While the material is not explicitly religious, it clearly aims to portray same-sex marriage as deviant and immoral behaviour. Doctors pressured by the group are also asked to urge patients to buy Christian parenting guides, including one designed to help parents bring up the topic of sex with their 11- and 12-year-olds. The college suggests telling parents to plan a “special overnight trip,” as an excuse to inculcate sexual mores in their children in line with evangelical practices. The group suggests telling parents to buy a tool called the “Exit Kit,” a series of $54 exercise manuals online. Workbooks methodically lead parents through the process of bringing up the topic, but only after a full day’s charade of gift-giving and impromptu play.
These books are full of games and puzzles that parent and child can do cooperatively. Throughout this process, the child slowly comes to grips with the concept of “sexual purity,” lessons supported by Plain Bible and the proverbs of a well-attended Bible school.
Another document shared by the group with its members contains a provision for appointments with pregnant minors. Its purpose is clearly stated: the advice is specifically designed to reduce the odds of minors coming into contact with medical professionals who are not strictly opposed to abortion. The training text advises the doctor to inform the minor that they “strongly recommend against” abortion, adding that “this procedure not only kills the infant you are carrying, but also poses a danger to you.” (From a medical point of view, the terms “fetus” and “infant” cannot be used, the latter term referring to a newborn child less than one year old.)
Doctors are urged to recommend that the minor visit a website, such as the one above, that is not overtly religious but will only direct visitors to “pregnancy crisis centers” run by the Catholic Church, which staunchly disapproves of abortion. The site itself is widely promoted by anti-abortion groups such as the National Right to Life, which last year deemed it illegal to terminate the pregnancy of a 10-year-old rape victim.
professionals
The effort to ban mifepristone, which was halted by the Supreme Court last month pending further review, faces significant legal hurdles but may ultimately benefit from the disproportionately conservative composition of the appeals court. Most of the legal power in the fight has been provided by a much older and better-funded group, the Freedom Defense Coalition, which has cultivated relationships with some of the country’s most elite political figures—former Vice President Mike Pence, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett among them.
A contract in the leak dated April 2021 shows ADF agreeing to legal representation of the college pro bono. It states that the ADF’s ability to support expenses incurred during litigation will be limited by ethical guidelines; However, she can still overlook any remaining costs once the college is declared “destitute”.
In contrast to the college’s 700 members, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)—the organization the college’s founders split from 20 years ago—has roughly 67,000 members. The estrangement between the two groups was a direct result of a statement made by the AAP in 2002. Recent research has shown conclusively that parents’ sexual orientation had an imperceptible effect on children’s well-being, the AAP said, for a long time. Where they grew up in caring and supportive families.
Data Visualization: DataWrapper
The college would gain notoriety early on by attacking AAP positions. In 2005, A.J Boston Globe The reporter noted how common it is for “a quote from the American College of Pediatrics to be taken as a counterpoint” to anything the American Academy of Pediatrics says. He wrote that the establishment had a “great name” for being run by “a single employee”.
Internal documents show that group managers quickly encountered obstacles operating on the fringes of accepted science. Some claimed to be persecuted. Most of the college’s research was “written by one person,” according to the minutes of the 2006 meeting, which were included in the leak. College was failing to make a splash. In the future, a director suggested that papers rejected by medical journals “should be published on the Internet.” The vote to do so was unanimous (although the board decided that “unpublished” was nicer than “objectionable”).
A second director put forward a proposal to create a separate “scientific section” on the group’s website, linking it to articles published in medical journals. The proposal was rescinded after it became clear on the board that they did not have “enough articles” to make the page “look professional”.
The college struggled to identify the root cause of its appearance. “To get enough leverage, it takes large numbers, maybe 10,000,” said one manager. (The college’s recruitment efforts would result in less than 7 percent of that goal in the next 17 years.) Another said the marketing department advised, “The college needs to pick a fight with the AAP and get on with it.” Larry King Live. Other notes say, the organization felt the organization was too busy trying to “go on the fence” by neglecting to acknowledge that we were “conservative and religious.”