Monday, February 28, 2011

The Changing Face of Pro-Life

A pro-choice rally in Chicago, Walk for Choice, was surprised by a joyful group of young pro-lifers. They brought yellow helium balloons with the word Life on them, kept hidden in black garbage bags until they could release them simultaneously. The pro-choice supporters were asked to wear orange; hence the pro-lifers held a sign that said Orange You Glad to See Us! And they took over the pro-choice chants with Hey hey ho ho! Roe v Wade has got to go!

Meanwhile on the other side ---

One sign carried by a pro-choice supporter reveals that many people haven't got a clue about conception, eggs and fertilization. Everyone should know that an egg is not a baby chick; that egg must be fertilized. This person, trying to compare chicken eggs to human beings in utero is revealing incredible ignorance, sadly typical of many pro-choice supporters. The egg in the uterus, unlike an egg, is fertilized. And fertilization of the egg is exactly what makes a human being come into existence. One thing has to be acknowledged; the pro-life position really does have science on its side.

htAmerican Papist

Friday, February 25, 2011

The Necessity of Integrity for the Pro-Life Movement

Critique of Live Action by Christopher Tollefsen

As my husband said to me a few days ago, Live Action may produce some short-term results but their actions will also produce a re-action amongst pro-choice opponents, the extent of which we just don't know. Live Action's methods of deception and lying to gain information that could disable Planned Parenthood may bring about irreparable harm to the pro-life movement. Who will be able to trust us now, if we have resorted to devious means to achieve our ends? What else will we do in order to save lives? Shoot an abortionist? Why not? The reasoning would be that one death would prevent so many others.

It is tempting to refer to the “pimp” character in Live Action’s videos as an “actor.” But this is misleading. Actors perform for willing and aware audiences who realize they are watching a fiction. The “pimp,” rather, lied, repeatedly and pervasively, in his conversation with the Planned Parenthood worker: he presented himself as other than he truly was, and his purpose in doing so was clearly to deceive.

Of course, the makers of the Live Action video could argue that the end—the good sought—justified a morally problematic means. But such a form of argument is a centerpiece of those arguments for abortion which acknowledge the “special respect and value” owed the unborn child, but which still justify his or her destruction for the sake of the consequences. “Do no evil that good may come about” should be central to the pro-life movement’s ethos.

Nor can it be said that Live Action’s behavior towards the Planned Parenthood workers was loving. Under most circumstances, to speak the truth to another just is a demand of love. But under all circumstances, to seek to deceive is to create a relationship with another based on falsity, and this seems inevitably to be unloving. While often undesired, it is a paradigmatically loving thing to do to make known to another the moral wrongness of what they are doing. Indeed, those who protest and pray outside abortion clinics are acting lovingly in speaking the truth. But to encourage wrongdoing through falsity does no good for the deceived agent.

So, while the increased scrutiny of Planned Parenthood is a good thing, and will conceivably lead to the even greater good of a general defunding of this morally bankrupt organization, I can take no joy in Live Action’s approach. They seem to have “fought fire with fire,” combating deceit and lack of charity with more of the same. The pro-life movement must be better than that, always, and it must be willing to engage in self-criticism when it fails to meet its own exacting standards.

Christopher O. Tollefsen is Professor of Philosophy at the University of South Carolina and a senior fellow of the Witherspoon Institute. His latest book, co-authored with Robert P. George, is Embryo: A Defense of Human Life (Doubleday, 2008). Tollefsen sits on the editorial board of Public Discourse.

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Oh Canada, how far from compassion

The ongoing case of baby Joseph Maraachli in a London, Ontario hospital is now on Fox News. Click here to view the video.
Fox News

The parents know that their son is going to die; in fact they had another child die nine years ago from a similar problem. What they want is for the doctors to perform a tracheotomy so that they can bring their son home and care for him there. The hospital is refusing; they want instead to remove Joseph's breathing tube, which will cause him to suffocate to death.

The hospital is trumping the parents' rights in this case. So the parents are pursuing legal means to get their baby transferred to a hospital in Michigan where doctors will perform the minor surgery and release the baby to his parents. As Doctor London says in the interview, in the US doctors go to court to get parents to consent to certain procedures; this case is baffling her because it is the parents who have to go to court to get a minor procedure done. Why are the doctors and the hospital refusing the parents this request?

