New York State Steers Pregnant Women Toward Abortion in New Ad Campaign

 New York State has launched a pro-choice ad campaign meant to direct pregnant women to abortion clinics, which will include promotion online and on subway ads.

 New York Governor Andrew Cuomo's press office announced the "public awareness" campaign on Tuesday, which describes its mission to be to provide important information on reproductive health services for women.

"These actions are in direct response to widespread reports of organizations known as Crisis Pregnancy Centers or CPCs misrepresenting themselves as health centers to dissuade those seeking abortion from going through with that choice," claimed the office.

"These centers' actions may interfere with New Yorkers' constitutionally protected rights to seek reproductive health care and may endanger them by preventing them from receiving medically accurate information."

 In a statement, Gov. Cuomo also referenced actions by the Trump administration to enact pro-life initiatives, which he labeled a "war on women's reproductive rights."

"In New York, we refuse to let President Trump and Washington take us backwards and jeopardize the rights of New Yorkers," stated Cuomo.

"We are launching this public awareness campaign to combat the insidious spread of misleading, medically inaccurate information about reproductive health and to ensure all New York women know the options they are legally entitled to."

 The campaign will direct New Yorkers to what the state government describes as medically accurate information on abortion, contraception, and pregnancy.

 The Christian Post attempted to reach several to New York-based crisis pregnancy centers, however only one of those contacted returned comment by press time, and only to say they are declining comment for the time being. 

 In April 2015, the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority voted 9-2 to ban political advertising from their subways and buses as a way of avoiding litigation over rejected ads.

 Taking effect immediately, the MTA's policy exempted from their political ban paid government messages and certain public service announcements.

 In recent years, some states with pro-choice leadership have sought to curb the influence of crisis pregnancy centers, claiming that they are providing false information on abortion and forcing women to forgo abortion.

 Abby Johnson, a former Planned Parenthood staffer who now is a pro-life activist, has taken issue with this portrayal of crisis pregnancy centers.

"I can say unequivocally that the most manipulation I have ever witnessed was inside the abortion center walls," stated Johnson in April.

"It is Planned Parenthood that has opposed every single anti-trafficking bill proposed by pro-life legislators. If you want to see who Planned Parenthood is really out to protect, you don't have to look far. They want to protect abusers, not victims."

 In late June, the United States Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that a California law forcing pro-life pregnancy centers to promote abortion was unconstitutional.

 The high court ruled in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra that the Reproductive Freedom, Accountability, Comprehensive Care, and Transparency (FACT) Act "unduly burdens protected speech."

"The unlicensed notice imposes a government-scripted, speaker-based disclosure requirement that is wholly disconnected from California's informational interest," wrote Justice Clarence Thomas for the majority.

"California has offered no justification that the notice plausibly furthers. It targets speakers, not speech, and imposes an unduly burdensome disclosure requirement that will chill their protected speech."

https://www.christianpost.com/news/new-york-state-attack-pro-life-c...

Views: 34

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

 What can you say, they must need the money from dead children.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by AF BrancoPolitical Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

OMG!!! Ruth Bader Ginsburg Voted Best Real-Life Hero At MTV Awards

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Monday was crowned the best real-life hero at the MTV Movie & TV Awards.

The 86-year old judge — whose 2015 biopic The Notorious RBG help cement her as a cultural icon among Liberals — beat out tennis star Serena Williams, WWE wrestler Roman Reigns, and comedian Hannah Gadsby to take him the award.

Though it wasn’t a clean sweep for Ginsburg last night.

The RGB documentary lost the “Best Fight” category for “Ruth Bader Ginsburg vs. Inequality” to “Captain Marvel vs. Minn-Erva.”

The justice was absent from the ceremony in Santa Monica, California.

Last December, Ginsburg had surgery to remove cancerous growths on her left lung. She was released from the hospital in New York four days later and recuperated at home.

Earlier this year, Ginsburg missed three days of arguments, the first time that’s happened since she joined the court in 1993. Still, she was allowed to participate using court briefs and transcripts.

Ginsburg has had two previous bouts with cancer, in 1999 and 10 years later.

Flashback: Ruth Bader Ginsburg: A Pregnant Woman Is Not A ‘Mother’

Celebrated liberal U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued in an opinion released Tuesday that a pregnant woman is not a “mother.”

“[A] woman who exercises her constitutionally protected right to terminate a pregnancy is not a ‘mother’,” Ginsburg wrote in a footnote, which in turn responded to another footnote in the 20-page concurring opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas in the Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc. case.

As Breitbart News’ legal editor Ken Klukowski reported, the case concerned a law signed by then-Governor (now Vice President) Mike Pence of Indiana in 2016, which required that the remains of an aborted fetus (or baby) be disposed of by cremation or burial. The law also prohibited abortion on the basis of sex, race, or disability alone.

The Court upheld the first part of the law, but declined to consider the selective-abortion ban until more appellate courts had ruled on it.

In his lengthy opinion — which delighted pro-life advocates, and distressed pro-choice activists — Thomas wrote that “this law and other laws like it promote a State’s compelling interest in preventing abortion from becoming a tool of modern-day eugenics.” He traced the racist and eugenicist beliefs of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, and warned that the Court would one day need to wrestle with abortion as form of racial discrimination.

In a footnote, Thomas attacked Ginsberg’s dissenting opinion, which argued the Court should not have deferred to the legal standard used by the litigants in the lower courts, but should have subjected the Indiana law to a more difficult standard instead, since it impacted “the right of [a] woman” to an abortion.

Ginsburg cited no legal authority for her claim that a pregnant woman is not a “mother.” The claim that a fetus is not a child is central to pro-choice arguments.

SPECIAL VIDEOS

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service