U.S.-style in vitro fertilization appears to enjoy bipartisan support, without a solution to its concomitant problems of genetic screening and mass embryo freezing and destruction. The Democratic Party continues to steam ahead, promoting state constitutional amendments that literally wipe out all vestiges of a right to life for the next generation. The Republican Party, having risen to power by sweeping into its ranks voting blocs of Catholics, evangelicals, and others alarmed by the decline in common values, now seems embarrassed by its ties to these bedrock Americans.

Some of these challenges are distinct to the issues themselves, contested questions on matters of sexuality and the value of human life. But there is also fog-like pea soup in the public mind. Nastiness on all sides is rewarded daily. Standards of behavior are so low that politicians routinely utter ideas and phrases that once would have gotten mouths roughly washed out with maternal soap. Merely witnessing the caliber of recent candidates from the major parties is enough to see that moral fiber amounts to crumbs in our national diet. “Imposing one’s values” is a damning phrase in a culture where the buying and selling of access and political favors have become an international sport.

Get the latest pro-life news and information on X (Twitter). Follow @LifeNewsHQ

But these value contests are not taking place in a psychological or social vacuum — elites across the partisan spectrum spend their waking hours preaching doom and gloom everywhere from Davos to downtown L.A. The apocalypse is always now. The next pandemic, tornado, or heat wave will end us all.

How does a bruised and battered pro-life cohort respond in such an era? The most honest thing for this writer to say is that he does not know. Entering the ranks of right to lifers in 1972 at the University of Notre Dame, I can attest that despite the odds, our attitude was hopeful. The wave of liberalization of abortion laws in the 1960s and ‘70s seemed to be receding — even the New York State General Assembly was voting to repeal a permissive abortion law that had made the state a travelers’ hub for abortions up to 20 weeks (Alan F. Guttmacher of Planned Parenthood famously proclaimed at the time that he was surprised how so permissive a law had gotten passed in the first place).

Notre Dame Law School Prof. Charles Rice, who had published a book titled “The Vanishing Right to Live” in 1969, soberly inspired the formation of a student pro-life group at the University. Its leaders included an evangelical graduate student and a clutch of eager Catholic undergrads. His book’s subtitle was “An Appeal for a New Reverence for Life.” We thought that goal was achievable.

Rice warned us, however, of what was coming. The 1970s had more than its share of pressing issues, especially for young people. The Sexual Revolution, the war in Vietnam, the wake of a decade of battles over civil rights, drug use, draft-dodging and student deferments and sit-ins. The last thing the times needed was a battle over who counted as human. In January 1973, the roof caved in. A ruling that may have been more sweeping than even Charlie Rice feared was handed down on a cold January day in Washington. By a 7-2 margin, with five Republican appointees in the majority, the Supreme Court struck down virtually every law in the nation that had supplied protection for more than a century to developing children in the womb.

The ruling stoked attempts to create a coherent national movement to check Roe and chart a new course. Retrospection likely makes it seem less chaotic than, in fact, it was, but one of the first student actions of the time was the formation of the National Youth Pro-Life Coalition (NYPLC). Student-run, poorly funded, and formally dedicated to non-violence, the NYPLC published its charter, as recapped by its co-founder, Tom Hilgers, M.D.:

“The NYPLC has taken strong positions against abortion and abortifacient ‘contraceptives,’ euthanasia, fetal experimentation, government birth regulation, and for positive solutions to human problems, cooperation with nature, the poor, the elderly, the mentally and physically handicapped, prisoner rehabilitation and peace. All of the positions revolve around intensifying the value and dignity of every human life and the leaders of the NYPLC firmly believe that this is where the ultimate strength of the pro-life movement lies. …The NYPLC openly admits that it does not have all the answers; nonetheless, it maintains that the use of violence to solve human problems is unconstructive, non-progressive, and ultimately always destructive.”

Over time, the NYPLC, with all its youthful energy and vision, dispersed, and the pro-life movement diversified into lobbying organizations, student networks, pregnancy center groups, political action arms, religious projects, child loss ministries, and more. With that specialized effort, millions of lives have been saved and millions of mothers and fathers supported. Once again, however, it is clear in 2026 that we have fallen short and must openly admit we do not have all the answers. What, now, would an appeal for renewed reverence for human life look like? What follows is only a sketch and represents only the views of the author, but here goes:

Expand Support and Alternatives to Abortion. All criticism from the Left aside, this has been a strength of the pro-life movement for decades. The pregnancy center movement, almost always privately funded for fear of government interference, is one of the largest charitable outreaches in history. Public policy has advanced over time with gains in the form of child tax credits, expansion of Medicaid postpartum coverage, federal and state grants, adoption tax credits, child support enforcement, and other positive measures. Much more, however, remains to be done. Leading pro-life groups could combine their analytical power and produce an annual Consensus Compendium of public and private policies to expand support for families and safeguard life.

Pro-Life Solutions to Root Causes of Infertility. Blame AI, perhaps, but searching online for resources on infertility returns a list of groups and articles that represent the worst practices of the IVF industry while including only a few initiatives to deal with underlying factors. An estimated 1.5 million embryonic humans are kept in frozen storage in the U.S. Many more have been discarded. One AI summary cheerfully says, “Discarding embryos is an inherent part of the IVF process.” It needn’t be. More medical and policy groups are forming in the effort to ensure that no human being is discarded in the effort to remedy infertility. The pro-life effort in this area needs to be redoubled, for the sake of other once-frozen children like Hannah Strege and Noah Markham.

Pictures Are Worth a Million Words. Nothing so rattles an advocate for abortion as the idea that a woman or girl will see a vivid ultrasound of her developing child. To avoid that prospect, they will omit that medically necessary step by prescribing abortion pills without a doctor’s visit or asking the woman if she would rather not see the image. In truth, every child in America should see ultrasound pictures well before the age at which she can conceive a child. When I showed these beautiful images to a classroom full of girls at the Cesar Chavez Charter School in D.C. (right after they had visited a Planned Parenthood facility and evidently seen nothing), it brought the house down with the teenagers’ ooh’s and aah’s. The side that wants you blind is the wrong side.

Support Criminal Penalties for Purveyors of Abortion. In a frustrated movement, the search for effective answers becomes more intense. The appeal of an “equal protection” argument that would impose severe penalties, including imprisonment, on women obtaining abortions is that it is relentlessly logical and treats women as moral agents in an abortion decision. Such a policy might be conceptually just. The counter view is illogical to a degree, but it has these virtues: abortions result from a network of abandonment, among which the last is the woman’s, which may be deliberative or, just as often, despairing. Her isolation is the source of her harm, which threats of jail or physical punishment do not nullify but instead amplify.

From the beginning, the pro-life movement, born in the throes of a culture of assassinations, riots, and war, has stood for non-violence, yearning for an end to all the bloodletting. Some argue that there is a biblical basis for criminalizing the mother. In the Old Testament, acts of adultery were to be punished by stoning (Leviticus 20-10). In the New Testament, Jesus disarmed the crowd bent on stoning the woman taken in adultery. He saved her from death and then commanded her to repent (John 8: 1-11). The appeal of abolition is real, but its advance would end the hope of enactment of a Hippocratic legal and social regime that binds the physician never to wrong his patient. The penalty should be on him and the sellers and shippers who strike the unborn drone-like from afar. Government officials who approve these drugs should be defeated for office.

New Resources for the Perinatal Frontier. Few things illustrate the folly of Roe and its trimester scheme more than advances in perinatal medicine. “Viability” is a concept rooted in the capability of medicine, not the reality of the child. You and I are not viable in our birthday suits on the surface of Mars. The unborn child at 16 weeks is perfectly viable where he or she is. Since 1973, the median gestational age at which an unborn child may, with the best medical care, be viable has moved lower by seven to eight weeks.

Improvements in fetal surgery and advances in perinatal care are rapid. Children with Down syndrome are living much longer and healthier lives, and leaders like Tim Tebow are engaged in social support that counters the images too often cast up by diagnosticians. America should have one or more dedicated institutions specializing in caring for babies and families in these situations. The appearance of new colleges and existing universities adding medical schools should open the door to the building of future “Children’s Hospitals for the Unborn” that will move the frontiers of care for these youngest of our brothers and sisters.

If nothing else, the pro-life movement today should seek to renew reverence for life by recovering as much as it can of its original idealism and optimism. Today it is reluctantly partisan and yearns for new consensus. It leads by example and not by force. Its imagery is still that of mothers and fathers’ interlaced fingers, the playground, the laughing child, the birthday candles, and brilliant balloons. It campaigns against the darkness and sees hope in and for everyone. It believes that it is never too late to leave the killing fields and come truly home.

LifeNews Note: Chuck Donovan is a 50-year veteran of the national debate over the right to life and served from 1981-89 as a writer in the Reagan White House. He is the former Executive Vice President of Family Research Council.

The post What Can the Pro-Life Movement Do Now to Save Babies From Abortions? appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Referring to the state legislature’s woke rewording of state laws, Hempstead Township Supervisor John Ferretti said in a Fox News interview this week, “As a father of two, it was an insult to me and to my wife.” He reported that, as he told his wife the news, his 9-year-old daughter overheard. “Can I still call you dad?” she asked, deeply distraught. “It really hit close to home.”

“We need to take a stand in the Town of Hempstead, the largest township in America, and make sure that we make it clear not just to residents in the Town of Hempstead, but to residents throughout New York State, that we won’t stand for this kind of woke nonsense,” Ferretti insisted. “We’re taking a stand because we will not allow woke Democrat liberals in New York State and the New York State Legislature to erase the traditional family,” he continued. “They did not pass a law that adds language. They passed a law that erases mother and father from certain statutes under New York state law, and that’s completely unacceptable.”

Get the latest pro-life news and information on X (Twitter). Follow @LifeNewsHQ

According to Ferretti, the state legislature could have achieved its ostensible goal by simply adding “gender-neutral” language to state laws. “Instead, they chose to erase mother and father and replace it, and we won’t stand for that,” he said. Ferretti noted that Governor Kathy Hochul (D) has not yet signed the bill. He anticipated that she will sign the bill but wait until after November’s elections to do so “because she’s not brave enough to take a stand,” fearing possible political backlash.

Hochul’s office, however, fired back, defending the proposed language changes as required for the sake of legal clarity. “The governor believes mothers are mothers and fathers are fathers, and no legislation changes that,” said Gordon Tepper, a spokesman for Hochul’s office. “The legislation, which we will review, appears to address technical legal issues related to surrogacy and parentage. … Anyone making bad-faith arguments is deliberately misleading New Yorkers for political gain.”

Author and mother-of-six Bethany Mandel rebuked the Democrats’ claims in an op-ed article last week. “Americans were assured that if Donald Trump became president, women would be stripped of our rights. As it turns out, Gov. Hochul is the one poised to make good on that prediction in New York,” she wrote. “In the name of inclusion, New York lawmakers have managed to do something remarkably regressive: stripping women of perhaps the most meaningful identity they can ever hold.”

Reem Alsalem, the United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women and Girls, also condemned the proposed changes, warning that eliminating “the word ‘mother’ and mother-related terminology in law and policies” is “linked to the devaluation of motherhood and women overall.” She added, “This is deeply troubling. I hope New York will step away from this move!”

Hempstead Township’s emergency resolution, which has earned the support of Republican state legislators, is intended to preserve the use of the terms “mother” and “father” in municipal and local laws and regulations, regardless of any state-level changes. “Nobody will ever change the fact that my children’s mother is their mother,” Ferretti said in a separate interview with the New York Post. “Nobody will ever change the fact that I am their father. Just words on a piece of paper won’t change someone being a mother, someone being a father.”

The Democrat-dominated state legislature’s changes in language will impact state law relating to parenting, child custody, family law, and education.

LifeNews Note: S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washigton Stand.

The post We Must Stop the Campaign to Eliminate “Mother and Father” appeared first on LifeNews.com.

We’ve collectively been so inundated with the “fact” that abortion is a “woman’s decision” that it’s difficult to remember that this is an absurd proposition on a gazillion different levels.

I am not naïve. No one is neglecting the truth that carrying a baby to term is not easy under the best of circumstances, or that care of that child most often falls disproportionately on the mother. But it doesn’t follow from that the father ought not to have a voice in the fate of a child that is his as well as hers.

Get the latest pro-life news and information on X (Twitter). Follow @LifeNewsHQ

The simple-minded, one-dimensional stereotype of the boyfriend/husband who can’t wait to abort an unplanned pregnancy, while obviously true in some instances, doesn’t account for many men, let alone exhaust all the other possibilities. (Note to pro-abortionist feminists, life is rarely simple.)

It would not be true to life to photoshop out the villains. That would include the men who coerced the women in their lives—including their daughters—into having abortions. But my point is that this does not exhaust the range of possible behaviors, nor does the failure of some—even most— to act as they should exclude all men from any voice in any and all abortions.

Consider…

I have known men who have opposed an abortion from the beginning, fought fiercely, but had no ability to save their child. Listen to their stories of powerlessness and you will have a tough time sleeping.

There are men—a lot of men—who’ve been lectured not to engage their hearts or their minds. Their “job” is exclusively to support the woman’s decision to abort.

To do otherwise, it’s implied when not stated flatly, is to try to “impose their will.” But what about the man who, in his heart, knows that he has a responsibility to the child and the mother of their child? He is, at best conflicted, at worst an emotional basket case.

The late Vicki Thorn single-handedly created Project Rachel, a post-abortion healing ministry, at a time when none existed. She once wrote

There are men whose wives had abortions before they met, who get caught up in the vortex of her pain.

Talk to any counselor, as I have, and you hear how this unresolved pain and grief about an abortion she likely has not told her husband about, is almost too much to bear. And if they are unable to have children, the impact is multiplied.

Abortion does not forever change the destinies of just women and unborn children alone, but also husbands, boyfriends, brothers, grandfathers, even uncles and cousins.

Talk about something that almost never gets discussed: How a sister’s abortion affects her brother. We tend to overlook how deep the bonds can be between siblings and how much one sibling can be hurt by the decision to end the life of his niece or nephew.

If you think I am exaggerating, I can tell you from personal experience what a difference my father’s care and compassion for my unwed, pregnant cousin made in her decision to carry her baby to term and to find a loving home for that child—and how that generosity of spirit shaped my attitude forever more.

There are lots of arguments one can make that easily dismantle (or at least show the inconsistencies of) the argument that men are, at best, irrelevant to the abortion issue, at worst power-hungry intruders.

But the truth is, never more so than in the case of a crisis pregnancy, women and men are in this together.

LifeNews.com Note: Dave Andrusko is the editor of National Right to Life News and an author and editor of several books on abortion topics. He frequently writes Today’s News and Views — an online opinion column on pro-life issues.

The post When it Comes to Abortion, Men Should Have a Voice Too appeared first on LifeNews.com.

It’s not unusual to be lectured that snuffing out the lives of preborn babies is liberating/fulfilling/empowering. But “What I Learned From My Four Abortions” takes aggressive self-deception to a new level.

You would expect nothing less from the Rewire News Group. It specializes in pushing abortion advocacy to the outer limits under the guise of this being a “deeply personal and empowering journey that allowed me to make the best decision for my body and my future on my own terms,” to quote Larada Lee-Wallace, the author of this piece.