Americans will sit up and pay attention to this, because it is obvious that this is what happens when health care is controlled by the state; the state then decides what you get, when you get it, and if you get it.

“This would be a second tragedy for the parents,” said Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition. “Not only must they accept that their child is terminally ill, ... but their power to even decide how to care for their child is going to be removed from them - only because they love him.”

Get the latest on this story at LifeSiteNews

Also read the updates on Alex Schadenberg's blog; Alex is the head of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition in Canada
Alex Schadenberg

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

A Great Man Passes

Yesterday, Bernard Nathanson died at the age of 84 after a difficult battle with cancer. As so many others, I had heard of Nathanson years ago when he released the video The Silent Scream, the photographic display of an early suction abortion. This is seen to be the turning point for Nathanson in his journey from pro-abort to pro-life. But his journey began years before; this was the last straw and, after that ultrasound, he only performed one more abortion in his career, and he felt obliged to do that for a friend.

Nathanson is one of my heroes. I felt as if I had come to know the man through his book The Hand of God, but it was reading Aborting America that made me really come to appreciate this extremely intelligent man (you just have to read his prose to see his writing skills). In many ways, he reminded me of my father, also a medical doctor and a very intelligent man who could run circles around people with his arguments. Both had very high principles and it was those principles that led Nathanson to the place where he dared to be brutally honest with himself. He admitted that abortion was taking human lives and he followed the consequence of that thought to a place not many go - to publicly admitting his wrongs, to working to advance the pro-life ideology, and to acknowledging his sin before his Creator.

I am deeply troubled by my own increasing certainly that I had in fact presided over 60,000 deaths. - Bernard Nathanson, Deeper into Abortion, New England Journal of Medicine, 1974

A few years ago, I thought the biography of Nathanson would make a wonderful movie and I even thought it was the story that only Mel Gibson could produce. Unfortunately Gibson himself battled his own personal demons and appears to have lost. Perhaps someone will write this story and produce such a movie, because many people would benefit from knowing the truth about the man who was so key to legalizing abortion in the USA and his subsequent conversion.

I pray that Bernard Nathanson finds the peace that he sought during his life and that he will enjoy the joy of heaven, surrounded by the forgiveness of those whose lives he took part in ending.

Monday, February 21, 2011

On Staying True

There has been a flurry of blog posts about the videos made by Live Action. I am sure that most people who keep connected with pro-life issues know about the seven videos released by Live Action, videos that showed actors posing as pimps and prostitutes catching Planned Parenthood employees on tape, giving advice on how to secure STD testing and abortions for young girls engaged in sex work. The videos were even raised as evidence in the House of Representatives last week as a bill was put forward to deny funding to Planned Parenthood. The bill was passed, and pro-lifers are rejoicing over this victory, but it still has to pass the Senate and can eventually be vetoed by the President himself, so it is not a done deal.

Jill Stanek posted the question over a week ago, Is it morally acceptable to lie? with regards to the Live Action videos. And received 170 comments, the topic certainly raises debate. The question had been raised by some pro-life people as to the morality of Live Action's methods. The majority of people come down on the side of Live Action, with the best argument (in my mind) being that it is morally ethical to lie to someone who is not hurt by this deception, and if that lie is being used to expose a truth that would be beneficial. There is no doubt that the coverup of rape and sex abuse of minors by Planned Parenthood is wrong and exposing that is definitely something desirable.

Even Peter Kreeft, a noted philosophy professor at Boston College has weighed in to say that what Live Action did was right. And Stephen Kellmeyer has written a good response, claiming that Kreeft is abandoning logic, his very life's work, with emotionalism and gut reaction.

I suppose I am guilty of gut reaction myself. But this whole thing worries me and has been hanging around my mind for the better part of a week. Something is just not right; in the same way that I cannot endorse the pro-life activity of Randall Terry, I cannot endorse and support the activity of Lila Rose.

Going into a Planned Parenthood clinic and using actors to get information from the employees there is deceitful. Now people argue is it a lie in the sense of the Ten Commandments? and one can get lost in the long arguments that follow that trail. And the worrisome question then arises - did hiding Jews in the Second World War - was that a lie? was it wrong to lie to the Nazis in order to save lives?

