How would you feel if your daughter’s or sister’s boyfriend got her pregnant and then tricked her into taking an abortion-inducing pill?  You should take the question seriously, because this is exactly what happened recently to a young woman in Tampa, Florida.  The boyfriend responsible for forcing the miscarriage of his own child is now being charged with murder.

Make no mistake, though.  Unless we all take stand against this sort of behavior — starting with young men like myself — this type of sad story is likely to repeat itself with growing frequency across America as the administration, liberal courts, and special interest groups (all of whom purportedly support “women’s reproductive health”) pursue their commitment to make contraceptives and abortion drugs more widely available to women at an increasingly young age.  The recent ruling by federal judge Edward R. Korman — ordering the availability of the powerful “emergency contraceptive” pill known as Plan B to women of all ages — will enable situations like this to occur again far too easily.  Specifically, it reduces barriers for so-called boyfriends to simply walk into a pharmacy and acquire powerful, abortion-inducing drugs to use on their girlfriends, no questions asked.

Pimps and rapists have, for many years, abused the over-abundance of contraceptives — thanks in part to groups like Planned Parenthood — to prevent the pregnancies of their prostitutes.  Consequently, pimps can keep even their youngest victims “in business” without inconvenient questions being asked.  Making powerful and potentially dangerous drugs like Plan B even more widely available will only exacerbate the problem.  As CWA’s Dr. Janice Crouse writes:

Judge Korman is a sex abuser’s dream and a victim’s nightmare. Essentially, he creates a brand new avenue for pimps, sex traffickers, and sex predators hoping to hide the evidence of their exploitation. We are removing doctors’ examinations, one of the vital tools used to detect sexual abuse. Now, a young girl afraid she might be pregnant at the hands of her abuser will not have the opportunity to see a doctor who could offer help and protection. Instead, her abuser will feed her Plan B like it is candy. In Thailand, where the morning-after pill has been freely available since 1988, men are the largest purchasers. What is wrong with this picture? It is no secret why Thailand is considered the world’s hot spot for sex trafficking of minors.

As a young guy, I would hate to see a family member or friend coerced, manipulated, or misused, and I suspect you probably feel the same way. Twenty-something guys who oppose victimizing women need to take back the sex culture and remind both society and our leaders that it is unacceptable to treat the ladies we care about like prostitutes.  We must stand up to keep them from becoming victims of the ever-growing sex industry, enablers like Planned Parenthood, and abusive boyfriends.

However much we’d like to deny it, the truth is that young men in my age bracket have far too easy of a time acquiring the tools they need to commit atrocities like the forced miscarriage of an innocent child in Tampa.  Thanks to the efforts of liberal “reproductive health” advocates, you and I need not only keep an eye out for the traffickers, pimps, and rapists — the deceptive boyfriend has now acquired the tools to victimize your daughter, little sister, or friend in the same way, to turn her into his own personal plaything.

But unborn children need you more.

I thought it would be a lazy Tuesday morning; I thought everything would go smoothly.  But then, “You’ve got Mail!”  And, well, I’ll let you read it for yourself:

“There won’t be as many babies killed this year, but the slaughter is still moving forward.  We have made big strides, but our work isn’t finished yet! … 2013 must be the last year that the … slaughter takes place — and with your help, we can save … lives.  Please donate now — help us stop the senseless slaughter. … Unless something changes, without more help from … defenders like you, this horror will occur again.  Please donate today so that we can ramp up our campaign to stop the slaughter.  This massacre is a terrible price to pay. …”

Despite what you may think, this isn’t from any of the pro-life groups with which you’re familiar.  However, it is a pro-life message … for baby seals.

Don’t get me wrong; I love the adorable baby seals just as much as anyone else, but the Left’s obsession with saving anything but human babies is beginning to wear my patience thin.  I’m tired of hearing the women of my generation being urged to give up their world in order to “save the earth” — “courageously” killing our future in the name of “freedom of choice.”  I’m also tired of hearing about women like 29-year-old Jennifer Morbelli walking into abortion clinics and dying days later from “complications” after having their late-term children ripped from their wombs.

Over 4,000 children are aborted each day in America — over 4,000 children crying, screaming — no, shrieking in horror — for a chance at the same life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that the Left has twisted into a license to kill.  Over 4,000 children a day.  Is this not a “senseless slaughter”?  Is this, too, not a “massacre” in the truest sense of the word?

