Posted on July 30, 2020 6:58 AM

IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Citizens Deliver Thousands of Signatures Opposing "ROE" Act

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

MASSACHUSETTS PRO-LIFE CITIZENS DELIVER THOUSANDS OF SIGNATURES OPPOSING “ROE” ACT


Press Contact:

C.J. Williams

857 302 0466

cj@masscitizensforlife.org

July 30, 2020 -- Boston, MA -- Just over a year after rallying more than 1,000 citizens at the State House to oppose the “ROE” Act (S.1209/H.3320) during its 2019 public hearing, Massachusetts Citizens for Life members and staff will deliver thousands of “No to ROE” petitions at noon on Thursday, July 30th.

The bill, heavily supported by abortion rights organizations, including NARAL and the Planned Parenthood Federation of Massachusetts, eliminates significant amounts of text in current abortion law, resulting in legislation that proves too extreme for many citizens to swallow, even those who identify as pro-choice.

If voted into law, the “ROE” Act would deny medical care to babies who survive failed abortions. Girls as young as 12 would be able to have an abortion without any adult knowing about it. Additionally, “ROE” would remove medical standards of care for women undergoing the grueling multi-day late-term abortion procedure, placing these life-threatening surgeries in unregulated clinics. In New Mexico, where this practice is standard, Albuquerque’s abortion facility, Southwest Medical, currently faces prosecution in the wrongful deaths of 13 women.

“Our supporters continue to call their legislators daily, urging them to reject this flawed attempt at ‘care’ for Massachusetts women. Even if the current legislative session is extended indefinitely, we will continue to speak on behalf of our members to oppose this radical and unsafe bill for as for as long as it takes to defeat it,” said MCFL President Myrna Maloney Flynn.

“This bill has, thankfully, received considerable attention since it was introduced last year. Its dangerous implications have raised alarms among both pro-life and pro-abortion voters across the state,” Flynn continued. “We are honored to deliver thousands of petitions to Beacon Hill today, because we know that each one represents a passionate ‘no’ to this bill from residents of Massachusetts who care deeply about the health and safety of our women, our girls, our infants, and the unborn.”

The petition delivery will be made by members of Massachusetts Citizens for Life, who are acutely sensitive to current circumstances caused by the pandemic.

“We wouldn’t come out under other circumstances,” says C.J. Williams, MCFL’s director of community engagement. “But if we value our fellow citizens enough to lock down the entire state to save the most at risk from COVID, shouldn’t we oppose laws that will take those very lives, the lives of the most vulnerable among us?”

“I’ve called every day for the last month to ask the Joint Committee on the Judiciary to consider the dangerous implications of this bill. I’m definitely delivering petitions,” said David Lehr, a member from Everett.

The signatures were collected online, during events, and through a direct mail campaign. This will be the second delivery. Williams, and three others, delivered nearly 2,000 last fall as well.



###

Massachusetts Citizens for Life, founded in 1973 by women such as Dr. Mildred Jefferson, remains the Bay State’s singly-dedicated human rights organization focused on pro-life activism. 

 

Posted on July 24, 2020 10:03 AM

Planned Parenthood in NY Removes Sanger's Name, Distances from Eugenics

Photo: AP

At the New York flagship Planned Parenthood facility, you could always count on seeing Sanger. No, not in person -- the abortion giant's founder, an adherent of Hitler's philosophy on race and a gung-ho eugenicist, has her name up in lights on that location. Or at least, she did until this last week when the organization finally decided to publicly disavow the woman who called the disabled "undesirables" and said of large families that "the most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."

During this current upsurge of awareness around racial violence, Planned Parenthood simply couldn't brush off its founder's legacy any longer.

One Planned Parenthood representative was quoted in a NY Times article saying they had decided to formally remove Sanger's name because of her “harmful connections to the eugenics movement."

But what the decision did not do, and cannot do under contemporary circumstances, is remove Planned Parenthood's clear and present commitment to continuing Sanger's eugenicist and racist agenda.

Clinics under the abortion organization's umbrella are disproportionately situated in minority neighborhoods. A few years ago, Lila Rose's investigative activists at Live Action caught representatives offering to take donations specifically to target black babies in Ohio.  

