All articles from February 27, 2017


Hollywood, LGBTQ activists in la-la land after pro-gay ‘Moonlight’ wins Best Picture

The writers of the 'gay'-celebrated movie took the opportunity to make political statements at the Academy Awards on Sunday night.
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 4:31 pm EST
Featured Image
"Moonlight' director Barry Jenkins CNN screenshot
Peter LaBarbera Peter LaBarbera Follow Peter
By Peter LaBarbera

February 27, 2017 (LifeSiteNews)Moonlight, a low-budget, “gay” coming-of-age movie about a poor, bullied, black boy with a drug-addicted mother, surprisingly won Best Picture at the Academy Awards on Sunday night, giving homosexual activists a propaganda victory as well.

In addition to winning Best Picture, after a mistake in which La La Land was first announced as the winner, Moonlight won for Best Supporting Actor (Mahershala Ali) and Best Writing Adapted Screenplay (Tarell Alvin McCraney and Barry Jenkins).

In accepting the award, both Jenkins and McCraney got political: “All you people who feel like there’s no mirror for you, the Academy has your back, the ACLU has your back, we have your back, and for the next four years, we will not forget you,” Jenkins said, in what Variety described as his addressing the alleged “rollback of civil rights by the Trump administration.”

McCraney said, “This goes out to all those black and brown boys and girls and non-gender conforming who don’t see themselves, we’re trying to show you and us.”

The LGBTQ media-pressure group GLAAD describes Moonlight as following “a young man named Chiron living in a rough neighborhood of Miami in three acts from childhood to teen years to adulthood. Over this time, Chiron struggles with his own sexual identity, the concept of masculinity, and his feelings for his friend Kevin, all set against a challenging home life and bullying at school.”

GLAAD, which enjoys a special relationship with Hollywood elites as the benefactor of the industry’s far-left politics, stressed the importance of Moonlight being the “first LGBTQ ‘Best Picture,” according to the Los Angeles Times.

“This sends a strong message to the film industry that is needs to embrace inclusive stories if it wants to remain competitive and relevant,” tweeted Sarah Kate Ellis, GLAAD’s CEO.

Moonlight was inspired by the play, In Moonlight Black Boys Look Blue, by McCraney, who is homosexual.

In the film, the main character, Chiron, is pictured first as a young boy, then as a teenager, and finally as a young adult. In the teenager section, Chiron kisses his best friend, Kevin, who performs a sexual act on him.  

Last year, GLAAD “found that 4.8 percent (43) of the characters expected to appear on prime-time scripted broadcast TV will be LGBTQ, a record in the 21 years it has been tracking such numbers,” reported The Guardian. That’s out of proportion with their numbers in society, which is around two percent (for gays, lesbians and bisexuals) of the population, according to a large federal study.

Strangely, GLAAD itself crusades against the ex-“gay” movement and does not include former homosexuals in its “inclusion” formula. To the contrary, GLAAD and other homosexual activist groups are crusading for laws that explicitly ban ex-“gay” (pro-heterosexual) therapy for minors.

In contrast to the liberal plaudits, Charlene Cothran, a former lesbian and an African American, said the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences’ honoring of Moonlight is “yet another attack on the black family and the black church.”

Cothran, who runs The Evidence Ministry, based in Florida, told LifeSiteNews that for decades homosexual activists have targeted the biblical values that most black Christians hold dear, with a particular focus on changing Blacks’ views on homosexuality and same-sex “marriage.”

A “Plugged In” review of Moonlight by the Christian pro-family organization Focus on the Family described it as a “well-made movie with an obvious agenda.”

“Chiron, the film suggests, suffered mightily due to his sexual inclinations. Thus, the movie says, Chiron's life would've been so much better had his world been more accepting,” says the review. “Christians who hold the Bible as the Word of God, of course, can't go where the movie would like to push us. We can't applaud where Chiron goes.” 

Moonlight, as mesmerizing as the movie is, isn't just filled with problematic content: It gives us a message counter to what we believe God tells us,” it continues.

  academy awards, african americans, best picture, glaad, hollywood, homosexuality, moonlight, oscar


Poland takes steps to restrict abortion pill; but pro-life advocates want it completely banned

Since 2015, EllaOne has been available to girls age 15 and older.
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 3:42 pm EST
Featured Image
Natalia Dueholm Natalia Dueholm
By Natalia Dueholm

WARSAW, Poland, February 27, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — Poland wants to make the so-called emergency contraception ellaOne available by prescription only, but the Right to Life Foundation criticized the Minister of Health for not completely banning the abortifacient drug.

The Polish government under the Law and Justice party has begun drafting legislation to regulate hormonal contraceptives, which are available in pharmacies by prescription only. EllaOne is included among them.

In 2015, the Minister of Health from the then-governing Civic Platform had made ellaOne available without prescription. His administrative decision followed the recommendation of the European Medicines Agency to permit the sale of this product without prescription.

The conditions of sale differ among European Union countries, with Germany requiring a prescription and Malta banning the drug.

Since 2015, the Polish regulation has allowed for the sale of ellaOne to girls 15 years and older. However, in practice, without the need for a prescription, the age limit was difficult, if not impossible to enforce. The current Minister of Health decided to make a correction.

EllaOne is produced by the French company HRA Pharma. In the United States, its brand name is ella, marketed by Actavis Generics (formerly known as Watson Pharmaceuticals and Actavis, plc).

Each tablet of ellaOne contains 30 mg of ulipristal acetate. Its manufacturer describes it as the “morning-after pill that can prevent a pregnancy after unprotected sex.” As the HRA Pharma website states, it is “most effective when used as soon as possible and within 24 hours after unprotected sex.”

In response to some criticism toward the change of the policy, Minister of Health Konstanty Radziwiłł told media that Poland requires a prescription for contraceptives, so why not for ellaOne?

“What’s more,” he added, “kids could buy it.”

Calling the situation “unacceptable,” he explained that a “potent medicine” should be available by prescription only.

“This move is to bring normalcy, and not to ban this type of products,” he said.

The Right to Life Foundation did not appreciate the minister’s phrasing. The organization wrote a petition addressed to him in which they criticized his use of the word “normalcy” while speaking about ellaOne. Pro-lifers also pointed out that some of “his statements are untrue and misleading,” specifically those calling the drug “medicine.”

“It confuses women,” said Kinga Małecka-Prybyło of the Right to Life Foundation. “Pregnancy is not a disease, and an abortive pill is not medicine. EllaOne does not cure any disease. It can cause serious health problems and bring death to an unborn child.”

Mariusz Dzierżawski of the Right to Life Foundation commented that the sale of ellaOne violates Polish law. Abortion is generally illegal in Poland, allowed only in some circumstances.

“EllaOne and other drugs of this sort should be completely banned in Poland,” he said.

Dzierżawski added that “ellaOne is killing by prescription.”

However, the Minister and the pro-lifers seem to agree on some issues. During an interview for commercial radio Zet, Radziwiłł, a physician and father of eight, admitted he wouldn’t prescribe ellaOne even to a raped woman. The doctors in Poland have the right to freedom of conscience, he explained.

During an exchange with a woman journalist, who stated that ellaOne is not an abortive pill, he curtly answered, “You are certainly wrong.”

EllaOne’s abortive mechanism of action is often disputed in pro-abortion media.

Dr. Donna Harrison, a board-certified obstetrician-gynecologist and the executive director for the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, explained how ellaOne works in a National Review article, “Contraception After Conception?”  

