Pope Francis' false appeal to "communion" in blocking Latin Mass

Pope Francis' backwardly named motu proprio, Traditionis Custodes, appealed to a fictional disunity as justification for restricting the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM). 

In the document, Francis acknowledged both Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI's move to promote the TLM for "the concord and unity of the Church." Two paragraphs later, Francis called for the exact opposite of his predecessors, and instead restricted the TLM for the sake of "ecclesial communion." 

Pope Francis photo by Juan David Tena, accessed at Wikimedia Commons

On November 30, 2023, EWTN's Raymond Arroyo interviewed Abp. Georg Gänswein, Pope Benedict's personal secretary.

Gänswein recalled asking Pope Emeritus Benedict in 2021 about Pope Francis' document oppressing the TLM. 

"Holy Father can I ask you a question? ... I do not understand understand that motu proprio because the liberty you gave with your motu propio years ago has bought peace in the liturgy and in the Church. And I feel this motu proprio will cause many, many problems." 

Gänswein then recalled Benedict's answer: "I hope God will help us."

Gänswein's instinct in 2021 has proven correct, as today we see "many, many problems" largely issuing from Pope Francis' antagonism for the TLM and the faithful attending. Following Francis' motu proprio, a multitude of vexed faithful have cried out. Francis' action, rather than following a trajectory of unity, has given rise to multiple faithful individuals and even formal organizations pleading for the restoration of the TLM. 

We knew nothing of such resistance and disunion during the time period Francis claimed disunity needed fixing. John Paul II wrote his indult in 1984; Pope Benedict his motu proprio in 2007. Pope Francis' motu proprio was in 2021. No such disunity between 1984 and 2021 existed. As Gänswein said, Benedict's motu proprio "brought peace." 

Speaking of the language, Pope Pius XI in 1922 said that Latin was a "great bond of unity." Pope Pius XII in 1947 said Latin was a "beautiful sign of unity."

Obstruction of Latin is also a disunion with the saints of old. For at the divine liturgy, the saints and angels are present. We especially acknowledge this during the confiteor when calling to angels and saints. Liturgical unity is not an enterprise trapped in a single generation. The presence of angels and saints for all of Christianity should not be ignored in the scope of "unity" in the Liturgy. Beyond the language, the new mass arguably preserved a mere 13% of the content of the traditional liturgy. Appealing to the new mass as somehow more unifying than a centuries-old liturgy is nonsensical.

Among the reasons the late Cardinal George Pell said of Francis "this pontificate is a disaster in many or most respects; a catastrophe" were because " liturgical tensions are inflamed and not dampened" under Francis.

6 political behaviors of the Francis pontificate

Pope Francis and many of the bishops and Vatican spokespersons during his pontificate frequently behave in a manner matching modern propagandistic politicians. There are many examples. Here are 6.

CENSORSHIP

Francis Pontificate: Not only did the Pope command suffocation of the Traditional Latin Mass, but Vatican officials subsequently issued instruction censoring the TLM from being included among the bulletin mass times.

Hundreds of priests find themselves “cancelled” for reasons kept hidden by the aggressing bishops. In the typical case, there is no impropriety even alleged by the bishops. These priests are forbidden from public ministry. The latest inexcusable scandal was Pope Francis declaring the orthodox Bishop Joseph Strickland’s office in Texas vacant without due cause.

Politics: Recently, we’ve seen western governments even controlling social media sites to limit what is said and by whom. For example, Facebook has censored video of a living unborn baby. Both Facebook and Twitter censored a news story just prior to the 2020 election about Joe Biden’s son that was indisputably true. Social media knowingly censored true Covid information. Once the latest Ukraine conflict started, Youtube censored Oliver Stone’s 2016 film Ukraine on Fire, which incriminated the West in the 2014 Maidan coup. Youtube also recently removed interviews for the film The Sound of Freedom, which exposed a vast child-trafficking international network. It's a warlike tactic to take out an opponent's communication channels. These are a fraction of the censorship and account banning that has occurred in recent years at the behest of politicians.

Pope Francis 2016 (from Wikimedia Commons)

BLAMING A PROXY

Francis Pontificate: At the close of the recent “Synod on Synodality,” German heretical bishop Georg Bätzing claimed the “overwhelming majority of a world church has chosen” the sexual perversions he and many bishops (especially in Germany) have propagated. Of course, this is asserted gratuitously, because the practicing faithful believe the Church’s true moral teachings. The bishop points the finger at the faithful as a proxy for advancing his own ambitions.

Pointing the finger at the second Vatican council is also a common theme during the Francis pontificate. A Vatican official recently said, “Francis is the one who is pushing forward the application of Vatican II.” Yet Vatican II did not call for many of the Pope’s chief causes, such as the oppression of the Traditional Latin Mass. Cardinal Roche even claimed “The Council Fathers perceived the urgent need for a reform” in his letter defending suppression of Traditional Latin Mass. When cited this way, Vatican II has become a Rorschach blot, a proxy for advancing causes the Council did not call to advance.

Politics: The censorship tactic also ties into this, as government officials launder their power through big tech, belying the argument that these are “private companies.” They are instead used as proxies to do the bidding of the government entity.

In the Ukraine conflict, both NATO and U.S. politicians have insisted involvement in the war is limited to Russia and Ukraine and not NATO nor the U.S. However: In September, NATO candidly confessed the NATO expansion east was a cause for Russia’s response; the April Discord leaks show that the Pentagon was the source of war plans to which Ukraine did not have access; Hillary Clinton has said favor for Ukraine come with “strings;” British intelligence flat out said they support Ukraine so they can hurt Russia for non-acceptance of Western “lgbt+” ideology; President Biden’s son spearheaded funding for bioweapon research in Ukraine; and U.S. Undersecretary Victoria Nuland confirmed involvement with Ukraine biolabs. Sen. Tim Scott proudly said the U.S. was using “Ukranian blood” in the U.S. effort to weaken Russia. These are just a few of the direct involvements and interests the West has in Ukraine well beyond “freedom” help.

So, while Western politicians say their support is just altruism to help Ukraine, the operation appears ordered for Western interests. Ukraine is the proxy.

HYPOCRISY

A quick word on “hypocrisy.” The concept of hypocrisy is not merely condemning someone for that which one does himself. Someone addicted to smoking would be quite right and not hypocritical to discourage others from doing the same. Hypocrisy as used here is to condemn another for a behavior one condones for himself.

Francis Pontificate: Synod on Synodality pitchmen speak of the “openness” of the event. Yet participants are sworn to secrecy.

Pope Francis often makes statements like “say an emphatic ‘no’ to all forms of clericalism” while his pontificate is plump with clericalism. One example would be his attitude of placing himself above Church Fathers and preceding Popes when he rejected their teaching on the death penalty. Another is his absolutization of the Novus Ordo mass, in which the priest’s ad populum posture is a textbook form of clericalism. Other examples abound.

Politics: One of the politicized tactics of the abortion industry is to accuse the pro-life movement of being against “choice.” Of course, “choice” is a euphemism the abortion industry uses to disguise the intentional termination of an innocent human life. Meanwhile, when doctors offer women an actual “choice,” such as the abortion pill reversal (APR) protocol, the abortion industry has responded by attempting to silence that treatment, most recently in Colorado and California.

As mentioned above, the West has denied leveraging proxies throughout the business world – especially tech - and the international scene. Ironically, Nuland said last year, “It is classic Russian technique to blame on the other guy what they're planning to do themselves.”

FICTIONAL VICTIMS

Francis Pontificate: One of the battle cries of the Synod on Synodality is reaching out to people labeled “marginalized,” such as women or so-called “LGBT+” etc. As Professor Regis Martin said recently, “I have yet to meet any of these people. Who exactly are they whom we’ve so cruelly consigned to the margins of ecclesial life? … I really have not seen anyone who fits the description.”

Of course, the victimhood expressed here is fictional, since all of humanity is invited to participate in the full life of the Church, and the above persons are no exception. The only ostracized group today are the TLM attendees, ostracized by that very pontificate, and referred to in official Vatican documents as “members of the said group” distinct from all the other faithful. The heterodox cries of marginalization of women or the sexual identities commit a form of the fallacy of equivocation, confusing the non-possibility of a female priest or the non-possibility of blessing a sinful relationship as “marginalizing” those people. It’s similar to the modern world’s poorly thought-out attempt to redefine “love” as “endorsing” whatever someone does.

Politics: Fictional victimhood in the Synod mirrors fictional victimhood tactics in the world. Leftist ideologues have been conditioned to seek refuge in victimhood even when they act as bigoted aggressor. For example, in December, the Family Foundation had reserved a dining room at a restaurant later discovered to be owned by a leftist. Once the owner discovered the group was pro-life and pro-marriage, the owner rescinded the reservation and released a delusional statement claiming the Family Foundation sought to “deprive women and LGBTQ+ persons of their basic human rights” and that the restaurant staff felt “unsafe.” Of course, the natural law and millennia-old notion of marriage and desire to protect innocent life is no cause for alarm.

Another example of fictional victimhood prowls the world of modern feminism, which asserts that women are denied “equal pay” for equal work. However, the statistics they use for this assertion conflate the average pay of males and females in totality, ignoring job-types or amount of work. When those factors are accounted for, the so-called discrimination virtually vanishes. A hallucination of victimhood occurred when the U.S. women’s national soccer team cried foul on equal pay because they themselves rejected the collective bargaining agreement under which they would have made more had they signed it when offered.

EUPHEMISMS

Francis Pontificate: Pope Francis often uses the term “backwardness” as a pejorative against orthodox Catholics. He said, “There is incredible support for restorationism, what I call indietrismo (backwardness).” The term is non-theological. As a concept, looking backward per se is neither good nor bad. It depends to what one is looking back. Certainly, the Church in every age has looked back toward the Apostolic deposit and the preceding Magisterium to guide matters of the day. As mentioned in the proxy section above, Francis himself is ever looking “backward” to Vatican II and the 1960s to defend many of his teachings. In rejecting what he claims is “backwardness” of orthodox Catholics, he ironically (and unconvincingly) appeals to the 5^th century’s St. Vincent of Lerins. Also ironic is that his document detaching from Tradition is called Traditionis Custodes, which in word means “guardians of tradition” and in practice means obliterator of tradition. While Pope Francis belittles such “restorationism,” predecessors such as Pope Pius X said where “Christian doctrine…is neglected, to restore it.”

Another common term used by Francis and heterodox bishops is “accompaniment.” This is, again, a concept that is neither good nor bad, per se. It depends on who one is accompanying. Proverbs 13:20 says “[T]he companion of fools will suffer harm.” In 2018, Cardinal Cupich exposed the term as a vehicle leading to the 2023 Synod, which, among other offenses, blurred the authority of the hierarchy and laity: “Thus, in a genuinely synodal Church there is no hierarchical distinction between those with knowledge and those without. As such, the most important consequence of this call to accompaniment ought to be greater attention to the voices of the laity, especially on matters of marriage and family life.” Opening doctrine in this way to any laity has resulted in various justifications of sinful behaviors. Fr. Jerry Pokorsky explained: “instead of accompanying our Lord on the way of the cross, many Church leaders choose to accommodate sinners on sinners’ terms.”

Related to “accompaniment” is “inclusion.” The Synod touted concepts like “radical inclusion” in the context of women and so-called “LGBT+,” etc. But, as discussed in the fictional victims section above, the notion that any group is excluded is really only applicable today to TLM attendees against whom the Francis pontificate has been plainly hostile. Polish Archbishop Stanisław Gądecki said the modernist term “‘inclusiveness’ implies an acceptance of how a person defines him or herself, as if defining oneself were in obvious conformity with reality, inherently unquestionable, and therefore demanding affirmation.”

Politics: The abortion industry is dependent on lies, including many euphemisms like “reproductive health” or “her body.”

The gay “marriage” movement hides behind many euphemistic slogans like “love is love,” “same love” or “marriage equality,” none of which address the root of the matter of what is a marriage or what is a man and woman.

The term “underrepresented” is used to signal supposed injustice if there are not enough of certain people of a particular demographic involved in a business, industry, film, or similar. It’s also applied inconsistently. Modern use of “representation” is a euphemism to condition people to perceive injustice where there is none. Politicians then leverage this. Merely sharing, say, skin color, with another person does not amount to any sense of relevant “representation.” If a white female devout Catholic is asked who better represents her, Nancy Pelosi or Cardinal Francis Arinze of Nigeria, she’s going to pick Cardinal Arinze. Today’s political use of “representation” appeals to trivial demographic characteristics when those characteristics are irrelevant to the context at hand.

ABUSE OF AUTHORITY

Francis Pontificate: The Pope’s quest to eradicate the Traditional Latin Mass is outside the scope of his authority. Cardinal Roche also abused authority proper to local bishops when he attempted to police them to impose Pope Francis’ Latin Mass restriction.

The removal of priests or even bishops without due cause is also external to the Pope’s or a bishop’s authority.

The Vatican Press office declared the Church was now ruled by Pope Francis as an individual, as opposed to the authority of Scripture and Tradition.

Politics: In an explicit overlap between the Francis pontificate and politics, the FBI was caught spying on traditional Catholics.

A court recognized the “abuse of authority” the U.S. government attempted to impose when demanding “vaccine mandates.”

Another court blocked Minnesota’s Democrat Secretary of State from forbidding the opposition party’s overwhelming leading candidate from appearing on the ballot.

FINAL THOUGHTS

What these overlapping tactics and language patterns between the Church and the world suggest is that the world is over-influencing the Church if not outright directing it. Language tricks and political tactics are not native to the pursuit of sound doctrine nor pastoral and familial leadership. It is indicative of a modern and worldly infection warned against by many in Church history:

Everyone must understand that such ravings and others like them, concealed in many deceitful guises, cause greater ruin to public calm the longer their impious originators are unrestrained. They cause a serious loss of souls redeemed by Christ’s blood wherever their teaching spreads, like a cancer; it forces its way into public academies, into the houses of the great, into the palaces of kings, and even enters the sanctuary, shocking as it is to say so. (Pope Pius VI, Inscrutabile, 7, 1775)

The common enemy of the human race is wholly engaged in undermining faith, destroying truth and disrupting unity by worldly wisdom, heretical discussion, subtle, clever deceit, and even, where possible, by the use of force. (St. Pius IX, Quartus Supra, 2, 1873)

According to these rules, Venerable Brethren, you should judge those to whom you will entrust the ministry of the divine word. Whenever you find any of them departing from these rules, being more concerned with their own interests than those of Jesus Christ and more anxious for worldly applause than the welfare of souls, warn and correct them. If that proves insufficient, be firm in removing them from an office for which they have proven themselves unworthy. (St. Pius X, Pieni L’animo, 9, 1906)

2 paths to save the immoral culture

What will solve the immoral madness that has seized the world today? The Western world is largely responsible for fostering various sexual deviance, abortion, sterilizations, child predation, anti-marriage and family, fatherless homes, drug overdose, and various other immoralities.

There are at least two key fronts by which this hellish trajectory can be altered.

#1: The Church restores moral authority

Abortion and various sexual, economic, and societal indecencies have infected the world, in a particular way, the West (predominantly North America, Western Europe, and Australia). The primary and non-negotiable path to save the moral decadence in the West must come from the Church. The current generation of papacy and bishops is largely infected with a secular bent hostile to truth and tradition.

Our Lady of Akita in 1973, fifty years ago, prophesied:

The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their confreres.

In recent days, we’ve seen no less. One archbishop called out a Cardinal’s acceptance of sexual perversion at the divine liturgy, another archbishop called out a Cardinal’s heresy on sexuality, another Cardinal called out the bishops of Germany for openly embracing heresy, and holy priests remain persecuted and removed unjustly from ministry by their own bishops. Even the Pope is in contradiction to his predecessors and Vatican council fathers on the liturgy and otherwise. Cardinal Zen this week called to the attention of bishops the revolutionary sexual deviance promoted by the German bishops, allowed by the Pope to persist to date, and warning that a goal of some at the “Synod on Synodality” is “sexual morality different from that of Catholic Tradition.”

The sex abuse scandal, predominantly victimizing young males, continues to come to light. Liturgical abuses are all too common.  Pagan influence permeates the current hierarchy. The secrecy of the sex abuse scandal has moved to secrecy in “cancelling” good priests. And there are other scandals throughout the Church hierarchy, sadly too numerous to enumerate.

Meanwhile, a supermajority of “Catholics” are apparently contracepting against the moral order. Only a small minority agree fully with the Church on abortion. Suicides are hitting record highs. Teen depression is spiking. In the past several years, youth have been conditioned to embrace heterodox sexuality to the point that 20% of Gen Z thinks they are “nonbinary.”

Such tragically off-course results coincide with a Church hierarchy too silent on orthodoxy, morality and the meaning of the human person, marriage, life, sexuality, and humility. Instead of feeding the flock a foundation for virtues, they largely act as “a disciple of the world,” as Msgr. Charles Pope recently described the suspect “Synod on Synodality.”

As long as all these scandals and improprieties are permitted or endorsed by the Pope and hierarchy, the entire world will suffocate and decay under their poisons. The sanctification of the world is dependent on the sanctity of the Church.

“The world and the church are in a mess because we priests have failed to be as holy as we are called to be,” said Father John Corapi in 1997 at a retreat for priests and seminarians.

Dr. Edward Feser, professor of philosophy and scholastic, recently observed (emphasis added):

A mark of the diabolical disorder of our times is that we face grave problems (in Church, state, education, etc.) which can be solved only by those with the relevant authority, while at the same time largely having the worst possible people occupying those positions of authority.

Finally, restoration of the Latin may be a lynchpin to restoring sanity in the world. The Traditional Latin Mass’s promotion of family and anthropological realities are especially what today’s world not only lacks but often abhors.

Exorcist Fr. Chad Ripperger F.S.S.P. stated:

It is safe to say that, objectively speaking, with respect to the ritual itself, the old rite of Mass has an ability to merit more than the new rite of Mass. While this merit is accidental, since the essential or intrinsic merit of the Mass, which is the Sacrifice of Christ, is the same in both rites, it is nevertheless something serious. Since the faithful are the beneficiaries of the fruits derived from this aspect of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, we have a grave obligation to consider the impact that this factor may be having on the life of the Church.

The Mass of St. Gregory
Spanish anonymous, ca 1490

A parallel change in rites also occurred in the wake of the Second Vatican Council, namely the rite of exorcism. While some exorcists deny a difference in efficacy of the older or new exorcism rites, the late Fr. Gabriel Amorth, exorcist of Rome, decried the new exorcism rite and obtained a dispensation to perform the rite rooted in antiquity from 1614.

On the new rite of exorcism, Fr. Amorth said, “Efficacious prayers, prayers that had been in existence for twelve centuries, were suppressed and replaced by new ineffective prayers.” Another anonymous exorcist stated of the new rite: “The new rite will one day itself be subject to a true restoration, which will restore to the obligatory texts of the exorcist the true nature of his office.”

These changes in liturgical and exorcism rites coincide both with the aftermath of the Council and immoral norms of the cultural and sexual revolution from the 1960s and 1970s. The evidence shows that a restoration to Latin in liturgy and exorcism will restrict the current hold the devil and his minions have on the world today.

Ultimately, moral decadence will persist until the Church leads the way back to sanity.

 

#2: The East and Global South move the West to reverse course

Related to the Church dimension is a secondary political one. In the U.S., the current Administration is using a form of financial terrorism against states that do not submit to “LGBT” ideology by withholding school lunch funding that is available to states that do submit.

Western nations also use economic penalties (or even military penalties) to obtain their social demands as an international policy. While Eastern or Southern nations are not immune to corruption, the West had traditionally operated with a brand of freedom and human prosperity. Those days have vanished. The East and South at least appear to have a greater aversion to the degree of moral depravity in the West.

The West’s accelerating deterioration has been noticed around the world. The following is a small sample of countries condemning Western economic and social immorality.