Groups like PETA bemoan the slaughter of baby seals and condemn the women who wear the furs.  But Left-leaning groups support the slaughter of innocent human children and ignore the women who are forced to wear their decision to abort on their hearts and consciences for the rest of their lives.

Where, oh liberal Left, is your compassion?

This hypocrisy — this cultural insanity — is what first drove me to work with groups like Concerned Women for America (CWA), which was founded after Beverly LaHaye heard NOW’s founder, Betty Friedan, claim to speak for the women of America.

Like me, Beverly knew this Leftist woman didn’t represent her beliefs or those of the vast majority of women.  And they still don’t.  NOW … NARAL … Planned Parenthood and the rest. … They don’t speak for me.  They don’t think for me.

And they shouldn’t speak or think for you.

It’s time to rise up, ladies.  It’s time to stand and take the microphone back from loudmouthed, liberal feminists who hate children.

It’s time to stand with Concerned Women for America.

Seal the deal.  Donate here.  But for pity’s sake, don’t just throw money at the problem.  Get involved in a state chapter of CWA or, if you’re in college, check out Young Women for America.  But whatever you do, do it today.  Because, “unless something changes,” the horror of abortion will occur again … and again … and again.

Today’s guest blogger is Christian Shelby, a volunteer with Concerned Women for America.

Warning: Pro-life advocates, or anyone who possess an ounce of compassion, will find the content of this blog post difficult to stomach.

It’s horrifying enough to have innocent children aborted inside their mother’s womb. But now we’ve learned United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS) hospitals have employed a post-birth abortion procedure called “death pathways” to dispose of sick, disabled, and simply unwanted newborn babies, as well as elderly patients, according to The UK Daily Mail.

To spare you the gruesome details, I will simply tell you that a newborn whose parents choose to place their child on a “death pathway” is essentially starved and dehydrated to death, either in neonatal units, a hospice center, or a family home. The starvation process typically lasts ten days before the child dies.

An anonymous U.K. doctor, who felt remorse after supervising over ten newborn deaths, blew the whistle on “death pathway’ procedures in the British Medical Journal, writing:

“Like other parents in this predicament, they are now plagued with a terrible type of wishful thinking that they could never have imagined. They wish for their child to die quickly once the feeding and fluids are stopped.

“They [parents] wish for their child to die quickly once the feeding and fluids are stopped. They wish for pneumonia. They wish for no suffering. They wish for no visible changes to their precious baby.”

“I know, as they cannot, the unique horror of witnessing a child become smaller and shrunken, as the only route out of a life that has become excruciating to the patient or to the parents who love their baby.”

U.K. Ministers have dubbed death pathways “controversial” and are launching an investigation. But we know there is nothing controversial about this homicidal scheme. “Death pathway” is another term for “infanticide” or “euthanasia.”  Folks, nationalized health care and government-sanctioned abortion have a ghastly dark side.  While Americans choose to ignore it, we are watching it play out in Great Britain.  And the bitter irony of a world that celebrates Kate Middleton’s pregnancy while quietly allowing the brutal, barbaric starvation and dehydration of children is not lost on those of us who fight daily against such atrocities.

In the United States, on January 25, 2013, Americans will gather in our nation’s capital to commemorate the 40^th anniversary of Roe v. Wade.  Forty years of innocent bloodshed — nearly 55 million lives — is 40 years too many.

Protect innocent life. Join with Concerned Women for America (CWA) this January to remember Roe and recommit to life.

Hey baby, you’re cool.  You’re hip.  And you’ve come a long way.  You deserve … a Grande.  At least, that’s what Starbucks would have us believe.  The liberal little coffee roasters have introduced their “Geisha” blend, and at seven bucks a cup, it is the thing to have in your hand as we hit the gas and drive straight for the fiscal cliff like Thelma and Louise.

Seriously, I can’t imagine why, during an economic downturn of epic proportions, Starbucks would float a new coffee blend that you had to pay for with your firstborn child.  My taste buds are just as discriminating as the next customer’s, although Starbucks pointedly avoids using that term.  We mustn’t discriminate.  That’s bad, bad, bad … and so very old, white, and Republican.  No, Starbucks has “loyal reserve customers who are interested in any opportunity to try something as rare and exquisite as the Geisha varietal.”  Well lull me into submission; that was so slick I almost reached for my credit card.

But I can’t.  Not at seven-dollars per Grande.  Nope.  Something must be done about this.  So let’s put on our thinking caps.  (Cue the Jeopardy music.)

