All articles from May 7, 2018




The Pulse

  • There are no pulse articles posted on May 7, 2018.

Featured Image
The HuskerCatholic Rosary Crusade
Amelia Jarecke

News, ,

Thousands of Catholics surround university campus as part of ‘Rosary Crusade’

Amelia Jarecke

LINCOLN, Nebraska, May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – The University of Nebraska-Lincoln has long been uniting Nebraskans over the common cause of college football. On April 29, thousands of Nebraskans came to campus not to cheer on the Huskers, but to pray to the Blessed Virgin Mary together.

Catholics from all parishes in the Lincoln Diocese and those within a 60-mile radius of Lincoln surrounded the university campus with the HuskerCatholic Candle-lit Rosary Crusade. Bishop James D. Conley also participated.

At World Youth Day in 1993, Pope Saint John Paul II said, “Do not be afraid to go out on the streets and into public places like the first apostles who preached Christ and the Good News of salvation in the squares of cities, towns, and villages. This is no time to be ashamed of the Gospel. It is time to preach it from the rooftops. Do not be afraid to break out of the comfortable and routine modes of living in order to take up the challenge of making Christ known in the modern metropolis.”

The approximately 4,000 people who participated in the Rosary Crusade certainly did make Christ known in Lincoln.

The man behind the mission is Father James Kelleher S.O.L.T., the founder and director of the Eucharistic Family Rosary Crusade. Bishop Conley invited “the rosary priest” to bring his work to Nebraska, and leading up to the event, Fr. Kelleher gave talks about the rosary to Catholic schools throughout the diocese.

He focused on responding to the call of Our Lady of Fatima to pray the rosary.

“These three little kids faithfully praying the rosary every day helped bring World War I to an end,” Father Kelleher told Nebraskans.

Mary told the children – two of whom are now canonized – to pray for peace in 1917. The same intention remained true for the Rosary Crusade, because the world today is just as desperate for peace.

 The image of the rosary as a spiritual weapon is why the event was called a crusade.

“Our Lady exhorted the children and us that to fight Satan we need weapons, and the rosary is one of our most powerful weapons to restore God to the family and to our society,” said Bishop Conley.

Rosary Crusade Committee Vice President Wayne Ringer said Catholics joined Mary’s army against evil with their public prayers.

He also said it was significant that Catholics prayed the rosary around campus, where the “next generation of leaders” is being formed.

While kneeling at an altar behind St. Thomas Aquinas Church, Bishop Conley led the prayers. His voice rang out through portable radios all over downtown Lincoln.

Priests and FOCUS Missionaries from the Newman Center encouraged college students to make a public witness to their faith.

Father Steven Mills, assistant priest at St. Thomas Aquinas Church, said, “This gave students the opportunity to live out their faith and draw beyond just something they do at home or in private. They were able to say, ‘This is me. This is who I am.’”

The rosary raised the curiosity of non-Catholic college students. Fr. Mills recalled watching a young man walk out of his fraternity house to ask the participants about their purpose in praying.  

FOCUS Missionary Mary Forbes said that these questions are very important for evangelization.

She explained, “The students can start a really cool conversation. Their friends will ask, ‘Why did you do that? Why did you take time out of your finals week to stand outside and recite words?’ And the students can tell them, ‘Actually, there is a reason for this – there is a God and He yearns for you just to turn to Him.’”

Young students made up a large portion of the crowd.

“We are strong enough to take this on because of our awesome priests and religious sisters who provide such a great example for us. They really inspire us young people to pray and receive the sacraments and to just really be present in our faith and that it’s not just something for when you get older,” said University of Nebraska sophomore Elizabeth Foley.

Pius X High School senior Joe Pynes was inspired to attend the Rosary Crusade because he hopes to see an end to the violence in the world today.

“I think it sends a powerful message of unity without anger,” he explained. “There’s a lot of anger going around and when we gather to pray, it shows peace in a stronger way than anything else.”

“I first heard the call to the priesthood when I was a student at the University of Nebraska, so when I heard about this, my first instinct was to go,” said Father Patrick Behm of Fort Dodge, Iowa, who travelled three and a half hours to pray with the Nebraskans. “I think it’s a great witness to evangelize not only the students here but the larger culture and the entire city really.” 

The prayer event “was a beautiful expression of faith,” said Bishop Conley. “I wish I could’ve been 200 feet in the air and seen it from above, but I’m sure it was a beautiful sight from heaven and God and Our Lady smiled.”

Featured Image
Jeffrey McCall at the Freedom March in Washington, D.C., May 5, 2018 Doug Mainwaring / LifeSiteNews
Doug Mainwaring Doug Mainwaring Follow Doug


Former trans-woman: I dumped my dresses, hair, makeup to follow Jesus

Doug Mainwaring Doug Mainwaring Follow Doug
By Doug Mainwaring
Freedom March at the Washington Monument in Washington D.C., May 5, 2018. Doug Mainwaring / LifeSiteNews
Jeffrey McCall at the Freedom March in Washington, D.C., May 5, 2018 Doug Mainwaring / LifeSiteNews

WASHINGTON DC, May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – A band of young courageous ex-gays and ex-transgenders from around the United States converged on the Nation’s Capital on the weekend to proclaim in public the freedom they have found by having a relationship with Jesus Christ.

Their message stands in stark opposition to popular LGBT dogma, which until now has dominated national discourse. 

The racially diverse group of mostly millennials — formerly sexually active gays and lesbians, as well as others who had lived as ‘transgenders’ (assuming the identity of a member of the opposite sex) — spoke about their personal conversion to Jesus and the freedom that comes from having a new life in Christ. 

The group marched from the Washington Monument grounds toward the Ellipse in front of the White House. The banner that they carried in the public square says it all: “Freedom march.” As they carried the banner, they chanted “Jesus delivers.”

Some LGBT groups and commentators were quick to dismiss the gathering as being about “conversion therapy.”  But the young people said that this was not what they were talking about.  

Their stories are not based on “reparative therapy,” so-called attempts to “pray away the gay,” or other efforts to change sexual orientation. They spoke only about conversion to Jesus Christ and embracing the new identity as an adopted child of God that goes along with that. 

These men and women who have found Christ accept the reality of their same-sex attractions or transgender impulses. But what makes them different from other same-sex attracted person is that they seek their individual self-worth in Christ, not in their sexual appetites. 

They attest that their attractions do not dictate their relationships. Rather than choose the now culturally acceptable and celebrated same-sex relationships, or seeking “affirmation” as a member of the opposite sex, they instead have chosen Jesus Christ, and along the way they have found what they say is genuine freedom.

They have come to know that while they may not have a choice about their sexual attractions or gender dysphoria, they do have a choice about their relationships and how they live their lives.  

Former Trans Woman:  ‘I threw it away to follow Jesus’

The improbable organizer of the Freedom March is a young man from Georgia, Jeffrey McCall.  He formerly lived as a trans "woman" and went by the name, “Scarlet.”  

Instead of dressing as a woman, McCall now wears a bright red tee shirt emblazoned with ‘JESUS’ in big letters across his chest.

“I was living as a female,” McCall told the crowd. He explained that when he was younger, he saw a psychiatrist and was about to begin a series of gender transitioning surgeries.

“One night I was secretly listening to a preacher in my apartment,” recalled McCall.  “I called out to the Lord, and asked, ‘Will I ever live for you? … I’ve seen real people live for you … not just going to church; They have relationships with you, and they have peace and joy.”  

“I had wanted to kill myself,” he said.  “I was spiritually bankrupt; I was destitute.”  

And at that moment McCall knew he “was being convicted by the Holy Spirit that there is so much more than [what] I had been a part of.”

McCall, who up until that time had been an activist pushing for transgender rights, told Jesus, ‘If I follow you, it will be all the way.  I don’t do things half-way.  I didn’t do things half-way in the world;  I’m not going to do things half-way with you.’  

“And so I took all my life as Scarlet and I went to a dumpster and threw it all away—the clothes, the hair, the make-up, the jewelry, the shoes, my whole identity—I threw it away to follow Jesus.”  

McCall prayed out loud while giving his talk that the testimonies given by ex-gays and ex-transgenders would help transform the lives of any who heard who were caught up in the LGBT movement. 

“Father God … I thank you that the lies and deception that have been placed on our country are about to begin to break.  Lives will be transformed today. People will see, through the telling of our stories, the power of the Gospel, the power of the blood of Jesus Christ,” he said. 

Pulse Nightclub Survivor: ‘Come and fall in love with Jesus and he’ll do the rest’

Another member of the band was Luis Ruiz, who survived Orlando’s horrific Pulse Nightclub massacre two years ago where 49 were killed in an act of Islam-inspired terrorism that was intended as revenge for US anti-terror policies abroad. 

Ruiz chose to deliver his impassioned message on his knees.  

“The Holy Spirit is pouring out,” blessings and power and “He is raising up a generation with boldness,” said Ruiz.  

Appealing to the same-sex attracted around the country and the world, Ruiz issued an invitation. 

“I love you guys.  LGBTQ, I love you.  I love all of you guys.  Come as you are.  Fall in love with Jesus.  He’ll do the rest. Forget [your preconceived notions] that ‘we have to become this and that,’ and that we ‘have to become a man now,’or we have to get married just to make it seem like we’re ‘church folk.’  No, no, no, no!” he said. 

“Come and fall in love with Jesus and he’ll do the rest.  And then if you decide that’s not what you want, you can go right out, just like you came in,” he added.

Ruiz concluded by saying that what’s important is having a relationship with Jesus Christ.

Featured Image
Adam Putnam
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin

News, ,

Florida governor candidate vows to sign heartbeat bill, oppose transgender bathrooms

Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

ORLANDO, Florida, May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Republican candidate for governor Adam Putnam vowed Saturday night to sign legislation banning abortions once a heartbeat is detected and to veto legislation mandating that men be allowed to use women’s restrooms, if he is elected.

“If the heartbeat bill gets to my desk, I will sign it,” Putnam, currently the state’s Agriculture Commissioner, declared during a question-and-answer event with his leading primary opponent, U.S. Rep. Ron DeSantis. “That life is real. It should be protected. It should be defended.”

Last week, Iowa became the first state in the nation to put such a law on the books, banning the vast majority of abortions in the state. The law protects pre-born babies more than any other pro-life law in America. State Planned Parenthood affiliates and the left-wing American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) are expected to file a lawsuit against the law’s enforcement.

“There are some very powerful arguments to be made that just as faith and science illuminate each other, as Justice [Sandra Day] O'Connor said, science is on a collision course with current case law,” Putnam explained in his answer, which recalled his experience of listening to the heartbeat of one of his four children during his wife’s pregnancy.

Before the event, Putnam also pledged to pro-lifers that he would “remove activist judges who seek to protect abortions by legislating from the bench.”

After the event, Florida Democratic Party spokesperson Kevin Donohoe declared that Putnam’s answer revealed him to be an “anti-choice extremist hell-bent with taking away women's health freedom.”

DeSantis is also pro-life, and told the crowd that his son’s ultrasound was “a powerful example of science reinforcing something that I believe,” but was not questioned about the heartbeat bill specifically. LifeSiteNews has reached out to the DeSantis campaign for his position but did not hear back by press time.

DeSantis is not listed as a co-sponsor of the federal version of the heartbeat bill, the Heartbeat Protection Act.

Putnam also declared that he was “not going to sign a bill that allows men in my daughters' restrooms.” DeSantis agreed, but added that he didn’t think “getting into bathroom wars” was “a good use of our time.” Florida does not currently have statewide legislation specifically addressing the subject.

Eleven Republicans and six Democrats are currently running to succeed Republican Gov. Rick Scott, who is ineligible for a third term. President Donald Trump has endorsed DeSantis.

Ohio passed a version of the heartbeat bill in 2016, but Republican Gov. John Kasich vetoed it. Rep. Steve King, R-IA, is the main sponsor of the federal heartbeat bill.

Featured Image
March for Life UK, May 5, 2018. John Aron / March for Life UK
K.V. Turley


Thousands march for life in London one week after passing of Alfie Evans

K.V. Turley
March for Life UK, May 5, 2018. John Aron March for Life
March for Life UK, May 5, 2018. John Aron / March for Life UK

LONDON, May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – There were two protests in London on Saturday. One was the annual UK March for Life, now in its fifth year, and the first time it had taken place in London. The other was a counter-protest from pro-abortion groups.

The 4,000 strong march started from a central London hotel, where a family friendly pro-life festival took place. The venue was heavily ringed with security provided by a privately financed security firm – such were the concerns of the organizers about possible disruption following the scenes witnessed at last year’s March for Life held in Birmingham.

At last year's event, pro-abortion counter-demonstrators managed to hijack the day. For a considerable time, they blocked the procession through Birmingham city center. The West Midlands Police, tasked with policing and protecting the march, appeared to be powerless to shift the aggressive, chanting crowd blocking the march.  Women, children and elderly pro-life supporters were, as a result, forced to stand in the pouring rain for a prolonged period. 

There were no such problems during the Saturday march in London. Francis Carey, Chief Steward for the March for Life, predicted there would be no repeat of last year’s disruption on account of London’s Metropolitan Police being used to accompanying contentious marches through the streets of Westminster. His prediction proved right. The march left on time and arrived in Parliament Square encountering little by way of counter-protest. 

Awaiting the March for Life in Parliament Square, however, there was another protest march from pro-abortion groups. Shouting obscenities, they had come simply to belittle and verbally abuse the March for Life participants. Even after the March for Life had proceeded into the square and started its speeches, the counter-demonstration continued throughout to chant from a distance. 

This year’s UK March for Life took place against a background of persistent attacks upon life in Britain. The 50th anniversary of the implementation of legalized abortion has just passed. Furthermore, last week, laws came into effect banning prayer or the offer of help outside a London abortion center. This type of prohibition is now expected to be rolled out across the country, assailing as it does - at the behest of the abortion industry - freedom of assembly, freedom of speech and freedom of worship. 

In addition, the case of Alfie Evans still throws a long shadow. Many on the march expressed fears that British authorities no longer care about the rights of the most defenseless in society.  

For all the darkness enveloping the UK those on the march were in decidedly upbeat spirits. There were people from all over the United Kingdom - families, single people, elderly couples, religious and ‘Vegans for Life’: all marching for life. In short, the march’s participants were a cross-section of largely ordinary British people who had come to London to say of abortion: “Not in my name.” 

Bright sunshine welcomed the march as it set off from the hotel. The March for Life then made its way through London’s Covent Garden district before winding down past such historic landmarks as Trafalgar Square and Whitehall, then past 10 Downing Street, before arriving at the green in front of the Mother of Parliaments.  

The pro-life marchers were then treated to US singer-songwriter, Joy Villa, speaking unapologetically of her pro-life commitment.  Two speeches, both moving and uplifting, followed. The first was from Rachel MacKenzie of the post-abortive support group, Rachel’s Vineyard. Her personal testimony, and plain speaking, would have silenced any protestors had they cared to listen. After two abortions, followed by a life that spiraled out of control, Rachel finally found what she was looking for: someone to tell her that abortion was wrong but that there was forgiveness. 

Next to speak was Clare McCullough, founder of the Good Counsel Network.  She has been at the forefront of attempts to overturn the recent legal moves to prevent prayer and sidewalk counselling outside abortion centres. She gave an equally moving testimony if from a different angle. She talked of the verbal abuse and physical assault that both she and her staff have endured outside abortion centres perpetrated by those pro-abortion groups there to offer ‘support’ to the women accessing such facilities. As McCullough poignantly pointed out: at the end of the day, a baby was going to be born to the women attending the abortion centre – the question was simply was it going to be born alive or dead. Either way, it was going to be traumatic for the woman concerned. 

Later, joining McCullough upon the stage from which she spoke were some of the women helped by the Good Counsel Network. Now they told their story. They spoke haltingly and nervously but no less powerfully of the help they had been offered and gratefully received outside abortion facilities, and which allowed them to continue with their pregnancies. Their children were also brought on stage and the obvious love and affection between the mothers and their children spoke volumes about the joy of welcoming life. 

The March for Life has continued to grow in size and significance each year. The question in Britain today, however, is not when the next march will happen, but, given the current climate, if in due course such marches will be banned, just like the peaceful prayer and offers of help to pregnant women outside abortion centres.

Featured Image
Thomas J. McKenna

News, ,

New center in honor of St. Gianna Molla to be established in U.S.

Thomas J. McKenna
By Thomas McKenna

May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – On April 17, several hundred people participated in a special Mass and gala dinner held in Fargo, North Dakota to announce plans to establish the Saint Gianna and Pietro Molla International Center for Family and Life in the United States. Cardinal Raymond Burke, who was the principal celebrant of the Mass, together with Bishop John Folda, bishop of Fargo, hosted the inspiring events, which featured St. Gianna's daughter, Gianna Emanuela, as the keynote speaker to officially make the announcement.

Preliminary plans, which have been underway for several years, sought to construct the International Center to Saint Gianna in Ponte Nuovo, Italy. "With much prayer and deliberation, it has become very clear that my mother is greatly revered and loved in the United States," stated Gianna Emanuela. "And the fact that all of the money that has been raised thus far has come from people in the United States, my brother and sister, along with Cardinal Burke and others involved, have decided that the center should be established in the United States," she continued. The center will serve as a pilgrimage site and will consist of grounds with a reconstruction of the home where St. Gianna lived after her marriage and a little chapel situated next to the original home as in Italy.

On Mother's Day in 1994, the Year of the Family, Pope John Paul II beatified Gianna Beretta Molla in the presence of her husband, siblings, and children. He proposed her as a model for all mothers, saying:

A woman of exceptional love, an outstanding wife and mother, she gave witness in her daily life to the demanding values of the Gospel. By holding up this woman as an exemplar of Christian perfection, we would like to extol all those high-spirited mothers of families who give themselves completely to their family, who suffer in giving birth, who are prepared for every labor and every kind of sacrifice, so that the best they have can be given to others.

On May 16, 2004, Saint John Paul II canonized Saint Gianna, whom he referred to as "The Mother of a Family."

"There is clearly great fervor here in the United States for the pro-life, pro-family movement, and Saint Gianna has certainly inspired many in this mission for life," stated Mary Pat Jahner, the organizer of the event and the founder of St. Gianna's Maternity Home in Warsaw, N.D.

During the homily at the Mass, Cardinal Burke highlighted the life and virtues that led St. Gianna to be canonized. At the dinner, he explained more details of the project before Gianna Emanuela gave a presentation on the life of her saint mother before an appeal was made for donations to help complete the project. A committee is currently considering several options of locations of where to establish the center and will be announced at a future time.

To learn more about the project and to donate, go to the National Catholic Community Foundation.

Thomas McKenna is the founder and president of St. Gianna Physicians Guild and serves on the committee founding the Saint Gianna and Pietro Molla Center.

Featured Image
Entrance to Walt Disney World, Orlando, Florida.
Calvin Freiburger


Disney World ends annual Christian music festival after 34 years

Calvin Freiburger
By Calvin Freiburger

ORLANDO, Florida, May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – After 34 years, Walt Disney World has ended its annual Night of Joy event showcasing Christian music artists.

“Last year was our last event,” a spokeswoman for the Florida resort confirmed to the Orlando Sentinel. She added that the decision was made in the interest of “continually changing our offerings.”

Rikki Niblett of the blog notes that the announcement follows the deletion of the Night of Joy’s official Facebook page.

The resort has hosted the Christian concerts in September since 1983, mostly in Magic Kingdom but with two years at Disney’s Hollywood Studios, and at ESPN Wide World of Sports complex for its final two years.

Steven Curtis Chapman, Amy Grant, Newsboys, Casting Crowns, Chris Tomlin, Kirk Franklin, Michael W. Smith, and Debby Boone are among the major names to perform over the years. Its final 2017 showing, which had to be canceled after its first night due to Hurricane Irma, featured TobyMac and MercyMe.

The Sentinel notes that in 1998, Orlando’s Universal Studios launched its own competing Christian music event, also in September, called Rock the Universe. Universal’s festival will continue in 2018. SeaWorld still hosts a yearly Christian music fest as well, called Praise Wave, in February.

Night of Joy’s popularity eventually caused it to grow to include a variety of side activities, the Christian Post adds. Disney’s listing for the 2017 event says its associated FanFest included “appearances by some of your favorite Night of Joy artists, Disney character meet-and-greets, video games and sporting activities.”

Disney is not completely eliminating Christian music, however. Its annual Eat to the Beat concert series, hosted at Epcot, is slated to feature MercyMe and Tauren Wells.

Disney has come under fire for undermining Christian values in a variety of ways across its entertainment and vacation properties, most recently by selling hats featuring rainbow Mickey Mouse ears to symbolize “gay pride.” For years its Orlando park has allowed unofficial “Gay Days,” which even some pro-LGBT activists have criticized for associating “gay pride” with leather “fetish” outfits, sexually suggestive dancing, and even partial nudity.

Last year, Disney depicted children with two lesbian mothers in the preschool-aimed cartoon Doctor McStuffins, included an unrequited homosexual attraction in its live-action Beauty and the Beast remake, showed multiple same-sex couples kissing in the cartoon Star vs. the Forces of Evil, and introduced a storyline about a 13-year-old wrestling with homosexual attraction in the teen-targeted series Andi Mack. Top members of Frozen’s production team have expressed interest in making lead character Elsa a lesbian, as well.

Featured Image
Moira Greyland
Matthew Cullinan Hoffman Matthew Cullinan Hoffman Follow Matthew

News, ,

INTERVIEW: Daughter of famed sci-fi author explains mother’s gay pedophile worldview

Matthew Cullinan Hoffman Matthew Cullinan Hoffman Follow Matthew
By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

“Science fiction is full of bizarre sexuality with no limits at all,” says the daughter of Marion Zimmer Bradley. “The issue is not admitting that science fiction fandom has a pedophile problem.  The issue is that science fiction fandom denies that pedophilia IS a problem.”

May 7, 2018 ( – Moira Greyland, daughter of famed science fiction author Marion Zimmer Bradley, has recently published her memoirs recounting the horrific sexual abuse she and her two brothers suffered at the hands of her lesbian mother and homosexual father, Walter Breen, a famous numismatist in his own right.  Greyland’s book, The Last Closet: The Dark Side of Avalon, has spent weeks on Amazon’s bestseller lists for Kindle and was recently published as a physical book by Castalia House.

In the following interview with LifeSite, Greyland explains the mentality and worldview that animated her parents and that led so many science fiction fans to ignore and even to accept Marion Zimmer Bradley and Walter Breen’s homosexualist and pedophilic ideologies. Greyland also provides a context for understanding the sexual deviancy that permeates Zimmer Bradley’s works, particularly her bestselling “Mists of Avalon.”

LifeSite: Your account of life in the madhouse that was your home is truly horrific and simultaneously very credible. Both of your parents were homosexual activists who sexually and physically abused you for years, and your father in particular sexually abused a large number of boys outside of the family. Your home was a moral and physical chaos, a place that was unhinged and seemingly without boundaries, and this was witnessed by many people. How did these two individuals, so famous and highly regarded in their respective fields of work (science fiction authorship and numismatics), and so very public in their interactions with others, get away with such atrocities for so long, and what does that say about the moral state of sci-fi fandom, and the city of Berkeley, where you grew up?

Moira Greyland: There are two reasons my mother and father got away with what they did for so long.  Fame and money, with the first being more important. 

Fame confers a glamour on its owner.  Fame makes it seem as though the one possessing it understands something which mere mortals cannot, and so imitating the famous person will surely lead to success and happiness.

My mother’s fame came from her ability to write, and to express ideas which appealed to a large number of people.  Her descriptions of edgy, perverted sexuality appealed to those eager to throw off the rigid moral structure and narrow ideas about sexuality which prevailed in her day.

The fact that these moral structures were protective of both men and women was trampled and tossed aside in pursuit of new internal permissions to do literally anything with anyone.  The fact that the consequences of these new internal permissions was disaster for generations of men, women and children who must now live with broken homes, all that was ignored. 

In all the counterculture groups, whether the Society for Creative Anachronism or science fiction fandom, the group becomes a stand-in for one’s own family.  Fandom is full of the disaffected, the misfits, people from broken homes, even people who were rejected by their own families for one reason or another.  The new surrogate family is every bit as broken as the original family, but its value is greatly exaggerated to the people who need it, because it provides not only a common frame of reference but common interests, and a sense of belonging and understanding which they might never have experienced before.

And there you have the true poison pill of science fiction fandom and the sexual revolution: my father viewed himself as a revolutionary and a visionary.  He did not see himself as a pedophile.  He saw himself as gay. Moreover, since he regarded every man as being “naturally gay” he was doing a great thing, in his own imagination.  The real-life failure of his sexual ideas was a source of anger and frustration to him.  We simply did not live up to his expectations with all our tiresome crying and protests. My father was perpetually annoyed that the boy prostitutes he saw wanted money, food and presents, instead of “desiring” him, as he thought they should.

I could imagine him screaming at me and his other targets “Hurry up and get enlightened and quit crying right this minute!!!”

Rocking the boat represents the end of the new, idealized surrogate family.  The price for standing up for a child is being ostracized by one’s entire family.  For someone in a surrogate family, losing the new family is unthinkable.  Social death hurt too much the first time for anyone to want to risk it a second time.

So were the Berkeley fannish people morally nebulous?  Yes.  They took social and moral cues from the writers they admired, and science fiction is full of bizarre sexuality with no limits at all.  There was a sense that sexual morality was something left behind with their square, unsympathetic original families.  Since sexual morality was so widely questioned, it was easier to assume that the famous people had figured it all out and do the same stupid things they did.

And the blind lead the blind.  Sexual morality is questioned, loyalty to the new group is total, and the price is too high, but it does not feel as high as social annihilation. The sexual predators took reckless advantage of the need for belonging exhibited by the followers.  

By an absolute fluke, I ended up on the outside.  I did not care if my famous mother approved of me or not.  Over time, it became more and more obvious that the price of remaining in my family was to overlook conduct which would cause absolute destruction of another human being.  When the person being destroyed was me, I figured I could cope.  But when the person being destroyed was a child, I didn’t think I had the right to make him cope. 

And I was furious at what I was being asked to overlook!  How could the adults in my family encourage a woman to leave her son with my father for a week, and make sure she did not ask me, the only person in the whole family who would have told her to keep her son away from my father?

By reporting my father to the police, I broke the central rule of the community by visibly siding with the authorities against sexual license which included exploitation of a little boy.  I fell on my sword and lost all my people. And it hurt, like nothing had ever hurt before.  But there were gifts in the agony.  I lost horrible people, not decent people, and I decisively took a moral stand that let me know I was not one of them.  I would not be bought, I would not be silenced, and if it upset a million apple carts to get that little boy out of danger, it was worth it.  After losing horrible people, I found decent people.  People who would never have dreamed of making the sort of moral compromises my mother made every day.

For the best possible picture of the moral atmosphere of Berkeley, look to the situation in my family when my father is trying to “adopt” Barry, his twelve year old sexual partner.  My mother is completely aware of what my father has been doing, and suggests that once Barry is adopted that he be a son instead of a sexual partner.

Can you imagine being in a house where the mother takes for granted the fact that her husband is sleeping with several little boys, and she is so unconcerned about it that she simply suggests the sexual relationship between her husband and a child end once he is adopted?

The fact that my father had no interest in complying with her wishes was beside the point.

How many women would tolerate a child being sodomized under her roof?

LifeSite: The homosexual movement has a long history of association with organizations and groups that are sympathetic to pedophilia or promote it outright. Your father was a homosexual activist and an open advocate of pedophilia. For decades the “North American Man-Boy Love Association” (NAMBLA) marched in homosexual “pride” marches, and major homosexual organizations, like the International Gay and Lesbian Association, used to have NAMBLA as a member. Do you see the embrace of pedophilia as a natural outgrowth of the homosexual movement?

Moira Greyland: In my father’s book, Greek Love (J.Z. Eglinton, 1962), he explored at length the fact that pedophilic and pederastic relationships are the historical norm, and peer-to-peer gay relationships are a modern phenomenon. Where I completely deny my father’s contention that pederastic relationships do anything positive for young men, I do believe that nearly all gay men were initiated in this fashion as boys by older men.

Attempts to sanitize these “initiations” of younger boys by older men are ongoing, including in the recent movie “Call Me By Your Name” which Hollywood gushed over, despite its appalling content.

Since the reality of gay culture depends on these initiations, there are only two choices: keep the reality of the genesis of a gay identity secret, or yank it out of the closet and risk the outrage and hatred of the general public.

Here is the trouble: screaming “homophobia” at anything which has a problem with homosexual conduct will only go so far.  As soon as our children are endangered, and their seduction praised, the torches and pitchforks rightfully come out.

After all, this is the Big Secret, and the truth behind a gay identity.  Father-son porn is the number one topic of all gay pornography.  Why is this the actual reality?  In male nature, there is the need to pursue, to vanquish, to conquer.  This is much easier with a young, vulnerable, hairless and helpless male.  They can be manipulated into adoring an older male, putting up with darned near ANYTHING for his love and approval (read: fathering) and they submit.  Always in male homosexual relationships, there is the top and the bottom, the giver and the receiver, and these roles are predicated on age and the ability to project masculine dominance.

This is the conclusion I reached, not only from knowing far too many young boys seduced by my father, but also reading the words of former gay men like Joseph Sciambra and Robert Oscar Lopez.

Male homosexuals know, and count on the fact that a young man who does not have a present, protective father in his life will be much easier to seduce than either a masculine boy who obviously has a strong father, or an older man who might well beat or kill them for a sexual overture.  They seek out boys who are unsure or effeminate, precisely because of those qualities.

How can they persuade those they persuade?  Boys tend to be perpetually sexually frustrated, and know that vanishingly few girls will go along with their advances at that age.  Predatory male homosexuals take advantage of this knowledge, and offer porn and intoxicants to lower the inhibitions of their target.  Once the sexual assault has taken place, even involuntary arousal on the part of the male victim is used as “proof” that the boy is actually gay.  

This attitude assumes that being gay is a physical, inevitable reality which other gay men can “see.”  But the truth is that the first sexual experience will usually create an indelible impression, a longstanding change to a male fantasy life, deliberately imposed.  These raped and molested boys are not “gay,” they have been forcibly imprinted with a sexual act meant to permanently alter their fantasy life.

Claiming the involuntary arousal suffered by the boy “proves” they are gay is like claiming that bleeding as the result of a stab wound proves the victim wanted to be stabbed.

In any case, the raped boy is destroyed three times.  Once by the betrayal of the sexual assault, even if they end up going along with it, once by the permanent alteration to their fantasy life, and once by the forced imposition of a “gay” identity which is made to seem inevitable and indelible.

Without pederastic relationships, there would be no adult gay men.  But as it is the Big Secret, don’t expect any admissions about this.  When Milo joked about his own initiation at thirteen, he was demolished in the press.  Shortly thereafter, he admitted on video that he actually had been raped, and it actually was a horrible experience.  

It is no joke. When I see a man who identifies as homosexual acting out in a flamboyant way, I see the thirteen year old boys in my house screaming with rage: “I meant to do that!  You did not hurt me, I am no victim, and you will not own me, you BASTARD!”

LifeSite: Many science fiction and fantasy authors have treated pedophilia, incest, and homosexuality with a creepy sort of sympathy. For example, Robert Heinlein’s “Time Enough for Love,” has a protagonist who has sexual relations with his adopted daughter, clones himself as two women and “marries” them (as well as two men), and finally travels back in time where he has sexual relations with his own mother. The book was nominated for both the Hugo and Nebula awards and Heinlein was called the “dean of science fiction writers,” and his followers have created a “Robert Heinlein award” for science fiction writing.

My question is this: as one who grew up in this world and was so terribly victimized by such attitudes, why do you believe sci-fi and fantasy writers and their fans have such a thirst for this kind of material? What is the connection between these genres of literature and these pathological tendencies?

Moira Greyland: People wanted to have promiscuous sex and the books gave them a map.  The authors writing about the promiscuous sex were hailed as Great Thinkers, and it was assumed that if the people in the books were happy and promiscuous, then it would work out that way in real life.

Throwing off sexual morality meant more sex, more often, with no way for women to refuse without being labeled “prudish.”  It meant an end to the sexual dominance of the biggest and the strongest, and meant any ugly jerk could get laid if he had drugs and a good line.

Sexual morality is questioned, and all the rules are thrown out.  Suddenly, instead of having one husband and one wife, people are having all kinds of sex with all kinds of people, and a lot of people like it.  Some are too drug-addled, drunk or stupid to think through the implications, and others have weak personalities and go along with anything their husband or wife demands provided they can stay married.

But here is the trouble.  Since the new social circle operates on a new rulebook, whether it is the Stranger in a Strange Land rulebook or the Darkover rulebook, it is no longer acceptable to do things the old way.  In practice, the wife who has a broken heart because her husband is carrying on with five women, or five small boys, had better keep her mouth shut or risk losing him. 

Since the books delegitimize jealousy and fidelity, troubles in the relationship which normally result from adultery must be blamed on something else.  Now instead of it being normal to hate the other woman, the wife is in the atrocious position of having to blame her own jealousy and possessiveness for her agony.  She can no longer blame her husband for his conduct, and must instead blame herself.

Naturally, in practice, this is a recipe for disaster.  The result is divorce, abortions, broken homes, single parenthood, and always the blame was misplaced.  Adultery does not work.  Promiscuity does not work.  Polyamory does not work.  But if you are in a social circle where they are normalized, you have to swallow the poison pill or lose your social group.

Even in the weirdest social circle, there will be a few good couples who love each other and who just can’t get into the poly stuff no matter how fashionable it might be.  One might even think that those people have a moral compass or a backbone, and they are probably the couple that heads on over to church while the rest of their circle are sleeping off the debauchery.   Are they aware that their morality has saved their marriage and their family?  Maybe.  But you can be sure they do not trumpet their differences.  And years after the dust settles, it will be those couples who say “I always felt funny about the weird sex in Marion Zimmer Bradley’s books.”  

And it will be those couples who have stayed together.

LifeSite: According to your account, your home was a place of pagan rituals and your parents apparently considered themselves to be pagans, at least in the 1970s. How did pagan beliefs and practices contribute to your parents’ worldview?

Moira Greyland: As I mentioned in my book, I do not believe my mother or father actually believed a shred of the goddess-worship nonsense they peddled.  Goddess-worship translates loosely to “men worship women as goddesses, so let’s all have lots of sex with our goddesses, because in paganism, worship is confused with sex.”

What my mother actually believed in was occultism.  She frequently referenced the Rosicrucian church, and believed in ghosts, spirits, and psychic powers.  My father believed in psychic powers, and in aliens.  They denied both hell and heaven and spoke of “The Other Side” as the realm of the afterlife.

Both believed in reincarnation.  Not Hindu reincarnation, which holds that a bad man is reborn as a woman, and a bad woman is reborn as a cabbage or an insect.  Instead, they believed in New Age reincarnation, which holds that our promiscuous, oft married, divorced and shacked-up parents are so amazingly enlightened that they will be successively reborn to greater and greater planes of existence.

After listening to the psychic gobbledygook for decades, I came to a few conclusions.  First, it is nonsense, and second, it is not well thought out nonsense.  Telepathy could be replaced by the far simpler and more effective expedient of picking up the phone, or paying someone a visit and actually talking to them.  Psychokinesis or teleportation could be replaced by simply getting up, picking up the item you want moved and moving it yourself.  Levitation, which at best seems to amount to sages bouncing around on their bottoms, could be easily replaced by getting up and walking where you want to go, getting into the car, or booking a flight on Southwest.  

Being impressed with or claiming psychic powers was just another way for strong personalities to manipulate weaker ones.  “I am A Heap Big Powerful Psychic Magic Person” really meant “I am stronger, smarter and more powerful than you.  I am Alpha, and I therefore have sexual privilege, and you will obey me.”

Perhaps the most important thing to notice about the entire culture of the Sixties and Seventies is this.  Traditionally, the ones with the power and the social dominance were the biggest and the strongest.  The advent of the hippies and geek culture turned that on its head.  All of a sudden, you did not have to be big, strong or beautiful to obtain status.  All you needed was an idea, like permissive sexuality, which allowed people to do the things they had previously only fantasized about in secret.

The big, muscular bullies were no longer on top, while the proverbial 97 pound weaklings had sand kicked in their faces.  Now ideas and intelligence held sway -- Not good ideas, but ones which gave moral license.  Not intelligence of the sort which enables problem-solving, but the flashy intelligence which confers status around fellow geeks with weaker personalities.  Little did we know how much the proverbial “Geek’s Revenge” would cost us, or how stupid the intelligentsia would eventually prove to be.

LifeSite: You recount in the book that, despite the pagan practices and anti-Christian attitudes in your home, at some point you secretly became a Christian. How did this come about and what effect did it have on you during this terrible period of suffering in your life, as well as after you left home?

Moira Greyland: I was about ten, and staying at the houses of friends in order to escape my home.  I used to listen obsessively to Jesus Christ Superstar, which my parents did not tolerate well in their house.  I would cry and cry and not know why.  One day I heard Jesus talking to me, very quietly, and very gently.  He told me what my father would never say.  He told me he loved me, and that I was His, and that He would take care of me.

The effect that my secret conversion to Christianity had on me was to give me enough strength to eventually go to the cops about my father’s sexual abuse of children.  He made it possible for me to quietly question the nonsense I had been programmed to believe, and He gave me the hope of eventual escape.

I know that most conversion stories are more dramatic, with more fireworks, but mine was not like that.  It was more like He showed me the reason for the iron backbone He had given me all along, and He made it so I was eventually strong enough to break the lies in my family and end the active abuse of the children in our home.  

One thing my faith in God did was to help me understand why speaking the truth about the family secrets was so important to me.  For all that people try to claim how “tolerant” Jesus was, that is a conclusion born of no actual knowledge.  Jesus challenged people right and left, whether they were committing sexual sin or some other kind of sin.  

Jesus sat down to eat with tax collectors and prostitutes, who stopped being tax collectors and prostitutes, and became disciples and followers.  At no point did Jesus encourage or tolerate sin, but called it out openly at every turn.  There were times when his scoldings included calling people “whitewashed sepulchers” and even “broods of vipers.”  Just how tolerant is that?

Jesus never stops loving sinners, but understands that sin hurts us, and it hurts the people around us.  Allowing it to continue, or claiming that sin is magically acceptable, only prolongs suffering.

Paganism seeks to reinterpret sin, and in so doing, to out-shout our own consciences.  We are meant to regard promiscuous sex as being holy and Christianity as being evil, because it “judges and blames.”  The fact that all the sin has the predictable results of destroying our lives and our relationships is conveniently overlooked.  Something other than promiscuity must be blamed, because since sex is a “sacrament” it cannot possibly be the problem.

I had to be old enough and strong enough that I would be able to handle the break which would inevitably come when I went to the police.  I could hardly expect my mother and her girlfriend Lisa to back me up when they knew what had been happening for years, and had done nothing about it.

LifeSite: Worldcon, which is the largest and most important gathering of sci-fi and fantasy literature fandom in the world, recently banned famed science fiction writer and Worldcon member Jon Del Arroz from its annual convention this year in San Jose, California.  Their reasoning was a vague and unexplained accusation that he meant to stir up trouble at the convention. Others say it was because he is a conservative. At the same time, your publisher, Vox Day, pointed out in a recent post that Worldcon has never banned any pedophile or other sex criminal in its whole history. Does this surprise you? Why is Worldcon behaving this way? Do you believe that Worldcon has adequately addressed its past tolerance of pedophiles and other sex abusers?

Moira Greyland: Jon Del Arroz, who is a friend of mine, was banned from Worldcon because he is conservative, and because he stated that he would wear a bodycam in response to the threats and doxxing he received.  I saw a photo of the springloaded, genital-shaped glitter bomb which was mailed to him and went off in his kitchen in front of his children.

Why would Worldcon ban Jon Del Arroz, while gleefully allowing my mother and father to attend in the past?  My father, Walter Breen, was banned from Worldcon for only one day, after his molestation of at least ten children was announced to the sci-fi community in an affair that came to be known as the “Great Breen Boondoggle” or the “Breendoggle” (

It is simple.  As I mentioned earlier, fame brings with it the assumption that the famous person has some amazing secrets to share which ordinary mortals cannot imagine.  People do not see my parents as ordinary schmucks with perverted ideas, but imbue them with nearly mystical importance.  Since they Wrote Books, they are smart and possessed of a special something which their fans believe can only be obtained by drawing as close to them as possible.  

Jon Del Arroz is a new author, up-and-coming, and not a legend like my mother.  Since his ideas are so different from those of my mother, he is a threat to the status quo.  After all, in effect, my mother, Heinlein and Piers Anthony told several generations of science fiction fans that all the sex they wanted was OK, and they shaped their very lives around these ideas.

In fact, it was their enlightened sexual sensibilities which made them so very superior to the “mere mortals” of the rest of the world.  Conservatives, prudes, Christians, and anti-abortion weirdos are regarded as being mentally inferior, unenlightened, and needing the patient guidance of the superior minds of the science fiction community.  The assumption is that the Conservatives will all eventually get a clue and follow along.

Jon Del Arroz, John C. Wright, and other conservative authors challenge that mindset.  But the Old Guard in science fiction fandom is both hidebound and totally dependent on alternative sexuality as a framework for the universe.  Anything which goes against alternative sexuality and Liberal values is deeply threatening to fandom.  After all, their Great Ideas all concluded that promiscuous sex would bring happiness.  Conservatives and Christians are spoilsports who have no place at the table.

The fact that much of the very best fiction being written today does not come from the population of aging perverts which comprise the core of fandom must be grating indeed.

LifeSite: In a recent radio interview you were asked a question that was so difficult for you to answer that the interview needed to be ended at that time. I hope it isn’t too burdensome to ask you, but certainly our readers will want to know. The question is, quite simply: How are you, following the writing of this book, and following such horrible trauma for so many years in your childhood? Has writing the book helped you to heal in any way? How did your siblings fare after reaching adulthood?

Moira Greyland: How am I? I am not good.  I am lucky in that my job allows me to work at home, where I teach voice and harp, and my performances are limited right now of necessity.  I have a lot of distress from flashbacks and nightmares.  I wish this was not true but it is.  I had a very severe episode of major depression after writing the book, which I have only begun to come out of.  

It is a blessing that I know that it is a major depressive episode, rather than buying into every stray thought which walks across my head.  It does not reduce the pain to know it is only a depressive episode, but it does reduce the chance of my doing anything irrevocably stupid.  I think of it as having “bad brain” rather than using my misery as an excuse for self-reproach or self-hatred which would only compound the issue.  

The part which many people do not understand is this.  It is not thinking about the past which is the problem.  It is the fact that severe trauma rewires your brain and alters your responses to things.  Where a normal person would not respond at all to about a million different things, from a loud noise, the sound of someone crying, or even a tap on the shoulder, my brain interprets these things as catastrophic danger or threat.  

I have taught myself to reality-test very quickly and shut down my inappropriate responses to things, but although I can minimize and shorten my response, I cannot alter it or eliminate it.  This is isolating, because I know if I am in public and someone taps me on the shoulder, I will gasp in terror and look like an idiot for several seconds before I shut it down, apologize, and do my best to act normal.  

People always want to know if it was healing and cathartic to write the book.  Healing?  No.  Maybe. Cathartic?  Yes. 

The popular notion is that a catharsis will bring healing.  It can, but the trouble with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder is that a catharsis can be profoundly retraumatizing, like ripping off a scab, or re-breaking a partially set fracture.

I wrote my book because I thought the story needed telling, not because I expected it to heal me.  I have spent many years reading and studying, learning to stay calm instead of dissolving in terror and tears and panic.  But still, those are my first responses, no matter how quickly I have learned to blunt them.

Writing the book has allowed me to come to some unwelcome conclusions, like understanding the pivotal events when I was ten in the destruction of my relationship with my father.  So many things float by and we do not necessarily understand what they mean at the time.

But frankly, writing the book was the most excruciating task I have ever done.  It is my hope that it will empower others to speak up against their own trauma, and to lay the blame squarely at the feet of the perps and at the feet of the idiots who dreamed up the sexual anarchy which made so much of it possible.  

What a bill of good we have been sold!  Just because Kinsey wrote about how allegedly harmless all this sex was, and my mother and others wrote pansexual and intergenerational sex into their books, suddenly every jerk who wants extramarital sex is a Great Revolutionary Thinker, not just another sexual degenerate.

The one really good thing that came from the book, apart from a profound sense of relief, is my brand-new ability to be angry with my father.  My previous inability to be mad at him kept me stuck in a childlike posture in relationship to him, and it left me dependent on his ludicrous opinion of me. He felt I was a failure because I was a prude, because I would not bring his Grand Vision to the world, and his final assessment of me was that I was his murderer.  His murderer.  And for many years, I felt I had no choice but to believe this.  Even as I rejected his ideas, they still mattered.  The judge at my father’s trial was a much better model, regarding my father as sexually dangerous, completely lacking in remorse, and likely to offend literally from his deathbed.

If nothing else, I hope my book will demonstrate that a pedophile is not an unmarried straight man born in a trenchcoat who hangs around playgrounds and entices children with candy.  Pedophiles are married, have gay and straight sex, usually lots of it, and look like everyone else.

How are my siblings? My brother David died in his fifties, estranged from my mother but in close contact with my cousin Ian.  He never married, though he was in a long term relationship with a woman who did not always live with him.  He died quite suddenly from heart failure.  He lived on SSI, complete disability.  He had had a head injury resulting in epilepsy, but I am positive it was more than that.

My brother Mark is still alive at 53, and his health is very bad.  He has poorly controlled diabetes.  He lived with me for a time, but I asked him to move to Greyhaven, our multigenerational family home, after two episodes of diabetic coma nearly killed him.  I figured that where I am often traveling or performing out of town, at Greyhaven, there were plenty of people who would look in on Mark every day, and he would not be risking coma like he would be by being alone in my house.

Poor self-care is very common among the severely traumatized.  Passive suicide, the same.  It cannot be ignored or minimized.  Like most men, my brother is quite stoic, and suffered in silence.  As a result, his Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) has been virtually untreated.  I cannot begin to describe to you how distressing PTSD is when there is no way to understand what is happening.  There is a reason so many vets with PTSD kill themselves.  It hurts less than being alive.

PTSD rewires the brain, and causes us to react to nearly everything as though it was a threat.  Since everything seems like a threat, we cannot always respond effectively to actual threats, although the ability to do so is often the dividing line between a miserable quality of life and the ability to improve our condition.  Also, the perpetual state of hypervigilance our brains are locked into is profoundly exhausting.  We want to relax, yes, we really do.  But it feels dangerous to sleep, lest we miss a threat.  Much of this is unconscious, and reality testing does not improve it.  Yes, I know I am safe here.  But my brain does not know it, and it refuses to be talked into believing it.

For a time, Mark spoke openly of what our parents had done, notably in his interview “Secret Keeper No More” (published on line several years ago, but since removed) but then he became frightened and stopped wanting to talk once he went to Greyhaven.  

Also, when two of my voice students complained about hearing my uncle Don talking about sleeping with his ex-boylover’s children, I went to the cops, and so did they.  As before, my family sided with my uncle Don, and not with the children, and my brother told me he had to side with my cousin Ian, who sided with Don.  My father is still defended in that house.

I trust that sheds light on how this continues through the generations.

So how are my siblings? Dead, nearly dead, and in my case, not dead.

LifeSite: Your book has been available for sale on Amazon in e-book form since mid-December and has spent much of that time in the top 5,000 best-sellers. It now has over one hundred and twenty reviews, most of them with five-star ratings. Has the response to your book surprised you? What have readers been telling you about the book, either personally or in the Amazon reviews?

Moira Greyland: I expected a lynch mob.  

I was astonished and pleased with the reviews, with the heartfelt empathy of the reviewers, at their insight, and at the consistency of their horror of what my “home” was like.

I have been inured to the horror, because I was used to it.  Although I railed against it and despised it, it was “normal” for me.  Knowing others thought my experiences were distinctly NOT normal was like a safe hot bath after being dipped in slime, or an old injury finally being cleaned and treated.  

There were only two really bad reviews, both by people who had obviously not read the book.  Both were removed.  A third bad review, which is still up, screamed against my family with tremendous ire and sympathy, but then went off the rails and called me a bigot, as though I came to my conclusions by mail order instead of by observation.

One final note about pedophilia and fandom: when my story broke about my mother in 2014, quite by accident, when I answered a friend’s letter and allowed her to print my responses on her blog, nobody in fandom offered to publish my story.  The offer came from Vox Day, who also published an expose of pedophilia in fandom called “Safe Space as Rape Room” by Daniel Eness.

Why would a conservative publisher offer me a book contract where fandom argued about the merits of separating the art from the artist?  Simple.  Although there were many who were outraged at my mother’s conduct, most were too star-struck by her and her Revolutionary Ideas to allow the facade to crack before a wider audience.  The Old Guard of fandom had to stay sex-positive.  Anything else would be admitting the failure of the sexual revolution, and that was a bridge too far.

The issue is not admitting that science fiction fandom has a pedophile problem.  The issue is that science fiction fandom denies that pedophilia IS a problem.  Although this reality is kept away from straights, Christians, and other stupid, backward people, the common belief is that children allegedly have sexual agency, they supposedly WANT sex, and should be encouraged to make their own decisions.

So then it is up to us.  Do we accept a counterculture that wants our little children to “make their own decisions” when perved on by some creep, or do we stand up and absolutely, irrevocably REJECT a culture that regards intolerance as literally its only sin?

The answer should be very obvious.

Click here to purchase a copy of Moira Greyland’s book, The Last Closet: The Dark Side of Avalon

Featured Image
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg Shutterstock
Calvin Freiburger


Facebook to oversee investigation of itself for anti-conservative bias: report

Calvin Freiburger
By Calvin Freiburger

SAN FRANCISCO, California, May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Facebook will conduct an internal review to address allegations of anti-conservative bias, according to a new report.

The social media company has invited former Sen. Jon Kyl, R-AZ, to lead a team from the Washington, DC law firm Covington and Burling to conduct the audit, Axios reports. The team will reportedly take feedback from conservative organizations and use it to recommend changes to Facebook’s policies.

Kyl retired in 2013 after 18 years in the Senate. Heritage Action, the conservative Heritage Foundation’s political advocacy arm, gave him a score of 77%, slightly above the Senate GOP average of 73%.

In addition, Facebook executives will meet with the Heritage Foundation to discuss bias and censorship issues, according to the report. Heritage vice president of communications Rob Bluey told Axios it “sounds encouraging that Facebook is taking steps to evaluate where things stand in the marketplace and hear concerns.”

"I think it's wholly right that conservatives want to be treated fairly and enjoy the benefits of the service like anyone else," Heritage technology policy expert Klon Kitchen, who hosted an event last week with Facebook’s Monika Bickert, told USA Today. "If Facebook is doing a reasonable job of that now, it’s up to Facebook to make that case.”

“If there are systemic problems, they should deal with that, not only to do well as a company, but also for the sake of consumers to provide the best product possible,” he added.

Kitchen previously told Breitbart News that however Facebook might be discriminating against conservative users, Heritage would be “very clear about a private company’s right to organize and conduct its business as it sees fit.” Others have argued that Facebook’s unprecedented ability to influence elections makes it a special case. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-TX has noted that existing regulations forbid Facebook from exercising political preferences over users’ content if it wants to qualify as a “neutral public forum.”

While admitting that Facebook has not given Heritage “total transparency or decisive answers on all of our questions,” Kitchen maintained that “in terms of their response to us and their professionalism, they’ve been nothing but top notch.” He expressed confidence that Facebook has “given every indication that they are” serious about reforming.

However, Breitbart warns that Covington and Burling happens to be the law firm in which Eric Holder, Barack Obama’s former Attorney General, is a partner.

Last fall, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-VA, released a “smoking gun” email showing that Holder’s Justice Department allowed companies to donate money to liberal groups as settlement payments, but actively prevented companies from donating to conservative groups under the practice. In February, Holder said it was “unnecessary” for the Trump administration to apologize for the Obama IRS targeting conservative groups.

A 50-page report recently released by the conservative Media Research Center (MRC) notes that several former Facebook employees have admitted the platform “routinely” manipulated its trending news feature to exclude topics of interest to conservatives, while it relies on left-leaning publications such as Snopes and PolitiFact to “fact-check” content.

LifeSiteNews has covered multiple instances of Facebook censoring conservative and Christian content. These include classifying Black conservative commentators Diamond and Silk as “unsafe to the community,” censoring a pro-life documentary on Roe v. Wade, and refusing to run a Holy Week ad by the Franciscan University of Steubenville featuring the San Damiano Cross. In addition, a study by the conservative Western Journal found that left-of-center sites enjoyed a nearly 14% traffic increase following algorithm changes last fall, whereas popular conservative sites saw a 27% decline.

Last week, more than 60 conservative leaders, including MRC founder Brent Bozell, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins, and Students for Life of America president Kristan Hawkins, signed a joint statement calling on Facebook, Twitter, Google, and YouTube to protect conservative speech on their platforms through greater transparency, clearer definitions of “hate speech,” replacing left-wing groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center with more neutral content-monitoring partners, and using the First Amendment as the ultimate guide for acceptable speech.

“Social media companies must address these complaints if they wish to have any credibility with the conservative movement and its tens of millions of supporters,” the statement warned.

Featured Image
Students for Life of America

News, ,

VIDEO: Students’ pro-life chalk messages destroyed at Fresno State

Students for Life of America
By Students for Life of America

May 7, 2018 (Students for Life) – Wednesday, May 2nd, a vandal at Fresno State was caught on video washing away pro-life chalkings at the school that were written by Fresno State Students for Life.

This comes on the 1-year anniversary of Fresno State professor Greg Thatcher ordering his students to students to destroy similar chalkings on campus. As a result of a lawsuit by the Alliance Defending Freedom and Students for Life, Thatcher was ordered to pay damages to several students involved as well as undergo First Amendment training with ADF.

Bernadette Tasy, one of the plaintiffs in the original lawsuit and the president of Fresno State Students for Life said, "When will students at Fresno State learn that we have just the same free-speech rights as everyone else? Professor Thatcher underwent free-speech training; maybe the whole school should. There should be respect for differing points of view on campus, and if students oppose us they are free to chalk their own messages on the ground, but they should not destroy ours."

Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life, added, "Bernadette is a great example of the resilience of Students for Life leaders. Bernadette has seen the group through multiple vandalizations, but nothing fazes them. We call on the university to send a strong message to the school that they will not tolerate violations of free speech."

Campus police have been given a copy of the vandalization video, and are also investigating another student who was caught several weeks ago tearing down Students for Life flyers on campus opposing Senate Bill 320, which would force 4-year public colleges to distribute free abortion drugs.

Oddly, this happened the same day that the university held a forum to review free-speech and explain why a professor mocking the death of  former First Lady Barbara Bush is protected.

Published with permission from Students for Life.

Featured Image
LifeSiteNews staff

News, ,

After court challenge, Alberta Child Services lets Christian couple adopt children

LifeSiteNews staff
By LifeSiteNews staff

May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms ( today announced that Alberta Child and Family Services has backed down and reversed its denial of an Edmonton couple's application to adopt children. The government had denied the application solely because of the couple's religious beliefs about marriage and sexuality. This reversal follows a court application filed against Alberta Child and Family Services in November of 2017, seeking judicial review of the adoption application denial.

The married couple, who are referred to in filed court documents as "C.D" and "N.D.," have no children of their own, and are currently unable to conceive due to medical complications. N.D. was adopted at birth himself. C.D. was keen to adopt an older child, for whom it is extremely challenging to find adoptive parents.

On October 7, 2016, C.D. and N.D. met with a Child and Family Services intake worker to submit their application to adopt. Their file was assigned to Catholic Social Services in Edmonton, which began the Home Study process of considering the applicants' financial, emotional and social stability, and overall fitness to adopt. Catholic Social Services recommended to Alberta Child and Family Services that the couple be approved for adoption.

On March 6, 2017, Catholic Social Services advised the couple that Child and Family Services had further questions in regard to the couple's beliefs regarding sexuality. The Home Study had evidenced that the couple are Evangelical Christians with biblical views on marriage and sexuality. The C.D. and N.D. reiterated their commitment to treating any child in their care with unconditional love, respect, and compassion regardless of what the child chose to do, and regardless of the child's choices regarding sexual behavior.

On March 13, Catholic Social Services advised C.D. and N.D. that it was reversing its previous recommendation that they be approved for adoption. The rejection letter enclosed a revised Home Study Report that stated the couple should not be approved as adoptive parents because they would be unable to "help" a child who "has sexual identity issues." The rejection letter did not explain how or why the couple would be unable to "help" a child that they valued, loved, accepted and cared for. The couple asked Catholic Social Services to reconsider their decision but were refused.

On May 3, the couple met with two Child and Family Services staff, who informed them that they had denied the couples' application to adopt. The Casework Supervisor explained that Child and Family Services considered their religious beliefs regarding sexuality to be a "rejection" of children with LGBT sexual identities, and that this stance was the "official position of the Alberta government". The couple was subsequently informed that the denial of their application was final.

The Justice Centre represented C.D. and N.D. in their legal challenge to the Alberta Child and Family Services decision. "This decision to deny adoption access on the basis of sincerely held religious beliefs violates all Canadians' right to religious freedom and equality under the law as guaranteed in the Charter and in Alberta's own Bill of Rights and Human Rights Act," explained lawyer and Justice Centre president John Carpay.

"We are pleased that Alberta Child and Family Services has recognized it was wrong to deny this couple's adoption application," Carpay added.

The Justice Centre's court application, filed on November 1, sought judicial review of the May 3, 2017 decision of Child and Family Services to deny adoption to C.D. and N.D. on the basis of their sincere religious beliefs in regard to marriage and sexuality, and a declaration that the decision is "unreasonable and void by virtue of arbitrariness, bias, bad faith, as well as breaches of procedural fairness and natural justice."

The court application further sought a declaration that the decision to deny adoption violates sections 2(a) and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Alberta Bill of Rights and the Alberta Human Rights Act.

Featured Image
Dave Bledsoe / Flickr
LifeSiteNews staff


Study: Planned Parenthood propping up flagging US abortion numbers

LifeSiteNews staff
By LifeSiteNews staff

May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Wednesday, the national pro-life group Susan B. Anthony List (SBA List) and its research arm, the Charlotte Lozier Institute (CLI) rebutted statements by former Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards that redirecting taxpayer funding away from the abortion giant will cause abortion rates to rise and that "we [Planned Parenthood] do more to prevent unintended pregnancy and the need for abortion than any organization in this country."

More than 85 national and state pro-life groups Tuesday sent a letter to Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar asking him to revise Title X Family Planning Program rules to disentangle abortion centers from the Title X network and redirect taxpayer funding to alternative providers.

New research by CLI Vice President and Director of Data Analytics James Studnicki, Sc.D. and by John Fisher, Ph.D., J.D., published online in the peer-reviewed Open Journal of Preventive Medicine, finds evidence that Planned Parenthood has inflated the abortion rate in the United States, despite a significant overall decline in U.S. abortions for the last 30 years.

In "Planned Parenthood: Supply Induced Demand for Abortion in the US," Studnicki and Fisher examine data from Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) annual reports for 1995-2014 and Guttmacher Institute reports of abortion rates and volumes for 1973-2014. They compare Planned Parenthood abortions to non-Planned Parenthood abortions (abortions performed by another entity besides Planned Parenthood) over the 20-year period from 1995 to 2014 and find:

  • Non-Planned Parenthood abortions reflected the national trend, decreasing by more than 50 percent.
  • Planned Parenthood abortions, by contrast, increased 142 percent.
  • Planned Parenthood's share of the U.S. abortion market increased from 10 percent to 35 percent.
  • More than three million excess abortions, or 12.5 percent of the total number of abortions, would have been averted between 1995 and 2014 if Planned Parenthood trends had been identical to non-Planned Parenthood trends.

Tell Congress to keep their promise and defund Planned Parenthood. Sign the petition here!

Supply-induced demand refers to a shift in demand for a service created by those who provide the service. It may occur in health care settings when patients are not fully informed, when there is a financial incentive for the supplier, or both.

"Contrary to their public protestations that abortion is a minimal part of their business model, the data strongly suggest that Planned Parenthood has actively propped up a national abortion rate that has otherwise seen large declines, to their obvious financial benefit," said lead author Dr. James Studnicki. "More than three million abortions that might have been avoided can be attributed to Planned Parenthood's intervention in the abortion market."

