• Skip to main content
Daily Citizen
  • Subscribe
  • Categories
    • Culture
    • Life
    • Religious Freedom
    • Sexuality
  • Parenting Resources
    • LGBT Pride
    • Homosexuality
    • Sexuality/Marriage
    • Transgender
  • About
    • Contributors
    • Contact
  • Donate

Life

Nov 20 2025

Abortion’s Lies Exposed by Activist’s Own Bumper Stickers

In a way, the bumper sticker predates the bumper – minus the adhesive.

Prior to the advent of Ford’s Model A in 1927 that included the world’s first car bumper, those wanting to communicate a message were known to strap wooden or metal signs using rope or wire onto the back of motorized vehicles. Prior to the car, they were affixed onto horse drawn buggies or carriages.

Forrest P. Gill is credited with inventing the “bumper strip” in the 1940s using self-adhesive paper and fluorescent ink. His first big order was to help promote a park in Clearwater, Florida. It took a few years before politicians began using them to campaign. Dwight Eisenhower’s election in 1952 was buttressed by bumper stickers featuring the ideal short and pithy slogan: “I LIKE IKE”. He won in a landslide.

Bumper stickers have been used for political and social activism ever since. If not always effective, they’ve certainly become ubiquitous. And why not? They’re cheap and everywhere. Motorists can’t help but look at the bumper in front of them while waiting at a red light.

Most causes benefit from reducing the mission, goal or call-to-action down to a single phrase that can fit on a bumper. And yet some are actually exposed by such an exercise – especially the abortion lobby and industry.

I was waiting at a red light the other morning when I spotted a sticker on a silver Subaru in front of me. It read:

ABORTION IS HEALTHCARE

PRO LIFE IS ANTI-WOMEN

Both statements are lies, of course.

According to Merriam-Webster, “healthcare” is “efforts made to maintain, restore, or promote someone’s physical, mental, or emotional well-being especially when performed by trained and licensed professionals.”

Abortion isn’t healthcare by any stretch of the imagination. It doesn’t restore anything but destroys innocent life and then burdens and enslaves the mother and father with a lifetime of guilt and regret.

The claim that being pro-life is somehow “anti-women” is a nonsensical statement on numerous levels, especially since half of the babies aborted are female. But it does speak to the selfish ideology that permeates the abortion movement overall. Many of the activists refuse to acknowledge the existence of life inside the womb and instead put all the emphasis on the mother and none on the baby.

Contrasting pro-life bumper stickers with pro-abortion ones is also instructive and revealing. It’s easy to note the aggression, anger and ignorance in the pro-abortion stickers:

“Keep Your Laws Off My Body,” “No Uterus, No Opinion,” and “My Body, My Choice.”

The slogans are also downright stupid. Do pro-abortion activists really not want any laws concerning the human body? Countless laws protect the bodies of both women and men by making murder illegal or regulating countless other things we ingest/utilize that can potentially kill us – everything ranging from medical procedures to our food and medicine. And only women can have an opinion about abortion? They seem to be fine with pro-abortion male presidents appointing pro-abortion justices to the Supreme Court.

The pro-life messaging?

“Choose Life,” “Every Life Matters,” “Love Them Both,” “Children Are a Gift From God.”

How can anyone be intellectually honest and disagree with these statements?

It can be difficult to reduce contentious issues to soundbites and bumper stickers, but truth is often revealed by contrast. None more so than by examining the rival messages regarding the sanctity of life making their way around the streets of our towns and cities.

Written by Paul Batura · Categorized: Culture · Tagged: abortion, Life, Paul Random

Nov 10 2025

Abortionists Normalize Third Trimester Abortions as ‘Later Abortion Care’

The abortion industry describes third trimester abortions as “later abortion care.”

The deceptive euphemism normalizes the ghastly procedure, which ends the lives of preborn babies between seven and nine months old, so abortion providers can profit from it.

Americans’ support for abortion drops as preborn babies develop and begin to look less like “clumps of cells” and more like what they are — human children. But the closer preborn babies are to birth, the more money abortionists make from ending their lives.

Third trimester abortions cost up to $25,000. More clinics have started performing the brutal procedure for a chance to cash in. RISE Collective began performing third trimester abortions up to 34 weeks last month in Boulder, Colorado. A similar clinic plans to open in New Jersey this spring.

To make money, these clinics must convince pregnant women it is acceptable — even normal or humane — to end the life of a child with an 80- to 90% chance of surviving outside the womb. They do this, in part, by calling third trimester abortions “later abortions” or “abortions later in pregnancy.”

The Kaiser Family Foundation claims the “medical community” uses “abortion later in pregnancy” instead of “late-term abortion” because the latter implies an abortion took place at or past a baby’s due date.

For all its concern about rhetorical implication, the pro-abortion medical community’s chosen term offers no information about the age of the child being aborted.

Nor is “abortion later in pregnancy” used in a consistent context. The Kaiser Family Foundation uses it to describe abortions after 21 weeks, when a baby can survive outside the womb. Warren Hern, the infamous abortionist behind the defunct Boulder Abortion Clinic, used “later abortions” to describe abortions in the third trimester

Boulder Collective, the fundraising arm for RISE Collective, uses inscrutable terms like “later abortion care” to solicit donations without revealing what procedures RISE performs, or how it performs them.

“When Colorado’s only later abortion care clinic closed in April 2025, it left an unsustainable gap for people needing specialized care,” Boulder Collective’s website reads. “Clinicians and administrators immediately responded by forming the RISE Collective to provide later abortion care.”

RISE Collective’s website advertises a staff “trained in areas where only a handful of clinics in the country have experience” and offers to guide customers through their “healthcare journey.”  

Media outlets could choose to use more accurate terms, like “third trimester abortions” or “abortions after fetal viability,” to describe procedures offered by clinics like RISE Collective. Instead, many choose to adopt the abortion industry’s euphemisms.

“The RISE Collective plans to begin by offering later abortion care, where the greatest gap in service remains,” 9News wrote of the new clinic.

“People seeking abortions later in pregnancy could soon get them in NJ,” the New Jersey Monitor wrote of the New Jersey clinic opening this spring.

The abortion industry uses “later term abortion care” and its variations to make people uncritically accept the morality of third trimester abortions. Believers must reject this language in favor of describing reality.

Third trimester abortions intentionally end the life of a human child in the seventh, eighth or ninth month of its life and confer no legitimate health benefits on a mother.

That is murder. It should never be described otherwise.

To speak with a family help specialist or request resources, please call us at 1-800-A-FAMILY (232-6459).

If you are experiencing an unexpected pregnancy and want to learn more about your options, visit My Choice Network.

To learn more about pro-life legislation in your state, contact your state Family Policy Council.

Additional Articles and Resources

Counseling Services

Counseling Consultation Request

Post Abortion Resources

Considering Abortion?

Colorado Abortion Clinic Performs Third Trimester Abortions ‘For Any Reason’

Are Late-Term Abortions Still A Thing?

Three Doctors Respond to ‘Abortion is Healthcare’

Guide to Abortion Definitions & Language

Induced Abortion: The Facts

Written by Emily Washburn · Categorized: Life · Tagged: abortion, Life

Oct 24 2025

Seven Radical Abortion Bills Advance in Pennsylvania

The Pennsylvania House Judiciary Committee advanced seven radical abortion bills Wednesday that would protect, expand and fund the abortion industry.

Each bill passed in a 14-12, party line vote, with Democrat committee members voting for the proposed measures and Republican members voting against them.

“These laws would make Pennsylvania one of the most extreme abortion states in the country overnight,” Lexi Sneller, a Policy Analyst with the Pennsylvania Family Council, told the Daily Citizen.

Four of the bills would shield abortion providers from prosecution, both from pro-life states and women harmed by abortions.

HB 1643 and HB 1966 prohibit Pennsylvania courts from cooperating with out-of-state judgements and legal cases against in-state abortion providers.

HB 1640 prohibits abortion providers from disclosing records to state courts without patient permission. Sneller says this bill would protect abortion providers from in-state prosecutions if Pennsylvania’s government became more pro-life.

HB 1641 effectively requires insurance companies to provide medical liability insurance to healthcare companies that perform abortions on citizens from states where abortion is illegal.

Pennsylvania informed consent law requires a mother to receive counseling on alternatives to abortion before going through with the procedure. It also requires a mother to wait at least 24 hours between deciding on an abortion and receiving one.

HB 2005 would completely remove both requirements, allowing desperate mothers to receive abortions without any time to consider other options.

HB 670 would criminalize peaceful protest outside abortion clinics. Prohibited conduct would encompass violent and non-violent “physical obstruction and intimidation [of] or interference [with]” a person trying to enter an abortion clinic, including persuading someone not to receive an abortion.

The bill is modeled off the Biden administration’s FACE Act, which led to the imprisonment of dozens of peaceful, pro-life protesters in 2024.

The final bill, HB 1957, would amend the Pennsylvania state constitution give every “individual” the right to “exercise personal reproductive liberty,” including undergoing an abortion.

The amendment would impose strict scrutiny — the highest level of legal review — on current and future pro-life laws, effectively gutting Pennsylvania’s pro-life protections.

“It’s such a high bar that, colloquially, it’s referred to as ‘strict in theory, fatal in fact,’ meaning that very few laws survive challenge under this rigorous test,” Dr. Elizabeth Kirk, a law professor at The Catholic University of America, testified before the Judiciary Committee.

The amendment would further require taxpayers to fund elective abortions. It does not limit a mother’s “right” to abortion at a certain gestation, which means the amendment could be used to defend a “right” to abortion until birth.

Dr. Kirk also warned the amendment’s broad language could open the door for minors to receive abortions without their parents’ consent:

The plain text makes no distinction between adults and minors. It suggests that Pennsylvania courts may grant an absolute right to abortion or any other reproductive decisions, which substantially weakens the Commonwealth’s interest in protecting parental rights.

Planned Parenthood Advocates Pennsylvania celebrated the committee taking a “stand for health, dignity and freedom” on Instagram. But these bills do nothing to protect women’s health, dignity or freedom. Each one is oriented toward protecting the people who profit from performing abortions.

Enshrining a potentially unlimited “right” to abortion in the Pennsylvania constitution guarantees the existence of the lucrative abortion industry at the expense of women, babies and parental rights.

Eliminating Pennsylvania’s informed consent requirements and criminalizing people who encourage women to choose life increases the likelihood that business like Planned Parenthood will make money off vulnerable women.

Shielding abortion care providers from prosecution could prevent women from suing negligent doctors, which effectively eliminates abortion providers’ incentive to ensure women are fully informed and consenting before undergoing an abortion.

Pennsylvania abortion clinics routinely fail to meet health codes as it is. These clinics racked up a combined 600 health and building safety infractions between 2012 and 2025, according to Pennsylvania Family Council.

Between 2022 and 2025, 13 of 18 Pennsylvania “abortion mills” failed a health inspection — including nine Planned Parenthoods.

“The fact that Planned Parenthood is so excited about these bills shows they don’t care about women,” Sneller remarked. “They don’t care about choice. They don’t even care about freedom. They care about their bottom line and their ability to do whatever they want with as little restrictions as possible.”

Tax records show Planned Parenthood in Pennsylvania has gobbled up $45 million in taxpayer funding since 2012.  

The Daily Citizen encourages Pennsylvania readers to contact your representative and urge them to vote no on these radical, destructive bills.

Additional Articles and Resources

President Trump Pardons 23 Peaceful Pro-Life Protesters

House Subcommittee Examines Weaponization of FACE Act Against Pro-Life Supporters

Louisiana, ADF Challenge Biden-Era Abortion-By-Mail Scheme

FDA Approves Generic Abortion Pill Despite Ongoing Safety Review

FDA Launches Review of Abortion Pill and the Harms it Causes Women

Pro-Abortion States Beef Up Protections for Abortion Pill Prescribers

Texas Father Sues Out-of-State Abortionist for Killing His Preborn Children

Shield Laws Enable Chemical Abortion in Pro-Life States

Shield Law Abortion Providers Advertised Alongside Black Market Abortion Pills

Texas Sues New York Doctor for Prescribing Abortion Meds

New Abortion Pill Study Confirms Danger to Mothers

Woman Nearly Dies from Abortion Pill, Story Reflects Disturbing EPPC Data

Focus on the Family Broadcast: Abortion Pill Reversal

#AbortionChangesYou: A Case Study to Understand the Communicative Tensions in Women’s Medication Abortion Narratives (Health Communication)

The Abortion Pill Harms Women: Insurance Data Reveals One in Ten Patients Experiences a Serious Adverse Event (Ethics and Public Policy Center)

Written by Emily Washburn · Categorized: Life · Tagged: abortion, Life

Oct 08 2025

FDA Approves Generic Abortion Pill Despite Ongoing Safety Review

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a generic abortion pill just days after it confirmed its new investigation into the safety of chemical abortions.

The FDA approved Evita Solutions’ application for a generic mifepristone pill on September 30 after finding it “bioequivalent and therapeutically equivalent” to the name brand pill, Mifeprex.

Mifepristone starves preborn children of essential blood flow and nutrients by blocking the pregnancy hormone progesterone. It is the first chemical women ingest in the two-step chemical abortion regimen.

Watch Focus on the Family’s broadcast about the abortion pill.

The FDA’s authorization of another abortion pill seemingly contradicts its commitment to reevaluate mifepristone’s safety.

Just eleven days before its letter to Evita Solutions, FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary and Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Robert F. Kennedy Jr. confirmed the FDA is conducting an evidentiary review of the abortion pill.

“HHS — through the FDA — is conducting its own review of the evidence, including real-world outcomes and evidence, relating to the safety and efficacy of the drug,” the wrote in a letter to 22 concerned state attorneys general.

The AGs had requested HHS and FDA reinstate stringent restrictions on mifepristone in July.

When the FDA legalized mifepristone in 2000, it required:

  • The patient be less than seven weeks pregnant.
  • The patient visit the doctor three times before ingesting the drug.
  • The drug be prescribed by a doctor in a doctor’s office.
  • The drug be ingested in a doctor’s office with a doctor’s supervision.
  • The patient follow up with the doctor at least once after ingesting the drug.

Scientists used the same stringent restrictions in mifepristone’s clinical trials.

Today, the FDA requires none of these safety precautions. Women can be prescribed pills by doctors online or order them from legally-dubious websites. They do not have to get a sonogram to determine the age of their child or whether they have an ectopic pregnancy.  Most go through the painful abortion in their bathrooms alone.

In April, the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC) released data showing just how dangerous taking mifepristone has become.

The bombshell report analyzed insurance claims from a representative sample of more than 865,700 chemical abortions. It indicated nearly 11% of women experienced a severe or life-threatening adverse event within 45 days of taking mifepristone, including:

  • Sepsis – 0.10% of cases (824 women)
  • Infection — 1.34% (11,707)
  • Required blood transfusion – 0.15% (1,257)
  • Hemorrhage – 3.31% (28,658)
  • Required hospitalization for complications related to the chemical abortion – 0.66% (5,699)
  • Required ER visit for complications related to the chemical abortion – 4.73% (40,960)
  • Ectopic pregnancy — 0.35% (3,062)
  • Other life-threatening adverse events related to the chemical abortion, including cardiac and pulmonary complications, anaphylaxis, thrombosis and surgery – 0.22% (1,956)
  • Repeated surgical abortion to complete the chemical abortion – 2.84% (24,563)
  • Other complications related to the chemical abortion, including life-threatening mental health diagnoses – 5.68% (49,169)

These findings indicate women are up to 22 times more likely to experience severe or life-threatening harm after taking mifepristone than the FDA had previously claimed.

HHS and FDA promised to investigate the discrepancy. In their September 19 letter, Kennedy and Makary wrote:

Recent studies — such as the study by the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC) … — indicate potential dangers that may attend offering mifepristone without sufficient medical support or supervision.”

They further revealed the FDA itself had documented thousands of mifepristone-related adverse events before it eliminated the drug’s safety protocols:

FDA’s own data collected between 2000 to 2012 indicated 2,740 adverse events, including 416 events involving blood loss requiring transfusions.
Since then, safeguards for women regarding the administration of mifepristone have been significantly reduced.

Members of the House Values Action Team (VAT) team are among the legislators asking why, if mifepristone is dangerous enough to warrant a safety investigation, the FDA is approving more of the drug to hit shelves.

“The FDA’s approval of a new generic version of the abortion pill, mifepristone, endangers women’s health and disregards the value of life,” Congressman and VAT Chairman Robert Aderholt wrote in a statement.

“By approving another generic iteration of this pill while a safety review is ongoing, the FDA risks undermining women’s health and safety across the United States.”

Read more statements from more VAT members.

Neither Makary nor Kennedy had commented on the issue as of October 8.

The FDA has an urgent problem on its hands. Upwards of 11% of women may be suffering severe harm from chemical abortions, which are only growing more common. Meanwhile, the abortion industry claims mifepristone is safer than Tylenol.

The FDA should never approve drugs used to end human life. Barring a complete prohibition on mifepristone, the FDA should not approve generic abortion pills while investigation the drug’s safety.

To speak with a family help specialist or request resources, please call us at 1-800-A-FAMILY (232-6459).

If you are experiencing an unexpected pregnancy and want to learn more about your options, visit My Choice Network.

