Monthly Archives: May 2016

Priests for Life vs. HHS

May 9, 2016

Priests for Life is awaiting word from the Supreme Court on its case, Priests for Life vs. HHS, challenging the HHS mandate.  Our case illustrates the importance of the 2016 elections.

With the Supreme Court evenly divided along ideological lines, it becomes clear that how Americans vote in November will not only impact the next four years, but the next 40 years as well.  The president and the Senate together shape the Supreme Court and the other federal courts. Depending on what party controls each branch of government, the court will move solidly to the right or to the left. The differences between the two parties on fundamental issues could not be more clear, more stark, or more extreme.

I have recorded a series of short videos to explain more about Priests for Life vs. HHS, the Supreme Court case in which Priests for Life is a petitioner along with 36 others. The videos can be found at  Please share them with your contacts in email and on social media.

Please also read and share a list of talking points about the case found at

Voters who find themselves dissatisfied with the likely Democratic and Republican candidates have to look beyond the nominees themselves and understand the impact of a party, and its prevailing philosophies, not only on the next four years but on the next 40 years.  Among other things, do we want to protect the unborn or do we want to continue to be a nation that sanctions the murder of its most vulnerable citizens?

You can find information on voting in your state at  Be sure to vote in your state’s primary election and take advantage of early voting, if your state offers it, in the General Election.

Finally, please pray for the outcome of the election by joining us in saying a Prayer for our Nation as we Prepare to Elect our Leaders from now until Election Day.


Fr. Frank Pavone
National Director, Priests for Life

P.S.  Priests for Life is pleased to announce that we are distributing, free of charge, prayer cards in honor of Pope St. John Paul II. These cards are Third Class Relics, because they have been touched to the First Class Relic of his blood, which we have in our chapel here at Priests for Life.  Order as many as you want at and spread the word.

P. P.S. Please tune in to our TV and Radio shows this week:

The Gospel of Life: Come Holy Spirit: Father Frank Pavone and Janet Morana will discuss the significance of Pentecost, and check in on the Vote for Life campaign.
Airs on Radio Maria, Tuesday at 6 p.m. ET.  Each show re-airs on Thursdays at 2am and Mondays at 12 midnight.  Ask questions on the live show at 866-333-6279 (MARY) or email us ahead of time at Tune in at

Defending Life: Always a dad:  Two men share how the loss from abortion has personally affected them; Fr. Stephen Imbarrato retells how he found healing and went on to become a priest.
Airs on EWTN Wednesday, May 11 at 3:00 am and Thursday, May 12 at 11:00 pm.  Listen on EWTN Radio and EWTN shortwave on Sunday at 5am and 1pm.  Also on EWTN shortwave every Saturday at 6:30pm.  On EWTN RadioPlus Sunday at 9am and Saturday at 7:30pm. (All times Eastern) You can also stream EWTN online by going to and clicking on the “television” tab.

The Catholic View for Women: Finding my vocation: Guests Mother Agnes Donovan of the Sisters of Life and inspirational speaker Jackie Francois Angel offer practical advice for women trying to discern between marriage or religious life.
Airs on EWTN Wednesday, May 11 at 11:00 pm  and Friday, May 13 at 10:30 am .

Hear us on EWTN radio on Catholic Connection with Teresa Tomeo.  Fr. Frank will be on with Teresa on Tuesday, May 10 at 8:45 am. Call-in to the live show with questions at 877-573-7825. For more information and to listen to the live show on the internet, go to

Father Frank Pavone will talk about his new book, Proclaiming the Message of Life, on Redeemer Radio at 7:15 a.m. May 11. Listen online at


Priests for Life
PO Box 141172
Staten Island, NY 10314
Phone: 888-735-3448
Fax: 718-980-6515

Subscribe to The Father Frank Blog by Email

Do you know others who may be interested in our work? Please refer them to us.

