Raising Them Right
BREAKING: Planned Parenthood’s Shocking Denial of Late-Term Abortions Sparks Outrage
Recently, the political arm of Planned Parenthood, America’s largest abortion provider, made a startling claim: they denied the existence of abortions up until the moment of birth. This denial is not only shocking but deeply concerning for those of us who hold a conservative, pro-life perspective. In this blog post, we will dive into this issue and explore why we must stand up for the sanctity of life, especially in its most vulnerable stages.
It all started when Florida Governor Ron DeSantis called for accountability during the second Republican presidential primary debate. He rightly criticized the Democrats for their support of what he termed “extremism” in abortion, allowing it “all the way up until the moment of birth.” In response, Planned Parenthood Action Fund claimed there was “no such thing as ‘abortion up until birth.'” They labeled it as “pure propaganda used by politicians who want to play politics with people’s medical decisions.” But is it really just propaganda?
Pro-lifers wasted no time in pushing back against this assertion. A Community Note pointed out that, currently, the “right” to legal abortion has no gestational limit in seven states. Despite the challenges in data collection due to underreporting and inconsistent state reporting, available data indicates that over 1% of annual abortions occur at or after 21 weeks, amounting to at least 10,000 late-term abortions annually. Shockingly, more than 50,000 preborn babies are terminated each year after 15 weeks.
In the legislative arena, we’ve seen a concerning trend. Last year, almost every House Democrat supported the Women’s Health Protection Act, a bill that would compel all 50 states to allow abortion for any reason until fetal viability and even up until birth if an abortionist deems it necessary for the mother’s “health.” In 2020, only two Senate Democrats voted in favor of legislation to ban abortion at 20 weeks. Democrat leaders continue to avoid specifying any abortion restrictions they would accept.
Perhaps one of the most disturbing aspects of this debate is the fate of babies born alive following failed abortions. These innocent infants are fully separated from their mothers. While it is technically illegal to end their lives under the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002, the law lacks the necessary criminal penalties for meaningful enforcement.
Efforts to protect these babies have been met with resistance from Democrats. The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which mandates basic medical care for these infants, was voted against by nearly all Democrats in January. Even when they held power, Democrats consistently blocked such legislation from reaching a vote.
Despite claims that late-term abortions are only sought for extreme medical circumstances, the truth is quite different. Nearly every current abortion ban explicitly allows for life-saving treatment in emergencies, even if it results in the loss of the preborn child. Many medical experts, including former abortionists, confirm that intentionally ending the child’s life is neither necessary nor the most prudent option for saving the mother’s life. Furthermore, the vast majority of abortions are not sought for medical reasons but for social, career, or financial considerations.
Some abortion advocates try to downplay the issue of infanticide, dismissing it as a myth. However, several former insiders of the abortion industry and policy scholars have testified before Congress or admitted under oath that infanticide still occurs and often goes unaccounted for in official statistics. The Abortion Survivors Network estimates that two out of every 1,000 abortions result in a live birth.
Despite recent discussions about abortion rights following the overturning of Roe v. Wade, it is clear that public opinion remains firmly against late-term abortion. Entities like Planned Parenthood may try to deny this harsh reality, but we, as conservative, pro-life moms, must remain steadfast in our commitment to defending the sanctity of life from conception to natural birth. Our voices are essential in advocating for those who cannot speak for themselves and ensuring that every life is valued and protected.
The gay agenda has been after kids and this video of Pete Buttigeig’s husband proves it.
WATCH:
Raising Them Right
Shocking Realities of Youth Transgender Healthcare – It Is WORSE Than We Thought!
In a shocking revelation, Environmental Progress recently obtained leaked documents from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), shedding light on the disturbing and sinister reality of youth and adult transgender healthcare. The findings, published by the Daily Caller, uncover a troubling pseudoscience that has infiltrated American children’s lives, surpassing previous expectations.
WPATH’s Influence on Transgender Healthcare:
As the leading organization guiding doctors, hospitals, and clinics on transgender healthcare, WPATH holds significant influence in shaping medical practices for individuals with gender dysphoria. While just three years ago, the transgender craze was perceived as affecting a limited number of confused individuals, the rapid increase in self-identifications, particularly among young girls, has turned it into a widespread societal concern.
The Betrayal of Trust:
At the core of this issue lies the question of whether parents can trust the medical information provided by their doctors. The leaked documents make it abundantly clear that trust in the medical guidance offered by WPATH is misplaced. Shockingly, professionals in the field discussed the necessity of obtaining two authorization letters for the surgical removal of a minor girl’s breasts, dismissing concerns as “gatekeeping.”
