Senator Tells Pro-Lifers to Leave NY State

Senator Tells Pro-Lifers to Leave

In floor arguments during the NY Senate vote on the Reproductive Health Act, Sen. Kaminsky (D-Long Beach) echoed Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s sentiments about the pro-life community in their state: we don’t belong.

…a woman’s right to choose should be paramount in this state. Because in this state where they choose to live, it matters, and it matters to the point that we’re going to be leading the country. And if you don’t like that, then there are plenty of other places that have different laws, and we can vote with our feet if we want to.

Sen. Todd Kaminsky

See for yourself stating at 1:33:58 of the Jan 22 NYS Senate Session:

Sen. Kaminsky’s statement while voting in favor of the RHA: “there are plenty of other places that have different laws.”

Investigation Already Done

A Pregnancy Center Investigation Was Already Done

In 2018 the Charlotte-Lozier Institute published a 79 page report on the community impact of pregnancy centers. What does the New York State Legislature hope to add to their findings?

Why should New York taxpayers pay for a Division of Consumer Protection investigation of pregnancy centers, when the work has already been done?

What protection do the 2 million consumers of pregnancy center services nationally need? Do their medical communities need protection from $161 Million in free services offered annually? Or from the 7,500 medical professionals that have volunteered over 400,000 hours? 

Doesn’t it make more sense for New York to perform a thorough investigation of abortionists (who regularly profit from vulnerable women in moments of crisis) than pregnancy centers who don’t charge women a dime?

Beyond Roe

Beyond Roe

Governor Cuomo and proponents of the Reproductive Health Act claim that it simply codifies the US Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade. The RHA goes far beyond Roe, and beyond any abortion legislation any state has ever passed in creating a new fundamental human right of abortion and contraception.

The historical corollary to a fundamental human right is a duty. The move from access to right is a slippery slope—the move from an individual choice to a public duty is never far behind. That’s exactly what happened in China 40 years ago. That is not Roe, that’s the RHA.

Roe v. Wade made abortion a legal choice. The RHA would make abortion a legal responsibility. Unless we want to redefine what a ‘right’ is, we shouldn’t consider the RHA. Roe declared that the child in the womb is not a person. The RHA refuses to consider the child at all.

We’ve done this before. We’ve refused to consider the personhood of categories of people—blacks, Native Americans, the mentally disabled, Jews. The powerful can do whatever they want with the sub-human: slavery, land-grabbing, forced sterilization, genocide… abortion.

Decriminalizing Abortion

NY to Criminal Abortionists: “Welcome!”

Under current New York State law, it is a criminal act to perform an abortion on a ‘viable’ child in the womb. (There is another time to discuss the atrocity of the popular, dehumanizing notion of ‘viability.’ Every person bears the image of God regardless of his or her ability to “survive.”) Governor Cuomo and advocates of the Reproductive Health Act want to completely remove all references to abortion from the penal code.

Kermit Gosnell. Heard of him? He ran an abortion mill near Philadelphia, PA where he routinely performed late term abortions for 30 years. He caused the death of Karnamaya Mongar in 2009. In 2010 his clinic was finally shut down after a raid for suspicious oxycodone prescriptions revealed barbaric conditions: blood on the floors and walls, bags of aborted babies, jars full of severed baby feet. A house of horrors. Gosnell is currently serving a life sentence without possibility of parole. His story inspired this feature-length documentary, released in theaters October 2018.

If New York’s Reproductive Health Act were law in Pennsylvania, Gosnell could not have been convicted of homicide.

And Gosnell is not just an isolated case. The corpses of 35 late-term aborted babies were found in freezers of Steven Brigham’s clinic in Maryland. He was arrested and charged with five counts of murder. Brigham’s history of abuse goes back to 1990, but his clinics are apparently still operating.

Douglas Karpen of Houston is currently under investigation by the FBI after four former employees came forward with pictures and testimonies indicating that he killed babies born alive, snipping their spinal chords or “twisting their heads off their necks with his own bare hands.”

After getting kicked out of Florida, James Pendergraft was caught illegally operating a mobile abortion clinic out of his van in South Carolina. Local authorities found bloody surgical implements “with tissue still attached” when they pulled him over for a traffic violation.

The list continues with Rho and Boyd and Hern and Osathanondh and Rutland and Sheikh

There’s no shortage of stories of late term abortionists behaving badly. Shouldn’t we hold them to a higher standard? Shouldn’t these actions be criminal?

RHA Translations

New RHA Language, Unmasked

The NY Legislature released an updated version of the Reproductive Health Act for the 2019 session, and it’s even worse than previous versions. Here we quote the text of the bill itself and offer brief commentary.

The legislature finds that comprehensive reproductive health care [includes] contraception and abortion.

What happens if a doctor disagrees?

The New York Constitution and United States Constitution protect a woman’s fundamental right to access safe, legal abortion.

… where?

If so, why push to change the NY Constitution?

Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures performed in the United States.

Really? What about the scores of peer-reviewed medical journal articles that demonstrate the contrary?

The goal of medical regulation should be to improve the quality and availability of health care services.

How does allowing non-doctors to perform abortions improve quality?

The goal of medical regulation should be to improve the quality and availability of health care services.

As the abortion capital of the US does NY really have an abortion availability problem?

With abortionists going out of business because of lack of demand, does NY really have an abortion availability problem?

Every individual possesses a fundamental right… [to seek] and [obtain] abortion care, free from discrimination in the provision of health care.

What does this mean for the pregnancy centers that have a fundamental right to freedom of speech, if they disagree?

What does this mean for doctors who have a fundamental right to freedom of religion, if they disagree?

Which “right” will win?


So now having an abortion is equal to freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, private property…?

What happens when those “rights” collide?

At what point will this “right” become a duty?


Meaning, government will ensure that every healthcare provider supports a woman’s access to an abortion.


Translation: Physician Assistants and Nurse Practitioners can legally do abortions.

“Person,” when referring to the victim of a homicide, means a
human being who has been born and is alive.

New York State refuses to acknowledge the personhood of preborn boys and girls.

Murdering a pregnant woman is now just one homicide, not two.

Body Mechanics

Are Doctors Just Body Mechanics?

All abortion procedures are invasive. Certain abortion procedures require surgery. Cuomo’s Reproductive Health Act (RHA) is so radical that it reduces quality of care for women by allowing lower level medical providers to perform risky surgical procedures. Allowing non-physicians to provide surgery (say nothing of non-surgeon physicians) serves only to reduce quality of care for women, not enhance reproductive health.

According to the RHA a woman will be able to obtain an abortion through all nine months of pregnancy, representing higher-risk procedures, which have greater chance of complications, infection, and death. Fully licensed physicians in good standing are trained specifically for managing the condition of patients in potentially dangerous developments. Eliminating the requirement of physicians to perform these procedures increases the likelihood of life-altering and deadly complications for the woman.

Allowing non-physicians to perform an abortion ignores the overall health and well-being of the patient. Medicine is an art. It is the most humane of the humanities and most unscientific of the sciences. Physicians are trained to manage the entire scope of a patient’s health and well-being, employing this art. Lower-level providers are trained in technical skill, not the art of medicine. To employ lower-level providers in the performance of a single procedure virtually ignores the patient altogether. Allowing anyone to treat a patient around abortion alone disrespects the profession of medicine and the patient, treating her as an object to be manipulated—as a mechanic would a car.

Allowing non-physicians to perform surgery makes medicine what it is not. It reduces medicine to a set of impersonal skills to be applied to manipulate biochemical reactions. In so doing, it reduces the good purpose of medicine from the lofty heights of protecting the dignity of each individual to the meaninglessness of heartless, evidence-based, widget-turning, economically motivated population management. No thanks.

If legislators really cared about increasing the quality of care for women in reproductive health they would ensure that only board certified OB/GYNs in good standing could perform these complicated, risky procedures, instead of reducing the qualifications for practitioners.

Legislators in Medicine

Legislators in the Exam Room

The Commission for Reproductive Health Service Standards (CRHSS) rallied the medical community against the Reproductive Health Act when it was narrowly defeated in 2013, and continues to unite medical providers against this atrocious piece of legislation. The following article originally appeared on the CRHSS website.

Do legislators know enough about medicine and the practice of medicine to feel comfortable legislating medicine? The Policy on Abortion from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists ends with this strong statement: “The intervention of legislative bodies into medical decision making is inappropriate, ill advised, and dangerous.” By making abortion and contraception fundamental rights, the government has stepped into the exam room. Whether you are pro-life or pro-choice or pro-Chihuahua, government arbitration between doctors and patients is a slippery slope which has no end in sight.

Should doctors get together to decide conditions for the practice of law? Should doctors decide that the drafting of wills is a fundamental right, the denial of which would be discrimination? At least doctors have not had the arrogance to try to legislate another profession for their own political gain.

The Reproductive Health Act represents the height of professional arrogance, the height of political narcissism. If politicians can trample the rights of physicians, the essence of medicine, and the dignity of the women that they are dedicated to serve, they either have too much time on their hands or are deluded with self-importance.

Physicians and Medical CliniciansStand with your colleagues against the RHA.

Pro-lifers Not Welcome in NY

Pro-lifers Still Not Welcome in NY

Gov. Cuomo’s insistence on the Anti Pro-Life Act shows he continues to act on what he said in a 2014 radio interview, that pro-life conservatives are not welcome in New York State.

For all it’s claims of tolerance and pluralism, the secular state is increasingly demonstrating its intolerance of Christianity. Perhaps most of our secular legislators are well-meaning people who are simply convinced that Christians are “wrong.” But if that is so, why attempt to legislate Christian organizations out of existence?

In his 2018 State of the State address, Gov. Cuomo declared, “The New York way is that tolerance is expected from all.” Apparently tolerance is expected from pro-life Christians, but not toward pro-life Christians.

This year, let us show that at times of trouble and anxiety, the premise that made America great still guides us. That we do not seek to raise ourselves by pulling another down, but rather believe we succeed by raising each other up.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo

Governor Cuomo, will you continue to attempt to raise yourself up by pulling down pregnancy centers and their supporters?  Or will you stand by your word, and refuse to sign the Anti Pro-Life Act?

Tax Money Abortion

More of our Tax Money Spent on Abortion

 Governor Cuomo’s Reproductive Health Act represents the largest and most radical expansion of abortion since Roe v Wade. This means New Yorkers will see even more of their tax dollars go toward abortions.

Abortion activists claim they strive for “Safe, legal, and rare” abortions. Abortion is far from rare in our state. 30% of NY pregnancies end in abortion. In 2016, there were 82,189 abortions performed in New York State. 49% of those were paid for by NY Medicaid, more than any other method of payment. In just one year, our tax dollars paid for 40,491 abortions. If the average cost of an abortion is $585, then the people of NY spent over $23.7 Million to abort babies. The Memo from the RHA’s sponsor Sen. Stewart-Cousins explicitly declared that it is “intended to ensure continued public funding of abortion services.”

The Reproductive Health Act completely deregulates abortion procedures, legalizes more dangerous and costly late-term abortion procedures and allows non-physicians to perform abortions. With a radical expansion of legal procedures and an increased supply of abortionists, New Yorkers can anticipate an increased number of abortions and costly abortion-related complications. More abortions equals more taxpayer dollars spent on abortion.

Can’t We All Just Get Along?

Why Can’t We All Just Get Along?

The Anti Pro-Life Act asks pro-life pregnancy centers to declare their religious affiliations… why don’t the secularists in the NY Legislature lead the way, and openly declare theirs?

Secularism and Christianity fundamentally reject the presuppositions of the other. Yet, Christianity can peacefully coexist with Secularism or any other belief system. Secularism, on the other hand, cannot peacefully coexist with Christianity, because Christians submit to an Authority higher than the Secular State. Secularism can tolerate no higher authority. In order for secularism to rule, it must de-Christianize society. 

Through this act of legislative bullying, the state seems to be attempting to do just that—to further ghettoize Christians, eliminating their intolerable beliefs from the public square.