It is the handmaidens working for Planned Parenthood who have joked about selling aborted baby body parts. And it was Kamala Harris, when she was A.G. of California, who viciously prosecuted the young man who exposed that scandal, after she had received a hefty donation from Planned Parenthood.
Planned Parenthood’s $80 Million Payday Sparks Call for Probe
Lawmakers accuse abortion giant of inappropriately taking small-business relief
ST LOUIS, MO - MAY 28: The exterior of a Planned Parenthood Reproductive Health Services Center is seen on May 28, 2019 in St Louis, Missouri. In the wake of Missouri recent controversial abortion legislation, the states' last abortion clinic is being forced to close by the end of the week. Planned Parenthood is expected to go to court to try and stop the closing. (Photo by Michael B. Thomas/Getty Images)Graham Piro • April 20, 2021 11:15 am
SHARE
Planned Parenthood improperly took tens of millions of dollars' worth of government loans intended to help businesses during the coronavirus, according to a group of Republicans who want to see the organization investigated.
House lawmakers accused Planned Parenthood of unlawfully using the Small Business Administration's COVID-response program, the Paycheck Protection Program, to obtain millions of dollars in taxpayer funds. Reps. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R., Mo.) and Byron Donalds (R., Fla.) wrote that the Committee on Small Business is calling for the Department of the Treasury and the Small Business Administration to investigate the organization's actions.
"We insist that the SBA and the Department of the Treasury investigate 1.) the distribution of these loans in violation of the relevant affiliation rules and 2.) whether Planned Parenthood violated the law," the lawmakers wrote in a Friday letter.
In May 2020, the multibillion-dollar organization came under fire for taking $80 million in small-business assistance loans. Planned Parenthood said that its local affiliates qualified for the assistance. The Small Business Administration, however, demanded the money be returned, saying local branches were too closely associated with the national organization to be considered independent. Now, GOP lawmakers are looking for answers as to whether or not the organization broke the law.
"At a time where small-business owners are working tirelessly to open their doors and contribute to their communities again, we must ensure the SBA is using relief funding for its intended purpose—assisting our nation’s hardest hit small businesses, not America’s most tragic abortion provider," Luetkemeyer told the Free Beacon. "The SBA must immediately investigate Planned Parenthood’s blatant violation of the rules to ensure guidelines are followed and American taxpayer dollars are protected."
The letter comes as President Joe Biden's Department of Health and Human Services threw open the door for taxpayer-funded abortion. The department unveiled new rules concerning Title X family planning funding that reversed Trump administration policies limiting taxpayer funding for abortion providers. Donalds said taxpayer dollars should not be used to subsidize abortion providers.
"Planned Parenthood—the nation's most notorious abortion provider that has an estimated $2 billion in assets and over 16,000 employees—receiving taxpayer dollars through the Paycheck Protection Program is extremely concerning," he said.
Planned Parenthood defended the loans and accused congressional Republicans of focusing on "baseless political attacks" and targeting centers that "provide essential health care."
"Like many other local nonprofits and health care providers, the independent Planned Parenthood 501(c)(3) organizations who were awarded PPP loans met the eligibility requirements established by both Congress and the Small Business Administration," said Jacqueline Ayers, vice president of government relations and public policy for Planned Parenthood for America.
The Trump administration made changes to the Title X family planning program designed to limit the amount of taxpayer funding for abortion providers. Planned Parenthood withdrew from the program rather than comply with limitations on abortion referrals, forgoing approximately $60 million in annual federal funding.
The HHS rules are expected to take months to implement but will effectively return Title X funding policy to its pre-Trump status. Senate Republicans ripped Biden for allowing the abortion industry to profit from his presidency.
"President Biden took millions from the abortion industry during his campaign," Sen. Steve Daines (R., Mont.) said. "Now, Planned Parenthood is cashing in."
Legacy of 7 Justices: More Than 62 Million Dead Babies
By Terence P. Jeffrey | December 1, 2021 | 3:46am EST
After President Richard Nixon appointed then-Appellate Court Judge Harry Blackmun to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1970, Blackmun somehow convinced members of the U.S. Senate that he embraced judicial restraint and felt a duty to protect "little persons."
When Blackmun's nomination came up for a vote, Democratic Sen. John McClellan of Arkansas made the case for confirmation.
"He does not believe it is either the duty or the prerogative of the Court to change the historical interpretations of the Constitution so as to be tantamount to amending that great document by edicts and decree," said McClellan. "For these basic principles of judicial integrity, I commend him and respect him."
McClellan then quoted a statement Blackmun had made during the confirmation process about how important the Supreme Court was to "little persons."
"What comes through to me most clearly is the utter respect which the little person has for the Supreme Court of the United States, and I think that the little person feels this is the real bastion of freedom and protection of strength in this nation," Blackmun had said, according to the Congressional Record.
"It was a lesson that was taught to me in the last two weeks and one which I think I shall not forget," said Blackmun.
Three years later, Blackmun wrote the court's opinion in Roe v. Wade. It declared there was a constitutional "right to privacy" that included the right to kill what could be called "little persons" — unborn babies — in the womb.
To come to this conclusion, Blackmun had to circumvent the obvious biological fact that an unborn human being is a living human being. So, he referred to unborn babies as "prenatal life," "potential life," "potential human life" and "the developing young in the human uterus."
