FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MA STATE LEGISLATURE OVERRIDES GOVERNOR, RAMS THROUGH EXTREME ABORTION BILL DURING COVID
Boston, MA -- December 29, 2020 -- In a vote of 107 to 46 in the House and 32 to 8 in the Senate, the Massachusetts State legislature chose to override Governor Baker’s veto of H.5179, also known as the “R.O.E.” Act. In an elitist gesture that not only ignored the governor’s commonsense rejection of special interests items in a state budget bill, but also tens of thousands of their constituents vocal opposition, the legislature has sent a clear message to Massachusetts citizens: We work for the abortion lobby, not for you or the public health.
Myrna Maloney Flynn, president of Massachusetts Citizens for Life, issued the following statement:
The ROE Act was introduced nearly two years ago. Every day since then, thousands of Massachusetts Citizens for Life members, who reside in every corner of our state, used their voices to speak for those who cannot. They learned the truth about this irresponsible and dangerous legislation and bravely spread that truth within their communities -- even during a pandemic. Almost as disheartening as this new law is the fact that legislators rammed this damaging bill through during Covid, inserting it into the state budget, knowing our opposition could not fight it in person due to quarantine restrictions.
So while we pause today to grieve for the many lives that will be severely damaged and lost as a result of the ROE Act, we anticipate, much as abolitionists did, the inevitability of a brighter tomorrow.
Pro-lifers know setbacks. What we don't know how to do is give up, look the other way, and allow injustice to stand.
We know the truth is worth pursuing! We know the lives we work to protect are worth every minute of our time in this life. We know without a doubt that our supporters, by their advocacy over the last 24 months, changed minds and opened hearts, even our governor's. And we look forward to continuing our work alongside the citizens of Massachusetts, who already know the value of human life and are eager to educate and support others and to ultimately illuminate the inherent right to life of the unborn.
As we have done since January 23, 1973, Massachusetts Citizens for Life will work tirelessly to make abortion unthinkable. And we will prevail.
At MCFL, we will continue to highlight the stories of women like Melissa Ohden, whose life would have been thrown away under “R.O.E.” Act provisions when she was born alive during a late-term abortion. We will continue to advocate for legal protection and medical support for babies like Hope Dupell and their mothers, who deserve physicians obligated by law to heal, not encouraged by laws like “R.O.E.” to discriminate against them because of a prenatal disability diagnosis. We will fight for women like Keisha Atkins, who lost her life to an extremist late-term abortion law in New Mexioc that prioritized “access” over safety.
Massachusetts Citizens for Life is the Commonwealth's single solely dedicated pro-life human rights organization. Founded in 1973, MCFL continues to advocate for the most vulnerable citizens in the Bay State: the preborn and the elderly and disabled.
BAKER VETOES "R.O.E." ACT (H.5179) Christmas Eve; PRO-LIFE CITIZENS' MESSAGE, "KILL BILL, NOT BABY"
MCFL mobilized thousands of citizens across the state to call the governor's office from Thanksgiving onward. "He clearly heard the message," say members.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE -- December 28, 2020, Boston, MA -- Massachusetts Citizens for Life (MCFL) applauds Governor Baker's action on December 24, 2020, Christmas Eve, vetoing the heinously anti-life bill H.5179, also and previously known as An Act Removing Obstacles and Expanding Access to Abortion in MA.
"Kill the bill, not the baby!" said Fernando Limbo, a member based in Revere, "Even our pro-choice governor can see the harm in this bill, and thank God for this Christmas Eve gift protecting life."
H.5179, nearly the same as "R.O.E."'s earlier draft, still:
- Allows underage girls to get abortions without their parents’ consent or even knowledge. (340 girls under the age of 18 had abortions in Massachusetts in 2019. Under this legislation their parents would no longer have the right to even know.)
- Allows doctors to deny life-saving medical care to a clearly viable baby born alive during an abortion. This is known as “passive infanticide.”
- Extends legal abortion all the way to 40 weeks for effectively any reason “to preserve the patient’s physical or mental health.” (emphasis added)
Speaker of the House, Robert DeLeo, responded--utilizing his Christmas Eve to promise that the House would "override the veto."
“It is appalling that, on the eve of the birth of Christ, Speaker DeLeo would promise to ram through legislation that expands the killing of babies,” said Patricia Stewart, Esq., Executive Director of MCFL.
The original bill, H.3320/S.1209, languished in committee, unable to fight commonsense opposition by citizens on both sides of the party line. Representative Claire Cronin drafted an amendment to the annual state budget to underhandedly sneak the deadly bill into law before the new year.
Following her action, both House and Senate approved the bill; but Baker rejected it.