The women who are most likely to "choose" abortion are black Americans. 

As recently as 2016, Planned Parentood was pushing a fact sheet calling Sanger 'well-intentioned' in her attempt to push birth control and abortion on immigrant communities.

If abortion is a free choice, and a right, why are women with fewer means and more pressure more likely to abort? Why is Planned Parenthood pushing it -- and why did they wait this long to throw out Sanger? Many fellow citizens here in Massachusuetts will ask us why, when they meet us at sidewalk outreach or during an event like the March for Life -- why don't you support PP? They do so much good work.

When Planned Parenthood jettisons not just the Sanger's name, but her bitter commitment to destroying the vulnerable, targeting minorities, and her sick philosophy on genetic purity, perhaps we as a nation should reconsider. But honestly, can we simply jettison Planned Parenthood at this point, Sanger's name, legacy, and all?

Let's support, not abort. Let's create new systems, and new organizations like Guiding Star and Stanton Healthcare that see women as strong, offer support and resource and information. Because a free choice is one that gives life; a decision coerced almost always diminishes and demeans.

 

 

Posted on July 20, 2020 7:30 AM

The ROE Act leaves girls like Veronica unprotected

CITATION: Changes to be made to Massachusetts General Law chapter 112, §§12Q and S: informed consent and parental consent. (Rewritten in the new Section 12N of the ROE Act, which eliminates all requirement of parental consent.)

Veronica, left, in a childhood photo

We spoke with a family whose daughter went to a Planned Parenthood clinic after discovering her unexpected pregnancy. The discussion revealed truths about what it’s like for a teenage girl to face pregnancy in Massachusetts.  

Current state law requires one parent to provide consent before a minor undergoes an abortion. (If the ROE Act passes, a girl as young as 12 could legally obtain an abortion without a parent, or any adult other than clinic staff, knowing about it.) We asked Jerry and Maggie, Veronica's parents, “As a 16-year-old, how accessible was abortion to Veronica?” “Obviously, we weren't informed when Veronica went [to Planned Parenthood],” they said. “We asked her, and she said no one there mentioned her age. We don't think that law is being followed.”

Veronica agreed. “When I went to Planned Parenthood there was no adult or parent with me,” she said. “The woman I talked to knew my age, and it did not seem to be a problem for me to get an abortion.”

“What do you remember about the clinic?” I asked. “I was expecting to be given more resources and options, but it felt like they were just mainly focused on abortion," Veronica said. One worker told her, "It isn't a baby yet," a comment Veronica says haunts her today. 

In spite of the difficult memories of being alone at Planned Parenthood, she says, “Every day, when I wake up to Myles’ smiling face, I am so thankful that I made the decision I did. My life would be very empty without him."

The "ROE" Act would leave Veronica without the protection of her parents or an adult.

Call the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Judiciary Committee today.

Ask them to shelve the "ROE" Act, and protect Hope.

Chair Claire Cronin

(617) 722-2396

Claire.Cronin@mahouse.gov

Vice Chair Michael Day

(617) 722-2396

Michael.Day@mahouse.gov

 

For more information on the "ROE" Act, and a call script, click here.

 

Posted on July 16, 2020 9:21 AM

Everybody Can Serve

Everybody Can Serve:

What MLK Can Teach Us About Grassroots Organization

By Sonja Morin, Communications Intern


Early this month, the Supreme Court's crucial decision in the June v. Russo case reaffirmed what has been echoed throughout the past several months: now is the paramount time in the fight against abortion and its ill consequences for women, the pre-born, and society as a whole. The fight is a worthy one, that when successful, will ensure the safety, protection, and empowerment of people everywhere. This fight can simultaneously seem imposing and insurmountable, with many not knowing where to start in their activism. How does one change hearts and culture when they are so firmly set on abortion?

In the past, we have reflected on Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s activism. His example of compassion, firmness, and nonviolent demonstration led the civil rights movement by leaps and bounds during the twentieth century and beyond. Dr. King aimed to shape hearts and minds, because through it comes the change necessary to shift culture. Now, more than ever, does it seem appropriate to look back to his example, so we may move forward with daring for the sake of life and liberty. This and the following two posts will examine elements of his activism, to pinpoint strategies that are most helpful to the cause for life and women’s empowerment. 

The first clear element of Dr. King’s activism was grassroots organization. This type of institution is one where its members are composed of the local community, and aim to improve the conditions of said community in regards to a particular issue. Individuals first come together out of shared concern over an issue. They decide to work together to actively spread the word about the issue, as well as promote and practice solutions for it. Individuals are united against issues that attack the humanity of a person or group, not because they are the same as the attacked persons, but because they share humanity. This shared status is reason enough to be angered by the injustice, and encourages the motivation to reverse the injustice.

Grassroots organization is incredibly effective by nature in its ability to identify and solve local issues. Dr. King worked within the communities to identify the issues applying to civil rights within each area, so that change could be demanded within those areas. In the same way, pro-life grassroots movements can find the issues within each community that need to be addressed through action or help. For example, if there is an area lacking resources for women facing unexpected pregnancies, resources could be pooled to ensure that these women feel secure and supported in their decision to choose life. If there is a law in a city that makes abortion even more unsafe than it already is, the community within that city can call for it to be repealed.

Grassroots organization also encourages the changing of hearts and minds like no other form of movement. Discrimination is the result of disordered, prejudiced thinking, which breaks relationships between people. Grassroots movements are based in communities, which are uniting forces. They rely on actions between persons, rather than large entities against each other. This interpersonal nature of their activism appeals directly to the heart. The community is able to witness the positive change the organization accomplishes, as well as witness the respect the organization gives to the dehumanized. Eventually, these actions will move the community to accept these dehumanized persons as the organization has. The impact of the grassroots movement grows, not because of large actions, but rather because of interpersonal foundation and efforts. 

It is not to say that top-down organizations, such as political parties, cannot create or implement change. However, especially in situations where discrimination and dehumanization are involved, it is all too easy for such groups to generalize the situation. This generalization not only leads to incomplete solutions, but also expediencies that do not solve the root issues. Grassroots movements respond to these flaws by speaking to individual and smaller-community needs, thus allowing their solutions to work through and with people on an ever-growing scale. With each person’s contribution comes a newer and more diverse understanding of the situation, as well as a better way to help. 

Dr. King’s utilization of grassroots organization caused the civil rights movement to reach countless hearts throughout the United States, and help improve conditions for African Americans in all spheres of life. If we participate in pro-life grassroots movements, like our own MCFL, we are entering into the same kind of culture-shifting, interpersonal work that he and many movements before undertook. It is through this type of organization that will create positive change for the pre-born and women we strive to defend every single day.

 

For those interested in taking part in grassroots efforts in Massachusetts, join MCFL today! We are a MA-based grassroots organization with chapters in all parts of the state. Get in contact with your chapter's leader here: MCFL Chapter List

For those already part of MCFL: Consider your own activism efforts. How are you currently contributing to the cause? In what ways could you improve or grow your efforts?



Posted on July 14, 2020 8:48 AM

Social Distancing, Sidewalk-Counselor Style

 

"I so did not believe anyone would be out here. And if they were, I was sure they'd be a fat old man, with, like, MAGA tattooed on his forehead."

The young woman was in front of Planned Parenthood in Boston. In COVID-time, she was also on a surprisingly quiet Commonwealth Avenue. The few other human beings who passed were masked and serious and looped wide to avoid her and each other as they pushed by.

But she wasn't alone.

An MCFL member who has been reaching out to our staff since late-Spring for guidance on when to return to the sidewalk was also there. Her sign read, "You're strong. Choose hope. Look at your ultrasound."

The young woman had arrived that Friday morning looking for an abortion -- and asking for a sign. But she had told the Universe, if there wasn't a sign -- or if the sign-holder was an old white man -- she was aborting.

Well, the MCFL member* wasn't an old man. She was a quiet woman in a violet face mask with dark eyes behind big glasses and a singsong voice.

She was all that mother needed to see, and all her unborn baby** needed to have his or her life recognized and protected.

