Home »

Search Result

Search Results for New and Mexico

Videos

NM State Evangelism Conference Wednesday #1

Dennis Swanberg speaks to the attendees of the Baptist Convention of New Mexico's State Evangelism Conference held Jan. 31st thru Feb. 2nd. Dr. Swanberg's message was "I'm an 8 track guy in and IPod world".

Show all results in videos 

News

The Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Protect Life Rule, which separates abortion activities from federally-funded family planning clinics, is currently in effect, as further court proceedings play out in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. In response to this rule, Planned Parenthood and several pro-abortion states decided that performing abortions is more important than providing family planning services to underserved women when they voluntarily withdrew from the Title X Program on August 19th.This week, HHS announced that $33.6 million of the funding forfeited by pro-abortion grantees will now be awarded to 50 current Title X grantees that do not promote abortion as a method of family planning.This supplemental funding will enable current grantees to better meet the family planning needs of underserved women across America. Contrary to what opponents of the Protect Life Rule claim, Title X patient coverage will not suffer. Clinics like Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) and Rural Health Centers (RHCs), which do not promote or perform abortions, will now be able to provide high-quality and affordable family planning services to even more women and families in need than they did before.Here is the list of Planned Parenthood entities and pro-abortion states that chose to reject millions of dollars in federal funding rather than stop referring patients for abortion:Grantees Voluntarily TerminatedAK Planned Parenthood of Great Northwest & Hawaiian IslandsCT Planned Parenthood of Southern New EnglandID Planned Parenthood of Great Northwest & Hawaiian IslandsIL Illinois Department of HealthIL Planned Parenthood of IllinoisMA Health Imperatives Inc.MA Massachusetts Department of Public HealthMD Maryland Department of HealthME Family Planning Association of Maine Inc.MN Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South DakotaNH Planned Parenthood of Northern New EnglandNY Public Health SolutionsNY New York Department of HealthOH Planned Parenthood of Greater OhioOR Oregon Health AuthorityUT Planned Parenthood Association of UtahVT Vermont Agency of Human ServicesWA Washington State Department of HealthGrantees Receiving Supplemental AwardAL Alabama Department of Public HealthAR Arkansas Department of HealthAZ Arizona Family Health PartnershipCO Colorado Department of Public HealthCT Cornell Scott-Hill Health CorporationDC Unity Health Care Inc.DE Delaware State Department of HealthFL Primary Care Medical Services of Poinciana Inc.FL Community Health Centers of Pinellas Inc.GA Neighborhood Improvement Project Inc.GA Family Health Centers of Georgia Inc.IA Family Planning Council of IowaID Idaho Department of Health & WelfareIL Aunt Martha's Health and Wellness Inc.IN Indiana Family Health Council Inc.KS Kansas Department of Health & EnvironmentKY Kentucky Cabinet for Health & Family ServicesMA Action for Boston Community Development Inc.MD The Community Clinic Inc.MS Mississippi State Department of HealthMN Ramsey CountyMT Montana Department of Public HealthND North Dakota Department of HealthNE Family Planning Council of NebraskaNM New Mexico Department of HealthNV Nevada Primary Care AssociationNV City of Carson CityNV Washoe CountyNV Southern Nevada Health DistrictNY The Floating Hospital Inc.OH Ohio Department of HealthOK Community Health Connection Inc.OK Oklahoma Department of HealthPA AccessMattersPA Family Health Council of Central Pennsylvania Inc.PA Maternal and Family Health Services Inc.PA Adagio Health Inc.RI Rhode Island Department of HealthSC South Carolina State Department of HealthSD South Dakota Department of HealthTN Tennessee Department of HealthTR FSM Department of Health & Social AffairsTR Commonwealth Healthcare Corp.TR Family Planning Association of Puerto RicoTR American Samoa Medical Center AuthorityTX Women's Health and Family Planning Association of TexasTX City of El PasoWI Wisconsin Department of Health ServicesWV West Virginia Department of HHSWY Wyoming Health CouncilYou may find more information about the Title X program here.
Abortion research hub the Guttmacher Institute has released its latest report on the trends and incidence of abortion in the United States. This abortion surveillance report covers abortion occurrences from 2014-2017 and documents what we’ve seen consistently: abortion rates are in decline, but the percentage of chemical abortions continues to rise.The trend continues, with the abortion rate dropping to its lowest point since 1973 at 13.5 abortions per 1,000 women for 2017, dropping eight percent since 2014. In 2014, the abortion rate was 14.6.The estimated total number of abortions for the year 2017 was 862,320, and 39,640 of those were chemical abortions, which means they accounted for approximately 39 percent of all abortions. That’s a 25 percent increase in the use of chemical abortions (the report refers to them as “medication abortions”) from 2014!Unsurprisingly, abortion advocates and Guttmacher have attributed the steady decline of abortions to contraceptive use, abortion facility closures, and pro-life protections – never to women choosing better options and rejecting the disempowerment of abortion. But this report added a second layer to their reasoning: “[I]ncreases in the number of individuals relying on self-managed abortions outside of a clinical setting.”What does that mean? It means that Guttmacher is attempting to account for women who are performing their own chemical abortions at home. This type of abortion cannot, for obvious reasons, be accounted for through traditional methods of abortion reporting.The report admits that the majority of “medication abortions” were seen in clinics for the year 2017. But the percentage of abortion clinics reporting that they “had