CLI President Chuck Donovan added, "This study shows beyond doubt that Planned Parenthood's commanding market share of U.S. abortions is no accident. Policymakers are fully justified in taking this fact into account as they decide how to allocate public money."

Planned Parenthood is the nation's largest abortion business, performing 321,384 abortions in 2016 and more than 1.6 million abortions over the past five years, according to annual reports (view fact sheet). Previous CLI research has found that Planned Parenthood controls more than 35 percent of the national market for abortions and is not a significant provider of medical care in the United States.

Featured Image
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry


Cardinal raises question: Is Pope Francis part of Church’s ‘final trial’?

John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

UTRECHT, Netherlands, May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – A Dutch cardinal has said that Pope Francis’ failure to uphold the Church’s authentic faith makes him think of the Catechism of the Catholic Church’s prophecy of a “final trial” for the Church before the second coming of Christ.

Cardinal Willem Eijk, 64, the Archbishop of Utrecht, made the startling comment in an article published today at the National Catholic Register.

Eijk, who was created a cardinal by Pope Benedict XVI in 2012, got his medical degree before ordination to the priesthood and went on to complete three PhDs in medicine, philosophy and theology.

In the article, the Cardinal laments Pope Francis’ failure to bring clarity on the question of intercommunion with Protestants during last week’s meeting at the Vatican with German bishops. The Pope told the German bishops to obtain unanimous approval on the issue, but, says Cardinal Eijk, he should have simply reminded them of the Church’s clear doctrine and practice.

“By failing to create clarity, great confusion is created among the faithful and the unity of the Church is endangered,” he said.

“Observing that the bishops and, above all, the Successor of Peter fail to maintain and transmit faithfully and in unity the deposit of faith contained in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, I cannot help but think of Article 675 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church,” he wrote.

That article of the Catechism, which he quoted in full, warns of a trial that will “shake the faith of many believers.” It prophesies a persecution that will “unveil the ‘mystery of iniquity’ in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth.”

Cardinal Eijk warned publicly last year that by failing to clarify Church teaching over divorce and remarriage, Pope Francis was “fracturing” the Church.

He is not the first Cardinal to recognize the confusion in the Church caused by Pope Francis as a sign of the end times. At the Rome Life Forum last year, the late Cardinal Carlo Caffarra spoke of the confusion in the Church around marriage and the family as the fulfillment of a prophecy he received.

In a letter Cardinal Caffarra received from Sr. Lucia, the Fatima visionary wrote that the “final battle between the Lord and the kingdom of Satan will be about marriage and the family. Do not be afraid, (she added), because anyone who works for the sanctity of marriage and the family will always be fought and opposed in every way, because this is the decisive issue.”

That final battle, he said at the Rome Life Forum, “is being fulfilled today.”

Cardinal Burke too has identified the confusion and error in the Catholic Church under Pope Francis with the end times. “One may have the feeling that the Church gives the appearance of being unwilling to obey the mandates of Our Lord,” Cardinal Burke said in an interview with the Catholic Herald in November. “Then perhaps we have arrived at the End Times.”

RELATED: Cardinal says Pope’s response to German intercommunion proposal is ‘incomprehensible’

Featured Image
Caroline Farrow | Alfie Evans
Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy


She kept the world informed about Alfie Evans. Online haters are now trying to take her down

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

ENGLAND, May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – As a high-profile lay Catholic commentator in England, Caroline Farrow has experienced online abuse for years.  

Unfortunately, Farrow’s advocacy for Alfie Evans’ family has led to unprecedented levels of harassment. Not only have strangers sent her insults and threats over Twitter, they have published her address, phone number, and the name of her children’s school.  Thanks to prank callers, her phone has been ringing off the hook. Last week police advised her to shut down her Twitter account for 72 hours. 

“It’s just crazy,” Farrow told LifeSiteNews from her home in England on Friday night. “It’s just hideous.” 

Examples of the abuse she has received online include the following sentiments: “Farrow is f***ed, her time is coming, time is running out, Farrow is a spiteful evil b*tch who is about to get taken down, she needs to be taken to account, legally or otherwise, we are using social media to whip up hate & fury, she’ll need more than a shovel.”

Farrow says there are two different kinds of people targeting her. The most recent is comprised of fans of Alder Hey hospital, which fought Alfie Evans’ parents in court for the right to end the child’s life, and the National Health Service, for which many Britons have an almost religious fervour. 

“[They] can’t believe the status quo has been challenged,” Farrow explained. “They’re outraged.”

But pseudonymous online attackers, known as “trolls”, have been coming after Farrow since she first joined a Catholic media initiative called Catholic Voices in 2011. Catholic Voices, founded by journalist Austen Iverleigh, trains young Catholics to explain Catholic teachings to interested journalists when Church-related stories break. Farrow began her training just after the British Prime Minister, David Cameron, announced plans to extend the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples. 

“A lot of [our] training was dedicated to how Catholic Voices would fight the gay ‘marriage’ issue,” Caroline explained. 

Obsessed anti-Farrow fanatics

While debating the issue on Twitter, Farrow attracted the attention of a man with four thousand Twitter fans, who wrote “terrible things” about her. He even expressed a hope that her children would get cancer.  

“He spent a couple of years obsessing on me,” Farrow said. 

This troll was not alone: Farrow has at least two other online stalkers who have fixated on her for years, and they are now trying to recruit new Twitter-users to their anti-Farrow cause. 

“They are using the Alfie Evans tragedy to leverage their own hatred….and to shut me down,” she explained. 

Farrow believes that many of her critics are ideological opponents who resent a Catholic woman appearing on mainstream television and in mainstream newspapers. Frequently consulted by such high-profile British media figures as Piers Morgan, Farrow is one of the principal female representatives of orthodox Catholicism in the UK. 

“They can’t bear it because I’m reasonable,” she explained of her critics. “They’re online painting me as a nasty bigot.” 

Farrow said that she came “very late” to the Alfie Evans story. She first heard about the infant when she met an individual in right-to-life causes at a pro-life meeting. 

“We’ve got this case coming to court soon; it’s going to be like Charlie Gard,” she recalled the individual telling her.  

It was then that Farrow said she was asked if she could raise awareness of Alfie’s plight. 

Farrow was moved both by the story and by the lack of a “coordinated Catholic effort” to help Alfie. She was put in touch with an activist who was working with the Evans family. Through this contact, Farrow was able to speak to members of the Evans family over the phone. By February she felt that she had established a working relationship with Alfie’s aunt Sarah Evans and some of the family’s friends. She was also given information about unfolding events from a “Liverpool Catholic mum” who simply went to Alder Hey and sat outside the pediatric intensive care unit while the legal battle over Alfie raged in the courts.

Farrow blogged, tweeted, and published articles about Alfie in the National Catholic Register and EWTN News. She gave interviews to EWTN, BBC Radio 4, and the Good Morning Britain talk show. She published details of the numerous hearings involved in Alfie’s case.

Fresh hatred after Alfie's death

After Alfie died, Farrow found herself assailed with fresh hatred for having tweeted part of Benedetta Frigerio’s story in La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana that Alfie had been given four drugs shortly before he died. Farrow had been told a similar story by two other people in Liverpool, both of whom had phoned her within seven hours of Alfie’s 2:30 AM death. 

When an administrator of the Alfie’s Army Official Facebook page contacted Farrow over Twitter to say Frigerio’s story was “causing great distress” and was “untrue,” trolls began to abuse Farrow for not removing the story from her Twitter feed. After tweeting her new misgivings about the story, Farrow contacted Frigerio. The Italian reporter insisted that her story was true and told Farrow who her sources were. Farrow then told her Twitter readers that she had asked “the family” to contact Frigerio directly to retract the story if it was false. 

To the best of her knowledge, the family has not done so.

Meanwhile, she has found herself treated by Twitter-users as a scapegoat for Frigerio, as well as for the Alfie’s Army protesters, whose demonstrations are being falsely painted as violent. 

“They’re blaming me for the angry mobs that didn’t even exist,” Farrow sighed.

Now Farrow hopes the police will be able to dissuade hate-filled strangers from harassing her.  

“In some ways I’m not bothered because I have the light of Christ,” she said. Nevertheless, she does worry, especially as her principal haters have been obsessed with her for years, opening new Twitter accounts as quickly as Twitter shuts their old ones down.  

“I wonder where they’re going to stop,” she concluded.

After her Friday night interview with LifeSiteNews, Farrow went back to work as a Catholic reporter on Saturday morning. She has begun using her Twitter account again to publish interviews with personalities at the UK March for Life. 

Featured Image
Pope Francis and Cardinal Burke.
Lisa Bourne Lisa Bourne Follow Lisa


Pope Francis continues sidelining Cardinal Burke by extending mandate of special delegate to Malta

Lisa Bourne Lisa Bourne Follow Lisa
By Lisa Bourne

VATICAN CITY, Italy, May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Pope Francis extended the mandate of his special delegate to the Knights of Malta last week, further sealing his demotion of the order’s Cardinal Patron Raymond Burke.

The Vatican released the pope’s May 2 letter on Friday, in which Francis asked Archbishop Angelo Becciu to remain his delegate and “exclusive spokesman” indefinitely for everything in regard to Vatican relations to the Order of Malta. 

Francis appointed Becciu, Substitute for General Affairs of the Vatican’s Secretariat of State since 2011, as his personal envoy to oversee the “spiritual and moral” reform of the Order, in particular its branch of professed Knights, on February 2, 2017.

In doing so, Francis effectively discharged Burke by handing Burke’s two areas of authority as cardinal patron — promoting the spiritual interests of the Order and its members, and relations between the Holy See and the Order — over to Becciu.

Becciu’s appointment as special delegate was supposed to end with the election of the Knights’ new Grand Master, which occurred with the May 2 election of Fra’ Giacomo Dalla Torre. 

However, Francis opted for an indefinite extension of his mandate.

“Considering the fact that the path of spiritual and juridical renewal of the S.M.O.M. (Sovereign Military Order of Saint John of Jerusalem, of Rhodes and of Malta) has not yet been concluded,” Francis wrote, “I ask you to continue to hold the office of my Delegate up to the conclusion of the reform process and in any case until I consider it useful for the Order itself.”

“Until then you will continue to benefit from all powers and of being my exclusive spokesperson for all that relates to the relations between this Apostolic See and the Order,” he added.

Controversy has surrounded governance of the Knights of Malta for the last few years, underscoring Francis’ choppy relationship with Burke in the process.

German aristocrat Albrecht von Boeselager was removed as the Knights’ Grand Chancellor late in 2016 for violating his promise of obedience after declining to resign in the wake of revelations he had overseen condom distribution as part of the Order’s charitable work in the developing world.

Pope Francis then stepped in and reinstated Boeselager in January 2017 and asked Grand Master Matthew Festing, the Order's top official who had removed von Boeselager, to resign. 

The move caused considerable controversy given the fact the Order of Malta is a sovereign state. 

He named Becciu his special delegate charged with reform of the Order shortly thereafter.

The proposed reform of the Order has caused worry among some of its members for the possibility it could overturn of the practice of having a professed Knight of noble lineage at the head of the 900-year-old Order.

The First Class members, called the “Knights of Justice,” and who take vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience, have comprised the heart of the Order from its 12th century origins and have been key in the perpetuation of its moral character.

Francis’ negating Cardinal Burke’s governance as cardinal patron of the Knights of Malta was the latest in an ongoing series of snubs toward the cardinal since Francis’ 2013 election as Pope.

In 2013, Francis removed Burke from the Congregation for Bishops, the Vatican office that oversees the selection of new bishops. 

Francis then demoted Burke the next year from his role as Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, the Church’s highest court, making Burke Patron of the Knights of Malta at that time. 

Further, Francis then removed Burke from the Congregation for Divine Worship in 2016 after Burke and three other cardinals submitted the Dubia to the pope requesting clarity on Francis’ controversial exhortation Amoris Laetitia.

Featured Image
Claire Chretien Claire Chretien Follow Claire


Assisted suicide of old married couples romanticized by mainstream media

Claire Chretien Claire Chretien Follow Claire
By Claire Chretien

May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Media coverage of two recent joint-assisted suicides indicates that the deadly practice is now being promoted as a romantic way for couples to die together. Pro-life advocates warn that swallowing lethal drugs together is in no way a loving act and should not be portrayed as such.