Dr. Harrison wrote that ellaOne blocks a hormone necessary for embryos to live. She called it “a second-generation version of RU-486,” referring to the abortion-inducing drug approved drug approved by the Food and Drug Administration in the United States.

Dr. Harrison explained that, “the two drugs work the same way in a woman’s body. If either ella or RU-486 is given several days before ovulation is expected, it can cause the egg release to be delayed several days.”

She added that “this is the basis of advertisements in which the manufacturer states that the mechanism of action is to delay ovulation.” But it’s different when pill is taken only shortly before egg release, or after egg release.

”When it is taken after the embryo has formed, it blocks the action of progesterone, which prepares the mother’s body to allow the embryo to implant,.” she said.

Dr. Harrison explained that when progesterone is blocked, the embryo cannot implant, or it implants imperfectly and subsequently “miscarries.”

Harrison concluded that ellaOne “can clearly produce an environment in the woman’s body that damages or destroys embryos.”

  abortion, catholic, contraception, ellaone, konstanty radziwiłł, morning-after pill, poland


Pro-abort population control activist speaks at Vatican conference despite pro-life outcry

The Vatican conference where the radical population control advocate is speaking is closed to media.
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 3:22 pm EST
Featured Image
Claire Chretien Claire Chretien Follow Claire
By Claire Chretien

VATICAN CITY, February 27, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – Leading population control activist Paul Ehrlich spoke at a Vatican conference on "how to save the natural world" today despite an outcry by members of the Catholic faithful.

The conference, Biological Extinction, is sponsored by the Pontifical Academy of the Sciences and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. It takes place from Monday to Wednesday and is closed to the media - an unusual prohibition for Vatican conferences with outside expert speakers on matters of significant public interest.

Ehrlich supports forced abortion and mass sterilization. He has compared human babies to garbage, said the Catholic Church's moral teachings are "just as unethical" as a "terrorist act," and suggested sex-selective abortion might be a better fate for girls than being born.

LifeSiteNews delivered a petition of more than 10,000 signatures asking the Vatican to rescind Ehrlich's invitation to speak.

"Thousands called on Pope Francis to ensure that a leading proponent of abortion and sterilization was not given a platform in the Vatican, but Ehrlich’s speech has taken place nonetheless," said Maria Madise of Voice of the Family. "The pro-life and pro-family movement is deeply concerned about the openness of Vatican authorities to anti-life and anti-family positions. These are not purely academic questions: the lives and wellbeing of real children are at stake."

"Over the last few years defenders of life and family have tried to give Pope Francis the benefit of the doubt but every new scandal raises further questions about the motivations of those who now hold key positions of power in Rome," said John-Henry Westen, co-founder and editor-in-chief of "In an interview with our news service Ehrlich told us he was 'thrilled' with the direction Pope Francis is taking the Catholic Church. Yet just a few years ago Ehrlich stated that ‘the pope and many of the bishops are one of the truly evil, regressive forces on the planet’ because of the Church’s opposition to contraception. Ehrlich has changed none of his positions in that time."

Pope Francis is moving the Church "more towards concern for environmental issues like climate disruption and the Sixth Great Extinction that threaten the lives of future generations," Ehrlich told LifeSiteNews via email

Of whether he sees hints that Pope Francis will attempt to reverse Catholic teaching against contraception, Ehrlich told LifeSiteNews, "I think the Pope recognizes the threat to future lives, and to the persistence of society, posed by overpopulation...Family planning with modern contraception is the only ethical solution, and if made universally available would greatly reduce the frequency of abortion. It also would generally improve women’s health and education. Francis is a brilliant and compassionate man – draw your own conclusions."

Ehrlich's presentation this afternoon was titled Why We Are in the Sixth Extinction and What It Means to Humanity. Ehrlich is the author of a 2015 study that he says "shows without any significant doubt that we are now entering the sixth great mass extinction event" during which lack of biodiversity will cause many species to go extinct.

Ehrlich's research suggested carbon emissions and the clearing of land for farming, logging, and settlement have significantly harmed the planet, paving the way for the "sixth great mass extinction."

"We are now profoundly damaging the conditions under which our numbers have increased from about 1 million to about 7.3 billion people, with a net of 250,000 extra people every day…The survival of the natural world, and ultimately our survival, depends on our adoption of principles of social justice and sustainability," a program for the Biological Extinction conference says.

In his 1968 book The Population Bomb, Ehrlich predicted hundreds of millions of people would starve because of overpopulation. He argued "compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion" could be Constitutional in the United States if the crisis was grave enough. Ehrlich's alarmist predictions didn't come true, and his views on overpopulation were debunked.

In 2015, Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, mocked "right wing" critics who think the United Nations is "the devil." In 2016, he defended giving American pro-abortion presidential candidate Bernie Sanders a speaking slot at a conference.

Sorondo didn't respond to the petition LifeSiteNews sent to him.

"For our part, we will continue to speak out against the evil and the errors that have found their way into the temple of God, asking Our Lady to lead us and all the faithful, in this dark hour of the Church's history," said Virginia Coda Nunziante of Italy's Famiglia Domani. 

  abortion, biological extinction conference, catholic, contraception, marcelo sánchez sorondo, paul ehrlich, pontifical academy of social sciences, pope francis, population control, the population bomb


NAACP threatens North Carolina with boycott over law requiring men to use men’s bathrooms

The organization compared homosexual and transgender rights with civil rights.
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 3:04 pm EST
Featured Image
Rev. William Barber speaks at a news conference in North Carolina. NAACP
Fr. Mark Hodges Fr. Mark Hodges
By Fr. Mark Hodges

BALTIMORE, Maryland, February 27, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) is planning a boycott of North Carolina over its law (HB-2) requiring people to use the bathroom matching their biological sex.

The NAACP says the law amounts to "gender discrimination." They are urging major sports teams and organizations, religious bodies and conferences, and music stars to refuse to schedule any activities in the state.

NAACP national president Cornell Brooks said at a press conference that "children … are being imperiled" by gender separate bathrooms. North Carolina chapter president William Barber called the state "a battleground ... for the soul of America."

The group equates homosexual and transgender affirmation with civil rights.

"The pro-abortion NAACP decries bathroom 'discrimination' but has no problem with the real and violent discrimination that results in more black babies being aborted than born alive," 

"Bathrooms are, by nature, gender discriminatory," Bomberger explained. "If gender is fluid, why isn't 'race'?  Why isn't age?"

The NAACP governing board unanimously approved their boycott of North Carolina in protest of the state law ("HB-2"). They are creating a "task force" to oversee the boycott.  

Barber said the boycott will not end until HB-2 is repealed, electoral districts are redrawn, and the newly elected Democratic Governor Roy Cooper is reinvested with powers rescinded by the Republican-led legislature.

The board's resolution threatens additional steps, including encouraging divestiture of North Carolina-related investments and boycotting all travel to the state.

Barber also threatened to boycott any state that passes laws similar to North Carolina's gender-separate bathroom statute.

The NAACP boycott was announced two days after President Trump nixed President Obama's executive order forcing transgender bathrooms on public schools.

"If the NAACP wants to promote the belief that self-chosen identification is all that matters, then what's to stop the race-switching, scholarship-stealing Rachel Dolezals of the world?" Bomberger rhetorically asked.

Bomberger was referring to the African studies instructor and a local president of an NAACP chapter in Spokane, Washington, who nine times reported to police that she was the black victim of hate crimes. But in 2015 her Caucasian parents revealed that she is white.

Since being exposed as lying on her biography, Dolezal admitted that she was born white but identifies as black. Her defenders contend her racial identity is "genuine," even though it is not based on genetics, biology, or actual ancestry.  

Last month, Dolezal’s mother told KREM news: “Rachel has wanted to be somebody she's not.” Dolezal is genetically German, Czech and Swedish, with a "smattering" of Native American ancestry.

Dolezal also was dismissed from the Spokane police ombudsman commission over "a pattern of misconduct" and was forced to resign as education director for Idaho's Human Rights Education Institute over accusations of "discrimination." She told Vanity Fair in 2015 that she was making a living braiding and weaving hair three times a week.

In 2000, the NAACP boycotted South Carolina over flying the Confederate flag, which was eventually removed in 2015.

The NAACP also sued over a North Carolina voting law requiring a photo ID. The lawsuit was upheld by a federal appeals court. That appeal is before the U.S. Supreme Court.

  bathroom law, homosexuality, naacp, north carolina, transgender


Facebook says ‘mistake’ led to ban of Christian mom who criticized homosexuality, but she’s not buying it

Elizabeth Johnson is on a mission to expose the social media platform's 'arbitrary and biased censorship.'
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 1:36 pm EST
Featured Image
Elizabeth Johnston, also known as the Activist Mommy.
Steve Weatherbe
By Steve Weatherbe

WARSAW, Ohio, February 27, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – Facebook has apologized to The Activist Mommy and restored her access, but Elizabeth Johnston is still upset with the social media platform for freezing her page in the first place over her posts on the Bible's condemnation of homosexuality.

“They apologized and said it was a mistake, but I don’t think it is sincere,” she told LifeSite News. “How can it be a mistake?”

As she told a sympathizer on her site, “They made it quite clear I violated their rules.”

“I have brothers and sisters who have been marginalized by Facebook,” she said. “My getting an apology from Facebook doesn’t solve the problem.”

Facebook also responded to LifeSiteNews. Public relations officer Arielle Argyres emailed to say, “Sorry for the delay on this – for your background, this was a mistake. Her posts should be restored and she should be able to use her account normally.”

Argyres has not responded to a follow-up question as to whether an algorithm or a human agent made the “mistake.”

Johnston told LifeSiteNews she received a short suspension when she quoted from the Old and New Testaments condemning homosexuality. When that suspension ended, she complained in a new post that repeated the Biblical passages Facebook had excised.

This drew a second excision and a seven-day freeze. In addition, there was an ominous warning. “People who repeatedly post things that aren’t allowed on Facebook may have their accounts permanently disabled.”

However, Johnston received coverage from LifeSite, Charisma, Fox News, and other media. The stories focused on how Facebook’s actions contrasted with founder Mark Zuckerberg’s recent claim to be politically impartial. The apology came shortly thereafter.

To Johnston, this demonstrates media savvy, not impartiality.

“Most victims of Facebook's arbitrary and biased censorship don't have the luxury of getting a media response. … I am on a mission to expose this and see it changed,” she said in a new post.

As glad as she is to reconnect with her 75,000 followers, Johnston is now taking up the cause of many conservative bloggers who contacted her after news stories began appearing. They had their own stories to tell.

“I talked to one group that Facebook shut down that had 3 1/2 million followers. Do you know how much work, how many posts it takes to get that many followers? It had to be devastating.”

Other conservative Facebook users experienced less obvious problems. Their “share” or “like” buttons went missing. Johnston said visitors to her page experienced something similar. Her buttons are visible but were not responsive.

“It says to me that Facebook wants to limit my influence because my ideology does not agree with Mark Zuckerberg’s,” she told LifeSiteNews.

The problem as she sees it is that Facebook does its best to reduce the reach of conservative and Christian users. The ultimate solution may well be found in alternative Christian or conservative social media platforms such as Gab, Plum and Freedom Vine,  Johnston said.

But Facebook has nearly two billion monthly users.

“It’s an audience you can’t get anywhere else,” she said. “”It’s the only place you can go viral.”

Johnston suspects Facebook’s liberal censors first took notice of her after she blogged about the Women’s March on Washington.

“I mocked them and I got 11 million views,” she told LifeSiteNews. “I made a lot of people angry.”


Facebook freezes out Christian mom for quoting Bible about homosexuality

  elizabeth johnston, facebook, homosexuality, mark zuckerberg, the activist mommy


George W. Bush’s daughter Barbara to keynote Planned Parenthood fundraiser

She's apparently an 'enthusiastic supporter' of the abortion company.
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 1:03 pm EST
Featured Image
Claire Chretien Claire Chretien Follow Claire
By Claire Chretien

FORT WORTH, Texas, February 27, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – Former President George W. Bush's daughter Barbara Pierce Bush is the keynote speaker at a sold-out Planned Parenthood fundraiser on Wednesday.

An individual ticket to the event costs $150. There are sponsorship levels up to $20,000.

Bush is the CEO and co-founder of Global Health Corps, which seeks to "mobilize a global community of emerging leaders to build the movement for health equity. We are building a network of young changemakers who share a common belief: Health is a human right."


The organization's website features material that is supportive of contraception. Its Senior Director of Advocacy and Communications is a former board member of Planned Parenthood the Great Northwest and the Hawaiian Islands and the Pacific Northwest Abortion Fund.

In June, Bush called Planned Parenthood an "exceptional organization." Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards and Bush "are enthusiastic supporters of each other’s work," the New York Times reported in a lunch interview with both of them.

President Bush was pro-life. His wife, Laura Bush, supports abortion.

  abortion, barbara pierce bush, cecile richards, global health corps, planned parenthood


Francis urges priests to ‘welcome’ cohabitating couples in the ‘style of the Gospel’

Francis told priests that for 'every person and every situation you are called to be fellow travelers to witness and support.'
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 11:39 am EST
Featured Image
Drop of Light /
Jan Bentz Jan Bentz Follow Jan
By Jan Bentz

ROME, February 27, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) -- Pope Francis urged parish priests participating in a Vatican-run course titled the “New Marriage Procedure” to “welcome” cohabitating couples living in fornication who “prefer to live together without getting married.” The pope did not ask priests to admonish such couples for living in grave sin nor did he ask them to work for their conversion and repentance.

“At the same time, make yourselves close with the style of the Gospel itself, in the encounter and welcome of those young people that prefer living together without getting married,” he told priests at the Saturday, February 25 event organized by the Roma Rota, the Vatican’s highest ecclesiastical court.

“On the spiritual and moral plane, they are among the poor and the little ones, toward whom the Church, following in the footsteps of her Teacher and Lord, wants to be a Mother that does not abandon but comes close and takes care. These persons are also loved by Christ’s heart. This care of the last, precisely because it emanates from the Gospel, is an essential part of your work of promotion and defense of the Sacrament of Marriage,” he added.

Last year Francis said that cohabitating couples are in a “real marriage” and receive the grace of the Sacrament. “I’ve seen a lot of fidelity in these cohabitations, and I am sure that this is a real marriage, they have the grace of a real marriage because of their fidelity,” he said at that time.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church calls fornication “gravely contrary to the dignity of persons and of human sexuality which is naturally ordered to the good of spouses and the generation and education of children.”

