Judge Blocks Ban on Dismemberment Abortions as ‘Undue Burden’ on ‘Right of a Woman’ to Kill Her Child

“Hence, that all efforts, direct or indirect, to disturb the progress of gestation or to injure the product of conception are criminal, alike violating the laws of nature and of God,”

AUSTIN, Texas — A federal judge appointed to the bench by then-President George W. Bush has struck down a Texas ban on dilation and evacuation (D&E) abortions, also known as dismemberment abortions, finding the prohibition to be an “undue burden” on the “right of a woman” to her child.

Abortion-Procedures-Levatino-DE-NAF-forceps

“An abortion always results in the death of the fetus. The extraction of the fetus from the womb occurs in every abortion. Dismemberment of the fetus is the inevitable result. The evidence before the court is graphic and distasteful,” U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel acknowledged, but nonetheless added, “But this evidence is germane only to the state’s interest in the dignity of fetal life and is weighed on the State’s side of the scale. It does not remove weight from the woman’s side. And it does not add weight to tip the balance in the state’s favor.”

“The State’s valid interest in promoting respect for the life of the unborn, although legitimate, is not sufficient to justify such a substantial obstacle to the constitutionally protected right of a woman to terminate a pregnancy before fetal viability,” he opined.

Planned Parenthood and the Center for Reproductive Rights had sued in July to challenge S.B. 8, a bill that prohibited dismemberment abortions, except for in the case of medical emergency. 

“‘Dismemberment abortion’ means an abortion in which a person, with the purpose of causing the death of an unborn child, dismembers the living unborn child and extracts the unborn child one piece at a time from the uterus through the use of clamps, grasping forceps, tongs, scissors, or a similar instrument that, through the convergence of two rigid levers, slices, crushes, or grasps, or performs any combination of those actions on, a piece of the unborn child’s body to cut or rip the piece from the body,” the bill read, describing the common second-trimester abortion method.

Baby-aborted-6-months-D-and-E
Baby Aborted 6 Months D&E

According to Yeakel’s ruling, attorneys for the state had argued in court that the law does not block mothers from obtaining second trimester abortions because the bill does not ban the procedure when the child is killed by another method first. 

“The State responds that the Act does not render second-trimester abortions unavailable, because fetal demise can be safely achieved with one of three procedures before a physician performs a standard D&E: (1) use of a hypodermic needle to inject the drug digoxin trans-abdominally or vaginally; (2) an injection of potassium chloride directly into the fetal heart; and (3) umbilical-cord transection,” he outlined.

However, Yeakel opined that these methods are potentially unsafe for the mother and would also delay the abortion.

“The court concludes that whether the court weighs the asserted state interests against the effects of the provisions or examines only the effects of the provisions, Plaintiffs have carried their burden of demonstrating that the Act creates an undue burden for a large fraction of women for whom the Act is a substantial rather than an irrelevant restriction,” he wrote.

“The court concludes the Act is an inappropriate use of the State’s regulatory power over the medical profession to bar certain medical procedures and substitute others in furtherance of the State’s legitimate interest in regulating the medical profession in order to promote respect for the life of the unborn,” Yeakel said.

Attorney General Ken Paxton has vowed to appeal the ruling to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

“A five-day trial in district court allowed us to build a record like no other in exposing the truth about the barbaric practice of dismemberment abortions. We are eager to present that extensive record before the 5th Circuit,” he said in a statement. “No just society should tolerate the tearing of living human beings to pieces. We are hopeful the 5th Circuit will respect the will of the Texas legislature by upholding Texas’ lawful authority to protect the dignity of innocent unborn children as they die.”

In his 1854 lecture at the University of Pennsylvania on criminal abortion, obstetrician Hugh Hodge declared, “Human life commences at the time of conception; … the embryo and fetus therefore should be protected during its intra-uterine life as sedulously as after birth.”