The importance of providing support and affirmation to women before they enter the abortion clinic can't be emphasized often enough. We have a society that has learned to treat women like burdens. As Boston, and the world, has had a light shone on how a system set in place can continue to dehumanize people despite the intentions of individuals, we see how the system of abortion has always treated women like problems, and their incredible ability to give life like a disease.

All we need as a society is continually to see that each of us can be workers on a new system: One that saves, protects, and cherishes vulnerable lives, and does not discard the woman or the child at any stage in their development. We can be like the woman this last Friday morning who was a sign of hope.

 

 

*The member asked to remain anonymous. Her story was taken by the director of community engagement and this article has been posted with her permission.

**This save was inspired by the #SaveBabyMyles campaign, and other members are returning to sidewalk counseling using safe social distancing to offer support to women and to be voices for the voiceless preborn babies. Whether online or in-person, you can join and save lives by checking the Baby Myles' story here.

 

Posted on July 13, 2020 9:13 AM

Member Reports: "I spoke with aides and gave testimony opposing ROE"

DOES YOUR CALL TO OPPOSE ROE MAKE A DIFFERENCE?

Yes, it does.

The legislative aides to the chair and vice chair told one of our members that the calls had been pouring in. "We count them. Every one."

But what if it's difficult to get on the phone? You may be working odd hours, have children at home, or just hate the phone and feel unable to communicate that way with a state representative. 

Two members, a member from Fitchburg, a family physician, and another, wrote our community engagement director yesterday after both calling and emailing the State House.
"You can always call off hours and leave a thorough voicemail," said the first, which he had. 
Dr. Rollo reported that he had sent in his testimony as well.
"You cannot imagine the value of your testimony to these legislators. They're listening to every word."
"Don't feel like you can't do it. Do it. These are the key points I used."

1- ROE puts women at additional risk since abortions beyond 24 weeks are no longer required to be done in the hospital.
2- ROE removes the requirement for infant resuscitation equipment to be present in the event that a baby is "accidentally" born alive.  This is passive infanticide.
3- ROE eliminates Judicial bypass for minors.  So not only does there continue to be no requirement for parental consent, there is not even a judicial bypass provision in the bill.  Therefore exploitation of minors including victims of rape and incest would obviously increase since they would have no respnsible adult protecting them.  This will provide cover for sex trafficing and other forms of abuse.
"I only got great feedback from the aides! It would be great for as many people as possible to send emails to the chairs and vice chairs of the committee."
Michael Day and Claire Cronin
Phone numbers:
(Rep Day) 617) 722-2396
(Rep Cronin) (617) 722-2396
Not everyone is comfortable speaking on the phone, even after a lot of practice. Myrna Maloney Flynn's easy to use phone script can help here.

Get up and go! Our members are standing alongside each other on this most critical of campaigns. Keep calling!

 

Donate  || JOIN ||| Connect

Posted on July 13, 2020 9:01 AM

The ROE Act endangers women by removing hospital care

CITATION: Changes to be made to Massachusetts General Law chapter 112, §12R, and 12M, putting women undergoing grueling 2-3 days abortions in underqualified and unregulated outpatient clinics. (Late term abortions are currently permitted in New Mexico under a law that mirrors the "ROE" Act's removal of basic standards of medical care in Massachusetts.)

 

Carmen Landau video embed

https://www.facebook.com/abortiontrials/videos/322418468781569

In New Mexico, the laws already endanger women like Keisha. Late-term abortions there are allowed in unregulated "clinics."

While "ROE" Act proponents say that they need to pass "ROE" to protect women, removing the section in 12M of our general laws, which requires late-term abortion procedures be done in a hospital setting, means women will die. Even pro-choice citizens find this change to current law shocking.

Above, New Mexico abortionist states under oath that her patients are advised not to call the emergency room.

The "ROE" Act would remove basic standards of life-saving care for women like Keisha Atkins.

Call the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Judiciary Committee today.

Ask them to shelve the "ROE" Act, and protect Hope.

Chair Claire Cronin

(617) 722-2396

Claire.Cronin@mahouse.gov

Vice Chair Michael Day

(617) 722-2396

Michael.Day@mahouse.gov

 

For more information on the "ROE" Act, and a call script, click here.

