Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Print All Articles

Is persecution around the corner?

by Fr. Alphonse de Valk Wed Mar 07 18:15 EST Comments (29)

 

TORONTO, March 7, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) - In Toronto’s Catholic Register (Jan. 2012), retired law professor Ian Hunter has expressed the view that Christian morality will never win against the Canadian Charter of Human Rights. Is the future really this bleak? Consider the following:

The opposition parties all approve the killing of the unborn. Some of them are concerned about seal pups but not about human babies.

The supposedly Conservative Prime Minister refuses to open the abortion debate in Canada. He says that he will not invoke section 33 (the Notwithstanding Clause of the Charter) to override hostile legislation. Canada has no abortion law, just as there is no abortion law in atheist China and North Korea.

The judiciary is no help. Activist judges will not recognize lobbying, petitions or referenda in favour of the unborn. Meanwhile since 2005 the Charter re-interpreted, tells us that same-sex relations are a universal right. The Charter does not recognize the rights of the unborn. The definition of a human being in the Criminal Code is 400 years old. It says that human life begins when the baby is fully separated from the mother. Science tells us that human life starts at conception (fertilization) but Canadian leaders do not give a hoot.

The media call abortion “an emotionally charged issue,” a “collision of values” and do not want anyone to ever open the box and see what is inside.

Professor Hunter’s arguments foreclose any future hope for a peaceful, democratic, human restoration in Canada of a Judean-Christian culture which treasures the dignity and integrity of every individual and protects it in fact as well as in theory. Have the atheists, the relativists, the secularists, who have substituted the libertine state for the principles of Christian civilization in the Western world won? For the time being, the answer appears yes.

A contemporary Catholic American writer, George Weigel, recently observed that “what began as a movement to liberate sexuality from the constraints of moral reason, custom, and law, has become a movement determined to use the instruments of law to impose its deconstruction of human sexuality and its moral relativism on all of society.” He continued: “That is what drives those who urged the Obama administration to issue its “contraceptive” mandate. Weigel added: “It is all about Leviathan as enforcer of the sexual revolution.”

In Canada too, the State, whether federal or provincial, is the Leviathan which cannot be stopped with some accommodation here or there, but must be beaten and defeated. “The sexual revolution distorts everything that gets in the way, and in due course, it will persecute anything that gets in its way” (See George Weigel, “The Libertine Police State,” National Review Online, Feb. 13, 2012).

Ottawa has now joined President Obama in using foreign policy to make the world safe for practitioners of the LGBTQ lifestyles.

The federal Minister of Justice, Catholic Rob Nicholson, immediately responded positively when the lawyer of two non-Canadian lesbians, who discovered they could not divorce because their Canadian same-sex marriage was not valid in their domicile, sent out a press release and was given publicity in the Toronto Globe and Mail. (”Feds move to close legal loophole threatening same-sex marriages,” Toronto Star, Feb. 18, 2012. See also Andrea Mrozak.

Under Harper management, the Canadian delegation at the United Nations has faithfully supported the pro-abortion policies of the ruling U.N. bureaucrats over the last seven years, including the current U.N. drive to declare abortion and homosexual relations as “universal rights.”

In Ontario Premier McGuinty uses his bloated Department of Education, together with his enlarged witch-hunting provincial Human Right Commission, to bully all parents, teachers and education officials into submitting to a new curriculum which makes the libertine sexual revolution the new ideology.

Quebec has gone further. In 2008, after the province abolished the Protestant and Catholic School boards, secular bureaucrats exacted their vengeance. Agnostics devised a religion course for Grades 1.12 where all faith beliefs, from Catholicism to vodooism, have equal status and are treated as equally true or false. Needless to say, the earlier freedom of choice was abolished by the doctrinaire secularists who immediately made their course mandatory for all schools and all students.

Canada’s Supreme Court, supremely secular in its own eyes and hostile to religious rights of any kind, ruled on February 17, 2012, that no religious freedoms had been impinged upon and denied the request for exemptions. Added Toronto’s Globe and Mail mockingly: “They (the parents) wanted to go back to a Quebec, and a Canada that no longer exists” (Editorial, “The raison d’etre of public schools,” Feb. 20, 2012).

Hard times are ahead for God’s faithful.

Fr. de Valk is the editor of Catholic Insight. This article is re-published with permission from the March 2012 edition of the magazine.

Tags: christian civilization, faith, harper, religion

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Gingrich urged to drop out to coalesce conservative vote behind Santorum

by Ben Johnson Wed Mar 07 16:35 EST Comments (6)

 
Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum

MANASSAS, VIRGINIA, March 7, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – A leading conservative activist is calling for former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich to bow out of the 2012 presidential campaign, so the anti-Romney vote can coalesce around Rick Santorum. 

“As Ohio proved, all that is lacking is a united conservative movement to put Santorum over the top,” said Richard Viguerie, who has been active in Republican politics for more than 50 years, in a statement e-mailed to LifeSiteNews.com.

“Looking at last night’s numbers, it has become increasingly clear that the former Speaker can either be a kingmaker or a spoiler, because, to unite conservatives, Gingrich would have to suspend his campaign and endorse Rick Santorum for the Republican nomination for president,” he said.

After prevailing in his must-win home state of Georgia, Gingrich failed to come in second place anywhere else, including the Southern states of Tennessee – where the state’s former U.S. Senator Fred Thompson campaigned for him – or Oklahoma. In five states, he came in fourth.

That spells trouble for the candidate who banked on his appeal to Southern voters.

The Santorum campaign itself has stopped short of asking Newt to drop out, but his supporters made the case today. The Red, White, and Blue Fund – the super PAC supporting Santorum – issued a statement saying, “With Gingrich exiting the race it would be a true head-to-head race and conservatives would be able to make a choice between a consistent conservative in Rick Santorum or Mitt Romney.” Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond replied the “same logic applies in reverse.”

Gingrich rebuffed such notions on Bill Bennett’s radio program this morning, stating Santorum is not a “slam dunk” to defeat Romney. His adviser, Vince Haley, told Laura Ingraham, on the contrary, Romney should drop out, so Republicans can choose between two more conservative candidates.

Former candidate Herman Cain, who has endorsed the Speaker, wrote on his Facebook page today, “Folks, only 1/3 of the delegates have been allotted! It’s too soon to call on a candidate to withdraw from the race!”

The back-and-forth between the campaigns following last night’s Super Tuesday results renews a series of charges and counter-charges that the two candidates are splitting the Republican Party’s conservative majority, paving the way for a moderate candidate. Centrist or liberal Republicans such as Gerald Ford, George H. W. Bush, Bob Dole, and John McCain have had dismal showings in the general election, because they failed to turn out their base.

The Romney campaign, meanwhile, insists its delegate lead is insurmountable. To be nominated, a candidate must win 1,144 delegates. Romney currently has 415. Santorum and Gingrich combined have 285.

Adding the Santorum and Gingrich vote totals together would have surpassed Romney’s vote in states like Michigan. That leads conservatives like Viguerie, who operates ConservativeHQ.com, to say someone must place principle above personal interests.

In January, Gingrich suggested both Santorum and Rick Perry drop out of the race to allow him to win the South Carolina primary. Santorum said it took “an enormous amount of hubris for someone who lost their first two races” to make the suggestion.

On ABC’s This Week program Newt said, “We’re down basically to the fewer conservative [candidates] there are, the better we’re doing.”

“The fact is, when you combine the Santorum vote and the Gingrich vote…the conservative combined would clearly beat Romney,” he said.

If an endorsement is worked out, it will have to address Santorum’s greatest deficit: money. Gingrich has three times the campaign funds in reserve as Santorum does. Romney has nearly ten times as much.

“Such a decision would not be easy for Newt and the loyal band of supporters and staff that have kept his campaign alive through its many ups and downs,” Viguerie told LifeSiteNews. “However, a united conservative movement is perhaps the only thing that can prevent a Romney nomination and the debacle of four more years of an Obama presidency.”

Tags: newt gingrich, richard viguerie, rick santorum

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Outspent four-to-one, Santorum scores wins in three states, Romney wins six

by Ben Johnson Wed Mar 07 16:18 EST Comments (1)

 

STEUBENVILLE, OHIO, March 7, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – Although three of the four Republican presidential candidates could claim victories in the Super Tuesday primaries Tuesday night, analysts say it has become a two-man race between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum.

Romney won the most delegates: 208 of 419 at stake in the 10 contests held last night. He narrowly edged out Rick Santorum in the biggest contest of the night, Ohio, a political bellwether pivotal to any Republican who hopes to win the White House. Romney also scored clear wins in the Massachusetts, Vermont, and Virginia primaries, as well as the Idaho and Alaska caucuses.

Rick Santorum fulfilled his promise to “get at least a couple of gold medals and a whole passel full of silver medals” by winning primaries in Oklahoma and Tennessee, and a caucus in North Dakota.

Santorum was pushed into third place only in Georgia and Vermont. Romney was first or second everywhere except North Dakota, where Ron Paul had a strong showing.

Newt Gingrich won his home state of Georgia, making it his second win of the primary season after his victory in South Carolina in January.

Ron Paul, who won no primaries last night, made a strong second place showing in Vermont. He also came in second in Virginia, where only Romney and Paul qualified for the ballot.

Ohio’s razor-thin margin and late reports from large metropolitan areas meant the race was called well after midnight. Romney won in Ohio by eight-tenths of one percent - 37.9 percent to Santorum’s 37.1, or just over 12,300 votes.

Amidst the close loss, Santorum’s supporters point to their candidate’s lack of funds. Romney’s campaign and his super PAC, Restore Our Future, outspent Santroum and his allied groups by a margin of 4-to-1 in Super Tuesday states. Santorum’s name did not appear on the ballot in certain parts of the state, such as Steubenville, a heavily Catholic, conservative city just minutes from Pennsylvania.

Exit polls showed a stark contrast between the two men’s constituencies.

Romney won urban voters in the state’s three largest cities: Columbus, Cleveland, and Cincinnati and their surrounding suburbs. He did well in Dayton, Akron, and Canton. Santorum swept the state everywhere else, piling up large majorities in the state’s rural districts.

Romney’s supporters, in Super Tuesday as in other contests, have been the best educated, the most affluent, and those whose top priorities are the economy or electability.

Ohio exit polls follow a familiar trend for Rick Santorum, showing he polled best among evangelical Christians, and those who said they support the Tea Party or consider themselves “very conservative.”

Mitt Romney won Ohio’s Catholic voters by 12 percentage points.

Click “like” if you want to end abortion!

The scattered results and fluid nature of the race keep any of the candidates from establishing themselves as prohibitive favorites. All vowed to fight on last night.

Speaking before his home state in a speech that lasted 27 minutes, Newt Gingrich reflected on previous Republican challengers, including Herman Cain, Michele Bachmann, and Rick Perry. “There’s lots of bunny rabbits that run through,” he said. “I’m the tortoise.”

He then challenged Barack Obama to seven, three-hour debates, offering that the president could use a teleprompter.

Flanked by his 93-year-old mother, Rick Santorum saluted the Greatest Generation in a speech in Steubenville, Ohio, before talking about his own resilience. “We’ve won races all over this country against the odds,” he said. “When they thought, ‘Oh, OK, he’s finally finished,’ we keep coming back.”

Taking note of growing government dependence, Santorum said once the president’s health care law takes effect, “every single American will be looking to the federal government – not to their neighbor, not to their church, not to their business or to their employer, or to the community or nonprofit organization in their community” as “the allocator and creator of rights in America.” 

“This is the beginning of the end of freedom in America,” he said.

Taking aim at Mitt Romney, he said, “I’ve never been for an individual mandate at a state or a federal level.”

Mitt Romney and his wife, Ann, spoke to an enthusiastic crowd in Boston, thanking state chairs and coordinators like Alaska’s U.S. Senator, Lisa Murkowski.

After thanking all his opponents by name, Mitt Romney turned his attention to the general election.

“President Obama seems to believe he’s unchecked by the Constitution,” Romney told the crowd. “He’s unresponsive to the will of our people. He operates by command instead of by consensus. In a second term, he’d be unrestrained by the demands of re-election. And if there’s one thing we cannot afford is four years of Barack Obama with no one to answer to.”

Over the next week the states of Kansas, Alabama, Mississippi, and Hawaii will choose their candidates for the GOP presidential nomination.

 

Tags: mitt romney, newt gingrich, rick santorum

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

How some kids with a van are changing the pro-life movement

by Kristen Walker Hatten Wed Mar 07 15:59 EST Comments (190)

 
David Pomerantz

March 7, 2012 (LiveActionNews.org) - On March 13, in Dallas, TX, an organization you’ve probably never heard of is going to revolutionize the pro-life movement.

It starts with a kid from Philly, a bus in New York, and an idea that brought him quite by accident to the city where Roe v. Wade started — the city where he hopes abortion will finally meet its match.

David Pomerantz, 23, does not look like a pro-lifer or a practicing Christian. He looks like a vegan hipster with emo hair. As a matter of fact, he sort of is a vegan hipster with emo hair. If you visit his loft apartment in an industrial section of downtown Dallas, he will offer you fermented tea with organic honey. You can lounge in a beanbag chair and talk about art while he surfs his Macbook and plays indie music and talks about Jesus.

A polite, friendly young man with a laconic kid-from-nowhere accent and a direct blue gaze, David Pomerantz — “Dave” to his friends — does not jibe with the stereotypical image of the angry activist holding signs outside a clinic. And he doesn’t mind, because that’s not the kind of pro-life activist Dave is.

He hails from Philadelphia, but he was attending Word of Life, a two-year Bible institute in New York, when he met Chris Slattery and Julie Beyel of EMC (Expectant Mother Care), a Manhattan pregnancy resource center. He was astonished to find that EMC had formulated a “new model” for approaching women outside abortion clinics.

EMC had a bus equipped with a sonogram machine. By approaching women outside the clinic with the offer of free help, with no mention of a pro-life ideology, they were able to see a staggering success rate. In fact, by their estimate, about 70% of women who got on the bus for a sonogram decided not to abort. In one day, they saw nine women decide on life for their children.

They did some simple math, and realized that if this success continued, 15 to 25 women a week, or about 800 a year, would choose life.

Click “like” if you want to end abortion!

Excited by the possibilities inherent in this new approach, Dave contacted his friend and mentor Joe Baker, who flew in from Philly to see the results firsthand. Equally impressed, the two began to ferment the idea that would become Save the Storks.

Dave was already planning on attending Southwestern Theological Seminary in Dallas, so he headed down south. With Joe Baker developing the art and marketing, and the generous help of Dallas-based organization Get Involved for Life and other private donors to bring to life a sleeker, smaller, more mobile ultrasound vehicle, they were off and running.

Save the Storks was born. Or, if you prefer, flown in through the window.

“We don’t want to intimidate anyone. We don’t want to force anyone. We just want to serve.” Dave is the Local Director for Save the Storks. Today, along with Daryl Harshbarger, Head Female Client Advocate, and Julie Beyel in town from New York, we are having pizza (some of it vegan) in Southeast Dallas. Dave is explaining to me why Save the Storks is a new kind of pro-life action.

“No one is offended by our activism,” he says. “We’re delivering a loving message in a strong way.”

Here’s what happens: a woman is walking up to an abortion clinic. She is approached by Dave or Daryl or another member of Save the Storks.

“Hi, how are you? Would you like a free ultrasound?”

This is the approach. There is no dangling rosary, no graphic pamphlet, no doom-and-gloom. Just an offer of free help from a non-threatening, friendly, smiling young person.

And then there is the Stork bus.

The stork was chosen as the mascot because of its comforting, unoffensive, nostalgic connection to motherhood and pregnancy. We can all remember old cartoons where a smiling stork would fly in a window and lay a swaddled baby in a crib.

What Dave and the others weren’t aware of until later is the text of Job 39:13-17.

The wings of the ostrich flap joyfully, but are her feathers and plumage like the stork’s?

She abandons her eggs on the ground and lets them be warmed in the sand.

She forgets that a foot may crush them or that some wild animal may trample them.

She treats her young harshly, as if they were not her own, with no fear that her labor may have been in vain.

For God has deprived her of wisdom; He has not endowed her with understanding.

This is the kind of thing that makes you whistle the Twilight Zone theme music.

The Stork bus, however, is free of all Old Testament references. It is a bright, lovely blue on the outside, and the inside is clean and free of clutter, with a welcoming but no-nonsense clinical feel. There is a little couch for the mother to sit on and speak to a counselor, and a padded bench where she can lie comfortably.

The ultrasound machine pulls out from underneath the bench. It is operated only by a licensed sonographer whose work is frequently reviewed by an OB/Gyn. In the back there is a small private toilet for pregnancy testing. It isn’t the slightest bit cramped or unpleasant; these mothers get only the best. The completed bus with the ultrasound machine was paid for by private donations to the tune of about $140,000.

The Stork bus is by no means the first mobile ultrasound vehicle — it was Chris Slattery’s mobile sonogram bus that inspired Dave and Joe in the first place — but it may be the smallest, lightest, and most practical. It doesn’t require a permit or special permission to park. It will fit in a parking space or even at a meter.

It is an abortion clinic’s worst nightmare.

So now this woman, who was going to go into an abortion clinic, is able to have a pregnancy test and a sonogram without ever reaching its doors.

But what happens now? She’s heard, “Yes, you’re pregnant! You’re this far along! There’s your baby! Here’s his heartbeat!”

So what does she hear next? “Good luck with that?”