• Bharatiya Janata Party (Indian People’s Party) recently issued a statement: “A valid marriage is only between a biological male and biological woman… any equality offered to same-sex couples goes against religious values and seriously affects the interests of every citizen.” Indian citizens also reject the idea to modernize by “follow[ing] Western culture.”
• The group of countries forming what is known as BRICS are allying in large part to insulate themselves from Western sanctions by way of “de-dollarization.” These sanctions are often imposed against countries that do not embrace the West’s sexual proclivities. The West openly admits this, citing a nation’s “climate of intolerance” as grounds for “financial sanctions, visa restrictions, and other actions.” The U.S. currently even has a bill, HR4422, with the intention “To impose sanctions on foreign persons responsible for violations of internationally recognized human rights against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex (LGBTQI) individuals, and for other purposes.”
• In June,130 African signatories wrote to the U.S. Congress warning against funding immorality in Africa. They wrote:

[W]e want to express our concerns and suspicions that this funding is supporting so-called family planning and reproductive health principles and practices, including abortion, that violate our core beliefs concerning life, family, and religion.

Nations represented included: Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, Malawi, Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.

• Japanese citizens are opposing so-called LGBT politics because “thanks to” the West, they have seen its “horror.”
• On the current U.S. government’s abuse of the Department of Justice, the President of El Salvador observed: “Sadly, it’ll be very hard for US Foreign Policy to use arguments such as ‘democracy’ and ‘free and fair elections’, or try to condemn ‘political persecution’ in other countries, from now on”.
• At the start of the conflict in Ukraine, Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill stated there was a link between Western moral values and the war. “For eight years there have been attempts to destroy what exists in Donbas. And in Donbas there is a rejection, a fundamental rejection of the so-called values that are offered today by those who claim world power.” He added that having “pride parades” showed a “test of loyalty” to Western sexual propaganda. “[I]n order to join the club of those countries, you have to have a gay pride parade.”
• In November, Russia passed a law criminalizing, among other things, propaganda for “promoting non-traditional sexual relations,” sex-change operations, and pedophilia. Vyacheslav Volodin, deputy of the Russian State Duma, commented: “This decision will protect our children and the future of the country from the darkness spread by the United States and European states. We have our own traditions and values.”
• In February, Russian President Vladimir Putin delivered a speech that proved internationally popular, emphasizing Western notability’s sexual predation of children.

Look what [the Western elite] are doing to their own people. It is all about the destruction of the family, of cultural and national identity, perversion and abuse of children, including pedophilia, all of which are declared normal in their life. They are forcing the priests to bless same-sex marriages. … Millions of people in the West realize that they are being led to a spiritual disaster. Frankly, the elite appear to have gone crazy, and it looks like there is no cure for that. But like I said, these are their problems, while we must protect our children, which we will do. We will protect our children from degradation and degeneration.

Meanwhile, Western leaders specifically state that “lgbt” issues are a primary factor in Western opposition to Russia in Ukraine. Four days after Putin’s speech, the Chief of the UK Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) Robert Moore said: “With the tragedy and destruction unfolding so distressingly in Ukraine, we should remember the values and hard won freedoms that distinguish us from Putin, none more than LGBT+ rights.”

• Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergei Lavrov also cited the West’s exportation of its sexual requirements.

“[T]he [West’s] “rules” concept also manifests itself in attempts to encroach on the very human nature. In a number of Western countries, students learn at school that Jesus Christ was bisexual. Attempts by reasonable politicians to shield the younger generation from aggressive LGBT propaganda are met with bellicose protests from the ‘enlightened Europe.’ All world religions, the genetic code of the planet’s key civilizations, are under attack. The United States is at the forefront of state interference in church affairs, openly seeking to drive a wedge into the Orthodox world, whose values are viewed as a powerful spiritual obstacle for the liberal concept of boundless permissiveness.

• In March, a Western ambassador from Germany traveled to the African nation of Namibia to criticize them on their growing Chinese population. The Namibian Head of State, Hage Geingob, responded sternly. “Why has this become your problem?” He contrasted the way Namibians are treated poorly in Germany versus how their relations with the Chinese are faring. “[O]ur people are being bullied in Germany. … Talk about Germans. How do you treat us there? The Chinese don’t treat us like this.”
• In September, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad also spoke of turning attention to China as a result of Western economic sanctions: “[M]ost countries in the world are looking forward to the Chinese yuan transforming into an international currency, since the dollar is the West’s weapon against developing countries.”
• In a November 2021 interview with British media, Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko issued strong condemnation of the West’s tactics. “I really don’t care what they think of me in England or in the USA or EU. Because the whole world has seen what you’re really like.” And, referring to Western interference in Belarus 2020 elections and possibly an alleged attempted assassination attempt in 2021, he added, “What business of yours are our elections? We don’t interfere in the UK or America, in your home, why did you come to ours and start to smash it up?”
• In March, the president of Uganda, Yoweri Museveni finished a speech on economic policy with a comment on Western interference: “On the issue of homosexuals, we shall get time and discuss it thoroughly… The western countries should stop wasting the time of humanity by trying to impose their practices on other peoples.”
• Brazil’s president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva explicitly condemned the United States’ role in fueling the Ukraine conflict. “It is necessary that the U.S. stops stimulating the war and talk about peace,” he said in April. Leaked documents pertaining to Russia and Brazil apparently refer to an “the West’s ‘aggressor-victim’ paradigm,” which echoes a sentiment that the West is the aggressor in many international conflicts while claiming to be on defense.
• Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban recognized both the West’s interference in elections and propagandization of its sexual distortions. He said “the [EU] federalists are trying to squeeze us out. They openly wanted a change in government in Hungary.” He added: “The EU rejects Christian heritage, carries out a replacement of its population via migration ... and conducts an LGBTQ offensive.”
• A member of Poland’s parliament, Kacper Plazynski, rejected Britain’s criticism of Poland’s efforts to promote the traditional family. “I am enormously disappointed in the unit of the UK’s Home Office which fell for propaganda of a trivial radical left activist about alleged Polish discrimination of gays.” Hinting at Britain’s interference, he added. “It is up to Polish people to decide the shape and form of the Polish constitution.”
• “This is the path of Venezuela and the path of a free economy where currencies are not used to punish countries and impose sanctions,” said Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in May, promising to abandon the U.S. dollar.  “The de-dollarization of global trade is an unavoidable reality that we are currently witnessing. The era of unjust sanctions and economic manipulations that harm the people is coming to an end.”
• The concept of gay “marriage” is overwhelmingly rooted in Western governments as this map illustrates.
• In April, a dignitary from the Bahamas vehemently decried England’s effort to push perversion in schools:

You can't come in my country teaching my children foolishness. Don't come in this country. Now you want to be in England, you can teach them all the boogery things you want to teach them in England. But not in the Bahamas. Don't bring that around here. And I also want to say to all you parents, all you parents who have been emailing me, texting me, listen, you all get ready. Because the time will come when all of us are going to have to stand up to protect our children. I think we have to show this government. Because what this government is doing is testing the water to see if we pass it, if we're benign and going to let it slide. We will not let it slide. Not one filthy book will be let in our classrooms and our libraries. I'm going to lead the charge. When I say let's go, I need you all to let's go. Because I ain't letting it happen.

• In July 2023, 21 international endocrinologists signed a letter condemning “the politicization of transgender healthcare in the U.S.”

Examples could go on and on. But this is a flavor for the global resistance to Western immoralities.

Jeffrey Sachs, economist and former UN advisor, recently commented on the West’s dangerous path:

The US is seen for what it is, which is, you know, most of the world saying we don't want to be led by you. Thank you. We'd like to trade with you, would like to cooperate. We don't want to be bombed by you. Thank you. … But we don't want to follow you or have your sanctions regime and so on. … I do think that the weight of the world opinion really coming together to say, come on stop already, is actually going to, one way or another, make the difference. I hope it makes the difference.

If the East and global South are sincere in their rejection of Western immorality, this could pose a problem for those immoralities to persist, even in the West. The current BRICS nations have surpassed the Western-led G20 nations in global GDP. BRICS also stands to control 80% of the world’s oil production. The West may well have to back off their insane immoral propaganda and child abuse if they want any part of commerce that will otherwise be insulated from their control. Or the West can stay the course and be king of the ashes gathering underfoot.

Abortion: An industry dependent on lies

No industry is more dependent on lies than abortion. What other industry today could even compete? Car sales? Politics? Illegal drug cartels or trafficking? Whichever it is, abortion is in that conversation.

Following is a multitude of lies advanced by the abortion industry. And the list isn't exhaustive. These are not obscure lies told by individuals with a negligible audience. These are lies pertaining to the fundamental premises of abortion. They are foundational. They are lies told by the abortion industry. They are lies told by politicians funded by the abortion industry. The are lies told by abortion influencers or media.

Lie #1: “My body, my choice”

The phrase “my body, my choice” is a common one among abortion proponents. The implication is that an abortion is merely a decision the woman makes about “her body.” But this is a lie. The baby’s body is not only philosophically but genetically distinct from the mother’s. A multitude of scientific papers acknowledge the individuality of new life at fertilization. For example: “Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual.” (Signorelli J, Diaz ES, Morales P)

Lie #2: Fake embryo pictures

In October 2022, The Guardian posted outright fake pictures of a human embryo. It described the pictures as “tissue” or what a “pregnancy” looks like at various early weeks of pregnancy. However, the images only showed bits of gestational sac. The embryo was missing from the photos. The article quotes Dr. Joan Fleischman with MYA Network, the abortion business credited with the photos. Fleischman specifically said the internet and placards show human embryos with “human-like qualities.” However, she asserted, the fake pictures in the Guardian article—which showed only gestational sac bits—are “what it actually looks like.” A stir on social media followed, both from medical professionals, and from women who have experienced miscarriages and know first-hand that the images from The Guardian and MYA Network were fake.

The Guardian later attempted to explain the absence of the embryo with another false statement which was added to the article as a disclaimer: “This article was amended on 19 October 2022 to include the detail that at nine weeks the nascent embryo is not easily discernible to the naked eye.” However, The Guardian only added another false statement to their false article. At 9 weeks, the human embryo not only has human features, but is close to ¾ of an inch in size, or larger than many adult fingernails.

Rather than vanishing in shame, this lie is perpetuated, as recently as April 2023. Ted Lieu, congressman from California, was angered by the recent judicial decision that ruled the abortion drug mifepristone had not undergone proper FDA protocols when it was approved in 2000. Lieu tweeted one of the fake MYA Network pictures and included the claim: “Mifepristone is for abortions of less than 10 weeks. Below are pictures of pregnancies at 6, 7, 8, and 9 weeks.” When called out for sharing fake images, Lieu later doubled down by sharing another fake article from Insider, which claimed, among other lies, “There is no ‘heart’ at six weeks of pregnancy.” But the heart is known to develop as early as 3 weeks and can be observed beating by week 6. (See more on the heartbeat lie at Lie #8 below.)

Embryo at 7-8 weeks
(Credit: lunar caustic at Flickr)

The above photo is of an actual human embryo (7-8 weeks). The gestational sac, which can be observed surrounding the embryo, is only what The Guardian article showed.

Lie #3: "Abortion Saves Lives"
This phrase is commonly seen at protests, asserted by pro-abortion organizations, or even stated by abortion "doctors." This lie is obvious. Abortion ends a human life. "Abortion Causes Death" would be an accurate sign. Some claimants confuse treatment of ectopic pregnancy or other life-threatening diagnoses with abortion. See Lie #13. Others use incomplete data.

Illinois’ anti-pregnancy help Senate Bill 1909 (SB 1909) claims the “risk of death associated with childbirth is approximately 14 times higher than the risk of death associated with an abortion.” Again, the assertion dishonestly does not account for the baby variable, which results in 100% death for every completed abortion. 

The statistic is still specious even if only the life of the mother is considered. For example, a subsequent study Short and long term mortality rates associated with first pregnancy outcome looked at 463,473 women. The study states:

Previous population studies, however, have failed to control for complete reproductive histories. In this study we seek to eliminate the potential confounding effect of unknown prior pregnancy history by examining mortality rates associated specifically with first pregnancy outcome alone. We also examine differences in mortality rates associated with early abortion and late abortions (after 12 weeks).

They concluded: “Compared to women who delivered, women who had an early or late abortion had significantly higher mortality rates within 1 through 10 years.”

A 2020 study, Induced Abortion and the Increased Risk of Maternal Mortality, found similar results when more health information about the patients was factored. They summarize:

In Finland, where epidemiologic record linkage has been validated, the risk of death from legal induced abortion is reported to be almost four times greater than the risk of death from childbirth.

Lie #4: Late-term abortions aren’t real

Dr. Barbara Levy, vice president of health policy for the American College of Gynecologists (ACOG), stated:

The phrase “late-term abortion” is medically inaccurate and has no clinical meaning. In science and medicine, it’s essential to use language precisely. In pregnancy, to be “late term” means to be past 41 weeks gestation, or past a patient’s due date. Abortions do not occur in this time period, so the phrase is contradictory.

ACOG’s website also claims “late-term abortion” is “a biased, nonmedical phrase intended to appropriate clinical language in order to misconstrue the reality of patient care.”

First, ACOG is attempting to restrict a scientific use onto a term that is also native to legal language. This is a form of the fallacy of equivocation and is a basic error in contextual interpretation. It is disingenuous for ACOG to suggest there is legislation against a non-existent abortion type. When the term “late-term abortion” is used in legal documents, a gestational age typically accompanies it. For instance:

• An amicus brief for Dobbs submitted by 375 women injured by abortion, “late-term abortion” is specified as 2^nd or 3^rd trimester (or 13 and 26 weeks).
• The case of Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin vs. Doyle specified “late-term abortion” as after the 20th week of pregnancy.

Second, Levy’s definition does not stand on universally held medical ground. For example, the McGraw-Hill Concise Dictionary of Modern Medicine defines “late-term abortion” as “Any abortion performed after the fetus would be viable…” (With current medicine, babies have survived at about 21 weeks.)

A cursory search of medical and scientific studies reveal that use of "late-term" abortions is not restricted to ACOG's 41-week definition. For example:

• A study published at the National Library of Medicine refers to “late-term abortions (after 16 weeks).”
• A study published in Reproductive Health Matters speaks of late-term abortions after women had 2^nd trimester ultrasounds.
• A study published in the Journal of Pregnancy refers to “late” abortions as occurring in the 2^nd or 3^rd trimester.
• A study published in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics looked at women seeking abortions after 20-weeks, referring to this as “late-term abortion.
• An article published at the National Library of Medicine suggests late-term abortion is after “viability.”
• An article in the Journal of American Medical Association says a “late-term abortion” is “referred to in the medical literature as intact dilation and extraction (D&X)”

Lie #5: Pregnancy Resource Centers are not "medical"
In 2022, Elizabeth Warren and several other senators sent a specious letter (PDF) to pregnancy help network Heartbeat International, Inc., and included the claim: "your organization and its affiliate CPCs are not legitimate medical providers." However, the facts refute this lie. The National Institute of Family and Life Advocates reports 1,400 out of their 1,600 affiliates are licensed medical centers. The Charlotte Lozier Institute report on pregnancy center statistics reveals 79% of pregnancy centers nationwide are "medical." Pregnancy Centers employ or have volunteers who are licensed medical staff, including nurses and sonographers. The report also states:

Medical pregnancy centers or clinics perform limited ultrasounds in accordance with specific standards and guidelines set forth by medical professional bodies, including the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM); Association of Women’s Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses (AWHONN); the American College of Radiology (ACR); and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). `Under these guidelines a limited ultrasound may be performed to “confirm the presence of an intrauterine pregnancy,” which addresses the primary reason a woman visits a pregnancy center. 

Lie #6: Only 3-4% of Planned Parenthood's “medical services” are abortions

Abortion behemoth Planned Parenthood's annual reports regularly claim 3 or 4% of total "medical services" their affiliates provide are abortion. As we've established, abortion is not medicine. So that's a lie. And the 3-4% figure is also dishonest. This false statistic has been debunked since at least as early as 2012, yet they continued to mislead year after year in annual reports. The number is fudged by counting peripheral services received in each visit as equal to abortion, when abortion was the entire intent of the client's visit. So if a woman gets a pregnancy test before the abortion, they will count them each as 50% of the client's services received, even though the former may cost $10 and take a moment and the abortion—which is why she’s there—will take upwards of hours including recovery and could cost over $1,000. As a perspective to how deceptive this is, journalist Nick Lowry wrote, "Major League Baseball teams could say that they sell about 20 million hot dogs and play 2,430 games in a season, so baseball is only .012 percent of what they do."

Lie #7: Pregnancy is an illness

The abortion pill mifepristone was fast-tracked by the FDA in the year 2000. The Code of Federal Regulations Title 21 only permits “accelerated approval” of a drug if it is for “treating serious or life-threatening illnesses…” The Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine pointed this lie out. In their November 2022 case filing against the FDA, they stated, “But chemical abortion drugs do not treat serious or life-threatening illnesses. Indeed, pregnancy is a normal physiological state that many females experience one or more times during their childbearing years.”

Lie #8: No heartbeat at 6 weeks

In October 2022, South Carolina Chief Justice Donald W. Beatty incorrectly asserted that a 6-week embryo’s heartbeat is “really not a heartbeat. It’s an electrical signal.” Associate Justice Kaye G. Hearn incorrectly described the heartbeat as “actually embryonic cardiac activity…a true heartbeat does not occur until all four chambers in the heart have developed.” The judges’ assertions amount to word games, a mere avoidance of using the term “heart.” Furthermore, scientific literature points to the onset of the heartbeat at the early end of the 4^th week of pregnancy, or around day 22.

Jörg Männer’s 2022 paper in the Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease states: “the human embryonic heart starts beating at 21 to 23 days after fertilization.” And Männer specifically accounts for electric activity preceding the heartbeat:

The term “heartbeat” is used to describe “the regular movement that the heart makes as it sends blood around your body”. The above-mentioned observations suggest that, with regard to the embryonic heart, we should not speak of a beating heart before coordinated regular movements of its walls generate a unidirectional fluid flow within the vascular network of the embryonic cardiovascular system. In human embryos this functional state seems to be reached during CS-10. Based on data from macaque embryos, the post-fertilization age of human CS-10 embryos was estimated as 21 to 23 days…

Some challenges to this figure only add 4-5 days, which means even conservative estimates acknowledge a heartbeat in the 4^th week.

Other studies affirm this. Tan and Lewandowski’s paper published in Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy states: “The initiation of the first heart beat via the primitive heart tube begins at gestational day 22, followed by active fetal blood circulation by the end of week 4.” Oregon State University Anatomy & Physiology curriculum teaches the same: “The human heart is the first functional organ to develop. It begins beating and pumping blood around day 21 or 22…”

Directly addressing the misinformation put out by the South Carolina judges, Dr. Tara Sander Lee, PhD, director of Life Sciences for the Charlotte Lozier Institute, said, “A heartbeat at six weeks is scientific consensus based on published validated, objective, biological investigation, not a public relations campaign.”

Lie #9: Abortion Pill Reversal (APR) isn’t real

Abortion proponents have deceived the public about the possibility of abortion pill reversal. For example, a 2022 anti-pregnancy center article published in a science journal contains multiple inaccuracies, including the following: “Research has established that CPCs engage in abortion misinformation, including leading people to believe that medication abortions are reversible…” The American College of Gynecologists claims abortion pill reversal is “not supported by science.” Appealing to these kinds of lies, the state of Colorado is currently seeking to ban abortion pill reversal.

The fact is, so-called “medication abortions” are indeed reversible. This is indisputable. Over 4,500 lives have been saved for mothers who changed their minds after taking the first abortion pill by following the abortion pill reversal protocol. Abortion pill reversal replenishes the progesterone that the abortion pill depleted, thus giving the pregnancy a chance to continue. Dr. George Delgado, pioneer of the abortion pill reversal protocol, explains the process in a recent Edify video. Testimonials and photos of actual babies born after successful abortion pill reversals can be seen at Heartbeat International’s Abortion Pill Rescue Network.

Lie #10: The abortion pill is safe/“safer than Tylenol”

Dr. Serina Floyd, vice president of medical affairs and medical director of Planned Parenthood, claimed in a February 23, 2023 television interview that the abortion pill “is not dangerous at all.”

A Bloomberg “healthcare” journalist made popular the bad faith argument that the abortion pill mifepristone is safer than Tylenol because it “sends fewer people to the ER.” The most obvious problem with these claims is that they ignore the 230,000+ innocent lives ended by the abortion pill annually. Read here for a thoroughly sourced refutation of the Tylenol claim at LiveAction.

Additionally, the Bloomberg article must nonsensically lump ER visits from Tylenol due to overdose with mifepristone ER visits due to use as indicated.

In 2016, the abortion industry convinced the FDA to help keep mifepristone’s adverse effects secret by

changing the requirement for prescribers to agree to report to Mifeprex’s sponsor any serious adverse event associated with Mifeprex, including hospitalizations and blood transfusions…

Adverse effects have not been required reporting for some seven years. Doctors at the Charlotte Lozier Institute conducted a thoroughly sourced review of mifepristone’s dangers and adverse effects reporting.

The Bloomberg article also fails to account for how the abortion pill enables sex trafficking or relationship abuse. Students for Life has organized dozens of stories of the abortion pill drug slipped into women's drinks or other devious tricks. Tylenol does not have this unsafe problem. Unfettered distribution of the drug will only exacerbate this problem.

Finally, data often cited by abortion proponents on the safety of mifepristone is founded on circular illogic. Since reporting of adverse events from the drug are no longer required, abortion proponents cite data that does not account for the very adverse events they lobbied to have unreported. In a recent judicial case in Texas, the judge pointed this out:

Defendants maintain that “Plaintiffs offer no explanation for why it was impermissible to rely on the reported data.” ECF No. 28 at 33. The explanation should be obvious — it is circular and self-serving to practically eliminate an “adverse event” reporting requirement and then point to a low number of “adverse events” as a justification for removing even more restrictions than were already omitted in 2000 and 2016. In other words, it is a predetermined conclusion in search of non-data — a database designed to produce a null set.

Lie #11: Abortion is “healthcare/medical”

Politicians and abortion proponents loyally use euphemisms like “abortion care” and refer to the abortion pill as “medical abortion.” “Abortion is healthcare…A medical decision…” declared JB Pritzker, governor of Illinois in a January press release. Of course, this language is dishonest. Abortion is the opposite of medicine.

Currently, Google flags videos on abortion with the following false “Context” statement:

An abortion is a procedure to end a pregnancy. It uses medicine or surgery to remove the embryo or fetus and placenta from the uterus. The procedure is done by a licensed healthcare professional.

First, that the topic of abortion gets this special treatment by Google’s staff only adds to suspicion that corporations are compromised by the abortion industry. Secondly, Google’s statement is false because abortion never uses “medicine.” As we established, by definition, it’s false to call something medicine unless it’s end goal is to help correct something wrong with the body and pregnancy is not a disorder nor disease. Additionally, Google’s statement is false to claim abortion is done by a licensed healthcare professional, because abortion-backed politicians have changed laws in several states so a woman can obtain the abortion pill without ever seeing a doctor, leaving the woman to self-administer the abortion and deal with the aftermath at home.

Abortion is more akin to poison, which is medically defined as causing “structural or functional disturbance.” (See related article Birth Control is not medicine). In an abortion, the baby is terminated and the typical mother’s body, which was functioning correctly to sustain pregnancy, is artificially obstructed from that correct function.

Lie #12: Plan B is only contraceptive, not abortifacient

In December of 2022, the makers of Plan B One-Step lobbied the FDA to change its product label. The drug is colloquially known as the “morning after pill,” often taken by women seeking to prevent pregnancy after they have had intercourse.

Prior labeling admitted the pill could possibly work by preventing implantation after conception. This of course amounts to an abortion. The manufacturer lobbied the FDA in part because the change would make the drug easier to market:

[T]he applicant states… some consumers are hesitant to use a product that might affect postovulatory events, in particular implantation of the blastocyst. … The applicant asserts that updates to the labeling are needed to make the labeling more accurate, to reduce consumer confusion, and potentially to reduce barriers to use of the legally marketed approved product.

As you can see, the impetus for the label change was in part based on marketability. ABC News helped market that motive in a headline: “Plan B gets new label by FDA to clarify it doesn't cause abortion.”

The FDA ultimately made the following label edit (underline was added and strikethrough was removed):

Plan B One-Step® works before release of an egg from the ovary. As a result, Plan B One-Step® usually stops or delays release of the egg from the ovary. Plan B One-Step® is one tablet with levonorgestrel, a hormone that has been used in many birth control pills for several decades. Plan B One Step® that contains a higher dose of levonorgestrel than birth control pills but and works in a similar way to prevent pregnancy. It works mainly by stopping the release of an egg from the ovary. It is possible that Plan B One Step may also work by preventing fertilization of an egg (the uniting of sperm with the egg) or by preventing attachment (implantation) to the uterus (womb).

Notice, however, the added text says the drug “usually” or “mainly” stops egg release. If that’s the case, the labeling still accounts for prevented implantation without explicitly saying so, and abortion proponents in the media are deceiving the public.

Regarding levonorgestrel’s effect on the uterine lining, the FDA’s memorandum says a “totality of the evidence” suggests there is no affect on the uterine lining.

However, a 2016 study by Peck, et al, specifically reviewed the mechanism of action for levonorgestrel’s post-fertilization effect. It reviewed at least five other studies that claim levonorgestrel has no effect on the uterine lining. Essentially, these studies were not conclusive because they did not account for the entire range of time the drug was typically taken. Peck concluded:

What these studies can say is that LNG, when taken 5–6 days following fertilization at the moment of implantation, does not affect its evolution. But this is not the typical time when EC is usually administered.

Furthermore, a group in one study did show uterine alteration.

[T]he “histologically normal” endometria from Durand's 2001 Group D in fact showed decreased glycodelin-A, a necessary endometrial implantation molecule.

Additionally, whether the lining of the uterine wall is affected by levonorgestrel may be irrelevant. The Peck study describes another mechanism the drug may cause to prevent implantation after conception. It states:

The tubal transport mechanism is essential for carrying the embryo to the uterus, so that arrival occurs within the narrow implantation window (days 20 to 24).”

In other words, altering the uterine lining isn’t the only way to prevent implantation. If the embryo doesn’t get there in time, it won’t matter how compatible the uterine lining is during the implantation window. The study cites two other studies that suggest levonorgestrel slows the speed at which the embryo moves through the fallopian tube:

The tubal transport of embryos is slowed down by either mechanism, and this would have critical consequences on their nesting, as the narrow window might have been passed. This effect, coupled with the shortened luteal phase, as discussed in the next section, could preclude successful implantation.

In reviewing the data, Anthony Campagna, PharmD, a clinical pharmacist stated:

The takeaway is that LNG-EC can, despite what the updated labeling claims, impair the implantation of a human embryo in a number of ways.

Thus, although the FDA and manufacturer of Plan B One Step ignore data, the drug does have the potential to act as an abortifacient just as the original labelling specified.

Lie #13: Treatment for ectopic pregnancy is the same thing as an abortion

A corporate media columnist wrote of the Supreme Court Dobbs decision:

“Do I abort this ectopic pregnancy to literally save my life or do I go to jail?” Question women in America now have to ask.

There are a couple lies packed in this histrionic statement. The first lie is the insinuation that Dobbs banned abortion and will send a woman to jail for procuring one. Dobbs did no such thing, but rather referred the matter back to the states.

The second lie in the statement is suggesting treatment for an ectopic pregnancy is the same thing as an abortion. Dr. Christina Francis offered the following clarification:

The treatments for ectopic pregnancy are not the same procedures used by induced abortions, which even Planned Parenthood admits. As a pro-life OB/GYN who’s practiced my entire career in hospitals that do not allow abortions, I have never been prevented from safely treating an ectopic pregnancy. In the rare but tragic situations where a pregnancy puts the mother’s life at risk, there are medical procedures for compassionately separating the mother and her baby and working to save both lives.  The only intent of an abortion is to produce a dead baby.  Women deserve to be empowered by medically-accurate information.

Dr. Monique Chireau Wubbenhorst, an OB/GYN, confirmed the nature of a life-saving procedure like ectopic pregnancy:

A procedure to save the life of the mother is not an abortion. Even though sometimes the child dies as a result of that procedure, the death of the child was not the intent.

A month after Dobbs, Planned Parenthood fostered the misinformation by removing the following sentence from it’s website: “Treating an ectopic pregnancy isn’t the same thing as getting an abortion.”

Lie# 14: Abortion doesn’t cause depression/mental health problems

“It’s important for folks to know that abortion does not cause mental health problems,” said Debra Mollen, PhD, a professor of counseling psychology at Texas Woman’s University.

This assertion is false. A 2010 study, Late-Term Elective Abortion and Susceptibility to Posttraumatic Stress Symptoms, states:

In fact 12–20% of women with an abortion history meet the full diagnostic criteria for PTSD with considerably higher percentages of women experiencing some trauma symptoms, while not meeting the full criteria. Even when the full criteria are not met, the more PTSD symptoms present, the greater the risk of psychological impairment and suicidal ideation.

A 2018 study, The abortion and mental health controversy, accounts for abortion proponents who wish to dismiss mental health issues associated with abortion as pre-existing conditions:

When interpreting the data, abortion and mental health proponents are inclined to emphasize risks associated with abortion, whereas abortion and mental health minimalists emphasize pre-existing risk factors as the primary explanation for the correlations with more negative outcomes. Still, both sides agree that (a) abortion is consistently associated with elevated rates of mental illness compared to women without a history of abortion; (b) the abortion experience directly contributes to mental health problems for at least some women…

Lie# 15: Abortion doesn’t increase risk of breast cancer

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) claim: “studies demonstrate no causal relationship between induced abortion and a subsequent increase in breast cancer risk.”

However, their assertion does not account for dozens of studies that say otherwise. An amicus brief was submitted for Dobbs v. Jackson (2022) by the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG). They note: 

Since 1957, at least 41 studies have shown a positive, statistically significant association between induced abortion and breast cancer. The reason for the association is straightforward given how the physiology of the breast changes during pregnancy.  Breast tissue mature enough to produce milk permanently resists cancer.  Abortion arrests growing breast tissue before it matures, trapping it in a cancer vulnerable state. 

The American College of Pediatricians, among other sources, describe the biology of why this happens. Essentially, lobules in the breast mature from type 1 and 2—which have more receptors that make them more prone to cancer, to type 3 and 4 after prolonged pregnancy—which have less receptors and are more immune to cancer:

The more receptors a cell has, the more responsive it will be to hormonal levels – and the more affected it is by carcinogens. …

After a full term pregnancy, Type 4 lobules predominate, with more fully differentiated (mature) cells and less stem cells, a decreased number of hormonal receptors, a slower DNA copying time, and a longer resting phase – all of which decrease the likelihood that breast cancer will develop in these lobules.

It is known that after a woman gives birth, with or without lactation (including when the baby is given up for adoption), the Type 4 lobules regress to Type 3, but importantly, via epigenetics, these cells maintain the genetic changes that protect them from susceptibility to cancer.

Lie #16: Partial birth abortions “don’t exist”

In January, the state of Minnesota, by a vote of 69-65, passed an unbridled abortion bill. Among amendments to the bill that were rejected was a ban on partial-birth abortions. Yet, Senator Alice Mann, who supported the abortion bill, claimed the idea of partial birth abortion was “literally making stuff up.” She continued: “A child doesn’t come out partway alive and doctors kill it. It’s not a thing. It’s not a thing today. It’s not a thing tomorrow. It’s not a thing ten years ago.” She added that politicians should not “legislate things that don't exist in real life.”

You might ask yourself why she would be so adamantly opposed to inclusion of an amendment that she claimed would have no effect on the bill. 

But, of course, her false claim is exposed by the existence of survivors of abortion. In the early 1980s, the CDC estimated up to 500 failed abortions per year resulted in live births. Cases have persisted into recent years. The “DC Five” babies discovered in 2022 are suspected of surviving botched abortions because of their late gestational size and autopsy roadblocks (see pictures and story at LiveAction). Abortionist Kermit Gosnell was found guilty to have murdered babies born alive, “breathing and moving” “by severing their spinal cords with scissors.” Abortionists admit how they kill a baby if born alive.

The Abortion Survivor Network estimates over 80,000 persons to have survived failed abortions since Roe vs. Wade. The network’s founder and director Melissa Ohden explained how most survived abortions occur:

[T]hey survive chemical abortions in the first trimester. They survive surgical abortions in the second trimester that may leave them with significant wounds found upon delivery, as was the case for survivor Hope Hoffman. They survive induction of labor in the third trimester with the intent that they won’t survive the preterm induction, or with the plan to leave the child to die if they do survive the delivery, as was the case with Sarah Zagorski and, sadly, as happened in the practice of the imprisoned Dr. Kermit Gosnell, where some babies were brutally killed by having their spinal cord “snipped.”