement that resulted from the above letter. Thanks to the joint efforts of Secretary Pompeo and Secretary Azar, 18 nations joined the U.S. in a joint statement on Universal Health Coverage and a stance against abortion as an “international right”.

After hearing Sec. Azar, two more nations were moved to ask if they could join the joint statement, bringing the total number of countries to 21.

We are here before the opening of the High-Level Meeting on Universal Health Coverage to present a joint statement, agreed to by 19 countries representing more than 1.3 billion people…

We believe that health of women, men, children and adolescents supports and improves the overall health of our families and communities, and that the family is the foundational institution of society and thus should be supported and strengthened…

We do not support references to ambiguous terms and expressions, such as sexual and reproductive health and rights in U.N. documents, because they can undermine the critical role of the family and promote practices, like abortion, in circumstances that do not enjoy international consensus and which can be misinterpreted by U.N. agencies.

Such terms do not adequately take into account the key role of the family in health and education, nor the sovereign right of nations to implement health policies according to their national context. There is no international right to an abortion and these terms should not be used to promote pro-abortion policies and measures.

Thank you, President Trump, Secretary Azar, and Secretary Pompeo for bringing life to the forefront of the U.S. UN delegation’s mission.

 

Doreen Denny: Planned Parenthood Chose to Give up Federal Funding – It wasn’t Forced out of Title X Program

By | Blog, News and Events, Planned Parenthood, Social / Cultural Issues | No Comments

CWA’s Senior Director of Government Relations, Doreen Denny, wrote an op-ed featured on FoxNews.com about Planned Parenthood’s recent decision.

“Planned Parenthood claims it was “forced out” of the federal Title X family planning program by the Trump administration. Hardly. The choice to exit was Planned Parenthood’s alone.

Title X is the federal program that provides access to contraceptive services, supplies and information. Priority goes to serving low-income individuals.

When the law was enacted in 1970, Congress prohibited funds from going to promote or perform abortion as a “method of family planning.” That requirement has never changed.

Rules prohibiting abortion were bent and unenforced under previous administrations. President Trump determined to realign Title X regulations to uphold federal law. The new rules were finalized in March after a public comment period that gave Americans the chance to weigh in.”

Read Doreen Denny’s Entire Piece Here:

See other Content Featuring Doreen Denny Here:

Planned Parenthood Withdraws From Title X Program Over Trump Rule

By | Blog, Family Issues, News and Events, Planned Parenthood, Sanctity of Life | No Comments

CWA’s Senior Director of Government Relations, Doreen Denny, was featured on NPR discussing Planned Parenthood’s withdrawal from Title X family planning program.

“Planned Parenthood is leaving the federal Title X family planning program rather than comply with new Trump administration rules regarding abortion counseling.

The new rules issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services earlier this year prohibit Title X grantees from providing or referring patients for abortion, except in cases of rape, incest or medical emergency.”

Read and Listen to the Entire Piece Here:

See other Content Featuring Doreen Denny Here: