Posted on 05/17/2019 23:10 PM (Noticias de ACI Prensa - América)
Posted on 05/17/2019 22:35 PM (CNA Daily News - US)
Denver, Colo., May 17, 2019 / 03:35 pm (CNA).- On a warm Friday morning in May at St. Mary’s Catholic Church in Littleton, Colorado, about 40 Knights of Columbus dressed in full regalia flanked the entrance of the church as friends and family of Kendrick Castillo filed in to commend him to God at his funeral.
Each attendee was handed a small card - on one side, Kendrick smiling, dressed in a Christmas sweater and sitting on a Jeep. On the other side, a simple tribute including his birth and death dates, funeral location, and the bible verse John 15:13 that seems to capture the way his life ended: “No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.”
Kendrick was the lone casualty in the STEM high school shooting on May 7 in Highlands Ranch, Colorado. He died, witnesses say, after he jumped up in the line of fire and ran to stop one of the shooters with a couple other students.
His funeral was attended by relatives and friends that filled the large Catholic church, and included an honor guard of 80 Knights of Columbus, about half of whom dressed in the old feather-capped regalia, and half in the new uniform with a beret.
The Knights lined the aisles and drew their swords in tribute to Kendrick during the processional and recessional, honoring a young man who spent hundreds of hours volunteering for the Knights of Columbus with his dad. A group of Kendrick’s close friends from high school served as pallbearers.
Bishop Jorge Rodríguez, auxiliary bishop of Denver, and five other priests and deacons presided at the Mass.
In his homily, Rodriguez talked about how Kendrick imitated Christ and “pleased God” throughout his life as a selfless, loving person.
Kendrick was “a holy young man,” Rodriguez said. “A young man who was a good disciple of Jesus Christ. We call ‘saints’ those able to love to the end. Kendrick gave everything he is, and everything he had -family, a future, a degree, his life- so other young men and women could go back to their families, have a future, graduate and live.”
“Kendrick’s life is like the echo of Jesus’ words: ‘Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends,’” he added, again referencing John 15:13.
The bishop referenced Scripture throughout his homily, noting how Kendrick was pleasing to and loved by God.
“Only a young man with God in his heart and possessing a big good heart can do what he did: to lay down his life to save his friends. I’m sure John and Maria, that you feel proud of your son: God too is very proud of his child, Kendrick,” Rodriguez said.
“The Book of Wisdom repeats: ‘His soul was pleasing to the Lord.’ The soul is the center of our consciousness, freedom, the seat of love and will; that self that makes us God’s image and touches who we really are. God loves Kendrick’s soul because he is a good young man,” he added.
He noted that Kendrick was only a few days from his high school graduation when he was killed, and could have accomplished many more things on earth with his “big good heart,” but that he was now with God, where “all the evil of this world will not be able to touch him again.”
Instead, Kendrick experienced a much more profound kind of graduation, Rodriguez said.
“Kendrick graduated not for an academic degree, but he graduated in humanity and in Christian life,” he said.
At the end of life, everyone will be examined not on their academic knowledge or worldly success, the bishop noted, but on how well they loved.
“Kendrick passed this test with honors,” he said. “He accomplished in a short time a great career in honorableness, love and holiness. As Scripture says, the greatness of a man ‘cannot be measured in terms of years.’”
Even though Kendrick was a good person and is loved and cared for by the Lord, his death still causes “unbearable” pain, especially for his family, Rodriguez said.
The bishop encouraged John and Maria, the parents of Kendrick, to hold fast to the Gospel of John 6:40: “For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him may have eternal life, and I shall raise him [on] the last day.”
That passage, Rodriguez said, contains two promises for Kendrick: that he is enjoying eternal life in heaven, and that he will be raised with Jesus on the last day.
“Dream with that moment, when you will see Kendrick right in front of you, radiant, smiling and coming to you for a big hug,” he said.
He then encouraged everyone in attendance to follow the example of Kendrick’s faith and love, and thanked John and Maria for their son.
“John and Maria, Kendrick, your son, is a gift for all of us. And we all must commit to keep his legacy and to praise God for the gift of Kendrick’s years among us.”
“God loves your child. Now, he is with him. And he left, keeping you in his heart.”
Posted on 05/17/2019 18:12 PM (CNA Daily News - US)
Washington D.C., May 17, 2019 / 11:12 am (CNA).- The House of Representatives passed the controversial Equality Act on Friday, amid heated opposition from those who argue it would pose serious threats to critical constitutional freedoms.
“This bill undermines human dignity by threatening the fundamental freedoms of speech, religion, and conscience that the First Amendment guarantees for every citizen,” said Kristen Waggoner, senior vice president of the U.S. legal division for Alliance Defending Freedom. “Americans deserve better than the profound inequality that this intolerant, deceptively titled legislation offers.”
In a May 17 statement, Waggoner said the legislation would harm women.
“It undermines women’s equality by denying female athletes fair competition in sports, depriving women of business opportunities designed for them, and forcing them to share private, intimate spaces with men who identify as female,” she said.
Waggoner added that the legislation would force Americans to participate in events and message that go against their deepest convictions.
“Many activists want to con Americans into believing that disagreement on important matters such as marriage and human sexuality is a form of discrimination that requires the government to enforce one view over another, but that is obviously wrong,” she said.
The House approved the bill by a 236-173 vote. Eight Republicans voted in favor of the bill. Seven Democrats refrained from voting for or against.
The legislation would add anti-discrimination protections for sexual orientation and gender identity to existing protections for race, color, national origin, sex, disability and religion.
It would apply not just to employment, but other areas like housing, jury duty, credit, and education, as well as at retail stores, emergency shelters, banks, transit and pharmacies, among others. It would also specify facility access for self-identified transgender persons, such as access to male and female bathrooms.
Critics have argued that the bill’s concepts of sexual orientation and gender identity are too broad and would penalize the appropriate recognition of difference between the sexes or differences between married heterosexual couples and other couples.
Representatives of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops had opposed the measure in a March 20 letter. They said that while they support efforts to ensure that all people are treated with dignity and respect, the legislation would fail to advance those goals and would instead harm society.
“The Act’s definitions alone would remove women and girls from protected legal existence,” they said. “Furthermore, the Act also fails to recognize the difference between the person – who has dignity and is entitled to recognition of it – and the actions of a person, which have ethical and social ramifications. Conflating the two will introduce a plethora of further legal complications.”
The bishops also warned that the Equality Act would harm free speech, conscience, and exercise of religion. It would require that homeless shelters place biological men with vulnerable women and adoption agencies place children with same-sex couples, even if this violates their beliefs and the birth mother’s wishes. It could threaten professionals in the wedding industry who will serve all customers but cannot express messages to which they object. And it would require health professionals to provide “gender transition” treatments and surgeries in violation of their medical and ethical judgments, they said.
Furthermore, the Equality Act would exempt itself from the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a move that the bishops noted is “unprecedented.”
The Equality Act now moves to the GOP-led Senate. Supporters of the bill will need to pick up more than a dozen Republican votes to advance the legislation. President Donald Trump has said that he opposed the measure, but has not indicated whether he would veto it if it came to his desk.
Posted on 05/17/2019 17:15 PM (CNA Daily News - US)
Frankfort, Ky., May 17, 2019 / 10:15 am (CNA).- Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin (R) is urging his fellow governors to “be bold” on the issue of life.
The first-term governor made the call during an interview Thursday on EWTN Pro-Life Weekly, as states across the country continue to debate abortion related legislation.
In recent weeks, Gov. Roy Cooper (D-N.C.), Gov. Tony Evers (D-Wisc.), and Gov. Steve Bullock (D-Mont.) all rejected their states’ versions of the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. Shortly after, Bullock launched a bid for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination. In contrast, Gov. Brian Kemp (R-Ga.) and Gov. Kay Ivey (R-Ala.) signed major pro-life legislation.
Speaking to Pro-Life Weekly host Catherine Hadro, Bevin said that arguments against Born-Alive laws are “weak,” and that such measures are far from redundant.
“It would seemingly be the same argument you might say for ‘why have airbags in a car if we already have a seatbelt,’” Bevin argued.
“Not to protect a human life, and to ask a doctor to take responsibility for protecting that human life, and to hold them accountable if they do not—especially given that they have taken an oath to do so, and in fact are licensed to do so—would be irresponsible.”
Urging his fellow governors to stand in defense of unborn life, Bevin said, “Don’t be politically opportunistic, don’t be beholden to outside interests that are going to help you politically, but be bold and do the right thing.”
Alabama's Governor signed the Human Life Protection Act into law.
Georgia's Governor signed the Heartbeat Bill into law.
We speak with another pro-life governor on @EWTNProLife, @GovMattBevin, who says - while there is pressure - being pro-life is the right thing to do. pic.twitter.com/0BCxEIm8Mc
— Catherine Hadro (@CatSzeltner) May 16, 2019
While discussing his work to pass pro-life legislation in Kentucky, Bevin called the Roe v Wade Supreme Court decision a “travesty,” and said he believes the issue of abortion will ultimately be returned to the states.
“In the meantime, states like ours have passed very intentional laws related to things like informed consent and ultrasounds performed in advance,” Bevin said.
Bevin also pointed to a recent bill he signed into law prohibiting abortions based on the race, gender, or a disability diagnosis of an unborn child. He said that the “non-eugenics bill” might reach the Supreme Court and “may very well be involved in the ultimate decision making as it relates to Roe v Wade.”
“We passed a bill here in this past session in Kentucky that says you can’t kill a child based on its race, based on its gender, or based on some perceived disability. We used language very similar to what we find in the Americans with Disabilities Act and other federal statutes that are already on on the books.”
After the anti-eugenics bill passed into law earlier this year, the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky promptly announced they would sue over the legislation, but the governor said he is undeterred.
We will see the state of Kentucky in court (again) after they attempt to ban abortion (again) #HB5 #stopthebans #kyga19 https://t.co/dJGMYRBCpc
— ACLU of Kentucky (@ACLUofKY) March 13, 2019
Kentucky will always fight for life...
Always!#WeAreProLife #WeAreKY https://t.co/mFfqhGhAWe
— Matt Bevin (@MattBevin) March 13, 2019
Critics of the discrimination abortion ban, Bevin said, “think that they’re defending folks when in fact they’re standing in the way of human life.”
“I’m grateful for the fact that ours is a strongly pro-life state, and that people are standing in the gap on the side of the vulnerable and those who cannot speak for themselves.”
The governor said he was bullish about the state’s prospects defending the law in court. “The gild is coming off the lily on the other side of this issue,” he said.
“We are standing firm and we will continue to do so regardless of the money, and the reasons, and just the evil, frankly, that is opposing us on the other side of the equation,” he said.
Bevin acknowledged that “there is pressure of course, politically” on governors who sign pro-life legislation, “but here’s the thing, to do the right thing is the right thing.”
“Sometimes of course, in politics and in other areas, it’s easier for some to do the easy wrong than to do the difficult right,” Bevin continued. “But I think we have a moral obligation, and for many it’s maybe a religious obligation, but I think for those for whom it’s not religious based, it’s moral to save a human life.”
Kate Scanlon is a producer of EWTN Pro-Life Weekly
Posted on 05/17/2019 16:35 PM (Noticias de ACI Prensa - América)
Posted on 05/17/2019 15:49 PM (Noticias de ACI Prensa - América)
Posted on 05/17/2019 07:32 AM (CNA Daily News - US)
Cincinnati, Ohio, May 17, 2019 / 12:32 am (CNA).- An Ohio bill seeking to limit insurance coverage of non-lifesaving abortions erroneously states that a procedure exists in which a doctor can reimplant an ectopic pregnancy in a woman’s uterus. No such procedure yet exists that has been proven safe and effective, two pro-life OB-GYNs told CNA.
“It astounds me that people would be writing law like this who don’t know the basics,” Dr. Lorna Cvetkovich, an OB-GYN with the pro-life medical practice Tepeyac Center, told CNA.
An ectopic pregnancy occurs when an embryo implants somewhere other than the uterus - usually in a fallopian tube. Ectopic pregnancies cannot survive outside of the uterus and pose a serious threat to the mother’s life, Cvetkovich said.
The legislation in question in Ohio is HB182, a bill that was introduced in April by state Rep. John Becker (R), and was co-sponsored by 19 other state legislators.
The bill seeks to limit insurance coverage for “nontherapuetic abortions” - elective abortions that are not performed when a doctor determines that the mother’s life is at risk.
The legislation states that it would still allow insurance companies to cover certain exempted procedures, including: “A procedure for an ectopic pregnancy, that is intended to reimplant the fertilized ovum into the pregnant woman’s uterus."
“I don’t know of any way that we can technologically, surgically put that embryo through the trauma (of reimplantation),” Cvetkovich said.
The doctor said the procedure has reportedly been tried three times, but it has not worked, and there is no approved, standard medical procedure for reimplantation that has undergone the appropriate steps to ensure it is safe and effective.
Journals reporting on two such cases are posted on John Becker’s Facebook page. One case occurred in 1915, before ultrasounds were invented, and another in 1980.
Cvetkovich said of the 1915 case that not enough documentation of the procedure exists to confirm its scientific validity, and that the 1980 case was found to have used falsified research.
The reason reimplantations have yet been impossible for doctors, Cvetkovich said, is that once an embryo implants into either the uterine or the tubal lining, it begins creating microscopic blood vessel connections with the mother.
“It’s like a microscopic heart-lung machine, and you can’t just disrupt that and redo it,” she said.
In rare cases, ectopic pregnancies have reimplanted themselves in the liver or bowel, causing an abdominal pregnancy, but there has not been a successful surgical reimplantation in a uterus, Cvetkovich noted.
Dr. Donna Harrison is an OB-GYN with the American Association of Pro-Life OB-GYNs (AAPLOG).
Harrison told CNA that AAPLOG would support an ectopic transfer procedure if it “were scientifically validated through the usual channels of animal studies to prove safety and efficacy, and then human trials to prove safety and efficacy. If such a procedure followed that protocol, and if such a procedure were then validated to be safe and effective in a human being, AAPLOG would support that,” she said.
“We would love to be able to save the baby if we could,” she said.
But to date, an ectopic pregnancy transfer procedure does not yet exist that has gone through the required safety and efficacy procedures to Harrison’s knowledge, she said.
However, she added, Dr. Stephen Sammut at the Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio is currently investigating such a transfer in animal models.
“So there is research being conducted in animal models right now, but it is very preliminary right now and there are no conclusions of that research yet,” she said. “And as far as I know that is the only research being conducted so far in the animal model.”
Because ectopic pregnancies can pose a serious threat to the life of a mother, pro-life doctors can morally perform a procedure in which they remove the fallopian tube or other organ where an ectopic pregnancy has implanted, Cvetkovich said.
This allows doctors to remove a malfunctioning organ of the mother in order to save her life, which has the secondary but unintended effect of terminating the pregnancy, she added.
“It’s what we call the principle of double effect,” she said. “You can go in to do the procedure that will save the mother’s life. Your intent is not to destroy that pregnancy, your intent is to keep her healthy. In the process of doing that, you accept but do not want that there’s a fetal demise. So that’s how we would handle this rare, rare situation where you would have...a viable fetus with a heartbeat in the tube.”
This kind of procedure is permitted by the Catholic Church, she said, which states that abortion is never permissible, though a procedure to save a woman’s life that has the unintended effect of an unborn baby’s death is morally permissible.
“Operations, treatments, and medications that have as their direct purpose the cure of a proportionately serious pathological condition of a pregnant woman are permitted when they cannot be safely postponed until the unborn child is viable, even if they will result in the death of the unborn child,” the U.S. Catholic bishops state in the fifth edition of their Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services.
This kind of procedure would also be exempted under the Ohio bill, which states that insurance companies could still cover: “A procedure, in an emergency situation, that is medically necessary to save the pregnant woman's life.”
Cvetkovich added that it was concerning that the Ohio legislators apparently did not consult with medical experts or research before writing the bill.
Legislation that contains erroneous scientific statements makes the pro-life movement “look bad, it makes us look silly, it makes us look stupid,” she said.
“I wish these guys would do some consultation before they wrote this,” she added.
On the other hand, Harrison said the bill could spur further research into developing a scientifically valid transfer procedure.
“I think the bill could encourage the appropriate research needed to develop such a procedure,” she said.
Posted on 05/17/2019 02:45 AM (Noticias de ACI Prensa - América)
Posted on 05/17/2019 00:45 AM (CNA Daily News - US)
Washington D.C., May 16, 2019 / 05:45 pm (CNA).- Earlier this week, the state of Alabama passed legislation to make abortion a felony. The measure is the nation’s strongest prohibition on abortion. It directly contradicts Roe v. Wade and is intended as a challenge to the Supreme Court case that established a nationwide “right to abortion” in 1973.
The Alabama law has generated serious controversy, and the promise of an immediate legal challenge, but it is not the only state legislation taking aim at Roe.
With a Supreme Court considered favorable to the pro-life cause and a total of more than 100 Trump nominees in the federal court system, states have been flooding the books with pro-life legislation, in the hope of winning significant victories nationwide.
Four states – Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Ohio – have so far this year passed laws to ban abortions after the unborn baby’s heartbeat can be detected, often around 6 weeks of pregnancy. All four laws are already facing legal challenges.
Nearly a dozen other states legislatures have considered similar legislation this year.
Heartbeat bills are often considered to openly contradict the jurisprudence of Roe v. Wade and subsequent court cases, which established a framework for abortion regulations – the closer an unborn baby is to viability, the more restrictions on abortion are generally deemed to be constitutional. In the earliest weeks of pregnancy, court precedent says, government cannot limit abortion in a way that places an “undue burden” on women.
Because of this, heartbeat bills have historically fared poorly in the court system. In January, an Iowa judge ruled against the state’s heartbeat law, which had passed last year. Similar laws in North Dakota and Arkansas were also struck down in recent years.
However, supporters of heartbeat bills plan to keep passing the legislation in state after state, hoping that it eventually ends up before the Supreme Court. Their wager is that the court, with its current makeup, will take the opportunity to deliver a fatal blow to Roe v. Wade.
Another category of legislation seeks to ban abortions performed for specified reasons, such as the sex or race of the baby, or a diagnosis of disability. Kentucky has signed into law one such a bill, which is currently being challenged by the ACLU in court.
While a ruling in favor of these laws would not necessarily eliminate legal abortion, pro-life advocates would view it as a step in the right direction and a powerful recognition of the humanity of the unborn child.
Safety standards for abortion clinics
In 2016, the Supreme Court struck down two key regulations on abortion clinics in Texas - a requirement that abortion doctors must have admitting privileges at a local hospital, and a rule that abortion clinics must meet the standards or ambulatory surgical centers. The vote in that case was 5-3.
Other cases are already in the court system. Next week, a court will hear a challenge to a Virginia law stating that only doctors may perform abortions, rather than nurses or other medical personnel.
One case to watch is June Medical Services v. Gee, which involves a 2014 Louisiana law requiring abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at a local hospital. The legislation closely mirrors the Texas law struck down by the Supreme Court in 2016. A district court initially ruled against the law, but its decision was reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals’ 5th Circuit. The Supreme Court was asked last month to hear an appeal in the case.
Several states have introduced bans on Dilation and Evacuation (D&E) abortions. This abortion method, known by opponents as a “dismemberment abortion,” is most commonly performed in the second trimester. North Dakota signed a ban on these abortions into law earlier this year.
One case challenging a Texas ban on D&E abortions is currently before the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. Its placement in the court system means that it could have a shot at being taken up by the Supreme Court in the coming months.
There is also a range of other legislation on the books in numerous states that does not ban abortions but enacts various requirements for those seeking them. These include mandatory 24-hour waiting periods before procuring an abortion, ultrasound requirements, and measures requiring parental notification or consent for a minor to obtain an abortion.
Such restrictions could be upheld by the Supreme Court without completely overturning Roe v. Wade. Some pro-life strategists suggest that it more realistic to hope the nation’s highest court will affirm numerous pro-life laws in this category, in essence chipping away at Roe rather than reversing it in one fell swoop.
Of course, if Roe v. Wade were overturned, the legality of abortion would not be immediately clear. A broad ruling on Roe could set a new national standard, but simply overturning Roe would send the question back to the individual states. Seven states have passed trigger laws, which would automatically ban abortion if Roe were to be overturned, while New York and Vermont have passed legislation affirming abortion as a “right” even if Roe were to be reversed.
Court cases take time, and it is likely that the question of abortion restrictions will remain prominent well into the 2020 election cycle. With several state laws taking the spotlight, and several others in the works, abortion may end up being a key issue in the upcoming presidential and congressional races.
Posted on 05/16/2019 23:15 PM (CNA Daily News - US)
Jefferson City, Mo., May 16, 2019 / 04:15 pm (CNA).- The Missouri Senate has passed a bill that would ban most abortions after eight weeks of pregnancy. Legislators responsible for the bill have said that, unlike recent measures in other states, the bill is specifically designed to pass scrutiny under legal appeal.
After passing a senate vote on May 16, the measure now moves to the state House of Representatives.
House Bill 126 includes a ban on all abortions past eight weeks of pregnancy except in cases of a medical emergency. Doctors who perform abortions after that point could face a 15 year jail sentence, but women who recieve abortions would not be punished.
"I think we've crafted a bill that will win in the courts," state Senator Andrew Koenig, one of the bill's sponsors, told CNA after the senate vote on Friday.
According to Koenig, the bill’s provisions are justified by a 98.5% chance of an unborn child surviving to term after eight weeks, compared to a 24% chance of a natural miscarriage at five weeks and under.
"We believe that the state of Missouri has an interest in protecting that viable pregnancy [after eight weeks]," the senator said.
State Representative Nick Schroer, the bill's sponsor in the House, told CNA in February that he worked with fellow lawyers to craft the bill so that it would stand up to judicial scrutiny.
"We looked at a bunch of case law and worked with attorneys on this," Schroer said.
Schroer said that should a district court rule against the bill’s eight-week ban coming into force, the law would still include a further ban at 14 weeks. Schroer said roughly two-thirds of abortions in Missouri take place before 10 weeks.
The bill invokes the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution and argues that most abortions performed at 14 weeks gestation invovle in utero dismemberment, which the bill terms "cruel and unusual punishment."
While the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals has not previously struck down a 14 week ban, Koenig noted, even if it were to do so the bills contains additional bans at 18 and 20 weeks, when doctors are required to certify that the unborn child can feel pain.
"We call it the 'heartbeat bill,' but it actually operates a lot differently than any other heartbeat bill that's passed," Koenig explained.
Several states, including most recently Georgia, have passed so-called “heartbeat bills” which would prohibit abortion after the detection of a fetal heartbeat as early as six weeks into a pregnancy. Kentucky, Mississippi, Ohio and Georgia currently have “heartbeat” laws waiting to come into force, while courts have struck down similar restrictions in North Dakota and Iowa.
The Missouri bill's sponsors say they knew that to avoid falling to similar legal challenges, they had to draft a bill not already covered by court precedent.
"We need to give the courts something that doesn't have precedent behind it, but accomplishes the same goals," Koenig said.
“Ultimately I think other states can take our language and start really limiting abortion, because I think our law will, for the most part, get upheld."
The Missouri vote came hours after Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey signed into law a near-total ban on almost in that state. Unlike the Missouri bill, the Alabama law is intended to generate a court battle and challenge the 1073 Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade.
"[Our law] is not a piece of legislation that is designed for a challenge," Missouri House Speaker Elijah Haahr told the Associated Press.
"This is the type of legislation that is designed to withstand a challenge and to actually save lives in our state."
The Missouri bill also provides for a 70% tax credit for donations Missourians make to pregnancy resource centers on or after January 1, 2021 to foster a "culture of life" in the state, Koenig said.
If passed, the law would also prohibit "selective" abortions following a medical diagnosis or disability such as Down syndrome, or on the basis of the race or sex of a baby.
"For me as a Catholic, for me being pro-life, this is common sense to me," Schroer said.
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that since peaking at more than 20,000 per year in the 1980s, in 2017 the annual number of abortions in Missouri had dropped to fewer than 7,000.
The bill would also require any abortion providers operating in the state to have at least $3 million in insurance to cover women in case of botched abortion procedures.
"I think that's actually a huge provision we added in the Senate," Koenig said. "I think ultimately we'll be able to eliminate abortion in Missouri because of this bill, but I think also because Planned Parenthood would just say it's not worth doing business in the state of Missouri.”
Missouri has only one Planned Parenthood clinic authorized to perform abortions in the state, located in St. Louis.
A Planned Parenthood clinic in Columbia, MO has been blocked from performing abortions since October 2018, after the facility failed to adhere to state rules and license expired. No abortions have been performed there since.