Joe Biden Denied Communion by Priest

The pastor of a South Carolina church refused Sunday to give communion to Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden due to his support for legal abortion. Biden, who is Catholic, was campaigning in South Carolina when he stopped Sunday morning at St. Anthony Catholic Church in Florence, S.C.

Rev. Robert E. Morey, pastor of the church, confirmed Monday he denied communion to the former vice president. 

“Sadly, this past Sunday, I had to refuse Holy Communion to Former Vice President Joe Biden,” Morey said, according to WPDE in Florence. “Holy Communion signifies we are one with God, each other and the Church. Our actions should reflect that. Any public figure who advocates for abortion places himself or herself outside of Church teaching. As a priest, it is my responsibility to minister to those souls entrusted to my care, and I must do so even in the most difficult situations. I will keep Mr. Biden in my prayers.”

During a Democratic debate in mid-October, Biden pledged to ensure abortion remains legal, even if the Supreme Court were to overturn Roe v. Wade. 

“I would make sure that … we codify Roe v. Wade,” Biden said. “The public is already there. Things have changed. … Reproductive rights are a constitutional right. And, in fact, every woman should have that right.”

Then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger – who later became Pope Benedict XVI – wrote a memorandum to U.S. Catholic bishops in 2004, explaining what they should do when a Catholic politician who supports abortion rights presents himself or herself for communion, Catholic News Agency reported. 

A politician “consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws” would constitute “formal cooperation” in grave sin, the letter said. Ratzinger was referencing Canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law, which states that “those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.”

“[The] Pastor should meet with him,” Ratzinger wrote, “instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.” 

If the politician refuses to change, Ratzinger wrote, then the “minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it.”

 

Episcopal Priest Gives Pre-Paid Gas Cards to Women Seeking Abortions

Episcopal priest Reverend Katherine Ragsdale, with her organization National Abortion Federation, will hand out pre-paid gas cards for women seeking abortions, according to FaithWire.

“Since there are a limited number of providers and states continue to impose additional restrictions, many women have to travel long distances to reach the closest provider who can help them,” NAF said in a statement. “And this situation will only worsen as the political environment continues to become more hostile toward abortion rights.”

Ragsdale, who is the Interim President and CEO of NAF, believes the initiative will provide more support for women “so that they can make, and act on, the best decisions for themselves and their families.”

The pilot program will run for three months and start in states that have waiting periods or other abortion restrictions, LifeNews reports.

The response comes in light of several states furthering restrictive abortion limits. States such as Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana have nearly abolished terminations and several other states are poised to do the same.

Former Plymouth priest the Rev. Mally Lloyd married the Rev. Katherine Ragsdale, dean and president of the Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, on New Year’s Day. The Rev. Lloyd, a former pastor at Christ Church in Plymouth, is now a ranking official of the Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts.

As the first lesbian to become a leader of an Episcopal seminary, Ragsdale has been no stranger to controversy.  World Magazine reported Ragsdale’s allegiance lies not only with pro-choice causes, but pro-abortion.

“Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done,” she said at a pro-abortion rally. “Let me hear you say it: abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done.

She continued: “The ability to enjoy God’s good gift of sexuality without compromising one’s education, life’s work, or ability to put to use God’s gifts and call is simply [a] blessing.”

Catherine Glenn Foster, president and CEO of Americans United for Life, the largest pro-life legal organization in the country, believes the pilot program doesn’t help women but abortion centers.

Katherine Ragsdale Babylonian pastor

“This is a half-baked publicity stunt by NAF meant to create the impression that there is even a need for this,” she said. “Why doesn’t the abortion industry—dominated by a ‘non-profit’ that has over a hundred million in the bank—lower its prices instead? Because it’s all about profit for them.”

 

~ Original Post Written By Mikaela Mathews | ChristianHeadlines.com Contributor

Supreme Court Upholds Indiana’s Abortion Law

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court turned down an appeal by the State of Indiana to reinstate a strict abortion law that outlawed the procedure based on so-called fetal characteristics like race, sex or disability. It did, however, uphold the part of the law that required abortion providers to bury or cremate fetal remains

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court  sidestepped part of a major abortion case, a new sign that the court is not yet moving aggressively to test the constitutional right to abortion established in Roe v. Wade.

In an apparent compromise in a case from Indiana, the justices turned down an appeal that asked the court to reinstate a state law banning abortions sought solely because of the sex or disability of a fetus. But the court upheld part of the same law requiring abortion providers to bury or cremate fetal remains.