A-ha!  I have it!  We’ll get it written into ObamaCare!  Don’t laugh yet.  If we can squeeze an HHS Mandate for birth control out of ObamaCare, why can’t we get one for coffee?  And now that the elections are over, we might even be able to get Sandra Fluke as our poster girl!

Follow the logic.  As a cash-strapped law student, Sandra Fluke already can’t afford Walmart’s nine-dollar-per-month contraception prices.  Hence the HHS Mandate.  Well, if she can’t afford nine dollars for birth control, then she certainly can’t afford seven dollars for a cup of coffee.

And let’s be frank, as a law student, she needs coffee more than she needs birth control.  Copious amounts of java are needed to keep a law student awake all night cramming for those finals.  If Fluke can’t get her coffee, she can’t score well on her exams.  And would you be able to sleep at night knowing that you deprived her of the ability to do her best in school?  I thought not.

So let’s rally the troops and get Sandra to get us some free, overly expensive coffee.  She may not be a slut or a prostitute, but in this case, maybe she wouldn’t mind being our Geisha girl.

Today’s guest blogger is Christian Shelby, a volunteer with Concerned Women for America from Virginia.

According to poll results tweeted by CNBC last night, 56 percent of viewers herald Paul Ryan as the winner of the first and only vice-presidential debate, and only 36 percent determined Biden the champ.  Yet, due to Vice President Biden’s rousing display of eccentric claims, this morning, mainstream media outlets are calling the debate a draw.

In truth, the winner of this debate depends on who you ask.

Women took note that in this debate a wide-range of issues important to us were brought to the table.  After last week’s presidential debate failed to focus on abortion or religious liberty, it was heartening to hear both Biden and Ryan respect the sanctity of life.  But it was Ryan who came across as steadfast on faith and the need to protect life, “Our faith informs us in everything we do.  My faith informs me about how to take care of the vulnerable, of how to make sure that people have a chance in life.  Now, you want to ask basically why I’m pro-life?  It’s not
simply because of my Catholic faith.  That’s a factor, of course.  But it’s also because of reason and science. … I believe life begins at conception.”

But the major sticking point for women in this debate had more to do with style than actual substance.  Vice President Biden’s unprecedented strategy called for 82 interruptions, eye-rolling, and laughing during serious discussion of the War Against Terror.  Not the type of behavior voters found flattering to America’s second in command.

Women were unconvinced by Biden’s over-the-top antics.  All of the women on a CNN post-debate panel criticized Biden’s rude behavior and condescending tone.  Though Ryan remained composed, he was not short of quips and snarky remarks, going so far as to say, “I know you are under duress to make up for lost ground, but I think people would be better served if we don’t interrupt each other.”

Undecided voters, too, found Biden’s tone unprofessional.  Every undecided women participating in a CNN focus-group panel criticized Biden for his distasteful manner.  One undecided woman commented, “I thought Paul Ryan … was trying to educate us, teach us, until Joe Biden would bumble in and tried to distort things by overriding him, talking, and being a buffoon in general.”  Another undecided North Carolina voter, Nella Stevens, commented, “I’m not totally decided, but the vice presidential debate has swayed me toward Romney/Ryan.”  When Stevens was asked how she graded the candidates, she answered, “C– for Biden , if for no other reason than rudeness and aggression; B+ for Ryan for poise, articulate answers, calmness and overall good sportsmanship.”

Overall, many believe Ryan could have aggressively tackled Biden’s points with potency, but his restrained attitude showed a humility and respect not normally seen in politicians.  Ryan’s strategy was simple.  Knowing his off-the-cuff attitude, Ryan let the truth shine through facts and statistics and sit back and allowed Biden to self-destruct.  American women and undecided voters needed to see steady, consistent leadership.

Apparently, those who saw the debate via split screen opined that Ryan won, while those who watched the debate without a split screen labeled the debate a draw.

Independents finally woke up during last night’s presidential debate.

This debate wasn’t a popularity contest or one of those “let’s see who has the last word” kind of things. It was about providing Americans with real solutions to the ever-increasing fiscal crisis. Let’s face it, Romney hit this one out of the ball park as he reminded Americans of the limited role of government and the liberties endowed by our Creator, stating, “We are endowed by our Creator with our rights, I believe we must maintain our commitment to religious tolerance and freedom in this country.”

