Laura Limmex is Executive Director of Restored by Grace Ministries. Here is her pro-life testimony from Tuesday night’s public hearing for the Protect Life Amendment:
Good evening. My name is Laura Limmex. I’m the Executive Director and Founder of Restored by Grace. An organization formed to offer hope and healing to women, men and families struggling to navigate the murky waters of life following an abortion.
A hasty decision
When I was 16, I found myself pregnant. I made the hasty decision to have an abortion out of fear of anyone knowing. Upon arriving at the clinic, I was given no information about the surgical abortion procedure.
In a follow up appointment for the abortion they informed me they had not completely removed the baby and told me I would need to return for another procedure. Before the second procedure occurred, I passed the remains of my baby in a toilet.
We know within these clinics they have a place where they sort through the remains of the child to make sure all the pieces are there. On this day they sent away a 16-year-old girl with an incomplete abortion. And they knew her parents had no knowledge of the abortion appointment.
Traumatized
I was traumatized not only by the procedure, but by the sight of what was left of my child.
My story is one of many. It’s heartbreaking to sit with a woman who is carrying the pain of aborting the only child or children she will ever conceive as a result of the poor quality of care she received during and after her abortion.
It’s awful to hear young women share of the horrors of RU486, also referred to as web-cam abortions.
Men and women have spend years trying their hardest to forget their abortions ever happened. It is said that guilt is to the conscience what pain is to the body. I can tell you keeping the feelings of guilt along with the memories at bay is similar to trying to hold a beach ball under water. Emotionally exhausting.
Regret
Today I deeply regret my abortion and I’m not afraid to share the truth that abortion ends a life and leaves another deeply wounded. Not only did I lose my first child to abortion, but grandchildren as this child would be 35 years old today. My family tree is forever changed.
Women and especially their unborn children deserve better. All children deserve a right to life, and women deserve to know the facts about abortion, rather than the deceptive, pro-abortion rhetoric that treats killing an innocent human life as normal.
Give us our voice back
MY story is the reason Iowa NEEDS reasonable abortion restrictions. To protect women like me and the women I work with every day. We can’t allow 5 men in black robes to silence women like me and turn Iowa into a wild west of unrestricted abortion. We need the Protect Life Amendment to give us our voice back.
We ask that you take the appropriate action to ensure the women and children of this great State of Iowa are protected from this judicial overreach and lousy healthcare provided by abortion clinics.
I’m Maggie DeWitte of Iowans for LIFE, and chairwoman of the Coalition of Pro-Life Leaders.
Today, you’re going to hear a lot about abortion, and the organizations I speak for make it very clear where we stand on the sanctity of human life. That little child in her mother’s womb – she’s a baby, and she deserves to be protected.
Broader than the abortion debate
But the Protect Life Amendment is broader than the abortion debate. It’s important that our legislators – and the public – understand what this amendment is about.
First, this amendment does not ban any abortions. It doesn’t change any abortion laws. And if it “takes us back” to anywhere, it’s only to 2018, when 5 unelected judges on the Iowa Supreme Court tried to do an end-run around the Iowa people. They tried to end the abortion debate by arbitrary judicial decree, adding a supposed “right” to our constitution without a vote of We the People.
Unelected judges rewrote the Constitution
This time, unelected judges rewrote the Constitution on abortion. But if we cede to them this power, what’s to stop them from rewriting our speech rights, second amendment rights, or any other rights the judges decide to add or subtract? If We the People – regardless of where we stand on abortion – don’t defend our right to amend the constitution ourselves, if we allow 5 unelected judges to rule over us AND the constitution, why meet in this building at all? Those concerned by the possibility of having their second amendment rights to bear arms overturned should stand up and voice the fact that they are not going to lie down and allow this cornerstone of American liberty to be bulldozed too. What can gun owners do other than continue to prove that they’re responsible and law-abiding citizens with a deep knowledge of the firearms in their possession? After all, if you take them out of such people’s hands, it’ll be the criminals who are the only ones left armed with guns. If you believe that you should be able to protect yourself and others in public then you may well want to get a concealed carry permit; check out this link for more details – https://gunlawsuits.org/gun-laws/colorado/concealed-carry/. These are strange times for our constitution, but we still have rights so, if you desire such a permit, you should look into it.
