Connect with us

World

Pro-life leader criticizes ‘insane’ UK bill that would decriminalize certain abortions up until birth

Published

on

Pro-life leader criticizes ‘insane’ UK bill that would decriminalize certain abortions up until birth

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

EXCLUSIVE: The leader of an international pro-life group is criticizing a bill being considered in the United Kingdom that would protect women from criminal liability for abortions up until birth.

In an interview with Fox News Digital, 40 Days for Life CEO Shawn Carney said British lawmakers are following efforts by Democrats in the U.S. in seeking to allow abortion in these instances, which he described as “absolutely absurd.”

“They haven’t really lobbied for this,” Carney said. “Typically, Europe is far more conservative on abortion than the United States. Most European countries regulate abortion to 12 weeks. England has 16. In some cases, they do late term, up to 24 weeks. But now they want abortion through all 40 weeks. And this just seems sort of out of nowhere.”

Carney said he fears this bill, if enacted into law, would “start an unfortunate trend throughout Europe.”

Advertisement

PRO-LIFE GROUP FINDS BIDEN-ERA FDA POLICY IS DRIVING 500 ABORTIONS PER DAY, SAYS TRUMP HAS POWER TO END IT

A bill is being considered in the U.K. that would protect women from criminal liability for abortions to end their own pregnancies up until birth. (Wiktor Szymanowicz/Anadolu via Getty Images)

The Crime and Policing Bill includes a provision, Clause 208, that would remove criminal penalties for women in England and Wales who end their own pregnancy at any stage. The bill is now in its final stages in the House of Lords and is expected to receive a vote as early as Wednesday. If the House of Lords approves the clause, the bill would return to the House of Commons for any final changes before receiving Royal Assent to become law.

Under the provision, a woman can no longer be investigated, arrested or prosecuted for ending her own pregnancy at any gestation, even though the current standard legal threshold for most abortions in England and Wales is 24 weeks.

While women who terminate their pregnancies would be exempt from criminal liability, doctors and others who assist in an abortion after 24 weeks without medical necessity can still face prosecution.

Advertisement

As lawmakers consider Clause 208, several amendments have been offered, including removing it entirely, modifying it to exclude late-term abortions and adding an in-person requirement for medical consultations to end so-called “pills-by-post” services.

PUERTO RICO GOVERNOR SIGNS LAW RECOGNIZING UNBORN BABIES AS HUMAN BEINGS

Under the provision, a woman can no longer be investigated, arrested or prosecuted for ending her own pregnancy at any gestation. (Wiktor Szymanowicz/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Carney argued that the latter two amendments should still be unacceptable, stating that the clause appears to represent “a desire to kill.”

“I think it’s insane,” he said. “I know what they’re trying to do, but you need to combat the laws by saying we’re not aborting children at 40 weeks. The left built an entire movement on being able to survive outside the womb with viability. Then, as science and medicine progressed, viability changed because we could do a lot for unborn children. So they said at first it was 24 weeks, and then it was 22 weeks. Some say it’s 20 weeks. Others say it’s still 22 weeks. Nobody’s ever said it was 40 weeks. They’ve all said, of course, you can survive outside the womb. This is just a desire to kill, it seems, at 40 weeks.”

Advertisement

“I understand the idea of trying to make a legal compromise,” he continued. “But the compromise would be that you people have lost your minds. You want to abort a child the day before he or she is born. And it’s not medically necessary. The baby’s completely viable … so that’s how I think that you have to defeat these bills.”

Carney also said that “people don’t want to celebrate abortion” and “certainly don’t want to brag about how they can have an abortion up to 40 weeks,” adding that opponents of the U.K. bill are “missing common sense responses” to efforts to allow any abortion up until birth.

He added that while most people are not “monsters” seeking abortions at 40 weeks, removing legal liability for women at that point could make abortion more socially acceptable.

“I think what it does is it takes a little bit of a stigma away from abortions at 8, 10, 12, 16 weeks, because typically what we’ve seen in the U.S. is when you have states that say, hey, you’re going to have an abortion through all 40 weeks, what they do is say, well, okay, I’m not that bad. My abortion is not that bad because it’s only at 10 weeks, it’s only at 12 weeks, it’s only at 16 weeks,” Carney said.

The bill is now in its final stages in the House of Lords and is expected to receive a vote as early as Wednesday. (Jason Alden/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“It’s not that you’re going to see a lot of abortions at 40 weeks. It’s the mentality that abortion is not a big deal. You can even do it the day before birth, and so it’s more acceptable to most people,” he continued.

“People aren’t monsters,” he added. “The monsters write these bills, which are typically very liberal White people who say, you know what, we need to be able to have an abortion the day before your birthday. And most people look around at a party and say that person’s clinically insane.”

The left “has just married themselves to this,” Carney said.

“They believe you need unfettered abortion at all times in order to be a free and just society,” Carney said. “But nobody’s actually really medically needing that whatsoever.”

Advertisement

World

Meta appeals landmark jury verdict that found it to blame for social media addiction for young users

Published

on

Meta appeals landmark jury verdict that found it to blame for social media addiction for young users

Meta, the parent company of Instagram and Facebook, has appealed the verdict of a landmark social media addiction lawsuit in Los Angeles, challenging the jury’s determination that the company designed its platforms to hook young users without concern for their well-being.

Lawyers representing Meta filed a notice of appeal Tuesday in Los Angeles County Superior Court. The lawyers will provide their arguments related to the appeal in subsequent court filings.

The case centered on a 20-year-old woman who said she became addicted to social media as a child and that it worsened her mental health struggles. The jury found that negligence by both Meta and Google-owned YouTube, which was also a defendant in the case, was a substantial factor in causing harm to the young woman, identified in court only by her initials, KGM, and her first name, Kaley.

The jury awarded her $3 million in damages and recommended an additional $3 million in punitive damages. Her lead attorney, Mark Lanier, said in a statement Friday that the legal team is expecting the appellate court to “continue the careful application of the law to this case, affirming the verdict of the trial court.”

A notice of appeal starts what can be a lengthy process. A Meta spokesperson provided a statement Friday that they also gave when the jury returned the verdict in March, saying that teen mental health is “profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app.”

Advertisement

José Castañeda, a spokesperson for Google, said in a statement Friday that YouTube plans to appeal and that “these are standard motions for this case to move forward.”

Meta and Google had each filed post-trial motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict — a routinely filed motion by defense lawyers asking a judge to toss out the jury’s verdict — and for a new trial. The trial judge, Carolyn B. Kuhl, denied those motions in early June.

Tech companies like Meta and YouTube are shielded from legal responsibility for content posted by third parties, based on Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act. To get around those protections, the plaintiffs focused on the design features of the platforms like “infinite scroll,” or the endless nature of feeds on the platforms, and autoplay functions.

Questions about encroaching into content-related territory were the subject of many objections from the defendants throughout the five-week trial.

The verdict in this case came during a time of legal woes for Meta. A jury in New Mexico returned a verdict finding that Meta’s platforms harm children’s mental health and safety just one day before the California jury reached its decision. The New Mexico jury, siding with state prosecutors who brought the case, landed on a penalty of $375 million. Meta has said the company disagrees with the verdict and will also appeal in that case.

Advertisement

“We will continue to defend ourselves vigorously, and we remain confident in our record of protecting teens online,” a Meta spokesperson said in a statement at the time of the verdicts and again on Friday.

Kaley’s case was a first-of-its-kind lawsuit, and the verdict could influence the outcome of thousands of similar lawsuits accusing social media companies of deliberately causing harm. TikTok and Snapchat parent company Snap Inc. were also initially named as defendants in the case, but each settled for undisclosed sums before the trial began.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

Israel signals readiness for another Iran strike as Trump declares ceasefire over

Published

on

Israel signals readiness for another Iran strike as Trump declares ceasefire over

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Israel’s leaders are publicly signaling that their country is prepared to strike Iran for a third time, while a U.S. official tells Fox News Digital that Washington remains closely coordinated with Jerusalem. 

“The IDF is on high alert and prepared to resume the campaign, regain air superiority, and carry out an independent Israeli strike against Iran to eliminate threats — even for a third time,” Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Minister Israel Katz said Thursday at a graduation ceremony for the Israeli Air Force’s newest pilots.

“If we have to return, we will return with even greater force,” Katz added.

ISRAEL DEFENSE CHIEF WARNS STRIKES ON IRAN COULD RESUME SOON, SIGNALS CAMPAIGN NOT OVER

Advertisement

U.S. Central Command shared this footage in a July 8, 2026, press release about strikes against Iran.  (CENTCOM)

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also warned Thursday that Israel’s campaign against Iran was not finished and said Tehran would not be permitted to obtain a nuclear weapon, regardless of any agreement reached with Washington.

“The war has not yet ended,” Netanyahu said at the air force ceremony. “Alongside the old challenges, new challenges are emerging. Axes are falling, and axes are rising. We are paying attention to this. We are prepared for every scenario.”

Two Israeli sources told CNN Friday that the Trump administration does not currently want Israel to participate in the latest U.S. strikes against Iran. 

“Netanyahu would really want to join the U.S. strikes, but the U.S. doesn’t want Israel involved at the moment,” one of the sources told CNN.

Advertisement

A U.S. official denied the report, telling Fox News Digital, “This is fake news. The United States has a strong relationship with Israel, which contributed to the resounding success of Operation Midnight Hammer and Operation Epic Fury. We remain in close coordination with our Israeli partners.”

Israel first launched a major campaign against Iran in June 2025, with the United States later joining the fighting by striking the Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan nuclear facilities. On Feb. 28, the two allies launched a new, coordinated military campaign against Iran.

While Israeli leaders are openly presenting the military as ready for another campaign, some Israeli officials and analysts say there is little appetite for renewed fighting unless it produces a clear strategic result.

The public warnings may overstate Israel’s desire to reenter the fighting, said Israeli analyst and journalist for Israeli newspaper Yedioth Aharonoth, Nadav Eyal. 

“On the record, Israel is signaling that it is prepared and even eager to strike Iran. But off the record, sources are saying that it is anything but that,” Eyal told Fox News Digital. “The reason is clear: Any Israeli strike in Iran will lead to Iranian ballistic missile attacks against Israel.”

Advertisement

US CLAWS BACK KEY CONCESSION TO IRAN AFTER FRESH ATTACKS ON COMMERCIAL SHIPS IN STRAIT OF HORMUZ

Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, from left, US President Donald Trump and US Vice President JD Vance during a bilateral meeting in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, US, on Tuesday, Feb. 4, 2025. Trump insisted Egypt and Jordan will take in Palestinians from the Gaza Strip, dismissing the countries’ refusal to accept people from the war-shattered territory. Photographer: Shawn Thew/EPA/Bloomberg via Getty Images (Getty Images)

Eyal said the domestic political consequences could make Netanyahu reluctant to begin another round of fighting, particularly as Israel approaches another election.

“If these strikes are meant to provide meaningful, strategic change, it is something the prime minister can sell to the public,” Eyal said. “But if the intention is only to use Israel as leverage, why should Israelis again experience a couple of weeks or more of sitting in safe rooms and losing their summer vacations, children’s day camps and summer camps? That could play out badly for the prime minister politically.”

“The truth is that Israel was not really enthusiastic about another strike,” he added. “That doesn’t mean it is not going to happen. If President Trump demands that Netanyahu join, it is very hard to see the Israelis saying no. But right now, I don’t see any passion for it.”

Advertisement

The diplomatic outreach continued even as Trump declared that the ceasefire with Iran was over.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran has asked us to continue ‘talks.’ We have agreed to do so, but the United States has stated to them, in no uncertain terms, that the Cease Fire is OVER!” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.

A source with knowledge of the situation told Fox News that Qatari negotiators have traveled to Iran, in coordination with the United States, to meet with Iranian officials in an effort to de-escalate the situation and create the conditions for negotiations to resume.

On Thursday, Netanyahu and Trump spoke by phone, according to the Israeli prime minister’s office, which said the two agreed to continue coordinating across several regional fronts. Trump briefed Netanyahu on American operations in the Gulf, the statement said.

NETANYAHU REJECTS REPORTS OF A RIFT WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP, SAYS THE TWO REMAIN ALIGNED ON IRAN

Advertisement

A satellite image shows damage at the control tower in the port of Chabahar, Iran, July 9, 2026, after the U.S. military said July 8, 2026, it launched fresh strikes on Iran to keep the Strait of Hormuz open to shipping. ( 2026 PLANET LABS PBC/Handout via Reuters)

The military warnings came as the Wall Street Journal reported Friday that Israel had provided the United States with intelligence about what is described as a fresh Iranian plot to assassinate Trump.

The developments follow renewed attacks on commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, where U.S. naval officials said the maritime threat remained “severe.” U.S. Naval Forces Central Command reminded commercial vessels Friday that an expanded southern route through the strait remained open and that no controlling authority could require ships to pay a fee for passage.

A U.S. official told Fox News on background that Iran’s attacks against commercial vessels were “acts of terrorism” and constituted failed performance under the memorandum of understanding between Washington and Tehran.

“The United States is still committed to finding a resolution, and technical talks continue,” the official said. “Iran can never possess a nuclear weapon.”

Advertisement

Brig. Gen. Yossi Kuperwasser, a former senior Israeli military intelligence officer who now heads the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, said Israel had never regarded the memorandum as an adequate guarantee.

“From Israel’s perspective, the MOU was never a good deal,” Kuperwasser told Fox News Digital, speaking of the memorandum of understanding between the U.S. and Iran. 

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

CENTCOM shared footage of strikes against airplanes amid Iran war (U.S. Central Command on X)

“Israel should be on high alert, ready to face an Iranian attack and prepared to strike back if necessary,” he added.

Advertisement

For now, Israel’s leaders appear to be leaving Iran — and Washington — with little doubt that they are prepared to act. Whether the United States allows Israel to join the renewed campaign, however, could determine whether the latest confrontation remains limited or develops into another full-scale regional war.

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for comment. 

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

Belgium to introduce new road tax in 2027, even for transiting drivers

Published

on

Belgium to introduce new road tax in 2027, even for transiting drivers

Published on Updated

Belgium’s three regions announced on Friday that they would introduce a road tax next year that foreign drivers transiting the country would also have to pay.

ADVERTISEMENT


ADVERTISEMENT

The country does not currently charge drivers to use its highways and the issue of introducing some form of payment has been debated for years.

Advertisement

“Everyone who uses our roads must contribute fairly to their maintenance,” said the transport minister for the southern Wallonia region, François Desquesnes.

Starting on 1 May 2027 drivers will need to register their vehicle and pay the road tax, with day passes available for drivers driving across the country.

An annual pass for a zero-emission car will cost €90 and up to €125 for higher polluting vehicles.

Road cameras that catch cars that haven’t paid for a pass will incur a fine of €70.

In Belgium, the individual regions are responsible for maintaining roads and motorways.

Advertisement

Currently, drivers can use almost all highways toll-free but the possibility of an introducing a charge has been under discussion for several years.

The revenue would be used for the operation and maintenance of the road network.

The proposed toll still needs final approval from the regions and European authorities.

According to the chairman of the liberal-conservative MR party, the government intends to offset the new toll by lowering other taxes for Belgians.

Advertisement

Additional sources • AFP

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending