by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN, and Kelli
Wesley J. Smith says the bioethics community is finally beginning to criticize artificial reproduction techniques like IVF – but not for the reasons you might think:
"But now, in the ever more radical Journal of Medical Ethics, Cristina Richie, of Boston College’s Department of Theology, argues that these technologies should be regulated to limit the number of children – called “carbon legacies,” as a means of fighting climate change."Smith opines:
"I don’t know if Richie coined the term, but it is ridiculous. Children are children, not bundles of carbon producers…. No, grim is the exploitation of surrogates in biological colonialism and the eugenic impetus that has sunk its fangs deep into the heart of the industry. In the face of such human objectification, sorry, I can’t get upset about global warming."
Reflections of a Paralytic highlights a growing craze from GoFundMe – funding IVF treatments with prizes attached for each level. The New York Post noted two of the campaigns, with one (prizes pictured left)
ProWomanProLife quotes research linking certain types of birth control pills to an increased risk of breast cancer. What pesky timing, when the abortion industry is pivoting from abortion talk to contraception talk:
Women taking newer formulations of birth control pills could face a 50 percent or higher increased risk of breast cancer than those not using oral contraceptives, according to a study by Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center scientists.Pro-Life Wisconsin is happy to announce the rescinding of a free speech restriction in the capital city:
Citing a lawsuit by Madison pro-life advocates, and reacting to the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in McCullen v. Coakley striking down a Massachusetts law requiring pro-life witnesses and sidewalk counselors in the public way to remain 35 feet from the entrance to an abortion clinic, the Madison Common Council last night unanimously repealed their own anti-speech zones created by an ordinance passed in March.At National Review, Michael J. New discusses the pro-choice movement’s effort to rebrand themselves as something other than “pro-choice.” New believes the reason for this is that they are “struggling to find messaging that will engage young voters, while pro-lifers continue to make quiet inroads among young adults.”
Saynsumthn’s Blog comments on the announced winners of the Excellence in Media “Maggie Award” from Planned Parenthood, named after their eugenicist founder, Margaret Sanger. One winner, pro-choice feminist writer and NARAL board member Jessica Valenti, called for a “safe sex f***-in” inside Hobby Lobby’s “glitter aisle[s]” (photo and tweet pictured right) following the Supreme Court’s decision upholding the company’s right to refuse providing abortifacient drugs in employee insurance packages.
Another winner? Cosmopolitan, that paragon of feminist empowerment, with their plethora of articles on how to sexually please men. (Standards for the award must be pretty low.)
At our newest blogroll addition, the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, Jonathon Van Maren debunks an article written by the aforementioned “safe sex Hobby Lobby f***-in” supporter Jessica Valenti (who has time to tweet but apparently no time for research), in which she claims the pro-life movement is dying:
"Basically, Valenti claims every pro-life tactic—from sidewalk counselling (which features evil bullies that, if you listen to her, closely resemble Disney villains), to Crisis Pregnancy Centres (where quack science such as embryology is used), to legislation restricting abortion clinics (because we don’t care for butcher shops like Gosnell’s House of Horrors, or any other dead-baby-producing establishment) — is a sign of demented desperation.
Actually, based on our track record thus far, it is simply a sign of smart strategy combined with a helpful thing called “the truth,” which in regards to abortion, can be found in any embryology textbook which Valenti has not read. If she wants to write about the pro-life movement, she might want to actually take a closer look at our movement so she knows what’s going on. She’d still be outraged, sure. But she’d be less bewildered.
One final point: The only way the anti-abortion movement will “end” is if abortion “ends” and our culture stops glorifying as a right this barbaric version of in-utero infanticide. Which isn't all bad for Ms. Valenti, I suppose. She will have occasion to write many more such columns."
[Valenti photo via times.co.uk, Tweet via ]