On July 30th, 2020, a little before noon, C.J. and Maria approached the State House, pulling a suitcase packed with thousands of citizens' signatures opposing the "ROE" Act.
But even though we had contacted the Joint Committee on the Judiciary offices ahead of time, our team had an unpleasant surprise.
After trying three different angles with the security guards -- and then a fourth ("We have petitions to deliver." "It's time sensitive." "We aren't the general public." "Would you be willing to help us and carry the box upstairs?) C.J. and Maria retreated to the lobby.
No one was working that day, they were told. Everyone is remote.
But if you really want to get something done -- and when lives, and the future of your state are involved -- you do it. In this case, the lives on the line are those of Massachusetts' women, babies like Hope and like Melissa, and our 13 and 14 year old girls' like Veronica.
Multiple phone calls later, C.J. reached Representative Michael Day's aide.
Thank you, Dan! Not only did Dan take the entire box of petitions, and your signatures opposing the "ROE" Act it contained, he gave us a social-distanced elbow-bump and good luck as well.
The campaign isn't over yet though. Due to the governor's declaration of a state of emergency, the legislature may continue to deliberate on bills past the July 31st date.
Help us continue to advocate for our women and the unborn babies in Massachusetts by donating here today.
To all of you who have signed the petition, shared on social media, and called the committee offices with us every day, THANK YOU.
29 JUNE 2020 -- Abortion providers need not have hospital admitting privileges that would ensure women’s safety during or after the procedure, according to today’s ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States in the closely-watched June Medical v. Russo case.
Instead, the Court determined that the Lousiana law at the heart of the case, Act 620 (“The Unsafe Abortion Act”) is unconsitutional. The 5-4 decision was weighted by Chief Justice John Roberts, who sided with the liberals of the court. As the first abortion-specific case to be heard by both Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, it was one which observers believed could signify whether the Court could potentially be willing to reconsider Roe V. Wade.
Although the case drew much national interest, in speaking to how it impacts Massachusetts, MCFL Executive Director, Patricia Stewart, Esq., said,”The Court's decision will have minimal impact in Massachusetts. The Department of Public Health has already removed the requirement for abortion doctors to have hospital admitting privileges when servicing patients insured by MassHealth, and Massachusetts case law rejects the requirement for abortions to be performed in a hospital, thus, eliminating the need for abortionists to obtain admitting privileges."
Stewart continued, saying, "In finding the Louisiana law unconstitutional, the Supreme Court guts the abortion safety net, threatening the life and health of women who feel compelled to seek abortion, by denying them the protection of a medical standard of practice that has been shown to avoid lifelong medical complications and save lives in an emergency."
MCFL President Myrna Maloney Flynn said, “Requiring abortionists to have hospital admitting privileges is simply a way to ensure women's safety. Sadly, Chief Justice Roberts and four other justices today maintained that abortion clinics do not have to meet the same standards as other surgical providers. True ‘abortion care’ and ‘women's health’ -- terms often utilized by abortion rights supporters -- should prioritize a woman's best interests.”
Throughout the court session, pro-life adovcates held a strong presence outside, holding signs like that of a woman who came from San Francisco to demonstrate in favor of both women’s safety and a baby’s right to life. “Health regulations do not equal undue burden,” read her poster, referencing the fact that the Lousiana act had required physicians performing abortions to have hospital privileges.
A decision in favor of Louisiana’s Act 620 would simply have been common sense, protecting women’s health from poor standards of care and ensuring a consistent application of safety measures to all surgical procedures in the state.
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.
MEDIA ADVISORY: ASSISTED SUICIDE BILL VOTED ON "FAVORABLY" IN MASSACHUSETTS FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY
Boston, MA - 9 June 2020 -- Last week, the members of the Joint Committee on Public Health voted S.2745 (previously S.1208), "An Act Relative to End of Life Options" favorably out of committee.
This is the first time in history a bill related to physician-assisted suicide (PAS) has cleared its committee assignment.
