Another Sign of the Times? 'Planned Companionhood' Advocates for Pet Abortions

June 02, 2017

WRITER

No matter what bombshell report or undercover video surfaces, Planned Parenthood never takes the hit and they just keep trucking along. Try this mental exercise out for a second --- would the left be just as praiseworthy of a group that facilitated pet abortions?

Doc Thompson filled in for Glenn on radio Friday and had an interesting interview with a caller named Rich Pronsky who is starting a business called Planned Companionhood.

"You know, you're still going to have cats and dogs who get pregnant," Rich said. "You know, they have one too many at the kitty bar or whatever, and they wind up with this litter of babies that they might not want. And I believe --- I assume everybody does, the pets have the right to choose. It's their furry bodies, it's their choice."

Just who is this monster you might ask? Rich happens to be none other than former Blaze personality and comedian, Brian Sack. Don't worry animal lovers, Planned Companionhood is not coming to a dog park near you --- you can bark easy.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

DOC: Hi, there it's Doc Thompson in for Glenn today. Thank you so much for joining me. Joined also by my fellow morning Blaze Brad Staggs and Kris Cruz along with Kal. We're regularly heard on the Blaze radio network. Weekday morning 6:00 to 9:00 a.m. Eastern time just go TheBlaze.com/Doc to find out more about us. We talk a lot about businesses and entrepreneurship, I think that's really the backbone of America. Capitalism and free market. And the more we can teach people that and support businesses, it's going to be better for all of us. So we often give people free airtime. We just say come and promote your business. The listeners get to hear about great stories of entrepreneurial and great products. So if you have a business that you want to discuss, just tweet ought at any time with the #BuildingAmerica. #BuildingAmerica, and we go through from time to time and we'll reach out to you saying, hey, we have an opening. We're usually backlogged a few weeks or so. Obviously a lot of people are interested.

BRAD: Free advertising? Backlog?

DOC: Yeah, imagine that. If you're interested, you can go back and search.

KRIS: And it's interesting you say we will go through me. That we is one person.

DOC: Yeah, by "we" I mean Kris. So we spotlight those. Sometimes their businesses have been around for a while, sometimes startup businesses. We have one of those startup business that is trying to get crowd sourcing trying to get started. It's an interesting startup. Rich is joining us from Planned Companionhood. Rich, How are you doing, buddy?

CALLER: Hi, how are you, Doc?

DOC: Doing well, sir. Give me the basic concept of what your business is.

CALLER: Sure. First, thank you for having me on. This is a great platform for me. I'm very excited. I had this idea that came to me the other night, and I did what pretty much all of my friends on Facebook have done. I started a GoFundMe to kind of raise money for this concept. It's Planned Companionhood and what I want to establish is a series of clinics across the United States that provide health services for pets.

DOC: Okay. That's --

KRIS: That's pretty smart.

DOC: How does that differ from any of the veterinarian services or health services out there?

CALLER: You're right. I don't have a degree in veterinarianism. I'm trying to get one from a prest I cannot online university. It's taking some time. I will have it. But in the meantime, we offer services very similar. We spay and neuter cats and dogs, mostly. And something I thought of I thought was very clever. We're going to offer mammal grams. So they're like a pet mammogram. And, again, I don't have the degree in veterinarianism, so you take the cat booby or whatever the medical term is. And you have the glass plates and see if there are any troubles. Also, we're going to offer pet pregnancy counseling to cats and dogs just to kind of guide -- what to expect when you're expecting kind of thing.

BRAD: To the owners of the pets; right? I mean, you're offering counseling to the owners of the pets.

CALLER: Oh, that's interesting. That's interesting. You know, that's not a bad idea. We include the owners. Bring the owners in.

DOC: Yeah, they could be a part of that. I can see that. So you're doing a lot of reproductive health as part of this clinic; is that right.

CALLER: Absolutely. We're going to offer contraceptives. We have kitty condoms, doggy diaphragms, and the IUD, which I understand is for intrauterine because that's -- I tried it out on him, and he seemed to, you know, not take to it. But we'll see. Maybe it works on other dogs. I don't know.

