In listening to CNBC financial news, I have been hearing more and more about companies that are offering travel benefits to women who opt to go to another state so that they can fulfill their abortion plans. Also, I have heard questions posed to corporate management representatives asking why they are not joining the fray and stating their position and/or supporting employees with regard to the recent overturn of Roe v Wade by the Supreme Court. Pressure – whether self-imposed or by the media – is forcing corporate America to state publicly where they stand on issues such as abortion, gun control, police brutality, immigration, etc. One of the guidelines now for selecting a financial investment is an ESG rating (Environmental, Social, Governance). Gone are the days when we bought something or invested in something and had no idea what the CEO and Board of Directors thought. Over the years we have probably all taken a stand on a particular company or product and boycotted purchases for a personal reason.
With this in mind,hereis a snapshot of companies that currently do provide travel benefits for employees seeking abortions (or in some cases other medical treatment) not offered in their state. This information may offer an opportunity to think twice before purchasing from these commercial icons. I would be hypocritical to say I denounce Amazon while I use them for everything, including purchasing diapers for a local pregnancy center but I do not need to buy a SONY brand television, or visit a CVS Pharmacy or get pulled into the middle of the ferocious cyclone known as Disney. Public and private companies can do what they want as long as their board and investors agree. And we their customers can take the time to evaluate where best to spend our dollars as it relates to our core beliefs.
AlphaCare serves the community by offering much-needed support to women and children without bias. Our mission is to empower pregnant women and families by providing health and social services, and serving as a bridge to community resources. I’m so saddened by the uneducated, misdirected aggression by those threatening the free services we provide to the women who come to us for hope and help.
“We smashed out all of the windows of the ‘Hope’ pregnancy center on Broad St. We are tired of your ‘family values’ and you forcing families, and your values onto our bodies. This fake clinic spread lies and is part of a broader attempt to strip away body autonomy from hundreds of women and people. We are inspired by the actions of comrades in Wisconsin, Colorado, New York, and a growing list of places. If the attack on abortion does not stop, our attacks will broaden…”
The radical group Jane’s Revenge has issued a statement of revenge and declared “open season” on pregnancy centers, including a “night of rage” across the nation on the night of the decision and possible overturn of Roe v. Wade.
To date AlphaCare has not experienced any direct physical attacks related to the Dobbs decision, although we’ve received several nasty, threatening phone calls. National and local pro-life groups have been sharing information regularly and providing advice for security. Currently we’re taking the following measures:
Regional pregnancy centers in the suburbs have shared their police departments have been very supportive, even providing special security details. Unfortunately, while I have contacted our local police department, they are so overwhelmed with crime they responded by saying, “We’ve made a note for our officers.” Likely they will not be providing much preventative support, if any.
Armored Glass Film
On Thursday, June 23rd, protective film will be installed on our windows as a security measure ahead of the court’s decision. It’s commonly used by banks and jewelry stores to protect against vandalism or small bombs. This film will prevent flying glass and it seems like a wise move to protect our building and limit any possible damage. It comes at the recommendation of other local pregnancy centers.
I am currently exploring the presence of physical security guards in our building for the late evening and early morning hours. Please pray for wisdom as we consider this precaution.
Prayer and Worship
We’re contemplating an all-night prayer meeting and worship service in our office the evening the Dobbs decision is released. This will be logistically complicated because we will not know until the day of (likely the 23rd, 28th, or 30th). Considering the direct threats across our country for that evening the need for prayer is an imminent need. If you have an interest in participating or helping to organize the prayer and worship night, please contact Kathleen Chappell at firstname.lastname@example.org or call our office at (215) 735-6028.
As the Dobbs v. Jackson decision is pending, the recent leak has propelled violent acts by unhinged pro-abortion terrorist organizations.
Unfortunately, Philadelphia was not immune to these attacks. Hope Pregnancy Center, located on Broad Street and a mile south of Temple University, was vandalized this past Saturday.
The details have not been released. The director asks for prayers and will update the pro-life community on what we can do.
It is clear that those who advocate for abortion and claim that pro-lifers don’t care about women are total hypocrites of this myth. They’re the ones who have been anti-woman. They’re the ones who see women as dollar signs. They’re the ones who do not want to help women with their pregnancies. They’re the ones who choose which science to follow while dismissing the claim that life begins at conception.
The real people since the half a century of the debate who care for women are those who work in pregnancy centers and are targets of domestic terrorists. Those who work or volunteer for the abortion industry lack love and mercy while carrying years of regret deep down their heavy, suffering hearts who are in need of Jesus.
To paraphrase Winston Churchill: We shall not be afraid nor fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in our communities, the public square, and oceans; we shall fight with growing confidence and growing perseverance in the faith that God is on our side. We shall never surrender. Never give in.
Pro-Life supporters came from Bucks and Montgomery counties to attend the Rally for Life at Warminster Planned Parenthood. The long sidewalk from the front driveway entrance to the rear driveway exit of PP was crowded with pro-lifers of all ages. The number of participants was over 200.
The event began with an opening prayer and pro-life message from Monsignor Joseph Gentilli, pastor of Our Lady of Guadalupe Church in Doylestown. Wendy Schettig of Chalfont Calvary Church led the gathering with the hymn Amazing Grace.
Other guest speakers included:
Rev. Bill Devlin, Redeem Ministries Pastor Chuck Wilson, New Hope Community Church Laura Gumbrecht, Bucks County Pro-Life Coalition Denise Wilcox, National Right to Life Diana Reimer, Susan B. Anthony List Wendy Schettig, Christian Music Ministry
Referring to the upcoming US Supreme Court decision in June, some speakers shared that 2022 should be the last time we would meet in front of Warminster PP.
Anne Ruegner, director of A Baby’s Breath in Warminster, attended the rally. Her ministry offers free services to women in a crisis pregnancy which include: counseling, pregnancy tests, ultrasounds, independence, classes, and housing. Her ministry has helped many moms choose life for their unborn babies.
Rev. Bill Devlin closed the Rally for Life with prayer. He then led us in the worship hymn, Hallelujah, with the last verse sung on our knees.
The Rally for Life was a glorifying God-centered event. It brought brothers and sisters in Christ together to prayerfully persevere in their efforts to restore the sanctity of life in the womb.
“While such a decision wouldn’t be the end of Roe, it could incentivize additional state-level innovations to restrict abortion.”
The following is a report from Breakpoint by John Stonestreet and Roberto Rivera concerning the Supreme Court case pending in Louisiana.
Last week, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the most important abortion case since Whole Woman’s Health vs. Hellerstedt. In that 2016 case, the court struck down a Texas law requiring abortion clinics to have admitting privileges at a hospital within thirty miles of their location. The court said that such a law placed undue burdens on a woman’s access to abortion. That law would have led to the closing of about 75% of the state’s abortion clinics.
So far, the headlines about the case heard by the court this past Wednesday have mostly been about Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer threatening Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, but there’s much more at stake in June Medical Services v. Russo.
This case involves a Louisiana law nearly identical to the Texas law struck down by the court. Note here that I am emphasizing the word “nearly.” Despite what you may hear from The New York Times and elsewhere, the laws are not identical, especially in how they would play out on the ground in their respective states.
That’s why, after a federal district court initially struck down the Louisiana law based on the Texas law precedent, the Fifth Circuit reversed the district court ruling, with the majority opinion citing two important ways the Louisiana law and the Texas law are different.
First, the Louisiana law would only affect about thirty percent of women seeking an abortion. Second, the requirements for doctors to obtain admitting privileges are less strict in Louisiana than Texas, meaning abortion providers could more easily comply with the law and fewer would be forced out of business. With these differences in mind, the circuit court concluded that the Louisiana law did not impose an “undue burden” on a woman’s right to an abortion.
So here we are, barely four years after deciding Whole Woman’s Health, a recently remade Court is agreeing to hear a case which could overturn precedent and create significantly more elbow room for state-level restrictions. The whole thing has abortion rights advocates, shall we say, a bit nervous.
Much of the oral arguments centered around what constitutes “an undue burden” on abortion. Chief Justice Roberts raised the possibility that the issue was a factual one. What may constitute an “undue burden” in one state, may not in another. Such factors as the number of clinics and doctors in each state, in light of the geographic size and population of the state, would need to be considered.
The lawyer for June Medical Services rejected that idea and insisted that because requiring admission privileges served no medical purpose, it would always pose an “undue burden.” That prompted Justice Kavanaugh to ask whether such a requirement would have any effect on the availability of abortion if, for instance, every doctor could get such privileges.
The lawyer repeated her answer that an admission privilege requirement serves no medical purpose. Her answer was telling. Apparently, any regulations of the abortion industry above bare minimum is unacceptable, whether or not it has any real-world impact on the availability of abortion.
Ultimately, this case is not about the availability of abortion in this one state. It’s about the nearly unique status abortion laws hold in our country. Unlike virtually every other right, such as freedom of speech or of religion, any limitation on abortion, no matter how small, is considered a mortal threat to “abortion rights” and cast as part of a “war on women.”