Sign up for Our Newsletter

* indicates required

Where the death culture leads: Lawsuits over disabled children who ‘should’ have been aborted


 

 

 

 

 

Listen to the 10 min audio

Read the transcript:

TOM LAMPRECHT:  Harry, I want to take you to two stories today. Both deal with pro-life issues. The first is out of Fox News. The Justice Department has launched federal investigation into Planned Parenthood practices and the sale of fetal tissue. In a letter first obtained by Fox News, Justice Department Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs Stephen Boyd formally requested unredacted documents from the Senate Judiciary Committee, the same panel that led the congressional probe into the Women’s Health Organization.

 The second story’s out of National Review. It’s a story by Kristan Hawkins and, basically, the story deals with an editor of New York Magazine writing that, because her son was born with cystic fibrosis, she is now suing the doctors because she should have aborted her son.

 The point that Kristan makes is, one day, this son is going to grow up to read this story.

DR. REEDER: Tom, that was an amazing story, wasn’t it? By the way, let me refer to the writer of this story, Jean Gann, that Kristan Hawkins writes about.

WISHING HER CHILD WERE DEAD

She writes this piece about her lawsuit of wrongful birth in which she is claiming the doctors are responsible and is seeking monetary relief from the treatments that she is now required to give to her son who has cystic fibrosis and is also attempting to put a marker down, which, again, will be quite the dampening effect in the medical field in terms of this claim that she should have had better diagnostic information so that she could have aborted the child and should have been informed of the option to abort the child.

Think if you are her child, Dudley, and you grow up and you find out that your mother is basically saying, “You have been so inconvenient that I wish I had killed you in the womb.” What a message to your son.

Now, cystic fibrosis is a challenging situation. I have the enormous privilege of being a pastor to parents who are dealing with that. I have not met any that would ever have taken such a position such as this, even in their wildest moments of frustration, but I believe that’s because the ones that I have the privilege to pastor call upon the grace of the Lord Jesus and realize that, in life, you are faced with challenges because we’re in a broken world and then to bring the grace of the Lord Jesus to bear in the life of their child.

Obviously, the writer of this article knows of no such motivation at this point in time, although I do pray that God’s saving grace would break into her life.

Let me also mention, the writer of The National Review article, Kristan Hawkins, I follow her regularly. She is, perhaps, one of the most effective and principled warriors for the sanctity of life that is currently present today.

WHY ABORTION EXISTS

What you see here is, again, the unabashed testimony that abortion exists for two reasons:

  • To wipe out the effects of the sexual revolution when it leads to unwanted pregnancies.
  • To eradicate any children that are not governed worthy of our parenting. Because of their imperfections, they are no longer worthy of our parenting or, the anticipated cost of parenting them, then we want no part of it and we ought to have the right to destroy their lives.

On the altar of convenience, if we have children that are deemed less than perfect, less than acceptable, our parenting them because of their physical or medical conditions would be beyond the scope of what we would want to be bothered with.

What a society that we have developed with that world and life view.

By the way, Kristan Hawkins, as the news story reveals, this is a woman who is raising two children with cystic fibrosis. There are those who, by the grace of God show the grace of God and the strength of God to deal with these issues.

And that’s why I am so grateful for the other news story that you gave. If you remember, David Daleiden and his staff, they had done all of videos as they would interact with Planned Parenthood officials and what was uncovered was the callousness of destroying the lives of children for profit and using mechanisms so that they could save body parts and make money from that.

All of this was, of course, criminal and, somehow, it got swept away – somehow, even the tables were turned on The Center for Medical Progress but, now, Senator Grassley’s going to go back and pick up their material and he’s going to do the investigation into the, dare I say it, bowels of Planned Parenthood and I am so happy for that.

WHY I HATE ABORTION

Tom, let me just go ahead and state it as clearly as I can: I hate abortion.

I will recognize that there comes a time in treating a woman that the triage principles may cost the life of the unborn baby, but that is less than 2 percent of any statistical analysis of pregnancies that come to the birth process.

Having said that, I utterly hate abortion and all of the world and life view it represents. It exists as the sacrament of the sexual revolution – you must believe it, you must embrace it because that’s the way you can erase the unwanted consequences of the sexual revolution when it issues forth in a child.

Secondly, it exists to get rid of inconvenient children like this young little boy who is now going to grow up and read an article where his mother says, “I not only wish I’d killed you, I am going to make money off of those who didn’t recommend for me to kill you,” and that is where we exist in this death culture.

I utterly hate it and I know there is only one remedy and that is to come back to the sanctity of life through a God-centered world and life view of a sovereign God who is at work in a broken world and provides us both the strength, and the power and the resources to deal with difficult situations, even as He graciously deals with the brokenness of our sin by giving His Son, Jesus Christ, on the cross to save us from our sins.

There is the One who was willing to take our sin upon Himself that we might have life.

We have to get back to a saturation of the Gospel from the church of Jesus Christ into this world and discipleship within the church so that Christians learn to think clearly.

A PERSON IS A PERSON NO MATTER HOW SMALL

That would be a premise in our world and life view of the sanctity of life and there’s nothing more sacred than life in the womb and, also, that we believe that a person is made in the image of God and we agree with our founding fathers that they have the inalienable right to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness to whatever degree that they can, no matter what the condition is that they face medically when they’re born into this world and a person is a person from the moment of conception made in the image of God, no matter where they are in the stage of development in human life and no matter what challenges they face in those stages of development of human life.

May God grant us, again, that sacred principle of the sanctity of life and we will continue to deal with that from this program and we ask believers to not only join us to again affirm the sanctity of life through crisis pregnancy centers, adoption agencies, ministry to children who are born with medical difficulties, and mercy ministries caring for women in crisis pregnancies, challenging men to be men in terms of their responsibilities in fatherhood – all of those things, that full-orbed dynamic that we would ask believers to join us in.

And may God allow us to get the root of it in place, which is the glorious Gospel of life that comes through Jesus Christ, life that is meaningful for eternity and that means the church must again not only proclaim the Gospel that people would be invited to Christ, but use the gospel and the entire whole council of God in His word to disciple believers that we might live consistently for the God of glory and grace that has saved us and that includes the sanctity of life.

Dr. Harry L. Reeder III is the Senior Pastor of Briarwood Presbyterian Church in Birmingham.

This podcast was transcribed by Jessica Havin. Jessica is editorial assistant for Yellowhammer News. Jessica has transcribed some of the top podcasts in the country and her work has been featured in a New York Times Bestseller.

3 hours ago

Aderholt named ranking member of appropriations subcommittee critical to north Alabama’s economy

On Tuesday, Congressman Robert Aderholt (AL-4) was named ranking member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science, which funds NASA and the FBI, amongst other important economic engines.

In a statement, Aderholt said, “It is a great honor to be named the ranking member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science. This subcommittee is certainly important to America, but even more so for North Alabama.”

193

“This subcommittee is directly responsible for funding NASA and the FBI, along with the Department of Commerce,” Aderholt explained. “The FBI and NASA are two very important agencies to the economy of not only Huntsville, but also the northern portion of our state. NASA, of course, has a long history in this region and gave rise to Huntsville’s name as the Rocket City. And in just the past few years, the FBI has built a presence on Redstone Arsenal and is in the process of growing to a level of approximately 4,000 jobs.”

The congressman concluded, “With my leadership on this subcommittee, I will work to ensure that North Alabama continues to lead as we return to the moon, put boots on Mars and travel into deep space. And with the FBI’s Hazardous Devices School, and growing footprint in North Alabama, I will also be a voice to let my colleagues know that North Alabama is in a prime position to be a hub for matters concerning our national security.”

Aderholt also serves on the powerful House Appropriations Committee.

Sean Ross is a staff writer for Yellowhammer News. You can follow him on Twitter @sean_yhn

5 hours ago

Is Doug Jones a foot soldier in the Democrat Civil War for taking a shot at liberal darling Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez?

If you are Sen. Doug Jones (D-AL) right now, you probably know you have almost no chance of being elected to a full term as a United State senator.

This obviously could change. Roy Moore could continue to crave the spotlight and enter a Republican primary field in 2020, but this is obviously a long-shot for him.

Complicating Jones’ life right now is a number of new Democratic members of the House of Representatives. They are outspoken, silly and contrary to the carefully crafted image Jones wants to sell to Alabama. Jones wants to be Mr. Moderate, a conservative-ish Democrat in the mold of former Congressman Bud Cramer (D-Huntsville), but he can’t do that if he is constantly dealing with a 24-hour news cycle where his fellow Democrats are acting nuts.

281

Jones seems to know this, and the clearest way to distinguish himself from members like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) is to directly scold her to The Hill.

He said, “I think it skews what’s really there for the Democratic Party.”

Jones seems to want to differentiate himself from Ocasio-Cortez’s brand of non-stop Twitter trolling will endear her to the same media that can’t let a Trump tweet go without an analysis of its impact. But Jones didn’t stop there. He also thinks this style of bomb-throwing is ineffective politics.

“When it gets time to get things done, that’s what people are going to be looking at — they’re going to be looking at the middle-of-the-roaders because it’s the only way to get anything done,” Jones stated.

If recent history is any judge, Ocasio-Cortez will not let these comments slide without a response. The fight for the soul of the Democratic Party is on and Jones will likely find himself out-gunned and without many powerful allies.

In response to similar criticism from former Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Lieberman (D-CT), Ocasio-Cortez responded with the following tweet:

Will Jones double-down or will he slink back to his backbench for fear of his party’s base if she hits back?

For now, Jones sounds like he thinks his voters want him to get stuff done, but considering that Jones’ main accomplishment at this point in his Senate career is his vote against now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation it is likely most Alabama voters would prefer he enjoys his time in Washington D.C. as a spectator before being sent home in 2020.

