Truth is the pro-life advocate's most important weapon. And the ultrasound machine provides truth visualized in what has been an especially dramatic and effective life-saving form.That's why the call to action at the conclusion of the press release from our good friends down at Nebraska Right to Life (printed below) is so crucial.
By the way, Christine Funk, executive director of Planned Parenthood of Nebraska and Council Bluffs, is strongly against the ultrasound bills.
Of course she is.
Planned Parenthood makes an awful lot of money from killing preborn babies via surgical (and chemical) abortion and they don't want anything that might change the minds of their customers.
Funk told a Lincoln newspaper that the ultrasound bills introduced by Tony Fulton are "incredibly disrespectful to women, a violation of the doctor-patient relationship and an outrageous government intrusion into a private matter." In other words, Funk doesn't want a patient seeing her baby on screen, thereby allowing visual truth to interfere into a Planned Parenthood matter.
In the same interview, Funk grumpily criticized pro-life pregnancy clinics who offer free ultrasounds to women. "They have an agenda. They are not neutral. We find that objectionable."
Sigh.
The truly objectionable agenda here is Planned Parenthood's. They are anything but neutral too but their sexist, obscurantist, profit-oriented goal is to keep a woman less informed about her pregnancy, less informed about her options, and less informed about her unborn child.
Here is that Nebraska Right to Life press release.
Lincoln --- Two ultrasound bills have been introduced by Senator Tony Fulton in the Nebraska Legislature. "The first bill, LB 675 is the stronger, most protective of the two." said Julie Schmit-Albin, Executive Director of Nebraska Right to Life. "If passed it will be one of the strongest ultrasound laws in the country."
"LB 675 provides that an abortionist doing an ultrasound an hour prior to an abortion must display the ultrasound screen to the mother, so that she is fully informed by what she can see on the screen as her developing baby." said Schmit-Albin.
"The reason LB 675 is stronger is because the burden would be on the abortionist to display the screen to the mother and not on the mother, who is in a crisis, to ask to see the screen." said Schmit-Albin. "However, nothing would prevent the mother from averting her eyes from the screen if she decides not to view it."
"If passed, LB 675 would ensure that the mother, at least one hour prior to the abortion, has a window to the womb. She should be given every opportunity to see her baby and reject the abortion at that point." said Schmit-Albin.
"Our concern with the other bill, LB 676, is that it would be business as usual for abortionists because it only requires the abortionist to 'offer' the mother an opportunity to view the screen, which abortionists claim they already do; thus maintaining the status quo." said Schmit-Albin.
"Now is the time for pro-life Nebraskans to let their voices be heard and to let the Legislature know that we want LB 675, the stronger bill to be passed." said Schmit-Albin. "Some people are afraid that the stronger bill would be challenged in the courts. We on the other hand welcome the challenge. Do we want to codify status quo for abortionists or make a difference and save lives? LB 675 goes the furthest to save lives."
