I saw the recent news that Governor Tom Wolf vetoed the 20 week abortion ban here in Pennsylvania, highlighting the fact that the ban had no rape exception -- even though he knows darn well he would have vetoed the bill anyway. This makes me so angry that politicians think that innocent children like my grandchild are not worth saving. These children are our future! One of these children killed in the womb could have discovered a cure for cancer, become president or hundreds of other amazing things.

I am a mother of a child who was raped and impregnated when she was just a child herself at the age of 11, and I have been raising that child conceived in rape as my own for the last 13 years. To be exact, she turned 13 the day the Governor released his statement on his veto.. And this is her birthday gift from our Governor?!

Like most young pregnant rape victims, my daughter's pregnancy wasn't discovered until
later in the pregnancy. Not that my daughter would have considered abortion, but this 20 week abortion ban would have protected the life of my granddaughter -- especially if the rapist had tried to coerce my daughter into aborting. You see, my granddaughter's DNA was the evidence used to put this child molester in prison. But with abortion, the rapist would have been protected. Gov. Wolf's veto will protect rapists. The baby actually helped my daughter heal because her life gave my daughter someone else to fight for. But Gov. Wolf doesn't understand that.

I can honestly say abortion is wrong, knowing what I know today. Would I have wanted my granddaughter aborted? No! With her special needs, it's extremely hard parenting her some days, but her life still has value and she is worthy of life.

So that being said . . . ,

Dear Governor Wolf:

You say that this bill was criminalizing a woman's "right to health care." What about the rights of the unborn child? What about my granddaughter's life that you criminalize? The bill did not deny a woman the right to prenatal care. It didn't even prevent women from obtaining an abortion -- it just said there was a cut off date. The bill was trying to protect unborn babies from dying the most heinous of deaths.

To Mayor Kenney:

You claim second trimester abortions are safe. But sir, that is a bold-faced lie. They're never safe for the baby. And, the further along a woman is, the more dangerous it is. There's a greater chance of becoming infertile, needing an emergency hysterectomy due to the uterus being punctured, or even her worst-case scenario of death. You also claim it is victimizing the victim to expect her to carry "a rapist's baby." But is not that child made up of 50% of her DNA, making that child the rape victim's baby? Last time I checked, we humans are made up of 46 chromosomes and 23 come from each parent.

Instead of trying to stop a bill that protects life, why don't you get a bill passed that truly helps rape victims who have been impregnated by taking the rights away from rapists, without requiring the obstacle of a getting a rape conviction? And if she's lucky enough to get a rape conviction, why not make termination of his parental rights automatic? Then people like myself and my daughter who was raped and impregnated at 11 years of age would not be in the situation we're in today.

She made the difficult decision that an adult -- let alone a child -- should not have to make to have her daughter in her life as her sister, and I have been raising this child as my own for the last 13 years. But I am only her legal guardian because if my daughter were to give up her rights, he could get custody in Pennsylvania. So I cannot legally make my granddaughter my own, because Pennsylvania law protects the rapist, not the victim or her innocent child. This is traumatizing my daughter far more than carrying a child for 9 months and loving that child. So Gov. Wolf and those who support his veto -- you are all wrong in your assumptions.

While these politicians jockey to look good in public opinion, my family lives in constant fear that when the man who raped my daughter is released from prison, he could be given visitation or even custody some day.

To the Executive Director of New Voice for Reproduction Justice:

Instead of promoting abortion as a means of controlling reproduction, how about spending your time educating and promoting respect for women instead? How about working to punish rapists and protect these mothers from the rapist?

And lastly, to Dr. Erica Goldblatt Hyatt:

You say women can somehow have freedom through the vetoing of this bill and can just trust the science. Well to that I say, if you really are trusting the science, then you would know that science has proven over and over that life starts at conception and the unborn child as young as 12 weeks can feel pain. So you are torturing an innocent baby when you rip them apart, while alive, when you perform a "D and E" procedure. You use the pregnant rape victim as an excuse to keep even late-term abortion legal for any reason.

To those who have been raped, I can't tell you how sorry I am that it happened to you, but trust me, killing an innocent baby is not going to make the pain go away or make you forget it any faster. But I can tell you that the minute you hold that child, you will feel love, because I know I did when my daughter's baby was born.

At first, I didn't want to see her because I was afraid I wouldn't be able to love her, and all babies deserve to be loved by their families. But when I held her, that fear disappeared and all I saw was my daughter in her. Even with all of these issues, I would not give her up for anything. She is as much my child as my other two are and I know my daughter loves her as much as she does her brother.

Life and death decisions should not be based on fear and prejudice, and neither should public policy. Shame on you Governor Wolf.

BIO: Michele Snook is a mother of two, grandmother to one, and a pro-life blogger for Save The 1.

7-month pregnant gang rape survivor denied a late-term abortion by the Gujurat high court in India.  With those kinds of news stories, we regularly see organizations like Amnesty International and Planned Parenthood International utilizing such stories to demand the legalization of abortion through all nine of months of pregnancy – not only for rape, but for any reason.  Rape is just the key to open wide the abortion door. 