“Hence, that all efforts, direct or indirect, to disturb the progress of gestation or to injure the product of conception are criminal, alike violating the laws of nature and of God,” he stated.

Former Abortionist Tells Congressional Committee: ‘I Am a Mass Murderer’

Aultman, now retired from her OB/GYN practice, outlined that she has come to realize that the abortion industry is replete with “extreme propaganda.”

WASHINGTON — A former abortionist turned pro-life OB/GYN told a Congressional panel on Thursday that she lives with the realization that she is a “mass murderer” because of all the lives she ended.

“We know from a scientific standpoint that the baby in the womb is a human being and not just a blob of tissue,” Dr. Kathi Aultman stated before the House Judiciary Committee as support for the Heartbeat Protection Act of 2017. “Birth changes nothing but the baby’s environment. What justification do we have to deny them personhood and human rights until after their birth?”

She explained that there were three cases that opened her eyes about the evils of abortion. The first was a situation where a woman on whom Altman had performed three abortions returned a fourth time.

“I was told by the clinic staff that it was her right to choose to use abortion as her method of birth control and that I had no right to pass judgment on her or to refuse to do the procedure,” she recalled. “I told them it was fine for them to say, but that I was the one who had to do the killing.”

The second incident involved a woman who was asked by an accompanying friend if she wanted to see the baby, and straightforwardly proclaimed, “No! I just want to kill it.”

The third matter involved a mother of four who felt that she could not afford another child and wept throughout her time at the abortion facility.

“What struck me was the apathy of the first patient and the hostility of the second towards the fetus, contrasted with the sorrow and misery of the woman who knew what it was to have a child,” Aultman recalled. “I had finally made the emotional connection between fetus and baby, and realized that the baby was the innocent victim in all of this.”

“The fact that it was unwanted was no longer enough justification for me to kill it, and I could no longer do abortions,” she explained.

Aultman, now retired from her OB/GYN practice, outlined that she has come to realize that the abortion industry is replete with “extreme propaganda.”

“We have sanitized our language to make abortion more palatable and talk about the ‘fetus’ instead of the baby, and ‘terminating the pregnancy’ rather than ‘killing the baby,’” she lamented. “We have have moved farther away from the idea that life is precious and closer to the utilitarian attitudes that destroyed so many lives during the last century.”

“More and more we are embracing a culture of death that only values the strong and healthy,” Aultman said.

And as much as she enjoys seeing the children that she delivered years ago all grown up, it also reminds her of the people who are not here because she killed them.

“I love to meet adults that I delivered, but it’s always bittersweet because I am reminded of all the people I will never meet because I aborted them. It also reminds me that I am a mass murderer,” Aultman bluntly told Congress. “Because we can’t see who they will become, we feel justified in sacrificing babies in the womb for the people we can see.”

According to her bio, Aultman worked as the medical director of Planned Parenthood of Jacksonville from 1981 to 1983, and was also the co-founder of the Rape Treatment Center. 

Mom is Jailed for Refusing to Vaccinate Son with Vaccine Containing Aborted Baby Cells

Bredow is also supported by Right to Life of Michigan, which issued a statement saying that parents should be able to follow their conscience in choosing not to vaccinate their children

A mom in Michigan recently spent several days in jail after she refused to allow her son to receive a vaccine which used cells from aborted babies.

According to LifeNews.com, Detroit resident Rebecca Bredow initially agreed to allow her son to receive the vaccine, but later refused. Bredow’s ex-husband wanted the boy to receive the vaccine.

Bredow was sentenced to seven days in jail for failing to allow the boy’s father to have a say in their son’s health, according to a judge.

Despite the jail time, Bredow says she doesn’t regret her position. “I was trying to protect my kids,” she said. “I was trying to stand up for what I believed in, and it was worth it for me to try and take the risk, because I was trying to stop the vaccinations from happening.” abc

Bredow is also supported by Right to Life of Michigan, which issued a statement saying that parents should be able to follow their conscience in choosing not to vaccinate their children

“There is absolutely no question that a significant number of common vaccines are directly cultured using cells from aborted unborn children,” said Legislative Director for Right to Life Michigan Ed Rivet. “That is how the vaccines are produced. We have long supported the right of parents to refrain from using them or to request alternative versions cultured in untainted cell lines.”