DOC: Interesting. Interesting. Yeah.

CALLER: And we're going to offer of course pregnancy termination.

DOC: So you can spade and neuter before, but you're also going to terminate pregnancies as well for pets?

CALLER: Well, you know, you kind of have to because even though you make these efforts and try to control pet overpopulation or whatever and get the message out there. But, you know, you're still going to have cats and dogs who get pregnant. You know, they have one too many at the kitty bar or whatever, and they wind up with this litter of babies that they might not want. And I believe -- I assume everybody does, the pets have the right to choose. It's their furry bodies, it's their choice.

DOC: So kitty and doggy abortions is what you're saying.

CALLER: Well, I don't like to use that word so I call it termination.

DOC: Okay. Uh-huh. So if they -- this is -- wow that's kind of new. I hadn't heard that. We always hear spade and neuter your pets. Control pet overpopulation. Spade and neuter.

CALLER: That's where I think Planned Companionhood is different.

DOC: Okay. Is pet overpopulation still that big of an issue where we would have to get to the point where you're aborting -- I'm sorry terminating the kitties and puppies? Is it that big of a --

CALLER: You have orphan pets all over the place and the adoption process for pets can take sometimes minutes to hours to get, you know? These pets and that might be a handful.

KRIS: Kris Cruz here. I just have a question for you. You say you posted this on Facebook. Have you gotten any backlash from, you know, the people who are against puppies abortion or any kind of abortion?

CALLER: Well, honestly, what is the red face mean?

DOC: Oh, the emoji? I don't think that's a good one for you.

CALLER: I haven't looked into it. We have a lot of those, but I can feel the energy shortly after we posted it. But I've really been devoting my morning especially to just kind of coming up with my ideas.

DOC: Kind of formulating them.

BRAD: What about counseling? With this counseling, is there going to be alternatives discussed? I mean --

CALLER: You know, we've -- it's more, you know, more like counseling like scheduling the pregnancy termination. Like, what day works better for you? Would a Friday be better? Do you want to come in on a weekend? Monday after work. Like, what -- we're going to work about -- it's about accommodating the people. The kitties or the doggies.

BRAD: I would think somebody would be willing to take the puppies the kids were born and somebody would be able to take them and adopt them.

CALLER: Yeah, I don't know. It just seems to me, you know, you want to give the pet the right to just say, you know, I want this or I don't want this. Get it out of here, you know? Because honestly, and, again, I don't have a degree in veterinarianism, and I will soon from a prest I cannot and accredited online university. But from what I know, it's just a clump of cells in there until they're born. And --

DOC: So you're saying because of these animals are pregnant, we've got to control overpopulation that it's better to go ahead and just abort them, the doggies and kitties, rather than just have people come by and adopt them?

CALLER: Yeah, because, you know, when a kitty cat or doggy gets knocked up for whatever reason, and they forgot to practice whatever and things happen, and then they get pregnant, you don't want to burden that kitty cat or doggy with puppies and kitties meowing and things.

DOC: Okay. I imagine there's going to be some people -- we're talking with Rich Pronsky from Planned Companionhood or what he hopes will become a series of clinics.

CALLER: Right now, we have raised $34.17.

KRIS: What's your goal?

CALLER: We need at least 250 million.

KRIS: Okay. And that covers.

CALLER: That covers the whole country plus give myself a decent salary.

KRIS: So that covers all the clinics or just one clinic with multiple doctors? I mean not doctors, veterinarians with veterinarianism certification, or is it just you performing all of these procedures?

CALLER: No. No. There will be all scattered all over the country and, you know, people are going to come in, they're going to come in on a leisure, they're going to come in however they want to come in, and we're going to help them.

DOC: So I have to think there's going to be some people who don't like the idea of dog abortions or cat abortions.

CALLER: I did run into a few of those on the sidewalk. Yeah.

DOC: What is your response to them where they're saying, hey, that's a life, and you're killing the little doggies and puppies? What do you say to those people?