Benefits of Natural Family Planning

The Couple to Couple League

Annual Wyandot Co Right to Life Geranium Sale

Very Helpful Primer on “Abortion Pill Reversal”

NRL News Today 

Very helpful primer on “Abortion Pill Reversal”

By Dave Andrusko

LevatinoDEabortionNRL News Today and NRL News has each carried stories about “abortion pill reversal.” The most recent was on Monday.

Tip of the hat to Live Action News for posting on its Facebook page a link to a brief video describing how this technique works. The narrator is Dr. Anthony Levatino, who (he tells us) earlier in his career performed over 1,200 abortions.

For those new to the discussion, this is a technique that in some circumstances (depending mostly on very early intervention), a chemical abortion is not so much reversed as neutralized. How does it work?

The one, very small saving grace of all the publicity surrounding the FDA’s new protocol on “RU-486” is that the public is learning that this chemical abortion technique actually involves not one but two drugs, and if a doctor intervenes before the second set of pills are given, there may be a chance to save the baby.

Drug #1 is mifepristone. It works to block the action of progesterone, a naturally occurring hormone in the woman’s body necessary to maintaining the baby’s food supply, the effect of which is to starve the baby of nutrients.

The second drug, misoprostol, is taken by the woman a day or so later. The baby, often dead by this time, is expelled after the misoprostol (also known as Cytotec) triggers powerful uterine contractions.

To neutralize the impact of mifepristone [commercially known as Mifeprex]requires administering very large dosages of progesterone–flooding the system, so to speak, to compete with the mifepristone –the sooner the better.

Dr. Levatino’s video is only 3 minutes and 39 seconds long. It is a very handy primer.

Editor’s note. If you want to peruse stories all day long, go directly to and/or follow me on Twitter at 



Do Babies Know the Difference Between Good and Evil?

NRL News Today

 May 4, 2016   Infants

Do Babies Know the Difference Between Good and Evil?

By Dave Andrusko

Editor’s note. This ran a while back, but thanks to the Internet, a newcomer to NRL News Today ran across this online and wrote to ask some questions. I find the topic not only fascinating, but more relevant today than when I first wrote the story.

eye60Those nine words were put in the form of a declarative statement, rather than a question, in a headline on Fox News. On the same topic, the Daily News of England wrote, “We’re born to be moral: Babies ‘can tell good from evil at six months.” The New York Times, in a magazine article, described the phenomenon as “The Moral Life of Babies.”

What are they talking about? Well, all are reflections of some ingenious work done for many years at the psychology department at Yale University.

David Derbyshire summarizes “an astonishing series of experiments” as showing that “Babies aged six months old have already developed a strong moral code, according to psychologists.”

Writing in the Daily News, Derbyshire adds, “They may be barely able to sit up, let alone take their first steps, crawl or talk, but researchers say they can still tell the difference between good and evil.”

The growing body of evidence suggests that babies possess a “rudimentary” moral sense every early in life. Without going into a lengthy explanation, the little ones were “tested,” so to speak, by being presented with a series of events. Overwhelmingly they responded favorably to “good” or helpful puppets and rejected the naughty or “bad” puppets. (Most of the response is measured by the way they track objects with their eyes, but there are physical exertions as well.)

“A growing body of evidence suggests that humans do have a rudimentary moral sense from the very start of life,” Professor Paul Bloom, a psychologist at Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, told Fox News. “Some sense of good and evil seems to be bred in the bones.” Bloom is at the center of this research and wrote a lengthy essay for the New York Times Magazine.

He stresses that the morality the child has early in life is unrefined, so to speak—noting that nobody is saying socialization is not crucial. But it’s also true, according to Bloom, that

“Babies possess certain moral foundations — the capacity and willingness to judge the actions of others, some sense of justice, gut responses to altruism and nastiness. Regardless of how smart we are, if we didn’t start with this basic apparatus, we would be nothing more than amoral agents, ruthlessly driven to pursue our self-interest.”

