WBEZ | abortion http://www.wbez.org/tags/abortion Latest from WBEZ Chicago Public Radio en Fallout From Grand Jury Decision Energizes Abortion Rights Opponents http://www.wbez.org/news/fallout-grand-jury-decision-energizes-abortion-rights-opponents-114795 <img typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://llnw.wbez.org//main-images/gettyimages-508396706_custom-8a7e2350ceb67d3f501d1e4b275e152da0e3373f-s800-c85.jpg" alt="" /><p><p>The day David Daleiden turned himself in at the Harris County courthouse, the throng of media there was a good indication of just how much this indictment means to both sides of the abortion debate.</p><p>Daleiden&#39;s attorney Jared Woodfill took full opportunity to express his indignation.</p><p>&quot;It&#39;s outrageous that it&#39;s David that has to come and present himself to the court when it&#39;s Planned Parenthood who should be on trial today,&quot; Woodfill said. &quot;The reality is David is a modern-day hero. He has exposed the wrongdoing that&#39;s been occurring in abortion clinics all across this country.&quot;</p><p>Daleiden faces charges that he tampered with a government record and attempted to purchase human organs. Houston prosecutors have offered him a deal for probation, which would expunge the charges if he stays out of trouble. But that was no sale for Daleiden&#39;s team of lawyers, including Terry Yates.</p><p>&quot;The only thing we&#39;re going to accept right now is an apology,&quot; Yates says. Yates feels confident the judge will drop the charges before trial.</p><p>&quot;All hat, no cattle &mdash; that&#39;s what we believe these indictments are. There&#39;s not much to &#39;em,&quot; he says, &quot;and we believe after the court entertains our motions, hears the facts in this case, these indictments will be quashed.&quot;</p><p>Daleiden&#39;s lawyers will argue that although their client admits to using a fake California driver&#39;s license, it&#39;s not a crime because he did so in the cause of investigative journalism. They&#39;ll argue the same First Amendment protection applies to the charges connected to Daleiden&#39;s email offer to buy fetal tissue from Planned Parenthood. But University of Texas law professor David Anderson says the courts have ruled on this defense.</p><p>The Houston grand jury&#39;s decisions have, for the moment, stopped the anti-abortion movement&#39;s political momentum against Planned Parenthood in its tracks. When they debuted, Daleiden&#39;s videos empowered Republican officeholders around the country to call for criminal investigations. That also happened in Texas when Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton asked fellow Republican District Attorney Devon Anderson to open a criminal investigation into Planned Parenthood in Houston. The clinic had been featured in Daleiden&#39;s videos.&quot;The Supreme Court and the lower courts have been perfectly clear that what the First Amendment protects is publication or disclosure of information. The First Amendment does not protect crimes committed in the course of newsgathering. Period,&quot; Anderson says.</p><p>&quot;It became crystal clear that we needed to get to the table with the prosecutors and the law enforcement agents before anybody else beat us there,&quot; says Josh Schaffer, Planned Parenthood&#39;s defense lawyer in Houston. Instead of acting like the DA&#39;s office was the enemy, Schaffer threw open Planned Parenthood&#39;s doors and file cabinets to the police and Texas Rangers. And he urged them to acquire all the video that the young activist had shot and compare it to the final product.</p><p>&quot;Well, they showed Mr. Daleiden attempting to bait the employee during the course of their meeting into being willing to do things that the law does not permit and that Planned Parenthood does not do,&quot; Schaffer says. &quot;At the time he appeared green, naïve, about research protocol and regulations, but we know now that he was trying to scam them.&quot;</p><p>Republican Devon Anderson has become the anti-abortion community&#39;s Benedict Arnold. They accuse her of betraying her own anti-abortion convictions because of campaign contributions from abortion rights supporters.</p><p>&quot;I think that she has shown that her biases have prevented her from being able to execute her duties in a proper way, and that&#39;s why we&#39;re calling for her resignation,&quot; says Cheryl Sullenger, senior vice president at Operation Rescue.</p><p><a href="https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1223578084336230&amp;id=749422628418447">In her own defense</a>, Anderson says the surprise indictments are nothing more than the grand jury following the trail of evidence uncovered by law enforcement. But for abortion opponents, the allegation that Planned Parenthood is selling fetal tissue for profit is indisputable fact. They&#39;re calling for Texas to appoint a special prosecutor and for a new investigation to proceed. Those cries are falling on sympathetic ears. Texas&#39; governor, lieutenant governor and attorney general have all stated that the Houston grand jury&#39;s decisions will have no impact on the state&#39;s three ongoing investigations of Planned Parenthood.</p><p>&mdash; <a href="http://www.npr.org/2016/02/09/465998302/fallout-from-grand-jury-decision-energizes-abortion-rights-opponents?ft=nprml&amp;f=465998302"><em>via NPR</em></a></p></p> Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:17:00 -0600 http://www.wbez.org/news/fallout-grand-jury-decision-energizes-abortion-rights-opponents-114795 Grand Jury Indicts Leader Behind Planned Parenthood Videos http://www.wbez.org/news/grand-jury-indicts-leader-behind-planned-parenthood-videos-114615 <img typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://llnw.wbez.org//main-images/gavel.jpg" alt="" /><p><p>AUSTIN, Texas (AP) &mdash; A Houston grand jury investigating undercover footage ofPlanned&nbsp;Parenthood&nbsp;found no wrongdoing Monday by the abortion provider, and instead indicted anti-abortion activists involved in making the videos that targeted the handling of fetal tissue in clinics and provoked outrage among Republican leaders nationwide.</p><p>David Daleiden, founder of the Center for Medical Progress, was indicted on a felony charge of tampering with a governmental record and a misdemeanor count related to purchasing human organs. Another activist, Sandra Merritt, was also indicted on a charge of tampering with a governmental record, which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison.</p><p>It&#39;s the first time anyone in the group has been charged criminally since the release of the videos, which began surfacing last year and alleged that&nbsp;Planned&nbsp;Parenthoodsold fetal tissue to researchers for a profit in violation of federal law.Planned&nbsp;Parenthood&nbsp;officials have denied any wrongdoing and have said the videos were misleadingly edited.</p><p>The footage from the clinic in Houston showed people pretending to be from a company that procures fetal tissue for research touring the facility.</p><p>In a statement announcing the indictment, Harris County District Attorney Devon Anderson didn&#39;t provide details on the charges, including what record or records were allegedly tampered with and why Daleiden faces a charge related to buying human organs. Her office said it could not disclose more information and a court spokesman said it was unclear whether copies of the indictments, which typically provide more insight, would be made public Monday.</p><p>&quot;We were called upon to investigate allegations of criminal conduct byPlanned&nbsp;Parenthood&nbsp;Gulf Coast,&quot; Anderson, an elected Republican, said in her statement. &quot;As I stated at the outset of this investigation, we must go where the evidence leads us.&quot;</p><p>Daleiden issued a statement saying that his group &quot;uses the same undercover techniques&quot; as investigative journalists and follows all applicable laws.</p><p>&quot;We respect the processes of the Harris County District Attorney, and note that buying fetal tissue requires a seller as well,&quot; he said.</p><p>Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who has his own ongoing investigation into&nbsp;Planned&nbsp;Parenthood, said Monday that the &quot;the videos exposed the horrific nature of abortion and the shameful disregard for human life.&quot;</p><p>The Texas video was the fifth released by the Center for Medical Progress. The videos provoked an outcry from the anti-abortion movement and prompted numerous investigations of&nbsp;Planned&nbsp;Parenthood&nbsp;by Republican-led committees in Congress and by GOP-led state governments. Congressional Republicans unsuccessfully called for cutting off funding for&nbsp;Planned&nbsp;Parenthood.</p><p>Planned&nbsp;Parenthood&nbsp;has said a few clinics in two states used to accept legally allowed reimbursement for the costs of providing tissue donated by some of its abortion clients. In October,&nbsp;Planned&nbsp;Parenthood&nbsp;announced that it would no longer accept reimbursement and would cover the costs itself.</p><p>The group called Monday&#39;s indictments the latest in a string of victories since the videos were released, saying that by its count, 11 state investigations have cleared the nation&#39;s largest abortion provider of claims that it profited from fetal tissue donation.</p><p>&quot;This is absolutely great news because it is a demonstration of whatPlanned&nbsp;Parenthood&nbsp;has said from the very beginning: We follow every law and regulation and these anti-abortion activists broke multiple laws to try and spread lies,&quot; said spokeswoman Rochelle Tafolla of&nbsp;Planned&nbsp;Parenthood&nbsp;Gulf Coast.</p><p>Before the Texas video was released, Melaney Linton, president of the HoustonPlanned&nbsp;Parenthood&nbsp;clinic, told state lawmakers last summer that it was likely to feature actors &mdash; pretending to be from a company called BioMax &mdash; asking leading questions about how to select potential donors for a supposed study of sickle cell anemia. Linton said the footage could feature several interactions initiated by BioMax about how and whether a doctor could adjust an abortion if a patient has offered to donate tissue for medical research.</p><p>Despite the lofty name of the Center for Medical Progress, public filings suggest only a small number of people are affiliated with the nonprofit, none of whom are scientists or physicians engaged in advancing medical treatments. The people named as its top officers are longtime anti-abortion activists with a history of generating headlines.</p><p>Earlier this month,&nbsp;Planned&nbsp;Parenthood&nbsp;sued the center in a California federal court, alleging extensive criminal misconduct. The lawsuit says the center&#39;s videos were the result of numerous illegalities, including making recordings without consent, registering false identities with state agencies and violating non-disclosure agreements.</p><p>After the lawsuit was filed, Daleiden told The Associated Press that he looked forward to confronting&nbsp;Planned&nbsp;Parenthood&nbsp;in court.</p><p><em>Associated Press Writers Juan A. Lozano in Houston, Will Weissert in Austin and David Crary in New York contributed to this report.</em></p></p> Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:52:00 -0600 http://www.wbez.org/news/grand-jury-indicts-leader-behind-planned-parenthood-videos-114615 Federal Court Rules Wisconsin Abortion Law Unconstitutional http://www.wbez.org/news/federal-court-rules-wisconsin-abortion-law-unconstitutional-113908 <img typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://llnw.wbez.org//main-images/AP_9376000260.jpg" alt="" /><p><p>MADISON, Wis. (AP) &mdash; A Wisconsin law that requires abortion providers to get admitting privileges at nearby hospitals is unconstitutional, a federal appeals court panel ruled Friday.</p><p>The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel&#39;s ruling comes in a lawsuit filed by Planned Parenthood and Affiliated Medical Services. The groups argue that the 2013 law amounts to an unconstitutional restriction on abortion. The law has been on hold since a federal judge struck it down earlier this year.</p><p>The law&#39;s supporters argue that the Republican-backed statutes would ensure continuity of care if a woman developed complications from an abortion and needed to be hospitalized.</p><p>But the lawsuit said the statute would force AMS&#39;s clinic in Milwaukee to close because its doctors couldn&#39;t get admitting privileges. That in turn would lead to longer waits at Planned Parenthood clinics. Therefore, the lawsuit maintained, the law amounts to an illegal restriction on abortions.</p><p>U.S. District Judge William Conley sided with the abortion providers in March, saying the law served no legitimate health interest. The Wisconsin Department of Justice later appealed to the 7th Circuit.</p><p>All three judges hearing the case peppered state attorneys with questions during oral arguments in October.</p><p>Judge Richard Posner told the state there was no rational basis for the law, saying it didn&#39;t provide any health benefits for women seeking abortions and was clearly designed to close abortion clinics.</p><p>Judge Daniel Manion noted that complications could arise from abortions carried out through medication that women take at home. In those instances, complications could occur 100 miles or more away from the hospital where the doctor who gave her the medication has admitting privileges, he said.</p><p>The third judge on the panel, David Hamilton, questioned how the state could suggest it was acceptable for women to travel to&nbsp;Chicago&nbsp;or Minneapolis if the law forced the Milwaukee clinic to close.</p><p>Courts have blocked similar laws in six other states, meaning the issue may ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.</p></p> Mon, 23 Nov 2015 17:39:00 -0600 http://www.wbez.org/news/federal-court-rules-wisconsin-abortion-law-unconstitutional-113908 Justices agree to hear first abortion case since 2007 http://www.wbez.org/news/justices-agree-hear-first-abortion-case-2007-113782 <img typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://llnw.wbez.org//main-images/1846178006_4fed70bfae_z.jpg" alt="" /><p><p>WASHINGTON (AP) &mdash;&nbsp;The Supreme Court is taking on its first&nbsp;abortion&nbsp;case in eight years, a dispute over state regulation of&nbsp;abortion&nbsp;clinics.</p><p>The justices said Friday they will hear arguments over a Texas law that would leave about 10&nbsp;abortion&nbsp;clinics open across the state. A decision should come by late June, four months before the presidential election.</p><p>The high court previously blocked parts of the Texas law. The court took no action on a separate appeal from Mississippi, where a state law would close the only&nbsp;abortionclinic, in Jackson.</p><p>Arguments will take place in February or March.</p><p>States have enacted a wave of measures in recent years that have placed restrictions on when in a pregnancy&nbsp;abortions&nbsp;may be performed, imposed limits on&nbsp;abortions&nbsp;using drugs instead of surgery and raised standards for clinics and the doctors who work in them.</p><p>The new case concerns the last category. In Texas, the fight is over two provisions of the law that Gov. Rick Perry signed in 2013. One requires&nbsp;abortion&nbsp;facilities to be constructed like surgical centers. The other allows doctors to perform&nbsp;abortions&nbsp;at clinics only if they have admitting privileges at a local hospital.</p><p>Backers of the regulations say they are common-sense measures intended to protect women.&nbsp;Abortion&nbsp;rights groups say the regulations have only one aim: to make it harder, if not impossible, for women to get&nbsp;abortions&nbsp;in Texas.</p><p>&quot;Texans should have full freedom to prioritize women&#39;s health and safety over the bottom line of abortionists,&quot; said Alliance Defending Freedom senior counsel Steven H. Aden.</p><p>But Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, disagreed about the purpose of the law. &quot;This law does not advance women&#39;s health and in fact undermines it,&quot; Northup said.</p><p>Texas had 41&nbsp;abortion&nbsp;clinics before the clinic law. More than half of those closed when the admitting privileges requirement was allowed to take effect. Nineteen clinics remain.</p><p>Northup said the effect of the law has been to increase wait times for women in the Dallas area from an average of five days to 20 days.</p><p>The focus of the dispute at the Supreme Court is whether the law imposes what the court has called an undue burden on a woman&#39;s constitutional right to an&nbsp;abortion. If allowed to take full effect, the law would leave no&nbsp;abortion&nbsp;clinics west of San Antonio and only one operating on a limited basis in the Rio Grande Valley.</p><p>The state has argued that women in west Texas already cross into New Mexico to obtain&nbsp;abortions&nbsp;at a clinic in suburban El Paso.</p><p>In its decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, in 1992, the court ruled that states generally can regulate&nbsp;abortion&nbsp;unless doing so places an undue burden on women. Casey was a huge victory for abortion-rights advocates because it ended up reaffirming the constitutional right to an&nbsp;abortion&nbsp;that the court established in Roe v. Wade in 1973.</p><p>In 2007, a divided court upheld a federal law that bans an&nbsp;abortion&nbsp;procedure that opponents call partial-birth&nbsp;abortion&nbsp;and opened the door to new limits on&nbsp;abortion.</p></p> Fri, 13 Nov 2015 13:36:00 -0600 http://www.wbez.org/news/justices-agree-hear-first-abortion-case-2007-113782 The Supreme Court's new term: here's what to watch http://www.wbez.org/news/supreme-courts-new-term-heres-what-watch-113172 <p><p style="text-align: justify;">The United States Supreme Court opens a new term Monday, and, as always, many of the most contentious issues facing the country &mdash; including abortion, birth control coverage, public employee unions, affirmative action in higher education, voter participation &mdash; are likely to be before the court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">But there is a difference this term. Chief Justice John Roberts, despite his overall conservative record on the bench, has become a punching bag for candidates vying for the Republican presidential nomination.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><img alt="" class="image-original_image" src="http://www.wbez.org/system/files/styles/original_image/llo/insert-images/first%20three.JPG" style="height: 749px; width: 250px; margin-left: 10px; margin-right: 10px; float: right;" title="" />Presidential candidates have often criticized the court, pledging that they would appoint a different kind of justice. It&#39;s been more than a half century, though, since politicians have put a chief justice, by name, in the cross-hairs of criticism. What is puzzling about the Roberts critique is that the right hailed this George W. Bush appointee when he was named ten years ago, and Roberts has a consistently conservative record on most issues.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">He has voted with the court&#39;s conservatives to strike down most of the legal limits on campaign spending, opening election campaigns nationwide to a flood of new cash. He has consistently supported an individual&#39;s right to bear arms. He wrote the court&#39;s opinion in the 2013 case&nbsp;<em>Shelby County v. Holder</em>, which struck down the heart of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. He has consistently opposed any sort of racial preferences. Last term, he wrote the leading dissent when the court struck down state laws banning same-sex marriage.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">On only one flashpoint subject has he parted ways with some or all or the court&#39;s most conservative members: Obamacare.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Yet, in the first two televised debates, Republican candidates took turns pummeling him, characterizing his nomination as a grave mistake, and suggesting that Roberts follows a political path rather than a legal one. If President George W. Bush had appointed someone more conservative than Roberts, said Sen. Ted Cruz, &quot;Obamacare would have been struck down three years ago, and the marriage laws of all fifty states would be on the books.&quot;</p><p><img alt="" class="image-original_image" src="http://www.wbez.org/system/files/styles/original_image/llo/insert-images/last2.JPG" style="text-align: justify; float: right; height: 495px; width: 250px; margin-left: 10px; margin-right: 10px;" title="" /></p><p style="text-align: justify;">Never mind that Roberts actually dissented in the same-sex marriage case.&nbsp;Jeb Bush, whose brother appointed Roberts, was less strident, but suggested nonetheless that Roberts was a &quot;politically expedient&quot; choice because he was a conservative whom the Senate could confirm. And Gov. Mike Huckabee said that he would require anyone he appointed to oppose all abortions and to see religious freedom as the first of all rights.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Nobody thinks it will be easy for Chief Justice Roberts or the other justices to ignore such talk. But, the job of the chief justice is, among other things, to guard the independence of the judiciary and to preserve the court&#39;s institutional role as a dispassionate arbiter of the nation&#39;s laws and the Constitution.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Notwithstanding the critique in the GOP debates, the Roberts court is most often a conservative court. But it is closely divided, and last term, for the first time in a decade, the court&#39;s liberals prevailed in the majority of 5-to-4 rulings. They did that by picking off not just Roberts and Justice Kennedy on Obamacare, and Kennedy on same-sex marriage, but other conservative justices in other cases.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Most experts see those liberal victories, however, as a product of an idiosyncratic mix of cases. This term, the issues play much more to the strength of the court&#39;s conservatives. There are cases that could further cut back affirmative action in higher education, hobble or destroy public employee unions, and make it easier to limit voter participation in elections.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">There is a strong likelihood that the court will revisit the abortion question, as well as the issue of birth control coverage under Obamacare. &quot;The worry is, does what goes around come around,&quot; said Tom Goldstein, Supreme Court advocate and publisher of SCOTUSblog, &quot;and the writing on the wall sure seems to up there that has got the left scared &mdash; bejesus!&quot;</p><p style="text-align: justify;">The court, for instance, for the first time is being asked to determine the meaning of the one-person, one-vote principle in<em>&nbsp;Evenwel v. Abbott.</em> Does it mean that state legislative districts should have the same number of people, or the same number of eligible voters? Does the population count include children, non-citizen immigrants both in the country legally and illegally, and others like those with a criminal record who are thus ineligible to vote? Or does the population count include only those eligible to vote, or even just those registered to vote?</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Virtually all state and local governments currently draw districts based on total population. But if those challenging that practice prevail, it could dramatically shift political power away from districts with lots of children and immigrants, and it would likely give Republicans a big boost in state legislative elections.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Also likely to come before the court are election cases involving strict voter ID laws and other provisions that make it more difficult to vote.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">The union case,&nbsp;<em>Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association</em>, could also have huge political consequences by crippling public employee unions and possibly all unions. The case pits the practical needs of collective bargaining against the First Amendment. The nation&#39;s labor laws, as the court has interpreted them since 1977, have struck the balance this way. Once a majority of public employees vote to be represented by a union, those who choose not to join do not have to pay for the union&#39;s political activities, but they do have to pay for contract negotiations that they benefit from.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">In short, they must pay their so-called &quot;fair share.&quot; Otherwise they would become free riders on the backs of those who do pay. In two recent cases, four justices, and possibly five, have suggested that requiring such fair share payments violates the nonmembers&#39; free speech rights.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Waiting in the wings at the high court are two politically incendiary cases: one involving abortion, the other birth control under Obamacare. The abortion test case will likely come from Texas, where the Republican-controlled legislature enacted strict new regulations on abortion clinics, requiring them to make costly renovations, and limiting the ability of doctors to perform abortions. The state maintains that the new law was aimed at protecting the health and safety of women. Abortion providers, backed by major medical organizations, counter that the regulations are unnecessary and that the law is in fact aimed at making abortions difficult to obtain.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">The birth control case is a test of the Obamacare provision that exempts religious organizations from having to pay for birth control coverage in their health insurance plans. While churches, synagogues and the like are totally exempt, religiously affiliated organizations such as universities and hospitals are exempt only if they notify the federal government of their objections. That in turn triggers an independent mechanism to provide the coverage for those employees who want it. Some religious organizations contend that the notification requirement makes them complicit in facilitating birth control coverage and thus violates their religious principles.</p><p style="text-align: justify;">&mdash; <a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/10/05/445885201/the-supreme-courts-new-term-heres-what-to-watch?ft=nprml&amp;f=445885201" target="_blank"><em>via NPR</em></a></p></p> Mon, 05 Oct 2015 09:47:00 -0500 http://www.wbez.org/news/supreme-courts-new-term-heres-what-watch-113172 Six clips of audio you should hear from the Planned Parenthood hearing http://www.wbez.org/news/six-clips-audio-you-should-hear-planned-parenthood-hearing-113115 <img typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://llnw.wbez.org//main-images/AP_214836156310.jpg" alt="" /><p><div id="res444552195" previewtitle="Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc. testifies during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on Capitol Hill, on Tuesday."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc. testifies during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on Capitol Hill, on Tuesday." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/09/29/gettyimages-490526590_custom-674767c7e3e0ce1a4b158fe4e97fc9e8c5cfdb11-s800-c85.jpg" style="height: 425px; width: 600px;" title="Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc. testifies during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on Capitol Hill, on Tuesday. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images)" /></div></div><p>For the first time since&nbsp;<a href="http://www.npr.org/2015/08/27/435273173/planned-parenthood-says-experts-found-misleading-edits-in-videos">surreptitious videos</a>&nbsp;put Planned Parenthood in the spotlight again, the organization&#39;s president, Cecile Richards, faced the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.</p><p>The more than five-hour hearing was oftentimes contentious. Richards defended her organization on several fronts. She said the videos released by the anti-abortion group Center for Medical Progress were misleading and she said her organization does not receive federal funding for most abortions.</p><p>Republican lawmakers for their part questioned why Planned Parenthood should continue to receive federal funding if many Americans don&#39;t agree with abortions.</p><p>With that, here are six audio clips that will give you a sense of the hearing.</p><p><iframe align="left" frameborder="0" height="290" max-width="500px &amp;" scrolling="no" src="http://www.npr.org/player/embed/444528541/444533413"></iframe></p><p>In the fiercest confrontation of the hearing, Rep. Jim Jordan, a Republican from Ohio,<strong>&nbsp;sparred with Richards over the apology she issued after the first video was made public.</strong> If the videos were so misleading, he asked, then why did Richards apologize:</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><iframe align="right" frameborder="0" height="290" max-width="500px" scrolling="no" src="http://www.npr.org/player/embed/444528541/444534461"></iframe></p><p>Given an opportunity to speak by Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Democrat from Washington, D.C., Richards offered this <strong>concise defense</strong> of Planned Parenthood:</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><iframe align="left" frameborder="0" height="290" max-width="500px" scrolling="no" src="http://www.npr.org/player/embed/444528541/444534559"></iframe>Rep. Gerald Connolly, a Democrat of Virginia,&nbsp;<strong>chastised his fellow lawmakers</strong>&nbsp;for what he said was disrespectful and misogynist behavior toward Richards:</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><iframe align="right" frameborder="0" height="290" max-width="500px" scrolling="no" src="http://www.npr.org/player/embed/444528541/444541195"></iframe></p><p>In a hearing dominated with questions about women&#39;s rights, Rep. John Duncan, a Republican of Tennessee, asked,&nbsp;<strong>&quot;Surely you don&#39;t expect us to be easier on you because you&#39;re a woman?&quot;</strong>&nbsp;Richards responded by conjuring her mother, the late Texas Gov. Ann Richards:&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><iframe align="left" frameborder="0" height="290" max-width="500px" scrolling="no" src="http://www.npr.org/player/embed/444528541/444546062"></iframe>Rep. Brenda Lawrence had<strong> the most impassioned soliloquy</strong> of the hearing. She began by pointing out that the men asking questions had no sensitivity to understand &quot;what a woman goes through with her healthcare.&quot;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><iframe align="right" frameborder="0" height="290" max-width="500px" scrolling="no" src="http://www.npr.org/player/embed/444528541/444550804"></iframe></p><p>This hearing was supposed to be about the testimony of Richards. But it really became a <strong>debate among lawmakers</strong>. This clip with Rep. Scott DesJarlais, a Republican from Tennessee, Richards and Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, a Democrat from New Jersey, make that point:</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&mdash;<a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/29/444528541/6-clips-of-audio-you-should-hear-from-the-planned-parenthood-hearing?ft=nprml&amp;f=444528541" target="_blank"><em> via NPR&#39;s The Two-Way</em></a></p></p> Tue, 29 Sep 2015 16:10:00 -0500 http://www.wbez.org/news/six-clips-audio-you-should-hear-planned-parenthood-hearing-113115 Pope Francis announces a year of 'mercy' — and gives ordinary priests the power to forgive the sin of abortion http://www.wbez.org/programs/takeaway/2015-09-02/pope-francis-announces-year-mercy-%E2%80%94-and-gives-ordinary-priests-power <img typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://llnw.wbez.org//main-images/pope.jpg" alt="" /><p><p>It&#39;s part of the Jubilee Year of Mercy &mdash; a special year for Catholics to receive blessings and pardons from God &mdash; which begins on December 8. Every 25 or 50 years since the year 1300 the Catholic church has evoked a jubilee year, as&nbsp;<a href="http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/francis-announces-new-global-jubilee-holy-year-mercy" target="_blank">the National Catholic Reporter explains</a>.</p><p>In a&nbsp;<a href="http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2015/09/01/0637/01386.html#ing" target="_blank">letter</a>&nbsp;published today, Francis said he understands that some people approach abortions with &quot;superficial awareness.&quot; He writes:</p><blockquote><p>&quot;I know that it is an existential and moral ordeal. I have met so many women who bear in their heart the scar of this agonizing and painful decision. What has happened is profoundly unjust; yet only understanding the truth of it can enable one not to lose hope. The forgiveness of God cannot be denied to one who has repented, especially when that person approaches the Sacrament of Confession with a sincere heart in order to obtain reconciliation with the Father. For this reason too, I have decided, notwithstanding anything to the contrary, to concede to all priests for the Jubilee Year the discretion to absolve of the sin of abortion those who have procured it and who, with contrite heart, seek forgiveness for it.&quot;</p></blockquote><p>Though the news has been welcomed by some, Rev.&nbsp;James Bretzke, a professor of moral theology at the Boston College School of Theology and Ministry, says the pope&rsquo;s announcement does not mark a doctrinal shift in the Church&#39;s teachings on abortion.</p><p>&ldquo;This is a big deal, but I don&rsquo;t think it should be misunderstood,&rdquo; Bretzke says. &ldquo;He is not saying that abortion is no longer a sin. What he&rsquo;s saying is this is a real sin and we need to give the power to deal with that real sin to as many priests as possible so that everyone who needs to have this reconciliation can obtain it easily, and in a sense of mercy and forgiveness.&rdquo;</p><p>Historically under church law, only bishops and certain priests had the power to absolve the sin of abortion. But Francis is extending that ability to every priest worldwide.</p><p>&ldquo;Let&rsquo;s use a business analogy: If you wanted to open a checking account, maybe you had to go to the bank&rsquo;s main office,&rdquo; Bretzke says. &ldquo;Now, [Francis] is saying you can go to any ATM or any store &mdash; any place where there is a representative of the business. That&rsquo;s really what he&rsquo;s doing &mdash; he&rsquo;s given this power not just to the branch office or the main office, but to every priest, wherever that priest is.