A new study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that there may be a link between gestational diabetes and use of hormonal birth control.
The study, released Thursday, found that women who use hormonal contraceptives have a 40 percent greater chance of getting gestational diabetes than their peers.
Of the contraceptive methods used, hormonal were the most common, at 17.9 percent, while barrier methods were used by 17.2 percent of women. Fertility awareness methods were used by 6.8 percent of women, and 2.3 percent said they used another method. A majority of women — 56 percent — “reported using no contraception.”
The study was based on data collected in 2007 and 2008 by the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services in the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) survey. The survey was “administered in 40 states and in New York City and represents approximately 78% of all US live births,” according to the report, though results for this study were taken from the 2,741 responses by women in Missouri.
The CDC says that gestational diabetes is usually found “in weeks 24 to 28 of pregnancy.” Women with no history of diabetes can find themselves suffering from gestational diabetes, “which can cause complications at birth and potentially force the mother to have a [C-section birth],” according to the CDC. Side effects can affect both mother and child, including jaundice in the baby and “an increased risk for Type 2 diabetes in … mother and child later in life.”
The report says that while gestational diabetes is thought to affect between one in 50 and one in 10 pregnancies, “US prevalence has increased since the late 1980s and has more than doubled since 1990.”
“More research is needed to verify contraception as a potential risk factor” for gestational diabetes, the report said.
A doctor interviewed by CBS Newssaid that the study had several limitations. Cleveland Clinic obstetrician Dr. Sharon Sutherland said there are potential wording problems, that it’s unclear whether women had been on birth control when they got pregnant, and there is a risk of “recall bias” because women answered the PRAMS survey several months after giving birth.
Another weakness the study authors acknowledge was how the survey was sent to “a sample of women who delivered live babies in Missouri, and data are not generalizable to pregnant women with other outcomes or in different states.”
The results of the study, however, are in line with the growing body of evidence indicating risks that come with various forms of contraception, including blood clots, heart disease, possibly glaucoma, and even death.
Should the law compel nursing homes to starve certain Alzheimer’s patients to death? This is not an alarmist fantasy, but a real question, soon to be forced by advocates of ever-wider application of assisted euthanasia. The intellectual groundwork is already being laid for legislation or court orders requiring nursing homes, hospitals, and other facilities to withhold spoon feeding from dementia patients who, though they take food and drink willingly, once requested the withholding of life-prolonging measures in an advance medical directive.
Consider the Bentley case in Canada. A lawsuit was filed in 2013 in British Columbia by the family of an Alzheimer’s patient named Margot Bentley. Bentley had signed an advance directive instructing that she be refused life-sustaining treatment—or be euthanized—if she became unable to recognize her children.
Bentley is now in that lamentable condition. But she doesn’t need life-sustaining treatment like a respirator or feeding tube, and she willingly takes food and water by mouth. Moreover, euthanasia is illegal in Canada. Thus, there is no legal way of making sure she dies immediately.
Bentley’s family thinks this is unjust and asked a court to order her nursing home to starve her to death. The trial court refused, in part because Bentley’s advance directive did not specifically reject spoon-feeding. The case is now on appeal. Of all the current litigation aimed at undermining the sanctity of human life, this may be the most dangerous. If successful, it would open the door to what I call VSED-by-proxy. Let me explain.
Suicide itself is not illegal, and patients have long enjoyed the right to refuse medical treatment, even if their refusal hastens death. For decades, moreover, courts have deemed artificial nutrition and hydration to be medical treatment. Removing or withholding unwanted feeding tubes and respirators is a routine part of contemporary medical practice. But euthanasia advocates want more. They argue that people who don’t require medical treatment to remain alive also have a “right to die.”
Already, Oregon, Washington, and Vermont allow assisted suicide: Doctors may prescribe lethal drugs for patients expected to die within six months. Some activists urge that elderly people who are “tired of life,” those with disabilities, and the chronically ill should also have a legal means of obtaining help to end their lives. Here’s how the assisted-suicide advocacy organization Compassion & Choices makes the case in one of its booklets:
Some call us because they feel overwhelmed by the symptoms of chronic and progressive illnesses that fill their days with misery and suffering. There are also those who may not be seriously ill but are simply “done.” After eight or nine decades of life, they want information about ways to gently slip away in a peaceful and dignified manner.
Regardless of their clinical circumstances, these individuals share a common desire to maintain autonomy over their own end-of-life decisions. They want to die as they have lived, making the important decisions that affect their lives with collaboration and support from trusted healthcare providers, family members and other caregivers.