Informed Consent and Unproven Science:
The documents reveal a consensus among the world’s top minds in transgender medicine that minors cannot provide informed consent for hormone blockers, cross-sex hormones, or surgeries altering healthy sex organs. This raises concerns about parents lacking the biological knowledge necessary to make informed decisions for their children’s healthcare.
Progressive Activism and Parental Rights:
The attack on parental protections becomes apparent, with progressive activists pushing for policies that separate children from parents who refuse to conform to the “affirmation” model. Parents seeking alternatives may face accusations of abuse, further limiting their ability to make decisions in the best interest of their children.
Misleading Information on Reversibility:
For a significant period, the medical community portrayed hormone blockers and hormonal treatments as reversible or non-permanent solutions. However, the report exposes the falsehood of these claims, revealing lifelong complications such as infertility, lack of orgasm, and an increased risk of developing cancerous masses.
Hidden Dangers of Cross-Sex Hormones:
The WPATH Files detail the dangers of cross-sex hormones, including pelvic inflammatory disease, cardiovascular issues, and even death. Medical professionals recount cases of severe health complications linked to prolonged use of these hormones, highlighting the urgent need for a reassessment of current practices.
Conclusion:
The shocking revelations within the WPATH Files showcase the alarming mistreatment of children in the name of transgender healthcare. The medical community’s obligation to “do no harm” is disregarded in this context, prompting a call for government investigations to ensure the safety and well-being of these vulnerable patients. It is essential to bring attention to these issues and work towards reforms that prioritize the health and future of the children affected by these controversial practices.
In a groundbreaking study led by Dr. Riittakerttu Kaltiala, a former advocate for gender-transition treatments, the mainstream narrative regarding the life-saving nature of such interventions for young people has been called into question. Contrary to popular belief, the study, based on health records from Finland’s national database, reveals that gender-transition treatments have no discernible impact on suicide rates among gender-distressed individuals. Instead, the research highlights a correlation between mental illness and suicide.
The Study Design
Dr. Kaltiala’s study analyzed the health records of 2,083 gender-distressed individuals, who sought assistance at gender clinics in Finland at an average age of 18. This group was tracked for approximately 7 years. To provide a comparative context, a control group of 17,000 individuals without gender-related concerns was also examined.
Surprising Findings
The study challenges the widely held belief that gender-transition treatments, including cross-sex hormones or surgeries, are “life-saving” for young people facing gender distress. While 38% of the gender-distressed group underwent such interventions, the suicide rate observed was just 0.3%, only marginally higher than the 0.1% rate in the control group. The study categorizes both rates as “unusual events,” casting doubt on the notion that gender-transition treatments significantly impact suicide prevention.
Questioning Ethical Standards
Dr. Kaltiala criticized the common practice of gender clinics posing questions to parents such as, “Would you rather have a living son or a dead daughter?” She labeled this approach as “most unethical” and emphasized that it is not grounded in factual evidence. The study suggests a need for a more nuanced and evidence-based dialogue around gender-transition treatments.
Mental Health Correlation
While the study did not find a direct link between gender-transition treatments and suicide rates, it did unveil a “statistically significant relationship” between a high prevalence of co-occurring mental health difficulties and increased suicide risk. This highlights the importance of addressing mental health concerns in conjunction with gender-related issues.
Implications and Contradictions
The research challenges the radical left-wing narrative that has been promulgated by certain medical and LGBTQ groups, claiming that the “science is settled” regarding the life-saving nature of gender-transition treatments. The study’s findings suggest a need for a more nuanced and evidence-based understanding of the complex relationship between gender dysphoria, mental health, and suicide risk.
Conclusion
Dr. Kaltiala’s study presents a significant challenge to the prevailing narrative surrounding gender-transition treatments and their purported life-saving impact on young people. By questioning the ethical standards of communication within gender clinics and highlighting the correlation between mental health difficulties and suicide risk, the research calls for a more informed and balanced approach to discussions on gender-related interventions.
-
Get Right9 months agoBREAKING: Are Flu Shots Harming The Elderly?
-
Did You See This?11 months agoChallenging Mainstream Narratives: Unpacking the Latest Nonsense Study on ‘Top Surgery’
-
Raising Them Right10 months agoBREAKING: CNN Host Grills Fauci on Mask Lies – You Won’t Believe His Response
-
Did You See This?11 months agoWOW! Did A Federal Court Just Admit They Unfairly Targeted Pro-Lifers?
-
Did You See This?11 months agoNew Research Exposes Alarming Connection Between Abortion and Mental Health
-
Did You See This?10 months agoBREAKING: Are We Really Going To FORCE KIDS To Wear Masks Again?
-
Did You See This?5 months agoBREAKING: DOJ Drops OUTRAGEOUS Lawsuit Against Tennessee
-
Did You See This?11 months agoBREAKING: Did Barack Obama Really Smoke Crack and Engage in Same-Sex Relations?