&rdquo;</p><p>Pope Francis has the ability to permanently delegate this power to all Catholic priests, though it&rsquo;s still unclear if he will do so. And many Catholics in the United States are split on the issue.</p><p>According to a&nbsp;<a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/19/majority-of-u-s-catholics-opinions-run-counter-to-church-on-contraception-homosexuality/" target="_blank">2013 Pew Research Center poll</a>, 53 percent of white American Catholics say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while 41 percent say it should be illegal in all or most cases. Among Hispanic Catholics in the United States, 43 percent say it should be legal in all or most cases, while 52 percent say it should be illegal in all or most cases.</p><p>Since he assumed his role in March 2013, Pope Francis has consistently shaken things up in the Catholic Church. He has criticized the &ldquo;<a href="http://www.thetakeaway.org/story/pope-francis-criticizes-tyranny-unchecked-capitalism/" target="_blank">tyranny</a>&rdquo; of unfettered capitalism; he has tackled&nbsp;<a href="http://www.thetakeaway.org/story/pope-francis-call-climate-change-action-vatican-conference/" target="_blank">climate change</a>&nbsp;and called on Catholics to be stewards of the Earth; he has sought to address clergy&nbsp;<a href="http://www.thetakeaway.org/story/judging-pope-francis-vaticans-handling-sexual-abuse-church/" target="_blank">sexual abuse</a>, and he&rsquo;s touched on issues of&nbsp;<a href="http://www.thetakeaway.org/story/will-pope-change-his-mind-divorce-and-remarriage/" target="_blank">divorce</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="http://www.thetakeaway.org/story/catholic-bishops-signal-potential-shifts-divorce-homosexuality/" target="_blank">homosexuality</a>.</p><p>In the United States, Pope Francis&rsquo;s more liberal stances on all of the aforementioned issues have caused a stir&nbsp;<a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/popes-pronouncements-making-trouble-for-gop-catholics-118234" target="_blank">among conservative Republicans</a>. And though this new announcement may complicate his trip to Congress later this September, Bretzke says that Catholic lawmakers must stand with the pope.</p><p>&ldquo;If they&rsquo;re good Catholics, they have to follow pope and the Gospel of Jesus Christ on forgiveness of sins,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;This pope is putting the accent on forgiveness and mercy. Certain bishops and priests, regrettably, have put the accent in the past on punishment and excommunication. I think the pope is trying to say that we need a different approach.&rdquo;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><em>&mdash;<a href="http://www.thetakeaway.org/story/pope-allow-priests-forgive-abortion/" target="_blank">The Takeaway</a></em></p></p> Wed, 02 Sep 2015 08:30:00 -0500 http://www.wbez.org/programs/takeaway/2015-09-02/pope-francis-announces-year-mercy-%E2%80%94-and-gives-ordinary-priests-power Worldview: Chile debates legalizing abortion http://www.wbez.org/programs/worldview/2015-04-15/worldview-chile-debates-legalizing-abortion-111877 <p><div class="image-insert-image "><img alt="" class="image-original_image" src="http://www.wbez.org/system/files/styles/original_image/llo/insert-images/photo%20for%20web%20page.jpg" style="height: 413px; width: 620px;" title="" /></div><div class="image-insert-image ">&nbsp;</div><div class="image-insert-image ">&nbsp;</div><p><iframe frameborder="no" height="166" scrolling="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/200983402&amp;color=ff5500&amp;auto_play=false&amp;hide_related=false&amp;show_comments=true&amp;show_user=true&amp;show_reposts=false&amp;show_artwork=false" width="100%"></iframe></p><p><span style="font-size:18px;">Chilean president pushes for changes to abortion law</span></p><p>Last month a 25 year old woman was arrested in the Chilean city of Calama, after she was treated for what a doctor suspected was a deliberately induced an abortion. Abortion is illegal in Chile, even in cases of rape. It became illegal at the end of the Pinochet military dictatorship. Now, legislation is being considered that would make it available in some limited circumstances. Easing the restrictions has been a priority for Chilean president Michelle Bachelet, who is a pediatrician but the legislation faces strong opposition. Lessie Jo Frazier, professor of American Studies and Gender Studies at Indiana University and author of<em> Salt in the Sand: Memory, Violence, and the Nation-State in Chile, 1890-Present</em>, explains the current debate around abortion in Chile.</p><p><strong style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 22px; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(51, 51, 51);">Guest:</strong></p><p><em>Lassie Jo Frazier is a professor of American Studies and Gender Studies at Indiana University and author of the book Salt in Sand: Memory, Violence and the Nation-State in Chile, 1890-Present</em></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><iframe frameborder="no" height="166" scrolling="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/200982455&amp;color=ff5500&amp;auto_play=false&amp;hide_related=false&amp;show_comments=true&amp;show_user=true&amp;show_reposts=false&amp;show_artwork=false" width="100%"></iframe></p><p><span style="font-size:18px;">Refugees grow fresh produce to feed the public and their families</span></p><p>With social media outrage still swirling around too many limes in one celebrity&rsquo;s food stamp challenge, 100 refugee families are quietly spring cleaning their urban farm on the Northwest Side of Chicago, many to grow their favorite though perhaps divisive vegetable: bitter melon. Linda Seyler, Director of the Global Gardens Refugee Training Farm, in Albany Park joins us to share the season&rsquo;s garden news. Louisa Chu, WBEZ&rsquo;s food contributor, who visited the farm for their end of season BBQ also joins the conversation.</p><p><strong>Guests:</strong></p><p><em>Linda Seyler is the director of the Global Gardens Refugee Training Farm</em></p><p><em>Luisa Chu is WBEZ&#39;s food contributor</em></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><iframe frameborder="no" height="166" scrolling="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/200982834&amp;color=ff5500&amp;auto_play=false&amp;hide_related=false&amp;show_comments=true&amp;show_user=true&amp;show_reposts=false&amp;show_artwork=false" width="100%"></iframe></p><p><span style="font-size:18px;">Global Notes: Cambodia, music and the Khmer Rouge</span></p><p><span style="font-size:14px;">Cambodia was perhaps like no other in Asia; Khmer musicians of the era were influenced by western R&amp;B, rock n&#39; roll, Afro Cuban and French pop. They took all these sounds and added a heavy dose of Cambodian musical culture. It all ended on April 17, 1975, the day the Khmer Rouge took over Phnom Penh.