Life Links 3/1/11

The University of Iowa is being criticized for allowing one of their professors, abortionist Jill Meadows, to quit her job and work for a nearby Planned Parenthood (which violates a non-compete clause in her contract) as long as she continued to train students on how to do abortions.

Ordinarily, university doctors cannot go to work within a 50-mile radius of Iowa City for two years after they leave employment under the school's non-compete agreements, which are common in the medical field. Meadows signed the agreement when she joined the obstetrics reproductive and gynecology faculty in 1999. She told the university last year she was resigning June 30 to become medical director for Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, which serves patients in Iowa and Nebraska.

Under a legal settlement dated June 22 and released to AP last week, the university said it believed her departure would violate the non-compete agreement. But the school agreed not to seek legal action to block her employment as long as she would take a position as an unpaid adjunct clinical faculty member, and continue to provide training to medical residents and students at the Planned Parenthood clinic in Iowa City.

Delaware abortionists Albert Dworkin and Arturo Apolinario are fighting against the possible suspension of their medical licenses.

Both Dworkin and Apolinario work at Atlantic Women's Medical Services, an abortion provider with clinics in Wilmington and Dover that employed Gosnell one day a week for years.

Two unborn children are going to "testify" before an Ohio committee.

Two in-utero babies will appear live before the committee by an ultrasound projector which is able to not only show that baby’s moving arms and legs, but also display–in color–the baby’s beating heart.

In the New York Times, Clyde Haberman reflects on the recent removal of a prolife billboard in New York City and discusses how tolerance in New York comes and goes based on whether the message conforms to popular opinion.

Was this anti-abortion statement subtle? Hardly. Accurate? Depends on your politics. Offensive? For some people, yes. Out of step with mainstream thought in New York? For sure. And so, a few days ago in this most tolerant of cities, a raft of elected officials wasted no time calling for the billboard’s removal.....

This plain act of censorship was not isolated. Rather, it fit into an established New York pattern of squelching unpopular opinions. Examples over the past decade abound.