Nope. Save the Storks is directly connected to Get Involved for Life and the two pregnancy centers it operates in Dallas, one uptown and one downtown. Also, needless to say, any expectant mother will be welcomed by whatever pregnancy center is closest to the bus at the time. The Stork team is prepared to call a cab for the mother if she needs a ride.

In other words, unlike the abortion clinic, the Storks and the pregnancy centers are in it for the long haul. They are going to get her what she needs to take care of herself and her baby, body and soul.

“The heart of this ministry is the Gospel,” says Dave, after asking for more vegan marinara sauce. “There are two causes every Christian should take up: orphans and widows. This encompasses both.”

It is part of Save the Storks’ mission that every woman who steps on the bus hears the Gospel message. While this may seem off-putting to some, to the Storks it is an essential aspect of caring for the mother that goes along with the physical support and counseling she will receive through the pregnancy center.

“She is just as important as that child,” says Dave. “We aim to improve her quality of life… The major issue here is the devaluation of life, and the answer to every injustice on earth is the church of Jesus Christ.”

“Our ministry is designed to meet all the needs of the woman,” says Daryl. At the pregnancy center, every mother will receive whatever her personal situation calls for, be it help with affordable medical care, legal aid to escape from an abusive boyfriend, life skills counseling, mental health counseling, spiritual guidance, and more.

Which of course begs the question: if the Storks’ mission is in fact successful and Dallas pregnancy centers see 800 or so more mothers every year, how will they handle the added demand for resources?

The answer is simply: us.

“The churches need to stand up and start giving to their local pregnancy centers,” says Dave.

Without the generous help of good-hearted people giving what they can, pregnancy centers can’t work, and by extension neither can the Storks.

Abortion clinic workers and management are used to seeing protesters outside their clinic. What they are not used to is a name brand.

The Save the Storks bus is slick, recognizable, welcoming, and — horror of horrors — it sits in between a mother and the abortion clinic doors. With a simple offer of no-strings-attached help — “Would you like a free ultrasound?” — and a bright, comforting image, it appeals to the desperate woman before she reaches the clinic.

She is not confronted. She is offered help. And while I firmly believe that virtually all sidewalk counselors and activists outside clinic are there for no other reason than to help women, the Storks are able to present help first. That is the key. The average clinic sidewalk approach is, of necessity, “Please don’t kill your baby. Here’s why. And here’s help.” Because they have their awesome bus, Save the Storks are able to say, “Here’s help. Now please don’t kill your baby. Here’s why.”

Because they don’t have to lead with agenda, there are no warning bells for a desperate and defensive mother. There is only a friendly face.

This new model will absolutely revolutionize the front lines of pro-life activism.

What is the battle cry of the pro-abortion movement? “Choice!” It is their mantra. What do you constantly hear from abortion advocates? “These desperate women feel like they are out of options.”

Right here, on four wheels, parked in front of the clinic, is another choice — one they might not even know they have. Inside that bus is an image of their baby waiting to be seen. Connected to that bus is a support system — in short, options.

Dave and the team have high hopes, and they should. The approach is breathtakingly simple and, if early tests are any indication, profoundly effective.

As mentioned, the Storks take to the streets of Dallas on March 13. Meanwhile their website is up and running at SaveTheStorks.com with the purpose of raising money to take the program national. A Save the Storks bus is not cheap, and it takes people to run it. While Dave and his team get things off the ground in Dallas, Joe is in charge of building a national movement.

The thought of a Stork bus in every major city in America should bring a smile to your face. Every one of these buses represents hundreds of lives saved every year.

I have met Dave and the gang. I have been on board the Stork bus. And I have never been more excited about a pro-life idea than I am about this one.

You probably are having the same reaction I did. You are probably thinking: “What can I do to help?”

First: spread the word. Use Facebook, Twitter, Twitbook, whatever, to share with people how awesome this is.

Second: go to SaveTheStorks.com now and volunteer. They need all kinds of stuff — bloggers, artists, counselors, you name it — all across the country to be part of their national team of Save the Storks volunteers. Whatever your talent is, Save the Storks can probably use it to help get Stork programs off and running across the country. You — yes, you! — can be a part of this movement from the ground up.

Third: donate if you can. Save your Starbucks money for a few days and buy a ridiculously cool Save the Storks T-shirt. Wear it and tell people about it. (I promise they’ll be curious.)

In just a few days, Dave, Daryl, and their remarkable bus hit the streets of Dallas, the city where abortion rights were born. As a native Dallasite, I hope what started here is ended here. And I wouldn’t be surprised if Save the Storks becomes a major factor in helping Dallas — and the country — see an end to abortion.

(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

Kristen Walker is a writer and comedian who makes people mad on the Internet. She is Vice President of New Wave Feminists and enjoys taxidermy, yachting, and 19th century French poetry. Stalk her relentlessly for fun and profit. Reprinted with permission from LiveActionNews.org

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

‘Perfect storm’ is brewing to reopen abortion debate in Canada

by Thaddeus Baklinski Wed Mar 07 15:34 EST Comments (20)

 

TORONTO, March 7, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his federal government can no longer refuse to re-open the abortion debate in the face of a “perfect storm” of events in the past six months, says Jim Hughes, president of Campaign Life Coalition.

“The abortion debate is coming. Society has moved past the Prime Minister. While he may be content to say, ‘Let the babies die!,’ Canadian society is not,” Hughes declares in a newly released video.

“While Harper may say, ‘It’s no concern of mine,’ Canadians are increasingly asking, ‘Don’t we have a duty to protect innocent lives?’”

Click “like” if you want to end abortion!

Hughes says that “rising attendance at the annual March For Life indicates that the tide is turning towards pro-life,” but also points to three recent events that “have created a perfect storm,” waking up many Canadians to the fact that abortion choice is about killing children.

The first was an Alberta judge’s September 2011 decision to hand down a lenient sentence in the case of a mother who killed her newborn child, citing society’s acceptance of abortion as the reason.

“The judge explained her reason for letting her go by arguing that since Canada accepts abortion, it shows Canadians sympathize with the mother. That raised many an eyebrow,” says Hughes.

The second event is a campaign begun in December 2011, by Conservative MP Steve Woodworth to bring awareness to Canadians that Canada has no laws whatsoever regulating abortion, and that the only Canadian statute on the books defining when human life begins is over 400 years old.

Woodworth filed an historic motion in February to establish a special committee to consider when human life begins.

“The campaign initiated by MP Stephen Woodworth in December focused attention on the fact that Canadian law defines some human beings as non-human,” Hughes states. “Specifically, he called out the absurdity of Section 223 of the Criminal Code, which is based on outdated science from the middle ages, essentially stating that a child in the womb ‘magically’ becomes a human being only once she has completely exited from the birth canal.”

“When he pointed out that the law considers the child non-human, if even her little toe still remains in the birth canal, it struck a chord with many Canadians,” said Hughes.

“The third event, and really the kicker,” Hughes states, “was a January editorial published in the Canadian Medical Association’s journal. It called for an end to the abhorrent practice of sex-selection abortion.

“The stark realization that baby girls were being targeted for destruction prior to birth, brought home the reality to many Canadians that we’re not talking about a blob of tissue. Indeed we’re talking about killing baby girls via lethal abortion, simply because they’re girls.”

Hughes observes that the three elements of this “perfect storm” reinforce one another, and have helped many Canadians realize that abortion should be re-examined.

In conclusion Hughes invites Prime Minister Harper to “have an adult conversation [about abortion] based on science” because “‘Let the babies die’ is no longer a response that will satisfy Canadians.”

The Campaign Life Coalition President’s Message video titled, “The perfect storm - changing abortion attitudes in Canada” is available on the CLC website.

 

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Obama brings daughters into flap over Limbaugh’s contraception remarks

by Kathleen Gilbert Wed Mar 07 15:21 EST Comments (0)

 

WASHINGTON, March 7, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - President Obama told reporters Tuesday that he gave personal support to Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown University Law Center student who was vaulted to stardom after advocating for the birth control mandate, because the affair caused him to think of his daughters.

“I thought about Malia and Sasha. And one of the things I want them … to be able to do is speak their minds in a civil and thoughtful way, and I don’t want them attacked or called horrible names when they’re being good citizens,” said Obama, as reported by The Hill. “And I wanted Sandra to know that I thought her parents should be proud of her.”

Fluke, the 30-year-old co-president of Georgetown’s Law Students for Reproductive Justice, submitted testimony to Congress last month in favor of forcing virtually all U.S. employers, including her own Jesuit-run Catholic school, to cover contraception. Fluke said that her classmates have “faced financial, emotional, and medical burdens as a result” of the lack of birth control coverage.

(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

Radio pundit Rush Limbaugh became embroiled in controversy for calling Fluke a “slut” on his show and saying her demand that “she must be paid to have sex…makes her a prostitute.” Limbaugh later apologized for his remarks, saying in a statement that he “acted too much like the leftists who despise me.”

In response to a question about Limbaugh’s apology, Obama declined direct comment but said, “What I can comment on is the fact that all decent folks can agree that the remarks that were made don’t have any place in the public discourse. “

Despite Limbaugh’s apology, the media firestorm has not abated, with Fluke brushing off the apology in an appearance on ABC’s “The View,” while media highlighted several advertisers who ended their relationship with Limbaugh. In remarks Tuesday, Limbaugh blasted the president’s double-standard for failing to chastise similar remarks made on the Left.

“Remember Labor Day 2011 ... James Hoffa Jr. at an event with Obama on the Tea Party, James Hoffa Jr. told the union to, quote, ‘Take these sons-of-bi**hes out,’ unquote,” said Limbaugh. “Mr. Civility didn’t say a word about it, Mr. Obama said not a word about it, laughed about it, in fact, didn’t he?”

Other conservatives, including House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), criticized the Democratic party for launching a fundraising push in response to Limbaugh’s comments. Erick Erickson of RedState called the Left’s response to the controversy “an organized campaign by the left to shut down opposing views from the right.”

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

U.S. Out of my uterus! But first: buy me stuff for my uterus!

by Kristen Walker Hatten Wed Mar 07 13:39 EST Comments (112)

 
Sandra Fluke

March 7, 2012 (LiveActionNews.org) - I worry about my health a lot. Not because I’m unhealthy, but because I’m a hypochondriac. I don’t imagine symptoms, but when I do have symptoms, I became immediately and irrevocably convinced that they are cancer. Thanks, WebMD!

Most recently, back in October, I found a tiny red welt on my right breast. WebMD told me that I almost definitely had inflammatory breast cancer–a particularly aggressive strain. I called my boyfriend in the middle of the night and made him talk to me until the sun came up, so scared I was shaking all over. I thought of nothing but my imaginary cancer for three full days, until the red spot went away. My friend Destiny texted me regularly to ask how my cancer was doing. She and my mom and my boyfriend found my terror hilarious, but I don’t think they realized its depth.

I was completely sure that I had inflammatory breast cancer. I was even starting to cope with my imminent diagnosis.

It is not my intention to make light of breast cancer. To the contrary. I have nothing but sympathy and respect for people who struggle with real cancer. I was in a state of abject misery over my imaginary cancer, so I can’t even imagine what it must be like when it’s not imaginary.

In any case, this is a pattern with me. I have been sure I was having a stroke about a dozen times in my life, when it turns out I was just really tired. I’ve had imaginary heart attacks, blood clots, pulmonary embolisms, and tumors.

I’ve finally broken myself of this bad habit of faux health crises with the simple solution of no longer googling my symptoms, and staying away from WebMD.

But you can imagine my relief when I discovered that someone has recently come into the public eye who also suffers from the embarrassing condition of imaginary health problems.

Sandra Fluke, the suddenly famous (or infamous, depending on who you talk to) Georgetown law student who publicly lamented the lack of free contraceptives available to women on campus, also seems to have created a health care crisis out of nothing.

Click “like” if you want to end abortion!

Just like the tiny red spot on my chest was not inflammatory breast cancer, Fluke’s lack of freebies is not a health care issue. It is nothing. She could get birth control pills or condoms for cheap or free at lots of different places: Planned Parenthood, other women’s clinics, publicly funded health clinics, regular old doctor’s offices, etc.

She doesn’t want free or cheap contraception from anywhere, though. She wants free or cheap contraception provided by a Catholic university. It’s not about access. It’s about forcing Catholics to do what she thinks they should do. She’s been in the news for days now talking about the tragedy of turning “women’s health” into a “political football,” when she is doing exactly that.

For all their fuming that we want to intrude into their sex lives, they sure are inviting us in, aren’t they? “U.S. out of my uterus! Oh, except, buy me stuff for my uterus!”

Funny story. Stop me if you’ve heard it. It’s last Thursday, and Congress is holding a hearing on the HHS contraception mandate in Obamacare. (You may have heard a whisper or two about this issue). They want an unknown Goergetown co-ed to testify, but they turn in her name too late to undergo the standard vetting period. So, Pelosi and the gang set up a press conference and stage it to look like a Congressional hearing.

That’s right, friends! Fluke was not testifying at a hearing. It was a press conference.

The whole thing is a big giant lie, just like my mosquito bite that wasn’t breast cancer. Sandra Fluke and the women of Georgetown University have more birth control options than “any woman in history,” as The Daily Caller aptly puts it. There are dozens of ways in which they can get pills and condoms for little or nothing.

Then, there is the insane idea of not having sex at all, but who does that? Freaks and ugly people, that’s who! (Oh, and me. Insert joke about Kristen being an ugly freak in comments below.)

Here’s the bottom line: no one is waging war on women’s health care. Birth control pills are not health care. They don’t cure diseases. (In fact, some believe they cause them.) Many non-Catholic Christians (and some cafeteria Catholics, although far fewer than the media would have you believe) have no problem with oral contraception and IUDs whatsoever, despite my incessant hollering that they are awful.

Guess what, gals? Rick Santorum is not hiding in your garage waiting for you to go to sleep so he can take the little pink compact out of your purse and leave a tiny Bible in its place. That is the political rhetoric of a media that is asleep at the wheel, and if you’re buying it, you’re asleep in the passenger seat.

I think birth control pills and IUDs are horrible, but I’m not a politician. I can say that, and I don’t care what you think about it because I don’t need your vote. Last time I checked, the GOP doesn’t listen to me, so rest easy. Your pills are not going anywhere, ladies. You can still engage in all the recreational sex your little hearts desire.

What you can’t do is expect me — or anyone else — to pay for it.

Reprinted with permission from Live Action News.

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Vatican website taken down by pro-abortion hackers

by Patrick B. Craine Wed Mar 07 12:57 EST Comments (35)

Update: The Vatican website was back up and running at about 7 p.m. Wednesday

ROME, Italy, March 7, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Hackers claiming ties to the high profile group Anonymous are taking credit after the Vatican website went down Wednesday, claiming they are going after the “corrupt” Catholic Church over the clergy sex abuse scandal as well as its stances against abortion and contraception.

“Anonymous decided today to besiege your site in response to the doctrine, to the liturgies, to the absurd and anachronistic concepts that your for-profit organization spreads around the world,” the hackers wrote in Italian.

“This attack is not against the Christian religion or the faithful around the world but against the corrupt Roman Apostolic Church,” it added.

The statement also includes a laundry list of other complaints going back centuries, including Catholics’ involvement in burning books and executing heretics during the Inquisition.

Anonymous hackers had failed in an attempt to take down the Vatican’s website in August.

The Vatican has not confirmed the involvement of hackers in Wednesday’s crash, merely stating that it was due to a “technical problem.”

On Tuesday, five alleged hackers purportedly associated with Anonymous were arrested in Britain, Ireland, and the United States after an Anonymous leader shared information with the FBI.

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Healing after years of pain: post-abortive parents find peace

by Shawn Carney, 40 Days for Life Campaign Director Wed Mar 07 11:35 EST Comments (5)

 
Shawn Carney

March 7, 2012 (40DaysforLife.com) - When I was 19 years old, I heard five courageous women give testimonies about how their abortions hurt them. Their testimonies had a huge impact on me then — and they still do today.

Abortion brings emotional and spiritual suffering that can last for years — decades, even. Through 40 Days for Life campaigns, we are hearing about many people who are seeking Christ’s healing after abortion.

LANCASTER, PENNSYLVANIA

“She was a beautiful woman with large dark eyes that spoke of deep hurt,” Abigail said of the woman who approached her at the 40 Days for Life vigil. “She had been forced to have an abortion and, though it was more than 20 years ago, she had never received help or healing for the pain and void it left in her heart and body.”

Abigail assured the woman that in Christ, she could find peace. “It’s beautiful to watch a woman take the first step to healing by breaking the silence and shame of abortion and asking for help,” she said. “Praise God!”

Click “like” if you want to end abortion!

But that’s not the whole story. The woman told Abigail that she had become pregnant again and at the time was being coerced into a second abortion. “But she knew she couldn’t go through with it.”

She pointed to a young man and said, “That is my son” — the child she did not abort. With him was his infant daughter — her grandchild, who would have never been born if she’d had the second abortion.

“God continues to meet both the physical and spiritual needs of His people,” Abigail said. “This is what HE is doing in YOU when you sign up for a prayer slot!”

HOUSTON, TEXAS

A volunteer tells of a man who went to pray at the 40 Days for Life vigil. He shared a story with this volunteer about something that had happened in his life many years ago. His girlfriend had become pregnant — and he’d paid for the abortion.

“He had kept his secret for years — until this very day, when God called him to pray,” the volunteer said. The man prayed at the vigil for several hours.

“Thanks be to God for the mercy and love he shows us through his forgiveness,” the volunteer said. “The grief this man poured out from his soul will always be in my heart.”

HAYWARD, CALIFORNIA

A volunteer offered a “precious feet” pin to a woman who was leaving Planned Parenthood. Her hands were shaking, but she took it, asking what it was.

When the volunteer explained it’s what a baby’s feet look like at 10 weeks into pregnancy, the woman began to cry.

She has five children, she explained. But she’d also had an abortion and still suffers emotionally. Yet here she was at Planned Parenthood, pondering another abortion.

Volunteers went into action. One offered information about pro-life pregnancy and post-abortion resources, while another assured the woman that choosing life for her baby was God’s will.

“Later that day, she arrived at the pregnancy resource center and got the help she needed,” said Lori in Hayward. “We are humbled by the many blessings God has given us this day. We pray God will continue to give us the grace to accomplish all He expects of us.”

Here’s the link to today’s devotional.

 

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Actor Kirk Cameron won’t back down, calls homosexuality ‘unnatural’ and destructive to civilization

by Matthew Cullinan Hoffman Wed Mar 07 10:34 EST Comments (185)

 

March 7, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Actor Kirk Cameron is holding his ground after an interview on CNN’s Piers Morgan Tonight in which he squarely defended Christian belief regarding homosexual behavior.

During the March 2 interview, Morgan asked Cameron if he regards homosexuality as a sin. Cameron answered that “it’s unnatural” and added that “I think that it is detrimental, and ultimately destructive to so many of the foundations of civilization.”

After Morgan claimed he would tell his homosexual child: “That’s great, son, as long as you’re happy,” Cameron replied: “I wouldn’t say ‘That’s great, son, as long as you’re happy.’ I’m going to say, There are all sorts of issues we need to wrestle through in our life. Just because you feel one way doesn’t mean we should act on everything we feel.”

Click “like” if you want to defend true marriage.

Although Morgan claims to be a Catholic, he is openly supportive of the homosexual political agenda, which is in opposition to Catholic doctrine.

Following an outcry from homosexualist groups and their allies in the major media, Cameron stood his ground.

“I spoke as honestly as I could, but some people believe my responses were not loving toward those in the gay community,” he told ABC News in an emailed statement. “That is not true. I can assuredly say that it’s my life’s mission to love all people.”

“I should be able to express moral views on social issues, especially those that have been the underpinning of Western civilization for 2,000 years—without being slandered, accused of hate speech, and told from those who preach ‘tolerance’ that I need to either bend my beliefs to their moral standards or be silent when I’m in the public square,” he added.

Cameron’s comments reflect the Bible’s firm denunciations of homosexual activity, which can be found in most religions and societies. In the New Testament, in the first chapter of the Letter of Paul to the Romans, the Bible calls homosexual behavior “against nature” and “filthy.”

Cameron on abortion

 

The former star of the 1980s sitcom “Growing Pains” also raised liberal eyebrows by condemning abortion in no uncertain terms, referring to it as “murdering a little child.”

“I think it’s wrong under any circumstances,” he told Morgan, adding that “I think that someone who is ultimately willing to murder a child, even to fix another tragic and devastating situation, like rape or incest or things like that, is not taking the moral high ground. I think we’re compounding the problem by also murdering a little child.”

“Could you honestly look a daughter in the eye if she was raped and say you’ve got to have that child?” asked Morgan, who claimed surprise when Cameron replied “yes of course.”

“I find it amazing that people would say that,” Morgan responded.

“Oh but because I love my daughter, I love that little child,” said Cameron. “This is a little creature made in God’s image.  Perhaps imagine if you were the result of that, and you had been aborted, we wouldn’t be here having this conversation. And so I value life above all things.”

Fellow actors chime in

Two former Growing Pains co-stars joined numerous other Hollywood personalities to tweet their dissent from Cameron’s Christian morality. 

Former co-star Tracey Gold, who played Cameron’s sister on the show, tweeted: “I am a strong supporter of the #LGBT Community, and I believe in equal rights for all. #NOH8 #LOVE.” 

Alan Thicke, who played Cameron’s father, tweeted: “I’m getting him some new books. The Old Testament simply can’t be expected to explain everything” and later “I love Kirk but I may have to spank him…‘tho not in a gay way!”

Stephen Baldwin stood out as the only actor reported to have supported Cameron, tweeting: “GREAT JOB Kirk !!! Let’s pray one day Piers Morgan finds true Salvation, God Bless!”

Morgan himself, interviewed by celebrity gossip site TMZ, said that he thought Cameron was “pretty brave” to express his views on the subject, but added that “many would call it an antiquated view about many of these issues” and that he found Cameron’s answer on not agreeing to an abortion for his daughter if she had conceived by rape “very strange.”

 

Tags: abortion, faith, homosexuality, kirk cameron

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

GLAAD to be totalitarian

by Patrick B. Craine Wed Mar 07 09:25 EST Comments (8)

 

March 7, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Kirk Cameron is an evangelical Christian who has carved a niche for himself as an actor in faith-based productions like Fireproof.  These films are both entertaining and meaningful, with a rich spiritual and unapologetic Christian message that is, frankly, not only evanescent in Hollywood today but virtually extinct.

This week on CNN’s Piers Morgan Tonight Cameron dared to say that he thought homosexuality was “unnatural” and that marriage should be limited to the legal bond of a man and a woman, to the exclusion of all same-sex unions.

“Marriage is almost as old as dirt, and it was defined in the garden between Adam and Eve. One man, one woman for life till death do you part. So I would never attempt to try to redefine marriage. And I don’t think anyone else should either,” Cameron said.

The remarks engendered a swift counterattack by the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), which apparently is unaware that Cameron has continued to work as an actor and producer since he was a featured player on the sitcom Growing Pains.  Said GLAAD’s senior director of programs Herndon Graddick, “In this interview, Kirk Cameron sounds even more dated than his 1980s TV character.  Cameron is out of step with a growing majority of Americans, particularly people of faith who believe that their gay and lesbian brothers and sisters should be loved and accepted based on their character and not condemned because of their sexual orientation.”

OK, so you would not expect an organization that is actively pushing the gay agenda to either ignore Cameron’s comments or even to agree to disagree.  Cameron said nothing about not loving gays and lesbians, but for GLAAD, anyone not of the fervent conviction that homosexuality is as natural as the rain falling is trapped in a medieval mindset and hopelessly out of step with progressive thought.

But does being “out of date” have anything to do with being right or wrong on an issue?  For that matter, one could say that the current trend towards acceptance and promotion of homosexual behaviour is in itself a throwback to the attitudes and opinions of ancient pagan civilizations where same-sex couplings were not only an acceptable part of sexual expression but embedded in religious rites.

The demands of GLAAD and other similarly focussed groups that Christians accept homosexual activity may well be a rooted in the approval of that distant coupling of sex and religion, in a desire to have organized religion today sanction that behaviour just as it was in the distant past by pagan cultures.  GLAAD desires a return to a religious conformity that might well be described as strangely nostalgic.

The “people of faith” that Graddick describes as accepting any sexual orientation must surely belong, as far as Biblically-based Christianity is concerned, to any apostate church that flatly rejects the clear moral dictates that may be found in preponderance in both the Old and New Testaments.  Furthermore, since “sexual orientation” is a term that can describe anything, and therefore ultimately means nothing, do we really believe that any sexual urge may be satiated, that any sexual calling must be applauded, that any sexual – dare we say – perversion is permissible?

Clearly we have reached a new level in society’s attitudes towards homosexuality.  The yardstick of political correctness has subtly but undeniably been stretched from tolerance to acceptance to promotion – and now it is insistence, insistence that religious opinion and “people of faith” accept the homosexual lifestyle without question, without remorse, without further comments—especially to networks like CNN.  At least no one – yet – is suggesting that Cameron should not be allowed to work in films because his opinions are too odious and corrosive for public viewing.

This insistence is profoundly totalitarian in scope and intent while being completely at odds with basic democratic freedoms – in particular a certain freedom which we used to have called freedom of religion.  No one can demand that people think in a certain way or that the only acceptable “people of faith” are the ones who won’t disagree or “condemn” your lifestyle choices.

It is inspiring for some to enjoy the philosophical concurrence of an insouciant religious establishment, to never have one’s moral assumptions or lifestyle choices questioned.  It is also the spiritual environment described by St. Paul in I Timothy 3:1 when “some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits…”

David Krayden is the executive director of the Canadian Centre for Policy Studies, an independent, not-for-profit institution dedicated to the advancement of freedom and prosperity through the development and promotion of good public policy.

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Justice Scalia tells young Catholics not to fear scorn for their beliefs

by Ben Johnson Wed Mar 07 08:56 EST Comments (11)

 

DENVER, COLORADO, March 7, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – The longest-serving member of the Supreme Court, Antonin Scalia, encouraged a packed gathering of Roman Catholics not to yield to criticism of their faith.  His message was a comfort and encouragement particularly to life and family activists who feel the sting of public scorn on the front lines of the culture war.

Scalia told the 500 participants in Denver’s Living the Catholic Faith Conference scoffers may ridicule their belief in the transcendent, their recitation of the rosary, or their devotion to the pope. But Christianity is worth the scorn.

Have “the courage to have your wisdom regarded as stupidity,” Justice Scalia said. “The wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight.”

(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

Scalia’s message is one that would be taken to heart by the young, celibate activists who travel with TFP Student Action. The young men travel the nation’s college campuses affirming traditional morality, opposing abortion and “homosexuality,” and spreading devotion to St. Michael the Archangel and the Virgin Mary.

About 10 members protested on the campus of the University of Michigan on Tuesday.

Belittling comments are frequent one of the college-aged activists, Zachariah, told LifeSiteNews.com.

Another, Charles, said passersby – some of whom insist they are Catholics – use foul language or demeaning stereotypes.

On rare occasion, someone becomes physically violent.

“The biggest issues are God and moral absolutes,” Charles told LifeSiteNews. “Most people believe in relativism.”

“The world is dark,” Zachariah said. “It needs the Catholic Church.”

Tags: antonin scalia, culture war, tfp

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Barack Obama had a transgendered nanny in Indonesia

by Ben Johnson Wed Mar 07 08:15 EST Comments (36)

 

JAKARTA, INDONESIA, March 7, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – As a young child in Indonesia, Barack Obama’s nanny was a transgender “woman” who walked around his home in female clothing and let the future president see him trying on lipstick. 

In 1969, “Evie” – who was born a man with the name Turdi – worked as a cook when he met Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham. (Turdi/Evie, like many Indonesians, goes only by one name.) Dunham had moved to the nation’s capital of Jakarta to live with her second husband, Lolo Soetoro.

For two years, Turdi watched “Barry”, as Obama was called, and his younger half-sister, Maya Soetoro, at their home in Jakarta’s Menteng neighborhood.

Turdi was well-known in the area. The New York Times described the nanny as “an openly gay man who, in keeping with Indonesia’s relaxed attitudes toward homosexuality, carried on an affair with a local butcher.” Turdi later danced in the streets as part of a group of transvestites called the “Fantastic Dolls.”

Rudy Yara, who still lives across the street from Obama’s childhood home, says Turdi “was a nice person and was always patient and caring in keeping young Barry.” The Associated Press reports, “Neighbors recalled that they often saw Evie leave the house in the evening fully made up and dressed in drag.”

“I never let [Barack] see me wearing women’s clothes,” Turdi insisted. “But he did see me trying on his mother’s lipstick sometimes. That used to really crack him up.”

After Turdi found a transgender friend badly beaten in 1985, he gave away his makeup and dresses and has lived outwardly as a man, attending mosque five times a day. The AP reported Turdi/”Evie,” who quit school in the third grade, “now lives in a closet-sized hovel” and scrubs laundry for food. He still self-identifies as a woman.

“It’s a story you couldn’t make up,” Americans for Truth President Peter LaBarbera told LifeSiteNews.com. “Trying to discover who the real Obama is like peeling an onion, and the more you peel away, the more bizarre it is.”

“Now we know there is yet another person with an aberrant, disordered lifestyle in young Barack Obama’s life. We knew about Frank Marshall Davis before,” he said, “a Communist and a perverted man.”

The Associated Press reported the White House had no comment about the president’s onetime caretaker.

Can that childhood association explain Barack Obama’s promotion of the transgender political agenda, a cause he did not mention during the 2008 campaign?

“There’s no way of knowing what his [Turdi’s] interaction was with Obama,” LaBarbera said, but “I think it’s safe to say that when you’re exposed to radical and aberrant and disordered influences as a young man, you’re open to more radical agendas and outlooks later in life.”

“It helps form a radical outlook on life, which Obama certainly has,” LaBarbera stated.

(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

President Obama has held the first-ever White House conference on transgender issues in April 2011. He made the first transgender presidential appointment, naming “Amanda” Simpson to a post in the Commerce Department.

Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis updated the department’s harassment policy in 2011 to ban “contractors at every level” from engaging in any behavior that may cause “offense” on the basis of “gender identity.” And the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) passed a rule requiring landlords who accept Section 8 to rent their homes to transgender tenants. HUD announced, although the Fair Housing Act “does not specifically cover sexual orientation- or gender identity-based discrimination, it may still cover them in other ways. For example, gender-identity discrimination may be seen as sex discrimination.” 

Under new rules published in 2011, immigration officials must provide “hormone therapy” to transgender illegal immigrants facing deportation.

“The transgender agenda is the Brave New World, even within the larger LGBTQ agenda,” LaBarbera told LifeSiteNews.

“I certainly think Obama, much more so than anyone he’s ever going to run against, will mainstream this deviance with the power he has in the federal government,” he said.

Homosexual activists have increased their promotion of transgender issues since the 2008 election, including lobbying for inclusion of sex-change operations under the health care reform law.

LaBarbera says if Obama wins a second term, “look for the transgenders to be very active.”

“They’ll lay low now,” he said. “After the election is when you’ll see the action.”

Tags: peter labarbera, transgender, turdievie

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Murder charges dropped against two abortionists

by John Jalsevac Wed Mar 07 05:33 EST Comments (5)

 
Steven Chase Brigham and Nicola Riley

Elkton, MD, March 7, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Maryland State Prosecutor Ellis Rollins yesterday dismissed criminal murder charges against abortionist Steven Chase Brigham of New Jersey and his associate, Nicola I. Riley of Utah.

Rollins indicated in a press release that investigators could not be sure the unborn babies, who were aborted post-viability, were killed in Maryland, leaving the state’s jurisdiction in the case unclear.

Brigham’s practice was to start illegal late-term abortions at his office in New Jersey, then caravan the laboring women to Elkton, Maryland where the abortions would be completed.

“We know what the doctors did, we just don’t know where they did it,” said Rollins in his statement.

Brigham was charged with five counts of First-Degree Murder and Riley with one count of First-Degree Murder for their alleged roles in the abortions. Their illegal practice was exposed after a botched abortion at the clandestine Elkton abortion clinic alerted authorities to their bi-state late-term abortion ring.

Click “like” if you want to end abortion!

Brigham’s lawyer C. Thomas Brown celebrated the decision to drop the murder charges. “We’ve always contended Dr. Brigham hasn’t violated any Maryland laws,” Brown said.

Prosecutors pursued the murder charges based on a fetal homicide law which allows a person to be charged with murder if they kill an unborn baby in the course of committing another crime. This was reportedly the first time an abortionist has ever been charged under such a law, which are usually employed in cases where the unborn child is killed in the process of a violent assault on the mother.

Police investigators discovered the bodies of 35 late-term babies stored in a freezer inside the Elkton clinic. Brigham is not licensed to practice in Maryland, and Riley was apparently on her second day of late-term abortion training when she perforated the woman’s uterus and pulled out her bowel. The patient required emergency surgery to save her life.

Pro-life leader Troy Newman of Operation Rescue and Pro-Life Nation called on Attorney Rollins to reinstate the murder charges “for the sake of justice and for the safety of the community.”

“The State simply cannot let these abortionists get away with the murder.”

Early news reports indicated that the babies were likely killed in New Jersey, prior to the women being transported to Maryland for the completion of the abortion. However, according to Operation Rescue, records obtained by the pro-life organization indicated that at least one of the babies was alive at the time of the abortion in Maryland, giving Maryland jurisdiction over the murder.

Rollins indicated that the investigation into Brigham and Riley’s abortion practices in Maryland will continue. Disciplinary actions in three states to revoke Brigham and/or Riley’s medical licenses continue to proceed.

Tags: abortion, nicola riley, operation rescue, steven brigham

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

The lessons of the Bishop Lahey scandal

by John-Henry Westen Tue Mar 06 22:10 EST Comments (29)

 

March 6, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The internationally-reported child porn possession case of Bishop Raymond Lahey of Antigonish, Nova Scotia is indeed a sad one for the Catholic Church.  Yet from it, many valuable lessons can and should be learned, not only for the benefit of the Church, but also for the building of a culture of life.

Bishop Lahey was caught with child porn on his computer at the airport in 2009. Of the 155,000 pornographic images on the computer, 588 photos and 63 videos depicted young boys in sexual acts.  Lahey was sentenced this past January 4th to eighteen months in prison, but was released right after the trial since he was given two-for-one credit for the 8 months in jail he had already served.

Lahey told the court that he was a homosexual and had been in a steady homosexual relationship for 10 years. He hoped, he said, to return to this relationship after prison.

One of the first lessons to glean from this sad story is the need for effective action by fellow clergy when they have knowledge of grave scandalous actions by their brother priests or even their bishops.  How many of his fellow clergy, his brother bishops, his close friends and colleagues knew of Bishop Lahey’s dark secret - not only the porn addiction, but also his homosexual relationships and his repeated trips to Thailand, widely known as a major destination for those wanting to engage in pedophile adult/child sex?

It defies reason to conclude that none of Lahey’s fellow clerics, and even brother bishops, knew that there were sexual problems. There were likely more than a few who were aware that something was seriously amiss for a number of years.

In fact, Bishop Lahey’s problem with pornography, and other clerics having been advised of it, dated back more than 20 years.  A few short years after Lahey was ordained auxiliary bishop of the Diocese of St. George, Newfoundland, a sexual abuse victim found pornography at Lahey’s house and reported it to a priest.  In 1989 Shane Earle told Fr. Kevin Malloy of his find. Malloy reported it to then Archbishop Alphonsus Penney, but the trail ends there. 

Since pornography is not illegal the police were not involved.

This brings us to the matter of sexual impropriety on the part of major church leaders in general.  For practical purposes limiting this article to the leadership of the Catholic Church, let us assess some of the major damage that has occurred as various bishops lived out their elevated role in the Church while at the same time living lives steeped in sexual scandal.

The occurrence of these sexual scandals is not nearly as rare as it should be - that is, they should never occur.  Just a few months ago, Los Angeles auxiliary Bishop Gabino Zavala resigned after admitting to fathering two children who are now teenagers.  LifeSiteNews readers will recall Bishop Zavala for his address in 2009 when, as the head of the U.S. Bishops’ Conference communications committee, he expressed grave concern about Catholic blogs.

“We are particularly concerned about blogs that engage in attacks and hurtful, judgmental language,” he said. “We are very troubled by blogs and other elements of media that assume the role of Magisterium and judge others in the Church. Such actions shatter the communion of the Church that we hold so precious.”

It appears that the bishop may have been more discomforted about his inability to control the uncompromising fidelity and whistleblower revelations published on the Catholic blogs than he was about the uncharitable discussions that occasionally occur on some of them.


Devastation of the Faith

The quintessential example of the damage that can be caused by a bishop living a double life was that of Milwaukee Archbishop Rembert Weakland.  Throughout his 25 years as a powerful bishop in the United States he created havoc for faithful Catholics. In 2009, he admitted in an autobiography that he was an active homosexual.

At the time, Michael Rose, author of Goodbye, Good Men, which chronicled how faithful Catholic men had been turned away from seminaries, said Weakland’s revelation was not surprising at all.

“What is most disappointing,” Rose told LifeSiteNews at the time, “is that his sexual perversions and obsessions colored the way he led the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, turning it during his long tenure there into a bastion of liberalism that encouraged dissent from the teachings of the Church on sexual issues and a host of others. Gay ministry and radical feminism were welcome while orthodoxy was maligned.”

In addition to a false liberal vision of the Church, Archbishop Weakland supported and failed to discipline dissident left-leaning clergy who distorted the faith. One such Catholic leader, Daniel Maguire, was a tenured professor at the Jesuit Catholic Marquette University in Milwaukee and is renowned for his effort to show that the Catholic faith justifies abortion.

During his episcopal career, Weakland held a variety of key positions in the US hierarchy, including chairman of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops’ ad hoc Committee on Catholic Social Teaching and the U.S. Economy. As a liturgical expert and musician, he was a leading figure in the US Church’s ruling liberal elite that worked to suppress traditional forms of music and liturgy.

Another example of such devastation was the case of Springfield Illinois Bishop Daniel Ryan. When Bishop Ryan was accused of homosexual sexual misconduct he at first vehemently denied the charges, but a Church investigation revealed that many of the accusations were accurate.

In Bishop Ryan’s diocese a prominent abortionist was employed by the local Catholic hospital as chief OB/GYN while carrying on his abortion practice at his abortion mill across the street. For four years Angela and Daniel Michael, pro-life activists and parents of 11 children, urged Bishop Ryan to put an end to the scandal to no avail.

Bishop Lahey himself was reported in 1992 to have attended with all the priests of his diocese Enneagram lectures.  (a New-Age practice condemned by the Church )

In South Africa the auxiliary Bishop of Cape Town was an active homosexual.  In his diocese Dignity Masses celebrating homosexuality went on unchallenged.  A group called Roman Catholic Faithful found evidence exposing Bishop Reginald Cawcutt as participating in a homosexual sex website.  In addition to nude and graphic photos of the Bishop, his foul rants against Pope John-Paul II and then-Cardinal Ratzinger were also revealed. However, only two years later, in 2002, when an expose on the findings was run in the media, did the Bishop resign.

All of these situations were likely known by others for years, but no one took strong action to put a halt to the scandals and the resulting harm to individuals and the faith in the respective dioceses.


Blackmail

An additional sinister danger compounding the problem of bishops involved in sexual scandal is the potential for blackmail.

Weakland’s case exemplifies the scenario. In 2002, the Vatican quickly accepted his resignation after it came to light that he had made a $450,000 payoff, from diocesan coffers, to former Marquette University theology student, Paul Marcoux who had accused Weakland of sexual assault. It was later revealed that Marcoux and Weakland had engaged in a mutually consensual homosexual relationship ended by Weakland in 1980.

Blackmail was also suspected in the 2005 resignation of Argentine Bishop Juan Carlos Maccarone.  The then-Bishop of Santiago del Estero was forced to resign after a video was sold showing the Bishop in sexual activity with a 23-year-old man - Alfredo Serrano.

In another case the Bishop of Minas in Uruguay, Francisco Domingo Barbosa Da Silveira, was forced to resign in July 2009 after facing extortion by two men who filmed their sexual interactions with the bishop.


Culture of fear

One of the major road-blocks to having such scandals avoided and put to a swift end is the culture of fear created by these scandalous clergy and Bishops.  Bullying and other strong-arm tactics are often employed in cowing faithful, orthodox clergy, and even fellow bishops into silence. This has actually been rather common, as LifeSiteNews has learned to its dismay over the years.

The 2006 investigative report issued by his own former Diocese of Springfield noted that Bishop Daniel Ryan had “engaged in improper sexual conduct and used his office to conceal his activities.” He had fostered “a culture of secrecy ... that discouraged faithful priests from coming forward with information about misconduct.”

But there is more than fear which dissuades faithful priests and bishops from exposing the scandal or their brother clergy.  A misguided sense of personal loyalty, false charity, and an all-too-convenient rationalization that avoiding needed corrective action is in fact a way of guarding the faith, often come into play.

As we have seen over and over again regarding the numerous cases of grave and ongoing sexual scandal, these sentiments are terribly misguided and in fact accomplish the opposite of what they propose. 

Obviously when such abuses are dealt with, charity is extended to the victims of abuse.  But beyond this, it is true friendship and charity not only to the Church, but also to the offender, to expose him to the proper authorities in order that the offender may be relieved of his duties.

Bishops and other clergy involved in such scandal do themselves and the faith much harm in living double lives. In exposing the scandal and having the offender relieved of his duties, the courageous and determined whistleblower performs an act of charity for his brother clergy. The offender is enabled to seek the forgiveness and help which he needs to overcome his addictions and live out his life (and afterlife) in peace. 

Our Lord Himself warned of the seriousness of religious leaders leading the faithful astray.  “It is impossible that scandals should not come: but woe to him through whom they come,” He said.  “It were better for him, that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should scandalize one of these little ones.” (Lk 17:1-2)

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Environmentalists claim contraception, Agenda 21 will end global warming

by Ben Johnson Tue Mar 06 19:49 EST Comments (14)

 

WASHINGTON, D.C., March 6, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com)—While President Barack Obama and Kathleen Sebelius claim contraceptives can lower health care costs, influential environmentalist activists say birth control may save the world from the scourge of global warming. At a think tank conference last week, activists promoted Agenda 21 and United Nations climate change meetings, claiming that promotion of lower fertility rates “trumps almost anything else” and that the average 14-year-old girl “needs to know how to have” sex “for her pleasure.”

The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars held the hearing, “Women’s Health: Key to Climate Adaptation Strategies” last Tuesday.  Participants asked, “Can family planning and reproductive health be recognized as a legitimate climate adaptation method?”

Kavita Ramdas, the executive director for the Program on Social Entrepreneurship at Stanford University, cited two recent studies funded by the Hewlett Foundation claiming “that empowering women to time their pregnancies would reduce carbon emissions significantly, providing 8-15 percent of the reductions necessary to avoid dangerous climate change.”

But Ramdas, who serves on the board of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, said global population control had fallen on hard times in the current political environment. “Not a single person in the presidential primaries for the Republican position of president is willing to even get behind contraception, much less get behind the notion of any discussion of population,” she said.

This resistance to abortion and contraception at home hindered international attempts to craft “a thoughtful and active strategy around making contraception available to communities around the globe.”

