Planned Parenthood in Overland Park

Yeomans is on staff of Planned Parenthood in Overland Park

Last week, the online New York Magazine posted a lengthy piece painting a rosy picture of abortion and a “heroic provider” in Kansas.

The focus of the 2,435-word-long profile, written by Caitlin Moscatello, is 75-year-old abortionist, Ronald Yeomans, now employed by Planned Parenthood Great Plains (PPGP) in the Kansas City suburb of Overland Park, Kansas.

The writer portrays Yeomans as a Baptist-raised, devoted husband and anti-war pacifist who enjoys conversing with seminarians; a man who this particular Saturday morning “could be playing golf right now.” Instead he spends much of his work day brutally dismembering fully-formed unborn children, one by one, and mindfully reassembling each set of body parts onto trays.

Over and over.

With a price tag of up to $2,000 for each “procedure.”

What is the larger point Moscatello is using Yeomans to illustrate? That 100 years after its beginnings, Planned Parenthood operates two of the four abortion clinics in Kansas.

What Moscatello doesn’t tell you is that Yeomans returned to Planned Parenthood employment after he closed the sordid Aid for Women “cash only” abortion clinic in July 2014 due to “falling profits.”

For decades Aid for Women (AFW) was located in one of the poorest inner-city neighborhoods in Kansas City, Kansas. It used a series of abortionists with a documented history of malpractice and disciplinary actions from the state medical board. Those disgraced practitioners include original co-owner abortionists Malcolm Knarr and Sherman Zaremski, as well as later staff abortionists, Kris Neuhaus and Krishna Rajanna.

Under Yeomans’ control, the AFW website expanded its churlish critique of the “Woman’s Right to Know” state health department-provided information. This information is required by law to be accessed by clients 24 hours prior to obtaining any Kansas abortion. It is available both as a handout and online.

Aid for Women clinic

Aid for Women clinic

Yeomans’ AFW website discredited the state health information as authorized by “Republican misogynist (women-hating) bullies.” Yeoman’s website included rants and bizarre statements, for example, that cancer was a living human organism like the unborn child. (Read more here)

You also won’t read in New York Magazine that in June 2011, with Yeomans at the helm, AFW was unable to pass state inspection for a Kansas abortion clinic license. However, because the new licensure law was soon enjoined in state court, AFW’s deficient facilities stayed open for business.

Yeomans challenged the 2011 licensure law in federal court, then dropped his suit and had the gall to have his attorneys file for state reimbursement for their legal fees! (Reimbursement was denied.)

One of Yeomans’ AFW attorneys is married to the radically pro-abortion judge on the Kansas Court of Appeals, G. Gordon Atcheson. The appellate court’s split decision issued in January (read more here) included Atcheson’s 38-page long concurring opinion defending the discovery of a“state right to abortion.” Due in large part to Atcheson, the Kansas 2015 ban on dismemberment abortions is under injunction and not in effect. 

As a result, Yeomans and Planned Parenthood Great Plains’ other abortionist, 74-year-old Orrin Moore, can continue to profit from performing those barbaric dismemberment abortions.  On the PPGP website, the dismemberment abortion method is described as, ” Medical instruments and a suction machine gently empty your uterus.” That’s one whale of an understatement.

Wichita Planned Parenthood

Planned Parenthood in Wichita

Another “service” Yeomans does for profit is to drive six hours roundtrip to Wichita to dispense abortion pills at a hole-in-the-wall PPGP clinic. He shares this new circuit task with Moore, and they alternate weeks.

Yeomans tells New York Magazine that although this circuit is taxing, it shows how he is “needed.” I’d argue he’s needed only in the sense that Planned Parenthood decided in March that they needed their guys to get a cut of the profits that the other Wichita abortion clinic was reaping in abortion pills.

Which leaves as unanswered, the question, “what about the ‘needs’ of women experiencing problems with the powerful abortion drugs they ingested– when Yeomans /Moore are three hours away in Overland Park?”

So, Ron Yeomans, who could (as Moscatello tells readers in the first paragraph) be playing golf like retirees of his age, is still plying the grisly trade of abortion.

The audience that this piece is written for is supposed to be in awe of his dedication.

