B
PHOENIX — When Planned Parenthood Arizona recently filed suit in federal court against Arizona’s legal regulation of permissive abortion because the number of abortions had declined, the importance of pro-life activism was illustrated.
When Democrats win elections, Democrat politicians usually promote more abortion. When Republicans win elections, preborn babies and their mothers usually receive more support. Democrat officials also attack pro-life pregnancy centers and shut down Catholic adoption agencies.
This serves to refute misguided liberal Catholics who say they’re impelled to vote for Democratic candidates because that party is closer to Catholic social teaching. Instead, on the foundational issues of life and morality that precede all else, the Democratic platform is at war against innocent life and social justice.
Echoing Planned Parenthood deceptions, Democrats say abortion should be a matter “between a woman and her physician.” The long-disproved implication is that the doctor is her personal physician acquainted with her medical history. But the high-volume abortionist likely never saw the pregnant mother before and never will see her again.
Her own physician might well know nothing about her undergoing an abortion, unless damage from it later becomes an issue.
If she suffers complications, you can expect the abortionist to say, “Go to the emergency room. There’s nothing I can do for you.” Calling him “her physician” is about like saying “her dietitian” or “her nutritionist” is the person who shoves a packet of ketchup at her at the fast food drive-through window.
Part of the recent lawsuit says Arizona shouldn’t require that licensed physicians be the ones who do the abortions.
Arizona’s Republican attorney general, Mark Brnovich, responded to the April 11 lawsuit by saying, “Planned Parenthood might be disappointed its business model is failing, but we’re talking about human beings, not appliances. Planned Parenthood should work to change the law if it doesn’t like the policies, not rely on the courts to do its bidding.”
And the Arizona Republican Party, chaired by pro-life family physician Kelli Ward, issued a statement saying, “Arizona is routinely ranked the most pro-life state in the country because of our sensible, compassionate laws that ensure all women are informed of their health-care choices, while protecting the lives of the most vulnerable in society.”
The GOP statement continued, “With this dangerous lawsuit, Planned Parenthood is threatening to reverse policies that put women and children ahead of politics, revealing just how out of touch the nation’s largest abortion provider is with Arizona values.”
Can anyone imagine any of the gaggle of Democrat radicals seeking to be elected U.S. president next year saying anything remotely similar? Instead, they promote massive abortion and assaults against women’s dignity by hiding behind evasion and euphemism about “health care” and “autonomy.”
Conservative Arizona Republican consultant Constantin Querard told The Wanderer on April 22: “The difference between the parties is pronounced on this issue, in part because the GOP remains a pro-life party and, in increasingly large part, because the Democrats have moved beyond a pro-abortion position to a pro-infanticide position in many cases.
“If the African-American voters who make up such a large part of the Democrat base ever recognize the old slave-trader ‘people as commodities’ mentality that is so pervasive in today’s Democrat Party, there will be a profound exodus. The Blexit movement is, in part, based on these issues,” Querard added.
Earlier in his statement, he said, “Planned Parenthood is in the business of killing babies, and it is a very profitable business. That is why they fight so hard to be able to kill babies. As America becomes more and more pro-life, their business model will be negatively impacted, and that’s a good thing.
“One hundred fifty to 200 years ago, slave traders ran a profitable business treating people as disposable commodities, and we should be no more concerned about Planned Parenthood’s profitability than the slave traders of 200 years ago. Both should be out of business permanently,” Querard said.
“There is no shortage of women’s health-care providers who aren’t trying to kill your baby,” he said.
Phoenix attorney John Jakubczyk, a former president of Arizona Right to Life, told The Wanderer on April 22:
“Planned Parenthood is desperate and also needs to continue its aggressive approach to the issue. It knows that soon the Supreme Court will do ‘something’ and so are anticipating that ‘something’ by filing lawsuits throughout the country and demanding its minions (read legislators and congresspeople) introduce extreme pro-abortion legislation.
“As more people see films like Unplanned,” Jakubczyk added, “less people will support Planned Parenthood. Having gotten a free ride for almost 100 years, things are starting to turn. One can only hope that the Court will act soon to reverse Roe v. Wade, recognize the humanity of the unborn child, and declare the killing of such children a violation of the law.”
Although Planned Parenthood sloganeering chatters about “a woman and her physician,” two of the main aims in the lawsuit against Arizona oppose Arizona law requiring that physicians do the abortions, and that they personally see the women instead of practicing “telemedicine.”
Planned Parenthood saw these requirements as imposing harmful restrictions on providing permissive abortion. Some news reports noted Planned Parenthood’s distress at losing business.
Howard Fischer, of Capitol Media Services, reported on April 11: “Bryan Howard, president of Planned Parenthood Arizona, said the result is borne out in the fact that the number of abortions performed has dropped from between 9,000 and 10,000 a year a dozen years ago to fewer than 6,500 now.”
If women seeking abortions do so as a matter of their free choice, one might think Planned Parenthood would be pleased that fewer pregnant mothers believe they have to take this last resort. On the other hand, as former PP clinic director Abby Johnson revealed, PP has quotas it seeks to fill for numbers of abortions.
Reporter Fischer quoted Cathi Herrod, president of the pro-life Center for Arizona Policy, defending Arizona restrictions “like a requirement for a personal consultation with a doctor 24 hours before terminating a pregnancy and forbidding doctors from prescribing the pills for a medication abortion unless there is a face-to-face visit.
“‘Women who are considering abortion deserve a chance to be one-on-one with a doctor before they take the abortion pill,’ Herrod said,” Fischer wrote.
Other attorneys in the suit attacking Arizona law come from Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the Center for Reproductive Rights.
In an April 15 post on aspects of the lawsuit, Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona included abortionists’ interest in aborting minority women:
“Medically unnecessary laws have essentially stripped abortion access from many women living in Navajo, Hopi, Hualapai, and Apache tribal jurisdictions, among others, as well as rural women in other regions of the state who already face many barriers to accessing essential health care.”
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress