On Friday, June 7th, at approximately 8:30am 7 pro-lifers entered the abortion facility of the Women’s Center of Flint, MI, 3422 Flushing Rd. including your Citizens for a Pro-Life Society director. We sat down next to women seated in the waiting room and offered them material help and words of encouragement to leave the clinic and choose life for their babies. We had about 10 minutes to counsel the women before clinic staff rounded them up and ushered them into a hallway off of the waiting room.

At this point the rescuers sang hymns, prayed and tried to communicate with the women who were just in the next hallway. Your CPLS director left the clinic when one of the women came out of the back hallway and exited the facility. I hoped to talk to her in the parking lot and tried to persuade her to give life to her baby. Sadly however, she went back into the abortion clinic. While the rescue continued I stayed in the parking lot and continued to counsel other women who were arriving for their abortions.

In the meantime one of the rescuers, Rhonda, was actually able to gain access to the back hallway as the clinic staff believed she was one of their customers. She attempted to talk to the moms and offer them literature. When one of the women said: "Why are you back here with us?" Rhonda cleverly replied: "I'm back here with you because like your mother, my mother gave me life!"

A few of the women in the waiting room did take red roses offered to them and pro-life pamphlets as well. I was able to leave pro-life literature on a shelf near chairs in the waiting room before I left the clinic.

Four of the rescuers stayed in the clinic refusing to leave when told to do so by law enforcement when a contingent of ten Flint Township offers arrived! The four rescuers intended to offer an act of non-violent defense of unborn children about to be aborted. The philosophy of the Red Rose Rescue is that the unborn scheduled for abortion are the true outcasts of society--they are the abandoned and the unwanted--and they deserve to have someone BE WITH THEM as they are about to go off to their execution. Moreover, we know, after this, the 14th Red Rose Rescue, that as long as there is a pro-life presence inside the abortion center--the killing is stopped!

The June 7th Red Rose Rescue is the 3rd such Rescue to take place in Michigan since the first took place Sept. 15, 2017 at the Northland Family Planning Clinic in Sterling Hts. Attached to each rose offered to the women is a card that states on one side “You were made to love and to be loved... your goodness is greater than the difficulties of your situation. Circumstances in life change. A new life, however tiny, brings the promise of unrepeatable joy.” Phone numbers of local pregnancy help centers are listed on the reverse side of the card.

The Flint abortion center is owned and operated by Michigan resident Victoria Moore who also owns an abortion center in Saginaw. Theodore Roumell first performs abortions at the Saginaw facility while women, told to arrive at 8:30 at the Flint clinic, wait literally for hours for the abortionist to arrive. Second trimester abortions are conducted Mondays and are performed by abortionist Reginald Sharpe.

Monica Migliorino Miller, director of Citizens for a Pro-Life Society organizer of the Red Rose Rescue explains: “The Red Rose Rescue is an act of charity for women who feel for whatever reason they must have their innocent unborn children killed. Those who take part are willing to embrace risks for these women and their babies. We will go into the very places where the unborn are put to death and extend help to the moms. Should this help be refused—we will not leave the abortion centers but remain in solidarity with the helpless victims oppressed by the injustice of abortion. Saint Mother Teresa of Calcutta said that her work was ‘to go into the dark holes of the poor.’ The Red Rose Rescue is an action of going into the dark holes of the poor where the innocent are rejected—and in these dark holes we seek to bring love, hope, and true peace to the women scheduled for abortions, encouraging them to choose life.” (Photo above: Will Goodman under arrest)

Two Red Rose Rescues took place just before Christmas—the first December 20th at the Washington Surgi-Center, in which the abortion center was essentially shut down for over 3 hours due to the presence of the rescuers—namely Fr. Stephen Imbarrato, Linda Mueller and Laura Gies.