Her own parents are supporting this purification test out of fear for what will happen to them and their two other yet unmarried children once she gives birth to this child conceived out of rape.  If the tantric doesn’t clear her, then her siblings will never be able to marry.

The ritualistic test involves the tantric interrogating the rape victim, then testing her veracity “by taking a pinch of barley seeds from a bag and asking her to say whether the number of seeds in his hand are even-numbered or odd.”  She is then repeatedly subjected to this process, including with a 10kg stone upon her head, which must remain in place until the tantric is satisfied that she is telling the truth.  This ritual can reportedly take months to complete, under the belief that a Goddess will reveal the truth.  If in the end, the rape victim passes the test, then no one can banish or condemn her; if not, then she is considered “impure” and is ostracized from the community, along with her extended family members.

“...Including the exceptions is a smart move, it gives the bill a more feasible chance of  either becoming law or hurting pro-abortion politicians who vote against it.”

Will the 20 Week Ban Save Babies?   ~by Darlene Pawlik

HR 36 Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act is Back

The Republican leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives has announced that it will bring the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act to the House floor for a vote on Wednesday, May 13, or Thursday, May 14.

You might recall that the bill had been scheduled for a vote on January 22 during the annual March for Life when hundreds of thousands of pro-life advocates would be in Washington DC to commemorate Roe v Wade, but it was pulled at the last minute.  The media's account was that the bill had a reporting requirement for rape that didn't meet with the approval of a couple of legislators. 





At first glance, there was huge support for this bill because most pro-life advocates did not know that the bill had exceptions for rape and incest, meaning that abortions would be banned after 20 weeks except if the child was conceived in rape or incest.  When a core group of pro-life advocates found out about the exceptions and that there would be no hearing to try and remove that language, a huge opposition to the bill began and the bill was pulled off the docket.

Those against the bill, including Savethe1 and Personhood Alliance objected to the huge push by National Right to Life, Susan B Anthony List and Priests for Life asking pro-life advocates to contact their congressman to support the bill, without mentioning that the bill had exceptions for rape and incest.


The basis of the bill is that preborn babies at 20 weeks gestation feel pain as they are being killed by abortion. Is there any reason to believe that the manner in which a child is conceived impacts their ability to feel pain? Rape conceived babies feel pain too. We are developmentally the same as babies conceive in love.

The US has long been respected as a just nation. Is it just to kill a child because his or her father is a criminal? According to our laws, in no other circumstance is a child held accountable for the crimes of their father. We have courts and trial lawyers to hold people accountable by due process of the law. What due process is afforded these babies?

Emails from major pro-life organizations have already been out today to raise money based on the premiss that HR36 will save babies from abortion. A few have mentioned, while they don't condone the rape and incest exceptions, they support the bill because it will save babies. But will it?

My understanding is that the the reporting requirement has been removed. So, there may be no fear of reprisal for women claiming to have conceived by rape and less likelihood of women reporting abusers or traffickers when they conceive by rape or incest. Abortion is a trafficker's best weapon. Abortion keeps women subservient and breaks their spirits, so that abusers can continue their abuse. Coerced abortion is very prevalent. My trafficker forced me to make an appointment for an abortion and threatened my life if I didn’t abort.

How can we think that if a woman is desperate enough to submit to abortion and have her baby killed at five months pregnant, that she wouldn't be desperate enough to lie?

And what about the logic, or shall I say illogic, of this kind of a stipulation in law. How illogical is it to say that a baby who can feel pain should be protected in some cases, but not others? We have a concept here in the United States called equal protection under the law. This concept usually governs the enactment of legislation by giving a hearing to bills to be discussed. This bill was scheduled to be brought to the floor for a vote without a hearing last time and it has been scheduled without a hearing again.

The announcement that it will be voted on next week doesn't even allow for much media or lobbying for the exceptions to be removed. Savethe1 President, Rebecca Kiessling, will be there in DC along with Personhood Alliance President, Dan Becker, to reach out to as many legislators as possible next week. Please help us get the word out about the flaws in this bill and help others understand that there is either a baby worth saving or there isn't.

As someone who is conceived in rape, who has dealt with the trauma and stigmatization that this conception story engenders, (I now see my story as a gift), it is very exciting to see an increase in awareness on this issue.  There is now much more public debate, a growing number of articles and stories reaching the mainstream media, and lots of discussion on internet social sites and blogs.  The rape exception has entered the new presidential campaign early.  Rand Paul has used questions about his personal views about the rape exception to effectively turn the tables on abortion supporters in order to demonstrate their extreme, unwavering support of abortion on demand for any reason at any time.  (Although we wish that he will be able effectively defend a no-exceptions pro-life philosophy at some point.) 

It all started with a text:    “Can you drive five hours to Santa Fe to testify before the NM Judiciary Committee on Friday?”