The pro-life cause persists—and continues, by some metrics, to gain ground—despite the shift towards “progressive” mores on issues like same-sex marriage

The people who get abortions on TV are different from the people who get abortions in real life.

A new study finds that one-fourth of babies born at 22 weeks survived with intensive care—two weeks earlier than the current viability standards built into abortion law.

Last year the NYT print edition passed on covering the March for Life. The media’s biases will just as likely be at work this year.

Pro-life and pro-choice groups have come together to support a woman suing UPS over pregnancy discrimination. The two sides share more common ground than the media often suggest.

The recent GOP victories on the state level could mean a renewed attempt to pass abortion restrictions. Indeed, pro-life advocates have a number of reasons to be excited.

Entrepreneur Jonathan Rothberg has raised a million dollars from serious investors to produce a portable ultrasound machine that will be cheaper, faster, and more precise than existing technology. If it succeeds, it will have wide applications—but one unexpected effect may lie in discouraging abortions.

When the ACA was first passed, President Obama offered a compromise on federal abortion funding to pro-life Democrats whose votes he needed. Now a new GAO report suggests that compromise is lapsing in implementation.

According to California, elective abortions are “medically necessary” care that must be covered by all employers. The next big conscience fight could be here.

Richard Dawkins was recently forced to apologize for his recent remarks advocating abortion for babies diagnosed with Down Syndrome. But most of them are actually aborted.