The second RRR occurred at the Planned Parenthood abortion center in Trenton, New Jersey on December 22. This is the first time that an RRR occurred at a Planned Parenthood abortion center. At about 9am four Red Rose Rescuers entered the abortion center at 437 State Street in Trenton—Fr. Fidelis Moscinski of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, William Goodman, Patrice Woodward and Matthew Connolly. Six women were already seated in the waiting room, two of them Hispanic couples accompanied by their boyfriends. Will Goodman spoke to one of the Hispanic couples. He gave them literature, talked to them about the humanity of their unborn child and gave them a red rose which they accepted. During the course of the rescue the couple, who definitely were there for an abortion, got up and left the PP abortion facility.

All of the women in the PP clinic were counseled by the Red Rose Rescuers and were given roses before the Planned Parenthood staff moved the women to another part of the abortion facility. At that point the rescuers stayed in the waiting room praying and singing hymns until the police arrived. The officers warned the rescuers that they were trespassing. But Fr. Fidelis and Will Goodman explained that their presence was needed to defend the unborn scheduled for execution stating: “We cannot leave. Innocent unborn children are about to be put to death and we have opted to stay with them.”

The goals of a Red Rose Rescue are two-fold:

a) to offer help and words of encouragement to the mothers, to persuade them to turn away from their abortion decision and

b) to offer a loving act of defense on behalf of the unborn about to be aborted—to abide with them in the moment of their abandonment.

This is why Red Rose Rescuers do not leave the abortion centers—they do not leave—they must be removed.

At the RRR in D.C. the three rescuers entered the abortion facility a little after 9am. They made an effort to talk to the mothers. After several minutes however the women were told to move to a “back room” away from the rescuers. Since the clinic is located in a high-rise building the rescuers made a clever decision to exit the waiting room and stay in the hallway near the door of the facility. Now they had access to all of the other women coming for their abortions! Clinic staff having no authority to remove the rescuers from the building hallway, Fr. Stephen, Linda and Laura remained there for nearly three hours until the building manager could be located. The police who had arrived in the meantime had no authority to remove the rescuers until the manager indicated that he did not want the rescuers inside his building. Only then were Fr. Stephen, Linda and Laura placed under arrest.

While they were in the hallway abortionist Cesare F. Santangelo never arrived. The Washington Surgi-enter was thus shut down for over three hours. This abortion center has seen its share of scandal and controversy.

Lifesite News reports:

Washington Surgi-Clinic is one of the 19 abortion facilities in the DC metropolitan area. Known for providing late-term abortions, Cesare F. Santangelo has a history of medical malpractice. Court documents obtained by Operation Rescue showed a 2011 medical malpractice/wrongful death lawsuit filed by the family of a women who died during an abortion.

A 2013 undercover video from Live Action showed that Santangelo [was willing to leave] a baby struggling for life to die after a failed abortion. “Hopefully we’ll get this pregnancy out intact, but it doesn’t always happen that way,” Santangelo [told] an undercover Live Action investigator who [was] 24 weeks pregnant. “I try and sever the umbilical cord first, and we wait for that to stop pulsing, and this way the fetus is expired first.”

Pro-lifers, expect that those among us will always be loving, supportive and kind. We expect them to see our efforts for a mutual cause and rejoice. This is not always the case. By nature of being human beings, we quibble on the appropriate method to fight abortion. Each member thinks, “I have the answer!” and we forget that we do not fight for our own sake, but for those who are exploited, killed, and voiceless. Division in the pro-life ranks is exactly what the other side wants—it may be even what the devil wants. A house divided will surely fall.

Sidewalk Advocates for Life recently released a video speaking out against a new initiative, the Red Rose Rescue. I am one of those Rescuers. I am acutely disappointed over the misrepresentation and the effort to malign what we are trying to convey. Our message is simple: we peacefully enter the abortion facility waiting room to offer love and support at the absolute last second before women make the irreversible choice to abort. We speak out in love for the unborn children who have been or are in danger of being aborted.

One of their claims is that those who participate in a Red Rose Rescue ignorantly enter abortion facilities only to be swiftly sent off to federal prison. While this may be an outcome, should we shy away from risk to save even one life from death and hundreds of lives from the pain of experiencing abortion? Furthermore, how do such consequences in any way affect the work of SAFL? I am not ill-informed on the possibilities for my actions. However, I ask, “how much is a life worth?” SAFL filmed half of their video inside a church; did they not notice the man hanging from a cross who endured a violent sacrifice so that each one of us might live? The essence of love is sacrifice. If we are not willing to sacrifice, we are not truly rooted in love.

In no way am I saying that every single person in the United States needs to be arrested by entering an abortion facility and refusing to leave. This would be imprudent, especially for those with families of their own for which to care. We need lawyers to support us, pregnancy help centers that can care for those who leave abortion facilities and a multitude of others in active support of the cause. But we must not shy away from risk.

I am part the millennial generation that is commonly chastised for ignorance, irrationality, and laziness. I wonder if these attributes stem not from our own natures, but from the fact that for 45 years we have been under attack. When our lawmakers and elders attempt to dictate whether our lives are worth a chance in the womb or not, there is difficulty in getting excited about rising to our fullest potentials. The idea of social justice presented to us is that we can only be free if we kill children. 60 million of my would-be friends and neighbors entered the world to be put into plastic “product of conception” bags. I am committed to ending that narrative, whatever it takes.

Nationally known pro-life leader Jill Stanek featured the CPLS discussion on how to evaluate effective abortion victim photos (reprinted below) on her website blog--you may see it at:
http://www.jillstanek.com/2014/04/are-some-photos-of-abortion-victims-too-gory/  and feel free to join the discussion there.

It is important for the pro-life movement to begin to think about
the effective use of abortion victim photos. As someone who has spent countless hours photographing the victims of abortion, I offer this critique for your consideration.
Your feedback is welcome in the Com Box at the above link.

An Analysis of the Effective Use
of Abortion Victim Photos

by Monica Migliorino Miller

Nationally known, veteran pro-life leader Monica Migliorino Miller, director of Citizens for a Pro-Life Society urges the Pro-life Movement to reconsider and re-evaluate the necessary role that abortion victim photos (AVPs) play in bringing about an end to legalized abortion and establishing respect for human life.

Many of Miller’s ideas on this subject are available through her comprehensive article published September 2013 by New Oxford Review—available at http://www.newoxfordreview.org  for a mere $1.50 or by going to the homepage at: http://www.prolifesociety.org .

Miller is one of the few pro-lifers who has actually retrieved aborted babies from the trash and photographed their broken remains. See: http://imagesofabortion.com .

This blog highlights some of Miller’s important points with the goal of prompting discussion and new thinking on this important topic that continues to be hotly debated even within the ranks of the Pro-Life Movement.

• “Graphic Images” or “Abortion Victim Photos”?
  No longer should pictures of aborted babies be referred to as “graphic images”. The movement should drop that term entirely. These images should be called “abortion victim photos” (AVPs for short) because that is what they are really all about and, moreover, not all photos of abortion victims, while disturbing, are necessarily graphic in nature. The term “abortion victim photos” is terminology that also advocates for the subject of the photos—as these are abortion victims—and not merely graphic images— words that give the instant impression that the subject matter is simply gruesome or repulsive which is not the point of the photos. Using the term AVPs aids the cause for the unborn, as the subjects of the photos are victims of injustice and the language we use should be aimed at helping others make that connection.
• Life is Short – Use Better Abortion Photos
  While every photo of an abortion victim may be a true depiction of the abortion procedure and what happened to the unborn child, this does not mean that every photo is equal in terms of its effectiveness in raising awareness of the injustice of abortion. Pro-lifers need to begin to think more critically about the kinds of abortion victim photos they choose to display. Pro-lifers often tend to think that the bloodier photos are the more effective photos. This is not necessarily true.
  
  Whatever photos are selected, the subject of the photo, namely the abortion victim, should be easily recognized, the humanity of the unborn baby the central and immediate focus. Thus photos in which the blood and guts, visceral matter overwhelms, even submerges the abortion victim should be set aside in favor of photos in which the abused victim is easily recognized with whom the viewer can immediately identify—as opposed to emphasis on gruesome factors that are more likely to repel the viewer.
  
