All articles from November 7, 2017

Featured Image
Claire Chretien Claire Chretien Follow Claire

News, ,

Pro-abortion Democrat elected Virginia governor

Claire Chretien Claire Chretien Follow Claire
By Claire Chretien
Newly-elected 'transgender' delegate Daniel 'Danica' Roem and Ralph Northam Instagram

VIRGINIA, November 7, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – Pro-abortion Democrat Ralph Northam defeated Republican Ed Gillespie in the Virginia gubernational race tonight.

The abortion lobby, especially Planned Parenthood, backed Northam, Virginia’s current Lieutenant Governor. Northam's victory comes alongside the commonwealth's election of the first-ever transgender state legislator. 

Planned Parenthood is America’s largest abortion vendor. It commits over 300,000 abortions annually.

Gillespie was the more pro-life candidate of the two. He campaigned on a platform opposing abortion with support for rape and incest exceptions.

In August, the Washington Post reported that Gillespie’s spokesman, Dave Abrams, “said Gillespie would support legislation to cut state payments to Planned Parenthood, though he noted that the candidate believes individual donors should feel free to give their money to the organization.”

Virginia has become increasingly “purple” rather than red in the past decade. Obama won Virginia in 2008 and 2012. Hillary Clinton won it in 2016. Virginia’s current governor, Democrat Terry McAuliffe, is strongly pro-abortion.

Republicans had a majority in the state legislature until tonight. The results are still coming in, but polls show Republicans are down in 15 districts as of 8:25 p.m. EST. 

From 1977 to 2009, Virginia always elected as its governor a candidate from the party that had lost the presidential election the year before. This changed in 2013, when McAuliffe beat pro-life Ken Cuccinelli. Planned Parenthood poured money into electing McAuliffe.

Gillespie was a counselor to President George W. Bush and is the former chairman of the Republican National Committee. He ran for U.S. Senate in 2014 and lost to incumbent Sen. Mark Warner, a Democrat.

Northam beat pro-life, pro-marriage Bishop E. W. Jackson for that seat in 2013. Northam is a former state senator. He was elected as a Democrat in 2007.

Since then, he has gone farther and farther to the left, particularly on issues like abortion.

NARAL also endorsed Northam, who strongly supports abortion on demand and same-sex “marriage.” Planned Parenthood spent several million dollars backing Northam.

Northam called the relationship between an abortionist and a woman “sacred” and has opposed holding abortion facilities to basic health and safety standards.

Two of Northam’s ads featured a professional abortion activist as a “regular” voter. One of these ads lamented how Gillespie wants the “government in charge of women’s personal decisions.” It didn’t mention that these “decisions” involve the killing of a tiny human being.

The pro-life Susan B. Anthony List endorsed Gillespie and Republican John Adams for Attorney General. It reached over 171,000 voters and warned them about the Democrats’ pro-abortion records.

“Ralph Northam and Mark Herring are extremists who support taxpayer-funded abortion on-demand through the moment of birth,” said SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. “That’s why America’s largest abortion business, Planned Parenthood, promised to spend three million dollars to get them elected.”

One of the lowest points in Northam’s campaign was when the Latino Victory Fund released an anti-Gillespie campaign ad. It showed a man driving pickup truck with a Gillespie sticker and “don’t tread on me” license plate flying a Confederate flag. The man was chasing terrified minority children with his car.

The ad comparing Gillespie supporters to “racists who wanna murder children,” as Tucker Carlson put it, was pulled after the terrorist attack in Manhattan. A radical Islamic terrorist killed eight people by running them down with his truck.

Carlson called the Latino Victory Fund video “the single most disgusting, unfair thing I’ve ever seen” and “self-evidently disgusting.”

Featured Image
Daniel "Danica" Roem YouTube
Claire Chretien Claire Chretien Follow Claire

News, ,

Man becomes first ‘transgendered’ state rep in US history

Claire Chretien Claire Chretien Follow Claire
By Claire Chretien

PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY, Virginia, November 7, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – A transgender political candidate won a seat in Virginia's legislature tonight, making history for LGBT and left-wing activists and defeating one of the commonwealth's staunchest social conservative delegates.

Incumbent Del. Bob Marshall, a Republican, lost to Democrat Daniel “Danica” Roem, a man who purports to be a woman. Roem will represent Virginia's 13th district, making him the first-ever transgender state legilsator.

“This is what happens when the radical transgender lobby pours more than $600,000 into a small state race and conservative donors largely sit the race out — Democrats cruise to victory and claim a mandate on an issue they were too afraid to outwardly campaign on,” said Terry Schilling, Executive Director of American Principles Project. “Delegate Marshall ran an incredible race and did the best he could, but ultimately, with the news media cheering hard for Danica Roem and the transgender lobby purchasing a small state race for the absurd price of $60 per vote, defeat was inevitable.”

Political pundits called this the “race of the year.” Marshall has an impressive record of defending life and marriage and the laws protecting them. Roem stressed during his campaign that “it’s time for us to take out those parts of our state code that still make us a regressive place.” 

Roem won the Democratic primary and launched an aggressive campaign against Marshall, who for 25 years represented Virginia’s 13th district.

As Northern Virginia has become more liberal over the past few years, Marshall has had to fight to keep his seat. Marshall’s Prince William County and Manassas City Park district, usually more conservative than closer-in D.C. suburbs, has also swung more “blue.”  

Hillary Clinton won Virginia’s 13th district in 2016.

Roem campaigned on a platform of transgender sex education for kindergarteners. He released a campaign video about how his “identity shouldn’t be a big deal.”

In this ad, Roem takes female sex hormones and puts on makeup while his voiceover says “this is just who I am. There are millions of transgender people and we all deserve representation in government.”

Roem said his election would inspire “LGBTQ kids everywhere will know they can succeed because of who they are, not despite it.”

Marshall is a seasoned social conservative who has defended life, family, and religious freedom in the Virginia legislature. Marshall refused to incorrectly call Roem a “woman” during the campaign, saying, “You can change appearances, but your DNA fixes your bodily structures for your entire life.”

Roem legally changed his name from Daniel to “Danica.” Virginia legally classifies him as a woman because the commonwealth doesn’t have an objective requirement for sex changes.

Roem fundraised five times as much as Marshall. The national LGBT lobby threw its support behind him. Groups like the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund and the Human Rights Campaign supported Roem.

Throughout his time in the legislature, Marshall has defended pro-life laws, supported bathroom privacy rather than sexless shared bathrooms in schools, and opposed allowing gender-confused individuals in the military. He proposed an anti-porn resolution declaring pornography a health crisis.

Marshall also sponsored a bill that apparently would have forbidden judges in Virginia from applying Islamic Shariah law rather than U.S. law.

Featured Image
Diane Montagna Diane Montagna Follow Diane


Police interrogate pro-life activists for honoring dubia Cardinal outside Vatican

Diane Montagna Diane Montagna Follow Diane
By Diane Montagna

ROME, November 7, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — Italian police interrogated pro-life leaders today after they ran a campaign yesterday honouring Cardinal Carlo Caffarra, one of the dubia authors, outside the Vatican.

The pro-life groups ProVita Onlus, Vita è, and Fede e Cultura drove a publicity truck through the streets of Rome around the Vatican on Monday, bearing billboard-sized images of the dubia cardinal and Pope John Paul II.

The police had stopped them for questioning on the Via della Conciliazione, the central road leading to St. Peter’s Basilica. According to main organizer Toni Brandi, head of ProVita Onlus, at one point the police claimed Cardinal Caffarra “wasn’t in line with Pope Francis.” After two hours, organizers were ordered to report to the police station today at noon for further questioning.

This afternoon, following the interrogation, Brandi, published an article on the ProVita website describing his meeting with police. He claims that one of the police chief’s objections to the campaign was that “now the Church doesn’t talk so much about life.”

Here below is an English translation of the article describing the meeting.

“We stood up to defend life and the family”

by Toni Brandi

The interview at the Borgo Police Station in Piazza Cavour (Rome) was polite and friendly and lasted about 45 minutes. I was interrogated as to the reasons why ProVita Onlus [a pro-life non-profit], along with Vita è [Life is] and Fede e Cultura [Faith & Culture] commemorated Cardinal Caffarra two months after his death, by drawing attention to his commitment to life and the family, and by tying him to the figure of Pope John Paul II, founder of the Pontifical Academy for Life, whose statement on the indissolubility of marriage was featured on our billboard-sized posters: “We will stand up when the institution of marriage is abandoned to human selfishness or reduced to a temporary, conditional arrangement that can easily be terminated, we will affirm the indissolubility of the marriage bond.”​

The police chief and four or five other policemen were present during the interview. Initially they asked me if we had authorization for the publicity truck. They then focused on our reasons: Who organized it? Who’s behind the initiative? Why was it done? Do the Vatican authorities know about it? I answered that I don’t believe the Vatican authorities were informed, but I didn’t see why we should have had to inform them. “But the Cardinal was from Bologna!” they said. “Yes,” I responded, “but Rome is the center of Christianity!” — “But now the Church doesn’t talk so much about life,” the police chief said. I replied: “But the Church has proclaimed — and many times — that she defends life.”

“But was it a campaign to raise awareness? A protest? Or only a commemoration?” they asked me. I replied that it was a commemoration of a great cardinal who died two months ago, and also an opportunity to remind Romans of these two great figures in the field of life and the family.

At the end of the interview, the police chief, who was very kind, seemed satisfied with the reasons I provided.

The reasons for the commemoration of a defender of life like Caffarra, by an association called ProVita, should be easy for anyone to guess. And they were clearly explained in yesterday’s press release: “Cardinal Caffarra was a friend and a model for us. He taught us that one can and one should spend one’s life for life, for the family, to care for the weakest among us, beginning with babies, before and after birth.”

Yet this event raises questions: I don’t believe that it was the celebration of two great figures of the Church that was the real annoyance. What irritated the establishment, what creates “problems of public order” for the one dominant mentality, is summed up in the words: “We will stand up to defend marriage.”

Marriage (true marriage, between one man and one woman, forever, open to the generation of life) and the family (real family, the natural one) have been in the crosshairs of the culture of death for decades. And it was Cardinal Caffarra who often recalled a letter sent to him by Sr. Lucia of Fatima, in which the visionary said: “A time will come when the decisive batter between the kingdom of Christ and Satan will be over marriage and family.”

RELATED: Truck honoring Dubia Cardinal stopped by police while circling Vatican

Featured Image
Lianne Laurence Lianne Laurence Follow Lianne

News, ,

Canada loosens restrictions on who can prescribe dangerous chemical abortion pill

Lianne Laurence Lianne Laurence Follow Lianne
By Lianne Laurence

OTTAWA, November 7, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — The Canadian government is expanding access to the abortion pill, including allowing the drug for abortions of children in utero of up to nine weeks gestation, and allowing pharmacists to dispense it directly, rather than requiring doctors to do so.

Health Canada made its decision based on evidence submitted by the drug’s sponsor, Linepharma, according to an information update the department released Tuesday.

Linepharma is represented in Canada by Celopharma.

Health Canada says it also undertook a “thorough review of new and existing scientific literature on the safe use and effectiveness of Mifegymiso.”

It has authorized the following:

  • Mifegymiso can now be prescribed up to nine weeks (63 days) into a pregnancy, rather than the previous limit of seven weeks (49 days).
  • Mifegymiso can now be dispensed directly to patients by a pharmacist or a prescribing health professional.
  • Health professionals are no longer required to complete an education program before they can prescribe Mifegymiso.
  • The requirement for written patient consent to use Mifegymiso is being removed.
  • Health professionals will no longer be required to register with Celopharma in order to prescribe or dispense Mifegymiso.

Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights, a recent merger of Canadian pro-abortion groups including Planned Parenthood, lauded the change, claiming it was the result of activism and lobbying.

But Campaign Life Coalition, the nation’s leading pro-life group, swiftly denounced the decision.

“This is a cavalier response to women’s health. Accessibility and affordability shouldn’t come before the safety of Canadian women,” said Marie-Claire Bissonnette, CLC youth coordinator.