It further states that situations such as cohabitation “offend against the dignity of marriage; they destroy the very idea of the family; they weaken the sense of fidelity. They are contrary to the moral law. The sexual act must take place exclusively within marriage. Outside of marriage it always constitutes a grave sin and excludes one from sacramental communion.”

The formative course was designed to teach parish priests working in their own respective diocesan courts on marriage annulments, and other related matters, how to implement the changes of the two Motu Proprio, Mitis Iudex and Misericors Jesus, with Amoris Laetitia giving the larger framework.

Francis told the priests that for “every person and every situation you are called to be fellow travelers to witness and support.”

He urged them to “support” all couples who have determined by themselves that their marriage is invalid and want it officially declared as such.

“When you offer this witness, may your care be also to support all those who have realized the fact that their union is not a true sacramental marriage and want to come out of this situation. In this delicate and necessary work, proceed in such a way that your faithful recognize you not so much as experts of bureaucratic acts or juridical norms, but as brothers who put themselves in an attitude of listening and of understanding,” he said.

Francis stated that priests are often the first representative of the Church to whom young people encounter when they get married and at the same time the first to whom they turn when their marriage is in crisis.

“It is you to whom the spouses turn, when serious problems in their relation occur and they find themselves in crisis and have the need to revamp the faith and rediscover the grace of the sacrament; and in some cases ask indications to begin a process of annulment.”

The process of discernment he left in the hands of the individual in their parish since “nobody better than you knows and is in contact with the reality of the social grid of that territory, and experiences the various complexities.”

  amoris laetitia, cohabitation, fornication, marriage, marriage annulment, pope francis


Bruce Jenner scolds Trump for transgender decision: ‘Call me’ to fix this ‘disaster.’

The 'transgender' celebrity rebuked the President and ripped the Attorney General in a Twitter rant.
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 9:17 am EST
Featured Image
Bruce 'Caitlyn' Jenner offers a 'transgender' message to President Trump on social media. Twitter
Peter LaBarbera Peter LaBarbera Follow Peter
By Peter LaBarbera

February 27, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — Former Olympian turned “transgender” activist Bruce (“Caitlyn”) Jenner scolded President Trump on social media for not renewing a controversial Obama federal mandate pushing schools to allow “transgender” students to use opposite-sex bathrooms and changerooms, or risk losing federal funding.

In the video, Jenner, clad in what CNN reported was a “pink ‘pussy bow’ blouse,” takes a vicious shot at Attorney General Jeff Sessions, implicitly calling him a “bully” who is “picking” on vulnerable transgender people, including children, ostensibly due to his own LGBT-related insecurities.

Jenner sent out a video on his Twitter and Instagram accounts. Talking directly to the camera, he says: "I have a message for President Trump from, well, one Republican to another. This is a disaster. And you can still fix it. You made a promise to protect the LGBTQ community"

Holding up a mock phone to his head, Jenner says to Trump, "Call me." He and Trump have gone back and forth on the “transgender” issue, with Trump even welcoming Jenner to use the female restroom at Trump Tower in New York. As Cosmopolitan reported in April, “Caitlyn Jenner Peed in One of Trump’s Bathrooms and Filmed it.”

In his new video, Jenner also gives a pep talk to “transgender” youth in the wake of Trump’s action, which was lauded by pro-family advocates (yet resisted by Trump’s own Education Secretary). Jenner cites the Supreme Court’s hearing of a case next month involving a gender-confused, “female-to-male” transgender Virginia high school student now calling herself Gavin Grimm.

However, legal experts say the prospects of the Grimm case are dimmed because it relied upon Obama’s radical and expansive interpretation of “sex discrimination” under Title IX in the civil rights code. That interpretation was flatly rejected by Sessions. A federal judge blocked Obama’s mandate after it was challenged by almost half of the United States.

According to an ABC News legal analyst, the case changes without the Obama directive. The Supreme Court could decide that it will not even hear the Grimm case and instead send it back to the lower courts.

Jenner to 'Trans Kids:' “You’re Winning”

Jenner said in the video: "I have a message for the trans kids of America. You're winning. I know it doesn't feel like it today or every day, but you're winning. Very soon we will win full freedom nationwide and it's going to be with bipartisan support. You can help by checking out the National Center for Transgender Equality and letting Washington hear you loud and clear.

The National Center for Transgender Equality bills itself as “the nation’s leading social justice advocacy organization winning life-saving change for transgender people.”

Implying that Sessions is a bully who picks on vulnerable people purportedly because he is insecure about his own homosexual or transgender issues, Jenner said:

“Now I have a message for the bullies: You're sick. And because you're weak, you pick on kids, you pick on women or anyone else you think is vulnerable. Apparently even becoming the attorney general isn't enough to cure some people of their insecurities."

  bathroom law, bruce jenner, donald trump, gavin grimm, homosexuality, jeff sessions, transgender


Beyoncé on being pregnant with twins: ‘I have three hearts’

Pro-choice celebrities have no trouble speaking of their unborn children as being human beings when they choose to keep them.
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 6:41 pm EST
Featured Image
Anton_Ivanov /
John Stonestreet John Stonestreet
By John Stonestreet

February 27, 2017 (BreakPoint) -- Objective realities aren’t subject to feelings, but increasingly, that’s the verdict of our celebrity-driven culture. Just ask Beyoncé’s twins.

With few exceptions, the entertainment industry is committedly pro-choice. Whether it’s Scarlett Johansson and others in a recent “Stand with Planned Parenthood” ad campaign, stories from celebrities like Whoopi Goldberg about how they don’t regret their abortions, or financial support for Planned Parenthood from names like Lena Dunham, John Legend, and Pink, actors and musicians are overwhelmingly on one side of this cultural debate.

But every so often, someone wanders off-script and talks about the unborn not as mere “rapidly dividing cell masses,” but as babies, with heartbeats, and with value.

The most recent celebrity to break form was singer Beyoncé. Despite participating in the aggressively pro-choice Women’s March in D.C., the expectant mother-of-twins has encouraged her millions of fans to talk about and celebrate her unborn children as if they were, well, children.

At the recent Grammy Awards, she appeared on stage pregnant and dressed as a goddess in a performance dedicated to “birth and motherhood.” Now I’m not endorsing the performance itself, which was pretty bizarre and maybe a little sacrilegious. But what struck many was how Beyoncé and her fans on Twitter and Facebook freely referred to the twins in her womb as “children,” not fetuses or any other dehumanizing euphemism popular with abortion supporters.

Her performance was a follow-up to her recently released pregnancy photo shoot, which took the Internet by storm shortly before the Grammys. In the most-liked upload in Instagram history, Beyoncé posed, hands on her baby bump, with the caption, “I have three hearts.”

Hearts! As in “beating hearts!” As in the kind pro-choice activists go to incredible lengths to convince us are just “contracting cardiac cells.”  And notice Beyoncé also equates her babies’ heartbeats with her own. They are, in her eyes, fully human.

Get breaking pro-life news on Facebook Messenger!

Let me emphasize this: Don’t Google Beyoncé’s pregnancy photos. Some of them are pretty inappropriate. But Beyonce’s Instagram post and Grammy performance highlight the unspoken, false assumption that unborn babies have personhood and humanity only if they’re wanted. If they’re inconvenient or untimely, they’re disposable. In other words, our feelings about them determine what they are.

It was this assumption Yahoo News anchor Katie Couric took into her recent interview on the Ellen DeGeneres show, where she discussed her forthcoming National Geographic documentary on gender identity. Now Couric has made no secret of her support for Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers. For her, the unborn aren’t persons. They’re choices. And yet at the same time she insists that babies in the womb can “feel” gender confusion—something clearly beyond the capabilities of a mere cell mass.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

So what’s behind this glaring contradiction? Simply this: the conquest of feelings over reality. According to pro-abortion reasoning, unborn babies, especially early in pregnancy, aren’t human beings with a right to life. Rather, they’re choices to be made.

But pro-choice celebrities have no trouble speaking of their unborn children as being human beings when they choose to keep them. In other words, what makes them human is how their parents, society, or a news anchor feel about them—not some inherent quality they share with all unborn babies.

The Christian worldview cuts in diametric opposition to this anthropology, and to any feelings-centric approach to truth. That unborn babies are inherently valuable image-bearers is true regardless of how we feel about them. Christians embrace objective reality, one not subject to the whims of choice, and not influenced in the least by how famous your mother is.

Now I’m happy for Beyoncé. And praise God for these two new heartbeats. But the thousands of heartbeats quieted each year by abortion are no less human and no less valuable, no matter how we feel about them.

Reprinted with permission from Break Point.

  abortion, beyonce knowles


Fur babies: Have pets become the ‘feel-good’ substitute for children?

If what matters most are our 'needs' and desires, pets can sound like a preferable alternative to children.
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 6:26 pm EST
Featured Image
John Stonestreet John Stonestreet
By John Stonestreet

February 27, 2017 (BreakPoint) -- I’m gonna get a lot of email about this commentary, so let me say this up front: I like animals. And pets are wonderful things. But. . . .

In her 1992 novel, “The Children of Men,” P. D. James told the story of a world where it has been 25 years since the last child was born. In this dying world, kittens and puppies are pushed around in prams and receive the treatment previously afforded to human infants.

Twenty-five years later, it seems that life is imitating art, though in James’s novel, childlessness was the result of a mysterious and catastrophic collapse in male fertility. Today, it’s the result of people’s choices. But in both James’ dystopia and today’s celebration of personal autonomy, the result is the same: Animals have become substitutes for actual children.

This substitution was the subject of a recent article by Bradley Mattes of the Life Issues Institute. In it, Mattes told readers that “according to government statistics, an increasing number of women from the millennial generation are opting out when it comes to having babies.”

“Instead,” Mattes continues, “it appears they’re finding an alternative more to their liking.” That “alternative” is what might be called “pet parenthood” and its substitute progeny, “fur babies.”

What’s more, many millennials are approaching pet ownership the way previous generations approached first-time parenthood: preparing “for their impending bundle of joy by reading books and consuming other available research.”

Now the obvious question is “Why?” Several people Mattes quotes help us answer that question. One thirty-year-old told the New York Post that “It’s just less work and, honestly, I have more time to go out.”

Another thirty-year-old, writing in Charlotte Magazine, wrote about how she went from wanting to be a stay-at-home mom to a pet parent. In her words, pets “give us a greater purpose without making our lives mainly about theirs.”

While there is something “stunning” about such “self-centered transparency,” as Mattes put it, we shouldn’t be surprised. It’s the logical outcome of the triumph of personal autonomy in the West. We exist for our own benefit and pleasure, as do our children and our pets.

Whereas having children was historically thought of as an act of obedience to a divine command, an obligation we owed past and future generations, today it’s an act of self-fulfillment. Children are now a means to an end, not ends in and of themselves.

For many, having a child is just another bucket-list item; something we do (or don’t do) to “complete” our lives, preferably after we’ve experienced the other things we believe make for a “complete” life, like a successful career and travel, etc.

The problem with this idea is, with kids, the “feel good” phase passes pretty quickly, and is replaced by a long, hard slog of raising them with all the sacrifice that entails. If you get struck by the travel bug, you just can’t board your kids at a local kennel.

Now if you’re a Christian, this shouldn’t be a problem. We get—or at least we should get—concepts like “obligation” and “self-sacrifice” and “self-giving.” But if what matters most are our “needs” and desires, pets can sound like a preferable alternative to children.

After all, as one person quoted by Mattes put it, “Who needs children when research has shown that certain hormones that increase when we cuddle children also increase when we cuddle our pets?”

So get your fix of oxytocin, the “cuddle hormone,” and you still get to live however you want. What’s the problem with that?

The problem is there’s literally no future in a world of “fur babies.” The England of James’ novel is a hopeless dystopia, not a paradise. As the principle character writes in his diary, “without the hope of posterity, for our race if not for ourselves, without the assurance that we being dead yet live, all pleasures of the mind and senses sometimes seem to me no more than pathetic and crumbling defenses shored up against our ruins.”

This is where the enshrinement of autonomy and self-fulfillment will take us as a culture. It’s a dead, loveless end. And no amount of oxytocin or fur can change that fact.

Reprinted with permission from Break Point.

  children, millenials, parenting


7 shocking things you didn’t know about Jane Roe of Roe v. Wade

Norma McCorvey not only never had an abortion, she never even entered a courtroom regarding this court case. She signed an affidavit and was used as a pawn.
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 5:59 pm EST
Featured Image
Natalie Brumfield

Editor's Note: Norma McCorvey, also known as "Jane Roe" of Roe v. Wade, passed away earlier this month (February 2017).

February 27, 2017 (LiveActionNews) -- Perhaps you haven’t heard much regarding Jane Roe of Roe v. Wade. If you’re like me, only eight years ago did I know that the famous leading plaintiff in the case that legalized abortion in the United States is actually a woman by the name of Norma McCorvey. “Jane Roe” was her given pseudonym for the case.

On September 13, 2008, I attended an Alabama Citizens for Life banquet in Montgomery, Alabama. There I would hear Norma McCorvey’s story for the very first time.  I hung on every word as she told us the truth about her part in the Supreme Court ruling and other facts like the following…

1. She never had an abortion.

Norma McCorvey, the plaintiff in the case that legalized abortion for women, has confessed in innumerable interviews and speaking events that she never had an abortion and that her pregnancy was not a product of rape as she had claimed in the case. The then mother of two gave her third child the gift of adoption. She was represented in the case as a woman seeking a legal abortion of her unborn baby. In a 1997 CNN interview, it was explained that:

 “McCorvey had made one trip to an illegal abortion clinic in Dallas that had been shut down. But now, McCorvey says she wouldn’t have had an abortion, anyway, because she was too far along in her pregnancy. “I can honestly say no, I wouldn’t have,” she said.

Norma McCorvey wrote in her first book, I Am Roe, that she in fact was not pregnant by rape like she had first said. That was a lie. She said she had invented the rape story in an attempt to make a stronger case for an abortion.

2. She asked her doctor to put her in touch with an adoptive/foster attorney. That attorney put her in touch with pro-aborts.

In an interview on May 18, 2006, they stated that after a time of being abortion minded, Norma McCorvey wanted other options:

Realizing that her child was going to be born into this world, she finally talked her physician into giving her the name of an attorney that dealt in adoptive/foster cases. This lawyer listened to Norma and then introduced her to two people who would change her life forever.

Those two women were Sarah Weddington (the attorney) and Linda Coffee (representing the plaintiffs) looking for a vulnerable pregnant woman who would sign their paperwork for the monumental case. 