&nbsp; Many of the artists&nbsp; where executed or sent away to prison camps to die.&nbsp; This Friday marks the 40th anniversary of that fateful day and the darkness that followed.&nbsp;</span></p><p><strong>Guest:</strong></p><p><em>Tony Sarabia is the host of &nbsp;Morning Shift and Radio M on WBEZ.</em></p></p> Wed, 15 Apr 2015 13:14:00 -0500 http://www.wbez.org/programs/worldview/2015-04-15/worldview-chile-debates-legalizing-abortion-111877 ISIS poses threat to neighbors http://www.wbez.org/programs/worldview/2014-08-20/isis-poses-threat-neighbors-110679 <img typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://llnw.wbez.org//main-images/AP163856221898.jpg" alt="" /><p><p>In a statement today, President Obama said a group like the Islamic State &quot;has no place in the 21st century.&quot; Today we&#39;ll talk to Steven Simon, a fellow at the Middle East Institute, about the ISIS threat to surrounding countries and what can the U.S. do about it.</p><div class="storify"><iframe allowtransparency="true" frameborder="no" height="750" src="//storify.com/WBEZ/worldview-isis-poses-threat-to-neighbors/embed?header=false&amp;border=false" width="100%"></iframe><script src="//storify.com/WBEZ/worldview-isis-poses-threat-to-neighbors.js?header=false&border=false"></script><noscript>[<a href="//storify.com/WBEZ/worldview-isis-poses-threat-to-neighbors" target="_blank">View the story "Worldview: ISIS poses threat to neighbors " on Storify</a>]</noscript></div></p> Wed, 20 Aug 2014 14:17:00 -0500 http://www.wbez.org/programs/worldview/2014-08-20/isis-poses-threat-neighbors-110679 Aborted baby flag removal sparks debate at DePaul University http://www.wbez.org/blogs/nico-lang/2013-01/aborted-baby-flag-removal-sparks-debate-depaul-university-105199 <p><div class="image-insert-image " style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" class="image-original_image" src="http://www.wbez.org/system/files/styles/original_image/llo/insert-images/southie3.jpg" title="" /></div><div>Tuesday, January 22 marked the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the landmark court decision on abortion and women&rsquo;s sexual health, but at DePaul University, that day will be remembered very differently.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>In the university&#39;s quad, the conservative student group Young Americans for Freedom erected a pro-life memorial to their cited 54 million fetuses aborted in the decades since Roe&#39;s passage. To do so, the students hung pink and blue flags in the quad as a form of public protest. To counterprotest, another group of pro-choice students took the flags down, distributing them in garbage cans across campus.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>According to a source close to the pro-choice protestors, they thought it was the most peaceful way to respond. Some students planned on writing affirming messages on the flags and returning them to their previous positions, as a reminder that this issue isn&rsquo;t just about babies, it&rsquo;s about women&rsquo;s rights. They hoped that doing so would send a message to pro-life students on campus and start a dialogue at a school that often ignores issues of sexual health. No one expected it would go as far as it did. No one thought it would mean they might not graduate.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>The problem began when an <a href="http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/pro-life-display-destroyed-by-vandals-at-catholic-university.html">article</a> from Fox News, the Pied Piper of American conservatism, threw ideological gasoline all over the conflict, branding the pro-choice students as &ldquo;<a href="http://www.christianpost.com/news/vandals-destroy-pro-life-display-at-depaul-university-conservatives-say-intolerance-growing-88825/">vandals</a>&rdquo; and Young Americans for Freedom as heroes of the GOP and warriors of free speech. Fox writer Todd Starnes&mdash;who comes personally endorsed by Sarah Palin and Sean Hannity&mdash;used the conflict as a way to bash the pro-choice students as being bigots. Other articles continue to refer to the students as &ldquo;leftists&rdquo; and &ldquo;radicals&rdquo; (or sometimes <a href="http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/01/radical-leftists-trash-a-pro-life-display-at-depaul-university/">both</a>!) and the act as a &ldquo;<a href="http://www.lifenews.com/2013/01/23/activists-trash-depaul-university-memorial-for-aborted-babies/">trashing</a>&rdquo; of students&#39; rights.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>To further this indictiment, Fox spoke to Kristopher Del Campo, the DePaul chairman for Young Americans for Freedom. Del Campo said, &ldquo;It is a sad thing to see that liberal minded students aren&rsquo;t more tolerant, and don&rsquo;t respect the views of those who respect the lives of the unborn. It&rsquo;s really discouraging and I&rsquo;m saddened by that.&rdquo;</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>In a follow-up <a href="http://www.depauliaonline.com/news/flags-under-fire-pro-life-display-disposed-of-under-suspicious-circumstances-1.2976795#.UQnyN2f3GWZ">article</a> in the DePaulia, the university&rsquo;s student-run newspaper, Del Campo went much further, referring to the flags&rsquo; removal as an &ldquo;act of hate.&rdquo; (He also says that liberals are more likely to be the perpetrators of hate crimes.)</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>Despite an apology from the university&rsquo;s Dean of Students, Art Munin, Del Campo advocated that the university go further, calling for expulsion for all the students involved.&nbsp; Del Campo told the DePaulia that YAF has surveillance footage of the students responsible and that they will show that alleged footage to the police. In the meantime, Del Campo stated that he like to see DePaul take responsibility in hunting down those responsible: &ldquo;If you really want to find these students, put out pictures&hellip;Let other students see it and identify students.&rdquo;</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>Del Campo&rsquo;s advocacy for a student witch hunt isn&rsquo;t the first time that the school&rsquo;s faced free speech issues at DePaul, as a &ldquo;satirical&rdquo; Affirmative Action Bake Sale in 2006 highlighted the extreme divisions between conservative and liberal students on the nation&rsquo;s largest Catholic campus.