“The organizations that lobby for lower safeguards don’t care about the repercussions of their requests,” she told LifeSiteNews.

“Mifegymiso is not a magical pill that liberates every women from a patriarchal society. It’s an actual drug with actual side effects and many women have died from it.”

Health Canada approved Mifegymiso, or RU 486, in August 2015, and it has been available since January 2017.

The two-drug combination includes Mifepristone, which blocks progesterone and essentially starves the baby to death in utero, and Misoprostol, which is taken 24 to 48 hours later and induces labor to expel the dead baby.

Alberta, New Brunswick, Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia have since announced they are offering the abortion drug for free.

Pro-life groups have long warned the abortion pill is not only deadly for the child in utero, but dangerous for the mother.

Indeed, when Health Canada approved RU-486 in August 2015 for abortions up to seven weeks, it stated the two-drug combination was a risk to women, noting: “Rare cases of fatalities were reported.”

Under lobbying from pharmacy groups, pro-abortion groups and some doctors, Health Canada dropped its requirement a doctor supervise women who take the abortion pill because of the risk of internal bleeding, LifeSiteNews reported in March 2017.

Bissonnette, who launched an educational campaign #RU486RUCrazy in April 2017 documenting the dangers of the drug, says Health Canada’s lowered standards means an increased risk to women.

“By no longer requiring health professionals to register with Celopharma, the government is relinquishing statistical information that can be used to monitor the effects [the abortion drug] has on women and therefore is relinquishing tools to properly protect them,” she told LifeSiteNews.

“This replaces a surgical procedure. These are chemicals strong enough to kill a child in the womb. It’s not an aspirin,” she said.

“Health Canada put these safeguards in effect for a reason. They didn’t have an anti-abortion agenda,” added Bissonnette.

“They wanted to minimize the damage this drug could cause women. Now Canada’s safeguards are considered some of the lowest in the world.”

A U.S. FDA risk assessment report gathered data on 1.5 million women from September 2000 to April 2011 who used Mifepristone, or RU-486.

It documented 2,207 reported cases of “adverse events” from the abortion drug, including 14 deaths, 612 hospitalizations, 58 ectopic pregnancies, 339 cases of blood loss requiring transfusions, and 256 cases of infections, of which 48 cases were considered severe.

Featured Image
Lianne Laurence Lianne Laurence Follow Lianne


School helped 11-year-old girl ‘transition’ to boy, hid from parents

Lianne Laurence Lianne Laurence Follow Lianne
By Lianne Laurence

CALGARY, Alberta, November 7, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — A legal group is speaking out after learning that a school facilitated an 11-year-old girl’s “gender transition” behind her family’s back, and only informed them when she had become suicidal.

The girl told her teachers at age 11 she wanted to be a boy but didn’t want her parents to know. She became suicidal after a year of living a double life as a boy at school and a girl at home.

Only when she told her guidance counsellor she was depressed and wanted to kill herself did the school inform her parents, says lawyer John Carpay, director of the Calgary-based Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF).

The parents knew their daughter, who is moderately autistic, was struggling, but had no idea the school was facilitating her “transition” to a “boy,” Carpay said.

Carpay believes this is proof — if any were needed — that the Alberta NDP government’s radical bill forbidding schools from telling parents if their child joins a gay-straight alliance without the child’s consent will harm vulnerable children.

“Apart from the actual cases, it’s something common sense would tell you: If parents are pushed out, then you’re pushing out the greatest sources of love and the greatest source of protection that children have,” he told LifeSiteNews.

“The law doesn’t seem to recognize that the political activists don’t love these children anywhere nearly as much as their parents do,” he said.

“There’s an underlying assumption that political activists are 100 per cent trustworthy and can have access to kids without parental supervision, which is outrageous.”

Bill will keep parents in the dark

NDP Education Minister Dave Eggen introduced Bill 24 or “An Act to Support Gay-Straight Alliances” last Thursday, claiming it was necessary to prevent schools “outing” same-sex attracted students to their parents.

Critics of the clubs say GSAs are far from neutral, but are means to promote homosexuality and transgenderism to impressionable children and adolescents.

In the case Carpay highlighted in a JCCF statement opposing Bill 24, at the onset of puberty at age 11, the girl “wanted to identify as a boy socially, i.e. boy’s name and pronouns, boys bathroom/change room, and boys sports teams.”

The school “indulged her” in these requests without telling her parents, and “without any evidence that the parents were in any way abusive.”

But when the student admitted being depressed and suicidal, the school did inform the parents, who promptly pulled her out.

The principal was “apologetic and contrite,” consulted with superiors, and told the parents the school would abide by their direction if their daughter returned, the JCCF statement related.

That included not attending GSA meetings, being referred to by a boy’s name and male pronouns, or joining boys’ activities.

The principal also verbally agreed the school “would inform the parents immediately of anything to do with their daughter's gender identity, or her attempts to attend a GSA meeting or otherwise attempt to go against her parents' wishes.”

UCP Jason Kenney hears similar case

Carpay says the JCCF heard from another couple with an autistic daughter, and knows of other cases where schools had initially kept parents in the dark.

Indeed, newly elected United Conservative Party leader Jason Kenney heard a similar story while on the campaign trail.

“A mother approached me in January after a public town hall,” he told Global News in March.

“She was quite distraught, and she told me that her 12-year-old autistic daughter had been put into counselling and referred to as a boy, given a boy’s name in school. But none of this information had been shared with the parents,” Kenney related.

“So, for months, the child was being treated as a boy in school and as a girl at home, creating even more problems, confusion and tension.”

“I think generally speaking, parents have a right to know what their kids are doing in school,” Kenney added.

“If there’s evidence that the parents are abusive, then they shouldn’t be involved.”

Carpay echoed Kenney’s concerns.

Alberta’s current laws authorizes teachers to “deal with the rare individual situations of actual or suspected” parental abuse, and grants them discretion to withhold information to parent if the situation calls for it, notes the JCCF statement.

“Replacing this discretion with a law that requires secrecy is harmful to children,” it says.

“Absent exceptional circumstances, to prohibit parents from being informed violates parents' legal rights and responsibilities for their children.”

JCCF released a policy paper Monday documenting how Bill 24 is unconstitutional.

UCP will oppose Bill 24

Meanwhile, the NDP has branded Kenney as an extremist, and Eggen mentioned the UCP leader to reporters after tabling Bill 24.

“Jason Kenney suggested earlier this year that schools should be able to out LGBTQ students to their parents, and that is dangerous,” he said.

Kenney has dismissed the NDP as playing “wedge politics,” and has said he supports policies that safeguard the child’s best interests.

And he announced the UCP will oppose the bill in a news conference before the bill’s second reading debate Tuesday, the CBC reported.

He said the UCP supports keeping the status quo.

“Teachers, not politicians, should decide when it makes sense to engage parents,” Kenney said. “The unique circumstances of each child should be the key factor, not the blunt instrument of law.”

He also said the UCP does not favour mandatory parental notification, and that he supports Bill 10, the law passed in March 2015 making GSAs obligatory in schools on student request.

The UCP caucus supports GSAs, Kenney said, but he pointed out some GSAs engage in political activism.

“The NDP is trying to do indirectly, what it cannot do directly,” he said.

“That is teaching sensitive subjects that would normally require parental notification.”

To suggest UCP MLA’s wanted to “out” same-sex attracted students was “offensive and dishonest,” Kenney said.

Featured Image
Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy


Research proves social conservatives right: Marriage helps families escape poverty

Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy
By Dorothy Cummings McLean

November 7, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – The one big factor separating poor families from comfortable and wealthy families is marriage, say sociologists.

Writing in The Federalist, Glenn T. Stanton of Focus on the Family reviewed the current literature indicating that marriage has replaced employment and education as the central factor in the financial well-being of families. His findings are startling.

The marriage rate is “sinking” among lower and middle-class American adults; it’s now down to 48%. It has, however, remained stable among the wealthy.  And it’s “the proliferation of single-parent households” that “accounts for virtually all of the increase in child poverty since the early 1970s,” as Stanton quotes Jonathan Rauch.

In the early 1990s, sociologist Bill Galston said that to stay out, or climb out, of poverty, Americans needed to do only three things: graduate from high school, marry before having a child, and have that first child after the age of 20. Only 8% of Americans who follow these rules will be poor, Galston claimed, whereas 79% who fail in all three respects will certainly live in poverty.

This “success sequence”--high school, marriage, and only then baby carriage--still holds true today, and “working-class” women are three times more likely to have babies out of wedlock than wealthy women. Poor women are five times more likely than wealth women to have babies outside marriage. Both poor and working class women are twice as likely to be cohabiting than their richer sisters.

Marriage has a “extraordinary economic power,” Stanton wrote. “It boosts every important measure of well-being for women, children and men.” That includes income, health, savings, employment, educational success, happiness, recovery from serious illness--even a healthy diet.

“Marriage is an essential active ingredient in improving one’s overall life prospects, regardless of class race, or educational status,” Stanton observed. Astonishing as it may seem, the poverty rate for children living with two unmarried, cohabiting parents is similar to that of single-mother led households. Even so-called “shotgun” marriages, contracted when the bride was pregnant, help keep women and children out of poverty.

But doubters have asked if this is putting the cart before the horse. Does marriage really generate wealth, or does wealth generate marriage?

“That’s the criticism some scholars have had--the liberal scholars,” Stanton told LifeSiteNews. “But marriage itself is a wealth creating institution. That’s what the research is finding.”

Marriage creates wealth because marriage encourages men to become better, more committed workers, providers and savers. Married men are less likely to fall into substance abuse, they are less likely either to commit or fall victim to crime, they have better health and they’re even less accident-prone. “A married man is a far different kind of man than the single or cohabiting man,” Stanton told Lifesitenews.

He said that one of the factors helping married people do better financially than cohabiting or single people is that they manage their money in a better way. For example, the cohabiting man is less likely than the married man to hand over his pay to the woman he lives with, for banking and settling household expenses. The cohabiting man is very aware that the woman he lives with is not his wife and is reluctant to allow this non-wife to manage his money. “It’s curious that cohabiting women are more likely to have to work but are more likely to live in poverty,” said Stanton.

Meanwhile, the married man is more likely to be given a job than the cohabiting or single man because employers know that married men tend to be more stable workers.

“When you’re married, your wife reminds you that you have to stick with your unfulfilling job until you have a new one,” said Stanton. “Married men settle down; unmarried men don’t settled down. This is shown time and time again in the [research] literature.”  

Stanton argued against the idea that young men no longer want to marry, fearing marriage leads straight to divorce and financial ruin. “Most young men do want to get married,” he told LifeSiteNews. “If they could wave a magic wand to make it happen, they would.”

The problem is that marriage intimidates contemporary young men--and in today’s world, where more women than men graduate from college,“there’s not a lot going for them.” Stanton thinks that contemporary young men are intimidated by “strong, capable women.” Meanwhile, he said, young women are just as afraid of divorce. Stanton says that the thought “I don’t want to fail at marriage like my parents did” is what leads young adults to cohabit rather than marry.

Stanton thinks women are compromising on the quality of men they marry or live with. However, there is reason to believe the married men will improve. “The irony,” Stanton told LifeSiteNews, “is that with so many [successful, married] men, it was their marriage that made them what they became.” A man who isn’t married by his late twenties hasn’t been developed by marriage and family.

“Marriage transforms men more than it transforms women,” Stanton told LifeSiteNews. “Women insisting that men become good husbands and fathers make the change.”

Featured Image
Alberta Premier Rachel Notley
Lianne Laurence Lianne Laurence Follow Lianne

News, , ,

Alberta gov’t to schools: You can’t tell parents when their child joins LGBT club

Lianne Laurence Lianne Laurence Follow Lianne
By Lianne Laurence

EDMONTON, Alberta, November 7, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — The Alberta NDP government made good its promise and introduced a bill November 2 that forbids schools telling parents their child has joined a “gay-straight alliance” without the child’s consent, regardless of the child’s age.