Contrary to what you may hear in testimony today, the judges of the Supreme Court are NOT the supreme rulers of Iowa. Even the judges serve a constitution, one that may only be re-written by We the People. And We the People did NOT add a “right” to abortions, nor do we want to be forced to pay for them. And that is, after all, what the Protect Life Amendment actually says. Thank you.
The pro-life movement makes the case for the sanctity of human life by invoking the overwhelming mountain of evidence provided by science. Scientific evidence persuades secularists. However, many people of faith still accept abortion as a matter of personal conscience. This upcoming weekend’s Mass readings should give these ‘pro-choice’ Christians pause, for it makes a compelling case for the theology of life.
As background for non-Catholics, the Catholic Church produces a lectionary on a three year-cycle, which typically includes an old testament passage, a Psalm, an epistle, and a gospel reading. Many Protestant churches use the same lectionary, because the readings are often arranged around a theme which connects them, which is often stated in the Psalm.
The second reading this weekend comes from the first Letter of Saint Paul to the Corinthians:
Brothers and sisters:
Do you not know that YOU are the temple of God,
and that the Spirit of God dwells in YOU?
If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy that person;
for the temple of God, which you are, is holy.
Emphasis added. So what does this mean?
The pronoun ‘you’ can certainly be interpreted in the plural and the singular. In the plural, it can refer to the Church. In the singular, it can refer to our bodies. And if a person is with child, that unique person’s body, no matter the size, is also a temple.
The Spirit of God dwells in both, and our bodies are holy, says St. Paul.
The temple of God
The Gospel reading comes from Matthew 5:38-48. Priests for Life points out how pro-life this passage is:
“The Lord Jesus makes universal the commandment of love. The Father’s “sun rises on the bad and the good, he rains on the just and the unjust.” So Christians are not to draw false boundaries to their love. Christ, after all, now has full authority in heaven and on earth. He has embraced and redeemed the entire universe, and has given us a share in his dominion and in his power to love. “All these are yours, and you are Christ’s and Christ is God’s,” Paul tells us in the Second Reading. So loving everybody comes with the territory.
One of the false distinctions, therefore, is between born and unborn. There can be no difference in our love. The size or age or level of dependency of a child cannot exempt us from loving and caring for the life of that child. Nor can it exempt us from recognizing the personhood of that child in the law. “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” This does not simply mean we love our neighbor in the way or to the extent that we love ourselves. It means we love our neighbor as a person like ourselves. We recognize that whatever differences there may be between ourselves and our neighbors, they still have the same human dignity that we share. We are to see through all the differences, recognize that common dignity, and love them as a person like ourselves.
Ultimately, this command of universal love is not simply an external command. It is not God saying, “Do this because I told you,” as if it were just an item on a list of do’s and don’ts. Rather, it is because we are called to be like God. “You must be perfected as your heavenly Father is perfect.” Perfected in love, in service, in selflessness. “Be holy, for I am holy,” the Lord declares to Moses and the Israelites. His command of love is followed by the declaration, “I am the Lord.” When we hold up the standard of love for born and unborn alike, we are not claiming to be better than anyone else. Rather, we are pointing to the one who made us all, and who wants us all to be just like him.”
The entire Bible is a theology of life. If you believe in God and the divinity of Christ, and yet if you hold pro-choice views, Iowans for LIFE encourages you to prayerfully reflect on the seriousness of these scripture passages.
As expected, the Iowa Senate passed the Protect Life Amendment along party lines in a 32 to 18 vote. IFL Executive Director, was on hand and was interviewed on WOI television, which you can watch here.
The amendment, if passed in two consecutive legislative sessions, and approved by a vote of the people, would undo an Iowa Supreme Court ruling which discovered a “fundamental right to an abortion” hidden in the recesses of the Iowa Constitution.
The Protect Life Amendment doesn’t ban abortion, it simply makes the Iowa Constitution abortion-neutral and returns the power to the people to regulate human abortion.
Senator Jake Chapman said:
Senator Jake Chapman addresses the Senate
“Because the courts made this new fundamental right, heaven forbid Republicans are taking the right away. No, we’re restoring the right of the people to govern themselves. Not un-elected judges.”
For the second day in a row, the Des Moines Register published a misleading and biased online headline:
“Anti-abortion constitutional amendment advances in Iowa.”
As state before, the amendment simply makes the Iowa Constitution abortion-neutral.
The bill also passed the House Judiciary Committee. House Democrats have requested a public hearing before it is debated in the full House, which requires a five day notification.
Iowans for LIFE will let you know when that hearing is scheduled.
The Des Moines Register’s online headline states:
“Iowa lawmakers advance anti-abortion constitutional amendment.”
Translation:
“Iowa lawmakers advance abortion-neutral constitutional amendment.”
The Register story goes on to say:
Republicans in the Iowa Legislature are speeding forward with a proposed constitutional amendment stating that the Iowa Constitution does not protect abortion rights.
The word “speeding” suggests a rush to judgement. Let’s face it, the clock is ticking on every single piece of legislation still in committee. After all, Joint Rule 20 says they’ve only got to March 20th to get the amendment out of committee:
Final date for Senate bills and joint resolutions to be reported out of House (Friday of the 10th week)** committees and House bills and joint resolutions out of Senate committees (March 20th).
A more honest way of reporting would have deleted the unnecessary word, speeding, perhaps with a rewording like this:
“Republicans in the Iowa Legislature advanced a proposed constitutional amendment stating that the Iowa Constitution is neutral on abortion rights.”
Isn’t that better? The Register goes on to say:
“The Iowa House Judiciary Committee voted Wednesday afternoon along party lines to advance the proposal, with Republicans in favor and Democrats opposed. In the Iowa Senate, an identical amendment will be debated by the full chamber Thursday.”
This is a good, solid piece of factual journalism. Alas, the Register again exposes their bias in the next paragraph.
Republicans say the measure is needed to respond to the “judicial overreach” of a 2018 Iowa Supreme Court decision that found a fundamental right to abortion in the state constitution. Democrats argue the goal is to strip away Iowans’ rights.
The quote marks around “judicial overreach” were unnecessary.
The Register went on to report:
“Rep. Karin Derry, D-Johnston, said Republicans’ goal in passing the amendment is not about addressing judicial overreach or making the constitution silent on abortion.
“Don’t be fooled: This amendment is about restricting women’s freedom to make their own health care decisions. It’s about telling women what they may or may not do with their own bodies, with their own future. The intent of this amendment is to strip Iowans of their right to safe, legal abortion. It’s about its proponents’ long-term goal to eventually ban abortion in Iowa,” she said.”
In fact, Representative Johnston is clearly misinformed. The Protect Life Amendment simply makes the Iowa Constitution abortion neutral. Here is the exact wording of the amendment:
No right to abortion or required public funding of abortion. To defend the dignity of all human life, and to protect mothers and unborn children from efforts to expand abortion even to the day of birth, we the people of the State of Iowa declare that this Constitution shall not be construed to recognize, grant or secure a right to abortion or to require the public funding of abortion.
Such an amendment should be unnecessary, because the Iowa Constitution’s Bill of Rights spells out a right to life in Section One:
All men and women are, by nature, free and equal, and have certain inalienable rights — among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty …
You certainly can’t “enjoy life” if you’ve been aborted. And for the record, biologists with practical unanimity declare that human life begins at fertilization, as we’ve reported in an earlier blogpost. Clearly, the authors of the Iowa Constitution did not include a “fundamental right to abortion” in this 19th century document. That’s why it is honest to call the Iowa Supreme Court’s decision last year that discovered a “fundamental right to an abortion” in the Iowa Constitution “judicial overreach.”
For the record, the Iowa Constitution goes on to assert in Section Two that:
“ALL political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit of the people, and they have the right, at all times, to alter or reform the same, whenever the public good may require it.” (Emphasis ours.)
The elected officials of the Hawkeye State, reflecting the power of the people, restricted human abortion to the point at which a heartbeat of the unborn person was detectable, as well as a three day waiting period before an abortion could be performed.
Activist judges have made this amendment critical to protecting innocent, unborn human life, along with the political power of the people.
Iowans for LIFE is a member of the Iowa Coalition of Pro Life Leaders, whose spokesperson is IFL Executive Director, Maggie DeWitte.
We will continue to provide you with timely, accurate information on the progression of this amendment.
“Equality of rights under law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.”
Thus says the proposed 1972 Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. How could any modern person disagree with such a straight forward proposition? Because the Amendment is a Trojan Horse intended to gut pro-life laws and usher in a Constitutionally protected era of unfettered abortion.
The ERA is all about abortion
Liberal Congresswoman, Bella Abzug (D-NY) made it clear back in 1971 that the ERA would supersede sex-based pro-life laws, because only women can become pregnant:
“Thus the amendment … eliminates all existing legal distinctions based on sex and rejects the assumption that sex is ever a reasonable legal classification.”
Another liberal Congressman from New York, Gerald Nadler (D-NY), made it clear in 2018 that passing the ERA is a back-up plan if Roe v Wade is overturned:
“We cannot trust the Supreme Court not to go back … what the Supreme Court giveth, the Supreme Court can taketh away … we are worried now that another Supreme Court nominee … might overturn Roe v. Wade …”
Legal scholars admit Roe v Wade needs the ERA
Abortion-friendly legal scholars recognize that the Roe v Wade decision was a verbal smokescreen with no Constitutional basis. Harvard’s pro-abortion, pro-ERA legal scholar, Laurence Tribe, admitted as much:
“One of the most curious things about Roe is that, behind its own verbal smokescreen, the substantive judgments on which it rests are nowhere to be found.”
Stanford Law School’s former dean, John Hart Ely concurred by acknowledging that Roe v Wade …
“is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be. What is frightening about Roe is that this super-protected right is not inferable from the language of the Constitution …”
What is frightening to the pro-life community is that such a dishonest case still stands.
Even a sitting Supreme Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, has acknowledged that Roe v Wade’s flaws need to be shored up, which the ERA would do:
“the Court presented an incomplete justification for its action … the Court’s Roe position is weakened … by the opinion’s concentration on a medically approved autonomy idea, to the exclusion of a constitutionally based sex-equality perspective.
It is essential to woman’s equality with man that she be the decision-maker, that her choice be controlling. If you impose restraints that impede her choice, you are disadvantaging her because of her sex.”
The ERA forced New Mexico taxpayers to fund abortion
New Mexico passed the ERA in 1973. In a 1998 ruling, the New Mexico Supreme Court upheld a case which compelled New Mexico taxpayers to fund abortions, basing its ruling solely on the ERA. The same happened in Pennsylvania and Connecticut.
Ultimately, the Equal Rights Amendment has nothing to do with equal rights. It is a smokescreen to beat back pro-life regulations which have been spreading across the U.S. at the speed of love.
The ERA passed Congress in 1972, who then gave the states seven years to ratify the amendment. It takes 38 states to amend the Constitution. Thirty-five approved the ERA before the deadline for ratification passed. Five of those states later changed their mind and rescinded their approval.
Undeterred, pro-abortion legislators are trying to work around the process to resuscitate the ERA. They will vote on Thursday on House Joint Resolution 79 which removes a deadline on the ratification process.
In recent years, Nevada, Illinois, and Virginia have passed the ERA, bringing the total number of states approving the amendment to 38 according to abortion advocates, even though the deadline passed decades ago, and even though five of those states rescinded their ratification.
Here is what you need to do now
Again, the ERA is all about abortion. Contact your member of Congress with a message something like this:
Dear [name]:
I am writing to ask you to vote ‘no’ on H.J. Res. 79 that will extend the deadline of the Equal Rights Amendment.
I embrace the American creed that boldly states that we each possess immutable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
I am deeply concerned that the ERA would abolish common sense and humane pro-life regulations passed at the state level. Even more, I absolutely oppose the potential for taxpayer and federally funded abortions being included in the Constitution.
Biologists unanimously affirm that human life begins at the instant of fertilization. I ask that you consider the impact this Amendment could have on unprotected human life in the womb.
Equal rights apply to unborn children. The ERA would threaten those rights.
As your constituent, I respectfully ask you to vote NO on H.J. Res 79 this week.
Here is your contact list:
https://www.facebook.com/PersonhoodIowa/videos/215304542976724/
I’m Maggie DeWitte of Iowans for LIFE, and chairwoman of the Coalition of Pro-Life Leaders.
Today, you’re going to hear a lot about abortion, and the organizations I speak for make it very clear where I stand on the sanctity of human life. That little child in her mother’s womb – she’s a baby, and she deserves to be protected.
But the Protect Life Amendment is broader than the abortion debate. It’s important that our legislators – and the public – understand what this amendment is about.
First, this amendment does not ban any abortions.
It doesn’t change any abortion laws.
And if it “takes us back” to anywhere, it’s only to 2018, when 5 unelected judges on the Iowa Supreme Court tried to do an end-run around the Iowa people. They tried to end the abortion debate by arbitrary judicial decree, adding a supposed “right” to our constitution without a vote of We the People.
This time, unelected judges rewrote the Constitution on abortion. But if we cede to them this power, what’s to stop them from rewriting our speech rights, second amendment rights, or any other rights the judges decide to add or subtract? If We the People – regardless of where we stand on abortion – don’t defend our right to amend the constitution ourselves, if we allow 5 unelected judges to rule over us AND the constitution, why meet in this building at all?
Contrary to what you may hear in testimony today, the judges of the Supreme Court are NOT the supreme rulers of Iowa. Even the judges serve a constitution, one that may only be re-written by We the People. And We the People did NOT add a “right” to abortions, nor do we want to be forced to pay for them. And that is, after all, what the Protect Life Amendment actually says. Thank you.
[You can watch all of the testimony in the video above, which was shot by Tim Overlin of Personhood Iowa, a member of the Iowa Coalition of Pro-Life Leaders.]
Iowa is in the national spotlight once again. Caucus night is here! Before you vote, IFL wants to keep you informed on where major candidates stand on the abortion issue. The RealClearPolitics average poll numbers for Iowa look like this:
- Bernie Sanders (24.2)
- Joe Biden (20.2)
- Pete Buttigieg (16.4)
- Elizabeth Warren (15.6)
Here are representative quotes from the four leading Democratic candidates followed by a few by President Trump:
Bernie Sanders
“And the Mexico City agreement, which denies American aid to those organizations around the world that allow women to have abortions or even get involved in birth control to me is totally absurd.”
“I have a lifetime 100% pro-choice voting record. I understand that people disagree on this issue, but I believe that it is a woman’s decision, it’s a difficult decision, but it’s a decision between her and her physician. I will do everything that I can in 50 states of this country to make sure that women have a choice.”
“The current attempt to discredit Planned Parenthood is part of a long-term smear campaign by people who want to deny women in this country the right to control their own bodies.”
“We are not going back. We are not returning to the days of back-room abortions, when countless women died or were maimed. The decision about abortion must remain a decision for the woman, her family and a physician to make, not the government.”