In his opinion in Roe, Blackmun pushed aside what he called "the theory" that life begins at conception that was advanced by those who supported banning abortion.
"Some of the argument for this justification rests on the theory that a new human life is present from the moment of conception. The State's interest and general obligation to protect life then extends, it is argued, to prenatal life," said Blackmun.
He disagreed.
"There has always been strong support for the view that life does not begin until live birth," Blackmun wrote. "This was the belief of the Stoics."
"In areas other than criminal abortion, the law has been reluctant to endorse any theory that life, as we recognize it, begins before live birth or to accord legal rights to the unborn except in narrowly defined situations and except when the rights are contingent upon live birth," he said.
"In short," Blackmun, "the unborn have never been recognized in the law as persons in the whole sense."
"We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins," he concluded.
Wrong. The answer to that question, which science had already unambiguously determined, should have been embraced by the court. Human life begins at conception. Killing a human being any time after that is exactly that: killing a human being.
By arguing that the court could declare abortion a right without resolving whether or not an abortion kills a living human being, Blackmun was essentially arguing that the court could legalize what as far as he knew might be an act of murder.
"This right of privacy," Blackmun wrote, "whether it is founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy."
But then Blackmun appeared to open a narrow avenue for some regulation of abortion.
"Logically, of course, a legitimate state interest in this area need not stand or fall on acceptance of the belief that life begins at conception or at some other point prior to live birth," he wrote. "In assessing the State's interest, recognition may be given to the less rigid claim that as long as at least potential life is involved, the State may assert interests beyond the protection of the pregnant woman alone."
He then concluded that states could regulate or even prohibit abortion after "viability" except when killing the unborn baby was "necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother."
There were two problems with this: 1) "viability" (the point at which a baby can survive outside the womb) is determined not by the baby's inalterable humanity but by advances in medical science; and 2) the "health" of the mother, as defined by Blackmun himself in Roe's companion case of Doe v. Bolton, is anything her doctor says it is.
In that case, Blackmun declared that "the medical judgment" about whether a woman's health justified an abortion "may be exercised in the light of all factors — physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the women's age — relevant to the well-being of the patient."
Blackmun was not the only justice who voted in 1973 to declare abortion a "right." He was joined in his Roe opinion by Chief Justice Warren Burger and Justices William Douglas, William Brennan, Potter Stewart, Thurgood Marshall and Lewis Powell.
Their legacy? Between 1973 and 2017, according to numbers published this year by the Guttmacher Institute, doctors killed 58,177,540 babies in the United States. The National Right to Life Educational Foundation estimates that from 1973 and 2020, the number is 62,502,904.
This year, the killing has continued. But the Supreme Court now has a chance to reverse Roe v. Wade. Will Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Barrett stand with Blackmun — or with the innocent unborn?
(Terence P. Jeffrey is the editor-in-chief of CNSNews.com.)
Sen. Steve Daines: ‘Supreme Court Has Opportunity to Defend Most Fundamental Right—the Right to Life’
Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) urged Americans to grasp the significance of the historic case before the U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday – one that offers the nine justices “the opportunity to reconsider a wrongly decided case that has since resulted in the death of 62 million innocent babies.”
The chairman of the Senate’s Pro-Life Caucus said Tuesday afternoon that as the Court hears opening arguments in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the justices will have the chance “to restore the Constitution and defend our most fundamental right—the right to life.”
The case involves Mississippi’s Gestational Age Act, which would limit abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, and poses the most significant challenge in decades to the right to abortion created by the Supreme Court in its decision in Roe v. Wade in 1973.
In explaining the nature of the case, Daines asserted:
It’s very important that we are clear about what overturning Roe would mean for our country. Overturning Roe will not, will not, ban abortion nationwide, as many on the Left like to claim in an attempt to mislead Americans. Instead, it would return the power to state and federal lawmakers, allowing them to protect the most vulnerable and act on behalf of the people they are elected to represent.
“Because today under Roe, state lawmakers are robbed of their ability to represent the values of their constituents,” the senator continued. “Yet because of Roe, the will of the people of Mississippi to protect life is obstructed.”
Daines observed that, with Roe in place, the United States cannot fully lead the world on human rights by recognizing “innocent babies in the womb deserve equal protection under our laws”:
I’m sure many of my colleagues and most Americans would agree that nations like Communist China and North Korea, egregiously violate human rights. Yet, when it comes to abortion, sadly, America stands with them; just seven countries and we’re on that list. The United States is a global outlier on abortion. We’re just one of seven nations that allow abortions on demand past the point where a baby feels pain all the way up, in fact until the moment of birth. Standing with North Korea and China on abortion is horrifying. It’s a disgraceful place for the greatest country in the world to be. We must do better.
Our nation has the opportunity to finally modernize our laws. We have the opportunity to catch up with great advances in science, technology and medicine that indisputably show the humanity of unborn children. We have the opportunity to end an extreme judicially-imposed abortion regime aligned with nations such as China and North Korea.
The justices “have the opportunity to reverse this horrific decision that imposed abortion on demand up until the moment of birth across the United States,” Daines asserted.
“They have the opportunity to recognize that Roe was based on flawed and outdated science, and that the right to abortion which Roe invented has no support in the text, history, or structure of the Constitution. The Supreme Court has the opportunity to restore the Constitution and defend our most fundamental right—the right to life.”
The case is Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, No. 19-1392 in the Supreme Court of the United States.
No comments:
Post a Comment