Patricia Stewart, Esq., executive director of Massachusetts Citizens for Life, and one of the Commonwealth’s leading experts in the legalities of PAS, said: "The bill’s soothing catch phrases can disguise, but they cannot change, the bill’s ugly reality, which is the intentional ending of a human life in secret. We cannot permit this dangerous policy to become law in Massachusetts. The life of our most vulnerable family members and neighbors depend on it."
Difficulties in ensuring Massachusetts’ high standards of patient care, and the impossibility of protecting at-risk patients from abuse, have plagued this version of the bill and its predecessors. Citizens and legislators have shelved it repeatedly, while out-of-state suicide advocates have lobbied it back onto the agenda again and again.
Dr. Mark Rollo, MCFL board member and family physician in Fitchburg, MA, highlighted the bill’s perils in an automated call reaching citizens across the state.
State sanctioned suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the physician’s role as healer. The American Medical Association has strongly rejected it. Physicians make mistakes. No law can include a safe guard for this simple fact.
- Elder abuse will be exacerbated via potential coercion to take suicide pills.
- Insurance companies will have an incentive to cut costs by denying expensive care and approving the affordable solution of suicide.
- The COVID-19 pandemic elicited discussion of rationing of care, putting people with disabilities and the elderly at the end of the line. The same logic can be applied to assisted suicide.
- Recent mass protests have reminded us that minorities still suffer from discrimination. Inevitably the poor and people of color will be steered toward suicide.
MCFL, in its mission to protect and respect the lives of every individual human being in Massachusetts, continues to oppose this bill and this week encouraged its members to contact their state representatives. The response has been tremendous.
"There is nothing more painful than witnessing a loved one face the challenges that often accompany the end of life. Yet there is nothing more precious than the human life itself," said Myrna Maloney Flynn, president of Massachusetts Citizens for Life. "And so there is never too much energy or care we can expend when it comes to seeing our laws reflect that truth. This bill is deeply flawed, whatever your stance on the issue, and will endanger our at-risk neighbors and family. There are far more meaningful and humane end-of-life options our society should promote, namely palliative care and hospice services.”
For press queries:
Please email firstname.lastname@example.org
Ms. Magazine Attacks MCFL with Blatant Misinformation
"Anonymous" writer makes outrageous claims about the June 5 press conference, provides no evidence in article titled “I Went Undercover in the Anti-Abortion Movement—and Found Hypocrisy and Misogyny”
Did you see the hit piece? Providing no evidence, and appearing to mix up details from multiple events, the anonymous writer was published by Ms. Magazine.
We released the following press release.
Now more than ever, we need your support.
Please donate $100 today as we encounter national pushback on our extraordinary pro-life efforts this past year.
On Tuesday morning, Dec. 17, our team was alerted to an anonymously-written article that appeared on Ms. Magazine’s website. In this article, the supposed “feminist gender studies major” claims that she went undercover at one of our events and felt it necessary to share her experience.
There is just one problem…multiple actually: the details of Anonymous' story don't add up.
Given that Ms. Magazine felt it appropriate to print an anonymously-written story without fact-checking any of it, or asking our Massachusetts Citizens for Life staff to confirm or comment, we felt it necessary to publicly do so ourselves.
Claim: “It was a sweltering June day in Boston …Attendants were packed into a conference room on the second floor of the state house, creating a sea of “stop infanticide” red shirts.
Reality: Based on the author's reference to the "data set," this was the June 5th, 2019 press conference unveiling the polling results, which are, of course, misrepresented in her piece. The event was held in Room 437 (not the second floor, as the author stated). The location is important to the story because the room does not allow the kinds of interactions the author claims. The room was completely packed, for one thing. It is a hearing room. Organizers were informed ahead of time of capacity, and State House staff helped seat the public before the polling announcements were made to help fit the number of press and audience present without violating codes.
Claim: “I even wore one of those red shirts—emblazoned with the Massachusetts Citizens for Life logo alongside a crudely drawn fetus.”
Reality: Massachusetts Citizens for Life staff did not hand out red shirts at this event. Though MCFL's logo was one of multiple organization's logos, all opposing ROE. It is not on the front of the shirt as stated. Had Anonymous done even a little research, she would have noticed the t-shirts did not place our logo prominently, nor beside a the other image she mentions.
Claim: “Women are dying. Abortion is killing our women.”
Reality: This is the one truthful thing the author wrote! Women like Keisha Atkins, a 23-year-old woman who died following a legal abortion, at six months, in New Mexico due to the very abortion-deregulations the ROE Act is trying to impose on Massachusetts residents. Additionally, more than 30 million pre-born females have died since Roe v. Wade was legalized in 1973. Anonymous may have been quoting someone else, but it is worth applauding that the the one fact she decided to publish was this true statement.
Claim: “My confusion was warranted: MA Citizens for Life’s argument doesn’t make scientific sense. Their claims about protecting women’s autonomy and reproductive health are actually just thinly-veiled covers for their actual view that women should not have decision-making authority over their bodies.”
Reality: Anonymous apparently doesn’t understand basic scientific facts about human development or the concept of autonomy. Every credible textbook on human development states as a proven fact that life begins at the moment of conception. Anonymous doesn’t understand, or perhaps plays ignorant to the fact, that abortion ends the life of a uniquely different human being, oftentimes through painful dismemberment. Half of abortion's victims are defenseless female human beings. Additionally, too many women, like Keisha Atkins, have lost their lives because of legal abortion, and many more have been harmed physically and/or psychologically.
Claim: “The supposed shocking dataset was just fluff, too, for what it’s worth. ‘75 percent of Massachusetts citizens do not support infanticide. With this bill, full-term healthy babies will be killed. Reject the infanticide bill!’”
Reality: The dataset Anonymous describes as “fluff” is anything but fluff. The independent survey conducted between April and May 2019 surveyed Massachusetts voters from all political spectrums – Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. The survey proved that three quarters of Massachusetts voters reject the ROE Act. In fact, one of the provisions in the law would allow late-term abortions to be done outside a hospital, something 77% of self-proclaimed “pro-choice” in the survey opposed! So, no, Anonymous, the survey is not “fluff." Instead, it proves how out of touch the pro-abortion lobby are with the actual will of voters in the Commonwealth.
Claim: “When there was a call for all young people to come in for a photo-op, two different men pushed me until I stumbled and was able to slink away. “Don’t you want to support the cause?” they were yelling. “What’s wrong with you women?””
Reality: Anonymous first claimed the event was held on the second flood, however, it was held in Room 437. Neither the layout nor the mechanics of the situation would have allowed for the kinds of interactions the author claims. The room was completely packed, and those in attendance were seated or lined up along the back wall. This would not have allowed for a shuffling of the audience for photo-ops. Additionally, those in attendance know full well there was no yelling at any participant. In fact, with half a dozen prominent and reputable media sources reporting on the event, and not one mentioned any grabbing, yelling, or pushing. If there had been any type of altercation, they would undoubtably have reported it.
We know that the media likes to write about any confrontation at any of our events). At the annual Massachusetts March for Life, the media was quick to mention how seven were arrested at the event for acts of violence – two for throwing urine and a slushie at participants. The problem with the report? They failed to mention that all seven arrests were pro-abortion, antifa activists assaulting pro-life advocates.
Biased or otherwise, no news reporter would pass up a chance to report on an altercation in a peaceful press conference.
Claim: “When I initially refused to put on the red shirt, I was booed and sneered at, and the Citizens for Life member handing them out grabbed my arm and yelled that I was too concerned with fashion, and not about “protecting life.””
Reality: No MCFL member handed out any red shirts. In fact, the red shirts were not provided by MCFL. Some of our own staff didn’t even wear red. So this, too, appears to be something the author daydreamed and decided to include in her story. (I personally eschewed the shirts.)
Claim: “The attendees treated children no better. During the photo-op, someone yanked a crying baby out of its mother’s arms to pose for the camera—even though, supposedly, they were fighting for this baby’s safety and happiness. The man smiled for his photo-op while the baby continued crying—and yelled about how we must ‘protect the youngest members of our society.’”
Reality: This also did not happen. We knew the photographer. We also know the number (severely limited by State House request) and names of all attendees. Neither the photographer nor I took any photos of babies.
Claim: “Anti-abortion activists do not care about women—they care about power and subjugation. They care about forcing women into becoming incubators for babies. And they are willing to use force and shame to realize that mission.”
Reality: Anonymous fails to acknowledge that abortion does not empower women. In fact, since Roe v. Wade passed in 1973, more than 30 million unborn girls (and 30 million boys) have been exterminated in the name of “women’s rights." Abortion is the greatest human rights abuse of our time. Abortion is violence. Women deserve better than the ROE Act and what Anonymous advocates for, and three quarters of Massachusetts voters agree with that statement.
Once thing is certain, the anonymous author of the “I Went Undercover in the Anti-Abortion Movement—and Found Hypocrisy and Misogyny” article that appears on Ms. Magazine’s website came to our event with a message written for what she expected to happen, and she left with that same message in hand– if she even came to the event at all. Her supposed experiences contradict what those who actually attended the event have said – that it was friendly, calm, and educational..
Ms. Magazine deciding to publish this article demonstrates a shocking carelessness in journalistic due diligence: No photos or evidence of any kind; no checking with the organization which the piece attempts to slander. The author doesn’t even want her name tied to her article. Perhaps she knows that her claims are false, and she wishes to get her narrative out to mislead others before the real story was told. Perhaps she doesn’t want to held liable for her blatantly false accusations.
Even more puzzling is that this apparently curious citizen journalist, who reputedly has researched MCFL, was not aware that the female leaders in the organization routinely invite and chat with friends or counterparts in pro-choice circles to these events. We have invited NARAL and pro-choice friends to meet for conversation before the Massachusetts March for Life, and to unite on our common ground that removing standards of medical care is not pro-woman, pro-choice, or pro-life. Instead, we were met with violent counter-protestors who assaulted our event attendees.
If the author or Ms. would like to correct these inaccuracies, I can supply facts. But since no one actually reached out to MCFL prior to, during, or after the event, I'm more than a little dubious about the genuine journalistic search for truth here.
I wonder if the author would like to talk. If so, we are always free to chat.
Perhaps Ms. Magazine would also like to fact check their submissions before publishing so-called reporting on actual events. If they do, they can start with who organized the press conference, who was in attendance, and maybe even look up MCFL on social media.
In the meantime, we are calling on Ms. Magazine to pull this fabricated story from their website, for their own credibility, and for their reader's benefit.
Mass. Citizens for Life is the Commonwealth's solely dedicated pro-life organization, protecting the lives of our fellow citizens from conception to natural death and advocating for human rights everywhere in between.
DONATE today to keep our life-saving work moving
JOIN the movement in Massachusetts
press conference and annual State House Celebration of Life this Wednesday
Massachusetts Citizens for Life and partner organizations to illustrate dangerous impact of proposed ROE Act.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - BOSTON, MA - 28 October, 2019 - During the Celebration of Life, an annual lobby day that highlights holistic and life-affirming resources for women and children, Massachusetts Citizens for Life invites media to a press conference at noon on Wednesday, October 30th. National experts from a broad spectrum of political backgrounds, including abortion survivor, Claire Culwell, will speak on the impact of provisions in the ROE ACT(S.1209/H.3320).
Great Hall, Massachusetts State House
Press Conference: 12:00 noon - 1:00pm
Celebration of Life Event: 10:00am - 3:00pm
C.J. Williams, Director of Community Engagement, MCFL: "Massachusetts can do much better than a bill that ditches basic standards of medical care in favor of a burnt-earth push for abortion access over women's safety. In no other medical procedure do we reduce regulations and safety- it's backward. In this case, it uniquely discriminates against women."
Regarding a weeklong campaign launched by MassNARAL that claims, "Massachusetts can do better," MCFL President Myrna Maloney Flynn said, "I agree 100% with NARAL. Massachusetts can do better. But the so-called ROE Act wi make things worse. Instead, let's start talking about prevention, about the facts of fetal development, the effect abortion has on a woman's long-term mental health, adoption, and, especially, universal childcare programs like the one Senator Warren proposes," she said. "That's doing better."
Bill Gilmeister, executive director of RenewMass, said, regarding the showcasing of resource centers, "Pregnancy health centers offer a positive response to pregnant women in difficult circumstances. They provide the resources women need when experiencing tough pregnancies. They are willing to come alongside in support. This is in stark contrast to the abortion businesses that seek to profit from women in need.”
New Mexico attorney Mike Seibel will speak to reporters in the Great Hall Wednesday. Siebel is currently prosecuting the outpatient abortion facility on behalf of his client, mother of Keisha Atkins, who was killed by the deregulation of late-term abortion procedures in New Mexico, the same kind of provision that "R.O.E.” would permit in Massachusetts.
Seibel said, "Massachusetts may take late-term abortion out of hospitals and away from life-saving medical equipment. Let [New Mexico] be a lesson for Massachusetts. You pass that bill, and there will be transports to hospitals for uncontrolled bleeding, uterine rupture, sepsis . . . just like here in New Mexico. Massachusetts will devolve from its first-class status in healthcare to substandard care. There will be deaths just like those in New Mexico."
Depositions, testimony, and other legal documents will be available to press following the speakers’ statements, as will activist and abortion survivor Claire Culwell.
Director of Community Engagement
Massachusetts Citizens for Life
857 302 0466
Are you a concerned citizen or MCFL member? Do you have the resource, but maybe not the ability or energy to spend time or travel to engage in the activism and education MCFL facilitates?
You can still support our work.
To support our digital and local action campaigns to shelve this anti-life bill, you can donate now. Just click through our secure links here: Donate to MCFL.
PRO-ABORTION SENATORS BLOCK BILL PROTECTING INFANTS BORN-ALIVE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE -- WASHINGTON D.C. -- The U.S. Senate voted on February 26, 2019, 53-44 to advance the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act (S. 130) sponsored by Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.). Pro-abortion senators blocked the bill from receiving the 60 votes necessary, however, to move forward. Had it advanced, this bill would have federally mandated that medical professionals administer life-saving healthcare to babies born alive during an abortion.
The president of National Right to Life, Carol Tobias, remarked:
"Today we saw the extremism of the abortion industry's agenda on full display. The 44 members of the United States Senate who voted against this bill now need to explain to their constituents why they believe abortion is such an absolute 'right' that it protects what amounts to infanticide: willfully withholding life-saving care from an born-alive infant."
The block of this common sense legislation comes right off the heels of a slew of controversy over extreme-abortion-promoting laws in states such as Virginia and New York. In Massachusetts, we will soon face The ROE ACT ("Remove Obstacles and Expand Abortion Care").
For more information regarding upcoming opportunities to make an impact on our local protection for preborn humans and women, please sign up here for email alerts. Join the movement here and become an MCFL Advocate. Or support our legislative lobbying for life by making a tax-deductible donation.
Photo courtesy of the Boston Herald
With the length of Mrs. Fox's tenure at MCFL' president, we cannot do justice in a short article to her legacy at MCFL. Our entire team wish her the best in her retirement, and are grateful to her service in the pursuit of justice for the unborn, and all of our vulnerable in the Commonwealth.
We released the following announcement to the press, and now post here for all of advocates as well:Read more
By Domenico Bettinelli, Jr, Director of Community Engagement of Massachusetts Citizens for Life
Senate Bill 754 on “safeguarding the health care decisions of young adults” seeks to lower the age of consent for abortion from eighteen years old to sixteen. What this bill would really do is make teenage girls less safe.Read more