People like these are prime candidates for suicide by voluntary starvation, known in euthanasia parlance as “voluntarily stopping eating and drinking” (VSED). A person commits VSED by refusing all sustenance. To ensure that death is not impeded, the suicidal person leaves instructions explicitly refusing any medical intervention to nourish them. Because VSED can cause agonizing symptoms, advocates suggest that the suicidal person find a sympathetic doctor or hospice to provide pain relief.
(It is important to distinguish here between VSED and the point in the process of dying when a patient naturally stops taking food and drink. This is not suicide, and starvation is not the cause of death. Indeed, in such cases it is medically inappropriate to force food upon the patient.)
But what about a Margot Bentley —someone suffering from dementia, who eats and drinks willingly, but who once signed an advance directive calling for the withholding of treatment? Some bioethicists—reflecting the mix of utilitarianism and autonomy-worship that predominates in the field—have leapt to support VSED-by-proxy.
Writing in the May-June 2014 Hastings Center Report, Paul T. Menzel and M. Colette Chandler-Cramer argue for allowing people to use an advance directive to order themselves starved if they become incompetent:
Such directives are . . . arguably already legal. They follow logically from the intersection of two existing legal rights: directives for refusing life support and VSED. The principle behind [advance medical directives] is that people do not lose their rights when they become incompetent; someone else just has to exercise those rights for them.
The driving element behind VSED is that forcing people to ingest food is as objectionable an intrusion on bodily integrity, privacy, and liberty as imposing unwanted medical treatment. Thus, if incompetent people do not lose their rights to refuse life-saving treatment, then people do not lose their right to VSED when incompetent either.
This is rank sophistry. Even today, the courts do not deem spoon-feeding to be medical treatment. It is basic, humane care—no different ethically from turning a patient to prevent bed sores or providing hygiene. Just as an advance directive instructing that a patient not be kept clean should be disregarded, so should an order to starve a patient.
Second, VSED is suicide. Legally requiring nursing homes to commit VSED-by-proxy would be forcing them to kill—and to kill cruelly. A legal regimen that did this would drive many doctors and nurses out of medicine.
Third, even in the states where assisted suicide is legal, the person being helped by a doctor to die has to be capable of making decisions. Demented patients are incompetent.
Finally, in cases such as Bentley’s, the patient is not being force-fed. She is taking nourishment willingly.
Mother of Soccer Super-Star says she tried to abort him
By Dave Andrusko
It’s only initially a brief story in a small paper, later picked up by newspapers such as The Daily Mail newspaper, but what a story. We are only a week out from the FIFA World Cup and the mother of Portugal’s super-star soccer player, Cristiano Ronaldo, has revealed in a “tell-all” autobiography that she tried to abort her now 29-year-old son.
Dolores Aveiro’s book, titled “Mother Courage,” was released in Portugal today.
Details are sketchy at this point, but after a doctor refused to abort the child, Aveiro said she tried a “home recipe.”
“I wanted to abort but the doctor didn’t support my decision,” she says in the book. “She went on to explain she drank warm ale and ‘ran till she dropped,’ without achieving her aim,” the Daily Mail’s Steve Hopkins reported.
According to The Independent newspaper, Ronaldo cited work commitments as the reason he was not at the official launching of “Mother Courage.” Aveiro
“says that the football star already knew of the attempted abortion and the pair are able to light-heartedly reflect on the past.
“’He told me when he found out, ‘Look mum, you wanted to abort and now I’m the one who’s pulling the purse-strings in the house.’”
The Daily Star reports that Ronaldo has a son, who is now three. Who the mother is and the circumstances surround the boy’s birth remain something Ronaldo has kept private.
The Daily Star’s Gerald Couzens concluded his story, noting
“Dolores revealed in the approved biography, written by a Portuguese author, that she picked the child up from a clinic in Florida while Cristiano was playing in the 2010 World Cup in South Africa.
“Speaking of the moment Cristiano told her he would be a father, he had said: ‘I’m going to have a child and I want you to be the one to help me educate him and give him love, as you’ve always done with me and my brothers and sisters.’”
Abortion isn’t only a women’s issue. Here are three ways that fatherhood and abortion intersect.