Get the latest pro-life news and information on X (Twitter). Follow @LifeNewsHQ

Of course, there is not the slightest inkling in Lee-Wallace’s essay that there could or should be hesitation before she undertook her “abortion journey” which “began early in the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and was punctuated by four pregnancies that I decided to terminate.”

The most fulfilling of all, we learn, was the last: her “self-managed abortion via pills” which “allowed me to make the best decision for my body and my future on my own terms.”

Lee-Wallace’s other three abortions were typically like her second abortion–at an abortion clinic–where

“I received an icy reception from the staff, their demeanor mirroring the sterile environment. Stripped of the comfort of familiar faces due to pandemic restrictions and social distancing measures, I felt loneliness, exacerbated by the impersonal nature of my surroundings.”

Loneliness. Not good. Abandonment—what her four babies experienced—infinitely worse.

You don’t have to be a psychologist to understand that her narcissism blinds her from grasping why she is pregnant in the first place—four times to boot. “My third pregnancy discovery arrived as unexpectedly as the first two.”

“Discovery”? The babies just appeared out of nowhere? Such a willfully cavalier attitude means Lee-Wallace cannot acknowledge cause and effect or accept any responsibility for the deaths of four unborn babies.

Abortion #3 is another off-putting experience for Lee-Wallace.

Lying sedated, the procedure itself unfolded in a blur of sterile surroundings and clinical efficiency. After the procedure, I grappled with a profound sense of dissonance, as the bleak realities of reproductive injustice collided with the rhetoric of choice and autonomy.

But thank heavens, so to speak, for “self-managed” abortions—“DIY” —”that was a stark contrast to my previous experiences.”

Empowered [that magic, all-absolving word] by my work as an abortion advocate and doula, I embraced the autonomy of  managing my own care at home. Supported by my partner and armed with information, I navigated the process confidently, free from the bureaucratic burdens that had marred previous experiences. My partner was by my side as I transformed my office space into a sanctuary of compassionate care.

You knew, even before reading her conclusion, that this “sanctuary of compassionate care” would come equipped with a television that “illuminated the room, casting a soft glow that belied the gravity of the moment while I passed the pregnancy” and be “infused with the aroma of my favorite nag champa incense.”

But the point is simple: “self-managed abortions” skip over—avoid–the cold, impersonal, “sterile” atmosphere of the abortion clinic where there might be just a tiny hint of judgment. Lee-Wallace concludes

As I reflect on these journeys, the safety and effectiveness of self-managed abortion emerges as a beacon of hope amid the mounting legislative restrictions.

But for the four unborn babies she sacrificed on the altar of “dismantling barriers” and “unfettered access” to abortion, it was no “beacon of hope” but a reckoning with brutality, cruelty, and callousness.

LifeNews.com Note: Dave Andrusko is the editor of National Right to Life News and an author and editor of several books on abortion topics. He frequently writes Today’s News and Views — an online opinion column on pro-life issues.

The post Feminist Celebrates Killing Four Babies in Abortions appeared first on LifeNews.com.

That’s a law that blocks mail order abortions that are killing babies, putting women’s health at risk and enabling predators to target women.

Desperate to sell more abortions, Planned Parenthood Great Northwest, Hawai‘i, Alaska, Indiana, and Kentucky, filed the complaint in Anchorage Superior Court. It asks the court for a preliminary injunction to stop enforcement of the law while the case is litigated and for a declaration that the restriction is unconstitutional.

The lawsuit targets Alaska Statute 18.16.010(a)(2), which requires that abortions killing babies be done in a hospital or other facility approved by the Department of Health.

Get the latest pro-life news and information on X (Twitter). Follow @LifeNewsHQ

Planned Parenthood claims this facility requirement violates the privacy rights of Alaskans under the state constitution by forcing customers to travel to abortion centers.

More than 60,000 Alaskans live off the road system and must travel by plane to reach the only two public abortion businesses in the state, located in Anchorage and Fairbanks.