The case, Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, No. 18-483, had been closely watched because it could have given the Supreme Court its first chance to consider the constitutionality of a state law restricting abortion since Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh replaced Justice Anthony M. Kennedy last year.

Justice Kennedy had been a cautious supporter of abortion rights, while Justice Kavanaugh’s limited record on the subject as an appeals court judge suggested some skepticism.

The modest move on Tuesday left for another day the consideration of state laws limiting abortion that were enacted, at least partly, to challenge Roe v. Wade. Such laws are being enacted at a brisk pace, including one in Alabama banning almost all abortions in the state, without exceptions for rape and incest, and others that bar the procedure after doctors can detect what the measures call a “fetal heartbeat,” which happens around six weeks of pregnancy.

The new laws are intended to give the Supreme Court an opportunity to reconsider Roe.

The court’s decision on Tuesday, issued without briefing on the merits or oral arguments, was unsigned and just three pages long. The court stressed that its decision on fetal remains was not a ruling about abortion rights.

In declining to hear an appeal on the law banning abortions sought for specific reasons, the court said it was expressing no views on the constitutionality of such laws. A split among lower courts is ordinarily required for Supreme Court review, and in this case, the court noted, there was no such disagreement.

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor said they would have denied review of both issues in the case.

The Indiana law was enacted in 2016 and signed by Gov. Mike Pence, now the vice president. It prohibited all abortions, at any time during a pregnancy, solely sought based on the fetus’s sex, or because it had been diagnosed with Down syndrome or “any another disability,” listing conditions like scoliosis, albinism, dwarfism and “physical or mental disease.” The law also barred abortions sought because of characteristics like race or national origin.

The state law also imposed limits on the disposal of fetal remains, though it allowed mass cremations and did not impose any restrictions on women who disposed of the remains themselves.

A statement issued by Mr. Pence’s office on Tuesday said he “commends the Supreme Court for upholding a portion of Indiana law that safeguards the sanctity of human life by requiring that remains of aborted babies be treated with respect and dignity.”

“We remain hopeful,” the statement said, “that at a later date the Supreme Court will review one of numerous state laws across the U.S. that bar abortion based on sex, race or disability.”

A three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, in Chicago, unanimously struck down the provision limiting permissible reasons for having an abortion, though one judge said he did so reluctantly and only because he was bound by Supreme Court precedent.

In 1992, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the Supreme Court ruled that states may not prohibit abortions or place substantial obstacles in the way of women seeking them before fetal viability. Judge William J. Bauer, writing for the majority on the Seventh Circuit, said that ruling doomed the law’s restrictions.

“These provisions are far greater than a substantial obstacle; they are absolute prohibitions on abortions prior to viability, which the Supreme Court has clearly held cannot be imposed by the state,” he wrote in the decision issued by the appeals panel.

Judge Daniel A. Manion voted with the majority in that case, but did not adopt its reasoning. “Indiana has a compelling interest in attempting to prevent this type of private eugenics,” he wrote. “But the fact remains that Casey has plainly established an absolute right to have an abortion before viability.”

“That today’s outcome is compelled begs for the Supreme Court to reconsider Roe and Casey,” he wrote.

The Seventh Circuit panel had divided 2 to 1 on the part of the law concerning fetal remains. Judge Bauer, writing for the majority in that decision, said the distinctions in the law were not rational, noting that it allowed women to dispose of remains as they saw fit but required abortion providers to treat them largely as they did other human remains.

In dissent, Judge Manion wrote that Indiana was entitled to insist on “the dignified and humane disposal of the remains of unborn children.”

The full Seventh Circuit initially agreed to rehear the panel’s ruling on the fetal remains provision but later announced that it had deadlocked after a judge recused himself.

Dissenting from the full court’s decision not to rehear the case, Judge Frank H. Easterbrook, joined by three other judges, wrote that both parts of the panel’s decision were misguided.

“Casey and other decisions hold that, until a fetus is viable, a woman is entitled to decide whether to bear a child,” he wrote of the provision on permissible reasons. “But there is a difference between ‘I don’t want a child’ and ‘I want a child, but only a male’ or ‘I want only children whose genes predict success in life.’”

*Editors Note: Despite what laws are agreed upon or not, abortion is murder and murdering an innocent baby is wrong! The word “abort” is used instead of “murder” to make it more socially acceptable.  Thou shalt not kill! 

 

Planned Parenthood Murdered 321,384 Babies Last Year and Received $543 Million From Taxpayers

“Their annual report demonstrates that Planned Parenthood is not a healthcare organization but a political movement, intent on forcing their pro-abortion views on as many Americans as possible.” -Abby Johnson

[LifeSiteNews.com] Planned Parenthood aborted 321,384 babies during its 2016-2017 fiscal year, according to its new annual report. (Photo: aborted baby/ courtesy Youtube)

 

This is a slight decrease from its last annual report, which revealed the company committed 328,348 in 2015-2016. Planned Parenthood’s total revenue is $1.46 billion, with $543.7 million—37 percent—of that coming from taxpayers.

Many of the contraceptives Planned Parenthood dispenses can also act as abortifacients.

Jim Sedlak, executive director of American Life League (ALL), said this is Planned Parenthood’s lowest self-reported annual abortion number since 2007.

“In addition to the reduction in abortions, Planned Parenthood also reported a slight lessening in its government funding (from $554.6 million to $543.7 million),” said Sedlak. “Planned Parenthood also reported lower numbers of female birth control customers, emergency contraceptive kits, PAP tests, and pregnancy tests. In fact, it reported that its total number of unique customers was the same as last year—2.4 million individuals.”

By attracting 721,000 new donors giving an average of $120 each, the abortion company added $86.5 to its coffers, according to the report.

“Our initial analysis is that Planned Parenthood spent the last year reducing medical activity and increasing its community and political organizing,” ALL observed. The group says it will release a detailed analysis of Planned Parenthood’s latest report in the coming days.

Planned Parenthood provided just 3,889 adoption referrals (exactly 1,000 more from the number it put on its last report) and 7,762 “prenatal services” from 2016-2017. That’s one adoption referral for every 83 abortions and prenatal care for one woman for every 239 abortions.

An investigation by the pro-life group Live Action released in January 2017 showed that Planned Parenthood facilities across the U.S. regularly turn away women seeking prenatal services. Only three of the 68 Planned Parenthood centers visited by Live Action investigators were able to provide women with an ultrasound for a purpose other than abortion. 

The report says Planned Parenthood provided miscarriage care to just 1,182 women.

Planned Parenthood touted its support from the technology, entertainment, and fashion industries as successes. It boasted of a leading a “two-day interfaith convention with more than 40 clergy and faith leaders who support access to reproductive health care.”

“Typical under Cecile Richards’ leadership of Planned Parenthood, the abortion giant once again cut their prenatal services to almost non-existent levels, cut contraception services, and served 100,000 less people than last year, while still committing over 321,000 abortions,” said Abby Johnson, a former Planned Parenthood director who is now a pro-life advocate.

“Their annual report demonstrates that Planned Parenthood is not a healthcare organization but a political movement, intent on forcing their pro-abortion views on as many Americans as possible,” said Johnson, who now runs a ministry that helps abortion workers leave the industry.

“We’ve seen first-hand the impact that former abortion workers, especially those from Planned Parenthood, have on closing their former places of employment by helping people to leave – ensuring no one is left to run the clinics,” she said.

Planned Parenthood’s annual report also reveals it has “expanded” its focus on providing transgender hormone treatments at 17 locations.

Despite not performing mammograms last year or having any mammogram machines, Planned Parenthood reported that it did 336,614 breast exams – the type of breast checks which women are able to do on their own.

The abortion giant’s report frames itself to supporters as a leader in the “resistance” against the Trump administration and “an increasingly hostile political climate.”

It used its 50 new campus chapters as proof of what it considers to be a strong youth base. But Students for Life of America (SFLA) started “nearly 120” new campus chapters last year, according to its President Kristan Hawkins.

SFLA “now has more than 1,200 student groups on campuses in all 50 states,” said Hawkins. “Planned Parenthood reports training 750 young activists from 11 cities while Students for Life trained nearly 11,000 students from across the country. The pro-life generation clearly has more energy, passion, and motivation to defund Planned Parenthood.”

“It is vital that Planned Parenthood be defunded and student lives protected from a predatory and profit-driven enterprise,” said Hawkins. “But there is a silver lining in this release, as we can see that more students are responding to the human rights interests of the preborn than to the business interests of Planned Parenthood.”

Professing ‘Christian’ Couple Refuses Woman’s Pleas Not to Abort Baby replying “We’ve prayed about it”

Who did they pray to? Do these “Christians” REALLY believe that God approved or gave them permission to KILL A BABY? If this woman wasn’t “ready to be a mom” yet, WHY DID SHE HAVE SEX??!!! What type of Christian man takes his wife to an abortion clinic to kill his child???? AND…. DOESN’T THE BIBLE SAY THOU SHALT NOT KILL??? 

