Life Matters

In this episode Brian outlines the direct legal and historical connection between the banning of slavery and the banning of abortion in the United States.

It is critical to understand that it was the British who first ended slavery in the western European world. That happened in 1807 with the Slave Trade Act, and in 1833, ended throughout the Empire via The Slavery Abolition Act, which ended slavery in all UK possessions as well as on the high seas.

A young Bostonian physician who had graduated from medical school and began practice in 1857 decided to specialize in childbirth. He went to Edinburgh University, the finest medical school at that time. In 1857, even though the British had ended slavery 30 years earlier, the United States had cemented slavery through the terrible Dred Scott Decision of 1857, as well as attempting to expand slavery through the bloody Kansas-Nebraska Act.

Senator Douglas, the sponsor of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, said he was 'personally opposed to slavery' and he only wanted states to have a "choice" regarding slavery. This directly violated the compromises on slavery that started with the Constitution and lead all the way to the Missouri Compromise, all of which were designed to prevent the growth of slavery.

1857 was a very dark year for those who wished to end slavery - but back in the UK slavery had already come to an end. Another advancement in the UK was the dramatic advance of scientific medicine. Thirty years earlier, the invention of the modern microscope demonstrated beyond any question that life begins at conception. The legal and medical systems of the UK in that year were also addressing another human injustice - the injustice of 'slave ownership'. In 1860, the UK Parliament passed a very important law which banned legalized abortion in the UK and its possessions. It was called The Offenses Against the Person Act.

At that time Horatio Storer was studying maternal care and childbirth. He, like other British doctors and lawyers, clearly understood as a medical scientist that this was a living and vulnerable human being from conception. He wrote on the matter and on the current injustices of abortion in America. He understood quite clearly that this was, "my second patient". He determined, upon his return to the United States, to ensure that every unborn child was protected under the law. Because such laws dealing with health and safety and various forms of homicide are dealt with on the state level, Storer campaigned for the newly founded American Medical Association to help enact laws in every state.

Through his concerted efforts this would bring protection to those children, previously slaughtered in abortion and treated as mere 'human possessions,' and bring an end to legalized abortion in our nation. Just as our British 'cousins' first protected the obviously human slave and offered new legal protections, abortion laws would protect the obviously human child.

This campaign was dubbed the Physicians Crusade Against Abortion and it was extremely successful. By 1880, every then state adopted laws outlawing human abortion. And as each subsequent state came into the Union it also adopted laws regarding abortion, recognizing those children as part of the human family.

Nearly 100 years later in 1973, with the sweeping Roe v. Wade decision, all of those state laws were swept away. The tyrannical Roe v. Wade dictate created abortion clinics in every state and prohibited legal recognition for the child at any time within the womb.

Dr. Horatio R Storer, using medical science and knowledge and the law, was the true founder of the modern pro-life movement. In helping to ensure that once slaves were recognized as human beings under the law and that unborn children who also had not been protected by the law, that they too would be recognized as human beings and offered protection under the law.

Commissioner Johnston discusses the tragedy of socialized medicine and its failure wherever it has been employed. Brian relates personal stories of Canadian healthcare and the healthcare system of the NHS in the UK as well as the similar system in Ireland.

Professor David Warner, a dear friend and colleague with whom the Commissioner had worked, received an appointment to a professorship in Canada. While there, David Warner was diagnosed with multiple myeloma bone cancer. The Canadian health service did indeed treat him. It did indeed diagnose as well as treat the cancer.

But David suffered and ultimately succumbed under the extremely common phenomenon of "queuing." Queuing refers to the wait time between diagnosis, treatment, ongoing tests, and ongoing treatments. The extreme lag time between each procedure increases the likelihood of ineffectual treatment and non-curative care.

The National Health Service in the UK has a very similar procedure. The government offers less medicine to more people. Recently, the physicians of the NHS protested the system, stating they were forced to offer third-world care to British patients.

In spite of the demonstrated failures of socialized medicine there is now a renewed push for "Medicare for all." Starting with Bernie Sanders, each of the Democratic candidates for president has pledged to expand the Medicare system to just such a vast, sweeping, ineffective level. For the sake of egalitarianism such programs require that no individuals may avail of a private health insurance.