Bill 24, or An Act to Support Gay-straight Alliances, also nixes a previous exemption for private schools, which will now have to allow gay-straight alliances (GSAs) if a student requests one, although the bill has a mechanism for “exemptions.”

Education Minister David Eggen issued a ministerial order in March to two private Christian schools demanding they establish a GSA if a student requests one.

Under Bill 24, parental notification requirements and opt-out for courses with sexual or religious content will not be in force when it comes to participation in GSAs.

The bill compels all schools to tell students they have the legal right to form a GSA, and to establish anti-bullying policies banning discrimination based on gender identity and expression and sexual orientation.

“Every single school in Alberta that receives public dollars must have a policy that clearly allows students to form a GSA,” Eggen said.

Schools that don’t comply risk losing public funds and accreditation.

Parents’ group blasts bill

Critics of “gay-straight alliances” or “queer-straight alliances” say the clubs are not neutral but pro-homosexuality, and expose impressionable children and adolescents to the LGBTQ lifestyle at school.

But that’s not why Donna Trimble, executive director of Parents for Choice in Education, blasted the bill in a critique on PCE’s website.

The law will “enforce secrecy, strip professional decision-making authority, remove sexual content opt-out provisions and replace a parent’s loving care with the strong arm of the state, all under the coercion, consultation and supervision of a select few,” she wrote.

Trimble noted Bill 24 builds on Bill 10, which the Progressive Conservatives passed in March 2015.

Bill 10 mandated that publicly funded schools, including Catholic, must establish a GSA if a student requested one.

PCE “has never opposed peer support groups in schools where the children, staff and parents deem such support systems appropriate,” Trimble wrote.

But “we recognized that Bill 10 – which became section 16.1 of the School Act – stripped authority from the adults in schools, placing total control into the hands of children as young as five.”

NDP using bill against UCP leader Jason Kenney

Observers say the NDP is using the bill to create trouble for Jason Kenney, a known social conservative just elected leader of the United Conservative Party.

Indeed, Eggen said at a Thursday press conference the legislation was a response to Kenney, reported the Globe and Mail.

“Jason Kenney suggested earlier this year that schools should be able to out LGBTQ students to their parents, and that is dangerous,” Eggen said.

“It’s unfortunate the NDP are using this sensitive matter as a partisan political wedge issue,” Kenney replied the same day in a news release.

The UCP will “comment on Bill 24 after our caucus has had an opportunity to review and discuss it.”

Kenney reiterated he’s “stated repeatedly” he does not support a repeal of Bill 10, and has “also said that the best interests and safety of children must be paramount in all matters.”

“We trust highly-trained educators to use their professional judgment to make decisions in the best interests of children, particularly given that this policy applies to children as young as five years of age,” he said.

“When dealing with complex issues like gender and sexual identity, I believe our education system should recognize that every child, and every circumstance, is unique,” Kenney said.

“In some cases informing parents would clearly be inappropriate. Longstanding laws and protocols exist to protect children from potentially abusive parents.”

Bill pushed by homosexual activists

Trimble, however, dismissed Eggen’s claim that the bill is a response to Kenney as “a lie.”

She maintains this legislation and Bill 10 are the result of relentless lobbying by homosexual activists.

And a key figure in that lobby is Dr. Kris Wells, director of the Institute for Sexual Minorities Studies and Services in the University of Alberta’s faculty of education.

Wells was standing behind Eggen when the minister introduced Bill 24, Trimble noted.

Wells “was a key influence in the promotion and content of Bill 10,” she wrote. He also co-authored the pro-homosexual Guidelines for Best Practices, and was the “driving force” behind the Alberta GSA Network website.

Parents’ rights advocate Theresa Ng discovered last spring that the Alberta GSA Network website’s list of “community services” included links to sexually graphic material, such as tips on sado-masochistic homosexual sex and advice on masturbation.

After Ng published the story, the website, which is promoted by Alberta Education, removed the community services section.

Ted Byfield, founder of the Alberta Report, and editor-in-chief of a 12-volume history of Christianity, pointed out that GSAs, or “sex clubs,” are “not confined to the provision of information and a place of social congeniality for ‘sexual minorities’.”

Rather, GSAs “will pre-eminently serve as missions to foster and perpetuate the forms of conduct which those minorities represent, and which virtually all the great religious traditions of the world denounce unequivocally,” Byfield wrote in his blog.

“What is the province’s legal position? If my son or daughter, having reached, say, the age of ten or eleven, is lured into a school sex club, is persuaded that he or she must be homosexual, acts accordingly, acquires HIV and then AIDS and remains crippled for life, whom do I sue? The government, or the minister that helped bring this tragedy upon us?”

Featured Image
A Specific Waste Industries truck leaves Planned Parenthood after picking up the remains of aborted babies. Created Equal
Lisa Bourne Lisa Bourne Follow Lisa


Pro-life group exposes companies that haul away Planned Parenthood’s aborted babies

Lisa Bourne Lisa Bourne Follow Lisa
By Lisa Bourne

COLUMBUS, Ohio, November 7, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) –After prevailing earlier this year in an effort to expose the nation’s largest medical waste hauler during a campaign to halt the disposal of aborted children, Created Equal is moving to unmask more collaboration between medical waste companies and the abortion industry.

The success #ProjectWeakLink has had thus far – resulting in the withdrawal of more than 400 contracts between Stericycle, Inc. and abortion facilities in recent years – has meant that Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry have had to find alternative ways to dispose of the babies aborted at their facilities.

A new phase of the #ProjectWeakLink campaign targets Specific Waste Industries.

The medical waste company disposes of aborted children at several abortion mills in the Midwest, Created Equal says, as well as for EMW Women’s Surgical Center in Louisville, Kentucky, the state’s one remaining abortion facility.

“Specific Waste is apparently filling a void left by Stericycle in the Midwest region,” Created Equal National Director Mark Harrington told LifeSiteNews, “demonstrating the difficulty abortion mills are having in finding waste haulers to do their dirty work.”

Finding a replacement option for disposing of aborted children’s remains has been something difficult for the abortion businesses to do, according to Create Equal. But the Ohio pro-life group is not letting up and is now focused on local and regional medical waste hauling companies across the U.S.

“We need to stay one step ahead of the abortion cartel,” Harrington stated. “If abortionists are going to kill babies, they should be forced to dispose of the bodies by themselves.”

Created Equal shared a video of Specific Waste picking up the remains of aborted children at the Cincinnati, OH, Planned Parenthood.

“We are now calling on Specific Waste Industries to cease disposing of aborted babies and the instruments used to kill them for Planned Parenthood and the abortion cartel,” Harrington stated.

Created Equal launched #ProjectWeakLink in 2016, aimed at compelling Stericycle, the largest medical waste hauler in the U.S., to stop disposing of aborted children for Planned Parenthood.  On June 1 of this year, Stericycle disclosed it had cancelled of hundreds of contracts with various abortion facilities.

This significant development has forced Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry to take on the challenging task of finding other means to dispose of aborted babies, Harrington said.

Created Equal has produced video documentation of an abortion provider acknowledging the difficulty this creates for abortion facilities.

But further, Vicki Saporta, president and CEO for National Abortion Federation, which represents hundreds of independent abortion facilities across the country, recently told National Public Radio, "There are very few companies that do what Stericycle did, and when companies like Stericycle give in to the harassment of anti-choice proponents, it puts an unfair burden on abortion providers.”

“Unfair burden?” asked Harrington. “Well that is the point of #ProjectWeakLink.”

Saporta also said her group is "closely monitoring Created Equal's campaign."

Having proven the concept of the abortion industry’s dependency on medical waste companies, Harrington said Created Equal is launching phase two of #ProjectWeakLink.

“One by one, clinic by clinic, waste hauler by waste hauler, we are making disposing of aborted babies a very difficult undertaking,” Harrington told LifeSiteNews.

Pro-life supporters are asked to contact Specific Waste Industries CEO Victor Anderson to insist that Specific Waste stop enabling the abortion holocaust.

Anderson can be contacted at 502-425-2770, or click here to send an email request for Specific Waste to stop disposing of aborted children.

Featured Image
giulio napolitano /
Diane Montagna Diane Montagna Follow Diane

News, ,

Pope sends ‘heartfelt condolences’ to victims of Texas church massacre

Diane Montagna Diane Montagna Follow Diane
By Diane Montagna

ROME, November 7, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — Pope Francis on Tuesday sent his “heartfelt condolences” to the victims and families of Sunday’s church shooting in Sutherland Springs, Texas.

At least 26 people were killed and many others injured when a 26-year old man opened fire at morning services at the First Baptist Church, about 30 miles east of San Antonio. It is the deadliest mass shooting by an individual in Texas, and one of the worst church shootings in US history.

The ages of the victims range from 17 months to 72 years. According to reports, almost half of the victims were children. One woman who was pregnant was also killed along with her baby.


Here below is the telegram sent to Archbishop Garcia-Siller of San Antonio on the Holy Father’s behalf, by Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin.

The Most Reverend Gustavo Garcia-Siller, Archbishop of San Antonio,

Deeply grieved by news of the loss of life and grave injuries caused by the act of senseless violence perpetrated at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, the Holy Father asks you kindly to convey his heartfelt condolences to the families of the victims and the wounded, to the members of the congregation, and to the entire local community. He asks our Lord Jesus Christ to console all who mourn and to grant them the spiritual strength that triumphs over violence and hatred by the power of forgiveness, hope and reconciling love.

Cardinal Pietro Parolin Secretary of State

Featured Image
American College of Pediatricians


Pediatricians blast new app giving 12-year-olds access to abortion-inducing drugs without parents

American College of Pediatricians
By American College of Pediatricians

November 7, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – The American College of Pediatricians is alerting parents to a dangerous new mobile phone app called Nurx. Dubbed the “Uber for birth control,” Nurx enables teens as young as age 12 to obtain contraceptive and abortive medications including the pill, vaginal ring, Plan B and Ella without parental knowledge or local physician oversight.

Sexual activity in adolescence is associated with harmful emotional and physical consequences including depression, suicide, sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and sexual exploitation at the hands of abusive boyfriends or sex traffickers. Easy access to contraceptives that bypasses parents and a physician visit, as Nurx does, increases the likelihood of teens experiencing these bad outcomes.

Adolescents are cognitively and emotionally immature. They need parental wisdom and oversight to compensate for their emotional impulsivity and their limited capacity to assess risk.  All hormone based contraception has serious potential side effects including stroke and cancer; some increase the chance of contracting an STI. Plan B is embryocidal at certain points in a girl’s menstrual cycle, and Ella works the same way as the abortion pill.  All women, especially adolescent women, benefit from a face-to-face encounter with a physician to discuss these risks.

Dr. Patricia Lee June of the American College of Pediatricians Board of Directors warns,

Nurx wrongly excludes those who know the child and her health history best — her parents and her physician, and places the full responsibility for a life-changing healthcare decision on a girl’s shoulders. When it comes to achieving optimal teen health, connected parents – not Smartphones – are paramount.

For more information about how you can become a connected parent and promote sexual responsibility to your child visit our Family Cycle and Sexual Responsibility pages at

Featured Image
Chris Schwarz/Government of Alberta
Lou Iacobelli

Opinion, ,

Liberal politician: It’s ‘super-cruel’ to tell parents what kids are learning on LGBT at school

Lou Iacobelli
By Lou Iacobelli

November 7, 2017 (Everyday for Life) – Have you heard what Alberta's Premier Rachel Notley said about family life and parenting recently? That it's "super-cruel" to inform parents that their child is a member of a gay/straight alliance in school. She has also stated in a desperate attempt to win a re-election that the new United Conservatives, led by Jason Kenney, will be harmful to gay children. She's playing gender politics and using children as pawns. It's also an open attack on Christians and anyone who disagrees with identity politics and the early (abuse) sexualization of children.

The premier has publicly come out against parental rights. Notley believes that the province can love and do a better job of raising children than their parents. Here you have a premier whose Minister of Education who sees nothing wrong with innocent children being sexualized at an early age and introduce them to pornography. Of course Eggen knows how to care for children more than their parents. This is complete and dangerous rubbish.