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>One of the pro-choice students involved in the incident, who asked not to be identified (and will be referred to as &ldquo;X&quot;), stated that incidents like these are endemic of a divided campus, an ongoing problem that the university has failed to holistically tackle. When X started at the university in 2009, students put up <a href="http://www.depauliaonline.com/news/university-groups-work-to-promote-healthy-religious-climate-1.2155312">swastikas</a> in Corcoran Hall, a residence building at DePaul, and in some of the other dorms. In 2011, another <a href="http://www.depauliaonline.com/news/university-groups-work-to-promote-healthy-religious-climate-1.2155312#.UQlQEmf3GWY">incident</a> arose when a student began to shout out anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim slurs in the student center.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>According to X, the pro-choice students involved didn&rsquo;t mean to &ldquo;fuel this fire&rdquo; at DePaul. This isn&#39;t what anyone wanted. They didn&#39;t even know that Young Americans for Freedom existed.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>Because pro-choice groups are informally banned on campus, X&mdash;like many students I spoke with&mdash;assumed that pro-life groups would not be allowed to operate either, due to the university&rsquo;s strict procedures on sexually charged material and student organizations. Per school policy, student organizations aren&rsquo;t allowed to distribute condoms, and sex ed is heavily censored.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>Currently, the university offers a Sexual Health and Violence Prevention center (that many students don&#39;t even know exists) and a undergraduate group called the Student Health Advocates. However, it&#39;s hard for these groups to be effective on a campus that won&#39;t allow them to hold public demonstrations on Safe Sex 101&mdash;and give students the educational resources they need. Because of their strained relationship with sex, DePaul University <a href="http://www.depauliaonline.com/news/trojan-ranks-depaul-most-sexually-unhealthy-university-1.2685719#.UQby2Gf3GWY">claimed</a> the title of &ldquo;Most Sexually Unhealthy University&rdquo; in 2011.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>The DePaul administration claims that the university&rsquo;s Catholic affiliation precludes amending these policies, even though other religious institutions (like Siena) allow for the distribution of condoms on campus.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>However, X believes that the strict adherence to Catholic doctrine in the school&rsquo;s sexual policies is a strange double standard, as the university allows LGBTQ groups to operate very publicly on campus and has been a champion of queer student visibility. In addition to an LGBTQ studies department, the school boasts three active queer student groups and allows them to throw yearly drag shows, which are a tentpole of the spring quarter. The 2011 show even took place in the DePaul Atrium, the common space of the school&#39;s student center.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>Because the university&#39;s LGBTQ leadership has often been stereotyped as male (which was also an issue when I was a DePaul undergraduate), X remarked that queer visibility has been easier for DePaul administration to swallow.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>As a student heavily involved in both LGBTQ and feminist organizing at DePaul, X stated that feminists on campus are &quot;treated differently because they have vaginas.&quot; This creates a culture where some female students feel unsafe, which include those students involved in last Tuesday&#39;s incident. X put it bluntly: &quot;When you step on this campus, it feels like you <em>don&#39;t</em> have a choice.&quot;</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>Because of this gender gap, the student worried that DePaul is going to use the flag removal to further marginalize the school&#39;s feminist and pro-choice communities. When X was initially questioned about the event, the student told me that administrators were already looking for links to feminist groups and leaders on campus. They were searching for a target. Currently, the university is seeking possible expulsion for anyone who was involved in the flag removal.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>Tracey Harkins, a senior DePaul student in Women and Gender Studies, agreed that gender inequality on campus is a huge problem and said that DePaul should show the same progressive stance to sexuality that they have demonstrated on queer issues. Instead of further silencing women&rsquo;s voices on campus and scapegoating them for the university&#39;s problems, the university should use this as an opportunity to start a conversation on sexual health, a dialogue that should have taken place a long time ago.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>According to Harkins, the conflict &ldquo;speaks to a real issue at DePaul,&rdquo; causing her to &ldquo;question how DePaul handles a range of women-related issues.&rdquo; Harkins cited this incident as yet another failure from the university in regards to its female population, as the school has yet to take action against sexual assaults that occurred on campus last fall. For Harkins, this is representative an <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nico-lang/sexual-assault-awareness_b_1427525.html">ongoing problem</a> at &ldquo;campuses across the country,&rdquo; where women are &ldquo;made to feel devalued&rdquo; by administrations that don&rsquo;t take their sexual health seriously. She argued that &ldquo;women cannot feel safe at an institutional level if they are considered unequal.&rdquo;</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>In response to DePaul&#39;s sex problems, Harkins is working with a team of student organizers on &ldquo;Say Yes to Consent,&rdquo; which hopes to change the culture of sex at DePaul and on Chicago&rsquo;s campuses. With student members from universities across the city&mdash;including the University of Illinois at Chicago, Columbia College and Northwestern University&mdash;the group hopes pressure university administrators to include policies educating students on sexual assault, consent and women&#39;s health, rather than sweeping these issues under the rug.</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div>As statistics show that 1<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/06/one-in-four-women-will-be_n_706513.html"> in 4</a> women will be sexually assaulted before graduating college, Harkins feels the best way to commemorate Roe v. Wade is to continue the fight for greater awareness: &ldquo;We&rsquo;ve come a long way in the past 40 years, but our work is far from over.&rdquo;</div><div>&nbsp;</div><div><em>Nico Lang blogs about LGBTQ life in Chicago for WBEZ.org. Follow Nico on Twitter <a href="http://www.twitter.com/Nico_Lang" target="_hplink">@Nico_Lang</a> or on <a href="http://www.facebook.com/NicoRLang" target="_hplink">Facebook</a>.</em></div></p> Tue, 29 Jan 2013 05:00:00 -0600 http://www.wbez.org/blogs/nico-lang/2013-01/aborted-baby-flag-removal-sparks-debate-depaul-university-105199