Brian includes an interview with the Heritage Foundation as they summarize the real physical problems of "Medicare for all."

The reason you want to have insurance is not for the little things - aspirin, colds, flu shots. You want to be insured in case of the potentially catastrophic illness - cancer or other expensive treatments - cancer treatment or other interventions that would personally bankrupt you. The reason you have insurance on your home is not to protect you from a baseball through the window. That's a relatively inexpensive event. Your house insurance is in case of a cataclysmic event that would otherwise impoverish you.

So the purpose of insurance is not to give you a little bit of coverage but instead give you necessary protection in the possibility you may need extraordinary interventions.

In this episode, Brian Johnston reminds us of the actual nature of the Roe versus Wade decision and the companion decision, Doe versus Bolton. Unfortunately, the major media has misrepresented these decisions since they came down on January 22, 1973.

Brian points out the amazing fact that the average person, when fully informed just how far Roe and Doe reach, does not agree with these Supreme Court findings. What that means is your neighbors, and the average person, even in California, more than seventy percent of Californians do not agree with unlimited abortion on demand.

In Roe v. Wade, Justice Blackmun declared he did not know when life began, and from that point on, the entire decision refuses to recognize the life of the child or the rights of the child at any time within the womb. In Doe v. Bolton, again Justice Blackmun, the author, wrote it as a companion decision to work with Roe and it then institutionalized a new abortion law across the entire nation - overturning the laws of every state.

Such judicial legislating is in direct violation of the constitutional role of the Supreme Court.

In Doe, Blackmun does not refer to the life of the mother, but in fact explicitly instructs the abortionist regarding the "health" of the mother. He defines health as including "familial, psychological, emotional, factors – anything that may impact the well-being of the patient." He does not use the word "mother" as this would imply there is a child.

The generous instructions to the attending abortionist are based on the abortionist's opinion of the well-being of the mother and not on the woman's immediate opinion.

This is significant in that there are many women who have indeed gotten up from the abortionist table to refuse an abortion. Women can be very torn about the actions at hand. Justice Blackmon is clearly stating it is the abortionist's decision whether or not to do the abortion. He is situated to 'guide' the woman if her psychological 'alarms are going off' It is this passage in particular that has drawn great fire from radical feminists, because they believe it is not up to the abortionist, a paternalistic decision-maker, but in their mind, abortion should entirely in the realm of the woman's decision.

When the average American fully understands the far reach of Roe versus Wade, they do not agree. What that means is, our job is to explain what Roe really does. Our job is not to explain our theology or philosophy or our opinion of when life begins. We can discuss that later. If they agree that Roe goes too far, we should accept that wise conclusion. They are on our side and want a pre-Roe world. If you demand they accept all of your ideas at once you are pushing away your natural allies.

Only if they are in a more unusual position of being a judge or actual lawmaker, then extensive philosophy and proposed options to Roe should be examined. In the meantime, if you can get them to understand Roe, they are very likely to disagree with Roe.

THAT is a win, and the more folks that demand Roe's overturn the better. Until Roe is overturned there will be no laws written - so if they are with you, let them know they have some insight, let them know it is good to disagree with Roe.

Your job in this present moment is to restore the legal right to life. That can only be done when Roe is overturned. Let them help!!!

The right to life is a very specific thing. It is an assertion of a legal principle. It is not an expression of feelings, or of personal theology, but rather an assertion that the duty of government is to protect innocent lives.

The abortion controversy has taken a dramatic turn in 2019 with the adoption of laws in some states and proposals in others, that abortions be legalized throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy, and in the situation where a child is born alive in the course of the abortion that that child be set aside to die. This has caused an alarm both within the pro-abortion camp as well as the pro-life camp.

The President has proposed in the Senate a measure that would assure that a child born alive in the process of abortion get full protection under the law. Numerous quotes from television and radio broadcast as well as the statements of Governor Cuomo of New York and Governor Northam of Virginia are included in today's program.