  We really want the viewer to see the abortion victim and not just a “graphic image” of an abortion. It should be realized that all that blood featured in some abortion victim photos is not the blood of the baby—it is the blood of the mother that attends the abortion procedure. Even for this reason the visceral material in the photo should be secondary to the actual abortion victim.

The 3 photos below are examples of AVPs in which the subject of the photo is overwhelmed by, immersed in blood matter and uterine tissue.

While photos 4, 5, 6 and 7 below are graphic, the aborted baby is clearly the focus of the image. Blood and other matter are secondary to the subject.

• Not All Abortion Victim Photos are Graphic Images
  This is a distinction that is not in any way sufficiently appreciated especially by those in the Pro-Life Movement who oppose the use of AVPs— and who certainly reject their public display. We need to begin to appreciate that AVPs represent a spectrum from very graphic to much less graphic images. Given that such a distinction exists, those who oppose their use have very little foundation upon which to do so. Some images certainly and rightly demonstrate the violence of abortion in all its graphic horror—the shattered remnants of bodies torn apart. Other images however, while still obviously depicting abortion victims, are truly less graphic in nature. Thus perhaps we can begin to move these arguments along that
       1) AVPs, whether graphic or less so, are necessary to the success of the pro-life cause and
       2) Choosing less graphic images is an option and
       3) The use of AVPs is central to the pro-life cause and thus those who use AVPs
           are not the  fringe element of the Movement but mainstream pro-lifers.
  
  The photos below, while disturbing, are not overtly graphic—indeed some may not be graphic at all.

• Responses to the Most Common Objections

1. Children will see the AVPs The crisis of legalized abortion that has claimed the lives of 56 million innocent human beings requires that the truth be publicly exposed. The magnitude of the injustice overrides the possibility that children will see the pictures. It simply makes no sense to forego the public exposure of a national slaughter that has sent tens of millions of children to their deaths for the sake of sparing children who might see the photos and be affected by them. There is absolutely no proof that children who see such images suffer any lasting negative effects.
2. Women who have had abortions will be disturbed by the AVPs The primary victims of abortion are the millions of unborn children who perish under the law in a violent death, in a nation that at least tolerates, and at worst advocates, such killing. Again the enormity of the injustice requires that the public be awakened to the slaughter. Furthermore there simply is no one-size-fits-all response of post-abortive women to such images. In addition we should consider how AVPs actually prevent women from getting abortions in the first place thus sparing them a life of grief and regret.
3. Women who have had abortions will be disturbed by the AVPs The primary victims of abortion are the millions of unborn children who perish under the law in a violent death, in a nation that at least tolerates, and at worst advocates, such killing. Again the enormity of the injustice requires that the public be awakened to the slaughter. Furthermore there simply is no one-size-fits-all response of post-abortive women to such images. In addition we should consider how AVPs actually prevent women from getting abortions in the first place thus sparing them a life of grief and regret.

CPLS DIRECTOR URGES
NEW DISCUSSION ON USE
OF “GRAPHIC IMAGES”
IN PRO-LIFE WORK

The use of graphic images of abortion victims in pro-life work has in more recent decades become a point of conflict and debate within the pro-life movement itself, especially the public display of such images. Monica Migliorino Miller’s recently published article is an unprecedented comprehensive examination of this issue. Published in the September 2013 New Oxford Review

The author has herself retrieved hundreds of aborted babies from trash containers and spent hundreds of hours photographing the bodies. Miller argues strongly that photos of abortion victims play a vital role in the efforts of the right-to-life movement to establish respect for the lives of the unborn and abolish the injustice of abortion. Among other areas of discussion Miller provides a history of the use of these images in the pro-life movement. However, she urges that the time has come for the movement to evaluate which photos of abortion victims are most effective. This means pro-lifers should be more critical and sophisticated in the selection of photos displayed in public, in literature and educational materials. She states: “Not all abortion victim photos are equal” and goes on to explain that it is a mistake that the “gorier and bloodier the image, the more effective it will be in depicting the injustice of abortion.”

