All articles from June 17, 2020






  • Nothing is published in Video on June 17, 2020.

The Pulse

  • Nothing is published in The Pulse on June 17, 2020.


Bans on help for gender-confused kids are an ‘assault on parental rights’: retired judge

'If this all sounds quite crazy, that’s because it is.'
Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 6:36 pm EST
Featured Image
Tuzemka /
Anthony Murdoch
By Anthony Murdoch

ONTARIO, June 16, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — A retired Canadian judge has blasted legislation in his country that would outlaw parents from seeking to help their son or daughter overcome gender confusion, calling it the most “aggressive assault on parental rights” ever attempted by a federal government.

The critique came from Judge Brian Giesbrecht in a June 8 Epoch Times opinion piece titled “The Problem with Canada’s Proposed Ban on Conversion Therapy.”

In his opinion piece, Giesbrecht wrote about his concerns regarding Bill C8 and S-202, which, if passed, will criminalize so-called “conversion therapy.”

“It is truly frightening that if this legislation is passed, any counselling that is not deemed to be ‘affirming’ will become illegal,” wrote Giesbrecht.

“In other words, a professional who might be able to help a child come to terms with his or her biological sex by means of counselling would become a criminal under this legislation. This is profoundly wrong.”

Giesbrecht wrote that there is a “universal agreement” that parents who have a gender-dysphoric child struggle with “immensely difficult challenges” but added that the government has chosen to go against parental choice by “making it illegal for parents to seek certain types of counselling for their child.”

“But that is exactly what the government has chosen to do. This legislation is probably the most aggressive assault on parental rights that a federal government has ever attempted. If it passes, it risks destroying the bond between parent and child when a parent’s philosophy or religion conflicts with that of the state,” wrote Giesbrecht.

Giesbrecht served as a judge in Manitoba from 1991 until he retired from the bench in 2007. He is now a senior fellow with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, which bills itself as an independent public policy think-tank.

In his critique of Bills C8 and S-202, Giesbrecht said the proposed Canadian legislation is a response to a United Nations “campaign for comprehensive sexuality education for children.”

According to the U.N. website, comprehensive sexuality education “empowers young people to know and demand their rights. The importance of sexuality education has been recognized by numerous international agreements.”

Giesbrecht wrote that while “no reasonable person” would disagree with the notion that “as part of their education,” kids should receive sexual information, “extreme activists” have influenced leaders with radical ideology.

“Extreme activists have convinced some particularly ‘progressive’ leaders that they must go much further than providing education. ‘Sexuality education’ in some places now includes an extreme agenda that emphasizes the early sexualization of children,” wrote Giesbrecht.

Giesbrecht stated that one of the issues with the “experts” who are tasked with coming up with the laws and providing advice to the policymakers is that they are “the very people who are often involved in the gender-change system.”

“They are committed people and believe they are doing the right thing, but there are at least an equal number of experts — pediatricians, psychologists, endocrinologists — who believe that intensive, professional counselling is the best answer for deeply troubled gender dysphoric children. Those experts do not have the government’s ear,” wrote Giesbrecht.

Tabled by justice minister David Lametti on March 9, Bill C-8 will make it an offense under the Criminal Code to 1) cause a minor to undergo conversion therapy, 2) remove a minor from Canada to undergo conversion therapy, 3) cause a person to undergo conversion therapy against his will, 4) profit from conversion therapy, and 5) advertise conversion therapy.

Bill C-8 defines “conversion therapy” as: “a practice, treatment or service designed to change a person’s sexual orientation to heterosexual or gender identity to cisgender, or to repress or reduce non-heterosexual attraction or sexual behaviour.” 

The bill adds, “For greater certainty, this definition does not include a practice, treatment or service that relates (a) to a person’s gender transition; or (b) to a person’s exploration of their identity or to its development.” 

Bill C8 could punish someone for up to five years for causing a minor to undergo “conversion therapy,” either in or outside Canada, or forcing an adult to do so. Benefiting financially on advertising from “conversion therapy” is punishable by up to two years in jail.

Bill S-202, now before the Senate, would criminalize so-called conversion therapy, which it defines as follows: 

any practice, treatment or service designed to change an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity or to eliminate or reduce sexual attraction or sexual behaviour between persons of the same sex. For greater certainty, this definition does not include a surgical sex change or any related service.

An “astonishing proposal”

Giesbrecht concluded his opinion piece by saying Bills C8 and S-202 would punish a parent or counselor should he want to help a child overcome gender confusion, even if the child changes his mind, yet would not punish a counselor “advocating a change in gender.”

