Mother Warns Against Colorado Law Prohibiting Abortion Pill Reversal That Saved Daughter’s Life
This is the person that the grim Leftists of Colorado would have killed
When Mackenna Greene took the abortion pill to end the life of her unborn daughter, she immediately knew she had made the wrong choice.
“I’ll admit that in the days leading up to it, I was not excited,” Greene told The Daily Signal. “I was second-guessing myself. I found myself trying to convince myself that I was making the right decision.”
“Immediately after taking it, I felt regret,” she said of the abortion pill, “and I had a feeling that that was a very bad decision.”
Greene said she googled her options and found Chelsea Mynyk, a nurse-midwife at the life-affirming Catholic medical center Bella Health and Wellness in Englewood, Colorado. Mynyk prescribes abortion pill reversal medication to women who regret starting a chemical abortion.
Greene took progesterone to counteract the effects of the first chemical abortion pill. About a month ago, she gave birth to her daughter.
“I felt like I had worked my whole life to have her,” Greene said. “I’m the luckiest girl alive to be looking at this girl’s face. And thank goodness that the reversal was successful.”
“She’s got such a personality and sometimes when I look at her, I think of missing out on all of that, and it hurts,” Greene said. “I’m just so lucky, so blessed, to be able to look into her face every day.”
But Colorado, where Greene and Mynyk live, passed a law in April 2023 forbidding doctors and nurses from providing the abortion pill reversal. Under that law, Mynyk could be fined up to $20,000 each time she helps reverse the effects of an abortion pill.
That same month, Becket—previously the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty—sued the state of Colorado on behalf of Bella Health and Wellness, securing a preliminary injunction preventing enforcement of the law against the faith-based OB-GYN practice.
In January, an anonymous individual filed a complaint against Mynyk because she offers abortion pill reversal, and the Colorado Board of Nursing opened an investigation. In response, Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian law firm, filed a motion to intervene on Mynyk’s behalf. It was granted in April.
“This is a law that restricts the ability of medical professionals like Chelsea [Mynyk] to save lives,” said Kevin Theriot, a senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom.
Theriot is representing Mynyk as she challenges the Colorado law so that she may continue saving babies such as Greene’s.
“It singles out those women that have regret, just like Mackenna, and decide that they don’t want to go through with the chemical abortion and doesn’t allow them to give to receive this progesterone, which is a drug that’s been used for over 50 years to stop miscarriage,” Theriot told The Daily Signal. “Chelsea herself has proven that it definitely increases the chances that moms like Mackenna can save their babies.”
Medical professionals should be able to talk about and prescribe the abortion pill, Theriot said.
The law “really doesn’t make any sense unless you see it from the perspective of this radical abortion lobby that says that we want women to have access to abortion, and we don’t think they should be able to change their minds,” Theriot said.
Theriot said he hopes the court will enter a permanent injunction putting the Colorado law on hold because it violates the rights of Mynyk and patients such as Greene.
“I think that would be very difficult to practice as a provider, not being able to offer this option to women, especially when they regret their abortion and they want something to take to reverse that, and especially because we know this is safe,” Mynyk said. “It’s natural progesterone. It’s not some sort of random pill we’re giving.”
Everyone should be concerned about laws such as this that violate religious liberty and freedom of speech, the lawyer said.
“The primary reason why this process is so important is because it saves lives, and Mackenna and her daughter are a perfect example of that,” Theriot said. “But it also is a treatment that medical professionals like Chelsea ought to be able to talk about, because it’s a viable option.”
******************************************
Stanford Marketing Course Requires DEI Statement Before Student Enrolls
Requiring students to make a DEi statement to qualify for a course is “inappropriate” and could cross the line of compelled speech, according to a Brookings Institution expert.
Stanford University is requiring that those applying to enroll in “Global Entrepreneurial Marketing,” a course offered by the Department of Management Science and Engineering, make a statement on diversity and inclusion.
“Diversity is an important part of the mission of the Stanford MS&E Department and this class,” text describing the required diversity and inclusion statement reads. “Please use this opportunity to describe how you will contribute to a culture of diversity and inclusion in this class.”
Brookings’ Jonathan Rauch, a senior fellow in governance studies, questioned the requirement in a post on his X account.
“Here’s what some @Stanford engineering instructors are requiring of prospective students for course enrollment,” Rauch wrote.
Rauch acquired the screenshot of the requirement from “a member of the Stanford community,” he told The Center Square.
Rauch has authored eight books and writes for The Atlantic, according to his Brookings bio.
“It is inappropriate to require students to make a statement about their commitment to diversity and inclusion in order to qualify for a course,” Rauch told The Center Square.
“While Stanford as a whole should expect students to conduct themselves in a civil, respective manner, conditioning participation in academic programs or activities on social or political commitments treads dangerously close to compelled speech, if it does not actually cross that line,” Rauch said.
“Moreover (and unfortunately), the term ‘diversity and inclusion,’ in today’s academic context, has acquired controversial political overtones which students may justifiably hesitate to endorse,” Rauch said. “A student could reasonably conclude that the teachers of this course intend to screen out students who disagree with them politically.”
“Stanford should tell these teachers to cut it out,” Rauch said.
The requirement is in place despite the university recently announcing an institutional neutrality policy.
The course description mentions “skills needed to market new technology-based products to customers around the world. Case method discussions. Cases include startups and global high tech firms.”
The course themes are listed as “marketing toolkit, targeting markets and customers, product marketing and management, partners and distribution, sales and negotiation, and outbound marketing.”
The course description states that enrollment is limited and admission is by application.
The Center Square sought comment twice each from the listed course instructors, professors Lynda Smith and Thomas Kosnik. Neither responded.
The Center Square also sought comment twice each from Stanford’s engineering dean, Jennifer Widom, and director of public relations, Jill Wu. Neither responded.
**********************************************
Michigan’s Election Chief Faces Lawsuit for Refusing to Remove Dead People From Voter Rolls. She’s About to Get More Power
Michigan lawmakers are poised to empower Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson—a Democrat who has faced six separate court orders to enforce election laws—to have more control over elections.
A package of four bills dubbed the Michigan Voting Rights Act cleared the Democrat-controlled state Senate and awaits action by the Democrat-controlled state House of Representatives.
Critics say the legislation would strip the state Legislature and Michigan’s local governments of authority to regulate voting.
The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now
“They are systematically moving power away from local election clerks—who are not partisan but are hard workers—and up to the state,” state Sen. Ruth Johnson, a Republican and former Michigan secretary of state, told The Daily Signal.
Under Benson, the state voter registration rolls have 106% of the voting-age population of Michigan, Johnson said, arguing that Benson is an “operative for the far Left.”
“She is the most partisan secretary of state in my lifetime,” Johnson said. “I prided myself on bringing both sides to the table in overseeing elections.”
Michigan—which Republican Donald Trump won in the 2016 election and Democrat Joe Biden won in the 2020 election—is one of the most hotly contested and closely watched states in the 2024 presidential race.
Benson formerly worked for the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center as well as the Democratic National Committee. She was the founder of an activist group called the Michigan Center for Election Law and Administration.
Pure Integrity Michigan Elections, an elections watchdog group, points to six occasions over the past four years in which state and federal courts ruled against Benson in election law cases:
—In July, in the case of Republican National Committee v. Benson, Michigan Court of Claims Judge Christopher Yates ruled against the secretary of state’s policy of presuming voters’ signatures were valid. The RNC brought the case in March regarding Benson’s December 2023 instructions to election clerks to presume the validity of absentee voters’ signatures. The RNC argued that the instructions violated the Michigan Constitution, which requires verification of signatures.
—In October 2022, in the case of O’Halloran v. Benson, Michigan Court of Appeals Judge Brock Swartzle ordered Benson to revise her rules governing poll watchers’ guidelines to comply with Michigan election law. Benson’s rules limited when poll watchers could make a challenge and also banned electronic devices. Swartzle determined that Benson did not go through proper procedures. However, the Michigan Supreme Court, in a 4-3 ruling, last month sided with Benson and reversed lower court rulings.
—In March 2021, Benson lost in the case of Genetski v. Benson when a judge struck down her October 2020 guidance regarding standards for voter signatures. Michigan Court of Appeals Judge Christopher Murray’s ruling said Benson violated the Administrative Standards Act. Benson’s guidance was put in place before the November 2020 election. The court ruling only affected elections going forward.
—In October 2020, in the case of Davis v. Benson, Murray issued an injunction against Benson’s directive banning the open carry of firearms at polling places.
—In 2020, in the case of Carra v. Benson, Michigan Court of Appeals Judge Cynthia Stephens issued a preliminary injunction against Benson’s directive restricting poll watchers and election challengers. (Poll watchers observe voting; election challengers observe the count.) The litigation was related to requirements for social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Days before the 2020 election, Benson’s office settled the lawsuit, which was brought by state House candidate Steve Carra, a Republican, to allow poll watchers and election challengers to be within six feet of election workers.
—In the case of Johnson v. Benson in October 2020, U.S. District Judge Paul Maloney ordered Benson to change her guidance on the time and manner of election processes to comply with state law on the deadline for the arrival of absentee ballots.
—On the most recent front, in a pending case, the Republican National Committee sued Benson over her instructions to local clerks and election inspectors to process and count ballots with numbers that don’t match those in the poll book or the return envelope. Republicans alleged that this procedure violated Michigan law requiring matching numbers on the ballot, poll book, and ballot return envelope to ensure that ballots were cast and counted properly.
Earlier this month, testifying with other secretaries of state before the House Administration Committee in Washington, Benson said unsubstantiated rhetoric can “harm those charged with protecting our election systems.”
However, Patrice Johnson, who chairs Pure Integrity Michigan Elections, said Benson hasn’t demonstrated evidence that election workers face threats of violence.
Benson also has tried to intimidate both election watchdogs and local election officials, said Johnson, who is not related to Ruth Johnson.
“Her behavior is reminiscent of Gestapo tactics, designed to intimidate and silence opposition,” PIME’s Johnson told The Daily Signal. “No one who values free speech and the Constitution of the United States—or who respects her constituents—would trample on individual rights in this arrogant and self-aggrandizing manner.”
The PIME chair pointed to Benson’s words during an online question-and-answer session last month.
“If someone were to violate the law, and not certify the election at the local level, we will come for you,” Benson said of local election officials. “So, any local certifier thinking of skirting the law and not certifying the vote, don’t even think about it, because we’ll get you.”
The legislative package touted by Benson as the Michigan Voting Rights Act is made up of four separate bills.
Senate Bill 401 would allow court-appointed monitors to oversee elections for up to 10 years. Critics say it would pave the way for the process known as ranked choice voting. SB 402 would establish a private “institute” outside a government entity for collecting election data.
SB 403 would mandate language assistance for elections, which critics say would create heavy costs for elections offices. Finally, SB 404 would legalize electioneering near voting locations, which critics say could jeopardize the secret ballot.
Benson’s office has argued that the legislative package would “prohibit voter denial, dilution, and suppression” and “enhance and clarify protections for voters with disabilities or others who need assistance to participate in elections.”
A spokesperson for the Michigan Department of State did not respond to inquiries from The Daily Signal for this story. But in a public statement last week, Benson touted the Michigan Senate’s passage of the legislation
“Every Michigan voter deserves access to fair, secure elections and no citizen should be unfairly denied the right to vote,” Benson said. “The Michigan Voting Rights Act will not only build on the federal Voting Rights Act but will add new protections at the state level to shield us from future attacks on our democracy.”
The Public Interest Legal Foundation sued Michigan over Benson’s refusal to remove the names of 26,000 dead people from voter registration lists. Of those, almost 4,000 had been dead for over two decades; 17,479 were dead for more than a decade; 23,663 had been dead for at least five years.
The foundation, an election watchdog group, noted that Benson’s department mismanaged voter rolls. She publicly defended her office, however.
**********************************************
Concerns over Gender Queer book dismissed by Australian classifications board as anti-LGBTQ+, court hears
OK to promote deviant sexuality to kids (?)
The Australian classifications board made a “broadbrush dismissal” of over 500 submissions calling for a ban of the book Gender Queer by labelling those submissions as anti-LGBTQ+, a court has heard.
In July last year, the Classification Board rejected calls to restrict access to a memoir about gender identity that was the target of conservative campaigns to have it banned in the US, and found the content was appropriate for its intended audience.
Activist Bernard Gaynor had applied to the board in early 2023 to review the classification of the graphic novel-style memoir about gender identity by writer Maia Kobabe.
Complaints about the book – which details Kobabe’s experience coming out as non-binary – are focused on the cartoon images of sex scenes, one of which has been described by critics seeking a ban as “pornographic” and “paedophilic”.
When the Australian Classification Board upheld its original decision to classify the book as unrestricted with the consumer advice of “M – not recommended for readers under 15 years”, Gaynor appealed against the ruling to the federal court.
In a hearing on Monday, Bret Walker SC, acting for Gaynor, said the overwhelming majority of submissions to the board on the review of the decision had called for the publication to be restricted or refused classification. He argued the classification board had erred by not taking these submissions into account, by broadly labelling them as “anti-LGBTQIA+”.
Walker said there was a “deliberately broadbrush dismissal” of those submissions, many of which he said objected to what they saw as depicting a man having sex with a minor – referring to an image portraying Plato’s Symposium. Walker said many of those objections did not refer to the gender of the image’s subjects, just that it appeared to depict paedophilia.
Justice Ian Jackman said that while by his count, about 600 submissions from among 9,000 people had been considered to be anti-LGBTQ+ by the board, on closer examination Jackman said just 52 of these expressed anti-LGBTQ+ views – less than 1% of submissions received.
Walker said the board gave little weight to the submissions, and had failed to engage with them in its review decision.
In response, the barrister for the minister for communications and the classification board, Houda Younan SC, said the law did not require the board to accept submissions as part of the review of its classification decision and that the invitation of submissions did not require the decision-maker to then consider them.
However, Younan said the board did consider the public submissions and did not dismiss them on the basis of being anti-LGBTQ+ but because they did not assist the board in its statutory task of a classifications decision.
“We say that in this case, every submission was received and considered,” Younan said.
Submissions in the decision were labelled to give their tenor, she said. Submissions were given weight based on whether they contained evidence the writer had read Gender Queer and understood its content within the context of the publication.
Those that did not demonstrate an engagement with the publication were given little weight, she said.
Younan indicated the board had considered whether a submission noted the context of the image being of Plato’s Symposium, or was a criticism of the image on its own, removed of context.
She later identified 14 additional examples of explicitly anti-LGBTQ+ submissions beyond those initially identified by Jackman.
Among the orders sought, Gaynor is seeking to have the decision remitted back to the classifications board.
Jackman reserved his decision.
In the US, Gender Queer is one of the most challenged books in libraries. Kobabe told the ABC in May that the US push to ban the book had been frustrating and that the depiction of Plato’s Symposium had been included as it was one of the few gay-themed texts Kobabe had encountered in college.
“It stuck in my mind, because it was the only one.”
**************************************************
My main blogs below:
http://jonjayray.com/covidwatch.html (COVID WATCH)
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
https://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)
https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)
https://john-ray.blogspot.com/ (FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC -- revived)
http://jonjayray.com/select.html (SELECT POSTS)
http://jonjayray.com/short/short.html (Subject index to my blog posts)
***********************************************
No comments:
Post a Comment