Alaska’s acting Attorney General Cori Mills said the department will defend the law. “We will have to review the complaint and have no comment on the specific allegations,” Mills stated. “As a general matter, the department will defend the law, which carries a presumption of constitutionality and represents state policy validly enacted by the legislature and the governor.”

The case is pending in Alaska state court.

The action comes amid heightened national scrutiny of mail-order abortion pills.

The FDA has launched a safety study of mifepristone, the primary drug used in chemical abortions. The review, expected to take about six months, is examining risks associated with the drug, particularly when distributed remotely without in-person medical oversight.

A recent analysis of commercial insurance claims involving 865,727 mifepristone prescriptions from 2017 to 2023. It found 94,605 women — nearly 11% — suffered serious complications within 45 days, including hemorrhage in 3.31% of cases, emergency room visits in 4.73%, and sepsis in 0.10%.

Peer-reviewed research found three quarters of ER visits within 30 days after abortion drug use were coded as severe or critical. Two separate, independent studies also found more than 1 in 10 women experience at least one severe adverse event. Complications can include hemorrhaging, infection, sepsis, and even death.

Other issues encompassed infections, transfusions, hospitalizations and life-threatening events like cardiac problems or anaphylaxis. In nearly 3% of cases, the drug failed, requiring surgical follow-up. Multiple women have died from the abortion pill.

A large national poll found 7 in 10 voters want to roll back Biden’s mail-order abortion drug rule and reinstate safeguards like in-person doctor visits.

The post Planned Parenthood Sues to Stop Alaska Ban on Mail-Order Abortions appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Murphy landed 3rd place with 24.3% of the vote, Grand Rapid Herald reported Wednesday. He reportedly told ProPublica that he believed his bill will cost him Republican support ahead of the election.

Murphy didn’t respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

Get the latest pro-life news and information on X (Twitter). Follow @LifeNewsHQ

“We are extremely pleased with the results, because Eric Murphy introduced the most pro-abortion bill our state has ever seen,” North Dakota Right for Life Executive Director Bridget Turbide told the DCNF. “Jill Chandler, former Executive Director of Relate Care Clinic, Grand Forks pregnancy center, stepped up to the plate to challenge him in the primary and won! The pro-life movement in ND couldn’t have asked for a better outcome!”

“I served with integrity and political courage. I worked for the betterment of K12 public education and healthcare in NoDak,” Rep. Murphy said in an X post Wednesday morning. “It is tough to say goodbye, but this is a pause. Not done yet.”

Well, it is tough to lose an election, but at this point without some miracle, I have lost. I served with integrity and political courage. I worked for the betterment of K12 public education and healthcare in NoDak. It is tough to say goodbye, but this is a pause. Not done yet.

— Eric J. Murphy (@LoveLipids) June 10, 2026

Abortion is illegal from conception onwards with limited exceptions in North Dakota. Murphy introduced HB 1488 last January, aiming to let women abort their children for any reason during the first 15 weeks of pregnancy. The House shot it down 87-6 the next month.

Murphy read two cases during a hearing about women who died in Texas after not being able to receive treatment after a miscarriage, according to ProPublica. (The Texas abortion ban fully allows medical care for all women in miscarriage situations. The abortion ban was not responsible and the doctors who failed to provide legal care have been disciplined by the state.)

“Physicians felt compelled to follow the law … and both women died so that an inane law could be followed,” Murphy said.

North Dakota’s abortion ban doesn’t classify removing a dead unborn child from the womb as an abortion.

Chandler and research executive Mike Holmes advanced to face the two Democratic nominees for District 43’s seats in November, according to Ballotpedia.

LifeNews Note: Daily Caller reporter Spencer Lombardo is a student at University of Mary Washington This column originally appeared at The Daily Caller.

The post This Republican Just Lost His Primary After Sponsoring Radical Pro-Abortion Bill appeared first on LifeNews.com.