“Conversely, any counsellor advocating a change in gender is specifically given the OK by the legislation. The proposed legislation is not neutral on this point — it clearly favours transition over watchful waiting. Encouraging a child to transition is legal, discouraging a child from transitioning is illegal. This is such an astonishing proposal,” wrote Giesbrecht.

“I will back up on that sentence and repeat it: A person advocating that the child change gender is exempted by the legislation, but a person suggesting that the child stick to their birth gender would be guilty of a serious criminal offence. Similarly, a religious adviser, medical doctor, or anyone else consulted by a parent would be committing a jailable criminal offence if they gave their honest advice about transition that a government official did not approve of. If this all sounds quite crazy, that’s because it is.”

Giesbrecht’s column touched on data from the United Kingdom that show that over the last decade, there has been an increase of around 4,000 percent in young girls who express the desire to become “a boy.”

“This new trend has even been given a name: Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD). There is no consensus about why ROGD is happening, but it is becoming clear that social media plays a significant role,” wrote Giesbrecht.

Giesbrecht also wrote that there are many, “including political leaders and professionals who should know better,” who are pretending they “know far more” about transgender issues than they do in reality.

He wrote that he finds it “questionable” whether or not anyone is truly an “expert” with regard to ROGD, as there are many who say they are experts whose opinions “vary so widely — particularly regarding surgery on children.”

Giesbrecht wrote that one of the most “most difficult challenges today” is when parents discover that   one of their children might show a tendency to identify with “a sex other than one’s birth sex.”

Giesbrecht added that although little is known as to why this may be the case, he adds that “we do know” that the majority of these type of case will “resolve [themselves], given time and sensitive handling,” adding that in most cases, the “child will eventually become comfortable with his or her birth gender.”

Politicians, family groups, authors speak out against Bill C8 and S-202 and “trans activism” 

Many in the pro-life and pro-family movement in Canada, such as Campaign Life Coalition, have sounded the alarm that Bill C8 and others like it will prohibit Christians from counseling anyone who wants to overcome same-sex attraction or who struggles with their gender dysphoria.

They have also warned that the bills will prohibit parents from helping a gender-confused child conform to his sex. 

“Bill C-8 represents an unprecedented assault by the Trudeau Liberals on our civil rights, personal freedoms, and religious liberties in this country,” stated David Cooke, campaigns manager for Campaign Life Coalition, in a blog post. 

Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) leadership candidate and member of Parliament (M.P.) Derek Sloan said in early June that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is legislating “child abuse” with Bill C-8.

Last week, Sloan again accused Trudeau of child abuse for pushing to ban help for gender-confused kids with Bill C8

This promoted CPC leadership candidate Peter MacKay to call it “child abuse” for parents to seek help for their children who suffer from gender dysphoria, in a June 3 tweet directed toward Sloan.

Sloan told LifeSiteNews last week that genital-mutilating surgery on minors is “abusive.”

“I believe that sex-change operations [sic] on minors are abusive. Minors are not old enough to drink, smoke, gamble, or vote, and they are not old enough to make life-altering decisions about surgeries that will permanently change their growth and development,” Sloan told LifeSiteNews. 

Giesbrecht’s opinion piece was tweeted out by former Conservative M.P. Brad Trost.

Last week, J.K. Rowling, author of the bestselling Harry Potter book series, published a lengthy essay on her website about why she opposes the transgender agenda and refuses to “bow down” to it despite public pressure to surrender.

  bill c-8, child abuse, conversion therapy, free speech, freedom of association, homosexuality, justin trudeau, parental rights, propaganda, transgenderism


Google threatened to attack conservative sites’ revenue stream over comments section

Conservatives in Congress are outraged.
Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 6:26 pm EST
Featured Image
Google in New York City. Arturo Holmes / Getty Images
Martin Bürger Follow Martin
By Martin Bürger

MOUNTAIN VIEW, California, June 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Google has threatened to refuse access to its advertising platform to conservative news website The Federalist over unspecified claims that the website was violating Google’s policies on content related to race. In response, The Federalist said it had “temporarily” removed its comments section.

Another conservative website, ZeroHedge, was demonetized entirely.

Conservatives, including Fox News host Tucker Carlson and Texas senator Ted Cruz, have reacted to Google’s decision with accusations of censorship.

