Eventually, while serving as Director for a Planned Parenthood outlet in Texas, she realized women weren’t really getting information about any options other than abortion.
According to an interview with KBTX.com in College Station, Texas, Johnson felt that Planned Parenthood wasn’t putting the bulk of their money into family planning or pregnancy prevention, but into making money from abortions.
Johnson saw it was becoming all about selling abortions.
But when she viewed the ultrasound of an extracted 13-week old baby, her mind was made up. She turned in her resignation.
A taped interview not to be missed:
Life Issues Institute has done a two-part interview with Johnson.
As of February 2010, it can be viewed at Facing Life by selecting “Insider Exposes Planned Parenthood, Part 1 and 2” from the Video List.
The interview includes other workers and prayer group participants who corroborate Johnson’s statements about the lack of information given at various Planned Parenthood clinics; forceful handling of peaceful protestors; girls and women being encouraged not to tell their partners about the abortion; and lack of knowledge among staffers about a baby’s vital life signs.
In November 2009, Planned Parenthood obtained a temporary restraining order against Johnson and the organization she is now involved with, Coalition for Life, just down the street from the Texas clinic.
Little protection is afforded Johnson, who now finds herself vilified and discredited by this most powerful “family planning” organization that receives hundreds of millions of dollars in federal aid each year.
Earlier attempts to expose the abortion industry:
Johnson is not the first to expose legal abortion as an industry caring mostly about the money, not about the women. In 1992, ex-abortion clinic owner, Carol Everett, wrote the book, Blood Money, revealing the exploits within abortion clinic walls.
Everett started as an abortion clinic employee and realized her salary depended on selling as many abortions as possible. She made enough money to start six clinics.
However, she later became horrified at her own business. Women were being maimed or dying on a regular basis from legal abortions; there were cover-ups of abortion as the reason for complications leading to death, and other gruesome details.
In 1996, a film called The Procedure* was distributed by Mission City Television, Inc.
In it, registered nurse Brenda Pratt Shafer tells of her switch from being pro-choice to pro-life after what she witnessed while assigned to work at an Ohio abortion clinic.
Dr. Bernard Nathanson, himself the creator of the phrase “pro-choice” and founder of the abortion rights group NARAL, reversed his position years ago in favor of life after seeing ultrasounds.
Nathanson even admitted in one of his earliest books, Aborting America (1981, still being sold), that statistics about “back alley abortions” were magnified and falsified – pulled out of thin air to serve the movement’s purpose. “Mainstream” media refuses to interview him.
These messages are often lost under the din of the pro-choice mantra that currently infiltrates every facet of our society. Follow the links in this article to be further informed.
*(The video “The Procedure” appears to be out of circulation yet still listed on many pro-life websites. Contact the Underground for backup sources of its earlier existence.)
]]>
Sanctity of Human Life Sunday was created in 1983, marking the 10th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roe v Wade, which legalized abortion in 1973.
With evidence that millions of abortions took place in those 10 years, the Christian Action Council Education and Ministries Fund, now known as Care Net, asked former President Ronald Reagan to create a special day to focus on the value of human life.
President Reagan declared an annual national commemoration on the third Sunday in January.
Since that time, many pro-life organizations and churches across the United States organize annual activities for this day. Some observe a Sanctity of Human Life Week for seven days, proclaiming the value of all human life from conception to natural death.
The Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v Wade created one of the biggest political controversies in American since the Civil Rights movement. Consequently, being “pro-life” or “pro-choice” has ignited political firestorms and election controversy for nearly 30 years.
One of the pro-choice movement’s main platforms is that women should not have to suffer through pregnancies due to rape, incest or any risk to their own survival.
However, according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute’s research throughout the history of legalized abortion, rape and incest have accounted for only 1.5-2 percent of all abortions.
Regarding health of the mother, former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop has repeatedly stated that late-term abortion is one of the most dangerous ways to end a life-threatening pregnancy, and Caesarean delivery should be preferred.
Koop’s theory was backed up by more than 500 physicians in a letter to the Wall Street Journal (Partial Birth Abortion is Bad Medicine, Sept. 19, 1996; presented before U.S. Senate March 7, 2003).
Will taxpayer-funded abortion be in the new U. S. Congress’ Health Care Bill?
The National Right to Life organization has sent letters to both the House and Senate itemizing problems with the recent draft of the healthcare bill as last seen.
One of the main issues is the absence of a clear definition between “private” and “public” funding in the wording so far.
A final health care bill has not yet been revealed to the American people. It remains to be seen if the language will shut out or nullify the Stupak-Pitts Amendment or similar bills attempting to prevent taxpayer-funded abortion.
A January Rasmussen Poll shows 53 percent of American people surveyed are against putting taxpayer-funded abortion coverage into any health care plan.
For distribution materials regarding Sanctity of Human Life Sunday, go to SOHLS here.
]]>“Sarah’s Choice”, the pro-life themed film starring longtime and multi award-winning Christian pop music sensation Rebecca St. James officially hit retail stores across the country earlier this month: November 17, 2009. Although rumors of the film surfaced in early March of this year, it is already having a profound impact on churches, communities and families. For more on this, see my article entitled “Sarah’s Choice: Christian Songstress Rebecca St. James to Star in Upcoming Pro-Life Film.”
St. James plays the role in the film of Sarah Collins, a “young, unmarried junior account executive at a major advertising agency who becomes pregnant while climbing the ladder of success,” according to The Christian Post. The film, which bypassed movie theatres altogether, going straight to DVD, centers on the choice Sarah must make concerning the life of her child.