(1) The importance of supportive fathers. According to the Guttmacher Institute, half of women having abortions say (as a reason) that they do not want to be a single parent or they are having trouble with their partner. A 2009 study published in the International Journal of Mental Health & Addiction found that pregnant women who felt they lacked support from the child’s father were more likely to choose abortion. A 2004 study in Medical Science Monitor found that 64 percent of American women having abortions said they felt pressured by others to abort. A wealth of other evidence confirms that fathers often play a central role in determining pregnancy outcomes.
Men who help conceive a baby must support (emotionally, economically, or in whatever other ways) both mother and child. When they don’t, abortion is more likely—and women and children pay a price, whether abortion is chosen or not.
(2) The effect of abortion on fathers. Abortion can detrimentally affect men just as it can women. Fathers may experience grief, guilt, anger, depression and other psychological consequences following abortion. Books like “Men and Abortion: A Path to Healing”; “Redeeming a Father’s Heart: Fatherhood Aborted”; and “Men and Abortion: Losses, Lessons and Love” have explored this issue. A number of ministries and websites (including http://www.fatherhoodforever.org, http://www.menandabortion.net and http://www.menandabortion.info) seek to provide healing for men who have lost children to abortion.
(3) Defending the unborn. Pro-choice advocates sometimes say that only women may speak about abortion, and many men are silent or have their opinions disregarded. But the case against abortion is sound irrespective of the gender (or any other characteristic) of an individual making it. Many, many women, after all, make the very same pro-life case. Men have an obligation to graciously speak the truth and to defend the lives of those who cannot defend themselves—the little girls and boys who have not yet been born.
Dads play an essential role in the lives of their children. They are also essential to restoring a culture of life in which all human beings, especially the youngest and most vulnerable, are respected and protected.
Editor’s note. Paul Stark is Communications Associate for Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, NRLC’s State Affiliate. This first appeared on MCCL’s blog.
Applying the science of human prenatal development is increasingly recognized as an indispensable and unique way to improve children’s health, enhance their development, and prevent certain birth defects and chronic diseases.
We now have an unprecedented opportunity to join with teachers to enhance students’ education, health, and lives by providing them with the foundation for making wise health decisions for themselves, their children, and their communities.
About Us
The Endowment for Human Development (EHD) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving health science education and public health. EHD equips educators, clinicians, and governments to help everyone appreciate, apply, and communicate the science of health and human development.
We are committed to neutrality regarding all controversial bioethical issues.
Our board of directors, board of advisors, staff, and volunteers include accomplished educators, researchers, authors, programmers, and clinicians from a variety of scientific and business disciplines who share the common goal of improving lifelong health through prenatal development-based education.
We invite all who share our vision to join us. Please visit our support page to see how you can help.
From: Douglas Johnson, NRLC legislative director (202) 626-8820, federallegislation@nrlc.org
Date: Friday, July 11, 2014
Re: Advance notice of testimony by NRLC President Carol Tobias before Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, July 15, 2014
This is to advise you that NRLC President Carol Tobias has accepted an invitation to testify before the Judiciary Committee of the U.S. Senate on Tuesday, July 15, 2014, at 10 AM EDT. The subject of the hearing is S. 1696, the so-called “Women’s Health Protection Act,” a bill that would invalidate nearly all current state and federal limits on abortion. NRLC has dubbed the bill the “Abortion Without Limit Until Birth Act.”
S. 1696 is currently sponsored by 35 Democrat senators, including the chief sponsor, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Ct.), who will chair the July 15 hearing. A House companion bill, H.R. 3471, currently has 125 cosponsors, all Democrats. Always-current lists of cosponsors, arranged by state, are posted on the NRLC Legislative Action Center at:
Like most congressional committees, the Senate Judiciary Committee offers video coverage of its hearings, which can be accessed either live or after the fact via the Committee website at http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/ We do not know yet whether the hearing will also be covered by C-SPAN.
National Right to Life, 512 10th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20004, USA
The smarter and more technologically advanced our culture gets, the lazier and less responsible it becomes. It’s apparent that many people think they are entitled to things which should make their lives “easier”. Abortion and contraception are two perfect examples of this. Rather than uphold standards of morality and values, sex and sexual behavior have become “rights”, and we shouldn’t have to worry about the “consequences”. Television, advertising, movies and even sex education in schools have made premarital sex, conjugal living and multiple sexual partners part of normal behavior. Instead of responsibility, respect and abstinence, we teach birth control. And when birth control fails, we say it is okay to end the life of the innocent child.
As if this isn’t bad enough, the use of contraceptives and abortion have been rationalized as healthcare! What’s even worse is the fact that people say they are entitled to contraception paid for by their employer! As usual, it makes my head spin!!!