3. She agreed to be the leading plaintiff for “free pizza & beer.”

Norma lamented in the 2006 interview with Brad Harrub, Ph.D.:

To make a long story short, I met with Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee, and they—how do I say this, they upset me. They said, “Oh Norma, don’t you realize that women drive cars? Oh Norma, don’t you realize that women get to smoke in public? Oh Norma, don’t you know that women get to vote?” I finally told them, “Hey look, I just came for the pizza and beer, because I was hungry.” I met with them three or four times. I signed the affidavit that brought Roe v. Wade into being on March 17, 1970…

4. She never stepped foot in a courtroom.

Norma McCorvey not only never had an abortion, she never even entered a courtroom regarding this court case. She only signed an affidavit in Texas and was used as a pawn. Had she been questioned or given testimony in court proceedings, this case may not have been won at all. Dr. Harrub was surprised when he asked, “Did you ever attend courtroom sessions?” Her response stunned me. She quickly replied, “No, never.” 

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

5. She read about the legalization of abortion in the newspaper. She was never contacted after signing.

Norma explained:

I met with them (Weddington and Coffee) three or four times. I signed the affidavit that brought Roe v. Wade into being on March 17, 1970, and I found out about Roe v. Wade just like everyone else did. I read it in the newspaper.

McCorvey was unaware that the case had gone anywhere. She has described her reaction as being as surprised as anyone.

6. In 1995, Norma McCorvey declared herself pro-life.

Norma McCorvey publicly committed her life to ‘serving the Lord and helping women save babies.’ She accepted a new job at Operation Rescue as a computer operator and was welcomed into the pro-life community. Since that time, McCorvey published “Won By Love” in January of 2003, sharing her true story and accounts of changing her position from pro-choice to pro-life. She also made a pro life commercial (seen below) to lament her role in the case. In a 1995 Nightline interview, she explained that after working in four Dallas-area abortion centers and learning a lot more, she started having inner-conflicts with herself. From that time on, Norma has completely moved her position from “a woman’s right to choose” to upholding the right to life of the preborn baby.

Norma (Jane Roe) from VirtueMedia on Vimeo.

7. She has attempted to have the case reopened and overturned.

Norma has dedicated herself to pro-life work, starting her own ministry, “Roe No More,” in 1997, while continuing to speak out against abortion and for life. In 2003, Norma “went to court in an attempt to overturn Roe v. Wade":

Her case was dismissed by the Fifth Circuit appeals court; The U.S. Supreme Court subsequently denied review. In 1998 and 2005 she testified before Congress about the injustices of abortion and the deceit underlying Roe v. Wade.

Speaking publicly on September 13, 2008, for the Alabama Citizens for Life banquet in Montgomery, Alabama, Norma stated, “My decisions were wrong and I am fighting with every breath to change what has occurred. My view has changed. I believe that God has brought me to this point to bring change once again.”

Reprinted with permission from Live Action News.

  abortion, norma mccorvey, roe v. wade


CNN’s Cuomo: 12-year-old girl doesn’t want to see penis in girls’ room because of ‘intolerant’ dad

The news anchor used some wild arguments in a Twitter debate to defend his position that it's OK for young girls to see male body parts in women's restrooms.
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 11:20 am EST
Featured Image
CNN anchor Chris Cuomo
Caleb Stephen Caleb Stephen

February 27, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – Last week, CNN’s Chris Cuomo spent time debating folks on Twitter about the transgender bathroom issue and ended up advocating for men in girls’ bathrooms, saying that if a young girl doesn't want to see male genitalia, it's because either she or her father is a bigot.


So if a 12-year-old girl feels uncomfortable or scared by seeing a naked person in the women's bathroom who has male genitals but identifies as a woman, it's somehow the 12-year-old girl's problem because she's "intolerant" to trans people? Makes a lot of sense doesn't it? Not!


When another Twitter user questioned the flawed argument, Cuomo claims his point was "dead clear." He said, "This isn't about a scared girl. It is about an overprotective parent who is afraid without basis."

Well, if I were to put myself in the shoes of the parent (or the girl, for that matter), I'm pretty sure I'd have a more than justified reason for taking offense at a “trans” person in the bathroom. In fact, we don't even need to be talking about “trans”people here. For starters, no girl should be exposed to the sight of male genitalia like that. Period. To try and justify that is both insane and on the slippery slope to pedophilia.


But other people weren't buying the malarkey ...


Ummm hang on, actually you did say that. Now you're lying.


So apparently if a 12-year-old girl has an issue with seeing male genitalia in their bathroom, then they need a lesson in tolerance. A bit like saying we should be tolerant of murder, rape or theft. Sounds legit ...


Amusingly, Cuomo then admits he's an "overprotective father."

The point is not that the parent may or may not be afraid of such a situation but rather he/she would be more concerned about protecting the innocence of his/her child. In that case, tolerance is totally irrelevant. The guardianship of innocency is a basic right that every single young child should have the right to.


Cuomo clearly ignores some very disturbing incidents in recent times where so-called 'transgenders' used their assumed sexual identities to enter female locker rooms and rape and/or peep on women. Clearly, transgender bathrooms enable sexual predators to have much easier access to their prey.

In February 2016, LifeSiteNews reported that a man twice entered the changing room of a Washington swimming pool and began disrobing, once in front of a young girls swim team, saying transgender policies gave him the right to do so.

In April 2016, a Quarryville, Pennsylvania, man was arrested and charged after a 10-year-old girl told her mother that she caught him watching her as she used the bathroom, CBS North Carolina reported.

In March 2014, a Toronto man claiming to be transgender was arrested and sentenced to jail 'indefinitely' for sexually assaulting several women in a women’s shelter after he gained access to the shelter and its shower facilitates as "Jessica," reported LifeSiteNews.

In November 2015, a Virginia man was caught and arrested for peeping on and filming two women and a 5-year-old child in a women’s restroom after receiving entry by dressing in drag.  Reports suspect that this was not Richard Rodriguez’s first time peeping on women by dressing himself up as woman to enter a restroom; disturbingly, he likely spied on a 53-year-old woman in May 2015 and a 35-year-old and her 5-year-old daughter in October. “Rodriguez was charged with three counts of unlawful filming of a non-consenting person and three counts of peeping,” reported NBC Washington.

In May 2013, a Los Angeles man dressed in drag entered a Macy’s department store bathroom and recorded "hours" of footage of undressed women under bathroom stalls, according to NBC Los Angeles. Jason Pomare reportedly disguised himself with a wig and fake breasts; he kept his video camera with him in a small purse. He was arrested and charged with six counts of unlawful use of a concealed camera for purposes of sexual gratification.

In 2012, a 45-year-old biological male who calls himself Colleen Francis lounged naked in a women’s locker room, in an area frequented by girls as young as six. According to the police report, an eyewitness stated, “There were girls 6 to 18 years of age and they were not used to seeing individuals in situations like this.” But the facility gave him the right to continue using its facilities as he wished.

In October 2015, two male students were caught at the University of Toronto exploiting “gender-neutral” facilities to peep on women in the shower with their cellphone cameras. The university subsequently dumped the transgender bathrooms concept after these incidents, LifeSiteNews reported.


Cuomo, it would be fair if young girls were not exposed to such indecency. That's what truly counts.

It is shocking that this is how society has ended up where flashing one's genitals in front of the opposite sex — especially at young children — is somehow acceptable and warrants a 'tolerant' response.

This is nothing less than the public promotion by a TV anchor of deviant behavior that once upon a time would get you locked up without any such argument as "tolerance" to get you off scot free.

  christopher cuomo, transgender bathroom policy


President Trump: Be a leader and fight for religious freedom

With a stroke of his pen, Trump could reverse executive orders and policies made by Barack Obama, who knew that there weren’t the votes in Congress to add “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” to the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 9:43 am EST
Featured Image
President Donald Trump at CPAC 2017 Steve Jalsevac/LifeSite
John Zmirak
By John Zmirak

February 27, 2017 ( — When I learned that President Trump had apparently changed his mind on protecting religious business owners and schools from government harassment and legal persecution, I’ll admit that I was angry. As Maggie Gallagher explained, with a stroke of his pen, Trump could reverse executive orders and policies made by Barack Obama, who knew that there weren’t the votes in Congress to add “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” to the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

So Obama declared that the federal government would henceforth play make believe, and act as if religious objections to homosexuality, and rational insistence that there are just two human sexes, were covered in the original law. (Which was passed back when sodomy was still in crime in most of those legislators’ states, when what happens in “sex change” operations was still called “castration.”) I guess Obama had seen the Supreme Court cram contemporary mores between the lines of the Constitution often enough, that he wanted to get in on the act when it came to federal law. This legal hijacking law is so blatant, you almost have to admire Obama’s chutzpah. It’s as if he dressed up Rev. Martin Luther King in drag like Tyler Perry, and got away with it.

Rumors suggest that it was Trump’s daughter Ivanka and son in law Jared Kushner who convinced him to go back on his promise to conservative Christians. I wondered why orthodox Jews would favor distortions of the law that could harm their co-religionists — who also follow the Hebrew Bible on this point. Then I remembered all those Biden-sniffing Jesuits at Georgetown, and felt a sickly kind of peace. “Everyone is insane,” I reflected. 

Was Ivanka worried about all the “fabulous”parties she would be disinvited from back in Manhattan, if her father stuck up for Christians? She needn’t worry. Those hostesses are already furious at her, afraid that her father will deport their illegal nannies. What the Trumps need to realize is that they will be treated as pariahs for simple, sane policies like enforcing our country’s  borders and laws. They might as well go ahead and protect religious freedom too.

Let me try to break it down another way.

Dear Mr. President:

Evangelical Christians, the people whom you promised to look out for until you were talked you out of it, make up 20 percent of voters, and 50 percent of voters in Republican primaries. In November, 80 percent of them voted for you.

Coming from New York City, you might not realize this, but gays make up a whole 2 percent of the electorate. For all you did to win them over, with Peter Thiel’s speech at the Convention and your waving the rainbow flag, what percentage of that 2 percent do you think voted for you — or would vote for you in four years in the blue states where most of them live? Sure they have a lot of money. Do you think they were contributing it to you? 

Now maybe you’re worried not about gay voters per se, but straight voters who watched Will & Grace for long enough that now they have pro-gay attitudes. There are a lot of people like that, especially women. How many of them do you think want to persecute Christian florists and bakers, close down wedding chapels and Catholic schools? Not many. You could sell that pro-religious freedom executive order as standing up for the little guy against tort-hungry lawyers using big government to persecute religious Americans — because that is, in fact, exactly what it is.

But these are heady arguments. So let me reach for the heartstrings. I will pull out the big guns here, and explain why you should sign the executive order protecting religious Americans using a Frank Sinatra song:

Trump, be a leader and fight,
Trump, be a leader and fight.
Trump if you’ve ever been a leader to begin with
Trump, be a leader and fight!

Trump let Christians see
What a straight shooter you can be.
I know how you treated your creditors in the 80s.
Trump shoot straight with me.

A leader never scams his voters.
It isn’t fair, it isn’t nice.
A leader doesn’t fawn on the snowflakes and snobs.
Or blow on his enemies’ dice.

Let’s keep the Party far-right,
And ruin Meryl Streep’s night.
Stick with the Deplorables who put you in the White House
Trump be a leader, and fight!

This article was originally published Feb. 17 on and is re-published with permission.

To RESPECTFULLY voice comments and CONSTRUCTIVE supporting information to the White House, click here.

** See important related stories:

Ivanka Trump, husband reportedly stopped religious freedom order; Pence affirms pro-LGBT rights move

Trump’s new Secretary of State pushed for open homosexuality in the Boy Scouts

DeVos is not as conservative on social issues as you think

Report: Gay rights sympathizer Scaramucci selected for role as key adviser to Trump

Billionaire Trump adviser Peter Thiel: President-elect ‘is very good on gay rights’

Openly gay Paypal founder to GOP: Donald Trump won’t wage ‘fake culture wars’

Trump: ‘My judges will be pro-life,’ but gay marriage is ‘settled law’

‘Not settled’: Social conservatives say Trump got it wrong on same-sex ‘marriage’

  barack obama, gay tyranny, gender, homosexuality, president trump


Pontifical Academy for Life chief glorifies radical culture of death devotee

Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia went out of his way to express his great admiration for atheist Radical Party founder Marco Pannella.
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 10:14 am EST
Featured Image
Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia
Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent
By Jeanne Smits

February 27, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, head of the Pontifical Academy for Life – or what is left of it since Pope Francis removed every single member in December – joined a “debate” earlier this month to mark the publication of a biography on recently deceased Italian Radical Party founder Marco Pannella.

A debate normally requires at least some differences of opinion or conflicting views on the subject under discussion. But during his 20-minute speech (available here), Paglia expressed unqualified admiration for longtime friend Pannella, one of Italy’s most radical proponents of the culture of death.

What made matters even worse is that the event took place at the headquarters of the Italian Radical Party in Rome.

The Archbishop’s performance was highly reminiscent of Pope Francis’ own praise for Emma Bonino, another prominent and historic member of the Radical Party. She is one of the country’s “forgotten greats,” Francis said of Italy’s foremost promoter of abortion in February 2016.

Pannella, born in 1930, was the figurehead of the Radical Party that he founded in 1955, and also headed the Italian League for divorce, successfully using Leninist-style agitprop to make it legal in 1970.

Pannella took part in each and every endeavor of the culture of death – successful or not – such as the legalization of abortion, gay “marriage,” blasphemy, free love, transgender rights, and so on. He wanted to end the prohibition of exhibitionism and drug use and dreamed of emptying Italy’s prisons through a general amnesty. Pannella was a proponent of non-violence and socialism, nudism and the abolition of the Concordat between Italy and the Catholic Church. His Radical Party stood for all of that and more.

Pannella came out as a bisexual on Radio Radicale in 2010, admitting that he had “loved three or four men” while maintaining a lifelong unmarried relationship with girlfriend Mirella who, he said, “didn’t mind” his homosexual flings and his affairs with other women. He was also an atheist.

But Archbishop Paglia fell over his own words in praising the memory of the man who died in May last year without having reconciled himself with Christ and the Church. During his speech, he called Pannella a “man of great spirituality.”

“From the beginning, when we met in the 1990’s in a common interest for the figure of Ibrahim Rgova whom he called ‘the Gandhi of the Balkans,’ we spoke of the force of ideals and I like to say of Pannella that he was a man of great spirituality," Paglia said. "Towards the end, he would say: ‘I chose not holy matter but the holy spirit, not property but spirituality … That is shown by this book in a really beautiful way.”

Smiling, laughing and obviously taking pleasure in his positive memories of Pannella, Paglia went on to remark: “He used to say that we Catholics have a tendency to leave the Gospel to one side while it is the force that can change the world – and he would invite me to join the Radical Party.” Paglia never went so far as to do so, but he did say that Pannella’s death had been “a great loss, not only for the people of the Radical Party, but also for our country.”