And to cap it off, the author reveals Yeomans hopes his 16-year-old granddaughter will follow in his footsteps because, “she started her school’s first feminist club, wants to be a doctor [and visits him] at the clinic.”

Well, the rest of us can only pray that Yeoman’s granddaughter will take a different path– perhaps with the influence of America’s pro-life millennial majority.

Auditioners read ECHO scripts

Auditioners read ECHO radio scripts

Movie animators take great care to find just the right voices to “match” their painstakingly-drawn characters. Kansans for Life similarly took great care to cast just the right voice for our new radio spots in which an unborn child “talks” about life in the womb.

This summer, numerous delightful girls and boys, age 6-10, came to our Wichita office to audition to be the voice of “ECHO, an unborn child.” The kids had a good time, although reading and rereading a “script” with emphasis, clarity, and the right lilt in the voice was probably a bit harder than they anticipated.

Our new one-minute radio segments featuring “ECHO, the unborn child” began appearing yesterday across the state on many secular and Christian stations. We are getting many compliments on the approach and pray that thousands of listeners will think about the marvels of an unborn child in a fresh way. Here’s an excerpt:

“Hello, it’s me, “Echo”… your favorite little friend coming to you from inside my mother’s womb. She calls it a “womb,” but it’s more like my room, complete with my very own hot tub. Most of the time in here, I’m just kicking back… literally. I’m trying to outmaneuver the sonogram paparazzi. That’s why I call myself ECHO– Sonograms! Imagine… a bunch of giants trying to get a look at your private parts, just so they’ll know whether to buy pink baby clothes or blue ones…”

The concept of hearing an endearing “voice from the womb” in the middle of your regular radio broadcast is the brainchild of David Gittrich, Kansans for Life State Development Director.


David Gittrich

David became involved in the pro-life movement 36 years ago after his friend dragged him to see the film, “Assignment: Life.” At that time, sonograms were just beginning to be available, and the images were pretty grainy. In the film, the late Dr. Jack Willke describes the baby developing in the womb, shows beautiful pictures of the unborn child and then challenges the audience, “Who would want to kill a baby you can see?”

That line made a lasting impression on David. He has a deep commitment to reminding Kansans that the most precious natural resource that we need to protect is our unborn children. One of his aims in this project is to personalize the child in the womb to the casual radio listener, without any reference to abortion.

Although 4-D ultrasounds are now ubiquitous, the ECHO project allows the radio audience to “see” in a new way—by listening to the baby’s voice– the marvelous developments and abilities of the child in the womb.

This is one more way we can build a society in which abortion is unthinkable.

Read details about the ECHO project here.

Julie Burkhart

Julie Burkhart

Oklahoma– Kansas grieves with you on the sad occasion of last week’s opening of the South Wind Women’s Center in Oklahoma City (SWWC-OC), run by Kansas abortion entrepreneur, Julie Burkhart.

We grieve that more innocent, unborn babies will be brutally destroyed while an exuberant press regurgitates Burkhart’s inane “Trust Women” propaganda, written by their new press agent– a former long-time reporter for the McClatchy-published Wichita Eagle—such as:

  • metro areas without abortion clinics are “underserved communities;”
  • Burkhart’s businesses “provide high-quality health care,” and
  • the public believes her clinic “is going to serve the community well.”

The new clinic will perform abortions up to 21.6 weeks. Burkhart has been predicting for months that it will do “1,500 abortions in the first year, increasing to as many as 3,000 per year after a few years.“

Trust Women Foundation boasted last Monday that it received a $100,000.00 grant from the Unitarian Universalist Congregation at Shelter Rock in New York to open more clinics in “underserved communities.” Notwithstanding, apparently, when residents don’t want them opened.

Oklahoma citizens didn’t want another abortion shop. Pro-life prayer vigils are already being held outside SWWC-OC.

In fact, Oklahomans wanted, and achieved, a state ban on dismemberment abortions, although—as in Kansas– the law is being litigated and not yet in effect.

Thus, tragically, many more hundreds of well-developed, fully-formed babies will soon die in excruciating pain when Burkhart’s practitioners use sharp-toothed metal tools to tear them apart, limb from limb, using the gruesome dismemberment method. dismemberment-brochure-art

And to add insult to the barbaric process, Burkhart charges up to $2,000.00 for each dismemberment abortion.

Burkhart says six practitioners will staff SWWC-OC. One is already notorious–  Colleen McNicholas, a traveling ob/gyn employed by Planned Parenthood in St. Louis, Missouri, as well as by Burkhart in Wichita, Kansas.

A fawning May article in Marie Claire began with this chilling data: “By the end of her eight-hour workday, [McNicholas] will have terminated 31 pregnancies.”

Although likely penned by the author to portray McNicholas positively, that sentence betrays the hardened reality of Burkhart’s business:

each hour, four beautiful unborn children will undeservingly suffer grisly deaths. Each hour, Burkhart will reap thousands of dollars in profit.

That’s not health care at all. Nor is it serving the community.

And that is why we grieve.

pp-bkgd-obamaThe Obama administration is slapping down every state that has acted on the idea that the federal Title X reproductive healthcare program was NOT created to bankroll Planned Parenthood.

A proposed new Health & Human Services(HHS) rule announced last week would nullify state eligibility thresholds (such as Kansas has) that prioritizes Title X grants to full-service medical facilities.

Created in 1970 to help the indigent and uninsured, Title X is federally-dispersed money designed to assist low income-qualifying women for non-abortion reproductive health services, including contraceptives and health screenings. In Kansas, Title X is distributed by the Kansas Department of Health & Environment (KDHE).

It is good stewardship for the state to allocate financial support to full-service public clinics and hospitals to provide the poor with the full range of well-woman care (not just gynecological services, but nutritional, cardio, mental health, etc.) as well as pediatric and geriatric care for women and men.

Beginning in 2007, Kansas legislators did just that. They annually passed the Huelskamp-Kinzer proviso, directing KDHE to prioritize Title X reproductive health care grants to full-service public clinics and hospitals.

Planned Parenthood cannot meet that criteria. It only offers a narrow range of exams and screenings and cannot provide mammograms, chest X-rays, and other essential medical evaluations.

The Huelskamp-Kinzer proviso was repeatedly vetoed by pro-abortion Kansas governors Sebelius and Parkinson until Gov. Sam Brownback’s first year in office, 2011, when it was approved. Planned Parenthood immediately sued.

A district court judge blocked the Huelskamp-Kinzer proviso and forced KDHE to continue to pay Planned Parenthood and another clinic roughly one million dollars during litigation. At the time of the ruling, Dr. Robert Moser, who was KDHE head in 2011, said

 “Title X was not intended to be an entitlement program for Planned Parenthood. Other providers are already offering a fuller spectrum of health care   for Kansas patients. This highly unusual ruling implies a private organization has a right to taxpayer subsidy. The people of Kansas disagree.” 

However, after Planned Parenthood lost its legal appeal in the Tenth Circuit  Court of Appeals, the Huelskamp-Kinzer proviso went into effect in mid-2014. (It was made a permanent law this spring.) The ruling held:

  1. that Planned Parenthood’s claim of a First Amendment violation lacked merit, and
  2. that Kansas could select mainstream, full-service health care providers as preferred grantees.

If the aim of Title X is truly to help the uninsured and indigent get disease screenings and full reproductive health care, Kansas’ priority of one-stop access at local comprehensive-care medical centers is the right model.

The new HHS proposal eliminates state authority. It should be opposed as an unabashed power play to send our tax-funded Title X money to the nation’s largest abortion business.

HHS is open to public input on the proposal through Oct. 7. Sign the KFL petition  to HHS today.


mother-teresa-babyAs the world watches Hillary Clinton clawing for the title of president, urging limitless abortion with full tax-funding, they will also see Mother Teresa being canonized Sunday. The comparison could not be more striking.

Hillary has spent her entire life chasing political power at the expense of the unborn; Mother Teresa gave her entire life in selfless service of the poor and vulnerable. Breitbart news reports:

“As Pope Francis canonizes Mother Teresa, we will also be reminded that the most vulnerable among us are the voiceless unborn children who can be legally eliminated at any moment, whom Mother Teresa fought valiantly to defend and whom Hillary is committed to forgetting.”

22 years ago, Mother Teresa spoke passionately against abortion in her address to 3,000 guests at the Feb. National Prayer Breakfast. Afterwards, the applause and a standing ovation lasted  nearly six minutes, with one conspicuous exception:  at the head table, a few feet away from Mother Teresa, President Bill and Hillary Clinton and Vice-President Al and Tipper Gore, sat in stony silence, neither clapping, nor standing.

Mother Teresa had not pressed for the politically correct call for more government involvement in fighting poverty. She spoke pointedly about the unborn child as truly the poorest of the poor, and deserving of our protection from abortion.

In contrast,

  • One year earlier, Hillary had urged her husband Bill on the very first day of his presidency to sign five executive orders authorizing federal funding for abortion, galvanizing the U.S. government’s sordid partnership with Planned Parenthood.
  • Seven months after the Prayer Breakfast, Hillary sent a virulent pro-abortion delegation to work against Mother Teresa at the Cairo Conference on Population and Development, attempting to coerce the world into accepting abortion as a basic human right.
  • This past January, America’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood, endorsed Hillary for President with an unprecedented $20 million donation.

Mother Teresa’s entire 1994 speech  (transcript here) is inspiring, but here are the most pertinent abortion sentiments:

“I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child, a direct killing of the innocent child, murder by the mother herself. And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?

By abortion, the mother does not learn to love, but kills even her own child to solve her problems. And, by abortion, the father is told that he does not have to take any responsibility at all for the child he has brought into the world. That father is likely to put other women into the same trouble. So abortion just leads to more abortion.

Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want. This is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion.

But what does God say to us? He says: “Even if a mother could forget her child, I will not forget you. I have carved you in the palm of my hand.” We are carved in the palm of His hand; that unborn child has been carved in the hand of God from conception and is called by God to love and to be loved, not only now in this life, but forever. God can never forget us.”

mad scientist warningIn a disturbing but not unpredicted development, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) last Thursday announced its support for expanded tax-funding of experiments in which human genetic material is combined with animals.

NIH will take public comment on the matter until Sept. 4 but—sadly– the agency has never changed directions based on negative public input.

For decades, researchers have engaged in ethically-noncontroversial mixing of human and animal cells such as growing human cancer tumors in mice to study disease processes and evaluate treatment strategies.  Also ethically-noncontroversial are therapies that utilize animal tissue, for example, using a pig’s heart valve for human heart repair, or other use of mammalian tissue in humans.

Stem cell research, however, is fundamentally different. “Pluripotent” stem cells can turn into any cell in the body, and when injected into animal embryos (as the new NIH proposals would allow) scientists don’t know what kind of new species will result. (See KFL post on hybrid creation controversy.)

UC-Davis stem cell researcher Paul Knoepfler, told the New York Times,

we lack an understanding of at what point humanization of an animal brain could lead to more humanlike thought or consciousness.”

David Prentice, board member of the Midwest Stem Cell Therapy Center in Kansas raised concerns about the results of injecting stem cells into animal embryos:

 “[N]ew forms of life—human-animal hybrids—could then be in view, or even the development of an animal with a largely human or fully human brain. NIH’s answer to objections like these seems to be to preclude such animals from breeding (this would likely not be 100 percent effective—just ask anyone who has run an animal facility)…If human-animal chimeras are allowed to be intentionally created for research, the door is also open to reproductive experiments, creating part-human organisms or designer animals to, say, carry out dangerous or degrading tasks human beings do not want to perform. Or donate organs these creations sacrifice for their human betters.”pigmanface

Research into creating animal–human hybrids is ongoing with private funding. Last September, NIH looked around at what was developing there and issued a moratorium on government funding of such projects. But after holding a November 2015 workshop, apparently all questions of acting responsibly have been abandoned and NIH is ready to plunge into this ‘brave new world’ of interspecies experiments.

Bioethics author Wesley J. Smith is not optimistic  about these developments:

“If we had a science sector that believed in the intrinsic dignity of human life, we could explore these potentially beneficent avenues of biotechnology with little concern that scientists would begin to blur vital distinctions or cross crucial ethical lines dividing human beings from fauna. Alas, we don’t live in that milieu and we can’t trust our regulatory bodies–which can be more controlled by the sectors they are supposed to regulate than the other way around–to maintain strict boundaries.”

