CompassCare

Originally aired September 2017

This August marks the two year anniversary of the first undercover videos showing Planned Parenthood and others in the illegal trafficking of baby body parts. That and subsequent videos sparked a flurry of state level investigations and legislation to stop the flow of taxpayer dollars to those organizations.

In the fallout, the investigative journalists were sued in Texas. After two years of court battles, the charges were dropped. And now the journalists and their attorneys are being held in contempt of court by a California federal court judge who volunteers for Planned Parenthood.

Scandalously, Planned Parenthood still receives over $500 million in federal tax dollars annually. While the Senate Judiciary Committee has twice referred Planned Parenthood and other organizations to the Department of Justice and FBI for the illegal trafficking in baby body parts, the Committee has yet to receive a response.

In the face of this potentially staggering systemic injustice, should an investigation be prioritized by the federal justice system?

Originally aired August 2017

Is there really a link between abortion and breast cancer?

Responding dismissively to studies correlating abortion with breast cancer, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists replied, “…women who have had an abortion or a miscarriage have the same risk of developing breast cancer … as women who have not.”

But merging miscarriage data with abortion data is bad science. Induced abortion and miscarriage are fundamentally different kinds of biological events. A miscarriage is a pregnancy that the body cannot naturally sustain. Often this means that the high quantities of pro-gestational hormones needed are not present to cause breast cell replication.

Conversely, induced abortion deals with a healthy pregnancy abruptly cut short. Healthy pregnancy comes with exponential increases in hormone levels triggering breast cell replication. Induced abortion leaves those new breast cells immature, or ‘undifferentiated,’ the kind of cells more susceptible to carcinogens.

Scores of peer-reviewed medical journal articles worldwide have found this link between abortion and breast cancer.

Originally aired August 2017

Bob is 60, lying in hospital bed, breathing with difficulty after having one cancerous lung removed. He smoked for 40 years.

Laura is 40; she too is lying in a hospital bed, after having a double mastectomy. The breast cancer spread to her lymphatic system and she has been given 6 months to live.

If someone asked you whether smoking caused lung cancer, you would likely reply “yes.” The average person’s risk of contracting lung cancer is 7%and smoking like Bob did increases one’s relative risk to 17%. Yet doctors are certain that smoking caused Bob’s lung cancer.

But what about Laura? Is there a behavior that, like smoking and lung cancer, is so strongly correlated in our minds that we automatically blame it for her condition? A meta-analysis, published in 2014, reveals there is a behavior that dramatically increases a woman’s risk of contracting breast cancer and it happens to be the most common surgery in the world. This study and many more, show a 44% relative risk increase of breast cancer after one abortion and a 76% risk increase after two or more!

If we are willing to believe that smoking causes lung cancer, why is there such silence in the face of overwhelming scientific data demonstrating the link between breast cancer and abortion?

Originally aired July 2017

The Illinois State legislature passed SB 1564 and the Republican governor Bruce Rauner signed it, amending the State’s ‘Health Care Right of Conscience Act.’ Paradoxically, the act designed to protect the conscience of medical practitioners changed, forcing them now to violate their conscience when it comes to one thing: Abortion. The law is being contested in the courts with several cases pending, including in the Federal 7th Circuit. The outcome will impact all of medicine since it is the first case of its kind to test a medical practitioner’s right to their own conscience at the Federal level.

The original Hippocratic Oath which a doctor was required to take at the outset of his career, summed up the purpose of medicine; to heal and never harm. Therefore it set the limits of its use in society stating in part, “I will not give a woman an abortive remedy.” But why single out abortion? Because it violates the very purpose of the profession representing the opposite of medicine.

Why was the practice forbidden in the Hippocratic Oath? To answer this question we first must ask a more fundamental one: When does a human become a human? And further, must a doctor check his beliefs about the humanity of a preborn child at the exam room door?

To argue, as the State of Illinois does, that abortion has been the standard of medical care is not merely untrue but so vacuously ignorant of traditional western medical ethics it would be comical if it weren’t for the sad fact that it was signed into law and now unreasonably forced upon reasonable medical clinicians and providers. This seems to be a case of politics dictating medical practice.

Are not all humans equally valuable? If not, why not and who gets to choose? What objective criteria did the IL government use to de-personalize preborn babies to the point of making a formerly criminal act, abortion, now compulsory? If politicians can force a physician to violate his conscience on abortion today what will be the new standard of health care tomorrow?

Originally aired July 2017

New York is the abortion capital of the U.S. And abortion is trending down. The data reveals that the number of abortions statewide hit an all-time low since abortion was legalized in 1970. In the last seven years measured (2008 to 2015) the number of abortions dropped 25%.

Monroe County, home to Rochester, is the only county with a year over year reduction, abortion falling sharply; 49% in just seven years. National abortion groups argue that declines in abortion happen for two reasons: 1) Increased access to contraception and 2) Decreased access to abortion. Yet, these reasons do not account for the phenomena in NY. Not only is NY one of the most legislatively permissive states in the union, apparently contraceptive use has played no measurable role either. Meaning, if abortion rates were declining because women were using contraception more effectively the number of NY pregnancies would be declining just as fast. But pregnancy rates have remained relatively stable.

Jim Harden, President of CompassCare Pregnancy Services noted, “Women have abortions because they feel trapped. These numbers say that the community cares and is rallying to support women rather than abandon or abuse them in their hour of need.”

