Extreme Pro-Abortion Report Advances to a Vote at European Parliament

The European Parliament is set to vote on a resolution on a radical report that recognizes a "right to abortion" and calls on EU Member States to change laws to allow access to abortion—an action that not only conflicts with EU law but has no basis in international law. As recently as this past March when responding to a question about pro-life policies in Poland, the European Commission acknowledged: “Legislative powers on sexual and reproductive health and rights, including abortion, lie with the Member States that are also responsible for the definition of health policy.”

 

Despite the blatant contradiction with EU law, the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (FEMM) approved the resolution by Croatian MEP Perdrag Matić on the situation of sexual and reproductive health and rights in the EU, in the frame of women’s health by 27 votes in favor, 6 against and 1 abstention. FEMM’s press release— EU countries should ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health—lists “Guarantee access to safe and legal abortion” as the first highlight of the report and second to “Remove all barriers impeding full access to sexual and reproductive health services.” Translation—EU countries must rescind laws protecting unborn children and their mothers from the violence of abortion.

 

Pro-life advocacy and support in Europe and in developing countries has radical MEPs worried who label it a “backlash”, this appears to be the main rational for the resolution. The Matić report states that it “comes at a crucial moment in the EU, with backlash and regression in women’s rights gaining momentum and contributing to the erosion of acquired rights and endangering the health of women.”

 

It continues, “What worries and urges a strong response from the EU is the evident backlash in women’s rights, with the right to a safe and legal abortion being one of the key targets in these attacks.”

 

Prioritization of the abortion agenda is pervasive in the report which is critical of common-sense abortion regulations stating, “whereas even when abortion is legally available, there are often a range of legal, quasi-legal and informal barriers to accessing it, including limited time periods and the grounds on which to access abortion; medically unwarranted waiting periods; a lack of trained and willing healthcare professionals; and the denial of medical care based on personal beliefs, biased and mandatory counselling, deliberate misinformation or third-party authorisation, medically unnecessary tests, distress requirements, the costs involved and the lack of their reimbursement.”

 

The Committee on Development added its opinion to the report seeking access to abortion in developing countries and criticizing pro-life opposition writing about “the worrying backlash on women’s rights over their bodies both in developing countries and the EU”.

 

It requested that a recommendation to African countries to fully implement the abortion article of the Maputo Protocol be included and sought the condemnation any “violations of SRHR” including failure to provide access to legal abortion.

 

The interconnectedness of the report and radical pro-abortion organizations is evident. The report includes citing three reports by International Planned Parenthood, reference to data from the Center for Reproductive Rights, and to a so-called “investigation” by Open Democracy which attempted to discredit the work of pro-life pregnancy centers in Latin America.

 

Open Democracy was also involved in an attempt by pro-abortion MEPs to discredit pro-life groups in Europe presenting the targeted groups as part of a Christian-conservative plot against the values of the European Union. According to ECLJ, “The aim of this presentation was to discredit pro-life organisations, to question their legitimacy and to exclude them from the democratic debate.”

 

The report is problematically comprehensive, linking to numerous EU programs and calling on various EU commissioners to support actions by pro-abortion organizations in development cooperation policies. It states, “Stresses that it is essential to ensure that development cooperation policy involves civil society organisations which are directly involved in the defence of SRHR in developing countries.”

 

Read more here.

Mexico: Mobile App Instructs Women in Misoprostol Alone Abortions

Pro-abortion activists in Mexico are using an app to instruct women in do-it-yourself illegal abortions, so-called “medical abortion”, using the uterine-contracting drug misoprostol, the second drug in the RU 486 regime which expels the living unborn child from the womb. Misoprostol is available over-the-counter in Mexico due to its use in preventing ulcers. The first abortion drug in RU 486 abortion, mifepristone, is not available in Mexico because its only use is to end the life of an unborn child.

 

Once a woman signs up for the App, she is added to a WhatsApp group that includes so-called “abortion accompaniers” who give advice including where she can buy misoprostol and how to take it. Pro-abortion activist groups in Mexico behind the App include Morras Help Morras, Fondo Maria, Marea Verde Mx, and Group for Information on Reproduction and Choice (GIRE). GIRE tweets to those advising others on illegal abortion: If you are a medical abortion companion and they try to criminalize you, contact @Gire_mx!”

 

Abortion is restricted in most Mexican states, 30, with legal access allowed in only 2 states—Mexico City and Oaxaca. Nationally abortion is legal in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy in case of rape and in severe threats to health. As in the U.S., state lawmakers are increasingly legislating on abortion.

 

The Supreme Court is considering challenges to state laws in Sinaloa and Coahuila that stipulate that life begins at the moment of conception, as well as a challenge to conscience rights that would ban medical professionals’ right of refusal to administer abortions in cases when the women’s life is at risk.

 

Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has suggested holding an informal referendum on the legalization of abortion stating, “For very controversial decisions I have always thought that it is best to consult the population and not impose anything on them. In this case, the women can freely decide.” 

 

However, the pro-abortion organization GIRE is one group opposed to a public referendum in the Catholic country. Its director stated, “We are talking about human rights, and women have to decide about their bodies. It is not a decision that should be decided by a popular vote”. She added, “The legalization debate is now in the field of the state governments.”

Mozambique: International Pro-Abortion Collaboration

The International Federation of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (FIGO) reports on the efforts of its member organization in Mozambique, Mozambican Association of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AMOG) “to strengthen gender equality and access to safe abortion.”

 

According to AMOG, the penal code in Mozambique was changed last year to allow “abortion on demand for the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, and in cases of rape or incest, abortions will be legal during the first 16 weeks, and in cases of fetal anomaly, the first 24 weeks.

 

Abortions must be performed at officially designated facilities by qualified practitioners.”

 

The organization is working with the Ministry of Health and other pro-abortion NGOs including Ipas, DKT, Pathfinder International, and PSI to change minds and hearts on abortion and created a document “with messages identified as relevant and appropriate according to the different target audiences. This kind of best-practice guide will serve for the production of several communication materials used by the Ministry of Health and partners to inform citizens and communities about safe abortion…”

 

Ipas also partnered with AMOG to carry out “an action to clarify values ​​and transform attitudes”. They held A Value Clarification Training at Central Hospital of Beira for 20 health professionals designed to explain the legal changes and how to implement abortion policies.

 

AMOG is working to spread its abortion message beginning with those in leadership positions acknowledging that it “understands that change begins with an inclusive work that reaches the whole of civil society, but takes as focal points the community and religious leaders, women and youth, the providers of safe abortion services, key government partners ( Ministry of Health; Ministry of Education; Ministry of Youth and Technology; Ministry of Women, Gender, Children and Social Action; and Ministry of Justice), as well as legislators (Assembly of the Republic).” 

Northern Ireland: Human Rights Committee Ignores CRPD on Abortion

MLAs have been told by the Northern Ireland Human Right’s Commission (NIHRC) that a bill seeking to amend the law to stop abortions in cases of non-fatal disabilities does not comply with the UK’s international human rights obligations.

 

The NIHRC said that a “proposal to remove access to abortion in circumstances of serious foetal impairment is incompatible with the UK’s obligations under the UN CEDAW (Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women).”

 

The Severe Fetal Impairment Abortion Bill by DUP MLA Paul Givan, passed its second stage by 48 votes to 12 with Mr. Givan explaining that he wanted to amend the controversial abortion policy to show that people with disabilities are “equally valued”. 

 

The Bill is currently under consideration by the Stormont health committee. The Commission warned the Bill may result in the “violation of a number of Articles enshrined within Human Rights’ legislation” but the Commission in its strong support of abortion ignores the Convention on Disabilities. It also fails to mention this human rights committee’s consistent opposition to abortion for fetal abnormality, including during the 2017 review of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

 

In the Concluding observations on the initial report of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities was clear in opposing abortion on the grounds of disability citing Article 5 of the Convention— Equality and non-discrimination.

 

The Committee stated that it “is concerned about perceptions in society that stigmatize persons with disabilities as living a life of less value than that of others and about the termination of pregnancy at any stage on the basis of fetal impairment.” The Committee recommended that Great Britain “amend its abortion law accordingly. Women’ s rights to reproductive and sexual autonomy should be respected without legalizing selective abortion on the ground of fetal deficiency.

Ireland: 3 Years After Repeal the 8th Referendum

Three years after Irish voters repealed protections for unborn children in a referendum, pro-abortion activists are targeting the National Maternity Hospital. They seek to ensure that the Catholic Sisters of Charity, past land owners, divest of any involvement in the hospital and demand public ownership of the hospital. The Campaign Against Church Ownership of Women's Healthcare presented a petition to Health Minister Stephen Donnelly which reads in part:

 

“Repealing the 8th Amendment was only half the battle. Without ready access to abortion and other services, REPEAL will mean little. With the new maternity hospital costing the state at least €350 million and set to be built on land owned by the Sisters of Charity and run by a board appointed by them, this access will be compromised.

