Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Mary Kay Culp’

"third world" conditions of inner-city abortion clinic

“sterilization room” of now-closed Kansas City abortion clinic

By a vote of 5-3 today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a  ruling protecting abortion profits above state health protocols.  Struck down are two provisions of HB2, a Texas law requiring abortion clinics to meet the same safety standards as ambulatory surgical centers and requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital in case of medical emergencies.

Similar provisions are part of a larger pro-life bill under injunction in Kansas.

This ruling was not unexpected because the majority of the nation’s highest Court supports abortion and will go to any lengths to preserve it—even self-contradiction. The Court both affirmed and then undermined this holding (from Roe): “the State has a legitimate interest in seeing to it that abortion . . . is performed under circumstances that insure maximum safety for the patient.”

In its pretzel logic the Court now dictates that state regulation must be subject to interpretation of how it might present an “obstacle” to abortion. The same standards any state uses to insure safe medical facilities —under today’s rulings—cannot routinely apply to surgical abortion facilities.

This is ridiculous.

Even disgusting, filthy hole-in the-wall clinics that won’t upgrade their facilities are now –in the Court’s eyes—protected by a veritable “necessity” exemption. Yet the existence of at least two such clinics in Kansas City were a main impetus for the Kansas abortion clinic licensure law passed in 2011.

That Kansas law was ten years in the making, including testimony of patient abuse, abortion malpractice and “third-world” caliber clinics. (read more)

Today’s ruling now guarantees more judges at every level will be involved in scrutinizing duly-passed pro-life laws to decipher whether they will pass muster with the U.S. Supreme Court’s subjective notion of what constitutes an “obstacle” to abortion.

Statement from KFL Executive Director, Mary Kay Culp:

“No one should applaud today’s decision. It shows in the starkest terms the so-called ‘safe and legal’ fantasy for what it always has been: a cover for abortion at all costs. Today’s decision is a real tragedy for mothers and as always, for their unborn children–something most women realize eventually.”

Read Full Post »

2015 Rally for Life 2015 Rally for Life urges ban on dismemberment abortion bans

Last April, Kansas became the first state to pass legislation barring the barbaric dismemberment method abortions. Now, under challenge  by pro-abortionists, that first-of-its-kind law, which is on hold, is about to be reviewed by the Kansas Supreme Court.

This ban prohibits the gruesome abortion method of tearing apart fully-formed, living babies– limb by limb– until they bleed to death.

The Unborn Child Protection from Dismemberment Abortion Act, model legislation drafted by the National Right to Life Committee, has since been enacted by Oklahoma, West Virginia, and (soon) Mississippi. This vital legislation has also been introduced in Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Idaho, Nebraska, Missouri, Louisiana, Rhode Island, and Utah.

Thus the impact of the ruling by our Supreme Court will extend beyond our state borders.

The premise of the Unborn Child Protection from Dismemberment Abortion Act comes from the U.S. Supreme Court Gonzales ruling. In that 2007 decision, the justices upheld a ban on partial-birth abortions by acknowledging that,

“the State may use its regulatory power to bar certain procedures and substitute others, all in furtherance of its legitimate interests in regulating the medical profession in order to promote respect for life, including life of the unborn.”

Abortion supporters have thus sought to find and secure in state constitutions a broader and more unassailable “right” to abortion.

pro-abortion judgesThat’s what happened in Kansas last June, when Shawnee District Court Judge Larry Hendricks blocked the ban on dismemberment abortions from going into effect.  Hendricks adopted abortion attorney arguments–literally–asserting that the Kansas state Constitution protects abortion even more fundamentally than the standard established by the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

The temporary injunction was obtained by the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights on behalf of Kansas’ father-daughter abortionists at the Center for Women’s Health in suburban Kansas City.

The injunction allows three Kansas abortion businesses to continue to perform these grisly procedures — 629 last year–at a cost of up to $2,000 each.

That activist ruling by Judge Hendricks was left standing when the full Kansas Court of Appeals reviewed it and announced on January 22 that they were divided, 7-7.