I find the Nazi example not analagous, because it would be like comparing murder to self-defense. Lila Rose and her crew initiate the action of going in to the clinics and posing as pimps and prostitutes; preventing Nazis from finding hidden Jews is akin to defending one's self and one's family from an intruder, and self-defense is morally defensible. Live Action initiated the deceit; they weren't backed into it. I think there is a difference.

It is a question of integrity. Abby Johnson wrote at length in her book Unplanned, how she came to trust the people from Coalition for Life who were praying outside her clinic for the entire 8 years that she worked there. It was because she knew they were transparent to her that she could trust them and turn to them when she had to escape her work.

As the organizer of 40 Days for Life here in Halifax, I have to stand on the public sidewalk outside the Victoria General Hospital and be exactly what that movement calls me to be: a witness to the truth that abortion takes lives and hurts women. If I were to combine that witness with sneaking into the fifth floor and ferreting out information about the clinic from its employees without telling them who I am, then I compromise what is going on with the prayer vigil right outside. And if I were to applaud someone who did that, even if it seemed to advance our cause, I would be complicit in their deceitful behaviour.

The majority of the pro-life movement is composed of Christians. As Christians, we must remain true to what Jesus himself would do and that is to use the weapons of spiritual warfare because this is a battle against principalities that are not worldly. Does that mean we never take any action to stop abortion? Of course not, I am not saying we just pray and don't do anything. But we cannot use the tactics of the other side to gain victories, because then we taint the entire movement. And that movement has to be rooted in truth; deception and lies, even if they uncover truths, are not the weapons we should be using or endorsing.

Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort? - Galatians 3:3

What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul? - Mark 8:36

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Raymond Gravel Sues LifeSiteNews

Followers of LifeSiteNews will already know about the case of Raymond Gravel suing them for defamation and for personal injury to the tune of half a million dollars, a sum that would put LSN out of business. Gravel is a priest in the province of Quebec (I refuse to call him Father, since he does nothing to warrant that term of respect) who is unhappy with the pro-life online news resource because it has quoted him in the past, statements that he feels have damaged him.

Read the story here

Tonight, I was happy to get an email from a friend who forwarded me the link to this video. Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV has taken on Gravel and gives some of the background on this "dissident" priest. "Dissident" barely describes the extent of this man's aberration from the Catholic Church.

One has to wonder who is behind Gravel's action: the Bloc Quebecois? the homosexual community of Montreal? someone is putting this man up to his actions. And someone wants LifeSiteNews to disappear. Sorry, it's not going to happen! Too many real Catholics support it.

Spengler on Facebook and, more importantly, on Egypt

The mania didn't begin in the Middle East. Goldman Sachs invested $450 million in Facebook last month, placing a $50 billion valuation on the enterprise, and JPMorgan reportedly will do the same for Twitter. A dozen years ago, a pair of college dropouts in cutoff jeans could stumble into the oak-paneled offices of venture capital firms and walk out with eight figures' worth of startup capital. Facebook and Twitter sound like deja vu all over again.

Why should a social networking site have a market capitalization equal to DuPont or Metropolitan Life? It stands as an index of the anomie of the life of young adults in the industrial world, the apartment-and-cubicle dwellers who do not have friends, but only Facebook friends.

One made real friends in the deep past in the army, in church, or other venues that elicit deep loyalties. In the dystopia of youth culture, one encounters drinking buddies rather than comrades-in-arms, and hookup dates rather than romantic involvements. People lead trivial lives - lives, that is, unseasoned by sacrifice, by deep commitment to God, country, or even a prospective spouse.

Social networking elevates the trivial. Young people who have no intimate connection to each other, and no enduring tie to any institution, nonetheless feel a need for human contact. Facebook makes it seem that tiresome pursuit of pleasure, banal tastes, and gossip somehow add up to human interaction.

Click here to read the more important stuff of Spengler's article. For those who don't know, Spengler is a blogger who remained anonymous until two years ago, when he revealed his identity as David Goldman. This move became necessary as he was hired as one of the editors of First Things , a conservative publication that deals with the place of religious views in the public square.

Asia Times Online

Personally, I can't stand Facebook. Open up my page to read comments such as "I just woke up and went out on the deck" - who cares? "I got really drunk last night" - big deal! Facebook seems to be the page where people can dump their mental garbage for everyone to see. Yuck! For the most part, it is pretty harmless if stupid.

But when it can bring about mass action as it just did in Egypt, this is truly scary.

