Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, said about the event: “We are going to embrace free speech, the First Amendment and religious liberty … We will not be bullied or intimidated into silence.

“It is tragic that peaceful Americans are being threatened with arrest and actually being arrested for simply praying on a public sidewalk and offering women help who are facing a crisis pregnancy.”

For years the pro-life community has been allowed to pray, counsel and hold demonstrations on the sidewalk, but earlier this year PP built a fence around the walkway and put up signs claiming that the area is private property. Now law enforcement officials are threatening to arrest people if they enter the fenced-off area.

On June 8 of this year, Rev. Mahoney was arrested for praying and reading the Bible.

But while PP claims the land is “private,” pro-lifers argue that the abortion giant has not produced any evidence proving their case. Instead, they say, all the evidence indicates that the walkway remains public, as it has always been.

The American Center for Law and Justice, which is representing Rev. Mahoney, has met with D.C. City officials, and says that the officials confirmed that the sidewalk still remains public.

“It is unconscionable that the City of Washington, D.C. would ban and prohibit prayer and the First Amendment on a public sidewalk while protecting abortion and Planned Parenthood,” said Mahoney.

Mahoney also pointed to the recent case to the case of Joseph Holland, a Northwestern University graduate student, who was arrested by police on a charge of disorderly conduct on July 3 for praying in front of a Chicago Planned Parenthood clinic.

“With the recent arrest of a man praying in front of an abortion clinic in Chicago, the question must be asked, is this future of free speech and abortion under the Obama Administration?” he asked.

A spokesperson for Planned Parenthood confirmed with LifeSiteNews.com that Pelosi would be receiving the Champion for Women’s Health award, which recognizes “efforts to support women and their reproductive health.”

Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), and Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) will also receive the award.

In a statement, PP lauds Pelosi for having been “instrumental” in the passage of the federal health care bill, which was strenuously opposed by every major pro-life organization in the U.S., as well as the U.S. Catholic bishops, because of its abortion mandate. The statment also praises Pelosi for having “led her female colleagues in Congress as they stood strong against attempts to insert the Stupak abortion ban into the bill.”

“With their steadfast commitment to passing health care reform and making sure that women will be able to get the health care they need, the women leaders we honor today set the course to change the lives of millions of women for generations to come,” said PP President Cecile Richards.

While Pelosi and the Obama administration have repeatedly claimed that the health care law would not fund abortion, pro-life groups have warned that such claims are clearly contradicted by the facts. They have also warned that the last-minute Executive Order (EO) issued by Obama in exchange for the votes of the few remaining “pro-life” Democrats led by Bart Stupak does little more than “reiterate” what is already in the bill.

Immediately after the bill was passed in March Richards issued a statement dismissing the EO as a “symbolic” gesture, and announcing that “monumental progress” had been made in strengthening “women’s health.”

“The award is Planned Parenthood’s way of saying thank you for elevating the abortion machine that is Planned Parenthood to a level of government funding never before imagined, through the passage of the government health care takeover pushed so relentlessly by Pelosi,” Rita Diller, National Director of American Life League’s STOPP Planned Parenthood project, told LifeSiteNews.com.

“And she did it all while mocking God, claiming to be a devout Roman Catholic. Pelosi’s final award will await her at the end of her life, when the blood of millions of innocent babies will rise up from the ground to testify against her.”

Ironically, at the very height of the health care debate, even as the U.S. bishops were stepping up their efforts against the bill and its abortion funding, Pelosi publicly invoked one of the most prominent Catholic saints – St. Joseph, who is also revered by Catholics as “patron” of the unborn – to help pass the health care bill.

“Today is the feast of St. Joseph the Worker,” Pelosi told reporters on Capitol Hill in March. “It’s a day where we remember and pray to St. Joseph to benefit the workers of America, and that’s exactly what our health care bill will do.”

It was not the first time that Pelosi has attempted to reconcile her pro-abortion views with her professed faith. During a now infamous interview on Meet the Press in 2008, Pelosi was asked by the interviewer, “When does life begin?”

Pelosi responded by sidestepping the question, appealing to her Catholic faith as the source of her uncertainty.