 

“Despite its name, the National Maternity Hospital is a private Catholic corporation. The hospital recently agreed to be taken over by a private company owned by the Sisters of Charity, St Vincent's Healthcare Group (SVHG), which manages the nuns' three hospitals.

“The new maternity hospital was designed to be private and Catholic. We demand that it be public and secular.”

 

Health Minister Donnelly also announced increased funding for women’s health services and resourcing for a new post of Clinical Lead for Women’s Health in General Practice, with pro-abortion activists hoping will result in an increase in the number of GPs willing to provide abortion-inducing drugs for abortion. Currently, one out of 10 GPs are willing to do so.

 

Pro-abortion Senator Lorraine Clifford-Lee tweeted her support for the new position along with her desire that the individual named have expertise in reproductive health: “As Co-Chair of the Oireachtas All Party Group on Sexual & Reproductive Health & Rights I look forward to engaging with @DonnellyStephen in relation to the review of the legislation. An independent chair with expertise in the area of reproductive health is essential #repealedThe8th”.

U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Case that could overturn Roe v. Wade

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided to consider an abortion restriction case from Mississippi that could impact the future of abortion as decided in the Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling. The Court will take up the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, about Mississippi’s pro-life law that protects unborn babies from abortion after 15 weeks gestation. The law prohibits all abortions after 15 weeks except in cases of health emergencies or fetal abnormalities. The Court announced that it would consider only one question from the three-question petition: “Whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional.”

 

A lower court had struck down the 2018 Mississippi law when the Jackson Women’s Health Organization – the only licensed abortion provider in the state – challenged the law’s constitutionality. According to Amy Howe writing in SCOTUSblog, “The Supreme Court on Monday set the stage for a major ruling next year on abortion – one that could upend the Supreme Court’s landmark decisions in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, in which the court ruled that the Constitution protects the right to have an abortion before a fetus becomes viable.”

 

She continued, “A federal district court agreed with the clinic, reasoning that the Supreme Court’s cases do not allow states to ban abortions before a fetus becomes viable, which occurs at around 24 weeks of pregnancy.”

 

Jackson Women's Health Organization is represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights which on social media has expressed its concern over the potential impact of the case, “If Roe were weakened or overturned it would open the door for other lawmakers at the state AND federal level to further restrict abortion in the U.S.”

 

Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch said she is committed to defending the law's constitutionality stating, "The Mississippi legislature enacted this law consistent with the will of its constituents to promote women's health and preserve the dignity and sanctity of life. I remain committed to advocating for women and defending Mississippi's legal right to protect the unborn.”

 

Pro-life advocates are hopeful that the Court in hearing the case in its next term, beginning in October and ending in June, 2022, will rule in favor of Mississippi and in support of state bans on abortion before viability.

Pro-aborts to President Biden: "It's not that hard. Just say the word abortion."

Pro-abortion activists continue to express their frustration towards President Biden for not saying the word “abortion”, despite enacting abortion friendly policies. NARAL tweeted to Biden: “It’s not that hard. Just say the word abortion.” Ipas has tweeted that it too wants Biden to “say the word abortion.”

 

The fact that neither Biden, his office, or his press secretary can utter the word “abortion” in any statements, including on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, is an increasing sore point for pro-abortion activists who helped to elect him. Politico writes from Washington, D.C.:

“In his first 100 days in office, Biden rolled back restrictions on abortion pills, reversed restrictions on funding Planned Parenthood and overseas groups that provide abortion referrals and removed hurdles to medical research that uses fetal tissue obtained from abortions.

 

“But progressive members of Congress and outside groups say they have been struck by Biden’s own silence on the issue: Since taking office, he hasn’t mentioned abortion in any speeches, videos or social media posts. Now, they’re calling on Biden to speak up — and lay out how he will safeguard abortion access when it’s facing challenges before the Supreme Court and red states that are pushing a new wave of restrictions.”

 

Following President Biden’s address to Congress, an article in Cosmopolitan stated, “Failing to talk about abortion, as Biden did last night, is unacceptable. Rhetoric riddled with vague euphemisms is no longer an acceptable expression of support for abortion.”