Obama appealed to his audience, wishing his wife a happy anniversary, but failed to woo all other women when he was unable to articulate his economic policies. Women make 80 percent of all consumer purchasing decisions and needed to hear how the president will overhaul the nation’s ever-increasing spending habits.

According to a Las Vegas-area focus group, America’s moms have a new perspective on this presidential election after watching last night’s debate. The focus group was comprised of moms who shop at the discount retail chain Wal-Mart (a.k.a., “Wal-Mart moms”) and have children under the age of 18. Such women represent 27 percent of all registered women voters. Many of these Wal-Mart moms were undecided before this debate, but they now favor Romney, saying that he “seemed more aggressive and very forthright,” and “I was undecided and [now] I’m more leaning towards Romney.”

For us Wal-Mart moms and all Americans across the country, this debate was about answers to jobs and desperately needed leadership.

Finally, we have some answers and direction. Even if you disagree with Romney’s policies, you must admit he successfully communicated his economic recovery plans and addressed the president’s failing policies over the last four years.

Yesterday, I gathered all of the Concerned Women for America (CWA) staff to pray that God would grant both candidates wisdom and peace of mind as they entered the debate. But above all, CWA prayed that truth would shine through the candidates’ answers. That prayer was answered.

One down, two debates to go.

Have no fear, the federal government is here! Wait… that isn’t right.

I’m no damsel in distress, and neither are you. The days of a masked hero helping those in need are, so it seems, nonexistent. But that is exactly what’s unfolding before our very eyes.

The government wants to tell “we the people” how to live. Citizens, if you think politics won’t directly affect you, think again.  New York City’s mayor decided to ban sugary drink sizes to 16 ounces, putting a limit on buying soda in order to thin out an obese New York populace.  Michelle “The Lunch Lady” Obama has implemented an Orwellian lunch program to regulate what American children can and cannot eat, and health (for the mother, not for the abortion-targeted baby) mandates are being shoved down citizens’ throats despite how deeply they offend citizens’ religious convictions.

And it doesn’t stop there.  As if forcing you to pay for abortions weren’t enough, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius blatantly ignored — and arrogantly violated — federal law by using her Cabinet position to tell Americans to vote for President Obama.

Where are the outraged media elites?  Where’s the lone, masked hero who fights against those who abuse their power?  As you’ve heard, time and time again, this election is one of the most important elections of our life time.  We cannot allow our government to keep implementing laws that go against “we the people.”

Americans, listen up!  If you want a government that will cater to your every need, you’re living in the wrong country.  This country — the one built on freedom and liberty, bought by the blood and sweat of our ancestors, and lusted after by the rest of the world — is not a country of equal handouts, but of equal opportunity to work hard to achieve our ambitions.  Yet, that is not what we are seeing.  Instead, we have an administration that has implemented more federal control over American citizens’ everyday lives, and what are Americans doing about it?  Nothing!

It’s the American citizens’ choice, but I urge you to take a good, hard look.  It’s time to bring our country back to its founding.  Ben Franklin once said, “It is a republic, if we can keep it.”  So, I ask, can we?

Concerned Women for America (CWA) is doing what it takes to keep our government accountable to the taxpayers.  CWA’s She Votes 2012 project is working to make sure Americans are registered to vote in this extremely important election.  Are you ready?  Are you registered?  With voter registration ending on October 8 in most states, now is not the time to idly wonder.  Click here now to see if you’re registered. … And if you aren’t, stay on the site and do something about it.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has announced that only one last antibiotic is capable of fighting Gonorrhea.  That means Super Gonorrhea is just around the corner.  It is inevitable that once the current strain of gonorrhea becomes resistant to the last remaining treatment, it is only a matter of time until Super Gonorrhea arrives –– a new, more potent version of gonorrhea that will get into the bloodstream and be lethal.

In a recent Atlantic article, James Hamblin described the “ominous tones” of the CDC presenters at the telebriefing as they described the future “gonorrhea epidemic.”  As awful as that sounds, gonorrhea is currently pretty awful, too.  Few people seem to realize that gonorrhea can kill, and it is “tragically effective at making women infertile.”  Fortunately, we’ve had antibiotics that worked.  But the antibiotics that work are dwindling; over the past decades, one by one they have become ineffective against the power of gonorrhea.

Now there is only one, and it is an injection (not a simple pill) that has to be given along with other drugs.  Worse, for it to be effective, everyone who has had sex in the past 60 days with the person who has it must get tested and possibly treated, too.  This is no simple matter for today’s promiscuous young people.