Miller agrees that abortion victim photos will innately contain graphic elements, but argues that such aspects of the photos must be secondary to the subject of the abortion victims presented in the photos. To the viewer of a “graphic image” the abortion victim must be immediately recognizably human. Miller explains:

“Blood and extraneous uterine matter should not overwhelm the aborted baby in the photo. Indeed even a kind of mathematical ratio can be used to evaluate the usefulness of a graphic image. If the blood and gore is more than or even equal to the actual baby—such a photo should be set aside in favor of an image in which the actual human victim is primary. It is not only or primarily the violence of abortion that pro-lifers should display to the world, but the actual hidden and silent human victim of abortion will be the focus of the more effective images.” Miller continues:

“The viewer of the image of an aborted baby should be able to identify with the victim — not simply be shocked or repulsed by the blood-drenched image. The photo should provoke pathos, pity, sorrow, and a response to the injustice done to the baby, whose humanity is obvious in the midst of the tragedy and violence. To the majority of viewers whom pro-lifers are trying to reach, that first glance is the most important — indeed, it might not just be the first glance but the only glance — and thus its impact in drawing the viewer into the humanity of the victim cannot be squandered.”

Miller also urges that the pro-life movement drop the term “graphic images” when referring to photos of aborted babies. Many abortion photos—even effective ones are indeed extremely “graphic images”—but the term itself does not capture or encompass the essence of this type of photography. She states: “The movement needs to stop using that term. Instead we should refer to these pictures as “abortion victim photos” or “abortion victim photography.”

Distinctions exist between a graphic image that instantly repulses the viewer, an image with an appropriate proportion of extraneous graphic elements, and photos of abortion victims that certainly are disturbing, but in which the blood and gore is nearly absent. Miller’s article calls for a deeper appreciation for these distinctions and states: “Those who oppose the use of ‘graphic images’ need not necessarily oppose photos of abortion victims per se. Whatever side one may take in the debate, given that a difference exists between an excessively graphic image and an image of an abortion victim — between a repulsive image and a disturbing image— pro-lifers who object to the use of all abortion-victim photography should reexamine and move beyond that objection.”

Miller states: “There are many great pro-lifers who are dedicated to the display of abortion victim photos. What they do is essential to the movement. Their work should be supported and encouraged. I simply want to urge those of us on the front lines to look at abortion victim photos in a new way—to not be threatened or afraid to re-evaluate what we are doing and urge the selection of photos in which the tragic victim of abortion ‘however graphic’ is primary and obvious.”

1. History of the use of these images in the pro-life movement
2. Summary of the recent debate
3. Responses to the objections as to their use
4. Why we need to stop using the term “graphic images” and instead use the term “abortion victim photos”
5. Why not all abortion images are equal in their effectiveness and how to judge a bad photo versus a good one
6. The ethics of abortion victim photography
7. When and where to use the photos

This 10 minute video shows close-up just some of the aborted babies who were buried in 1988—taken from the trash as they were left out on a loading dock at the Vital Med pathology lab in Northbrook, IL. Citizens for a Pro-life Society and the Pro-Life Action League retrieved over 5000 bodies from the Vital Med trash and provided these victims with humane burials. The babies in the video were buried by CPLS with 1200 others at Holy Cross Cemetery, Milwaukee, WI, Sept.10, 1988 ALL OF THIS IS CHRONICLED IN ABANDONED— THE UNTOLD STORY OF THE ABORTION WARS-- SEE LINK TO BOOK IN SIDE BAR

New -- Great Review of Abandoned

Monica Migliorino Miller’s Abandoned: The Untold Story of the Abortion Wars resists singular classification: It is equal parts memoir, documentary, and a history of her pro-life work. Her exposé hails from the front lines of the war on babies; it is packed with heart-wrenching drama that follows pro-life battles on the ground and in the courtroom. Miller is founder of Citizens for a Pro-Life Society and is associate professor of religious studies at Madonna University in Michigan. She is also one of a small group of intrepid souls who dumpster-dived to recover the destroyed bodies of abandoned, aborted babies, and arranged burials and funeral Masses for thousands of them.