"We expect our lawmakers to listen both to their hearts -- and their constituents," said C.J. Williams, MCFL Director of Community Engagement, "This bill is about abortion, at any cost. It is about so-called access--even to the detriment of women's health. It is not pro-choice, it is not pro-life. Kill this bill, not our babies -- and not our women!"
Members and other citizens will be contacting their state representatives all this week with just that message. Kill the bill, not the baby. H.5179 was vetoed for good reason; and MCFL expects our lawmakers in Massachusetts to respect the lives of its citizens and the voices of their constituents.
“Tell them Massachusetts MUST do better than the”R.O.E.” Act,” said MCFL President, Myrna Maloney Flynn, “For all of our citizens: Our women, our infants, and our daughters.”'
Easy-to-use list of state representatives here. You're the one they need to hear from -- tell them to kill the bill, not the baby, and to sustain the veto!
BREAKING: GOVERNOR BAKER LINE-VETOES ABORTION SECTION OF STATE BUDGET (ROE ACT)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE -- DECEMBER 11, 2020 -- This afternoon, Massachusetts governor, Charlie Baker, approved the 46B state budget bill but line-vetoed segments of Section 40, which contained egregious provisions, expanding abortion.
He retained the section permitting abortion at and after 24 weeks in cases of so-called "fatal fetal abnormalities", even though that term is ambiguous and not defined in the bill and opens the door to fatal error. Hope Dupell, who just celebrated her first birthday, was diagnosed with a lethal condition while in the womb. Fortunately, she thrives today as a living example of a life that a deadly mistake under this provision would have extinguished.
"Although there remains much in this bill with which to take issue, we thank Governor Baker for the common sense recommendation to raise the age for consent to abortion to 18,” said MCFL Executive Director, Patricia Stewart. Massachusetts Citizens for Life.
Massachusetts Citizens for Life
Massachusetts single solely-dedicated pro-life human rights organization since 1973.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Judge Amy Coney Barrett CONFIRMED JUSTICE OF THE U.S. Supreme Court BY 52-48 VOTE; MCFL APPLAUDS VOTE BY DIVIDED SENATE
Massachusetts Citizens for Life commends the U.S. Senate for confirming Judge Amy Coney Barrett as Justice of the Supreme Court in a 52 to 48 vote, along party lines.
"Justice Barrett has consistently demonstrated judicial prudence in her career, and a commitment to upholding the Constitution of the United States," said C.J. Williams, MCFL Director of Community Engagement, "More than that, she has shown by her own life that feminism is not contingent on an act of violence -- abortion."
Amy Coney Barrett was sworn in by Justice Clarence Thomas after the vote. Speaking from the White House Lawn, she told the nation: "My fellow Americans — even though we judges don’t face elections. We still work for you. It is your Constitution that establishes the rule of law and the judicial independence that is so central to it. The oath that I have solemnly taken tonight means at its core that I will do my job without any fear or favor and that I will do so independently of both the political branches and of my own preferences,”
Justice Barrett earned her J.D. summa cum laude from Notre Dame Law School, where she was first in her class and received the Hoynes Prize, the law school’s highest honor. She went on to clerk for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Beginning in 2002, Barrett taught law at Notre Dame Law School, where she was named “Distinguished Professor of the Year” three times. In 2017, the U.S. Senate confirmed her to serve as a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. She is married to Jesse Barrett, an Assistant United States Attorney. The couple has seven children.
Roe v. Wade and abortion were raised repeatedly by extreme abortion supporters during Justice Barrett's confirmation hearings. In Massachusetts, even were Roe to be overturned, state laws promoting abortion would remain in place. Many citizens and national leaders have been troubled by this apparent litmus test and the double standard which makes acceptable dragging a personally pro-life judge through the mud while promoting pro-abortion candidates.
"A judge should judge, not legislate," said MCFL President, Myrna Maloney Flynn, "A litmus test on personal beliefs exposes a deep ignorance of--or purposeful intention to abuse--our judicial system."
During hearings before the Judiciary Committee, Justice Barrett said that she refused to be turned into a political pawn. "I certainly hope that all members of the committee have more confidence in my integrity than to think that I would allow myself to be used as a pawn to decide this election for the American people."
With expectation and excitement, we welcome Justice Barrett to our nation's Supreme Court.
Press Contact: C.J. Williams
857 302 0466
Massachusetts Citizens for Life is the Commonwealth's single solely dedicated pro-life human rights organization. Founded in 1973, MCFL continues to advocate for the most vulnerable citizens in the Bay State: the preborn and the elderly and disabled.
Photo Credit: Associated Press
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 [email protected]
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.