Our host to Brian Johnston points out that this is a tremendous opportunity for the average person to learn exactly what it is that Roe versus Wade has allowed and the unlimited nature of abortion as it exists under Roe v. Wade. It is because of the soon possible demise of Roe that abortion advocates are seeking these freedoms in the various states.

Brian reminds the listeners of the real facts of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton. Under our nation's Supreme Court abortion regimen the child has no rights whatsoever. The only reference to the child is a brief statement by Justice Blackmun in Roe, "…we don't know when life begins." With that sweeping statement no legal protection is offered to the child in the womb throughout pregnancy.

In Doe v. Bolton, Blackmun offers complete license to the doctor to perform abortions through any of the trimesters, even later, based not on the mother's life being in danger, but on a vague description of generic health. "…the medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors – physical, emotional, psychological, familial and the woman's age – relevant to the well-being of the patient. All these factors may relate to health."

Roe v. Wade authorized abortion on demand but the abortion sympathetic media insists on reducing it to a matter of "choice" and misrepresenting the nature of both the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions. We now have an opportunity to talk about how abortions are being done, how late they are being done and how offensive they are even to the average person who does not consider themselves to be pro-life. These are living, squirming children, big enough to hold in your arms. Now is the time to communicate just how deadly and how extensive the Roe versus Wade decision is.

In this episode Brian Johnston looks further into the insidious legislation being put into law around the country - law that allows for late-term abortions including post-term abortions.

In California, where the Democrat party is essentially pupeteered by Planned Parenthood, the danger of this law coming to our state is very, very real.

We need to condemn this great evil while it is exposed. Do not let the opportunity to remind Americans of their own conscience pass you by.

This episode of Life Matters also explores the upcoming Life Fest Film Festival. Life Fest is dedicated to showcasing films that affirm the intrinsic worth of innocent human life, and the profound significance of each life. Brian touches on the 'significance of the individual', a notion imbued in the films of Frank Capra who understood this basic human principal and set it as the focus of so many of his films.

Life Fest Film Festival 2019 will be held at the Raleigh Studios facilities in Hollywood from May 2nd to May 5th.

This episode of Life Matters explores the upcoming Life Fest Film Festival. In particular, this episode focuses like a laser on one extraordinary film, Unplanned.

Unplanned is the story of Abby Johnson and her escape from the influences of, and employment by Planned Parenthood affiliates of America. Abby had been a nominal Christian and risen to the highest levels of recognition within Planned Parenthood. Her conscience was finally awakened when she was asked to participate in a sonogram-directed abortion.

Brian includes excerpts from a special interview with star, Ashley Bratcher, who portrays Abby, conducted by Alex Marlow of Breitbart News.

Brian further explains the nature of Life Fest Film Festival which takes place at Raleigh Studios, Hollywood, California. Raleigh is the original Chaplin studios, which was so instrumental in putting Hollywood on the map. One of the goals of Life Fest is to restore powerful storytelling and dynamic life-affirming films to the cultural milieu.

Brian dedicates this episode to specific issues within California in April, 2019. SB-24 is the reintroduction of last year's SB-320, a measure which would require every state college and university to distribute the abortion drug RU486. RU486 is not a "morning after pill." It is a chemical, an artificial steroid designed to alter a young mother's body - taken only after she has missed her first two periods. There is clearly a young, growing child in her womb. The first part of the regimen causes the mother's body to shut down any nutrition going to her uterus. It is designed to literally wither the child within the womb, but may not cause death. The second regimen forces all parts of the child in her uterus to be expelled spontaneously.

The woman may not know exactly when that will happen. It is a grotesque and very personal form of abortion.

The first weekend in April also marks the distribution of a new film, Unplanned, the story of Abby Johnson's escape from the clutches of Planned Parenthood. She had been the youngest Planned Parenthood administrator in the corporation's existence. The film, coincidentally, vividly shows an RU 486 abortion. It is an extremely unpleasant and emotionally devastating portion of the film.

Another measure introduced in Sacramento is Assembly Bill 624, which would require every student identification card in California to include the phone number of sexual and reproductive health counseling lines - that is Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion agencies. It applies to all students in public schools but it also applies to charter, private and religious middle schools and high schools as well as colleges. It is a sweeping mandate on all students in all environments.