Beyond the obvious—who wouldn’t be fascinated by the idea that a sense of right and wrong is “hardwired” into us?—what struck me in Bloom’s essay was an extension of a refrain we hear over and over and over. Children—six-month old babies—are much more complex, much more complicated than we thought even a few years ago. Bloom talks about their “naïve physics” and an ability to “do rudimentary math with objects.“

Who knows what fascinating new discoveries we will make as we increasingly understand that birth is merely a way station on a journey that had already begun 9 months before and will end 70 or 80 years later.

And perhaps working backwards, we might learn that it is precisely because we have lost what Bloom calls “certain moral foundations” that explains how we adults can act so inhumanely toward defenseless unborn babies.

Editor’s note. If you want to peruse stories all day long, go directly to and/or follow me on Twitter at


3 Ways Abortion Robs America’s Mothers—and all of us

Opinion ,

3 ways abortion robs America’s mothers—and all of us

Dr. Laurel Shaler 

May 4, 2016 (Bound4Life) — We put in our application to adopt in February, announced our plan to adopt on Mother’s Day, and became ‘home study ready’ on September 11. In 2014. It’s now been two years of waiting and praying.

Mostly patient, I’m finding myself becoming less serene and more frustrated at this wait—with its end yet to be determined.

A prepared adoptive family may wait years for a placement. The abortion clinics are full… why aren’t adoption agencies teeming with children?

Dr. Laurel Shaler and her husband Nick are in the midst of their adoption process Kelsey Schwenk

Our society makes abortion so easy. It’s cheap, it’s accessible and it has even become glamorized (thanks to Planned Parenthood’s extensive Hollywood outreach). We hear all the time how abortion is so common, and it is. But that doesn’t make it right.

When I think of all that is lost as a result of abortion, it breaks my heart. Much has been said on the horrors of abortion, yet we rarely focus on how abortion robs us all of the blessings of adoption. Here are three ways abortion robs from adoption:

1. Abortion robs the birthmother

When a woman realizes she’s pregnant, she has three choices: she can raise the child herself, she can place the child for adoption, or she can abort the child. Let’s be honest, all too often we’re talking about 13, 14 or 15 year-old girls here. While teen pregnancy and abortion rates are at the lowest they’ve been in 40 years—thanks in part to effective pro-life laws—abortions still take place seven days a week.

Whether choosing an abortion or forced into it by another, women are robbed of the blessing of adoption. In an extremely difficult place in life, she feels her only option is to choose death.

Yet for years, perhaps decades, this woman will face trauma and even grave health issues as a result of post-abortive stress.

Abortion robs the most from young mothers, so often replacing expectant joy with shame Eric Bjerke / Flickr

Through adoption, women have an amazing opportunity to redeem a bad decision or unintended consequence. Yes, this choice carries its own difficulty. One birthmother shares in the New York Times how, despite a painful decision to place her child for adoption, it comforts her to see the child with his adoptive family. She would be robbed of this consolation if she had chosen abortion.

To be clear, adoption is not the only—or even always the best—alternative to abortion. Sometimes the right choice is for the expectant mother to parent. No woman should feel forced to place a child for adoption that she can care for. The point is: when a women or couple cannot provide a good home for their child, regardless of the reasons why, abortion is not the answer. Adoption is!

2. Abortion robs families of the opportunity to adopt

Wouldn’t it be amazing if every child was born into loving and capable families? I would love to see the unplanned pregnancy rate and national abortion rate go to zero. Any pro-life advocate would be perfectly content if there were no babies to adopt, because there was no need!

But the reality is, as long as women are still heading to abortion clinics, there is a need for adoption. Thousands of families nationwide have been making life changes so they can be ready to adopt.

Sometimes they bring unique strengths to the adoption process, like having raised several children; others, like my husband and I, bring a love for children we’ve nurtured through staying engaged in child sponsorship.

Laurel and Nick Shaler currently sponsor three children through Food for the Hungry Kelsey Schwenk

For both birthmother and adoptive family, adoption represents a great sacrifice of time, tears and treasure. When God uses adoption to save a life—or perhaps change a family’s entire storyline—the beauty and value that adoption brings into the world cannot be denied.