 

There is an expectation that the Supreme Court’s consideration of the Mississippi abortion restriction case will force Biden to directly address access to abortion or risk further criticism from his pro-abortion base.

 

Pro-abortion activists are also waiting for the Biden administration to provide funding for abortion by supporting or acting to reverse long-standing bipartisan bans on funding abortion domestically—Hyde Amendment— and internationally—Helms Amendment— in budget proposals.

U.S.: Record Number of State Laws against Abortion

State lawmakers continue to enact laws to protect unborn children and their mothers from the violence of abortion despite, or in response to, pro-abortion actions by the Biden administration. According to the pro-abortion research and policy organization Guttmacher Institute, “The number of abortion restrictions—and specifically bans on abortion designed to directly challenge Roe v. Wade and the U.S. constitutional right to abortion—that have swiftly been enacted over the past four months is unprecedented. If this trend continues, 2021 will end up as the most damaging antiabortion state legislative session in a decade—and perhaps ever”. The pro-life actions have taken place mostly in states with Republican legislatures and Republican governors.

 

The group reports that since January, “there have been 549 abortion restrictions, including 165 abortion bans, introduced across 47 states (all counts current as of May 16, 2021). A whopping 69 of those restrictions have been enacted across 14 states, including nine bans.” The group believes that state policymakers “are testing the limits of what the new U.S. Supreme Court majority might allow and laying the groundwork for a day when federal constitutional protections for abortion are weakened or eliminated entirely.”

 

Guttmacher fears that, “Because of the coordinated and creeping nature of these tactics, it can be anticipated that antiabortion lawmakers in other states may try to pass similar legislation in the near future. That poses new dangers for abortion rights, because this is a new and untested approach that we may see used in ever more creative ways to circumvent or challenge U.S. Supreme Court rulings upholding abortion rights.”

 

It seeks passage of the Women’s Health Protection Act “which would establish federal statutory abortion rights for providers and patients against state restrictions and bans.”

The report recognized that the state trend to restrict abortion pills is a direct response by state legislators to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s April 12 decision to allow patients to receive abortion-inducing pills by mail during the pandemic.



Guttmacher concludes, “The current barrage of coordinated attacks must be taken seriously as the unprecedented threat to reproductive health care and rights that it is. The year 2021 is well on its way to being a defining one in abortion rights history.”

And it will be a life-saving one for unborn children.

UK: Medics Demand an End to Mailing of Abortion Pills

More than 600 medical professionals in the UK wrote to Prime Minister Boris Johnson demanding that he end the controversial “pills in the post abortion scheme” introduced at the start of the pandemic lockdown fearing for the safety of women who take the pills without medical supervision and that the pills are being used later than the ten-week limit. In an open letter, they also expressed concerns that the relaxation of abortion rules made it easier for men to coerce women into abortions against their will and failed to protect girls who were being abused by adults, or women trafficked into prostitution. 

 

The letter includes: “Separating abortion from a clinical environment with direct medical supervision has ensured that abortion providers cannot guarantee that the pills are taken by the individual they are prescribed for within the appropriate time frame. Specifically, self-administration of abortion pills removes any certainty over who takes the pills, where they are taken, at what gestation they are taken, and whether an additional adult is present in case of complications.”

 

One signer, Dr Calum Miller, of Oxford University, said an in-person medical examination was “a critical safety measure to check the gestation of the pregnancy” and other possible medical issues, adding: “We should not be failing women by eliminating the checks.” 

 

The letter cites studies from Finland and Sweden that show that the rate of complications for abortion induced by the two-drug abortion regimen was higher than surgical abortion, with the complication rate in the Finnish study being 4 times higher than for surgical abortions.

 

The medics expressed concern that ‘at-home’ abortion has “undermined healthcare for pregnant women and their unborn children by prioritising convenience over care” and “publicly request that the ‘at-home’ abortion schemes in England, Scotland, and Wales are revoked with immediate effect in order to protect the health and welfare of women.”

 

Three police investigations into use of the drugs for abortions as late as 32 weeks of pregnancy are underway. Abortion providers Marie Stopes and the British Pregnancy Advisory Service are seeking to make abortion pills by mail permanent.

 

A decision on whether to retain the policy beyond the pandemic is expected soon.

