Skip to main content

Pro-Life Page

Thursday, November 20, 2014
by Mallory Quigley | LifeNews.com | 11/19/14 4:59 PM
 
Repeatedly stonewalled by the Obama Administration on questions of abortion transparency in the
Affordable Care Act, pro-life leaders are taking matters into their own hands to inform consumers which
Obamacare plans include coverage of abortion on demand and which do not.
Since “open season” began on Saturday, research staff at Charlotte
 
Lozier Institute (CLI) and Family Research Council (FRC) have been
performing an ongoing examination of healthcare.gov and state-based
exchanges, looking for information on abortion coverage and the
accessibility of that information. On Thursday afternoon, pro-life
leaders, including researchers from CLI and FRC, will join
Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ), lead sponsor of the No Taxpayer
Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act, to
share their findings to date.
 
Thursday’s press conference and the launch of the website follow the
release of a newly surfaced video in which key Obamacare architect
Jonathan Gruber called the “lack of transparency” with which the law was passed a “huge political
advantage.” The new web site, ObamacareAbortion.com, will go live on Thursday.
Since October of 2013, the Charlotte Lozier Institute has reported on the lack of transparency and
generally confusing nature of the exchange plans. This summer, the non-partisan government watchdog
agency, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), released a report identifying 1,036 ObamaCare
plans that cover abortion on demand and receive taxpayer subsidies.
 
When asked to address the issue of abortion transparency last month, HHS Secretary Sylvia Burwell
hedged, saying: “[I]n terms of how the communication is going to work, we’ll have to see how quickly we
can get the communication out and where we are.”
Wednesday, November 19, 2014

by Natalie Brumfield | LifeNews.com | 11/18/14 3:58 PM

Lee Jong-rak is a Korean pastor in South Korea. A simple man with a huge purpose, Pastor Lee saw a devastating problem. He thought of a way he could change it, and he became a prophetic voice to his society. His story is a story of faith. A story of hope. A story of love. And when you hear this heroic tale, you just may never be the same.

 

Lee Jong-rak is the creator of the Baby Box. His Baby Box is the first and only box in Korea that is for collecting abandoned babies who are physically or mentally handicapped, or are just unwanted by their mothers.

Hundreds of unwanted babies are abandoned on the side of the street in South Korea every year. Jong-rak knew he needed to set up a way to save the lives of these precious babies. He built a drop box on the side of his home with a humble sign reading, “Place to leave babies.”

 

The inside of the box contains a thick towel covering the bottom, and lights and heating to keep the baby comfortable. A bell rings when someone puts a baby in the box; then Pastor Lee, his wife, or staff associates come to immediately move the baby inside.

His aim was to provide a life-giving alternative for desperate mothers in his city of Seoul. He even admits that he didn’t really expect that babies would come in; he was mistaken. The babies came. In the middle of the night, in the middle of the day, some with notes, some without a word, and only a very few mothers actually spoke to him face-to-face.

Pastor Lee stated that one of the mothers said, “I have poison to kill both myself and my baby.” He responded, “Don’t do that. Come here with your baby.” One single mother left this heart-wrenching note with her baby. The English translation follows.

 

“My baby! Mom is so sorry.
I am so sorry to make this decision.
My son! I hope you to meet great parents, and I am very, very sorry .
I don’t deserve to say a word.
Sorry, sorry, and I love you my son.
Mom loves you more than anything else.
I leave you here because I don’t know who your father is.
I used to think about something bad, but I guess this box is safer for you.
That’s why I decided to leave you here.
My son, Please forgive me.”

My breath was taken away as I read, “I used to think about something bad, but I guess this box is safer for you.” Yes, this little box is a safer place than the plans that once haunted this single mother’s mind. Because this box was an alternative, she chose life. Thus, this box would be the beginning of an previously undreamed ministry in Korea, the ministry of the Baby Box.

 

The story of this man and his baby box is reaching the entire world with its own 72-minute documentary called The Drop Box by a young 22 year-old, Brian Ivie. The documentary won the “Best of Festival” Jubilee Award and “The Best Sanctity of Life” film award at the 8th annual San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival in February 2013.

Ivie was stirred to do the film after reading an article in the Los Angeles Times about Pastor Lee’s mission, and he decided to go to Korea to make the documentary. After seeing the testimonies of this orphanage up-close, Brian Ivie’s life was changed. In his acceptance speech, Ivie said, “These kids are not mistakes. They are important.”

He went on saying, “I became a Christian while making this movie. When I started to make it and I saw all these kids come through the drop box – it was like a flash from heaven. Just like these kids with disabilities had crooked bodies, I have a crooked soul. And God loves me still. When it comes to this sanctity of life issue, we must realize that that faith in God is the only refuge for people who are deemed unnecessary. This world is so much about self-reliance, self-worth, and self-esteem. It’s a total illusion that we can be self-sufficient. Christ is the only thing that enables us.”

The documentary that changed Brian Ivie’s life is bound to change the lives of the film’s audience. Following their success with Irreplaceable, Focus on the Family is working with the film producers and Fathom Events to screen The Drop Box in theaters nationwide on March 3-5, 2015. Be sure to like the movie’s Facebook page and connect directly with Pastor Lee’s ministry at Kindred Image.

As I scrolled through the stories on Facebook, I was overwhelmed to see a post dated as April 17th where one of the staff members of the Baby Box orphanage stated that they had received five babies in one week and to pray for them. There beside her request was a picture of five beautifully bundled babies. In my head, all I could think was, “This is the real thing. This ministry is the real thing.”

Korea is not the only place that deals with child abandonment. Globally, millions of children die from abandonment. It takes different forms from country to country.

In the United States, abortion serves our abandonment purposes and they call it a “woman’s choice.” Our nation is still struggling to see that these babies are human beings, too. They deserve to live just like any other human being. With incredible men and women like Pastor Lee, this world is seeing how life can be for these babies when we take them in; when we become a voice for the ones that cannot speak up for themselves.

They are loved, they are cherished, and they are worthy just the way they are.

“They’re not the unnecessary ones in the world. God sent them to the earth to use them.”
- Pastor Lee Jong-rak in The Drop Box documentary

Tuesday, November 18, 2014
by Steven Ertelt | LifeNews.com | 11/17/14 12:36 PM
 
The pro-life group Priests for Life was one of the earliest organizations to file a lawsuit against the Obama
administration over its HHS mandate. The mandate compels religious groups to pay for birth control drugs
and drugs like ella that can cause very early abortions.
But, last week, a federal appeals court ruled that the Obama administration can force Priests for Life to
obey the HHS mandate. In a 3-0 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
concluded that the HHS mandate doesn’t abrogate the religious freedoms of Priests for Life or 11 other
religious groups that also challenged the mandate.
Responding to that decision, Father Frank Pavone, the
director of Priests for Life, says his organization will never
obey the mandate no matter what the government tries to
do. From a report:
 
A statement from the national director of Priests of
Life and Gospel of Life Ministries, Father Frank
Pavone, denounced the judgement as “absurd”.
“Priests for Life will not obey the mandate! Not
today. Not tomorrow. Now ever!” he said.
Father Pavone also told the Washington Times that “To ask a group of priests to cooperate in
the government’s plan to expand access to birth control and abortion-inducing drugs is about
as contrary to religious freedom as you can get.”
 
After Friday’s judgement, Father Pavone wrote on Facebook: “I am convinced that God will
bring us through this setback. Faithfulness to His plan will render success, by resisting those
who would throw religious freedom to the wind as in this case.
“Far from a political motivation, what galvanizes PFL in pursuing the appeal to the Supreme
Court is first, the commitment to our Catholic Church whose moral principles themselves
remain severely compromised in the Mandate; and second, as a needed agent to resist
brazen government intervention against religious freedom of the First Amendment. This is a
threat to ALL religious freedom…This is about any American. It is about life, religion and, yes,
even our freedom. It is about God’s sovereignty over Caesar.
 
The group is now hoping to take its case to the Supreme Court, where it hopes to receive a
favourable ruling, as in the Hobby Lobby case.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a favorable ruling in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.,
a landmark case addressing the Constitutionally guaranteed rights of business owners to operate their
family companies without violating their deeply held religious convictions. But that ruling applies only to
Hobby Lobby and similar businesses.
Writing for the 5-4 majority, Justice Samuel Alito handed down the decision for the high court, saying, “The
Supreme Court holds government can’t require closely held corporations with religious owners to provide
contraception coverage.”
 
The court ruled that the contraception mandate violated the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act, a
1993 law and it held that the mandate “substantially burdens the exercise of religion” and that HHS didn’t
use the “least restrictive means” to promote this government interest, tests required by RFRA.
Click here to sign up for daily pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com
Chief Justice John Roberts, Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Anthony Kennedy joined in the
majority decision. Justices Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor
dissented.
 
The Hobby Lobby decision only applies to companies, including Conestoga Wood Specialties, which had a
companion case pending before the Supreme Court. Non-profit groups like Priests for Life and Little Sisters
are still waiting for a Supreme Court ruling about their right to opt out of the mandate.
A December 2013 Rasmussen Reports poll shows Americans disagree with forcing companies like Hobby
Lobby to obey the mandate.
 
“Half of voters now oppose a government requirement that employers provide health insurance with free
contraceptives for their female employees,” Rasmussen reports.
The poll found: “The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 38% of Likely U.S.
Voters still believe businesses should be required by law to provide health insurance that covers all
government-approved contraceptives for women without co-payments or other charges to the patient.
Fifty-one percent (51%) disagree and say employers should not be required to provide health insurance
with this type of coverage. Eleven percent (11%) are not sure.”
Another recent poll found 59 percent of Americans disagree with the mandate.
Monday, November 17, 2014

by Kristin Hawkins | LifeNews.com | 11/14/14 4:27 PM

These midterm elections, angry voters served the country with a clear message that the extreme liberal policies sweeping through the government must be stopped. The liberals lost big and perhaps even succumbed to their greatest weapon of recent past elections – the so-called “war on women.”

Voters, and women in particular, were fed up with the ridiculous rhetoric (condom shortages anyone?) and support of extreme policies, especially on abortion. Wendy Davis, who was nicknamed the “Abortion Barbie” because the filibuster that made her famous was solely in support of abortions on babies past the age of viability, went down in flames in Texas, losing her election by 20 points.

Pro-life Americans certainly rejoiced at the outcome of the elections as they should. But where should the pro-life movement go from here as they have significant support for their positions at every level of government?

Instead of supporting any kind of divisive policies, like those who launched the various “war on women” campaigns, the pro-life movement should focus on issues that a healthy amount of all Americans support: supporting the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Act, which bans abortion after 20 weeks gestation; putting in place legal restrictions that forbid taxpayer dollars paying for abortions, either through Obamacare or another entity; and defunding Planned Parenthood.

According to a Washington Post/ABC poll, 64 percent of Americans support prohibiting abortions after 20 weeks, compared with 28 percent who are opposed. And several polls show that Americans are opposed to using taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions – a particular CNN survey shows 56% opposed to 39% in support of public funding for abortion.

Defunding the nation’s largest abortion chain, Planned Parenthood, shows a more even split. In 2011, The Hill did a survey that showed 42 percent in favor of cutting funding while 46 percent said it should be left alone. The poll had a margin of error of +/- three points. Planned Parenthood’s image of “women’s health” has taken a beating over the past several years as multiple undercover videos by Live Action show their employees willing to aid and abet sex traffickersand cover up the rape of young girls.

Former Planned Parenthood director Abby Johnson revealed evidence recently that her former employer has abortion quotas. And Cecile Richards was almost comically called out for outright deception when she said her organization does mammograms and therefore should not have their funding cut from the Susan G. Komen Foundation. Planned Parenthood gets over $500 million a year in public funding.

These three areas are issues that not only pro-lifers agree on but many Americans. Why shouldn’t the new Congress start here and build support for these obvious unitive issues?

President Barack Obama is on the extreme idealistic end of all three of these goals. He fought tooth and nail for Planned Parenthood’s funding and almost shut down the government over it in 2011. He voted four different times against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act which would have protected babies born alive from botched abortions and forced doctors to save them. And he conned the last of the holdouts in his party to vote for Obamacare by signing a useless executive order saying that no taxpayer dollars would pay for abortions, which was a complete lie.

Voters elected the new Congress to stop President Obama in his tracks. Here is their chance to do something substantive to answer the voters.

Friday, November 14, 2014
by Sarah Terzo | LifeNews.com | 11/13/14 12:47 PM
 
One Chicago abortion clinic said the following on a brochure aimed at women considering abortions at the
clinic:
“From admission to recovery, patient ease and comfort are first considerations. She is
encouraged to ask questions, share feelings or misgivings.”
These were the actual instructions given to
the clinic workers:
 
“1. Don’t tell [the] patient. The abortion
will hurt.
2. Don’t discuss [the abortion]
procedure or the instruments to be
used in any detail.
3. Don’t answer too many questions.
Pamela Zekman and Pamela Warrick “The Abortion Profiteers” Chicago Sun-Times November 12, 1978
This article was from a long time ago but things in the abortion clinics haven’t changed much.
 
Former Planned Parenthood worker Catherine Anthony Adair :
“In fact, clinic workers would purposefully avoid providing information on fetal development,
what the child looked like, the child’s anatomical development and the pain he or she could
feel. I was continuously reminded that when referring to the baby, the appropriate terminology
was “clump of cells” or “contents of the uterus.”
Planned Parenthood’s mission is to pressure as many women into having an abortion as it
can. Those in charge know that can’t be accomplished if they refer to the child as a “baby.”
 
Then women would know what was really growing inside them: a little person with a beating
heart, functioning nervous system, tiny hands and feet. The child is entirely disregarded.
There is no counseling, no care, no waiting and no discussion. Once a pregnancy is
confirmed, it is off to termination.”
 
Catherine Anthony Adair “Planned Parenthood lies about itself” Washington Examiner, 11/22/11. Quoted in
Abortion Industry’s “Mission Is To Pressure Women”, Afterabortion.org, Elliot Institute, January 12, 2012.
 
 
Read more at the Washington Examiner
but:
In their factsheet “THE TRUTH ABOUT CRISIS PREGNANCY CENTERS” NARAL Pro-Choice America
makes the following ironic statement:
Unfortunately, reports indicate that CPCs frequently misinform, mislead, and coerce women
with unintended or crisis pregnancies. Staff and volunteers at CPCs often use anti-abortion
propaganda to dissuade women from exercising their right to choose…”
 
It goes on to say:
“Women are entitled to accurate, comprehensive and unbiased medical information with which
they can make their own decisions.”
 
Thursday, November 13, 2014
by Cheryl Sullenger | LifeNews.com | 11/12/14 2:23 PM
 
Federal Court Judge Timothy Black, who formally served on the Board of Directors of Planned Parenthood
in Cincinnati, has been appointed to hear a suit brought by that same abortion facility challenging Ohio’s
law that requires abortion clinic to maintain hospital transfer agreements.
“We are calling on Judge Black to recuse himself from this case because of his prior involvement as a
Planned Parenthood board member and president. It is wrong for him to sit in judgment of a case brought
by an organization with which he has been so deeply involved,” said Operation Rescue President Troy
Newman.
 
Right to Life of Greater Cincinnati has published a
questionnaire completed by Judge Black that was submitted
upon his nomination bu Pres. Barack Obama to the Federal
bench that identifies his involvement with Planned
Parenthood. On page three, the questionnaire states that
Black served from 1986-1989 as a Director of Planned
Parenthood Association of Cincinnati, which later morphed
into Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region. In 1988,
Black served as president of the organization’s Board of
Directors.
 
On Monday, Planned Parenthood of Southwest Ohio Region
brought suit against Ohio Department of Health Director
Richard Hodges and local hospitals challenging a provision of
Ohio’s abortion facility licensing law that requires abortion
clinics to maintain local hospital transfer agreements.
Planned Parenthood had previously been operating under an exemption to the law in the form of a
variance to the hospital transfer agreement provision. However, the Department of Health did not approved
its variance renewal application filed in May 2014, that named two doctors with long histories of malpractice
and other problems as the physicians responsible to treat Planned Parenthood’s abortion patients that
suffered abortion complications requiring hospitalization. The request for variance was amended on July
30 by Planned Parenthood to replace a third physician.
 
On October 14, 2014, the Department of Health sent Planned Parenthood a letter noting that it did not
meet the requirements for licensing under Ohio law and informed the abortion facility of its intent to deny
licensure, which would have forced Planned Parenthood to shut down their Cincinnati clinic. This prompted
Planned Parenthood to sue.
On Planned Parenthood’s variance application, it listed Cincinnati Obstetrician and Gynecologists David
Schwartz and Michael Drasnik.
Schwartz was honored just days ago at a November 1,
2014, Planned Parenthood Gala as its Diamond Award
winner. However, Schwartz has a shocking history of
numerous negligence and malpractice cases dating back
years, documentation of which is available on
AbortionDocs.org. Injuries to women listed in the cases
included botched delivery that resulted in an emergency
hysterectomy to save the patient’s life.
 
Draznik’s background is even worse. His malpractice cases
involve several botched laparoscopic surgeries that
perforated other internal organs resulting in life-threatening conditions to his patients. One woman
“crashed” as the result of an undetected bowl perforation and nearly died.
Draznik also has a criminal background involving domestic violence and criminal disorderly conduct.
 
Documents substantiating his legal woes are also available at AbortionDocs.org.
“Reading over Schwartz and Draznik’s extensive malpractice and criminal documents, it is obvious that the
Ohio Department of Health was exercising good judgment in rejecting Planned Parenthood’s variance
request and ordering them to comply with state licensing requirements as written,” said Newman. “This
lawsuit is a desperate measure to keep their income cash cow open and aborting, without respect to the
health and safety of women they purport to serve, who are left in the lurch should abortion complications
arise. This case is just too important to allow a Planned Parenthood crony to sit in judgment. We demand
Judge Black’s recusal and urge the appointment of a judge that can rule fairly and without bias.”
Operation Rescue urges the public to contact Judge Black’s office and respectfully leave a message for
him through his courtroom deputy demanding his recusal from Planned Parenthood v. Hodges in the
interest of justice.
 
Office of Judge Timothy Black
Courtroom Deputy Mary Rogers
Voice: (513) 564-7640
 
Wednesday, November 12, 2014
by Steven Ertelt | LifeNews.com | 11/11/14 1:59 PM
 
A city in Georgia has a unique way of making sure abortions never happen there. The city of Rossville has
banned abortion clinics, with its mayor saying the people of the town want it to be a “peaceful city.”
Members of the city council unanimously passed
the measure banning abortion clinics, according
to the local newspaper. The measure forbids any
abortion facility within city limits.
 
Rossville Mayor Teddy Harris said the measure
would help keep the city “drama free.”
“We want to be a peaceful city,” Harris said.
“We don’t want to have any protesters.”
There is no abortion clinic in Rossville, and
the ordinance does allow for abortions to
occur within the city if they occur at a
hospital by a licensed physician, are deemed by that doctor to be necessary to save the
woman’s life, and the doctor can certify that the baby would not survive out of the womb.
 
As of 2011, there were 19 abortion clinics in the entire state of Georgia. Ninety-six percent of
counties — including Walker County, where Rossville is located — do not have a clinic.
“I just don’t think (clinics) are appropriate for our city, ” Harris said.
Thank the Rossville city council by going here.
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
by Steven Ertelt | LifeNews.com | 11/10/14 4:56 PM
 
A new report sheds light on dozens of cases in England where mother are suing the government-run and
taxpayer-funded NHS health service after abortions they had failed to kill their unborn babies. The mothers
have won huge payouts — sometimes bringing in tens of thousands of dollars — after abortion procedures
went wrong. In some cases the abortions were supposedly done on babies with disabilities and the
mothers in question went on to have healthy babies after the failed abortions. The moms
who sued received cash for pain during birth and discomfort of pregnancy since
they went through with birth after the failed abortion. However, detractors are
blasting the lawsuits — saying the moms in question should feel blessed to be the mother of a healthy baby who didn’t die.
 
From the story:
 
Last night the former Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali, hit out at the move, saying: ‘A
healthy child is an occasion for thanksgiving rather than for taking the NHS to the cleaners and
using up precious funds which could otherwise be more usefully employed.’
 
And TV presenter and mother-of-two Kirstie Allsopp, who has urged women to have children
while they are still young, said she understood that people who had suffered a serious medical
malpractice or had a disabled child needed support, but added: ‘It seems to me that to be able
to sue the NHS after the birth of a healthy baby is simply not something the majority of people
would agree with.
 
‘The NHS hasn’t got an infinite amount of money. I think parents in that position should think
twice.’
Monday, November 10, 2014
by Matthew Clark | LifeNews.com | 11/7/14 5:04 PM
 
 
The Supreme Court announced today that it would hear a major ObamaCare case that could deal a
crippling blow to President Obama’s prized pro-abortion health care law.
As the Wall Street Journal reports:
The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to review whether
consumers can receive subsidies through the Affordable Care Act for insurance
purchased through a federal exchange, taking up a key
piece of the Obama administration’s healthcare law.
The move puts before the high court one of several cases over the subsidies. The justices
accepted a challenge from Virginia that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in
Richmond, Va., had rejected. The Fourth Circuit in July found in favor of an Internal Revenue
Service rule extending tax credits to lower-income Americans who purchase coverage through
the federal insurance exchange.
 
As my ACLJ colleague David French explained earlier this year:
ObamaCare as passed by Congress stated quite clearly that IRS tax credits (better known as
ObamaCare “subsidies”) are available to subsidize insurance policies purchased through state
ObamaCare exchanges. It does not state that subsidies are available for insurance purchased
through the federal exchange.
After 36 states refused to create state exchanges, an action that had the effect of limiting the
law’s individual insurance mandate and employer mandate, the IRS decided to simply make
up a new regulation – without any statutory authority – that extended subsidies to insurance
purchased on the federal exchange and thereby dramatically expanded the individual and
employer mandates.
 
Here’s how the IRS rule expanded ObamaCare:
“This broader [IRS] interpretation has major ramifications. By making credits more widely
available, the IRS Rule gives the individual and employer mandates—key provisions of the
ACA—broader effect than they would have if credits were limited to state-established
Exchanges. The individual mandate requires individuals to maintain “minimum essential
coverage” and, in general, enforces that requirement with a penalty. See 26 U.S.C. §
5000A(a)-(b). The penalty does not apply, however, to individuals for whom the annual cost of
the cheapest available coverage, less any tax credits, would exceed eight percent of their
projected household income. See id. § 5000A(e)(1)(A)-(B). By some estimates, credits will
determine on which side of the eight-percent threshold millions of individuals fall. See Br. of
Economic Scholars in Support of Appellees 18. Thus, by making tax credits available in the 36
states with federal Exchanges, the IRS Rule significantly increases the number of people who
must purchase health insurance or face a penalty.”
 
Put simply, if Congress had intended for subsidies to be made available through federal
exchanges, it should have said so.
 
He’s exactly right, and now the Supreme Court is going to take a very careful look.
The fact is if the subsidies don’t stand – the major funding mechanism that made it even remotely possible
for many families to comply with the individual mandate – then ObamaCare would likely collapse on itself.
We’ve always said ObamaCare was flawed and couldn’t sustain itself.
With a newly elected pro-life Senate, a major challenge to ObamaCare subsidies at the Supreme Court,
and the news that these subsidies are directly paying for abortion, the President’s prized pro-abortion
reconfiguration of America’s health care landscape may be in serious jeopardy.
 
Friday, November 7, 2014

By Lisa Bourne | Thu Nov 6, 2014 - 4:17 pm EST | LifeSiteNews.com|

Bolstered by a grassroots pro-life effort, Tennessee voters passed a constitutional amendment in Tuesday’s election that will allow the state to better protect its pregnant mothers and cease it from being the third-largest out-of-state abortion destination in the nation.

Amendment 1 passed with the support of nearly 53 percent of the state’s electorate despite supporters being outspent by abortion proponents by more than two to one,according to the Yes on Amendment 1 campaign’s webpage.   

"We are grateful to God and to the good people of Tennessee for this victory," Brian Harris, president of Tennessee Right to Life and a coordinator for Yes on 1, said in a statement provided to LifeSiteNews. "Despite millions of abortion dollars flooding our airwaves with deceptive ads, the people of Tennessee saw through the falsehoods and made their voices heard."

The Yes on 1 campaign raised and spent $1.5 million in contrast to at least $4 million reported by Planned Parenthood's "NO" campaign, Harris said, and 16 abortion facilities in Tennessee and across the country contributed a total of $3.5 million in a combined effort to defeat the pro-life amendment.

A 2000 Tennessee Supreme Court decision struck down regulations in the state, including a two-day waiting period, a requirement that a mother be fully informed about abortion, and a requirement that second-trimester abortions be performed in a hospital.

The state’s high court, which had deemed the existing law “overly burdensome” to women, left Tennessee to be a target for out-of-state abortions.

Tennessee’s eight surrounding states have laws requiring informed consent, waiting periods, and state health regulation of abortion facilities, drawing people to Tennessee for unregulated abortion. It is third in the nation for percentage of out-of-state abortions, with, for example, almost one-fourth of all abortions committed in Tennessee during 2010 being performed on mothers from out-of-state.

Amendment 1 allows Tennessee lawmakers to resume abortion regulations for their state.

The amendment reads:

Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother.

State lawmakers are looking for abortion legislation to introduce in the next session,according to NBC affiliate WBIR, including clinic regulation and waiting periods, but it would be limited in scope and certainly not eliminate abortion in Tennessee.

Harris credits Amendment 1’s passage to a statewide grassroots campaign that relied heavily on volunteers and smaller financial contributions from individuals, churches, and pro-life organizations. 

"We recognized that we would never have the financial resources of the abortion industry so began planning long ago to build a team of advocates who could educate and organize their local communities," he said in the statement to LifeSiteNews. 

The effort paid off, he said, especially in rural areas of the state where volunteers raised funds and awareness of both Amendment and the 2000 State Supreme Court ruling.

Harris gave special credit to clergy and religious leaders throughout Tennessee who made support for the amendment a priority.  

"In the end this could be characterized as pastors and pulpits in opposition to Planned Parenthood's abortion-profiteering,” Harris said. “We owe a debt of gratitude to men and women of faith who refused to accept Tennessee's designation as an abortion destination and who actively used their influence to promote the protection of innocent human life."

Abortion legislation passed in the next session is expected to go into effect July 1.