This attitude of super-imposition, even on the voters and concerned Californians who may disagree with government policy, was reflected as well in an alarming declaration of Governor Gavin Newsom.

The governor, who had said he respected the votes of Californians regarding the death penalty, instead made a declaration that - based on his own power and position - he would defy their decision made at the ballot box. He single-handedly prohibited any use of the death penalty in California. Thankfully, there is some discussion of bringing such a sweeping act of Fiat to the courts as it clearly violates both the principles of democracy and plebiscite as well as the functioning office of the governor.

Commissioner Johnston discusses the tragedy of socialized medicine and its failure wherever it has been employed. Brian relates personal stories of Canadian healthcare and the healthcare system of the NHS in the UK as well as the similar system in Ireland.

Professor David Warner, a dear friend and colleague with whom the Commissioner had worked, received an appointment to a professorship in Canada. While there, David Warner was diagnosed with multiple myeloma bone cancer. The Canadian health service did indeed treat him. It did indeed diagnose as well as treat the cancer.

But David suffered and ultimately succumbed under the extremely common phenomenon of "queuing." Queuing refers to the wait time between diagnosis, treatment, ongoing tests, and ongoing treatments. The extreme lag time between each procedure increases the likelihood of ineffectual treatment and non-curative care.

The National Health Service in the UK has a very similar procedure. The government offers less medicine to more people. Recently, the physicians of the NHS protested the system, stating they were forced to offer third-world care to British patients.

In spite of the demonstrated failures of socialized medicine there is now a renewed push for "Medicare for all." Starting with Bernie Sanders, each of the Democratic candidates for president has pledged to expand the Medicare system to just such a vast, sweeping, ineffective level. For the sake of egalitarianism such programs require that no individuals may avail of a private health insurance.

Brian includes an interview with the Heritage Foundation as they summarize the real physical problems of "Medicare for all."

The reason you want to have insurance is not for the little things - aspirin, colds, flu shots. You want to be insured in case of the potentially catastrophic illness - cancer or other expensive treatments - cancer treatment or other interventions that would personally bankrupt you. The reason you have insurance on your home is not to protect you from a baseball through the window. That's a relatively inexpensive event. Your house insurance is in case of a cataclysmic event that would otherwise impoverish you.

So the purpose of insurance is not to give you a little bit of coverage but instead give you necessary protection in the possibility you may need extraordinary interventions.

There has been an amazing change in the right to life debate in the United States. Starting with the actions of the New York State Legislature on January 22, 2019 and continuing through several other states from Vermont, Virginia and New Mexico. Each has introduced late-term and even "post-term" abortion laws. The push for unlimited abortion is wide open.

The United States Senate voted on the "Born Alive Infant Protection Act" on February 26, 2019. In that vote, 44 Democrats were opposed to protecting a baby after they are born. But that same deliberative body, the United States Senate, voted on an identical piece of legislation protecting children born alive in 2002 and it unanimously passed. At that time all Democrats supported such a common sense view of life. In this Life Matters program we hear from Senator Mitch McConnell and Melissa Ohden, an abortion survivor.

The government-protected killing of survivors is a new and terrifying 'necessary element' of the abortion mentality. Brian explains that it is the duty of all conscientious individuals to expose this evil. Do not be silent.

We are at a unique moment in the fight for Life. The State of New York and several other states are pushing beyond all sensible bounds and legalizing late-term and even post-birth abortion.

The vast majority of Americans oppose such abortions. The deceptive reporting of the abortion issue has camouflaged the fact that late Term abortion - Gosnell type abortion - has been legal under Roe.

The President has led the way in boldness and clarity. He has openly exposed and condemned such evil. It is time for all to openly condemn the great evil of killing these children. Why? The majority of Americans - even those who call themselves 'pro-choice' agree. This is going far beyond anything they had been told or imagined.

The task for us, says Brian, is to simply now do what the President has done. Speak the truth: Openly. Condemn this great evil while it is exposed. Do not let this moment pass.

Do not let the opportunity to remind Americans of their own conscience pass you by.