“My plan, as somebody who believes for a start that a woman’s right to control her own body is a constitutional right, that government and politicians should not infringe on that right, we will do everything we can to defend Roe versus Wade. Let’s face this, Medicare for All guarantees every woman in this country the right to have an abortion if she wants it.” [2019]
Joe Biden
“A woman shouldn’t have the “sole right to say what should happen to her body.” [1974]
“I do not view abortion as a choice and a right. I think it’s always a tragedy. I think it should be rare and safe. I think we should be focusing on how to limit the number of abortions.” [2006]
“I still am opposed to public funding for abortion. It goes to the question of whether or not you’re going to impose a view to support something that is not a guaranteed right but an affirmative action to promote.” [2007, a view he held until June 5th, 2019]
“My religion defines who I am. And I’ve been a practicing Catholic my whole life. And it has particularly informed my social doctrine. Catholic social doctrine talks about taking care of those who can’t take care of themselves, people who need help. With regard to abortion, I accept my church’s position that life begins at conception. That’s the church’s judgment. I accept it in my personal life. But I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians and Muslims and Jews and–I just refuse to impose that on others, unlike my friend here, the congressman. I do not believe that we have a right to tell other people that women can’t control their body. It’s a decision between them and their doctor, in my view. And the Supreme Court–I’m not going to interfere with that. [2012]
#Government doesn’t have “a right to tell other people that women, they can’t control their body,” [2012]
Biden affirms long standing support for the Hyde Amendment [June 5th, 2019]
“I can’t justify leaving millions of women without access to the care they need and the ability to exercise their constitutionally protected right,” [June 6th, 2019]
Pete Buttigieg
“Right now, they hold everybody in line with this one piece of doctrine about abortion, which is obviously a tough issue for a lot of people to think through morally. Then again, there’s a lot of parts of the Bible that talk about how life begins with breath, and so even that is something that we can interpret differently,”
“In my view, this is a question that is almost unknowable. This is a moral question that’s not going to be settled by science. And so the best way for it to be settled in practice is by the person who actually faces the choice. And when a woman is facing this decision in her life, I think in terms of somebody besides her who can most be useful in that, the answer to that would be a doctor. Not a male government official imposing his interpretation of his religion.”
Elizabeth Warren
“We do not pass laws that take away that freedom from the women who are most vulnerable.” [on the Hyde Amendment]
“We must build a future that protects the right of all women to have children, the right of all women to not have children, and the right to bring children up in a safe and healthy environment,”
“When abortions are illegal, women don’t stop getting them–they just risk their lives to do it. Today, thanks to Roe, getting an abortion is safer than getting your tonsils out. Before Roe v. Wade, many women turned to back-alley butchers to end their pregnancies.” [2018, Marie Claire op-ed]
Donald Trump
“But Planned Parenthood should absolutely be defunded. I mean if you look at what’s going on with that, it’s terrible. And many of the things should be defunded and many things should be cut.”; “I would look at the individual things that they do and maybe some of the things are good,” Trump said. “We have to take care of women. We have to absolutely take care of women. The abortion aspect of Planned Parenthood should not–absolutely should not–be funded.”
“But look, Planned Parenthood has to stop with the abortions. A lot of people consider it an abortion clinic. I think those tapes that I saw were outrageous and disgusting by any standpoint. And they have to stop.”
“I’ve evolved on many issues over the years. And you know who else has? Is Ronald Reagan evolved on many issues. And I am pro-life. And if you look at the question, I was in business. They asked me a question as to pro-life or choice. And I said if you let [that quoted excerpt] run, that I hate the concept of abortion. I hate the concept of abortion. And then since then, I’ve very much evolved. And what happened is friends of mine years ago were going to have a child, and it was going to be aborted. And it wasn’t aborted. And that child today is a total superstar, a great, great child. And I saw that. And I saw other instances. And I am very, very proud to say that I am pro-life.”
“All of us here today understand an eternal truth: Every child is a precious and sacred gift from God. Together, we must protect, cherish, and defend the dignity and sanctity of every human life.” [March for Life, 2020]
“I notified Congress that I would veto any legislation that weakens pro-life policies or that encourages the destruction of human life.” [March for Life, 2020]
Be sure to follow the links above to additional blogposts on the impact of Medicare for All and Pete Buttigieg’s actions to block the construction of a pro-life women’s reproductive health medical center. Go make a difference on this caucus night!
What a March for Life!
What a great group of pilgrims!
Iowans for LIFE took three busloads of pilgrims to the 47th March for Life which took place last Friday. Our pilgrimage consisted of about 150 students and their chaperones. They witnessed the most historic March in history. Here is our March for Life 2020 recap.