seen one or more patients for a missed or failed abortion due to self-induction” increased from 12 percent in 2014 to 18 percent in 2017.The questionnaire used to collect this data changed from the year 2014 to 2017. The 2014 survey question asked whether “any patients had been treated for missed or failed abortions due to self-induction and if so, how many?” For 2017, the questionnaire removed the yes/no screener and only asked for the total number of patients treated for missed or failed self-managed abortions. Only 55 percent of abortion facilities (808) responded, but the report states that 106 facilities (seven percent) answered, “I don’t know.” The survey concluded that an “I don’t know” response meant the facility was unsure what they were treating – self-induced abortions or miscarriages – so the data here is sure to be incomplete.It is also not unheard of that illegal abortion pill peddlers have encouraged women to lie and say they’ve had a miscarriage when going to an emergency room or clinic for follow up on complications.According to one study, women who undergo chemical abortions experience roughly four times the rate of complications compared to women who underwent surgical abortions.So, if 18 percent of these women were seeking follow-up care at an abortion clinic, then the question is: where were these women getting abortion pills in the first place?It is reported that some Texas women have walked over the border to Mexico to purchase one portion of the abortion pill regimen, misoprostol, which is available without a prescription there.What is even more shocking from this report is the implied support for the sale of illegal abortion pills from outliers like Aid Access. This is the same Aid Access that the FDA instructed to cease dispensing abortion pills and comply with their drug safety procedures through the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS), which essentially prohibits the distribution of the abortion pill regimen by mail or online.Aid Access has pursued a lawsuit against the FDA. Aid Access is no doubt just another pawn of the abortion industry in their efforts to get the REMS lifted and have abortion pills accessible over-the-counter.The abortion pill carries severe risks such as hemorrhage, infection, retained fetal parts, the need for emergency surgery, and even death. An incomplete abortion can occur up to 10 percent of the time; a chemical abortion is nothing to play with and should not be “self-managed.”A total of 4,195 adverse effects from chemical abortions were reported from 2000 to 2018, including 24 deaths, 97 ectopic pregnancies, 1,042 hospitalizations, 599 blood transfusions, and 412 infections (including 69 severe infections). These are just the adverse events reported to the FDA, so the data is certain to be incomplete.In spite of these devastating realities, the abortion industry proudly admits that their ultimate goal for the future of abortion in the United States is “self-management.”Abortion advocates claimed that legalized abortion would eliminate “do it yourself” abortions! Now they want to return to the days of “back-alleys,” this time with “chemical coat-hangers.” This business model places the heavy burden and liability of abortion on the women and not on the abortion industry themselves.At first, Guttmacher seems to suggest that the apparent decrease in abortion rates is not a true decrease at all, but rather an increase in unreported, self-induced abortions. But after dedicating an entire section of the report to analyzing what it calls “medication” and “self-managed” abortions, Guttmacher concludes the report by backtracking its earlier assessment, saying it is “unlikely” that unreported abortions could account for most of the decline.No matter what the abortion industry’s propaganda might say, the real reason abortion rates are in decline is that women are choosing life, and pregnancy resource centers providing life-affirming care—often at no cost to the women—are prevailing.
The inimitable New York Times columnist Ross Douthat recently wrote a column titled, “The Abortion Mysticism of Pete Buttigieg: How the party of science decided that personhood begins at birth.” Read the whole thing here. It’s a master-class in opinion writing.In a single, cohesive essay, Douthat pulls together several disparate threads to demonstrate the Democratic Party’s abortion extremism, including Pete Buttigieg’s recent comments that perhaps “life begins with breath,” the recent firing of Planned Parenthood’s Leanna Wen over the politics of abortion, and last weekend’s revelation that Buttigieg’s hometown abortionist had stored over 2,200 dead unborn children in his home.The only thing I might add is that Democrats do not actually draw the line on abortion when, as Buttigieg suggested, the baby draws his or her first breath. Witness Virginia Governor Ralph Northam and the Democrat state legislators who in 2019 undid or blocked protections for abortion survivors in New York, Illinois, and North Carolina, and came harrowingly close to doing so in Virginia and New Mexico. Witness the House Democrats who may soon vote for the 100th time to block protections for abortion survivors. When it comes to abortion, no baby is safe from the Democrats unless he or she is wanted by his or her mother.While the destructive force of the sexual revolution rolls on to enthusiastic cheering from the Left, its unfortunate casualties—both unborn and born children—are discarded.
Mexican authorities have detained a group of men for their alleged involvement in killing three native Indian Christians and seriously injuring six children of the same evangelical family in the country's Chiapas state, BosNewsLife established Wednesday, September 10.
As the number of evangelical Christians in southern Mexico has grown, hostilities from "traditionalist Catholics" have kept pace, according to published reports.
Show all results in news 

FamilyNet Top Sites Top Independent Baptist Sites KJV-1611 Authorized Version Topsites The Fundamental Top 500

Powered by Ekklesia-Online

Locations of visitors to this page free counters