AU: Pro-life Lawmakers Speak at March for Life Rally

Pro-life lawmakers spoke at the March for Life rally outside Queensland’s Parliament promising to fight for the rights of the unborn and for vulnerable mothers. LNP Senator Matt Canavan spoke out against sex selection abortions and said “I’m going to introduce a bill into the Parliament that will say there should be no Medicare funding of sex-selection abortions … because your taxes should not go to other parents trying to choose the gender of their babies.” 

 

Assistant Women’s Minister, Senator Amanda Stoker said vulnerable women including rape victims must have “real choice” when faced with an unwanted pregnancy and need to know that “there is a loving community of people who are … prepared to help you through that difficulty” including families willing to adopt and “joyfully raise your child if you couldn’t.” 

 

She raised concern about eugenic abortion stating, “Friends, there is something very awry when we look around the world, when we look at some of the Nordic countries who boast they have eliminated from their populations conditions like Down syndrome because what they really mean is not that they cured a condition, but they have eliminated all of the people who are born with an extra chromosome. 

 

“That is not humane, that is eugenics.” 

UN Women: Invites Group Hostile to Pro-Life to Join Media Compact

UN Women has invited a London-based media organization, Open Democracy, that is hostile to pro-life organizations to join UN Women’s Media Compact, “an invite-only alliance of media organisations across the world that are committed to actively advancing women’s rights and gender equality.” Other media partners include Glamour, the Huffington Post, Marie Claire, Politico, and numerous regional outlets across Africa, Asia, Europe and the Americas.

 

Open Democracy stated in a release, "We are thrilled to join this partnership. Since 2017, our groundbreaking feminist investigative journalism has had major impact – including on the media and policy debates internationally…It is wonderful to have this work recognised with an invitation to join the UN Women's Media Compact. We look forward to working with this group to change the media – and thus the debate – about rights and equality globally,” she added.

 

One of Open Democracy’s projects is called Tracking the Backlash, a hostile and biased writing about pro-life organizations and missions disguised as journalism. Its latest focus has been criticizing abortion pill reversals. An online solicitation on its website states: “We've found that the US Christian Right is pushing a 'dangerous' anti-abortion treatment on women around the globe – can you help us keep digging?”

 

Open Democracy has been working closely with radical pro-abortion members of the European Parliament. It reports, “We have also revealed: How US Christian right groups spent at least $50 million in Europe over the last decade – producing the first major analysis of their spending. The article prompted over 100 European lawmakers to write to the presidents of the European Commission, Council and Parliament demanding an urgent investigation.”



UN Women asks its media partners “to scale up their focus on women’s rights and gender equality issues through high-quality coverage, complemented by gender-sensitive corporate practices”. Partners are also expected to “disrupt stereotypes and biases”. The alliance was established in 2016 as part of UN Women’s strategy to implement the global Sustainable Development Goal 5 to achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls by 2030 with a target of “universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights.”

Malta: Bill Seeks to Decriminalize Abortion

A new bill introduced in Malta’s parliament would decriminalize abortion, the first attempt to do so in the pro-life country. Malta is the only European nation where abortion is prohibited regardless of circumstance. The legislation, introduced by independent MP Marlene Farrugia, removes criminal punishments from anyone procuring or assisting someone procure an abortion. Pro-abortion groups welcomed the bill as a first step towards legalizing abortion and EU MEPs are encouraging Maltese lawmakers to advance the legislation. Catholic Church leaders have spoken out against. Mgr Charles Scicluna warned that progress on human rights should not come at the cost of innocent unborn lives. "The womb of a mother is something that is dear and holy, it is there that human life can grow. Let us pray that the womb remains a place of life, not a place where killing takes place," said Mgr Scicluna.

Ireland: TDs Introduce Pain Relief Bill for the Unborn

A new bill introduced in the Dáil Éireann would provide pain relief to unborn babies undergoing late-term abortions. The Foetal Pain Relief Bill 2021 was sponsored by TD Carol Nolan along with ten other TDs. TD Nolan explained that scientific findings have proved that unborn babies can experience pain as early as 13 weeks gestation. “As legislators, we cannot ignore the fact that the existing abortion law does not contain any provision to promote the administration of pain relief, where possible, to an unborn baby prior to the carrying out of a late-term abortion procedure,” said Nolan. “Ensuring that no baby ever experiences pain or distress that could be avoided is surely something that all people of goodwill can agree on and work to achieve,” she said. 