However, pro-life Attorney General Derek Schmidt appealed the appellate decision to the state’s highest court. Schmidt argued that the appellate ruling does not make precedent and current abortion lawsuits remain in limbo without clear guidance. Yesterday, it was announced the appeal will be heard. (documents here) Here are the three questions that the state of Kansas has posed for the state Supreme Court to rule on:

  1. Does the Kansas Constitution create a right to abortion?
  2. If that right exists, does it clearly prevent government from regulating dismemberment abortions?
  3. Did the Court of Appeals wrongly accept the lower court’s facts and legal standard?

Our state Constitution was enacted in 1859, when abortion was illegal in Kansas and across the nation. Yet one radical judge of the Kansas Court of Appeals, G. Gordon Atcheson (writing to concur with the injunction against the dismemberment abortion ban) believes that the state Constitution is an “evolving” document with an “ever more enlightened understanding of humanity” and women’s “self-determination.”

Mary Kay Culp, KFL executive director commented, “The challenge we face is whether a majority of the Kansas Supreme Court will follow the U.S. Supreme Court’s holding that allows states to ban barbaric abortion methods, or whether it will follow Appellate Judge Atcheson’s opinion that the dismembering of unborn children comports with an ‘enlightened understanding of humanity’.”

Read Full Post »

Gov. Brownback flanked by KFL's Mary Kay Culp and Archbishop Naumann

Gov. Sam Brownback, flanked by KFL’s Exec. Director, Mary Kay Culp, and KCK Archbishop Joseph Naumann

Neither the D.C. blizzard nor the legal disapproval of half of the Kansas state Court of Appeals stopped the Pro-life Religious Council from giving their award to Gov. Sam Brownback Friday for Kansas’ historic passage of The Unborn Child Protection from Dismemberment Abortion Act.

The result of a rare 7-7 tie decision Friday by the Kansas Court of Appeals is that the appalling opinion of Shawnee District Judge Larry Hendricks’ is upheld–for now. Judge Hendricks ruled that barbaric dismemberment abortions cannot be outlawed because the 1859 Kansas Constitution contains a right to abortion.

The dismemberment ban is not voided, but it remains enjoined from going into effect while litigation continues. The ban will be vigorously defended by the legal team of Attorney General Derek Schmidt.

"shower curtain"sign by Kansas pro-life activist, Vonda Wiedmeyer

“shower curtain” sign held up in the audience by Kansas pro-life activist, Vonda Wiedmer

In his acceptance remarks, Gov. Brownback urged that Kansas’ strong bipartisan passage of this dismemberment ban be repeated across the nation and at the nation’s Capitol.

Fr. Frank Pavone, who hosted the award ceremony, observed that the Appeals Court ruling shows that, “the battle for the unborn child’s civil rights will go back and forth for now. We know, however, that the truth of that child’s humanity will ultimately triumph over the lies of the abortion industry.”

Among attendees at the PRC presentation were Mary Kay Culp, Executive Director of Kansans for Life, and Archbishop Joseph Naumann, head of the Catholic Archdiocese of Kansas City in Kansas. The Kansas Catholic conference had testified in support of the ban:

“The fact that this legislation is even necessary is an indictment of our society and even the very notion of human progress…[when] we in the here and now allow our children to be torn apart, piece by piece, limb by limb.”

Read Full Post »

SB 95 ceremonial signing in Lenexa

SB 95 ceremonial signing in Lenexa includes pro-life legislators

A special event is happening in Kansas for the first time today, as Gov. Sam Brownback travels to four cities for ceremonial signings of SB 95, the Unborn Child Protection from Dismemberment Abortion Act

The model language for the Act was provided by Kansans for Life, from the National Right to Life Committee. It prohibits the barbaric abortion method of dismembering living unborn children and has been enacted in both Kansas and Oklahoma.

SB 95 was technically signed into law April 7, but this dismemberment ban has such significance to advancing the pro-life cause that Gov. Brownback deemed it important enough to mark its signing with a wide public audience.