@TheDaleJackson is a contributing writer to Yellowhammer News and hosts a talk show from 7-11 am weekdays on WVNN

5 hours ago

Trump AG nominee: Sessions ‘probably did the right thing’ in recusing himself from Russia probe

Attorney General-nominee William Barr on Tuesday said Jeff Sessions “probably did the right thing” in recusing himself from the investigation into alleged collusion with Russia by the Trump campaign, according to The Washington Post.

Barr previously served as attorney general from 1991-1993. During his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Barr was asked by committee chair Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) about Sessions’ decision to recuse himself from the probe because he was involved in the Trump campaign.

“I am not sure of all of the facts, but I think he probably did the right thing recusing himself,” Barr said.

132

This came the day after Sessions attended Alabama’s Inaugural Day festivities, including the swearing-in ceremony for all statewide elected officials and reception for state Attorney General Steve Marshall.

During Marshall’s event in the attorney general’s office building, Sessions said, “Do the right thing every day and usually things will work out… [well,] not always.”

After the laughter of the room started to subside, he added, “At least in the United States, when they fire you, they don’t shoot you like they do in some countries.”

Sessions’ relationship with President Donald Trump was eroded by the recusal and the president’s public attacks on both that decision and Sessions personally. He resigned at the request of the president in November.

Sean Ross is a staff writer for Yellowhammer News. You can follow him on Twitter @sean_yhn

6 hours ago

State Sen. Gerald Allen responds to judge striking down Alabama Memorial Preservation Act — ‘Judges are not kings’

On Tuesday afternoon, State Senator Gerald Allen (R-Tuscaloosa), the sponsor of the Alabama Memorial Preservation Act, criticized Jefferson County Circuit Judge Michael Graffeo’s ruling that the law is unconstitutional.

Graffeo made the ruling Monday.

“Under the Constitution, judges are to be neutral umpires who apply the rule of law fairly,” Allen said in a statement. “A judge’s personal beliefs, whether about politics, sociology, or history, have no bearing on how he is to apply the law.”

He continued, “Judge Graffeo has taken it upon himself to know and declare that it is ‘undisputed’ that the majority of residents of Birmingham are ‘repulsed’ by the Linn Park monument, and has thus ruled the Alabama Memorial Preservation Act void. But judges are not kings, and judicial activism is no substitute for the democratic process.”

92

“The Memorial Preservation Act is meant to thoughtfully preserve the entire story of Alabama’s history for future generations. The law was vigorously debated for months by the people of Alabama’s duly-elected representatives in the State Legislature, and passed with overwhelming majorities in both the House and Senate,” Allen advised.

He concluded, “The Attorney General’s Office is confident that the Memorial Preservation Act is constitutional, and I look forward to the Attorney General’s appeal of Judge Graffeo’s ruling.”

Sean Ross is a staff writer for Yellowhammer News. You can follow him on Twitter @sean_yhn

6 hours ago

Judge voids Alabama law protecting Confederate monuments

A judge has overturned an Alabama law meant to prevent the removal of Confederate monuments from public property, ruling the act infringed on the rights of citizens in a mostly black city who are “repulsed” by the memorial.

The 10-page ruling issued late Monday by Jefferson County Circuit Judge Michael Graffeo said a 2017 state law barring the removal or alteration of historical monuments wrongly violated the free speech rights of local communities.

The law cannot be enforced, Graffeo ruled, but the state could still appeal.

256

The attorney general’s comment had no immediate response to an email seeking comment Tuesday.

The state sued the city of Birmingham after officials tried to remove a 52-foot-tall (16-meter)-tall obelisk that was erected to honor Confederate veterans in a downtown park in 1905.

Rather than toppling the stone marker, the city built a 12-foot (3.6-meter)-tall wooden box around it.

Birmingham’s population of 210,000 is more than 70 percent black, and the judge said it was indisputable that most citizens are “repulsed” by the memorial.

He rejected the state’s claims that lawmakers had the power to protect historical monuments statewide.

The law includes a $25,000 penalty for removing or altering a historical monument, but the judge said the penalty was unconstitutional.

The city has not had to pay while the lawsuit worked its way through court.

The ruling came hours after the inauguration of Republican Gov. Kay Ivey, who signed the law and opened her campaign last year with a commercial that prominently showed Confederate monuments.

“We can’t change or erase our history, but here in Alabama we know something that Washington doesn’t. To get where we are going means understanding where we have been,” Ivey said in the ad.

Supporters of the law contend it protects not just Confederate memorials but historical markers of any kind, but rebel memorials have been an issue nationwide since a white supremacist gunman killed nine worshippers in a black church in Charleston, South Carolina, in 2015.
(Associated Press, copyright 2018)

Sign-up now for our daily newsletter and never miss another article from Yellowhammer News.