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Connecting the Dots

Jennifer Fulwiler, of Conversion Diary posted a poll last week, with certain questions about the religious atmosphere in the country where you live. She got more than 100 comments and compiled the results yesterday for her readers. After all, who else is going to categorize the answers and come up with these results, other than the author of the blog?

The results were surprising in some ways and not so surprising in others. I was not surprised to read that people don't feel comfortable mentioning their faith in public and in the majority of countries, it is definitely taboo. What did surprise me was the low numbers of people attending church. In Alsace, France sometimes the Lutheran church has only 3 or 4 members present at a Sunday service; in Germany, the only people at church are over 80 years old; in Luxembourg about 5-10% of the population attend church; in England, somewhere between 2 and 5% attend church; but in east Africa, 80% attend church. In most countries, it seems that the Catholics have the highest numbers of attendees, with some evangelical Protestant churches drawing large numbers in Singapore surprisingly. I also know that the evangelicals are growing in numbers in South America.

On the question of their leaders' faith and expressed beliefs, most respondents said that this is kept private by most leaders, that religious belief, especially holding to principles of anti-abortion and traditional marriage, mean political suicide.

On the question of family size, the majority of respondents said that families with more than 2 children were rare, except in Africa and the Philippines and in predominantly Muslim countries where it is quite normal to see four or more children. Also Israel sees large families amongst the orthodox Jews.

It is not hard to see a pattern here, although it is amazing that many will simply deny it. The countries that have expunged religion from the public square are the very same countries with high divorce rates, high rates of suicide, substance abuse, sexual promiscuity, low birth rates, and that pillar of western society - high rates of abortion.

People simply refuse to acknowledge that they need a God who gives them guidelines by which to live; otherwise, we all go astray. The tolerant culture that I supposedly live in is intolerant of religious belief, if that belief should show itself in public. Take out God, take out the Ten Commandments, take away the sacrifice of Christ's life, and we are left to ourselves. (And some poor countries are left with Islam, no better alternative that I can see.)

What always amazes me is those people who believe that man, in himself, is good and that people will choose good over evil, right over wrong, if we only give them the chance and if we believe in them enough. Do those people ever read any history? It simply is not so. This is equivalent to parents claiming that they can have children and then simply leave them to bring themselves up, and they will turn out okay. None of us is naive enough to believe that, and we actually punish parents who do this, we call it "neglect" and "child abuse". What do we call it when an entire nation thinks it can do without God? I can't think of an appropriate name, but it certainly looks hopeless.

Monday, February 14, 2011

An Insidious MindSet

This morning, while taking my dog for a walk, I passed a neighbour whose dog is not doing well. When I asked how Lily was, John replied "well, she has trouble walking, and now she is throwing up, and her bladder is beginning to fail. I think the cancer may have spread to her organs. When I get like this, I want to just be put aside too."

I could not reply, because it would have meant a long conversation, not one that could be had in such a short meeting. But I thought the acceptance of euthanasia has really reached the ordinary person. They have no reason to protest euthanasia or assisted suicide. When your life is measured in terms of how happy you are, or how healthy you are, then when circumstances change and life involves suffering, why should we prolong it?

Aside from faith, I don't see that there is any answer to the euthanasia question. You could, I suppose, exhort people to be brave and face their death as the ultimate life experience, but I don't think that would hold much water against pain and suffering of any intensity.

Since the acceptance that a woman can kill her own child if the pregnancy interferes with her life, we really have come full circle to ending anyone's life if it proves inconvenient or too hard to endure.

If you live in Halifax, I would encourage you to attend the upcoming dinner and fundraiser put on by Campaign Life Coalition. The guest speaker is Margaret Somerville, a world-renowned ethicist who teaches at McGill University. Margaret's talk is entitled 'The Case Against Euthanasia' and this is an opportunity not to be missed. Tickets are $100 each (this is a fundraiser for CLC) and the dinner is at the Westin Hotel on March 18 at 6:30 pm.

For tickets and more information, contact Ellen at (902) 861-1982 or by email at

Let's make this a sell-out event, this is the second fundraising dinner put on by CLC and they hope to make it an annual tradition. Great food, great company, great talk. See you there.