3. Abortion robs our society and communities

When one third of a nation’s population is wiped out through the genocide of abortion, there is a huge financial and emotional cost. It’s estimated that our nation has lost $16 trillion dollars in federal revenue as a result of abortion, according to former liberal activist Mark Olson.

Click “like” if you are PRO-LIFE!

But that is nothing compared to the destinies we’ve lost. I cannot help but wonder what our society might look like were it not for abortion; would a cure for cancer have been developed? Steve Jobs, co-founder of Apple, was raised in an adoptive family after his birthmother Joanne Schieble bravely brought him into the world. Think about her next time you check your iPhone.

Whether an aborted child was diagnosed in the womb with cerebral palsy, or whether they would have faced other challenges, their life had a story the world will never know.

When prenatal testing reveals a potential birth defect, over 90 percent of parents choose to abort Joe Nicora / Flickr

There are practical economic issues too. “Babies are essential,” reports family trends expert Glenn Stanton. “Economic growth, debt retirement and support of an increasing population of elderly requires young workers, and these young creators, providers, inventors, consumers—not to mention taxpayers—only come in one original size: babies.”

So I will keep waiting and praying for the day a brave woman makes the very difficult, but incredibly honorable, decision that she will choose life for her child… and that she has chosen us to parent that precious baby.

And I’ll keep praying that every woman in a crisis pregnancy who cannot parent makes the same decision. Because we must not allow abortion to rob us all of the joy and blessing of adoption.

Dr. Laurel Shaler is a Chair at Liberty University in the Department of Counselor Education and Family Studies. She is a former social worker for the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Laurel writes on the intersection of faith, culture and emotional well-being at She and her husband, Nick, are in the adoption process; follow along with their journey via FacebookReprinted with permission from Bound4Life.


Scientists say Life Begins at Conception with a Flash of Light

The Pulse

Featured Image 


The Pulse

Scientists say life begins at conception with a flash of light

Cassy Fiano

May 3, 2016 (LiveActionNews) — Abortion advocates often claim as a defense of abortion that no one can really, truly define the moment life begins. Without knowing that, they say, there’s no real argument against abortion. Consider, for example, Melissa Harris-Perry’s insistence that life begins “whenever you feel like it does.” Obama famously said that the question of when life begins was above his pay grade. While the science of embryology has long been settled, it’s still not good enough for abortion activists.

But a new scientific breakthrough might go a long way towards changing hearts and minds: scientists have been able to capture the moment life begins, with a bright flash of light as a new life is conceived…

Human life begins in bright flash of light as a sperm meets an egg, scientists have shown for the first time, after capturing the astonishing ‘fireworks’ on film.

An explosion of tiny sparks erupts from the egg at the exact moment of conception.

Scientists had seen the phenomenon occur in…animals but it is the first time is has been also shown to happen in humans.

The photos included were not of actual embryos being created — the scientists used a sperm enzyme to replicate the incredible moment that life begins.

Unfortunately, rather than using this discovery to defend life, scientists are using it to better discern which lives to destroy.

Researchers from Northwestern University, in Chicago, noticed that some of the eggs burn brighter than others, showing that they are more likely to produce a healthy baby.

… “This means if you can look at the zinc spark at the time of fertilization, you will know immediately which eggs are the good ones to transfer in in vitro fertilization.

“It’s a way of sorting egg quality in a way we’ve never been able to assess before. “All of biology starts at the time of fertilization, yet we know next to nothing about the events that occur in the human.”

So basically, the scientists are advocating for embryos to be created in order to facilitate IVF, and then destroyed if they don’t seem to be the healthiest, strongest embryos. The ones with a dimmer glow are deemed to be weaker, perhaps because of a genetic abnormality, and so after creating their unique lives, scientists plan to destroy them. This is even though science has also just confirmed that babies with abnormalities can self-correct while still in the womb. People who are undergoing IVF are often encouraged to destroy “defective” embryos, ending the lives that were just created, without giving the embryos any chance at all to grow and develop, and certainly without placing any value on the uniqueness of each human life.

Click “like” if you are PRO-LIFE!