The governor is traveling with the bill’s lead sponsor, Sen. Garrett Love (R-Montezuma) and the bill’s carrier in the House, Rep. Steve Brunk (R-Wichita) to school locations in the four quadrants of the state: Lenexa, Pittsburg, Wichita and Hays. Rep. Brunk was lead sponsor of Kansas’ Unborn Victims of Violence Act in 2007 and Sen. Love was a lead carrier of Kansas’ Pain-capable Unborn Child Protection Act in 2011.

The signing events kicked off at 9 a.m. in northeast Kansas at the Holy Trinity Catholic Church and elementary school. Archbishop Joseph Naumann, Catholic Conference Director Michael Schuttloffel, and representatives of Benedictine College, were among the special guests. Also in attendance were numerous legislators, including Rep. John Rubin (R-Shawnee) who assisted in the defense of the bill during floor debate.

Gov. Brownback commended the “outstanding long-term work of Kansans for Life” and for “bringing this measure to ban a horrific abortion procedure.” He told the audience that when the American public learned about partial-birth abortion, they strongly wanted it banned and the Supreme Court said it could be done. “The people of Kansas don’t support dismembering unborn children.”

Archbishop Naumann, who has been involved in pro-life advocacy for many decades, said, “We look forward to many lives being saved by this law; it is an answer to many peoples’ prayers. It will educate and awaken people to the horror that is abortion, which is the civil rights issue of our times.”

Mary Kay Culp, executive director of Kansans for Life, offered some remarks to the the crowd, which included 7th & 8th grade students.

“The signing of this pro-life law shows Kansas’ deep commitment to protecting innocent life and setting an example for the nation.

Often a formal signing ceremony is done in the Capitol and is witnessed by those most affected by the change in law. In the case of SB 95, those who are most affected, the unborn, cannot be here today. So we stand in solidarity with those unborn children by standing here for them today.

Kansas is a great place in which to be born and to live. We are a state where our top universities are working on unlocking the keys to treating disease by using our own cells, called stem cells. We are a state with specialty care for unborn children with serious health problems. We are a state where every community has a place to help struggling mothers-to-be get the immediate and long-term help they need to become a great parent.

Let us applaud all our pro-life lawmakers and our pro-life governor for achieving this law and pray that Kansas will continue to work to show respect for life.

Pro-lifers in southeast Kansas will be gathering at 11:00 at the St. Mary Colgan high school, and pro-lifers from south central and western Kansas can attend the 1:30 signing at Bishop Carroll High School. Update: Bishop Carl Kemme also spoke at the Wichita gathering,

Lt. Gov. Jeff Colyer, who is a physician and testified in support of SB 95, will join the final signing event at 3:30 at his alma mater, St. Thomas More Prep- Marian school in Hays.

Read Full Post »

KFL exec.Director Mary Kay Culp celebrates with Se.Roberts Tues. night

KFL Exec. Director Mary Kay Culp congratulated Sen.Roberts Tues. night

All eyes turned to “reliably red” Kansas in October for reasons no pro-lifer wanted. Polls indicated the campaigns of both our pro-life U.S. Senator Pat Roberts and our pro-life Governor Sam Brownback were surprisingly struggling.

Already active, pro-lifers brought their far-flung efforts to a whole new level, determined to turn that around. Last night those immense efforts paid off. First, a quick summary.

  • Expected to either lose or win by a hair, pro-life stalwart Roberts, in fact, pulled off a sweet and convincing 53%-43% victory over pro-abortion “independent” challenger Greg Orman. Roberts’ re-election was crucial to taking control of the United States Senate out of the hands of pro-abortion Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.)
  • Pro-life leader Brownback also surged to a win by a margin of 50%-46% over pro-abortion Democrat State Rep. Paul Davis. The message was clear: Kansans want their administrative branch to stay pro-life.

KFL Executive Director, Mary Kay Culp, gave this commentary:”We worked as hard as we did because we knew that life issues in Kansas mean more to voters than any D.C. pundit understood, or poll took into account, which certainly proved true on election night!”

SENATE RACE
Kansas pro-lifers were alarmed in early summer at the upstart campaign of Senate challenger Greg Orman– a 45-year-old millionaire businessman without any record of public service and who had never held elected office. Millions of dollars in TV ads were introducing him as the solution to the ‘overriding problem of government gridlock.’ Even a few conservatives were showing some interest in Orman, despite his bizarre claim that he was unsure which party he would caucus with if he won.

But pro-lifers knew differently. They knew that Reid would not allow any pro-life measures passed in the House of Representatives to come to a vote, including the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. Pro-lifers also were well aware of the anti-life provisions of ObamaCare that were protected by Reid. Even more troubling, Orman had no voting record to contrast with the 100% pro-life record of Sen. Roberts.

KFL-PAC member Carol Dengel andPac co-director, Tim Hand celebrated pro-life wins in Topeka

KFL-PAC member, Carol Dengel, and KFL-PAC co-chair, Tim Hand, celebrated pro-life wins in Topeka Tues. night

Kansans for Life’s PAC went into high gear with phone calls, radio spots and other initiatives. We produced and distributed well over one million educational pieces, which is four times the number we have done in the past.

Orman largely hid from the press and kept to the strict script ‘that he had tried both political parties and found both deficient’. His history undermined that claim (as did Vice President Joe Biden at the last minute).

Although Orman had briefly registered as a Republican, he had long been a Democrat, and over 90% of his past and very sizable campaign donations had gone to pro-abortion Democrats. Even Kansas Democrats believed Orman would caucus with Democrats–as shown when they coaxed their own Senate candidate, Chad Taylor, off the ballot on Sept. 3rd so that the field was cleared for Orman.

On Election Day, however, Orman’s pretense at independence was shattered when Vice President Biden, speaking on a radio program, said Democrats “have a chance of picking up an independent who will be with us in the state of Kansas.”

Sen. Roberts has always been endorsed by Kansans for Life and the National Right to Life Committee, and has been a lead supporter of important pro-life bills. Orman described himself as ‘pro-choice’ in an October 15 debate with Sen. Roberts and dismissed pro-life concerns as something to “get past.”

Sen. Roberts quickly rebutted Orman’s position as “unconscionable” and publicly promised “never to stop fighting for life.” Orman continued to act as if pro-life issues were unimportant. For example, he never honored his October 9 pledge to several national media outlets to read and comment on two pro-life bills awaiting passage in the U.S. Senate and supported by Sen. Roberts.

But on Tuesday, Kansans reaffirmed that pro-life issues are important, and re-elected U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts by over a 90,000 vote margin. We so appreciate the help of the NRLC-PAC in producing radio and print materials for this race.

GOVERNOR’S RACE
After years of battling an administration that supported abortion and was pushing destructive embryonic research, Kansas pro-lifers were thrilled to turn that around with the election of Sam Brownback as governor in 2010. During his first term, he signed thirteen pro-life measures, including nationally-important bills championed by NRLC.

Gov. Brownback with Mary Kay Culp

Gov. Brownback with KFL’s Mary Kay Culp Tues. night

The contrast could not have been more clear. Challenger Davis was part of the cadre of anti-life legislators fighting every one of those bills. In fact, during his tenure in the House from 2003-2014, Davis voted 80 times against pro-life bills!

It may not be well known that Kansas has long had three political players: pro-life GOPers, a dwindling number of pro-abortion GOPers, and Democrats, who are now 95% pro-abortion. Bitter, pro-abortion GOP legislators who had fought the Brownback initiatives and lost their elections in 2012 added their support for Davis.

Going into the elections, the race was too close to call and early returns showing a slight lead for Davis had pro-lifers holding their breath. Those returns reflected that:

  • counties from Kansas’ eastern edge bordering Missouri (which came in early) traditionally lean Democrat, and
  • the bitter pro-abortion GOP wing seemed to be voting a straight GOP ticket except for Brownback and, to a lesser extent, Roberts.

But, as returns continued, Gov. Brownback finished ahead of Davis by about 33,000 votes. Another 33,000 votes went to a third party independent candidate, Keen Umbehr.

What you won’t see highlighted is that Brownback prevailed even in liberal-leaning Johnson County, the home of two abortion clinics, and serviced by the Kansas City Star, whose editorial board supports abortion and never overlooks a chance to slam Brownback.

We congratulate our many pro-life volunteers who helped insure another four years under Gov. Brownback! Social media has certainly impacted election politics, but in Kansas, the tried and true pro-life ground game was richly rewarded yesterday.

Read Full Post »

Maddow weighs in on clinic closing

Maddow weighed in on abortion clinic closing

Reporters are still contacting Kansans for Life to ask what we think is the real reason the Aid for Women clinic closed abruptly last Saturday.

Our executive director, Mary Kay Culp, responded,

“It’s hard to know for sure why the clinic closed, but if it’s as we suspect– that women are better informed and more protected from clinic exploitation due to new state laws–clinic owners and operators would be the last to admit it.” 

Culp is referencing the state of Kansas-provided “Woman’s Right to Know” information.

Aid for Women so hated having to post the statement

 “The abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being”

on their website’s consent form, that they added this ‘commentary’:

This [statement] is untruthful because the fetus is quite dependent upon, not separate from, the maternal placental oxygen and nutrient acquisition and kidney’s waste disposal. The word “whole” implies “complete” but the fetus is not truly completed until birth. Also, cancer is unique, human and living, yet not deserving of life.

In response to such abortion clinic “factoids,” the state of Kansas enacted a law, effective July 2013 (tweaked slightly in May 2014), that requires each Kansas abortion business to post this on its homepage:

“The Kansas Department of Health and Environment maintains a website containing information about the development of the unborn child, as well as video of sonogram images of the unborn child at various stages of development, the Kansas Department of Health and Environment`s website can be reached by clicking here.”

Isn’t it instructive that not just the abortion clinic but other abortion proponents are reduced to hysterically bad-mouthing scientifically accurate information?

When women go to an abortion clinic’s website, they should be able to see the truth about their unborn baby before they commit to further action.

It is a fair inference, is it not, that equipped with accurate information, fewer women would chose abortion?

On Monday’s show, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow recycled some of Aid for Women’s criticism. For example, Maddow said

“[T]he state of Kansas newly requires all abortion clinics to post this about the state’s official ‘talk you out of an abortion’ website…. And the clinic has made clear as day in context that they think that is hooey… that you shouldn’t believe, but they made us put it out.”

To emphasize the “burden” on the abortion clinic of having to provide an informational link, Maddow shows how Aid for Women added an ‘introduction’ to the mandated link on their homepage (archived here):

“We’re being forced by Republicans to use our website resources to say untruthful things about the state’s pro-life website in hopes you will visit their website and change your mind away from having an abortion. We must have this signage or go to jail. Republicans also don’t believe that rape causes pregnancy, nor that there can ever be too many children. They are stupid. Let’s vote them out of office. However, here goes.”

Maddow is obviously highly sympathetic to the Aid for Women business, quoting the clinic manager as revealing that they had struggled for eight years to find a replacement for the aging abortionist.

In addition, Maddow voices the clinic manager’s complaint of “ingratitude.” Maddow said,

“He told us, ‘We cannot seem to get some of these Gen Xers to take it seriously and vote. Why am I the only one fighting this?…The generation of patients whom we have helped need to step up and carry the torch instead of assuming clinic workers will always fight their battle.’ ”

So what do we learn from Maddow? That the poor abortion clinics are burdened by providing informational weblinks to pregnant women, when the unborn child is just like cancer, right?

Now that is hooey!