This is ‘Real Abortion News’ sponsored by CompassCare Pregnancy Services

Originally aired July 2017

Was the Supreme Court right to legalize abortion? Many abortion questions are debated in our society today without resolution. Why?

There appear to be two moral mill stones grinding against each other, the Judeo-Christian ethic vs secular materialism.

The secular ethic believes humanity is chance material with no purpose, other than what the individual assigns to himself. This view provides no objective standard for right and wrong.

The Christian moral framework holds that each human from conception to natural death was destined by God and made in His image. This makes each human intrinsically and equally valuable.

When society defaults to the secular ethic permitting the dehumanization of one category of person, like preborn babies, what keeps it from dehumanizing others? Wouldn’t it seem the best protective hedge for all human life within society to err on the side of a morality which contains the highest, most liberal definition of humanity like the Christian one?

Originally aired July 2017

Is Planned Parenthood the comprehensive and necessary women’s healthcare provider that we’ve been led to believe? Who is Planned Parenthood and what do they do according to them? It’s seems like we should know this information, given that our federal government funds this organization to the tune of half a billion dollars per year.

A look at their most recent annual report uncovers their dwindling services, with one exception. For example, the drawdown in actual women’s health care at Planned Parenthood includes; prenatal services: Down 76% since 2009, breast exams: Down 64% since 2006, etc.

Meanwhile abortion accounted for 95.8% of all services to pregnant women according to a recent AUL analysis. Planned Parenthood’s primary activity seems to be abortion, performing at least 1/3 of all abortions nationwide - 328,348 in 2015/2016. This is up 13% since 2006. During this time the abortion rate dropped nationwide, which means their share of abortions is higher than it ever has been.

Yet, their total patient load decreased 22.5% since 2006. Ironically their income went up in the same timeframe and federal funding increased 65% since 2007 for an annual total of $554.6 million.

Is Planned Parenthood a necessary institution for women’s reproductive health if their singular focus is abortion?

Originally aired July 2017

Mariana couldn’t endure the shame of her friends and family finding out she was pregnant. So, she and her boyfriend reluctantly paid the $600 for a medical abortion, also known as RU-486. RU 486 is a two pill regimen that blocks the pro-gestational hormone that a baby needs to survive and stay in the womb. After taking the first pill Mariana changed her mind. She and her boyfriend frantically searched the internet for some hope – a way to reverse the effects of the pill she just swallowed.

In the spring 2017 issue of Law and Medicine, a review of abortion pill studies by Davenport and others reveals that less than 25% of pregnancies continue after a woman takes the first dose known as Mifepristone. It is lethal. Interestingly, studies dating back as far as 1973 show that replacing the progesterone that the abortion chemical blocks causes the pregnancy to continue. A recent study series currently under review by Delgado and others demonstrates that 60-70% of pregnancies survive after exposure to the abortion pill if given progesterone therapy…with zero reported birth defects.

Three hours after Mariana was given the abortion pill she found a physician who gave her the pregnancy sustaining therapy in Rochester, NY. Marianna has gone on to a healthy pregnancy and baby.

Abortion pill reversal therapy empowers women with even greater choice, the ability to change their mind.

Originally aired July 2017

Many are not aware that a California court dismissed 14 of 15 charges brought by California Attorney General against journalists David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt for their expose of Planned Parenthood’s illegal trafficking in aborted baby body parts, or that private pharmacists in Washington State are being forced against their convictions to dispense abortion-causing drugs or risk closure (the Supreme Court refused to hear their case), or that medical providers in IL must either refer or provide abortion or face professional misconduct lawsuits, or that NY Gov. Cuomo desires to enshrine abortion as a fundamental human right in the NYS Constitution.

If abortion is nothing more than mundane, safe, medical procedures, why all the coercive government force? Why the brow beating of those journalists who simply pull back the veil, push past the abstract reproductive choice rhetoric simply to show and tell the shop talk of the abortion biz? Why threaten the livelihood of pharmacists with closure? Why create dark cloud legislation lurking behind every medical practice in IL? Why make a medical procedure a fundamental human right equal to things like freedom of religion when at best only half the population could ever exercise that ‘right’? Is a doctor’s right to practice his religion always and everywhere trumped by a woman’s right to abortion? And whose right is it to choose that one?

Abortion is the major flash point in our society today not so much because of the procedures and their gruesome outcome but because of a fundamental disagreement about how we answer one simple question: What is a human? Put another way, who is a person?

Because of the philosophical nature of this puzzle news agencies tend only to focus on the outrageous power struggle over which side gets to dictate their moral philosophy upon the masses. This is not a battle over right and wrong but a battle over whether right and wrong even exist and if they do whose version of right and wrong will rule.

This news spot is designed to arm you with greater depth perspective about abortion, to see beyond what the currently clogged news filtration apparatus will let through.

When it comes to the nature of what it means to be human the news is anemic, imprecise. As soon as the abortion temperature rises to the level of media awareness, somehow the iron facts melt into the abstract dross of political quips strung together like a row of listless cows by an algae packed pond on a mid-summer afternoon.

It is not really their fault…it is the air they breathe, the culture they live in. The thoughtless condition is reversible. So if a breath of fresh air is needed, it must come from somewhere outside. Let us open the widow. This ‘Real Abortion News’ from the outside.

Sponsored by CompassCare Pregnancy Services