The Supreme Court ruling in favor of Hobby Lobby has opened up a can of worms….and a LOT of stupidity! Forest Gump said it best when he said “stupid is as stupid does.” Jonathan Van Maren wrote the best article about the Hobby Lobby protest that I’ve seen. CLICK HERE to read it, and forward it to anyone who thinks contraception is healthcare. Sad, isn’t it? Our work goes on…
Just over 18 years ago, Emily and Caitlin Copeland left their mother’s womb, conjoined. Now, the girls are set to leave their hometown of Houston, Texas to different universities after graduating from high school as co-valedictorians. This will be only the second time in their lives that they will be apart from one another.
Just days after Emily and Caitlin turned 18, their mother, Crystal Copeland spoke with LifeSiteNews about how the dark time of finding out the girls were conjoined, and considering the possibility of aborting them, turned into a blessing and the knowledge that she and her family “wouldn’t change a thing.”
Receiving the diagnosis
Crystal and John Copeland, highschool sweethearts who “met in home room” and got married right out of college, were a typical young couple. Then she got pregnant, and the diagnosis of conjoined twins came. To the couple, it seemed to be the end of the world.
“Neither my husband nor myself were raised in a church,” Copeland told LifeSiteNews. “At the time that my husband and I found out that we were pregnant, we were not part of a church, we did not study the Bible. We both believed in God, but didn’t really understand what we were believing.”
“So we got the diagnosis, and it was an extremely dark time. I had always prayed, all my life, and I prayed heavily that weekend, when we were waiting to find out what the surgeons thought when they looked at the ultrasound video.”
Despite knowing the right decision was made almost two decades ago, Crystal says she only came to terms with the fact that she even considered abortion this year.
The waiting wasn’t easy, as doctors examined the results of the ultrasound. “We did have friends and family who felt that we should abort the pregnancy. Not having faith front and center in my life at that time, I worried all the time — I don’t know what I would have done if they had come back and told us they did share a heart, that they would not have been able to survive, I agonize over that. I don’t know what I would have done.”
According to Copeland, the girls were 17 weeks past gestation, and “they were kicking, they were moving, I could feel them, they were very real to me. We already had names picked out. It was very traumatic.”
“We were looking for any lifeline, anything that we could latch on to for hope. And when the surgeons came back and said, ‘we’ve reviewed the ultrasound, we think they’re only sharing a liver, and we think they have good possibilities for separation,’ we grabbed onto that.
We talked about it, and we decided that if there was a chance that at least one of them could survive, and have a normal life, then we would continue the pregnancy.”
Copeland says that the couple was “given the option” for abortion, “because [doctors] did not know if the girls were going to share a heart, which is a fatal complication, that kind of thing.”
Strength in adversity
Crystal says that choosing life for her babies, and raising Emily and Caitlin in difficult circumstances helped her and her husband realize inner strength. “I have a terrible fear of blood,” she explained, giving one example. “I’ve been known to almost pass out getting a paper cut, it’s that bad. But the girls obviously had a lot of surgeries and they had to have a lot of central lines run, directly into an artery on their chest.” And while she would have preferred to leave the area while nurses handled these responsibilities, the medical professionals told her that children get agitated when their mothers are not around.
“They were little tiny babies,” Crystal said. “So I sat in on more of those than I can even remember. And they were horrible, but I did it because my kids needed me to be there and do it.”
Crystal says she got so good at home health care – her daughters had larges holes on their abdomens from the separation surgery – that a home health nurse said she would “hire me in a minute.”
“I did all kinds of horrible stuff, and I got through it,” said Crystal. But she added that she could only do it for her kids. “You rise to the occasion when you have to, then it’s gone.”
Raising Emily and Caitlin also helped the Copeland’s marriage, she said. “It really made us stronger. I know a lot of marriages that are tested can’t handle the pressure. It really brought us a lot closer together, and really solidified our marriage in a good way.”
Healing and hope
However, some of the wounds from that period have healed more recently. Despite knowing the right decision was made almost two decades ago, Crystal says she only came to terms with the fact that she considered abortion this year. “I’ve thought about it over the years, and wondered if I had not gotten that lifeline, what would we have done?”
“A few months ago, I found out about a family in Houston who had a similar diagnosis — they were carrying conjoined twins connected in the same way that Emily and Caitlin were, and they decided to end the pregnancy. When I got that news — I don’t even know these people, I don’t know their names, I don’t know anything about them other than that fact that they were in my shoes, basically — I was so upset, I cried the whole way home.”