This is “a new way of selling death,” Alex Schadenberg, Executive Director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, told LifeSiteNews. The media are “selling it as an act which is romantic” and are contributing to the phenomenon of “suicide contagion.”

“Assisted suicide is a tragedy and a violence that has been cloaked in euphemisms by those seeking its legalization,” Genevieve Plaster, Deputy Director of Policy and Administration at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, told LifeSiteNews. 

“It is tragic enough when one person is lost to suicide (assisted or not); when a couple ends their lives by assisted suicide, this twofold suffering should not be exploited via sensationalized headlines to advance more deception and euphemisms,” said Plaster.

In a massive spread, The Globe and Mail – essentially Canada’s version of the New York Times, revered by liberal elites – reported last month on George and Shirley Brickenden, a Toronto couple who are apparently the first in Canada to publicize their decision to commit suicide together. A doctor injected them with fatal drugs at their retirement home thanks to Canada’s new allowance of this form of euthanasia.

Shanaaz Gokool, the CEO of the pro-assisted suicide group Dying with Dignity, called the Brickenden’s joint suicide “the final articulation of the love that they’ve had for each other for nearly 73 years.”

But Father Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, said that allowing your spouse to be killed by a doctor is in no way a loving act. 

“There’s a reason we say, ‘Friends don’t let friends drive drunk,’” he said. “At its root, real friendship – and by extension, real love – never allows someone to help the beloved hurt themselves. We can dress up sin and violence in all kinds of nice, and even romantic, language, but ultimately, ‘love’ has a content. It has a specific shape, specific boundaries, specific actions that it never permits. Killing is one of them. No amount of good and loving intentions can make an act of suicide a good act.”

An Anglican dean who “without hesitation” agreed to hold the couple’s funeral at St. James Cathedral in Toronto “prayed” as the doctors pumped deadly drugs into the couple and their adult children looked on. 

In what could be a scene from a horror film, one of their children had assembled a playlist of Mozart, Bach, and Scottish folk music to be played as the euthanasia was carried out and a member of the clergy looked on approvingly. 

TIME and the Global Mail failed to describe some of the nightmarish effects euthanasia drugs can have on recepients – convulsions and vomiting, for example – not to mention the high rate of failure of suicide drugs.

“There’s nothing beautiful about dying with lethal drugs in your veins,” said Schadenberg, who explained that some euthanasia protocols have had to double the dose of barbiturates given to a patient so they are less likely to wake up as “very harsh, very caustic” drugs kill them. Another drug given in euthanasia prevents the patient from throwing up, which is the body's natural response to try to expel the lethal chemicals.

READ: Hawaii legalizes assisted suicide

In the U.S., TIME magazine profiled Charlie and Francie Emerick, who “died together in their bed April 20, 2017, after taking lethal doses of medication obtained” through Oregon’s assisted suicide law.

Sher Safran, one of their grown daughters, told TIME “it meant so much to know they were together” as they killed themselves.

“It is often said that old age brings wisdom. Sadly, in these cases of couple-suicides, that is not the case at all,” Pavone told LifeSiteNews.

The Emerick’s joint suicide is the topic of a 44-minute documentary called Living & Dying: A Love Story. In the beginning of the film, Safran praises her parents for approaching death in a “compassionate and intentional and loving” way.

“There is no mercy in encouraging or advocating for people to commit violence against themselves to end their lives prematurely. Instead, true compassion requires us to affirm those who wish to die that their lives are worth living,” said Plaster. “This extends also to our public writing on the topic. Rather than putting an ideology or legal agenda first, media personnel should heed recommendations, for instance, from The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, which warns against glamorizing suicide since research has shown this could increase the likelihood of vulnerable readers committing the same violence.”

Schadenberg warned that now, healthy spouses of the terminally ill will face “pressure” to undergo euthanasia with their sick spouse.

Media glamorization of assisted suicide is “creating this contagion effect” amongst the elderly who are relatively healthy.

“What about the family who has a disabled child? And so they’ve been caring for their disabled child…and now [the parents are] in their 70s” and their child is an adult? The mindset will be “we’ll die together and we’ll get him approved for euthanasia too,” Schadenberg predicted. It’s “the next thing.”

“The United Nations has guidelines on how the media is to talk about suicide cases,” he explained. “You’re not supposed to romanticize it, you’re not supposed to talk about how it was done” because it leads to the “contagion effect...You’re supposed to talk about the help services that exist so therefore if you’re writing a story about this, you recognize that some people may also be going through similar problems” of suicidality.

But when it comes to assisted suicide, the media have decided to “go all out and promote it.”

“We have forgotten how this effects...others,” said Schadenberg. 

“Scripture says, ‘I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Choose life,’” concluded Pavone. “Notice that although God gives us the freedom to choose good or evil, he doesn’t give us the freedom to determine the consequences of that choice. Choosing life leads to blessings; choosing death leads to curses. ‘Death and blessings’ is not an option, and yet that is precisely the lie that these sadly misguided couples fell for, and that we must renew our determination to keep others from falling for.”

National Suicide Prevention Hotline: 1-800-273-8255

Featured Image
Pope Francis with Cardinal Reinhard Marx, president of the German bishops conference.
Diane Montagna Diane Montagna Follow Diane

News, ,

Cardinal: Pope’s response to German intercommunion proposal is ‘incomprehensible’

Diane Montagna Diane Montagna Follow Diane
By Diane Montagna

ROME, May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) — Pope Francis’ failure last week to give the German bishops clear directives on intercommunion with Protestants, based on Catholic teaching and practice, points to a drift toward apostasy from the truth, a prominent cardinal has said. 

On Thursday, Pope Francis directed the German bishops to reach a “unanimous” decision “if possible” on whether a Protestant spouse who is married to a Catholic may receive the Holy Eucharist. The Pope delivered the directive through Archbishop Luis Ladaria, SJ, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, during a meeting in Rome between Vatican officials and a delegation of German bishops. The meeting was called after seven German bishops sent a letter to the Vatican expressing their opposition to a Feb. 20 vote by the local bishops’ conference to allow intercommunion for Protestants under some circumstances. 

In comments published today at the National Catholic Register, Cardinal Willem Jacobus Eijk of Holland called Pope Francis’ directive “completely incomprehensible.”

“The Church’s doctrine and practice regarding the administration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist to Protestants is perfectly clear,” Cardinal Eijk said, citing the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Code of Canon Law.

He explained that intercommunion is only possible, in principle, with Orthodox Christians because, while not sharing full communion with the Catholic Church, they do have valid sacraments and “above all, by virtue of their apostolic succession, a valid priesthood and a valid Eucharist (CCC no 1400, C.I.C./1983 can. 844, § 3).”

RELATED: Pope Francis asks German bishops for ‘unanimous’ decision on intercommunion with Protestants

Protestants, on the other hand, have neither apostolic succession, nor a valid priesthood, nor faith in the Eucharist, the Dutch cardinal continued. Most German Protestants are Lutherans, he explained, and Lutherans believe in consubstantiation, i.e. that in addition to the Body and Blood of Christ, bread and wine are also truly present when someone receives communion. Lutherans also believe that one’s faith makes Christ present, so that if someone receives the bread and wine without believing this, the Body and Blood of Christ are not really present.  

The Lutheran doctrine of consubstantiation differs essentially from the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, Cardinal Eijk explained, since the latter “implies faith that what is received under the figures of bread and wine, even if administered to someone who does not believe in transubstantiation and even outside the moment of administration, remains the Body or Blood of Christ and that it is no longer the substances of bread and wine.”

Given these essential differences, he said, a Protestant does not live in full communion with the Catholic Church and so cannot receive the Holy Eucharist, even if he or she is married to a Catholic.

The differences between faith in consubstantiation and in transubstantiation are so great that the Church must demand that anyone who wishes to receive the Holy Eucharist “explicitly and formally” enter into full communion with the Catholic Church (except in case of danger of death), by converting to Catholicism, the cardinal explained. 

He further noted that the German Bishops’ draft directives on intercommunion allow a Protestant spouse to receive Communion after a  “private examination of conscience with a priest or with another person with pastoral responsibilities.” But he said this does not sufficiently guarantee that a person truly accepts the faith of the Church.

If someone truly accepts the Catholic Church’s teaching on the Eucharist — and therefore the priesthood and apostolic succession — his only option is to become a Catholic, the cardinal said.

Despite the German bishops’ assurances that the cases of Protestants who would like to receive Communion with their spouses is rare, Eijk said he believes cracking the door open to intercommunion will almost inevitably lead to it becoming widespread.

“Protestants who are married to Catholics and see other Protestants married to Catholics receiving Communion will think they can do the same. And in the end even Protestants unmarried to Catholics will want to receive it. The general experience with this type of adjustment is that the criteria are quickly extended,” he said.

Recalling Pope Francis’ directive last week to German bishops — to revisit the proposal and try to find unanimity if possible — Eijk asked: “Unanimity about what?” 

“The practice of the Catholic Church, based on her faith, is not determined and does not change when the majority of an episcopal conference votes in favor of it, not even if unanimously,” he said. 

As “the perpetual and visible principle and foundation of unity of both the bishops and of the faithful” (Lumen Gentium no. 23), Eijk said, the Holy Father should have given the German bishops clear directives based on the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Code of Canon Law.  

Pope Francis’ lack of clarity on the issue of intercommunion is having the opposite effect, creating “great confusion” among the faithful and “endangering” the unity of the Church, he said. The same is true for cardinals who propose blessing homosexual marriages — which is “diametrically” opposed to the teaching of the Catholic Church, he added. 

Cardinal Eijk concluded: “Observing that the bishops and, above all, the Successor of Peter fail to maintain and transmit faithfully and in unity the deposit of faith contained in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, I cannot help but think of Article 675 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.”

The article of the Catechism, titled “The Church’s ultimate trial,” states:

Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the ‘mystery of iniquity’ in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth.

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI is also known to oppose the German bishops’ intercommunion proposal and to support the seven bishops’ initiative. 

Read Cardinal Eijk’s full commentary here.

Featured Image
Alfie Evans in a recent photo with his eyes open, sucking his soother. Thomas Evans / Facebook
Wesley J. Smith

Opinion, ,

Alfie Evans: So much for ‘your body, your choice’

Wesley J. Smith
By Wesley Smith

May 7, 2018 (National Review) – The death of Alfie Evans, forced off life support by doctors, bioethicists, and judges – strangers – and denied the right to have his care decisions made by his parents, brings health care to a crossroads.

For years we have been told that end-of-life decisions are the most intimate of all, and that as autonomous persons, we – or if incompetent, our families – must be free to decide when to refuse life support, to which I say, amen.

Some, take the meme even farther, insisting that autonomy is so fundamental, patients ought to be able to direct doctors to provide a lethal prescription or jab if they wish termination to avoid suffering caused by illness, disability, or debilitation.

But, now we are told that when life is wanted, when a patient or family wish to fight for every breath, or parents decide to give their children every chance to make it through a terrible health crisis, no matter how unlikely – well, autonomy has its limits, don't you know. "Best interests," and all that.

These cases are becoming more brazen. Some call it "futile care," or "inappropriate care" – based on the utilitarian values of our technocratic "expert" class, which is taking power onto itself to decide when a life is no longer worth living. They can call it "professional standards," all they want, but people understand what is really going on.

But here's the thing: If Alfie had been a royal baby – either of the political or celebrity kind – he'd still be on life support if that was what his parents wanted. He would be in a different hospital with new minds and new imaginations searching for causes and treatments. And it rankles.

Our institutions are in a crisis state of distrust. In health care, this is bred and worsened by each case of coercion by the "experts." I know. People reach out to me. They email or approach after my speeches. In the stories they tell, I sense that sometimes two lives were lost in the event because people's sense of rage and loss is so raw they simply cannot move on.

Given the millions of times that patients and families decide to stop fighting illness or injury and allow nature to take its course, it is remarkable that bioethicists and health-care policy honchos feel the need to push the relatively few dissenters out of the lifeboat. It isn't right. It isn't just. And it isn't smart.

Ironically, I believe the doctors at the hospital genuinely thought it was in Alfie's best interests to stop life support. I might believe that the time had come to let him go too.

But so what and who cares? He was not my boy. And he was not theirs. The parents should have been able to make that call, and to move him to another hospital willing to keep trying.

What if they established a technocracy and nobody obeyed? This was about raw power. If Alfie – Charlie Gard before him, and the victims of futile care in this country – had escaped the diktat, there would soon be others demanding their freedom too.

In the end, that is the reason Alfie was denied his right to the last chance his parents fought so bravely and tenaciously to give him. He was denied his right to have the two people who knew him most intimately, loved him most intensely, and who bore him – his parents, not strangers – make these decisions, particularly since the withdrawing life support and refusing transfer were value judgments and not medically required.

Memory Eternal!

Published with permission from National Review.

Featured Image
Rev. George Rutler


Spontaneous generation and the massacre of infants

Rev. George Rutler
By Rev. George Rutler

May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – The exotic concept of spontaneous generation was taken seriously by astute thinkers for a long time before the invention of microbiology. Of course, they knew about the proximate process of birth, but the biological source of life itself exercised such minds as Anaximander six hundred years B.C., as well as Saint Augustine, Shakespeare, and the philosopher of fishing, Izaak Walton. It was at least a puzzle to Darwin.

Spontaneous generation is the theory that living organisms can arise from inanimate matter, like fleas born from dust or mice from salt and bees from animal blood and, in the speculation of Aristotle, scallops coming out of sand. I came across an unintentionally amusing comment from the 1920 proceedings of the American Philological Society, published by the Johns Hopkins University Press: "Since insects are so small, it is not surprising that the sex history of some of them totally eluded the observation of the ancients."

The advent of micro-imagery photography of infants in the womb destroyed eugenic propaganda that this is not a human life. Those who deny that are on the level of those who continued to insist on spontaneous generation after the Catholic genius Louis Pasteur disproved it in 1859.

Cold people who are not only credulous, but cruel admit that the unborn child is human but say, "So what?" At the recent White House Correspondents' dinner, an astonishingly vulgar comedienne joked about abortion to the laughter of pseudo-sophisticates in evening dress. But even she slipped and used the word "baby."

Christ used the image of the vine to explain that all life is contingent – not spontaneously generated, but dependent on other lives. "A branch cannot bear fruit on its own unless it remains on the vine." Likewise, those drinking champagne at the fancy dress dinner are related to every fragile life in the womb by a common humanity. To mock that is to dehumanize the self.

On the recent feast of Saint George, there was born in England, whose patron he is, Louis, a prince of the royal house. There were celebratory church bells from Westminster Abbey and a salute of cannons. Rightly so, for the birth of every baby is a cause for rejoicing. That same day, another baby, one with a neurological infirmity, was deprived of oxygen support by judicial decree and against the will of his parents, who brought him into the world by procreation, as stewards of the Creator, and not by spontaneous generation. This was in defiance of an effort by Pope Francis to rescue him by military helicopter. As sons by adoption, little Louis and little Alfie are princes of the Heavenly King, not by spontaneous generation, but by divine will.

Pope Leo XIII declared in Rerum Novarum: "The contention that the civil government should at its option intrude into and exercise intimate control over the family and the household is a great and pernicious error."

Featured Image
Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon

Blogs, , ,

Alberta’s new conservative party votes to restore rights of parents over their children

Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon van Maren
Jason Kenney

May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – In a barn-burner speech to thousands of Albertans who gathered in Red Deer over the weekend to vote on the policy platform for the new United Conservative Party, Jason Kenney declared war on Rachel Notley and her NDP government. 

He denounced the carbon tax, promised the return of the Alberta advantage, and solemnly committed to always listen to the grassroots with a “heart of servant leadership.” Waves of applause rocked the convention hall over and over again. The message came through: Albertans are fed up with the social engineering and job-killing policies of Rachel Notley’s NDP, and they are ready for change. 

The grassroots, throughout the convention, delivered one message loudly and clearly: The NDP’s meddling in schools and denial of parental rights has gone on long enough. Kenney got a raucous standing ovation when he addressed the issue in his speech. “If the NDP tries to smuggle more of their politics into the classroom through the curriculum we will put that curriculum through the shredder!” he thundered. Based on the policy resolutions passed throughout the convention, it was a guaranteed crowd-pleaser.

Resolution 30, which stipulated that parents should be told when their children are involved in any subjects of a religious or sexual nature, caused a ruckus when it was put forward, with MLA Ric McIver along with two of his colleagues coming to the mic to ask attendees to vote against it so that the UCP would not be labeled the “lake of fire” party, a reference to a 2011 blog post written by Wildrose candidate Allan Hunsperger. The resolution passed with a 57% majority, and despite Jason Kenney telling media that the UCP opposed the “mandatory” notification of parents when their children got involved in “peer groups,” Education Minister David Eggen was immediately out in front of the cameras.

Eggen promptly began to do what he does best: Engage in fear mongering and insinuate that Albertan parents pose a danger to their own children that he and the NDP must protect those children from: “We’ve worked very hard to create a safe and caring environment for students here in the province and just by passing this today, they’ve made a more dangerous and unsafe place for kids in schools.” He then, of course, highlighted Ric McIver’s plea to UCP members to vote against it, obviously delighted that McIver had voluntarily made the “lake of fire” connection for him to repeat.

What McIver and a number of other conservative politicians do not seem to understand is that the NDP is going to accuse the UCP of being socially conservative regardless of what they do. That is their entire election strategy, just like it is Kathleen Wynne’s strategy and will probably be a large part of Justin Trudeau’s strategy. When someone like McIver stands up and hands Eggen quotes that are 100% guaranteed to be used as ammunition against his own party, he is serving as a useful idiot. His quote is going to be used by the NDP nonstop until the election as confirmation that even UCP MLAs believe their own party to be “homophobic.” Not to mention that he looks like a hypocrite to both the UCP party members and to the NDP, considering that McIver himself voted against Bill 24 just a few short months ago.

Resolution 148 also passed with a whopping 76%. The resolution, another parental rights motion being panned by progressives as an attack on abortion rights, reads: “The United Conservative Party believes that the Government of Alberta should ensure that all minor children are protected from harm by requiring the consent of a parent or legal guardian for all invasive medical procedures performed on a minor child, subject to established emergency medical protocols, legal emancipation, or judicial intervention.” The rationale noted in part that, “The UCP affirms that parents love their children and are the best primary caregivers for their children…Unscrupulous operators may refer to ‘privacy rights’ or other principles to gain access to children and teenagers without parental knowledge, but this is a violation of trust and interferes in healthy relationships between children and parents.”

For the NDP, of course, this is extraordinarily controversial—a brief look at the meltdowns happening on Twitter during the UCP AGM illustrated that most progressives do not even believe the concept of parental rights is a valid one. Notley and Eggen believe that parents should not stand between the state and the child, and thus the resolutions passed at the UCP AGM were a repudiation from everyday Albertans who showed up in droves to turn the event into the largest political convention in the history of the province. It is those thousands of Albertans that Eggen was calling “dangerous” when he stepped out in front of the TV cameras to accuse parents of posing a threat to their own children.

Overall, the United Conservative Party Convention delivered a stinging repudiation of NDP social engineering from thousands of men and women who spent their own money and time to travel to Red Deer and vote in overwhelming majorities for policies that would roll back the government encroachment of the last several years. Jason Kenney and the UCP MLAs and candidates have received their marching orders from the Albertans who have placed their trust in the new party and the new leader. Hopefully, this convention will signal the return of common sense values and fiscal responsibility to Alberta.

Featured Image
Ryan Bomberger Ryan Bomberger Follow Ryan

Blogs, ,

Public school threw me under the bus for delivering life-affirming school-approved speech

Ryan Bomberger Ryan Bomberger Follow Ryan
By Ryan Bomberger
This was one of many deleted Instagram posts by a small group of Vicksburg students.

May 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Public schools need more truth, not less.

The aftermath of my recent life-affirming presentation at Vicksburg High School in Michigan showed that some leaders don't believe honesty is the best policy. Despite some incredible feedback from students, parents and even teachers, the school decided to cower to a vocal minority of students and parents who detest who I am.

Contrary to the school district's dishonest public statement, it wasn't what was said at the assemblythat caused the negative reaction. It was that some, who took to social media to protest me, discovered (gasp!) that I'm a Christian with a Biblical worldview on humanity who espouses a reasoned, thoroughly researched, and mostly secular perspective on social issues. Online protestors accused me of being "hateful". That's code for – you don't agree with my opinion! The venom on Instagram (many posts had to be deleted) shows the level of "tolerance" from those demanding it (see herehere, and here). One student – Austin Pryor – compared my presentation to a hypothetical one given by KKK Grand Dragon David Duke. The same student told WWMT news: "I guess what he said wasn't 'that's bad,' but when you Google his name and see he's homophobic and hateful like that, I don't really think you can bring that kind of person into a school."

I delivered the presentation according to the school-approved outline which detailed my story of adoption (a result of being conceived in rape), growing up in a multiracial family of 15, and believing that all lives – no matter their past or present situations – have purpose. I shared that we can all be stronger than our circumstances, how we should encourage one another even when it feels uncomfortable, and denounced racism by proclaiming that we're one human race. Students were very responsive and enthusiastically participated in fun Q&A segments on stage to win free gift cards. The administration then publicly apologized for that same presentation, in a school-wide email to parents and on Facebook, falsely claiming that I didn't deliver the speech I had agreed to:

The agreed content of the presentation was intended to be about finding purpose and inspiration in life, but the presentation given instead ranged into topics that were overtly political and were discomforting to many students and staff. High School Principal Keevin O'Neill sincerely apologizes for this and will be contacting the speaker and his organization to present his grievances. He will be happy to speak with anyone who wanted to give their feedback. We very much apologize that this event did not go as per the agreement and people were offended. We are taking steps to ensure it does not happen as future events are planned.

I'm a factivist, so I call out the school administration for lying. Blatantly lying. Here's the outline approved by the school. Here's the audio of the presentation given on Tuesday, in its entirety (minus 31 seconds where students sang a snippet of an Eartha Kitt song that could not be uploaded to SoundCloud). It's obvious that the approved outline was adhered to, and there was nothing "overtly political" in the speech. I was instructed not to use words like "abortion", "contraception", "prolife", "prochoice", or "LGBT" anything...and I didn't.

The school continued the dishonesty online"We can assure you that the message that the High School had agreed to through repeated contacts with the speaker was one of inspiration, motivation, and unity. The actual content of the presentation was not in keeping with that agreement."

Actually, the school never contacted me at all until 24 hours after posting the Facebook statements. A local organization in their area pitched my assembly presentation (which was offered for free) and coordinated the whole event with the principal. Neither the Superintendent nor Principal were present at the event. Ironically, the school proved one of the points of my delivered speech...they allowed the emotion of activism to take over the truthful context of factivism.

This is just a small example of what is a much larger cultural issue. Hate-filled, intolerant reactions take precedence over positive responses. Will there be a political and religious litmus test, now, for anyone who speaks to students in public schools? Superintendent Charles Glaes told WOOD TV 8: "... if you go beyond what was heard and look at the website, lots of people are going to be very alarmed. I don't believe there was any use of keywords that would have been very divisive. I just believe we have to do a better job of making sure that we don't bring in people who have a very strong political agenda."

That same Superintendent oversaw his entire middle school participate in the (pro-abortion, anti-Trump, pro-Hillary) Women's March 'National School Walkout' to promote gun control. That's overtly political. Telling kids they have purpose is not.

Radiance Board Chair, Julie Klose, reminded our team of why we do what we do: "You are called Radiance for a reason. When light illuminates it exposes and wow, did it expose! I pray that even if there was just one student who the message resonated with and a future life was saved through Ryan's measured and balanced message of life's purpose, that it would all be worth it!"

One of the emails we received from a Vicksburg student sums up why public schools – all schools – need people to speak truth and hope to their students: "Your story inspired me a lot. It was amazing to hear about your family and how a lot of you guys are adopted. That every life has a purpose. I went through some crap last year and I'm still bouncing back from it. Basically, the point of telling you that is that I believed my life was worthless, that I was worthless because that's what the people around me made me feel, worthless. But you inspired me to continue getting back up again and that it will get better."

That makes it all worthwhile.


Print All Articles
View specific date