Read Full Post »

baby money (2)Yesterday’s national abortion story was the periodic report/complaint about the high legal expenses the state of Kansas has incurred in defending the constitutionality of four pro-life laws.  Under the title, “Kansas Abortion Lawsuits Cost $913K,” AP’s John Hanna writes, “Kansas has paid more than $913,000 to two private law firms that are helping the state defend anti-abortion laws enacted since conservative Republican Gov. Sam Brownback took office, and such expenses appear likely to grow.”

The reality is, that after the U.S. Supreme Court Roe decision legalized abortion, every state law trying to regulate abortion– no matter how carefully crafted– is subject to court challenges.  Of our seven recent pro-life laws, four have been sued. We expect to prevail, but court action moves slowly, sometimes at a snail’s pace.

Lengthy, and even patently ludicrous, legal arguments that our opponents propose in litigation must be answered.

The first recent Kansas pro-life law that went to court was our 2011 law ending coverage for elective abortion as part of standard private health insurance. This was a law that had already been on the books in other states for decades, yet the ACLU and Kansas N.O.W. insisted on filing a challenge. We WON, but with a legal defense cost of $149,000.

Defense expenses Kansas has paid to two outside law firms for three other ongoing pro-life cases include:

  1. $126,000 for two challenges to the 2013 Pro-Life Protections Act;
  2. $386,000 for the Title X budget case with an initial ruling favoring Planned Parenthood, and now under appeal;
  3. $252,000 for defense of the 2011 law establishing minimum abortion clinic safety and sanitary regulations, including a ban on webcam abortions.

Kansas’ 2013 comprehensive Pro-Life Protections Act is in the initial stages of two suits, one brought in federal court by Planned Parenthood and the other in state court by the Center for Women’s Health. Both clinics have so far only gained a temporary block on two minuscule provisions, instead of stopping the entire law. Our state defense attorneys have had to rebut a multitude of claims, including:

  • misrepresentations about how the law was passed,
  • ridiculous assertions about abortion–related topics,
  • opposition to a states’ rights position the U.S. Supreme Court approved 25 years ago, and
  • complaints about informed consent provisions that clinics have already complied with for years!

The Title X case should have been the national abortion story …how Planned Parenthood is propping up two of its financially failing clinics with approximately $400,000 in tax money that it is not properly eligible for!

Explanation?  Planned Parenthood sued the 2011 Kansas budget provision that requires Title X federal family planning money go to full service health facilities that best serve the indigent. District court Judge Thomas Marten ruled in Planned Parenthood’s favor, and –without proper authority– ordered funding of Title X money for their “feeder”clinics in Hays and Wichita that were losing  nearly one quarter million dollars annually.

And while Kansas has waited over a year for an overturning of that ruling from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, we are compelled to keep sending non-recoverable money to Planned Parenthood while also keeping lawyers busy battling this ruling.  It is a steep price, but the end result is important for Kansas’ state sovereignty as well as for other states with similar laws.

Then there’s the lawsuit fighting our 2011 clinic regulation bill which, outside the webcam ban, largely imitates the South Carolina version that the U.S. Supreme Court let stand twenty years ago.  The case is creeping along in state court.

That fact that our pro-life Attorney General, Derek Schmidt, pays for the assistance of two private law firms does not “offend good financial stewardship” as complained by Planned Parenthood’s CEO, Peter Brownlie.  Mary Kay Culp, executive director of Kansans for Life observes that, for our opponents to complain about the cost expended on lawsuits they filed, is ridiculous!

It is appreciated that our AG sought highly qualified defense firms.  State AG offices aren’t generally populated by attorneys with abortion expertise—and as our readers know—the rules for abortion seem to be different than for every other field.

States that pass pro-life laws only to have their AG undermine the defense of such laws are truly in a bind. Thankfully, Kansas is not now in that spot, as we were when former Gov. Kathleen Sebelius’ hand-picked, pro-abortion Attorney General Steve Six failed to properly prosecute George Tiller for violating late-term abortion statutes.

When it comes to passing life-protective laws, logic and public support cannot protect them from costly litigation, but the price is worth paying.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 59 other followers