Dominican Republic: Parliament Rejects Attempt to Decriminalize Abortion

The Dominican Republic’s Chamber of Deputies approved a Penal Code that does not include changes to its current law prohibiting abortion. The deputies rejected a “dissident report” that sought to add changes to the Code to permit abortion in cases of life of the mother, rape or incest, and fetal disability. While some abortion groups reported that the Dominican Republic was decriminalizing abortion, the only mention of abortion in the Penal Code remains that it is allowed if, “in advance, to save the lives of the mother and fetus in danger, all available scientific and technical means are exhausted as far as possible.”

 

Abortion groups falsely reported that the new Penal Code was permitting abortion for the stated exceptions. Martharís Rivas Reyes, the director of 40 Days for Life in the Dominican Republic, clarified that no change in law was made. “Yesterday was a great joy because the document passed 'clean', without abortion, through all this process from now on, from this first reading. Hopefully everything stays that way until enactment,” said Rivas.

UK: Letter from MPs Cautions Against Attempts to Legalize Assisted Suicide

An open letter from 70 MPs and Peers has called on a change to the UK’s assisted suicide law. The letter is in response to a call by the All-Party Parliamentary Humanist Group calling for an inquiry to determine if the current law should be amended to permit medical professionals to administer life ending medications to patients wanting to end their lives. The open letter argues that the matter has already been thoroughly investigated and decided on. Further, the current law banning euthanasia has been tested twice in court in 2014 and 2019, both ruling the ban should stand.

 

The MPs warn of the slippery slope of legalizing assisted suicide for one group, which has shown in countries with legalized euthanasia to soon expand to include others: “There are escalating numbers of deaths over time in every jurisdiction, and in almost all places the categories of those who qualify for assisted suicide or euthanasia has been expanded”. The MPs also caution of the risk of creating pressure to seek euthanasia out of fear of being a burden to family members. “This letter provides ample reason to reject renewed calls for a change in the law on assisted suicide in the UK,” said Right to Life UK spokesperson Catherine Robinson. “Parliament and the courts have rejected such attempts multiple times in recent history. The experience of increased pressure to accept assisted suicide or euthanasia, as well as the often ever-expanding euthanasia legislation we see in countries that have legalised assisted suicide and euthanasia, should be all the evidence we need that introducing such legislation would have similar disastrous effects,” she said. 

Malta: President Would Resign Before Authorizing Abortion

Matla’s President George Vella said that he would rather resign his position than sign a bill allowing abortion. “I will never sign a bill that involves the authorization of murder,” said President Vella. The president, also a doctor, has consistently expressed his opposition to abortion with no exceptions. “You have either killed or not killed, there can be no half death. I’m very clear, there are no ifs and buts,” he has said. New legislation in Malta’s parliament seeks to decriminalize abortion.

Germany: Court Rules to Uhold Ban on Prayer Vigils

A German court has upheld a law prohibiting peaceful prayer vigils near abortion facilities. The case challenging local municipality Pforzheim’s policy, led by a German “40 Days for Life” group, claimed that the law violated their freedom of speech, assembly, and religion. Group leader Pavica Vojnović lamented the ruling and called it “discouraging”. “This is about more than our group in Pforzheim. It’s about whether prayer-free zones are lawful, or whether one is allowed to represent different opinions in the public square. That is why we want to continue fighting for this freedom,” said Pavica Vojnović. Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) who assisted on the case, has been fighting similar bans on peaceful prayer vigils throughout Europe.

 

“We are still awaiting the reasoning for the verdict, but it is obvious the dismissal of the case fails to affirm freedom of expression, which is the foundation of every free and fair democracy. What kind of society restricts prayer for vulnerable women and children? By prohibiting even silent prayer near an abortion organization, the Pforzheim authorities have gone beyond what could be considered reasonable or proportionate. Whether or not people agree with Pavica’s views on the sanctity of life, everyone can support the importance of the fundamental rights to freedom of expression, religion, and assembly,” said Felix Böllmann, ADF’s legal counsel. 

U.S.: Abortion Groups Sue to Block Texas City Abortion Ban

A law suit is challenging a voter approved ordinance declaring the city of Lubbock, Texas a “sanctuary city for the unborn” and banning abortion within the city. The ordinance would not go into effect unless the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade. The law suit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas claims the ordinance is unconstitutional. Spokesperson for Texas Right to Life Kimerlyn Schwartz discounted the lawsuit, saying Planned Parenthood was filing several complaints in an attempt to find something that would hold. “The ordinance language is solid and was carefully drafted in expectation of the abortion industry filing a lawsuit,” she said.