As Secular Pro-Life pointed out:

[T]he article is refreshingly clear about conception being the point where life begins. There is no obfuscation. The very first line of the article is “Human life begins in bright flash of light as a sperm meets an egg, scientists have shown for the first time, after capturing the astonishing ‘fireworks’ on film.”

Which is why the rest of the article is so incredibly disturbing.

Agreed. It’s sad that such a life-affirming discovery is being used to further the culture of death.

Reprinted with permission from Live Action News.


Why you must teach your kids about the culture of life before high school


Why you must teach your kids about the culture of life before high school

Mary Kizior

May 3, 2016 (American Life League) — A few minutes on a major television network is enough to convince any parent that the world is a dangerous place for young people. With the current laws in our country, parents must be constantly vigilant if they want to protect the innocence of their young children from the snares of the culture of death.

In recent years, the cultural climate has become so polluted that many parents might be tempted to wait on certain subjects, like a preborn baby’s development, until their children are more mature. But as a people of life, we cannot afford to wait. Here are five reasons why you need to start teaching respect for the dignity of every human being before your students reach high school:

Time is scarce

With added sports, college preparation classes, and science labs to complete, high school students have very little time to start learning about the basics of human development. The culture of life is not built by 50-minute classes three times per week.

Rather, it is a way of life that informs the intellect on the beauty of every human person, born and preborn. In our current society, it would be a travesty for any child to arrive at high school not knowing that a human being deserves dignity, respect, and protection from the very first moment of existence at creation.

While high school students are fully capable of learning basic biological facts in school, there is not enough time for them to build the same kind of foundation for their beliefs in those four short years. Instead, grade school should focus on learning a basic understanding of the culture of life so that high school can be spent looking deeper.

High school is the time to dig deeper

Once kids have a firm foundation in basic facts of biology, they are better able to explore more complex philosophical ideas concerning the respect for all human beings. In high school, students have the ability to start examining the attitudes and opinions of society around them.

They can begin to question and debate the lies of moral relativism in popular culture and multimedia. An early education in the culture of life allows teenagers to be more than simply consumers of knowledge. An early formation in the culture of life turns students into doers.

A high schooler’s first response to a question about euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide should not be “What is that?” but rather, “What can I do to create respect for the elderly or terminally ill in society?”

The fight gets harder

The culture of death targets kids in high school. Under pressure from peers and with so many new experiences available, high schoolers experience a minefield of new topics like abortion, contraception, euthanasia, and population control.

No matter whether your student is homeschooled, enrolled in private school, or attends public school, he will come across friends, teachers, and authority figures who demean the sanctity of human beings through lessons and passing comments.

By that time, your student needs to be not only prepared to speak with eloquence if the topic arises, but also to be emboldened and unafraid, knowing he is defending the least of his brothers in our world. Students can’t be prepared for moments like these if they only learn about pro-life issues one day per semester in their religious education class.

High school is the time to make a difference

Lila Rose started LiveAction when she was only 15 years old. David Daleiden, founder of the Center for Medical Progress which released the shocking videos of his investigation of Planned Parenthood, credits his crucial involvement in the pro-life movement to his early formation and involvement in his high school pro-life group.

Click “like” if you are PRO-LIFE!

As they mature into young adults getting ready to go to college, high school students become fully capable of defending the preborn and protecting the rights of the innocent. Young people are the hope of the pro-life movement, but we must encourage them to use their knowledge and skills to challenge society to respect human dignity.

Even young children appreciate the science of preborn babies

The earlier children understand that preborn babies are people, the better equipped they will be as they continue their education in the culture of life. It’s never too late to start teaching about the beauty and sanctity of all human beings, but your child will be so much more prepared to step out into our broken world if his formation in the culture of life starts by unconsciously living the truth that every human being is of inestimable value.

The future of the culture of life starts with you and how you will prepare the next generation. Will you take the challenge?