Beyond the moral quagmire of mixing species, this kind of experimentation would destroy many human embryos. Read our KFL fact sheet about animal-human hybrids (also called chimeras), which includes reasons why pro-lifers should be opposed:

  1. The research on these procedures would destroy many human embryos. No matter what we might learn from watching cells grow in the conditions created by a chimera, the fact remains that researchers would be killing human embryos to get their cells.
  2. If the purposeful creation of human-animal chimeras is allowed for research purposes, it opens the door to abuse of the technique for reproduction, as well as creation of part-human organisms as bizarre designer humans or animals.
  3. It could produce an animal that produces human sperm or eggs.
  4. It could produce an animal with a human brain.

NIH should be halting these ethically-unmoored manipulations of the human-animal boundary. Instead, this agency is moving to sanction them and promote them with our tax dollars.

God help us.

elections matterTurnout in the Kansas primaries was extremely low and the results rested heavily on economic issues, as AP writer John Hanna reported:

“The voting occurred against the backdrop not only of the state’s fiscal woes but ongoing legal and political disputes over funding for public schools. Kansas has struggled to balance its budget since the GOP-dominated Legislature slashed personal income taxes in 2012 and 2013 at Brownback’s urging to stimulate the economy.”

U.S. Senator Jerry Moran won his primary with 79% support, and Congressman Kevin Yoder won his 3rd District primary with 64%. Both have a 100% pro-life voting record.

Huelskamp loss for pro-lifers

KFL mourns Huelskamp primary  loss

However, embattled conservative and pro-life champion, Congressman Tim Huelskamp, lost in a fierce primary that saw multi-million dollars’ worth of ads from non-Kansas special interest groups. Challenger Roger Marshall, an Ob-Gyn doctor who describes himself as pro-life, won the GOP 1st district spot with 57% of the vote.

At the statehouse, KFL-endorsed candidates stacked up 18 wins in the House and 6 in the Senate, with 17 losses in the House and 10 in the Senate. However– and notably–in some races, the winners who had not earned KFL endorsement have stated they are pro-life.

Ten reliable pro-life reps won their primaries yesterday along with eight KFL-endorsed challengers. A key issue for KFL endorsement has been the candidate’s willingness to allow the public a vote to improve judicial selection for the state Supreme Court. Otherwise, Kansas’ pro-life laws are jeopardized by rulings from extremist judges selected without public accountability.judicial selection

Pro-lifers were dismayed to learn of the defeat of eight great state representatives: Rob Bruchman, Will Carpenter, Brett Hildabrand, Jerry Lunn, Kasha Kelley, Charles Macheers, Craig McPherson, and Connie O’Brien. Three of those races had the narrowest of margins and may be recounted.

KFL-endorsed primary challengers lost in House districts 21, 45, 52, 60, 64, 68, 89, 104 and 115.

Headed into November Senate elections are pro-life incumbents Don Kerchen, Ty Masterson, and Mike Peterson along with KFL-endorsed former state reps Bud Estes and Gene Sullentrop.

Five great pro-life state Senators retired in May: Senators Steve Abrams, Les Donovan, Mitch Holmes, Jeff King and Michael O’Donnell. Primary results indicate voters in four districts (15, 25, 27 and 32), will have pro-life candidates to replace them, but not so in district 33.

Six solidly pro-life incumbent state senators disappointingly lost their primaries yesterday: Tom Arpke, Terry Bruce, Forrest Knox, Jeff Melcher, Larry Powell and Greg Smith. Four districts will be left without pro-life representation:  districts 11, 14, 21, and 24.

Dismemberment schmidt postcard, editTwo of the 6 winning Senate challengers had told the public they were pro-life. In district 34, Ed Berger was the victor. In the campaign, Berger claimed he was pro-life because he was Catholic, but refused to fill out the KFL survey. In district 39, challenger John Doll, a former Democrat who lost a statewide office race before winning a seat as a GOP state rep, has a mixed voting record on the life issues.

In a very bitter result for pro-lifers, a GOP Topeka district remains in the hands of the sole GOP Senator to vote against a ban on dismemberment abortions, Sen. Vicki Schmidt. The bill was signed into law in 2015, but awaits the review of the state Supreme Court—which appears to be delaying their ruling until after the November elections in which 5 of the 7 justices are up for retention.