It's so wrong and disrespectful to children. Just consider what is happening in the province and keep in mind that the anti-parental rights wave has swept the nation. The United Nations has been pushing the same agenda through comprehensive sex "education" for decades. So, the top politician in Alberta tells parents that they need not be informed about their children's sexuality or the content of sex "education" lessons. To inform parents or consult with them has become "super-cruel." Why do Notley and the Education Minister David Eggen want to sever the bond with parents? Because it's much easier to brainwash them. Do these politicians believe that parents will teach their children what is harmful? They actually do. Have parents become the problem in delivering a progressive education? Yes, it's parents who are now the obstacle to make believe gender land.

Both Eggen and Notley don't deserve to re-elected. They can't be trusted. They have mocked parents and undermined parental rights. They have wrongly suggested that parents don't care for their children and that provincial bureaucrats can do a better job at nurturing and teaching them what's important. It's time to end this destructive myth being pushed and legislated that children belong to the state. Children belong to God and are given to parents as a gift to be taken care of and raised with love and sacrifice. To Rachel Notley and David Eggen: keep your radical sexual politics out of families and away from our children. The real cruelty and abuse against children are coming from governments advancing explicit sex "eduction" programs, not parents. Just take a look as the Alberta government tells Cornerstone Christian Academy what parts of the Bible they can and cannot teach. It won't be long before the Bible itself will be considered hate speech. This directly undermines and attacks Christian belief in God, parental rights, freedom of speech and the family.

What Notley is espousing was once articulated by Hillary Clinton in "It Takes a Village." She argued: "I believe the primary role of the state is to teach, train and raise children. Parents have a secondary role." Hillary is totally mistaken. It takes parents to raise good children. The state should have a secondary role, unless the government has a political agenda: to undermine parental authority in order to indoctrinate children about homosexuality, gender identity and gender expression. Notley, nor any other politician, owns the nation's children. Children are not products like lumber, gold, oil and electricity. However, Notley and Eggen want Canadians to accept this misguided view that children are a product of the state.

It's the progressive myth of socialism that permits Notley to assume she has the right to violate parental rights. And not only that but to then say that parents who disagree with the government agenda are "super-cruel." In this dystopian NDP world, there is no need for parents to be informed about what their children are being taught. Bottom line: Notley has no respect for parents. She doesn't trust them. This is a Caesar that is out of control. A Caesar that has the power and feels it's entitled to do whatever it wants. Christian and family values are of no importance to Alberta's NDP Marxist government. Children and families have become a means to an end. This is why the government has threatened to remove funding from Christian and private schools that refuse to teach "diversity education," read establish gay school clubs, sexualize children at an early age and promote the cult of gender identity. Parents who refuse to celebrate this view have become an enemy of the state like Steve Tourloukis. This Hamilton parent has been in court since 2012 battling for his parental rights against the school board, the province of Ontario and the elementary teachers' union who are intent on forcing all Ontarians not just to accept but celebrate "diversity education."

What should be troubling to parents in Canada isn't Notley criticism of the United Conservative Party, but her condescending attitude towards ordinary parents: that they are "super-cruel" in wanting to be informed so they can decide what's best for their children's education. Instead, "good" parents for Notley should always back Caesar and not question provincial radical sex "education" programs. Notley is the real cruel one. She has no respect for parents and parental rights. Parents now know that the New Democratic Party resents parents who disagree with gender politics and want the parental right to transmit the faith or alternative values. Parents should do whatever they can to make sure that not one candidate in the NDP is re-elected, including the Premier Rachel Notley. Ditto for the Kathleen Wynne Liberal government of Ontario. Canada sadly is not a great place to be today as a parent.

Reprinted with permission from Everyday for Life Canada.

Featured Image
J. Bicking /
Victoria Garaitonandia Gisondi


Planned Parenthood tells Blacks: You’re better off aborting your babies

Victoria Garaitonandia Gisondi

November 7, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – In what has to be the most shameless marketing strategy in recent history, a Planned Parenthood Twitter account called PP Black Community, tweeted a "scary stat" on Halloween morning: "If you're a Black Woman in America, it's statistically safer to have an abortion than to carry a pregnancy to term or give birth. #Scary Stats."

What's truly scary is that an organization that prides itself on its message of empowerment and inclusion is fear mongering young minorities with the exact opposite message of empowerment and inclusion. Planned Parenthood is convincing young Black women that they are not equipped to give birth. They are telling them that abortion is a safer option. They are saying if they choose to be mothers, they will most likely die.

Interestingly, this message is coming from the nation’s largest abortion business.  It’s an obvious and malicious hard sell to minorities whose neighborhoods are already invaded by abortion clinics. They may as well push them over the edge.

If Planned Parenthood’s intent was to bring attention to the disproportionate amount of maternal deaths and the lack of quality healthcare for Blacks compared to Whites, then they failed bigtime. Instead their message sounded something like, “Let us kill your baby before your baby kills you”.

Ironically, they take zero responsibility for any inequality of healthcare despite the fact the Planned Parenthood clinics abound in minority neighborhoods and that abortion clinics in general are notoriously under or unregulated. Look no further than convicted murderer and former abortionist Kermit Gosnell in West Philadelphia as an example of unregulated abortion clinics in Black neighborhoods.

Evangelist Alveda King, Director of Civil Rights for Unborn Children and niece of Martin Luther King, had something to say about the Planned Parenthood Black Community message to young women.

“Mother Teresa saw abortion as the greatest example of poverty.  ‘It is a poverty,’ she said, ‘to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish.’ Abortion is a civil wrong. The pro-life movement stands for justice and is ‘the new civil rights movement.’ What ‘Blacks’ were for the Civil Rights Movement of the 60s, the unborn are for the Civil Rights Movement of today.”

She was not alone in her condemnation. Twitter blew up with backlash from people who saw right through the condescending message disguised as concern to black women.

But PP Black Community simply doubled down.

I am not sure what the image of female rapper, Cardi B, saying, “I feel so damn powerful." was supposed to convey. But, those who promote the message of abortion through the use of fear are not promoting anything at all that empowers women. In fact, it is quite the opposite. Hopefully most people will be “woke” enough to realize that it’s not compassion or concern for minorities that motivates Planned Parenthood to “help” women.

Victoria Gisondi is Public Outreach Associate for Priests for Life, the world's largest Catholic organization focused exclusively on ending abortion.

Featured Image
Detail of a 16th-century painting by Jacob de Backer in the National Museum in Warsaw.
Peter Kwasniewski Peter Kwasniewski Follow Dr. Peter


The devil has declared open war against celibacy, marriage, and the Eucharist. Here’s why.

Peter Kwasniewski Peter Kwasniewski Follow Dr. Peter
By Dr. Peter Kwasniewski

November 7, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) -- Many readers will have seen this quotation from a letter written by Sister Lucia, the Fatima visionary: “The final battle between the Lord and the reign of Satan will be about marriage and the family. Don’t be afraid, because anyone who operates for the sanctity of marriage and the family will always be contended and opposed in every way. This is the decisive issue.”

Few, however, will be familiar with Pope Siricius (334–399), who described his opponent Jovinian as a tool of “the ancient enemy, the adversary of chastity, the teacher of luxury,” because he had attacked the celibacy of the clergy. Is there a connection between Sister Lucia’s insight and the devil’s age-old campaign against virginity and celibacy for the Kingdom of heaven?

In order to answer this question, we need to look at the devil: who he is, and how he operates.

Lucifer hates consecrated virginity and priestly celibacy because this charism and state of life is the one most intrinsically opposed to the pride that brought about his fall, his eternal loss of beatitude, his damnation. The devil desired to receive beatitude as a reward for his own natural greatness, not as a pure gift of grace undeserved by any creature. He desired to be the “firstborn son” who received the homage of inferior creation—perhaps even to be a mediator between the human race and its Creator.

When God revealed that He Himself would enter into friendship with rational animals, so vastly inferior to the angels, and grant them beatitude; that his own Word would become flesh, passible flesh; that this Word-made-flesh would raise up the human race by suffering and dying for it—Lucifer would not tolerate it. His love of self turned inward. In his pride, he said: Non serviam: I will not serve God, I will not serve such a God, I will not serve such a plan. Lucifer rejected the supernatural in favor of the natural.

The man or woman who chooses virginity or celibacy for the kingdom of God is doing the opposite. In a way, he or she is setting aside the natural in favor of the supernatural. The virgin or celibate is relinquishing that which is most natural to the human being—to live in partnership with another of the opposite sex, finding in this community a friendship and fruitfulness intended for man from the beginning, written into his very bodily nature, as we see in the account of Eve’s being fashioned from the side of Adam and then brought to him as his wife.

Just as nothing is more natural to man than marriage, nothing more supremely testifies to the offering of oneself to God in love than relinquishing it for His sake. The life of the virgin or the celibate is a holocaust in imitation of Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God. As the Word became flesh for our sakes, the consecrated soul makes of his or her own flesh a living word of total consent and surrender to God. The virgin or celibate is the supreme human sign of God’s radically self-emptying redemptive love—and the complete antithesis of Lucifer’s self-inversion.

But as the saints pray without ceasing and generate prayer in others, so the devil, who is a liar and the father of lies (John 8:44), lies without ceasing, and fathers ever more lies in his victims. He persuades people to think that celibacy or virginity is a denigration of marriage, that those who promote this higher state and calling are casting aspersions on the order of creation, the goodness of nature, the beauty of married love. He presents himself, at times, as a defender of these things, but only in a distorted way, as Luther was.

The devil wants the exclusive commitment of priests and religious to the Lord and His people to be diluted or abandoned, so that he can amplify and multiply his own infernal rebellion against the clothing of grace in favor of a naked nature he can call his own—and an army of followers he can call his own, who follow him to the emptiness and frustration of eternally denuded nature. Most of all, however, he sows the lie that man cannot be fulfilled apart from sex, from sexual experience and expression—that humans are maimed and impoverished if they do not enjoy the fleshly presence of another man or woman.

How subtle the strategy of Satan is! The ultimate impoverishment of man is, in reality, to live without God, to live without knowledge of or desire for his eternal communion with God in heaven. Since the priesthood and the religious life are both directly ordered to living out and proclaiming the reality and primacy of the Kingdom of Heaven, it is crucial for the well-being of mankind that priests and religious be unambiguous signs of our ultimate destiny—for in heaven, as Our Lord teaches, there is neither marrying nor giving in marriage. The one all-sufficient marriage in heaven is the perfect union of Christ and His Church. 

This marriage of Christ and the Church has two special signs on earth that point to it: the sacrament of matrimony and the sacrament of the Eucharist. Therefore the devil attacks both of them.

He attacks marriage by undermining the goods of marriage: offspring (through contraception and abortion), fidelity (through fornication and adultery), and sacrament (through divorce and pastoral practices that countenance divorce).

He attacks the Holy Eucharist, which is the fleshly presence of the Savior and fully capable of satisfying our hunger for love in this life, by attacking the sacred liturgy, by tempting people to make it into an anthropocentric, horizontal self-celebration through which its very meaning is undermined, even if the sacrament may still have been effected.

Thus, the devil’s strategy is multifaceted.

He works to undermine the indissoluble covenant of marriage, which is the sacramental sign of the indestructible and superabundantly fruitful union of Christ and His Church. The contemporary war against marriage is also, indeed more deeply, a war against the nuptial union of Christ and the Church—a vain but frenzied effort to erase from the minds of men any memory of this glorious union consummated on the Cross.

He works to undermine the Most Holy Eucharist, which is the sign and cause of our communion with Christ and our highest participation in His self-oblation on the Cross.

He works to undermine the priesthood and religious life, which exemplify and effectively bring about in this world the ordering of all creation, through Christ, to the Father, who is the beginning and end of all things. The common element in all these attacks is the devil’s fury that anyone or anything natural should ever be subordinated to that which is supernatural—that a faithful, radical self-sacrifice should be the path of salvation and blessedness.

Editor's note: This reflection will be completed next week. Stay tuned. 

Print All Articles
View specific date