Saturday, February 12, 2011

A good article by Kathryn Lopez, editor of National Review Online:

And then a "client" left the clinic, a woman who had just had an abortion. The religious sister, as Johnson writes, "fell to her knees and wept with such grief, such genuine personal pain, that I couldn't help but think to myself, She feels something far deeper than I ever will. She is honestly pained. This is real to her -- this grief at knowing that client had an abortion." Sister Marie Bernadette, the nun in question, would return every week on the days the clinic performed abortions.

Johnson asked herself: "How many other people cry outside my workplace because of the work I am doing?"

As Johnson writes: "From my first days at Planned Parenthood, I'd told myself I was there to decrease abortions. Now, the absurdity of that logic -- or lack of logic -- screamed at me. Not only had I been a leader in abortion efforts here in Texas, lobbying at the capitol, repeating clever talking points to the media, and running an abortion clinic, I'd even aborted two of my own children."

It's not a problem that's going to be solved in a day, or a column, a debate or a bill. But we might make a first step by taking a deep breath. We've had a series of wake-up calls lately: a brutal clinic in Philadelphia and disturbing undercover videos about the callousness inside some of the most mainstream, taxpayer-funded clinics. And yet, proponents of these modest legislative moves are accused of "assault" on women by purported leaders who should know better. Unfortunately, somewhere in all the violent, reckless rhetoric, lives are lost, and women and men are living in misery.

Read the full article here

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

One Woman's Story of Forgiveness

Amazing story of how a woman forgave the man who raped her and how she was reunited with her child and the father of that child.

The Miracle of Forgiveness

Her daughter's first words to her were "thank you for giving me life".

Saturday, February 5, 2011

Discovering a Gem

I found this link in a comment on ProWomanProLife:

The Street of the Dead Fetuses

The author, William Gairdner, taught at York University just about the time I was graduating from it. We might have overlapped by one year. Since I wasn't an English major, I did not come across him. But I am certainly going to be visiting his blog in future and reading more. Someone in academia "gets it".

Gairdner is quoting from Dr. Richard Selzer, a general surgeon retired from 26 years at Yale University Hospital.

...fetuses accidentally got mixed up with the hospital rubbish...were picked up by a sanitation truck. Somehow, the plastic lab bag, labeled HAZARDOUS MATERIAL, fell off the back of the truck and broke open. No, it is not known how the fetuses got in the orange plastic bag labeled HAZARDOUS MATERIAL. It is a freak accident.

The hospital director wants you to know that it is not an everyday occurrence. Once in a lifetime, he says. But you have seen it, and what are his words to you now?
"He grows affable, familiar, tells you that, by mistake, the fetuses got mixed up with the other debris. (Yes, he says other, he says debris.) He has spent the entire day, he says, trying to figure out how it happened. He wants you to know that. Somehow it matters to him.

He goes on:
"Aborted fetuses that weigh one pound or less are incinerated. Those weighing over one pound are buried at the city cemetery. He says this. Now you see. It is orderly. It is sensible. The world is not mad. This is still a civilized society.
"There is no more. You turn to leave. Outside on the street, men are talking things over, reassuring each other that the right thing is being done. But just this once, you know it isn't. You saw, and you know.
"And you know, too, that the Street of the Dead Fetuses will be wherever you go. You are part of its history now, its legend. It has laid claim upon you so that you cannot entirely leave it - not ever."
Let every citizen, every teacher, ask a schoolchild to read this - and then explain what kind of people we are.

h/t Bob Devine, in comment at ProWomanProLife

Friday, February 4, 2011

Entrapment - an Ethical Problem

Gut feelings - should we trust them? I have had ambivalent feelings about the videos released by Live Action over the past two days and some email conversations with Suzanne of Big Blue Wave about this. As readers of her blog know, Suzanne calls this simply "lying" and that we harm ourselves and our cause when we engage in it. She has commented on the previous post.

I opened my email this morning and got the newsletter from Mercator Net. The editor, Carolyn Moynihan, has written about this very issue and her column is definitely worth reading.

Stung! the Ethics of Entrapment

Moynihan asks why the Planned Parenthood's employee's face was not blurred in the video as it would have been in a police video; the simple act of giving one presumed innocence until proven guilty should apply here too. But the crucial part of Moynihan's article deals with a recent case in England where a homosexual posed as someone wishing therapy and sought the help of a Christian therapist who believes that homosexuals can change if they wish, and he did this to expose her to disciplinary action by those who have the authority to do so. When the shoe is on the other foot, what do we say?

The entire episode leaves me uncomfortable. My most pressing concern is that 40 Days for Life has become involved in this; the thought of Shawn Carney and David Bereit becoming involved in this whole affair, and now people like Father Frank Pavone amongst many others, disturbs me.

As well intentioned as she might be, Lila Rose is young and fearless. She doesn't have the years of experience or maturity to be taking on the giant of Planned Parenthood. And I don't need to hear about David and Goliath; I know the story. My fear is that Lila will bring a whole lot of people with great track records into a messy unethical situation that they should know better than to get involved with.

Yes, we all want the illegal activities of Planned Parenthood exposed; yes, we all want to see funding cut to an organization that teaches youth that sexual activity of all sorts is harmless and fun; and no one wants to keep supporting an organization that drives a wedge between young people and their parents by giving them cover when things go wrong.

But the pro-life movement has too much to lose by getting messed up by the actions of an enthusiastic newcomer whose main activity is setting up stings. Surely, we can get at the truth by methods that are in keeping with our Christian moral code.

Thursday, February 3, 2011

Second Video Released

Live Action has released a second video exposing a Planned Parenthood worker telling a pimp and his prostitute companion how to look after under-age girls in his prostitution ring, how to get abortions past the limit in Virginia, how to treat young prostitutes who have STDs.

Tonight there is a webcast on this breaking news; Lila Rose will be joined by pro-life leaders such as Abby Johnson, David Bereit, Alveda King amongst others. The videos have been forwarded to the attorney generals of the states involved and today, Lila is appearing on CNN - which means this has made the "big" news.

Planned Parenthood is being shown for what it does, which is to promote sexual activity regardless of age, situation, whether it is consensual or even qualifies as rape (given the age of the girl and the age of her partner).

The question has been raised "is it right for Christians to lie in order to get information such as this?" The old question of whether the means justifies the end.

The Catholic catechism has been quoted, stating that lying is intrinsically wrong.
However the definition of lie in the Catholic catechism is as follows:
#2483 "Lying is the most direct offense against the truth. To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead into error someone who has the right to know the truth. By injuring man's relation to truth and to his neighbour, a lie offends against the fundamental relation of man and of his word to the Lord."

I must confess that I had some difficulty with this whole issue of whether Live Action was correct in lying to Planned Parenthood employees in order to gain information. It still leaves me puzzled as to the correct judgment on that action. However, in this case, the lies of Live Action are used to actually gain access to the truth, something that Planned Parenthood has been keeping from the public.
Since the law enforcement agencies will not do this work themselves, Live Action feels obligated to do it in their place. Now, if the police were conducting these stings, wouldn`t that be great!

But they aren`t and they won`t unless they are pressured into it. Perhaps this exposure by Live Action will compell them to investigate the actual workings of Planned Parenthood.

For information on tonight`s webcast and to sign in, click on
Jill Stanek

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Live Action Undercover Again

NEW JERSEY – February 1, 2011– A Planned Parenthood manager in New Jersey coaches a man and a woman posing as sex traffickers how to secure secret abortions, STD testing, and contraception for their female underage sex slaves, and make their whole operation “look as legit as possible” in an undercover video released this morning.

Once again, Lila Rose and her organization Live Action have hit pay dirt. They have just released the video here on YouTube and submitted it to the US Attorney General as well as the Attorney General of the state of New Jersey.

Please send this link to as many of your acquaintances as possible. It is crucial that the real agenda of Planned Parenthood be known as this organization is the largest abortion provider in the US (performing 1/3 of all abortions in that country). As well, they are the recipients of 300 million dollars in taxpayer funds from the US government.

The top executives of Planned Parenthood receive enormous salaries; President Cecile Richards receives a salary of one million dollars and she is real cozy with President Barack Obama, buttering him up to receive even more of your tax dollars for her organization that works in the field of sexual corruption.

Keep going, Lila and your crew, expose the darkness of this organization.

And response from Abby Johnson, former director of Planned Parenthood in Bryan, Texas:

As a former Planned Parenthood director, it is not surprising to me that this organization would protect individuals involved in sex trafficking. It actually seems like a natural fit. Planned Parenthood is involved in the violent killing of children and have no regard for life. People who traffic these young women for sex have no regard for their lives and are often involved in violent crimes. As someone who has witnessed this connection first hand as a clinic worker, I am so thankful Planned Parenthood’s connection to this industry is being exposed. -Abby Johnson