Connect with us

News

College Students Complain They Have to Drive 8 Minutes Off Campus to Get Abortions

Published

on

There was a time when abortion advocates tried to justify the legality of abortion, a procedure most considered to be troubling, by saying all they wanted was for it to be “legal, safe, and rare.”

The idea was that it was justifiable to dismember an unborn baby in the womb when someone really, really needed to. Not just any old pregnancy.

Even Margaret Sanger, the racist eugenicist, argued at one time that birth control should be made more widely available to avoid abortion.

Trending: Biden Comment on Chauvin Trial Stuns Legal Observers

But Sanger’s organization, Planned Parenthood, would go on to murder millions upon millions of unborn babies, and the movement she started would go on to now, 100 years later, inspire young women to demand abortion facilities be only a stone’s throw away from their dormitory.

take our poll - story continues below

Is the Biden Administration Destroying Our Constitution?

  • Is the Biden Administration Destroying Our Constitution?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Life Site News reports:

The average distance between a California public college and an abortion facility is less than 6 miles.

But abortion activists are claiming even that short distance is too big of a burden for students who want to abort their unborn babies.

Right now, state lawmakers are considering a bill that would force public colleges and universities to provide abortion drugs to students on campus free of charge.

“It’s necessary because it’s a constitutionally protected right, but just because it’s a constitutionally protected right does not mean you have access,” said state Sen. Connie Leyva, who sponsored the bill.

They refer to a KQED article that featured the story of an abortion-seeking college student who was terribly inconvenienced to have to drive a whole 6 miles, about 8 minutes, to get an abortion, because her college clinic wouldn’t perform the procedure.

No, seriously:

Jessica Rosales recalls plunging into a downward spiral after discovering that her birth control had failed and she was pregnant. A financially unstable third-year student at UC Riverside, she immediately sought an abortion — something the campus student health clinic did not provide.

Instead she was referred to private medical facilities off campus. One wouldn’t accept her insurance; the other didn’t provide abortions. Her grades slipped, she said, and she frequently slept the days away to escape her circumstances. Eventually she traveled six miles to a Planned Parenthood clinic that performed the procedure. Ten weeks had passed.

“My situation could have been avoided if the student health center was there and provided medication abortion for students on campus,” Rosales said.

We are given no reason why this woman would have been unable to care for her baby other than being “financially unstable.”

In 2018, one of the outstanding circumstances in which a woman should be allowed to abort her baby is apparently when she’s bad with money and can’t walk to an abortion clinic from her dorm room.

Rosales had access to birth control, clearly opting for one of the many methods with a less than 99% success rate, and, while the article seems to frame the college student as having spontaneously conceived, she obviously chose to engage in premarital, most likely casual, sex.

We know no details of her financial instability, but, considering she’s a college student in 2018, we’re guessing she’s most likely faced with a great deal of debt and is probably simply irresponsible with her money.

All this amounts to not only her having a constitutional right to murder her unborn child, but having a right to do so closer to where she lives? 

I just…can’t.

News

Putin Puffs Out His Chest: Crossing ‘Red Lines’ Will Prompt ‘Asymmetrical’ Response

Putin has been extremely antsy as of late.

Published

on

Russia

It appears that US President Joe Biden is really getting under the skin of Russian President Dictator Vladimir Putin. These leaders of the world two preeminent superpowers have been trading barbs for weeks now, and on a range of subjects.  The latest focus of their fury has to do with the Kremlin’s continued aggression against Ukraine, where Russian military forces are lining just over the border, with “invasion stripes” painted on their vehicles to prevent friendly fire. This is a tacit admission that there will be fire, and Biden isn’t going to stand for it. The US first sent warships in the direction of the Black Sea in an attempt to deter Putin from poking the bear.  The Russian government responded by blocking the entrance to the area and warning that America’s maneuvers were “adversarial”. Biden responded by sanctioning Russia over a major hacking attack that took place months ago. Now, just ahead of what is believed to be an inevitable Russian invasion of Ukraine, Putin is once again puffing out his chest. Russian President Vladimir Putin, in his annual State of the Nation speech, warned on Wednesday against provoking his country, promising a swift retaliation against anyone who crossed “red lines.“ Moscow will respond “harshly,” “quickly” and “asymmetrically” to foreign provocations, Putin told an audience of Russia’s top officials and lawmakers, adding that he “hoped” no foreign actor would cross Russia’s “red lines,” according to a Reuters translation. Russia is also facing international condemnation for their treatment of journalist Alexei Navalny, who is believed to be at death’s door at a Russian prison hospital.  Joe Biden has said that Russia would “pay a price” if Navalny were to perish in custody of the government.

Continue Reading

News

DOJ Opens Investigation into Minneapolis Police Department

The investigation will feature the department’s civil rights division.

Published

on

On Tuesday, Derek Chauvin was found guilty on all charges in the death of George Floyd. Chauvin was seen on video kneeling on the neck of Floyd for nearly 9 minutes as the restrained man slowly suffocated, in a moment that has haunted our nation for a year. Now that Chauvin is off to prison, and a likely, lengthy appeals process, the Department of Justice is now hoping to find out exactly what went wrong in Minneapolis, and whether or not there is some systemic issue with the police department itself. Attorney General Merrick Garland announced Wednesday that the Justice Department will be conducting an investigation of law enforcement in Minneapolis following the death of George Floyd. The announcement comes one day after a Hennepin County jury found former police officer Derek Chauvin guilty of second degree murder for killing Floyd. “Yesterday’s verdict in the state criminal trial does not address potentially systemic policing issues in Minneapolis,” Garland said during a press conference. Garland said the probe will be a “fully comprehensive review” that will look into whether the Minneapolis Police Department has a “pattern or practice of unconstitutional or unlawful policing.” He specificed that this includes “using excessive force, including during protests,” as well as “discriminatory conduct and whether its treatment of those with behavioral health disabilities is unlawful.” The DOJ will utilize their civil rights division in the investigation, and the Attorney General said that the move could protect “good cops” from their not-so-pristine peers in the precinct. “I strongly believe that good officers do not want to work in systems that allow bad practices,” Garland said. “Good officers welcome accountability because accountability is an essential part of building trust with the community and public safety requires public trust.” Chauvin was moved to prison on Wednesday, and promptly…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week