The Italian Bishop’s Conference is perhaps not so far removed from this opinion as it sent an official delegation to the Radical Party’s march for a general amnesty in Rome last November.

Even more revealingly, Paglia said about Pannella and his ideals: “Today, it is vital to find a form of proximity through which to unite those who are diverse, in order to build a unity of purpose or a unity that embraces all … ” This is the “diversity” rhetoric toted by the internationalists and globalists who deem religions and traditions to be today’s main threat to world peace, and who openly work toward a global spirituality where all faiths are equal and relativism rules.

Pannella received several phone calls from Pope Francis. Paglia fondly remembers his friend’s last birthday when the Pope entrusted him with his book about Mercy and a medal for Pannella. That same day, the Pope flew to Lesbos to visit Middle-Eastern and African refugees. Pannella was deeply moved, Paglia said. He immediately wrote a letter to the Pope saying ‘I would have liked to go with you.’” Paglia added: “That was because he understood that this was the way to transform the world and Italy when so many walls are still being built. Others have appeared since his death to build other walls: Marco’s way of speaking must still be heard, it is the language of universality.”

When Pannella was dying, Paglia recounts how he got a phone call during a meeting with the Pope, who said, “Go there immediately and greet him for me … ”

“In July,” Paglia continued, “when Marco was already dead, the Pope thanked me for what I had done: ‘Marco lived as a believer, ready to pay the price with his very self for what he believed.’”

Paglia is of a similar opinion: “His story shows how a man can help history to go forward towards the defense of each and every person’s dignity, specially those who are marginalized. … I take great pleasure in saying that Marco was truly a spiritual man who fought and hoped against all hope … ” Pannella had a message, Paglia continued, “We should never give up … We must receive and keep his vitality.”

Of this man who put every effort into promoting the transgression of God’s law, the president of the Pontifical Academy for Life also said: “He dreamed of a convent that would not be established on the rules of others but on his own, the rules of radical thought. … He was against transcendence, he would say that rules do not descend from Heaven, it is man who creates them and makes sure they are applied. If by the word transcendence he was designating something that is exterior, far away or platonic, it is obvious that we should agree with Marco, because ideas should be incarnated in or own flesh!”

This effusive and fuzzy admiration leaves no space at all for God’s truth or for the commandments, making – as it does – man the sole author and measure of his own morals. A very ancient temptation …

Several Italian newspapers called Paglia’s speech an effort to canonize Pannella and to preach his new Gospel. His conclusion, as he turned toward Pannella’s biographers, tends to prove them right.

“I believe that today Marco, who is full of the spirit, is still blowing and asking us to help the spirit whose breath makes history move,” Paglia said. “Thanks to your book, in a way Marco is still alive, as the inspiration for a more beautiful life not only for Italy but for the world, that more than ever needs people who can speak like him – and there are fewer and fewer. … I am glad that the spirit of Marco can help us to live in that same direction!”

Not surprisingly, Riccardo Cascioli, editor of La nuova Bussola Quotidiana, one of Italy’s more conservative newspapers, called the author of this mind-boggling eulogy the president of the “Pontifical Academy for Death.”

  atheist, culture of death, marco pannella, pope francis, radical party of italy, vincenzo paglia

The Pulse

Planned Parenthood’s abortion quota certificate proven authentic – by Planned Parenthood

'We absolutely do celebrate our progress in ensuring that more people have access to the full range of reproductive health care, including abortion. And we always will.'
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 6:25 pm EST
Luke Faulkner

February 27, 2017 (LiveActionNews) -- On February 8, 2017, President and Founder of Live Action, Lila Rose, posted a photo of a certificate awarded to a Colorado Planned Parenthood for exceeding abortion quotas.

The certificate, “For Exceeding Abortion Visits,” was awarded to the Aurora Planned Parenthood facility back in May of 2013, but still stirs up controversy four years later. Live Action received emails and Facebook comments after Rose’s post, questioning the validity of the award. Some claimed the photo was doctored or photo-shopped.

However, Planned Parenthood itself admitted to the validity of the award in a blog post from July 2014. Speaking of pro-life claims that Planned Parenthood had abortion quotas, Vicki Cowart, President and CEO of Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains (PPRM), responded that the photo was of a certificate that PPRM had given to one of its clinics:

The entire basis of their claim was a photo of a certificate that Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains gave to a health center for increasing its abortion services. … And, yes, we absolutely do celebrate our progress in ensuring that more people have access to the full range of reproductive health care, including abortion. And we always will.


Abby Johnson, Founder and President of And Then There Were None and a former Planned Parenthood clinic director, posted the same image of the award to her Facebook page.

“So remember when I posted this photo that we received from a former Planned Parenthood worker? And remember that we said that this was an award for increasing their abortion numbers at the Aurora abortion clinic?” Johnson wrote. “Well, Planned Parenthood has responded and has confirmed that, YES, this is an award that was given out by them. And, YES, they will continue to ‘celebrate their progress and they always will.’”

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Even though Planed Parenthood acknowledged the authenticity of the certificate awarded to one its affiliates for achieving abortion quotas, PPRM’s Cowart still denied having abortion “quotas.”

In its most recent Abortion Corporation video, Live Action reveals how Planned Parenthood does have abortion quotas, through interviews with former Planned Parenthood staff.

“Every center had a goal for how many abortions were done, so we were very goal-oriented,” Sue Thayer, a former Planned Parenthood manager, said. “I trained my staff the way that I was trained, which was to really encourage women to choose abortion, to have it at Planned Parenthood, because that counts – you know – towards our goal.”

In another testimony, former Planned Parenthood nurse, Marianne Anderson, recalls her time at America’s largest abortion corporation.

“I felt like I was more of a salesman, sometimes, to sell abortions,” Anderson said. “We were constantly told, ‘You have quotas to meet to stay open.’ … We were told on a regular basis that, ‘You have a quota to meet to keep this clinic open,’” Anderson said.

Reprinted with permission from Live Action News.

  abby johnson, abortion, abortion quota, lila rose, planned parenthood, sue thayer

The Pulse

‘Best actress’ Emma Stone promotes Planned Parenthood at Oscars

But who cares?
Mon Feb 27, 2017 - 9:56 am EST
Featured Image
Emma Stone at the 2017 Oscars
Claire Chretien Claire Chretien Follow Claire
By Claire Chretien

HOLLYWOOD, California, February 27, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – Emma Stone and the 50 Shades series' Dakota Johnson wore Planned Parenthood pins at the Oscars last night.

Stone's pin was on her dress; Johnson's was on her clutch. Stone won "Best Actress" for her role in "La La Land."

Johnson made several "worst dressed" lists.

Planned Parenthood is the nation's largest abortion business. It aborts over 300,000 babies annually. The majority of its facilities do not offer prenatal care. It has been embroiled in scandal after scandal, from selling aborted baby body parts to aiding and abetting sex traffickers.

Tarell Alvin McCraney of "Moonlight" wore a pro-gay GLAAD pin. A handful of other celebrities wore American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) ribbons. The ACLU is pro-abortion and supportive of the LGBT agenda. 

Does it matter that a bunch of celebrities touted abortion and leftist causes? Nope, not really. 

  2017 oscars, abortion, dakota johnson, emma stone, hollywood, hollywood liberals, homosexuality, planned parenthood