<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>First Things RSS Feed - David DeWolf</title>
		<link>https://www.firstthings.com/author/david-dewolf</link>
		<atom:link href="https://www.firstthings.com/rss/author/david-dewolf" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<description></description>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2025 First Things. All Rights Reserved.</copyright>
		<managingEditor>ft@firstthings.com (The Editors)</managingEditor>
		<webMaster>ft@firstthings.com (The Editors)</webMaster>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:55:13 -0500</pubDate>
		
		<ttl>60</ttl>

		<item>
			<title>Lisa Snow&rsquo;s Dividing Line on Abortion</title>
			<guid>https://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2013/04/lisa-snows-dividing-line-on-abortion</guid>
			<link>https://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2013/04/lisa-snows-dividing-line-on-abortion</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 11 Apr 2013 09:00:11 -0400</pubDate>
			
			<description><![CDATA[<p> A lot of attention has been paid to Lisa Snow, testifying on behalf of Planned Parenthood at a  
<a href="http://myfloridahouse.gov/VideoPlayer.aspx?eventID=2443575804_2013031292&amp;committeeID=2719"> hearing </a>
  in Florida regarding a bill that would require medical care for babies born after a botched abortion. To the surprise of many, and to the chagrin of Planned Parenthood, she couldn&rsquo;t say what Planned Parenthood would do in a case where a baby on the table was struggling for life. Later Planned Parenthood  
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/04/03/priebus-media-is-covering-up-planned-parenthoods-support-for-infanticide/"> clarified its position </a>
 . Dismissing the exchange as having occurred only when &ldquo;state legislators demanded speculation about a vague set of extremely unlikely and highly unusual medical circumstances,&rdquo; Planned Parenthood acted as though it was no big deal. Should such a circumstance arise, &ldquo;of course Planned Parenthood would provide appropriate care to both the woman and the infant.&rdquo; 
</p> <p><em><a href="https://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2013/04/lisa-snows-dividing-line-on-abortion">Continue Reading </a> &raquo;</em></p>]]></description>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Washington State Contemplates Mandatory Abortion Coverage</title>
			<guid>https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2013/04/washington-state-contemplates-mandatory-abortion-coverage</guid>
			<link>https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2013/04/washington-state-contemplates-mandatory-abortion-coverage</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 05 Apr 2013 00:03:00 -0400</pubDate>
			
			<description><![CDATA[<p>  
<span> On April 1, the Health Care Committee of the Washington State Senate held a two-hour hearing on what its proponents euphemistically call the &#147;Reproductive Parity Act,&#148; and its opponents describe as the &#147;abortion insurance mandate.&#148; If passed,  <a href="http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2013-14/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/1044.E.pdf"> EHB 1044 </a>  would require that if any health insurance plan provided coverage for maternity care, it &#147;must also provide a covered person with substantially equivalent coverage to permit the voluntary termination of a pregnancy.&#148; </span>
  
</p> <p><em><a href="https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2013/04/washington-state-contemplates-mandatory-abortion-coverage">Continue Reading </a> &raquo;</em></p>]]></description>
		</item>
			</channel>
</rss>