She said, “If we are in the situation in the United States where the Catholic bishops and others, actually a large number of evangelicals, truly believe that somehow [policies] – not forcing somebody who doesn’t believe it to take birth control – but simply paying for it is somehow a moral travesty with the kind of outrage we’ve seen over the last few weeks, we are not going to be in a position to make sure that that kind of provision exists internationally.”

Developments in the American political scene proved, in her estimation, that “you can’t discuss…access to contraception…without feeling that you somehow will get pulled into a discussion, debate, argument, around abortion.” She stated environmentalists “will be quickly slammed” with an allegation that “this is about population control,” a belief she says is “not completely without justification.”

However, she promptly raised that subject by praising President Bill Clinton for repealing the Mexico City policy, which she referred to as the “Global Gag Rule.” The ban, instituted by President Ronald Reagan, barred U.S. funds from promoting abortion abroad. “Why have we gotten to a point in 2012 where we even have to have that discussion?” she asked.

Myron Ebell, director of the Center for Energy and the Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) told LifeSiteNews.com that the “more radical elements” of “the global warming movement have been concentrating on population for a long time.”

He recalled two of the early environmentalist groups were Zero Population Growth and Negative Population Growth. Neither one became a mass movement, lacking popular appeal.

“I think that the environmental movement, if you polled the leadership and the staff of the various organizations, most of them would believe the world needs very serious population control,” he said. “It’s a logical part of the movement. Human beings are a blight on the planet, so the fewer human beings the better.”

Despite the long linkage of environmentalism and population control, it remains little known in the mainstream media. “The global warming alarmist camp has tried to keep this argument under wraps,” Ebell said, “because they don’t want to antagonize even more people than they’ve already antagonized with their policies.”

Ramdas proved unafraid of a backlash, complaining that the American view that young teenagers are unprepared for sex undermines international efforts to teach sex education.

“A sexually active 14-year-old or 16-year-old as any of you who have teenage children can attest to, is full of her own sexuality,” she said.

A young teen “is not just some innocent waiting to be raped” but “has sexual feelings, has sexual desires, is interested in sex, wants to have it, and needs to know how to have it in ways that are good for her health, for her pleasure, and to understand that that sexuality is as true for young men of her age,” she said. “This is not something we want to discuss, so sex education is also off the table.”

The American Life League recently released two videos detailing the graphic heterosexual and homosexual material sex ed classes often teach the vulnerable.

Other participants at the Wilson Center had a more expansive international agenda in mind. Daniel Schensul, a technical specialist with the United Nations Population Fund, said, “Agenda 21 has an elaborate understanding of reproductive health and how it contributes to [destroying the] environment.” His presentation notes state, “Agenda 21 covered” reproductive health “in depth.”

He hoped the ties between population growth and global warming will be discussed at the upcoming United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, being held in Rio de Janerio on June 20-22. As the summit will take place on the 20th anniversary of an earlier UN climate change summit in Rio, it is referred to as “Rio+20.”

Ebell said the final agenda of the new Rio conference remains unknown to outsiders, although there have been hints it will focus on economic issues.

“The European Union has publicly called for the creation of a new World Environmental Agency” to replace the UN Environmental Program (UNEP), Ebell told LifeSiteNews.com. This, they hope, will be funded by the Tobin tax, a miniscule tax levied on every international financial transaction.

“They may be trying to slip that in at Rio,” Ebell said, in order to “redistribute more money form the developing world to the underdeveloped world.”

Although international delegates and bureaucrats hold to a consensus, other scholars question the depth of global warming and the notion that reducing population is a positive policy solution.

The 2011 report Climate Change Reconsidered, produced by the Heartland Institute, states the rates of global warming from 1860-1880, 1910-1940, and 1975-1998, and 1975-2009, “are similar and not statistically significantly different from each other.”

Many climate scientists, such as Scienze Czar John Holdren, have called for “de-development” the West, believing more prosperous nations cause more ecological damage. But primitive practices such as clear-cutting rainforests were more damaging than newer, greener technologies, Ebell said.

Ebell told LifeSiteNews reducing worldwide population also proved counterproductive. “My view is that people are a net plus, we need more of them. They’re not just consumers,” he said. “Human beings are naturally problem solvers, and if we have environmental problems, people will be able to solve them.”

Despite calls to implement a robust agenda, the event’s final speaker, Kathleen Mogelgaard, a consultant with the Wilson Center’s Environmental Change and Security Program, admitted more studies were “needed to more fully legitimize these linkages” between population growth and environmental demise.

Only two of 47 National Adaptation Programs of Action (NAPAs) for the least developed countries produced by Population Action International in 2009 proposed family planning measures and neither project has been funded.

Very little of the evidence cited by the population foes has appeared in peer-reviewed journals, she acknowledged. While one study exists claiming open access to contraceptives creates “more resilient societies,” reproductive research “doesn’t necessarily respond to a specific climate change threat.”

Mogelgaard said the movement’s financial resources, often financed by taxpayer dollars, would allow them to continue to attempt to forge links between population reduction and global well-being/

“There is a proliferation of funds for climate change adaptation,” Mogelgaard said, observing that the world’s developed countries had dedicated $30 billion to climate change studies from 2010-2012. “That is supposed to ramp up to the neighborhood of $100 billion by the year 2020,” she said.

Despite movements to further regulate the economy in the name of preserving the atmosphere, some scholars who work outside governmental institutions offer a different solution to heal the environment.

Ebell told LifeSiteNews.com his former boss, the late U.S. Senator Malcolm Wallop of Wyoming, used to note the ecological degradation of the former Soviet bloc, observing that the biggest polluters also scored low on rankings of economic freedom.

“The answer to our environmental problems is to keep getting wealthier and try to maintain as free an economy as we can,” Ebell told LifeSiteNews, “because it’s when you give people incentives to improve things, to change things, that you get environmental as well as economic progress. Wealth and free markets are the cornerstone of environmental protection and progress.”

But he understood the motivation of those concerned with holding down the growth of the human population. “I think ultimately they’re right that if you think global warming is an imminent crisis facing mankind and the planet, then you should probably be supporting population control of some kind or another, whether it’s voluntary through handing out free contraceptives and abortions or whether it’s mandatory like they’ve got in China.”

Tags: kavita ramdas, united nations

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

Franklin Graham would ‘break the law’: takes aim at HHS mandate

by Ben Johnson Tue Mar 06 19:25 EST Comments (21)

 

BOONE, NORTH CAROLINA, March 6, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – Franklin Graham has said if the government passes an edict forcing him to hire employees who do not share his Christian outlook, he will “break the law.”

In an interview with NewsMax senior editor David Patten in February, Graham said, “What I’m concerned about as a faith-based organization is that I’m going to be forced to hire people that are not of my faith, or don’t have the same values that I have.”

Graham worried the parachurch organizations with which he is affiliated, Samaritan’s Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, will someday be compelled to hire people who do not share their faith.

“Frankly, I think every Christian out there should be concerned that we will be forced to bring people into our organizations, and put them on our payrolls, when we know that they are opposed to everything that we stand for and believe,” he added.

“I guess at that point, I would just have to break the law and take it all the way to the Supreme Court and fight it if I have to.”

Graham voiced his concern over the HHS mandate to provide contraception and abortion-inducing drugs to the employees of religious organizations. “I don’t believe the compromise is a true compromise,” he said. “You’re still paying for it, but it’s going to be paid for now through the insurance carrier, who is then going to charge you.”

He worried forcing Catholics to pay for contraception was the beginning of a larger effort to suppress religious liberties in the name of fighting “discrimination.”

“We take very little government money, and I’m happy to give all of it back,” he said. “But even though we’re privately funded I believe the government’s going to mandate – they’re heading in that direction – where we don’t be able to discriminate in our hiring practices.”

His charity, Samaritan’s Purse, delivers eight million gifts to underprivileged children each year at Christmastime. Despite the fact that it is headed by the son of the world’s most famous evangelist, it does not qualify for a religious exemption under the Obama administration’s rules.

“We’re not a church. We’re a parachurch organization,” he explained. The Obama administration’s conscience clause protects only churches and other houses of worship.

(Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

Graham joins many of his Protestant brethren in urging defiance of unjust, anti-Christian measures.

Dr. Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC), told LifeSiteNews.com last month, “We will not comply with” the HHS mandate. “We want the law changed, or else we’re going to write our letters from the Nashville jail, just like Dr. King wrote his from the Birmingham jail.”

Dr. Albert Mohler, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, said in January, “We’re going to find out in coming months” how many evangelical pastors and leaders “are willing to go to jail rather than to comply with this.”

Megachurch pastor Rick Warren asked on his Twitter feed, “I’d go to jail rather than cave in to a government mandate that violates what God commands us to do. Would you?”

Attempts to reach Franklin Graham’s scheduler were unsuccessful.

 

Tags: franklin graham

Print Article  |  Email Friend  |  Back to Top | View Story on LifeSiteNews.com

back to top