The abortion pill regimen is a two-step chemical process, which uses the drugs mifepristone and misoprostol, taken up to 48 hours apart, to end the life of a preborn child. If the mother regrets her decision to abort soon after taking mifepristone, she has a chance at saving her child through so-called “abortion pill reversal,” which is simply the administration of doses of progesterone to outcompete the mifepristone’s mechanism of action. While results are said to be best if the process is started within 24 hours of taking the abortion pill, babies have been reportedly saved as long as 72 hours after.

Studies conducted by Dr. George Delgado, who pioneered the abortion pill reversal process, found low rates of complications. Live Action News has shared the stories of many women who have successfully gone through the abortion pill reversal process and continued on to have healthy babies.

“Natural progesterone has been used safely in early pregnancy for decades. According to the Charlotte Lozier Institute, ‘progesterone has been used to support healthy pregnancies since the 1950s,’” Dr. Christina Francis, board-certified OB-GYN and CEO of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, previously explained. “Natural progesterone is also commonly used for early pregnancy support in women with a history of recurrent pregnancy loss. That means healthier moms and babies!”

“Each life is precious and filled with promise and potential that, if not for tireless work of the APRN network, might not have had that second chance,” said Jor-El Godsey, president of Heartbeat International. “What a joy to celebrate this milestone of so many lives saved that they would overflow a concert hall!” […]

— Read More: www.liveaction.org

Adoptee says “adoption is not a solution to abortion”

Joanne Bagshaw, a therapist and professor of psychology, wrote an op-ed for Psychology Today about her experience as an adopted child, and spoke about how much it bothers her to see adoption being presented as an alternative to abortion, as well as the systemic issues that can lead women to choose adoption.

“With the new restrictive abortion laws being passed, I’m seeing a resurgence of this message: Choose adoption, not abortion,” Bagshaw wrote. “However, adoption is not a solution to abortion. Adoption is a choice about whether or not to parent. My birth mother, like many birth mothers, preferred to parent me, but couldn’t because of a variety of reasons that included mental illness and lack of family support.”

She continued:

The decisions we make about reproduction are the most personal decisions we will ever make. Who should make those decisions? You, with or without your doctor? The government? And how much of a choice is abortion or adoption when you don’t have any other choices? Access to safe, legal, and free or affordable contraception and abortion, informed and sensitive adoption policies, comprehensive sex education, and ethical and compassionate immigration policies that don’t criminalize asylum seekers are all examples of reproductive justice issues. […]

— Read More: www.liveaction.org

“I think it would be really really silly just to vote for somebody just because they have my name without doing any research, or knowing what they stand for,” Kamala Harris, a mother of three, told CBS. “Kamala supports abortion which I really like. Trump says that he supports weed which I really like.”

Yes, to some, the idea of abortion is very “likeable” — until perhaps they actually see it and learn the truth about what it is and what it does:

What seemed important for Ms. Harris was that she wanted to see politicians support Planned Parenthood.

“A lot of people don’t know Planned Parenthood, that they help low-income people with birth control, Pap smears, and mammograms,” she said. “It’s all free if you are broke, and I happened to be broke. You can’t close it down, and get rid of all the other things that it helps with, because you don’t like one thing it does.” […]

— Read More: www.liveaction.org

The DOJ initiated FBI raids and dug years into the past to charge and arrest peaceful protesters.

The Supreme Court first heard oral arguments in Dobbs on December 1, 2021. While the case was still in the hands of the justices in late March 2022, a monumental and heartbreaking event took place that held the potential to expose the reality of abortion to millions of Americans and change hearts and minds across the nation.

Five days later, the wave of retaliation efforts against pro-life activists began. […]

— Read More: www.liveaction.org

“In my opinion, which is bound to offend some,” he said, according to the video, “If a baby can survive outside the womb, it cannot be aborted. If a baby can survive outside the womb, it is not abortion, it is murder.”

He added, “Part of the challenge is that the education system has terrified girls and women and relentlessly pushed the idea that getting pregnant is the end of your life. When you instill terror in young girls that getting pregnant is the worst thing that can happen, they’ll believe that if they’re just kids.” He has made this type of statement before.

Musk: ‘It is not abortion, it is murder’

Musk’s statement cuts against the grain of much of the mainstream media narrative and what is considered acceptable discourse on abortion. He’s right, yet doesn’t go far enough; induced abortion is always the direct killing of an innocent human being – and isn’t medically necessary.

In fact most Americans, like Musk, actually do support limits on abortion. As Live Action News reported, polling from May 2024 found that just 25% of respondents believed abortion “should be legal in all cases.” A Knights of Columbus poll from January 2024 found that 58% of all Americans favored significant restrictions on abortion. […]

— Read More: www.liveaction.org

Harris replied, “I don’t think we should be making concessions when we’re talking about a fundamental freedom to make decisions about your own body.” She further added:

“I’m not going to engage in hypotheticals because we could go with a variety of scenarios. Let’s just start with the fundamental fact. A basic freedom has been taken from the women of America: the freedom to make decisions about their own body. And that cannot be negotiable, which is that we need to put back in the protections of Roe v. Wade, and that is it.”

Kamala Harris argues there should be zero compromises or limits to abortions in America….

NBC’s @HallieJackson: “So, as a question of pragmatism then, what concessions would be on the table? Religious exemptions, for example? Is that something you would consider if Republicans… pic.twitter.com/AT4JGVrbm0

— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) October 22, 2024

So the essential argument being made here appears to be that no one should have the right to refuse to participate in abortion — not even under the defense of religious freedom, religious exemption, or of conscience rights. Would this mean that in a Harris administration, religious groups will be forced to pay for the killing of preborn children through their insurance plans, for example, despite their clear opposition to it? Would this mean a doctor who refuses to participate in committing abortions (exercising his or her own ‘bodily autonomy’ in choosing not to take life) would be banned from practicing under the Harris administration? […]

— Read More: www.liveaction.org