Commenting on the film before its official release, St. James said, “I think the biggest thing the film imparted to me-both in researching the role and in portraying the character-was a real sense of empathy for women who find themselves in the situation my character found herself in.”
She also noted, “My heart goes out to them as I have seen the extreme amount of pressure and fear that can come from outside sources at a vulnerable time such as this.”
According to The Internet Movie Database, “Sarah’s Choice” also stars Christian Comedian Brad Stine, Dick Van Patten of “That Seventies Show” fame and Staci Keanen of “Step By Step.” Christian movie and media company Pure Flix Entertainment is the driving force behind the production and is also known for helming such Christian films as “The Wager”, starring country music singer Randy Travis.
The DVD will also include special bonus content, including “The Making Of”, “Commentary” and “Trailers.” “Sarah’s Choice” is available at Christian bookstores and movie retailers across the country, as well as online at: www.store.purflix.com.
]]>Dr. Tiller’s murder is no less heinous and should not be minimized. However, Pouillon’s death is no less important.
Pouillon, a disabled activist, was involved in a peaceful pro-life protest across the street from Owosso High School when he was shot several times and killed on Friday, September 11. The suspect now in custody is Harlan Drake, whose license plate number was cited by several witnesses to the crime.
With respect to CNN’s coverage as pretty much the only visible “mainstream” journalism on this case, even CNN kept calling Pouillon anti-abortion rather than pro-life. In nearly every sentence where victim Pouillon’s name is mentioned, the words anti-abortion follow or preceed. Question to “pro-choicers” – if choice is a good thing, then why not say Pouillon chose to be pro-life? Why must the term anti-abortion always be used to sound more hateful and intolerant?
The media’s avoidance of the latest murder was originally chalked up to this being some “random” incident. Of course it is, to the liberal powers that be. Any shooting of a person involved in today’s politically correct causes is cruel pre-meditated murder, but kill a conservative and it must be a random shooting. Drake has apparently admitted to another murder that day, the murder of business owner Michael Fuoss. So to liberal forces, Drake was on a random shooting rampage.
However, according to the CNN report, authorities feel the shootings were not random. Drake admitted being offended by Pouillon’s graphic sign of an aborted baby, and was no stranger to Fuoss. Another reason why the Big Three haven’t picked up the story.
On several articles about the crime, like this North Andover, Massuchussetts’ Eagle Tribune article, bloggers made comments like “Thank you Harlan Drake [the accused] – the world is a better place,” and “He [Pouillon] deserved it.” This coming from the ones who call themselves tolerant.
President Obama’s statement had been immediate on the day of Tiller’s murder. He waited until two days after Pouillon’s murder to speak up. However, he did state that violence over our differences is never the answer.
�
Dependable “conservative” media reports about the Pouillon killing can be found here at CNS News, and here at Lifesite News.
Should Human Rights, as defined today in America, extend to yet unborn babies? The American Life League says yes, and along with other pro-life organizations has announced its intent to propose a “Personhood” Human Rights Amendment to the Florida State Constitution.
A Press Conference was held Friday, September 11 at Florida’s State Capitol in Tallahassee to announce their intent. With pre-released media announcements, the group was already receiving criticism from pro-choice and abortion rights organizations.
The Amendment would recognize human rights for all human beings from the beginning of their biological development. Florida would be the first state to pass such an amendment. The Florida personhood movement recognizes unborn children as having the same inherent rights, dignity and value as every living human.
The proposed Amendment to the Florida Constitution reads in part as follows:
SECTION 28. Person Defined–
(a) The words “person” and “natural person” apply to all human beings, irrespective of age, race, health, function, condition of physical and/or mental dependency and/or disability, or method of reproduction, from the beginning of the biological development of that human being.
This connects with the Founding Fathers’ understanding of life as God created it:
As much as the colonists wanted to separate from Great Britain—and as much as American society today tries to obliterate the founding fathers’ faith in God— the words, faith and theories of English lawyer and judge Sir William Blackstone greatly influenced original American law.
Blackstone’s “Commentaries on the Laws of England,” written circa 1765, was used to help shape the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. If our judges who presided over Roe v. Wade had gone back and read some of what Blackstone said on life, they would find these statements (italics and bolding are mine):
“Life is the immediate gift of God, a right inherent by nature in every individual; and it
begins in contemplation of law as soon as an infant is able to stir in the mother’s womb. For if a woman is quick with child, and by a potion, or otherwise killeth it in her womb; or if any one beat her, whereby the child dieth in her body, and she is delivered of a dead child; this, though not murder, was by the ancient law homicide or manslaughter…”
“An infant in ventre fa mere [in the mother’s womb] is supposed in law to be born for many purposes. It is capable of having a legacy, or a surrender of a copyhold estate made to it. It may have a guardian assigned to it; and it is enabled to have an estate limited to it’s use, and to take afterwards by such limitation, as if it were then actually born.”
Blackstone’s opinion was obviously formed with a Biblical basis, echoing a key Bible verses which commands respect for early human life:
Psalm 139:13: For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb.
FOR MORE INFORMATION on the Florida Personhood Amendment:
Personhood Florida: http://personhoodfl.com/
American Life League: http://all.org/personhood/, 540.659.4942.
This writer is not receiving remuneration or recognition of any kind from the organizations mentioned in this article.
See the writings of Sir William Blackstone, Commentaries on The Laws of England, Book I, Of The Rights of Persons, Vol I. Section 1, originally written in 1765, reprinted Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1962.
]]>