CALLER: They made an argument, yes, this is an adorable puppy. How could you do that to an adorable puppy. Like, look at this little puppy right here how cute is she? And I was rubbing her. And I understand what they're saying. But then again, you know, if you have a cat or a dog that has a bunch of puppies or kitties inside, you know? Why not encourage them to kill them?

BRAD: Cost. Let's talk about cost. Is this going to -- you're going to obviously charge people -- the owners, I'm assuming are going to end up paying for these terminations.

CALLER: Preferably the taxpayer would. I'm going to see what I can do about that. But we have gotten some grants from the USDA, which I assume is the United States dog association. I don't really know.

KRIS: We know that Bob Hope; right? He was --

DOC: No, Bob Barker.

KRIS: Bob Barker.

BRAD: Bob Hope's dead.

KRIS: Have you tried to reach out to any celebrities? Because this is something they might want to get involved with.

DOC: Yeah, Drew Carey took over for barker.

CALLER: I haven't thought about that. But if you could recommend that, that would be great. You need that celebrity to help kind of sell your -- you know like when Sean Penn helps sell Venezuela and Hugo Ch·vez, you want someone like that and deliver that message who says take this. It's great.

DOC: So animals come in, and they're already pregnant, and you're saying we're going to go ahead and abort the kitties and puppies.

CALLER: If you don't, they're going to run out and have a back alley pet abortion.

KRIS: Or they're going to go to Mexico and have a abortion, which is dangerous.

BRAD: And then they have the slut term.

DOC: I didn't realize back alley pet abortions were a thing. But what would be the problem with that -- why is that a concern of yours --

CALLER: Because I haven't been in a back alley in a long time. Long story, and it ended poorly. But, you know, I assume that these things are going on in back alleys all the time if we don't establish these clinics.

DOC: So you establish a fee. But is that per kitty or doggy aborted? Or is that per service.

KRIS: Terminated.

DOC: Because, you know, sometimes it could be three or five, and you don't know. So the dog comes in, and you go it's going to be certain fee. But then it ends up being six puppies.

CALLER: Right. We call that jackpot.

DOC: Oh, for you?

CALLER: That's when you go, like, yes. And you do that gesture with your hand, and you go "yes" because that means you're going to make extra money. If you're expecting three, and you got six, that's bonus time.

BRAD: So there is some profit to be had on that backside? That makes sense from a profit standpoint.

DOC: We've heard this forever. Control pet population. How come you still have so many pets getting pregnant like this is for years -- have them spade and neutered, and we still have a pet overpopulation problem. How come we still have it then?

CALLER: A very, very good question. Basically pets in the U.S. are not getting quality sex education. And if you think about it, you know, most cats are locked up in a house like a Saudi wife. And dogs, they're literally kept on a very short leash and, you know, when you see people walking their dogs, you don't see them giving them education in sex, talking about the birds and bees. You just see them letting them pee all over the place.

DOC: And that would be a good opportunity right there, I would think --

CALLER: You get to -- yes, instead of getting down and picking up the pooh-pooh, you get down there, and you say, you know, if the dog's name is Rover, you go Rover, let's get a little awkward now and talk about things.

DOC: I mean, I'm not a fan of abortion. We're talking with rich from Planned Companionhood. I don't like abortion, but I can imagine you getting backlash online from this.

CALLER: Yeah, it does seem to be growing.

BRAD: You can take that awkward moment when your dog is humping your leg to --

DOC: This is a teachable moment.

KRIS: Are you going to lead with pet puppy termination? Or are you just going to be, like, hey, we provide all of this other stuff? Or are you just going to lead with the pet terminations?

CALLER: Well, I think like any business, you're going to go where the profit center is; right? Now, once again, I don't have a degree in business, but I am working on one from a prestigious online university, but I know when I run my business, and I'll just tell you right now we're up to $34.82. When I do run my business, I'm going to go where the profit is.

DOC: Rich, interesting concept. We wish you the best in your business.

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Glenn's Show Prep