“I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time,” she said.  “And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition.  And Senator – St. Augustine said at three months.  We don’t know.”

Pelosi then said that in her view the question of when life begins is a non-issue in the debate on abortion.

“Nancy Pelosi has proven herself time and time again an enemy of the preborn, an enemy of human rights and an enemy of women’s health,” said Diller. ”When she accepts this award tonight from Planned Parenthood for her commitment to abortion rights,  Pelosi will also be accepting moral culpability for her bigoted denial of basic human rights and the murder of millions of human beings. We will continue to pray for Rep. Pelosi while we oppose her murderous actions every step of the way.”

An outline of the proposed program, which can be found online, shows that students in grade 1 would be taught that “human beings can love people of the same gender.” In grade two they would learn that “making fun of people by calling them gay (e.g., ‘homo,’ ‘fag,’ ‘queer’) is disrespectful & hurtful.”

In grade 5, when students are typically 10 or 11 years old, they will be taught that sex can involve “vaginal, oral, or anal penetration.” They will also be taught about “sexual orientation.” In grade 6 they will be taught that sex can also involve “using the penis, fingers, tongue or objects.”

And in grade 8 students will be taught that the Supreme Court has found that “people have the right to make personal decisions concerning sexuality & reproductive health matters, such as abortion, sterilization, and contraception.”

Jeff Laszloffy of the Montana Family Foundation has called the program “absolutely insane.”

“This is not education,” he said. “This has crossed the line and has gone from education to indoctrination and that’s the problem parents have.”

Jim Sedlak, the vice president of American Life League, said that, “Parents in Helena are right to be upset about these proposed sex courses in their schools.

“Sex education is a value-laden subject, and information must be conveyed to each child at a level consistent with his or her mental maturity,” he said.

“The children who are unfortunate enough to be thrust into this kind of curriculum will suffer in countless ways, both academically and socially.”

A June 13th rally organized by pro-life and religious groups in the Kenyan capital Nairobi was bombed twice, killing six people and injuring more than 100. The police have not identified any motive for the attack, and are offering a reward of half a million shillings for information leading to arrests.

“Any person with information regarding the incident is advised and requested to report to the nearest police or administrative office,” said Police Commissioner Mathew Iteere, according to Capital News.

The rally had been called to galvanize a No vote in a referendum on a new Constitution. The proposed text for that document would legalize abortion for the life and health of the mother, as well as give a legal guarantee for any other written abortion law. A referendum is due on August 4th, and the government is pushing for a Yes vote.

According to The Standard, the two blasts ripped through the crowd after the rally had ended, but while religious leaders on the podium were still offering prayers.

Organizers of the rally produced a statement after the blasts blaming the government for the event. “We indeed consider that the attack was a premeditated aggression on democracy; a cowardly act seemingly aimed at scaring Kenyans from expressing their right to oppose the proposed constitution,” they said.

“Having been informed over and over that the passage of the new constitution during the referendum is a government project, we are left in no doubt that the government, either directly or indirectly, had a hand in this attack,” said a statement signed by more than 10 religious leaders.

The new Constitution would also give Constitutional recognition to Islamic courts – a provision that has also been a focal point of opposition to the document

Muslims account for only about 12% of the population, with Christians accounting for over 70%.

Commentators have speculated that the likely cause for the bombings is that extremist sympathizers of the government are trying to frighten the country’s Christian religious leaders and pro-life leaders, who are the only credible opposition to the proposed Constitution. If those two groups are successfully immobilized the government would have little difficulty in getting a Yes vote.

Another less likely cause for the bomb attack is that religious anti-Christian extremists are trying to undermine opposition to the religious provisions of the new Constitution.
See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Negotiations on Pro-Abort Kenyan Constitution Break Down
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/may/10050311.html

Unveiling of Kenya Constitution with Abortion Provisions Set for Thursday
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/may/10050406.html

The Senate voted 32-11 to approve House Bill 3284, known as the “Statistical Abortion Reporting Act,” which had already been approved by the House in an overwhelming 88-8 vote.

HB 3284 mandates the reporting of all abortions performed in Oklahoma, the reasons abortions are sought, and the complications that result.

The passage of the bill marks the seventh abortion-related, and pro-life leaning piece of legislation passed in Oklahoma this year. Others have included a bill protecting the conscience rights of health care workers, another mandating that all mothers receive an ultrasound within an hour of an abortion, and another outlawing sex-selective abortion.

Tony Lauinger, the chairman of Oklahomans for Life, said that HB 3284 ”will help protect the health of women by providing for reporting of complications and it will help identify reasons that women have abortions which will help make it possible to address underlying problems,” according to Tulsa World.

Oklahomans for Life has also said that “The reporting of complications will allow an assessment of the untested claim that abortion is ‘safe.’”

The abortion reporting provisions had been passed previously in an abortion-related omnibus bill that was later struck down by the state Supreme Court for violating the single-issue rule. That bill was then split up into a series of bills, all of which have now passed the legislature.

But while HB 3284 has passed both chambers of the state legislature, it is still not home free. Gov. Brad Henry has already vetoed pro-life legislation this year, although his vetoes were later overridden by the legislature.

The streak of pro-life legislation in Oklahoma is not yet over. Legislators are still considering HB 3290, prompted by the passage of the abortion-funding federal health care law, which would prohibit health plans offered through the health insurance exchange in Oklahoma from including coverage for elective abortions.

The governor had vetoed both bills, HB2780 and HB2656, on Friday. The House easily overrode the vetoes on Monday, before the Senate followed suit the next day.

Tony Lauinger, the state chairman of Oklahomans for Life, told LifeSiteNews.com in an interview Tuesday that “We are very appreciative of the wonderful pro-life actions taken by our Senate and House these past two days.”

The first of the two bills, HB2780, requires that women be given an ultrasound within an hour of their abortion, and that the sonographer must explain the results in detail. The senate overrode Gov. Henry’s veto in a 36-12 vote.

Governor Henry said last week that he believes the legislation constitutes an “unconstitutional violation of privacy.”

“State policymakers should never mandate that a citizen be forced to undergo any medical procedure against his or her will, especially when such a procedure could cause physical or mental trauma,” he said.

However, pro-life advocates have countered that the law simply ensures that women are given all the information necessary to give their informed consent to an abortion. Recent investigations by the group Live Action have revealed that, in many cases, women are given incomplete or grossly inaccurate information about the development of their unborn child by abortion facilities.

Rep. Lisa Billy, the sponsor of the bill, said that, “For women facing an unplanned pregnancy, there is often a sense of distress, panic and fear that can drive people to make hasty decisions without considering long-term consequences,” according to NewsOK.

“This legislation will empower those expectant mothers by giving them as much information as possible — in advance — before they make an irrevocable, life-altering decision.

“Women should have the choice to see that image, and to deny them that opportunity is baffling.”

HB2656, the second bill, would prohibit the “wrongful life” lawsuits that have become increasingly common across the West. In such cases women sue their doctors after their child is born with an abnormality that the mother claims would have led her to have the child killed through abortion, if she had known about it. The senate overrode the veto of this bill also in a 36-12 vote.

The language in both of the bills, which was drafted by the National Right to Life Committee, was originally included in a single piece of legislation passed in 2008, which was vetoed by the governor. That veto also was overridden by the legislature, but the bill was later struck down by the state Supreme Court, which decided that it violated the “single issue” rule.

That original bill has since been split up into separate pieces of legislation. Four pieces of pro-life legislation had already been passed and signed into the law by the governor prior to today’s senate vote – HB3075, SB1891, SB1890, and SB1902.

HB 3075 ensures that a mother’s consent to an abortion is truly voluntary and safeguards against coerced abortions. SB1890 prohibits abortions based upon the sex of the baby, and SB1902 makes it illegal for anyone other than a physician to provide or administer the abortion drug RU-486.  SB1891, sponsored by Rep. Pam Peterson, creates the Freedom of Conscience Act, which would protect health care workers from participating in acts that violate their consciences.

Rep. Peterson told LifeSiteNews.com in an interview last month that the latter bill is especially important in light of the passage of the federal health care bill, which pro-life leaders have criticized for having inadequate conscience protections.

“I think in light of Obamacare passing, it’s all the more reason why the states need to step up to the plate and say – you know what? If you want to be a health care professional and you come to Oklahoma we’re going to protect that right,” she said.

One final bill, HB 3284, which provides for the reporting of abortions performed in Oklahoma, the reasons abortions are sought, and the complications that result, has also been passed by both houses, but has been referred to the House for engrossment before being passed on to the governor.

Oklahomans for Life has said about this piece of legislation that, “Knowing why women seek abortions may make it possible to solve underlying problems,” and that “The reporting of complications will allow an assessment of the untested claim that abortion is ‘safe.’”

Tony Lauinger said today that legal challenges to some or all of the pieces of legislation are “probable,” but that for now his group will simply have to “wait and see.” In reference to the two bills passed by the legislature today, however, he said that he was confident that they stood well within U.S. Supreme Court precedents.

While the EPA study does not speculate into the cause of the jump in autism rates, and makes no mention of aborted fetal cells, the researchers point out that it “is important to determine whether a preventable exposure to an environmental factor may be associated with the increase.”

According to the pro-life group Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute (SCPI), which specializes in vaccine research, that “environmental factor” may well be the use of aborted fetal cells in vaccines.

The group pointed out in its most recent newsletter that 1988 is the same year the U.S. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices began recommending a second dose of the MMR vaccine, which included cells derived from the tissue of aborted babies.

Analyses of autism rate data published by SCPI identify 3 clear change points in U.S. autism disorder trends: 1981, 1988 and 1995, all of which the groups claims roughly correlate with the use of vaccines (Meruvax, MMRII, and Chickenpox) that were cultivated with the use of tissue from aborted children. The group says that it has been unable to identify any other factor that might correlate to the change in autism rates.

“The only environmental event correlating with these statistical autism trend ‘change points’ which would impact almost all children was the introduction of vaccines produced using human fetal cells and containing residual human DNA and cellular debris,” said SCPI.

Pro-life groups say that the research by EPA adds to an increasing body of evidence implicating the use of aborted fetal cell material in the nationwide vaccinations impacting nearly every child born in the United States.

American Life League has joined Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute in calling for a Fair Labeling and Informed Consent Act in light of the findings.

“For years the evidence has pointed toward the link between vaccines using DNA from aborted babies and the rise of Autism Disorder rates,” said Jim Sedlak, vice president of American Life League.

“Parents need and deserve to know the risks associated with vaccinations made from lines derived from the bodies of aborted children.”

SCPI has affirmed that they are continuing to study the impact of residual human fetal DNA in vaccines on the brain development and autism in children, and will present their studies at the International Society for Autism Research in May 2010.
For more information:

Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute http://www.soundchoice.org/

Click here to read Sound Choice’s April 2010 newsletter. http://www.soundchoice.org/Images/SCPINewsletter_April_2010.pdf

Environmental Protection Agency: Timing of Increased Autistic Disorder Cumulative Incidence (10 July 2009)
http://www.all.org/pdf/McDonaldPaul2010.pdf

See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Is Aborted Fetal DNA in Vaccines Linked to Autism?
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09072106.html

Fetal Tissue in Vaccine Production May be Linked to Autism in Children Claims Campaign Group
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09070611.html

Abortion-Tainted New Flu Vaccine From Vaxin Uses Aborted Fetal Cell Lines
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/feb/05020703.html

During yesterday’s press briefing, reporters queried Press Secretary Gibbs on how the two apparently contradictory statements could be reconciled.

“The President just said when asked about the issue of abortion that he wants somebody who’s interpreting our Constitution in a way that takes into account individual rights, and that includes women’s rights.  Isn’t it artifice to say that this is not a litmus test?” asked one reporter, to which question Gibbs responded simply: “No.”

The reporter continued to press the issue, asking, “So he’d be open, for example, to choosing somebody who didn’t believe in a woman’s right to choose?”

Gibbs attempted to avoid the question, saying, “I think we’re playing the Washington game again.  If I say this, then I don’t –“

“We’re in Washington,” shot back the reporter.

“I know, I know.”