Specifically, the CDC declared fluoroquinolones ineffective five years ago.  That left the oral treatment, cephalosporins.  Now, Hamblin reported, “injected ceftriaxone is the only recommended effective drug we have left.  And it has to be given along with either azithromycin or doxycycline.”

This is not a minor problem.  Every year, 64 million people worldwide get gonorrhea; 770,000 of those are Americans.  How many are going to follow directions when taking the medication, and how many will follow the recommended behavioral changes?  Based on history?  Not nearly enough.

Hamblin concluded his alarming summary of the CDC telebriefing with this perfunctory advice: get tested, and take the treatment exactly as prescribed and for the full duration of the prescription in order to avoid developing resistance to the antibiotic.  Then, he recommended — same old advice — use condoms and avoid having sex (with someone who has gonorrhea).

Amazingly, the Atlantic author then joked that his recommendation for not having sex was not a call for sex robots, but if it “lead to advancements in sex robot technology, well, so be it.”  (Seriously, he actually wrote that!)

Click here to see the full CDC Statement and here to see the gonorrhea FAQ.

According to the Washington Examiner, abortion activist Sandra Fluke’s bitter DNC Convention speech included this gem of a not-so-well-thought-out broadside against vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan, whom she said if elected would give us an America in which “you have a vice president who co-sponsored a bill that would allow pregnant women to die preventable deaths in our emergency rooms.”

What this political youngster failed to remember is that she’s stumping for the abortion president — a man who, as an Illinois senator, voted several times to allow the intentional deaths of infants who survived the abortion procedure.  Then-Senator Obama went so far as to argue that, while babies might be aborted alive, it would be a “burden” to a mother’s “original decision” to assess and treat them.

Oh no, Miss Fluke.  Copious blood has already been spilled.  However, it is not on Mr. Ryan’s record, nor is it on his hands.

Liberals have brought abortion to the forefront this election cycle, leveling numerous attacks on conservative candidates for their views on abortion.  President Obama and other anti-life politicians believe criticizing the GOP’s stance on abortion will attract votes, but in truth it only serves to reveal their own hostility to life. The current “Romney/Ryan: Wrong For Women” campaign from Team Obama expresses horror over the presumptive Republican ticket’s opposition to “abortion rights.”  According to the Obama campaign, abortion is a critical women’s health issue, and snobby conservative men who say otherwise are just plain offensive.  In one recent ad, a woman chastises the GOP, “They are talking about things that [are] none of their business.  They are going too far.”

The Obama camp’s strategy is to portray the pro-life views of presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney and vice-presidential pick Paul Ryan as novel and extreme.  But Romney and Ryan’s language this election cycle is nothing new.  Despite liberals’ attacks on the Republican ticket for opposing Roe v. Wade and favoring a constitutional amendment protecting life, these measures coincide with longstanding party platforms.  Penny Young Nance, CEO and President of Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee (CWALAC) explained, “The sanctity of life is, indisputably, a central tenet of the Republican Party’s platform. Since 1976, in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s devastating Roe v. Wade decision, the Republican National Committee has boldly defended the lives of precious unborn babies — regardless of the child’s race, gender, or special needs.  From that time on, the party’s pro-life stance has not been a major point of dissention among Republicans.”

So what’s driving these relatively traditional values into the spotlight this election cycle?  The increasingly pitched tenor over abortion can’t be attributed to a new referendum by conservatives; it’s the liberals who have changed their tune.  The Obama Administration has made no secret of its radical support for abortion:

• President Obama bragged in a special message to Planned Parenthood that he was willing to shut down the federal government when the GOP threatened to stop taxpayer funds from going to the organization, the biggest abortion provider in America.  In the same video, he pledged to continue supporting their goals “to protect … the choices American women deserve” (i.e., access to abortions) as long as he was president.
• Lauding the anniversary of Roe v. Wade in a statement earlier this year, Obama claimed that “we must remember that this Supreme Court decision not only protects a woman’s health and reproductive freedom, but also affirms a broader principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters.  I remain committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose and this fundamental constitutional right.”

While Obama creates widespread controversy by dubbing abortion as a constitutional right — which he believes should be funded by taxpayers — conservatives continue to lobby on behalf of unborn children.  No matter how many millions the Obama campaign spends trying to portray his opponents as off-base elitists, it is the president’s views on abortion that are extreme.  His radical ideas are the ones that don’t jibe with the average American woman.