“I was upset all day,” Crystal explained. “I could not process that they had chosen to end their pregnancy. I think, really, that was God’s way of letting me know how I would have reacted if we had gotten that news. I was so horrified that they had ended their pregnancy — I think that was God’s way of telling me ‘let this go.'”
With her daughters heading to different universities — Emily to Houston to be a wedding planner, and Caitlin to Concordia University in Austin to be a Lutheran schoolteacher — Crystal says she is “looking at some wide-open time come August.” With both girls in band, as well as cheerleading (Emily) and softball (Crystal), Crystal says that her “appointment book was full.”
“I’m going to have to start volunteering at church a lot more,” she says. “I told my husband he’s going to have to get a lot more interested in my hobbies, and he just looked at me like I was nuts.”
As her girls head off for their second lifetime separation, Crystal says that she is “so proud of them. They are the most competitive, driven girls — all on their own, in their heads. They accomplished everything they wanted to in high school, and they have no regrets.”
Having been in the same classes in small schools their whole lives, Crystal’s girls are “very worried about going to separate schools.”
“This is going to be really hard on them.” However, modern technology — iPads and Facetime — will allow Crystal’s once-conjoined daughters to continue to be together, even as life takes them in separate directions.
I realize this will not a pleasant thing to read, but I feel it is necessary if we are to fight this battle with facts. I find that most people on both sides of this debate don’t actually know how abortion procedures are performed. Showing someone a picture is one thing, but actually describing, in detail, what takes place to the woman and her baby during these hours seems to really have an impact on even those who claim to support abortion.
Since the ban on Partial-Birth Abortion, abortionists have come up with a different method…believe it or not, a more dangerous method. There are currently fewer than 10 physicians in the country that will perform a late abortion procedure. Out of that small handful, most stop performing abortions at 32 weeks. There is one, Dr. Warren Hern in Boulder, Colorado, who performs them all the way up until birth.
The following description is of an abortion generally performed after 19 weeks gestation. I have worked first-hand with several of these late abortion providers and know many women who have undergone this procedure.
The woman is usually given sedation so that she is unconscious during the actual abortion. The nurses and technicians will physically push on her belly to help the physician pull the pieces of the baby out.
Let me start by saying that this is not an open door to condemn these women who have chosen a late abortion. We need to pray for them to find true healing so that they can move past the regret that they feel after making this decision. It should also not be an opportunity to condemn the physicians who perform this procedure or the other abortion clinic workers who may participate. Just as I have personally experienced, all people are capable of conversion. We need to pray for their conversion and pray that they will reach out to pro-lifers who will help them make that transition. For more information about how you can reach out to abortion workers, please visit our website at www.abortionworker.com. They will not reach out to us for help if we stand in judgment of them.
When a woman comes in for a late abortion, her cervix is dilated through the administration of one of two medications called Misoprostol (Cytotec) and Pitocin and/or Laminaria/Lamicel insertion. Laminaria are made of sterilized seaweed and look like tiny tampons. Lamicel are similar, but made of a synthetic material. The Misoprotol is taken orally prior to surgery and may take several hours to work. Misoprostol is a medication administered to relax the cervical muscle so that the surgeon can dilate it easily. Pitocin is also used sometimes to help with this process and is administered through an I.V.
If Laminaria or Lamicel is necessary to complete dilation, they must be inserted into the patient’s cervix by the physician prior to the abortion procedure. The Laminaria/Lamicel act like sponges by absorbing the moisture in the patient’s vagina and expanding to open the cervix.
Laminaria/Lamicel and Misoprostol will be administered on day one. Also, on day one, the physician will also administer a medication called Digoxin. This medication will be injected into the amniotic fluid. The fetus will then drink in the Digoxin and will overdose in the womb. It can take up to 48 hours for death to occur. During this time, the mother may feel her child struggling as he dies in her womb.
When the woman leaves the abortion facility on day one, she is sent home with a “delivery kit” just in case she goes into labor at the hotel. It includes towels, scissors to cut the umbilical cord and a biohazard waste bag that she could put her baby and placenta in. It doesn’t happen very often, but there is always a chance that she could deliver the baby early. In this case, she is instructed not to go to the emergency room. She is told to call the abortion clinic’s on call nurse who will come to the hotel and assist her during the delivery.
On day two or three (depending on how quickly the baby dies), the physician will perform the surgical abortion after dilation of the cervix is complete — this may take several hours or overnight. The doctor will remove the Laminaria (if applicable), insert a speculum into the vagina, and remove the unborn child using vacuum aspiration (suction), forceps and curettes.
The woman is usually given sedation so that she is unconscious during the actual abortion. The nurses and technicians will physically push on her belly to help the physician pull the pieces of the baby out. The surgical procedure takes approximately 10 – 25 minutes. After surgery, the mother is taken into the recovery room, where nurses will monitor her for approximately 45 minutes. She is sent home with several medications; anti-nausea meds, narcotics for pain relief, at least two different antibiotics, a medication that will contract the uterus to stop bleeding, and anything else the physician deems necessary.
The woman is not required to follow up with the physician. She is asked to follow up with a different physician in her area. If she has complications, the abortion facility will in almost all cases refer her to the emergency room.
According to the Guttmacher Institute, approximately 13,000 babies die this torturous death. Most abortion supporters will argue that these babies have terminal illnesses anyway, so this is a better option. But growing numbers of former abortion clinic workers are coming forward and stating that the majority of these babies aborted were perfectly healthy with no illnesses. I personally have medical records from several women who now regret their decision to have a late abortion. The “medical” reason stated for their abortions was the same…“patient is not prepared for a child.” Last I checked, being unprepared for the birth of a child is not a medical condition. This is unfortunately what happens when bills are passed that include a “health of the mother exception.” The “health” of the mother is entirely subjective and can be determined by the abortion staff.
All abortion is heinous. As hard as it is to listen to these details, we as pro-lifers know that all babies have equal humanity, no matter their age. We must fight to save them all.
Pro-life youth surprise Planned Parenthood supporters in Ohio with the truth
Every year, young people who want to spend their summer making a difference make their way to the Troy, Ohio, headquarters of Stand True Pro-Life Outreach, the Youth Outreach of Priests for Life and Gospel of Life Ministries. Youth Director Bryan Kemper spends a good portion of the summer on the road with these college-age people, traveling to youth festivals and pro-life events. In between road trips, the youth get a chance to practice some sidewalk activism in Troy and in nearby Dayton.
Already this year, they’ve caused quite a stir on the sidewalks.
Bryan posted this blog on his website, StandTrue.com:
The Stand True Mission Team arrived at the Packard Museum in Dayton about an hour before a Planned Parenthood fundraiser was scheduled to begin. We set out immediately to chalk all the sidewalks leading to the museum with pro-life and Gospel messages. Within minutes someone from the museum came out to tell us we could not chalk near the driveways or big doors. I informed her she was wrong and invited her to call the Dayton Police.
Two Dayton Police officers showed up shortly after and talked to me for a few minutes and then went in to inform the museum that we were well within our rights.
Two employees from the museum came out and approached me to ask about what we were doing. They were both heartbroken that the event had been booked by the agency for the museum and told us how much they were on our side. It was obvious how devastated they were with the decision to host a Planned Parenthood event there.
One of the museum employees, an older gentleman, asked if I had any pro-life literature. I told him Planned Parenthood would take it away from him and he said “They will NOT stop me from passing this out inside the museum.” I loaded him up with some literature and graphic drop cards, and he went inside.
As the night progressed we set up right at the entrance to the event and showed every single person who paid $75 a ticket what their money went to and pleaded with them to stop supporting child killing. We did not get to do much pleading as fewer than 25 people went into the fully catered event. I am sure Planned Parenthood lost money that night.
Also this summer, the Troy City Council passed a law that was in effect for only four days. The law made it illegal to do sidewalk chalking on the grounds of the annual Strawberry Festival and it was passed just to stop Bryan and his team. That alone tells you how effective they are in getting out their message.
This evening on Radio Maria’s “Gospel of Life,” Bryan and one of his summer missionaries, Ed Fite of Morton, Pennsylvania, will join host Janet Morana to talk about some of the other activism the team has planned for the summer.
Make sure to tune in at 6 p.m. ET by going to http://radiomaria.us There’s also a Radio Maria app that can be downloaded to smart phones and tablets, so you can take Janet, the Gospel of Life and Radio Maria with you wherever you go.
Abortion isn’t only a women’s issue. Here are 
The Endowment for Human Development (EHD) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving health science education and public health. EHD equips educators, clinicians, and governments to 
We are committed to 
wyandotcountyrightolife 