Again the reporter asked, “But I think it’s a fair question.  I mean, here’s the question, would he be open to –“

Gibbs responded, “No, I think … again, the President has some familiarity with the Constitution and constitutional law and I think he can, while not having an explicit litmus test, can talk to somebody about a full range of their beliefs.”

The reporter the pointed out, “But if he rules out somebody who doesn’t share that belief, isn’t that de facto a litmus test?”

To which Gibbs could only say: “Again, I’m not going to get into the ‘if this, does it mean that; if that, does it mean this’.”

The issue came up again several minutes later, when a reporter asked, “If it turned out that the person [Obama] appoints to the court someday provided the fifth vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, would Barack Obama be upset about that?” The White House transcript records “laughter” in response to the question.

Gibbs again demurred from answering the question, saying only that he would not deal in “hypotheticals.”

During a session with the press on Wednesday, a reporter had asked President Obama if he would be willing to nominate a justice to replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens “who did not support a woman’s right to choose.”

Obama acknowledged that abortion has been “a hugely contentious issue in our country for a very long time,” but said he would take the approach of other U.S. presidents and not require candidates to pass a “litmus test” on that issue. However, he then added that he wanted to see “somebody who is going to be interpreting our Constitution in a way that takes into account individual rights, and that includes women’s rights.”

In response to Obama’s remarks, Dave Andrusko of the National Right to Life Committee quipped that, “If there is a difference between not having a ‘litmus test’ and setting specific demarcations within which prospective nominees must adhere in order to be nominated, it escapes me.”

Bill Saunders, the Senior Vice President of Legal Affairs, told LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) in an interview that, “I think that this is standard operating procedure out of Obama’s playbook. First you acknowledge there’s a disagreement, then you purport to be fair-minded, and last you signal to your base that you’re going to push ahead with this left agenda. This is exactly what he did yesterday.

“There is a litmus test, and it’s what he said second, which is that a right (so-called) to privacy and abortion comes from interpreting the Constitution – that’s what he’s looking for in a nominee. And if he thinks it’s not there he’s not going to nominate them.”

“So I think it’s meaningless,” said Saunders about Obama’s assurances. “I think the litmus-test language is used simply to fool the public and make them think that he’s really going to be fair with this.

Austin Council Member Bill Spelman proposed the ordinance, along with Council Members Laura Morrison and Mike Martinez.

Pro-abortion lobbyists urged the council to adopt the mandate because they say pregnancy centers should be clear that they only offer assistance helping women to keep their unborn baby, and not to kill them, and that they do not offer birth control.

“Many (centers) are using deceptive and manipulative tactics that prevent women from making fully informed choices about their reproductive health,” said Sarah Cleveland, the executive director of NARAL Pro-choice Texas.

Violators of the law would be cited for a Class C misdemeanor, and face charges of up to $450.

Pro-life advocates, however, are incensed at the new regulation, which they say unfairly targets one type of charitable organization for no apparent reason.

Lori DeVillez, the Executive Director of the Austin Pregnancy Resource Center, told LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) in an interview Friday that her organization was taken completely off guard by the new law.

“I’m still surprised at what happened here. We had no idea. There was no warning or information given to us,” she said.

DeVillez responded to pro-abortion critics who have accused pregnancy resource centers of false advertising, saying, “We are as honest as honest can be. We let people know exactly who we are. Anyone who calls, and they’re requesting an abortion, we let them know that that’s not what we do. We’re certainly very up front with what we do.”

The director said that her organization’s mission is simply to provide free resources to pregnant women. “We have a clothing boutique. We partner with medical care in the community so we can get her a good doctor in the community. She’s scared, so she doesn’t know what to do, and we help her with that.”

“We are a pregnancy resource center. That’s what we do. We provide resources for pregnancy. How much clearer can you be? I don’t understand it.”

Jonathan Saenz, director of legislative affairs at Liberty Institute, said, “This pro-abortion, political effort by the City Council and NARAL is an outrageous example of out of control government.”

“Why is the City of Austin so hostile to the needs of pregnant women served by charitable pregnancy centers?”

Liberty Institute also pointed out that “there is no corresponding requirement that abortion facilities post signs about the services they do not provide.”

DeVillez echoed a similar sentiment, saying, “I don’t know of any other group, non-profit or not, that has to put on their building what they don’t do. That doesn’t make any sense.”

Last year, when Baltimore passed its own law about pregnancy resource centers, Care Net President Melinda Delahoyde denounced the law as “nonsensical,” “unwarranted,” and “unconstitutional.”

“It is nonsensical for the Baltimore City Council to undermine local efforts to provide free support to pregnant women in their city, but that’s exactly what they’ve accomplished with this legislation,” said Delahoyde. ”It’s particularly alarming when abortions are decreasing nationwide, but increasing in the state of Maryland.”

The Archdiocese of Baltimore is challenging the city’s law with a lawsuit. DeVillez told LSN that her organization has not yet determined what its response to Austin’s new law will be.

“It was a phenomenal experience,” she said in an interview with LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) this week. Being given the opportunity to sing on the stage of the Kodak Theatre in Hollywood — the theatre where the Academy Awards take place — was an “amazing” opportunity, she said.

But, she continued, “What was so great about [the experience] was not necessarily making it that far, but the story that got out about our family, and the pro-life message that was shown to the world.”

Curtis’ January debut on American Idol won her more than a few fans, not only because of her powerful voice and simple charm (Simon Cowell famously complemented her on not being “annoying,” unlike other contestants her age), but also because of her unusual story: Maddy is from a family of 12 children, four of whom have Down syndrome.

The Idol episode where Maddy first auditioned gave prominent play to Maddy’s home life, featuring footage of her playing with her siblings (three of whom were adopted), and airing her comments about what life is like with siblings with Down syndrome.

“I think some people are a little sceptical of Down syndrome,” she said in that episode, as tears welled up into her eyes. But, she said, “Those four boys bring out the best in every person they meet.  They see the world in colors, and we need to see the world that way.”

When asked why she thought people were so moved by her family’s story, she responded, “I feel like it’s probably because kids with down syndrome sometimes aren’t given the chance – like 90% of kids with down syndrome are aborted.”

In fact, it was only a year ago, she said, that her mom first told her about the high abortion rate for babies with Down syndrome. “I couldn’t stop crying,” she said, “because I couldn’t believe it.”

“I guess it’s just a really hard concept for me to grasp.  Kids with Down syndrome are so special and people don’t seem to get it I guess.”

In addition to being one of the youngest in a family of 12, Curtis is the daughter of award-winning pro-life blogger and writer Barbara Curtis, who writes the MommyLife blog.

Barbara told LSN that she was surprised at how much coverage the producers of the show gave to Maddy’s unusual life story. She concurred with her daughter that, if getting that story out was “all God wanted to do, that was a lot.” After Maddy was cut in Hollywood, she said, “We came home really not disappointed.”

When asked why she thought people were so drawn to Maddy, and so touched by her story, Barbara answered: “She is a pure, joyful person. What you see is what you get. That was not a show, that’s how she is.”

Right now, said Barbara, their home life consists of four kids with Down syndrome, and Maddy. “She’s naturally just more selfless because she’s looking out for them,” she said. “I think people were intrigued because they might not put that idea together logically, but there was something very intriguing about her because she was so in love with life and with the situation that God put her in.

“Maddy is who she is because she grew up in a certain kind of family and if people understood how wonderful kids with Down syndrome are and the transformative power that they have in a family, everyone would want one.”

The question that remains for Maddy and for the Curtis family, then, is what lies ahead for their blossoming music star.

Maddy told LSN that she doesn’t intend on trying out for American Idol in the future, even though she is only sixteen years old. While she said she enjoyed the experience, she added, “I think I’m much more of a low-key person. I’m not really that much of a camera person. I’m not into the whole five cameras on you all the time.”

Barbara said that since her appearance on American Idol, her daughter has been receiving quite a few invitations, many of which are to perform for or speak at pro-life events.

When asked whether this is something she would consider, Maddy responded, “I think it’s amazing. I don’t know, I guess that would be a lot bigger to me than the American Idol thing, because of the message that goes along with it.”

To her new fans Maddy said she would like to say, “Just that I completely love and I am totally feeling their support … I guess just that I’m really grateful that they would be so supportive and loving.”