Posted on July 10, 2020 3:07 PM

The R.O.E. Act removes medical aid for babies like Melissa

CITATION: "R.O.E." (S.1209/H.3320) removes section 12P (chp.112) in Massachusetts General Law, which requires life-saving medical attention to be provided to infants born alive during late-term abortion procedures.

At 35 weeks, Melissa Ohden's college-age mother, desperate and pressured by scared parents, walked into a hospital where Melissa was aborted. Discarded by the abortion staff, Melissa was left for dead -- until one of the nurses heard a whimper. 

She was taken to the NICU, provided with life-saving medical treatment, and later adopted.

If the "R.O.E." Act is passed, lives like Melissa's will be discarded by our medical professionals. If a nurse goes against legal requirements, no life-saving medical equipment will be legally required on-site in abortion facilities.

The "ROE" Act would make taking Melissa's life legal.

Call the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Judiciary Committee today.

Ask them to shelve the "ROE" Act, and protect Hope.

Chair Claire Cronin

(617) 722-2396

Claire.Cronin@mahouse.gov

Vice Chair Michael Day

(617) 722-2396

Michael.Day@mahouse.gov

 

For more information on the "ROE" Act, and a call script, click here.

Posted on July 10, 2020 2:31 PM

Dear Maura Healey and Ayanna Pressley: This is "incompatible with life"

When you say, "incompatible with life," is this who you mean?

Baby Hope was diagnosed with what doctors said was a fatal brain abnormality. So they told her mom to end the life of Baby Hope. 

But since when does our society promote killing as a treatment for disability?

She is alive and thriving today, proving the doctors wrong. This is the face of "incompatible with life." And this is what "ROE" Act supporters call "abortion access."

 

 

The "ROE" Act would make taking Hope's life legal.

Call the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Judiciary Committee today.

Ask them to shelve the "ROE" Act, and protect Hope.

Chair Claire Cronin

(617) 722-2396

Claire.Cronin@mahouse.gov

Vice Chair Michael Day

(617) 722-2396

Michael.Day@mahouse.gov

 

For more information on the "ROE" Act, and a call script, click here.

 

 

Posted on July 09, 2020 12:22 PM

Supreme Court confirms religious orgs cannot be forced to support abortion

The Supreme Court of the United States has has ruled again to protect the conscience rights of religious orders and pro-life organizations against the abortion lobby.

The Court ruled 7-2 in favor of the Sisters. Earlier this year, the Trump administration created exemptions in the ACA (Affordable Care Act) for organizations whose religious identity or other beliefs would not allow them to pay for the deaths of employees' children. 

In his majority opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote:

"For over 150 years, the Little Sisters have engaged in faithful service and sacrifice, motivated by a religious calling to surrender all for the sake of their brother. But for the past seven years, they -- like many other religious objectors who have participated in the litigation and rulemakings leading up to today’s decision -- have had to fight for the ability to continue in their noble work without violating their sincerely held religious beliefs."

While this decision seems natural in light of U.S. declared freedoms, it has been hotly contested for almost 8 years. 

Under the Obama Administration in 2012, HHS mandated that all employers be forced to provide abortion-inducing drugs to employee via their insurance plans. The Supreme Court dealt blows to this mandate twice following Obama's mandate, once in 2016 and once in 2017 (Hobby Lobby Stores v. Burwell and Zubik v. Burwell)

When President Trump took office, his administration redefined rules regarding abortion in the ACA and HHS mandate. These new strictures affirmed the rights of pro-life organizations, and religious orders, to opt out of offering abortion to employees.

The only two justices in dissent were Ruth Bader Ginsberg and Sonia Sotomeyer.

While the ACLU -- against its purported mission to secure civil liberties to citizens -- called the decision "shameful", Sister Veit of the Little Sisters of the Poor told media:

"We dedicate our lives to this because we believe in the dignity of every human life at every stage of life from conception until natural death. So, we've devoted our lives -- by religious vows -- to caring for the elderly. And, we literally are by their bedside holding their hand as they pass on to eternal life. So, it's unthinkable for us, on the one way, to be holding the hand of the dying elderly, and on the other hand, to possibly be facilitating the taking of innocent unborn life."

Sister Veit, via Fox News