Debi Vinnedge, the director of pro-life group Children of God for Life, wrote in 2015 that it is not necessary for the medical field to use cells from aborted babies for vaccines.

“The fact of the matter is that aborted fetal tissue is absolutely unnecessary for vaccine production or any medical research. There are numerous FDA approved moral cell lines and if human cells are desired, they can be obtained from a plethora of non-objectionable sources including umbilical cord, cord blood and other adult stem cells,” wrote Vinnedge.

Former StemExpress Worker Recalls Daily ‘Grocery List’-Like Outline of Baby Body Parts Needed From Planned Parenthood

StemExpress was accused of similar actions, paying Planned Parenthood $55 for a baby and then selling his or her body parts for $250 each, making $1000 from just one child.

A former procurement technician at the biomedical research supply company StemExpress is explaining how she would open her email each day to find a “grocery list”-like outline of certain baby body parts that she and others needed to strive to obtain while spending the day at Planned Parenthood.

In the Center for Medical Progress’ second whistle-blower video, released on Tuesday, Holly O’Donnell provided actual emails and documents as proof of the workings of StemExpress inside Planned Parenthood.Baby-parts

“We would turn on Messenger on our laptops, we would go to one of the medical rooms, and we would open up the task page—which it shows you what the researchers want, [such as] how many specimens that they want for that day or that week,” she explained. “And if you were able to get that specimen, you would edit the task page and put how many you had and put your initials.”“Roughly saying, it was like a grocery list of what to get for that day,” O’Donnell said. 

She recalled that she would approach the head nurse at the Planned Parenthood facility and advise them what StemExpress was looking for on that date.

“They’d give you a sheet of the appointments, which women were coming in … and if they knew how far along they were,” O’Donnell outlined.

She would then compare who was coming in for an abortion that day with what was on the task page provided by StemExpress.

“Well, at 11 o’clock, we’ve got a 15-week. I need a liver. [So I’d] highlight her,” O’Donnell illustrated. “So that way, I could prioritize my day and know who to talk to.”

Sometimes, Planned Parenthood staff would let O’Donnell know that a mother that was of her needed gestation was present, so that she could obtain the woman’s consent that the baby’s remains be used for research.

One of the task schedules shown in the video from March 20, 2013 outlines that a liver from a baby 18-22 weeks gestation was needed for UCLA that day, and a liver, thymus and skin sample from a baby 16-20 weeks gestation was needed for the University of Massachusetts and Harvard.

“Ship all tissue under Harvard’s FedEx number,” one of the task notes read.

O’Donnell left her job at StemExpress in 2013, and StemExpress discontinued its partnership with Planned Parenthood in 2015 after CMP’s undercover investigative videos were released to the public.  

As previously reported, last year, the Congressional Select Panel on Infant Lives issued numerous criminal referrals while investigating Planned Parenthood and its partners, including StemExpress.

Specifically, the Congressional Committee noted in its report that StemExpress, Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR) and Novogenics Laboratories purchased the bodily organs of aborted babies from several California Planned Parenthood locations, and then resold them at substantially higher prices. The organizations were also accused of hiking the prices above costs for “transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control or storage of” the body parts.

 

“In June of 2014, an ABR technician obtained a 20-week-old fetus at a Planned Parenthood clinic, for which it paid $60,” the report outlined. “From that one fetus, ABR sold its brain to one customer for $325, both of its eyes for $325 each ($650 total) to a second customer, a portion of its liver for $325 to a third customer, its thymus for $325 and another portion of its liver for $325 to a fourth customer, and its lung for $325 to a fifth customer.”