For the first time in history, the sitting president of the United States attended and spoke to a mammoth crowd.
What makes President Trump so interesting is that two decades ago, he said that he was “very pro-choice” although he also said “he hates abortion.”
What changed?
He is now ‘very’ pro-life, the most pro-life president in history. Leaders in the pro-life movement reached out to the president and simply presented the case for life, which is compelling. Let’s face it, the case for life is based on sound science, sound theology, and sound philosophy.
Here’s the what President Trump said:
“Every human soul is divine, and every human life — born and unborn — is made in the holy image of almighty God.”
Wow! IFL stood in the midst of a crowd that roared with delight.
Mothers and sons shared the March for Life
A little later, Melissa Ohden, an abortion survivor and speaker at the IFL banquet a few years ago, got up and spoke. She screened a remarkable new video which puts a face on human abortion. Watch:
The organization that produced the ad, Faces of Choice, wants to air it during the Super Bowl, but has been blocked by the NFL, who evidently considers an ad this honest to be politically incorrect.
How did IFL pilgrims get to this point, standing in a crowd of hundreds of thousand of people listening to the president of the United States speak?
KCCI covered our departure
The pilgrimage began the Wednesday before the March, as we loaded buses at St. Francis of Assisi church in West Des Moines. KCCI actually covered the story!
Our two day journey to Washington DC was enlivened by prayer, as we prayed pro-life Rosaries. We were accompanied by Fr. Ryan Andrew.
A thousand people waited in line for confession!
We screened several videos IFL produced from last year’s March to share with our new pilgrims. The entire trip, coming and going, is an important part of the pilgrimage, as IFL provides pro-life education and prayerful leadership for our youth, both Catholic and non-Catholic.
20,000 people attended the youth rally and Mass
We attended an incredible youth rally where a thousand students stood in line for confession, and 20,000 shared a Mass led by an international cast of clergy, including a Vatican messenger sent directly by Pope Francis.
More than a bus trip
In other words, the trek isn’t just a bus trip. It’s an experience, a pilgrimage, that bonds people together to the most important cause of this generation.
One young man, Max, who is not Catholic, was the lone pilgrim from a Fort Dodge public high school. Max came, he said, because this cause is so important.
Young and old converge at the March for Life
The March ended at the footsteps of the Supreme Court, with a mammoth crowd on full display:
The March ended at the Supreme Court building
Iowans for LIFE’s role in the pro-life boom
Why is the pro-life generation booming? Because IFL and groups like us make the March for Life pilgrimage happen!
The March for Life is more than a March. It is five days of deep immersion into the mystery of our faith. We attend a youth rally in a lively arena with 20,000 youthful pilgrims. Our kids stood in line for up to 45 minutes to make their confession before attending Mass which was led by an international cast of clergy and religious, including an emissary from Pope Francis himself!
The March for Life needs YOU!
The March for Life is hard. The March for Life is fun. The March for Life is deeply moving. The March for Life is a godly event in a person’s life, whether young or old, as you can see in this March for Life 2020 recap.
Do you want to be a part of the pro-life generation? Then circle January 29, 2021 on your calendar, the date of next year’s March for Life in Washington DC! But register by November 1st of this year!
[The March for Life is one of Iowans for LIFE’s biggest events of the year. Your financial support helps us continue to take our youth on this life-changing pilgrimage. Donate today to support life.]
[subscribe2]
DAY NINE PRAYER
Mother of little children; Be with the child who is alone or afraid.
Saint Frances Cabrini, In every corner of hemisphere you sought out those whom everyone had forgotten. Mother of immigrants, friend of orphans, protector of the poor, intercede for us who seek to follow your example. We ask this through Christ our Lord. Amen.
Mother of those who care for the sick; Inspire doctors to be apostles for life.
Mother of the homeless; Teach us that all life comes from God and rests only in him.
Mother of little children; Be with the child who is alone or afraid.
Our Father …
Hail Mary …Glory to the Father …
Thank-you for praying for the most vulnerable members of our society: the unborn.