A viral VIDEO  posted to social media on Friday shows a man and woman who professed to be Christians declining a woman’s pleas not to abort their baby, stating that the child would interfere with their plans and that they had “prayed about” the matter.

While the background behind the video, such as the location of the recording, has not been divulged, the footage captures the nearly seven-minute conversation between the young couple and a woman named Kate.

“You guys aren’t here for an abortion, are you?” called out Kate, who stood on the sidewalk to help abortion-minded women turn from murder.

 

“I am not ready to become a mom,” the young woman responded. “I’ve got so many plans to do and I feel like a child [myself] right now.”

“I totally understand that, but I need to tell you the truth that you already are a mom,” Kate explained. “It’s too late for that. You already have a human child in your womb that’s just as valuable and just as human as you are. And so, what you’re about to do is not to undo that choice, but to kill that human.”

The woman remarked that what she does is her own business. Kate asked if it would likewise be her own business if she killed her one-year-old because the child interfered with her plans. The woman opined that such a situation would be different because the child was already born and the mother had an emotional bond with the infant. She stated that she doesn’t have an emotional connection with her child “at this point.”

Kate warned the young woman that she was about to do something she could never undo.

“Just because your son or daughter is really, really small and you can’t see him, and he’s really weak and defenseless right now, doesn’t make it less terrible to murder him than if he were older, or you could see him. He doesn’t change from a non-baby to a baby as he’s born,” she explained.The father of the child then chimed into the discussion.

“We understand that,” he said. “We’ve sat and talked about this and prayed about it, thought about it.”

“So, you guys are Christians? You’re followers of Jesus Christ?” Kate asked.

“Yes,” the father replied. “And unfortunately, we’ve got ourselves into this situation … and it’s not like we want to do this, but it’s something we feel like we have to [do].”

Kate explained that there was no circumstance that warranted killing their son or daughter.

“You’re going to have to stand before God and give an account for yourself, and He’s going to say, ‘I sent someone to warn you and you killed your son or daughter anyway.’ Please don’t do this,” she pleaded.

“I know that this seems inconvenient, that you have a lot of plans, but I promise you doing the right thing and being faithful to God and being a good mother and father is better, and will result in a good life for you [better] than whatever you have planned that you feel you have to get rid of this child for,” Kate added.

She reiterated that killing a baby in the womb is no different than murdering them outside of the womb because they are inconvenient.

“I understand, but unfortunately, we’ve made our decision,” the father stated.

As Kate continued to plead with the man to take care of both mother and child, he repeated that the two had already made up their minds.

“I get it. And I have my thought process and I’m not saying it’s right, but it’s kind of what I’m doing,” he said.

“So why would you do something you know is wrong?” Kate asked.

“Because I’m a human and I make mistakes,” the father answered.

Kate then warned the couple that they were not simply making a mistake, but intentionally doing what they know is wrong.

“No, no, no. Making mistakes is not intentional. You’re about to intentionally sin against God and against this child,” she said. “That’s rebellion. That’s blasphemy against your Creator.”

“I understand,” the father replied.

He advised that the two would think about it and consider their options. Kate said she was not sure that was so, and that it seemed that the two had their heart set on abortion.

“I’m trying to persuade you not to even go into this place,” she explained.

“You won’t,” the woman replied forthrightly. “I do not want this child. I didn’t even want it when I found out that I was pregnant. So, if you can continue to tell me that I’m making a bad mistake, I’ll make that choice…”

“It’s not just a bad mistake. It’s murder,” Kate noted.

“I understand,” the woman replied.

Kate again warned that the couple will have to give an account before God for killing their son or daughter.

“Then I can take that sin,” the woman asserted.

“No, you can’t, ma’am,” Kate answered.

“I don’t care,” the woman bluntly admitted.

“Why don’t you care?” Kate asked. “You guys say you’re followers of Jesus Christ, but you don’t care about innocent children?

“Yes, we are,” the father replied. “We understand.”

He then asserted that all sin is equal.

“Ma’am, I will take your child if you don’t want it,” Kate pleaded as the two began to walk away.

“I don’t want to go through the process,” the woman called out.

Kate continued to urge the couple to love their son or daughter as his or her parents, but the two continued on their way and proceeded to enter the abortion facility. It is not known what happened after that point.

 

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

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.

“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&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.

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

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