StemExpress was accused of similar actions, paying Planned Parenthood $55 for a baby and then selling his or her body parts for $250 each, making $1000 from just one child.

The Committee also noted that despite Planned Parenthood’s “constant statements to the media that [its] affiliates had merely been recovering their costs” in receiving payment from ABR, StemExpress and other companies, its attorneys told the investigative Congressional panel that the Planned Parenthood offices only sought to determine their costs after-the-fact in light of national scrutiny.

“Around that time, Planned Parenthood announced it would no longer accept any payments in connection with its fetal tissue transfer programs,” Sen. Chuck Grassley explained.

bbb

Planned Parenthood vs. Little Girls: Sex-Selective Abortion in America

“Modern abortions politics has done strange things to our culture.” Those who claim to be advocates for women turn a blind eye to the single greatest form of discrimination against them.

The worst form of discrimination against women in our time is one that is virtually ignored by feminists.

The abortion industry has long billed itself as a champion of women’s rights. Almost thirty years ago, the head of the National Abortion Rights Action League, or NARAL, told the New York Times that “Abortion is the guarantor of a woman’s right to participate fully in the social and political life of society.”

But as Cathy Ruse pointed out recently at the Daily Signal, abortion is being used right now to keep millions of women from participating in life, at all.

By some estimates, there are as many as 160 million girls and women missing worldwide because of sex-selective abortion. Modern technology that allows parents to find out before birth whether they’re having a boy or girl, coupled with traditional cultural preferences for boys, results in nothing less than “gendercide”—the systematic killing of female babies over males. And it’s not just happening overseas.

Newsweek reported last year that sex-selective abortions are on the rise right here in the U. S. One study by Columbia University found that Chinese, Korean and Indian parents on their second pregnancy gave birth to 117 boys for every 100 girls. For third children, the ratio shot up to a staggering 151 boys for every 100 girls.  

The culprit, says Newsweek, is sex-selective abortion. So-called “family planning” clinics like those affiliated with Planned Parenthood are helping women kill their unborn daughters. You’d think organizations that pride themselves on protecting and empowering women would want this to stop, but you’d be wrong.

Last year, after the state of Indiana passed a law banning sex-selective abortion, a federal district judge granted a permanent injunction against the law at the request of—you guessed it—Planned Parenthood. In the name of ending discrimination against women, this abortion giant is literally making sure fewer women exist.

This is beyond perverse.

Even worse, pro-choice and feminist support for gendercide remains virtually unflinching. Back in March, when Arkansas enacted a ban on sex-selective abortions, the American Civil Liberties Union complained that the law prevents women from “obtaining abortions that they want for whatever reason,” even, apparently, if that reason is preferring boys over girls.

As Ruse remarks, “Modern abortions politics has done strange things to our culture.” Those who claim to be advocates for women turn a blind eye to the single greatest form of discrimination against them.

Now occasionally, a pro-choice feminist will let slip how he or she really feels about gendercide. That’s what happened back in 2011 when Pulitzer finalist Mara Hvistendahl published a book called “Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys Over Girls, and the Consequences of a World Full of Men.” In it, she decries systematic discrimination against female fetuses, but comes up short of blaming the real culprit: abortion.

Reviewing the book in The New York Times, Ross Douthat observed that the problem of gendercide puts pro-choicers in a “distinctly uncomfortable position.” They insist “that the unborn aren’t human beings yet, and that the right to abortion is nearly absolute.” But this leaves them “struggling to define a victim for the crime [they’ve] uncovered.”

As pro-lifers, we need to continually point out this glaring inconsistency in the pro-choice worldview. To anyone not sold out to abortion-on-demand, it’s obvious that the sex of a baby is not a legitimate reason to kill her.

Of course, there’s never a legitimate reason to deliberately kill a baby—in the womb or out. But the 160 million missing girls worldwide should convince many that Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry—far from empowering women—have become the greatest perpetrators of their extermination.

Written by By John Stonestreet