Mary Kizior is a content developer for American Life League’s Culture of Life Studies Program, which stresses the culture of life as an integral part of every academic discipline. CLSP is dedicated to helping students become effective communicators of the pro-life message. Sign up for our email newsletter to see how we can help you foster a culture of life at home and in school. Reprinted with permission from American Life League.



Changing death from biological to sociological would open the door to profound evil

NRL News Today

Changing death from biological to sociological would open the door to profound evil

By Wesley J. Smith

culture-of-death-the-age-of-do-harm-medicine-by-wesley-smith-1594038562Maintaining the concept of “death” as a biological, rather than sociological, event is one of the few remaining impediments to exploiting the most weak and vulnerable among as mere natural resources.

If death can be “redefined”–an ongoing project in bioethics–to include the end of the subjective concept of being a “person,” then the unborn–supposedly, not yet persons–and those who through injury or illness have lost the ability to express personhood, can be deemed dead, or perhaps better stated, as good as dead.

This issue is discussed regularly above the public’s awareness in bioethics and medical journals.

Every once in a while, I think it worth the time to bring some of this advocacy to a wider readership to alert my readers to what the elites in bioethics would like to impose upon us.

From, “The Death of Human Beings” by bioethicist N. Emmerich, in the medical journal, QVM:

When we say that someone has died, we do not merely mean that some biological entity no longer functions. We mean that they, some unique mind or person, understood as a cognitive phenomena or psychological entity, has ceased to exist.

Despite being a non-biological term, personhood admits of the application of the terms life and death and, furthermore, reflects the ordinary meaning of the terms.

We should think very seriously about the consequences of changing death from the irreversible biological end of the integrated organism, to the subjective determination that personhood and relevant “capacities” have ceased.

It would mean that clearly alive individuals could become exploitable–or used instrumentally–in the same way as we do biologically dead bodies now.

That wouldn’t just mean live organ harvesting of persistently unconscious or minimally conscious patients–often proposed in organ transplant journals–but also experiments conducted on their living bodies.

Such uses could also be applied on living fetuses, perhaps even, infants, who would be deemed not yet “alive” as human beings because they haven’t yet attained the self-awareness deemed necessary for personhood, and hence, “earned” their equal moral value.

You think I exaggerate? Ponder the profound and adverse consequences of this [ed. Note. “zoe” and “bios” are Greek terms]:

A severely anencephalic neonate is a human organism that may be alive (or dead) in the sense of zoe. However, they will never have a life in the sense of bios. On the account offered by Schofield et al. life begins at conception. We should, therefore, distinguish between the commencement of biological or organismic life and the point at which the fetus becomes a subject, and not just an object, of life.

This does not mean the matter is easily settled; as with brain death, brain life remains a contested notion. Nevertheless such conceptual difficulties should not lead us to simply reject such notions. Rather, we might accept that situating an essentially metaphysical and philosophical conception of personhood in the empirical and practical context of biomedicine presents inherent epistemological challenges.

Changing death from biological to sociological would open the door to profound evil.

Illustrating how mainstream this subversive approach to human life and death has become among the medical/bioethics intelligentsia, this article was listed as the “editor’s choice.”

I explore these and other dangers of “personhood theory” much more deeply in my just released book: Culture of Death: The Age of ‘Do Harm’ Medicine.

Editor’s note. This appeared at Wesley’s great blog.


Abortion clinic director angered by Precious Feet pins

NRL News Today

Abortion clinic director angered by Precious Feet pins

By Sarah Terzo

feet-pinCarol Everett, former owner of two abortion clinics and director of four, on the “precious feet’ pins prolifers wear:

“You know those little feet pins? Those things used to irritate me to death when I was in the abortion business. I couldn’t stand them. In the grocery line, a girl of about 16 was wearing the feet. That just about drove me crazy because, of course, she was shining the truth on me. I didn’t understand that then, but I hated them.”

Judy Madsen Johnson, Stories from the Frontlines: the Battle against Abortion (2014), p. 55.

Editor’s note. Sarah Terzo is a pro-life author and creator of the website where this appeared. She is a member of Secular Pro-Life and PLAGAL.