Some women, after taking the first abortion pill (mifepristone) come to regret their decision. Thankfully, there is a way to reverse the pill’s effects if prompt action is taken. To learn more about the abortion pill reversal protocol, visit abortionpillreversal.com or call 1-877-558-0333 to be connected with a medical professional who can guide callers through the process of reversing the pill’s effects.

To learn more about pro-life legislation in your state, contact your state Family Policy Council.

To learn more about the consequences of a chemical abortion, visit the links below.

Additional Articles and Resources

FDA Launches Review of Abortion Pill and the Harms it Causes Women

Pro-Abortion States Beef Up Protections for Abortion Pill Prescribers

Texas Father Sues Out-of-State Abortionist for Killing His Preborn Children

Shield Laws Enable Chemical Abortion in Pro-Life States

Shield Law Abortion Providers Advertised Alongside Black Market Abortion Pills

Texas Sues New York Doctor for Prescribing Abortion Meds

New Abortion Pill Study Confirms Danger to Mothers

Woman Nearly Dies from Abortion Pill, Story Reflects Disturbing EPPC Data

Focus on the Family Broadcast: Abortion Pill Reversal

#AbortionChangesYou: A Case Study to Understand the Communicative Tensions in Women’s Medication Abortion Narratives (Health Communication)

The Abortion Pill Harms Women: Insurance Data Reveals One in Ten Patients Experiences a Serious Adverse Event (Ethics and Public Policy Center)

Written by Emily Washburn · Categorized: Life · Tagged: Abortion Pill, Life, mifepristone

Sep 05 2025

The VA Predicted Abortion Demand Would Increase Post-‘Dobbs.’ It Didn’t.

The Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) justified covering veterans’ elective abortions three years ago after predicting pro-life laws would supercharge abortion demand.

They were wrong — really wrong.

When the Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade in 2022, the VA expanded its abortion coverage to include elective abortions. Until then, it had only covered abortions to save the life of the mother.

Last month, the VA proposed repealing the 2022 abortion expansion rule, arguing it violates the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits taxes from paying for abortions, and improperly subverts the judiciary.

The objectional abortion expansion was only approved, the current VA explains, after the 2022 VA predicted more than 1,000 veterans and their family members would “need” elective abortions every year once states started banning abortion.

In reality, the VA has provided about 140 abortions per year since the Supreme Court reversed Roe. That means the 2022 VA’s prediction overshot reality by a whopping 86%.

The overinflated prediction allowed the VA to jerry-rig a “right to abortion” for veterans and their family members. The 2025 VA explains:

The stated reason for [expanding abortion rights] was a reaction to a Supreme Court decision…that was itself intended to prevent overreach.

Yet, the last administration used [the decision] to do the exact opposite, creating a purported Federal entitlement to abortion for veterans where none had existed before and without regard to State law.

In doing so, the administration predicted a high demand for VA abortions that never materialized.

The 2022 VA’s convenient “miscalculation” illustrates how the abortion industry benefits from making it seem like women, everywhere “need” abortions. The illusion of popularity makes policies supporting unregulated, elective abortions seem like “the will of the people.”

They’re not — and the VA proves the point. For three years, it has offered veterans and their families elective abortions on the cheap. If lack of abortion access has become such a crisis for women, why aren’t more taking advantage?

Take claims of ballooning abortion demand with a hefty grain of salt.  If abortionists in the government can juke the stats, you can bet pro-abortion organizations are doing the same.

Additional Articles and Resources

VA Moves to Rescind Taxpayer-Funded Abortion for Veterans

Pentagon Ends Paid Travel Expenses and Time Off for Abortion

Gen Z Women Rejected Pro-Abortion Messaging in 2024, Election Data Shows

Trump Signs Executive Order Limiting Taxpayer Funds for Abortion

U.S. Military to Receive Time Off and Travel Expenses to Obtain Abortions

BREAKING: Trump Administration Moves to Freeze, Cut Funding to Planned Parenthood

My Choice Network

Counseling Consultation Request Form

Considering Abortion?

Focus on the Family Pro-Life

Written by Emily Washburn · Categorized: Life · Tagged: abortion, Life

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Page 2
  • Page 3
  • Page 4
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 8
  • Go to Next Page »

Privacy Policy and Terms of Use | Privacy Policy and Terms of Use | © 2026 Focus on the Family. All rights reserved.

  • Cookie Policy