Waiting For Obama On Religious Liberty – Priests for Life is ready to reach a solution, as the Supreme Court directed.



The Supreme Court could have settled the question of whether federal bureaucrats may issue punishing, perhaps incapacitating, fines to faith-based organizations that refuse to participate in what we believe to be evil. Instead, the justices sent all of the cases in Zubik back to the four federal circuit courts that heard them first. The high court also asked those appeals courts to step away momentarily and give the two sides time to resolve the case on their own.

What will the administration do now? The White House’s latest “accommodation” proposal for religious nonprofit charities, schools and other organizations did not satisfy the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The proposal and each of its previous versions required faith-based groups seeking an exemption from the mandate to submit a form to an authority. Without this initiating action, abortion-causing drugs would not be made available to our employees. The basic requirement that we be complicit in the provision of abortifacients and other life-denying drugs, devices and procedures was a part of every government proposal. When we responded that we are forbidden by our faith to take part in this scheme—the government effectively retorted, “So what?

But both sides in Zubik have told the Supreme Court that a solution is theoretically possible.

For instance, the administration could, for once, actually listen to the Zubik petitioners—and to the scores of other faith-based groups that have lawsuits pending in lower courts—and propose a solution that does not hijack our health-insurance plans. The administration could, for example, make abortifacient/contraceptive coverage available to religious nonprofit employees through the ObamaCare exchanges, Title X (the federal program devoted to family-planning services), or separate arrangements with our own or another insurance company. In other words, don’t involve us, or the health-insurance plan we offer our employees, in the effort to expand coverage of abortion-inducing drugs.

The administration might be tempted to come up with a proposal that satisfies only those groups that have third-party insurance coverage—and not those that self-insure. This wouldn’t be acceptable, because self-insurers underwrite their own health-insurance plans and are, practically speaking, their own insurance companies. A government “accommodation” that offered as its only option a requirement that insurers of religious nonprofit groups offer the employees of those groups separate plans for abortifacients and contraceptives would still force self-insured religious groups to violate their faith.

Read the entire article in The Wall Street Journal: http://www.wsj.com/articles/waiting-for-obama-on-religious-liberty-1465163311

Today’s Pro-life Reflection: God is with us


“And they shall name him Emmanuel, a name that means ‘God is with us'” Matthew 1:23.

Reflection: In the midst of the abortion tragedy, the Church does not point fingers of condemnation. Rather, the Church extends hands of compassion and help, to lift up out of despair those who are tempted to abort their children. The Church informs her people of the many alternatives to abortion, and says “I am with you, and will enable you to say yes to life.”

Prayer: Lord, so many are tempted to abort because they feel alone. May we reach out to them, that they may know that we and you are with them. Amen

Priests for Life Leader Urges W.Va. Governor to Sign Bill Protecting Unborn Babies Six-to-Nine Months Old



Contact: Leslie Palma – 347-286-7277

Date: February 27, 2015

NEW YORK – Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, today urged West Virginia Governor Earl Ray Tomblin to sign the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act just passed by the state legislature.

“Governor Tomblin claims to be pro-life, yet vetoed an earlier bill that would have protected unborn babies of six months and older from the agony of being torn limb from limb,” said Fr. Pavone. “He now has a second chance to show he knows the difference between serving the public and killing the public. I pray he takes it.”

The West Virginia legislature has passed legislation that would protect almost all babies after 20 weeks of pregnancy from being aborted. The measure is based on scientific findings that such babies can feel pain.

“It all depends on whom Governor Tomblin wants to protect – innocent babies or, as he chose last year, the abortion industry that makes its money from killing them,” added Fr. Pavone.

Priests for Life is the nation’s largest Catholic pro-life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.

Priests for Life welcomes Arizona decision on late-term abortion

STATEN ISLAND, NY – Father Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, issued the following statement today regarding the decision of a federal court to uphold a ban on abortion after 20 weeks in Arizona.

“Priests for Life welcomes the decision of Judge James Teilborg regarding the Arizona law protecting children from painful dismemberment,” Father Pavone said. “Priests for Life vigorously supports similar laws in other states and the law that will be voted on today in Congress regarding protecting children in the District of Columbia.”

In the Arizona case, Judge Teilborg ruled that the law set to go into effect tomorrow is constitutional because it does not prohibit women from having abortions. He also noted in his decision that the state had provided “substantial and well-documented” evidence that a child at 20 weeks’ gestation or later has the capacity to feel pain.

“On an educational level, Priests for Life is bringing to the public’s attention the ‘D and E’ dismemberment abortion (see www.StopDandE.com).”  Father Pavone said. “The abortion debate should not be so abstract that we forget we’re talking about pulling the arms and legs off of babies. To those asking for our vote in November, I ask, do you or do you not think dismemberment should be legal? Every voter should ask the same.”

Priests for Life is the nation’s largest Catholic pro-life organization dedicated to ending abortion and euthanasia. For more information, visit www.priestsforlife.org.

We Have Just Begun to Understand

Psychiatrist and researcher Dr. Philip Ney relates the story of a patient of his who developed fibromyalgia, which causes chronic pain without any apparent cause. He found that she had undergone an abortion just before this pain began, and since then, has developed a theory that in some cases, the pain of fibromyalgia may in fact be caused by chemicals released by the aborted baby’s flesh when it is torn apart. These chemicals cross the placenta, and lodge in the mother’s nervous system. In reality, she is feeling not her own pain, but that of her aborted child.

We have not yet begun to understand all the implications of abortion, and of how destroying a child in the womb destroys the rest of us. Let’s pray that our society may forsake abortion and find healing.

The gruesome truth about D and E abortions

The debate in America about partial-birth abortion did a lot to shift public opinion in a pro-life direction, because it focused attention on what actually happens to the baby during an abortion – and what happens is not pleasant. That procedure was banned. But the D and E procedure is one among those that remain legal. In a D and E, the baby, while alive, is dismembered limb from limb. Medical textbooks and sworn court testimony describe how the abortionist pulls off the arms and legs and crushes the head. Above and beyond any thoughts they have about abortion in the abstract, it’s time to ask our fellow citizens what they think about D and E. Many who call themselves pro choice nevertheless oppose this procedure. Find out more at www.priestsforlife.org


Great tool for planning your pro-life activities: The 2012 Priests for Life calendar is a great way to keep pro-life front and center in your home throughout the year. Click here to order yours today.

Mobilize those who oppose late-term abortion

Father Frank Pavone greets Father Francis Martin at the opening rally for the Summer of Mercy 2.0 in Germantown, Md.

GERMANTOWN, MD. — The nine-day protest called the Summer of Mercy 2.0 will focus a spotlight on the type of abortion most people oppose, late-term abortion.

Speaking to several hundred people at Covenant Life Church on Saturday at the kick-off rally for the protest of Leroy Carhart’s abortion business, we pointed out that polls continue to show that the majority of Americans oppose abortion beyond the first trimester.

Most people – even those who call themselves ‘pro-choice’ — are closer to our position than to that of Carhart. But who is mobilizing those who would oppose what Carhart is doing? No one. We need to focus the attention of Americans to the reality of what Carhart does.

During the rally, we distributed literature with quotes from late-term abortionists that leave no doubt about the nature of the brutal procedure, and urged those fighting abortion to do so using the words of the abortionists themselves as found in medical textbooks and court testimony.

We also called for prayers for Carhart, so he will realize himself that what he is doing is wrong, the way the late Bernard Nathanson was converted to the pro-life cause.

Let us pray and work that the day will come when Leroy Carhart will be the next Bernard Nathanson. This week is going to make history in the pro-life movement.

Redefining the Abortion Debate

Public opinion about abortion in America can best be described as ambivalent: uncomfortable with unrestricted abortion, yet unwilling to ban it totally.

Another word for public opinion on abortion is “stalemate.” It has not moved much over the years since Roe vs. Wade. One time it did move was when partial-birth abortion was being debated publicly in the late 90’s. People were more willing to identify with the pro-life position during and after that debate, because the debate focused on abortion itself, rather than on abstract issues of freedom and choice.

And it is only in the specific arena of partial-birth abortion that our nation has succeeded, at any time since Roe vs. Wade, in actually prohibiting an abortion procedure in many states and on a federal level, and have that prohibition upheld by the highest court in the land.

When the question is, “Should we allow abortion?”, the debate is unwieldy and ambiguous, catching people in a seemingly endless and wearisome maze of arguments and counterarguments. But when the question is, “Should we allow a child to be pierced in the skull with scissors while still alive and partially delivered?”, the public comes much more quickly to a consensus. And that consensus in turn affects their view of the overall abortion question.

Now it’s time for Act 2.

The most common abortion procedure performed after the first trimester of pregnancy is the “D and E” (Dilation and Evacuation), a procedure which is legal throughout the nation, and which the Supreme Court itself described in this way:

“The doctor grips a fetal part with the forceps and pulls it back through the cervix …, continuing to pull even after meeting resistance from the cervix. The friction causes the fetus to tear apart. For example, a leg might be ripped off the fetus as it is pulled through the cervix and out of the woman. The process of evacuating the fetus piece by piece continues until it has been completely removed.”
(Gonzales vs. Carhart, April 18, 2007)

Now is the time to ask the American public, whether pro-life or pro-choice, a simple question: Should dismemberment of a living child in the womb be permitted? Let’s go beyond the all-encompassing question of “Should abortion be allowed?” and ask, “Should this specific procedure, in which a child’s arms and legs are ripped off, and head crushed, be allowed?”

As we saw in the partial-birth abortion debate, we will see again that many people who consider themselves “pro-choice” and who would want abortion to be generally available will nevertheless oppose this specific procedure and even work with us to prohibit it by law. It is time to mobilize that segment of the public.

Every abortion is wrong, no matter what method is used; every child must be protected. We do not in any way retreat from that principle and goal. But helping people focus on one procedure at a time is a quicker way to get there. See StopDandE.com for more info.

New Knowledge about Fetal Pain

In the time since Roe v Wade, scientists have learned a lot more about the ability of the child in the womb to feel pain. At the time of Roe, doctors thought that newborn children could not feel pain, and the only anesthetic they received was adhesive tape, to keep them still.

Now, however, we have much more evidence about how these young bodies respond to pain, and Nebraska has even passed a law saying that once the child can feel pain, the state can protect that child from being aborted. Hence abortions there have been banned after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

The National Right to Life Committee provides model legislation for other states that want to adopt it. Abortion is always wrong, but we should use every measure that will help reduce it.