NBC News first reported on Tuesday that “Google has banned two far-right websites from its advertising platform after research revealed the tech giant was profiting from articles pushing unsubstantiated claims about the Black Lives Matter protests.”

The television network, one of the so-called Big Three, revealed that it was in fact its very own NBC News Verification Unit that brought the alleged violations of Google’s policies to the tech giant’s attention.

The NBC News Verification Unit, in turn, based its accusations on “research conducted by the Center for Countering Digital Hate, a British nonprofit that combats online hate and misinformation. They found that 10 U.S.-based websites have published what they say are racist articles about the protests, and projected that the websites would make millions of dollars through Google Ads.”

A spokesperson for Google told NBC News that whenever “a page or site violates our policies, we take action. In this case, we’ve removed both sites’ ability to monetize with Google.”

“We have strict publisher policies that govern the content ads can run on and explicitly prohibit derogatory content that promotes hatred, intolerance, violence or discrimination based on race from monetizing,” the spokesperson explained.

Google subsequently clarified on Twitter that “The Federalist was never demonetized. We worked with them to address issues on their site related to the comments section.”

“Our policies do not allow ads to run against dangerous or derogatory content, which includes comments on sites, and we offer guidance and best practices to publishers on how to comply,” Google wrote. “As the comment section has now been removed, we consider this matter resolved and no action will be taken.”

NBC News, meanwhile, has substantially revised its original article, without indicating which changes have been made.

Instead of characterizing both The Federalist and ZeroHedge as “two far-right websites,” only the latter is still slapped with that label.

On Tuesday evening, popular Fox News host Tucker Carlson, slammed Google for its power over media outlets and its attempted censorship of the two conservative websites.

“Most media companies are dependent on Google,” Carlson pointed out. “Google controls 70 percent of all online advertising, so if you’re in the news business, you obey Google. When Google tells you to do something, you do it. You have no choice.”

“They can bankrupt you in a minute and they will,” he continued. “In all of human history, no single entity has ever had more control over information than Google does right now, so if you’re worried about the concentration of power in the hands of a few unaccountable actors, and you very much should be, nobody has more unchecked power than Google does.”

As Carlson explained, “Google says it now holds conservative websites responsible for the comments of their readers. And yet, irony of ironies, thanks to a special carve-out Google has received from the United States Congress (something called Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, remember that), Google itself is not responsible for content on its platform because the Congress says it doesn’t have to be.”

Brendan Carr, a commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), took to Twitter to argue for Section 230 reform, calling out Google’s “hypocrisy.”

“Big Tech has long argued that it needs Section 230’s unique set of liability protections because websites simply couldn’t operate if they were held liable for comments or user-generated posts,” he wrote, adding, “Not so, according to Google’s own ad policy!”

“Google is now holding The Federalist responsible for comments and user-generated posts, and Google will be demonetizing the website as a result,” Carr pointed out. “Google has no problem treating The Federalist as the publisher of comments and user-generated posts on that website for purposes of Google’s own ad policy.”

Carr framed NBC News’s involvement in getting Google to censor The Federalist and ZeroHedge as “an example of established media gatekeepers attempting to regain control of the political narrative - not through persuasion but coercion.”

“A legacy media outlet lobbied Big Tech to punish a new media competitor,” he summarized.

Senator Ted Cruz, a Republican from Texas, sent a letter to Google CEO Sundar Pichai earlier today, accusing Google of “abusing its monopoly power in an effort to censor political speech with which it disagrees.”

Cruz emphasized Google’s anti-conservative bias. “Numerous ‘progressive’ media outlets allow comments[.] ... I don’t know what the objectionable comments were that individual users might have posted on The Federalist, but any objective review would no doubt demonstrate at least as many profane, racist, or indefensible user comments on these other sites that would equally violate Google’s alleged standards.”

Republican Representative Jim Jordan from Ohio said, “Americans are sick of this. I mean, this is a direct attack on speech. I think Americans are tired of the press going after certain people, if you don’t have the right position or say the right thing.”

“Americans are so sick of this baloney. This may be a turning point today,” he speculated on Fox News. “What Google did to The Federalist, I think this is a turning point today, because people are so tired.”

“It always seems like it’s the conservatives who are getting censored,” according to Jordan. “I mean, in fact, in this situation here you had some liberal news organization going after a conservative news organization. You never see it the other way around, and you certainly never see Twitter or Google, you never see them going after the liberal news organization. So, that is what drives Americans nuts. It has to end.”

  big tech, censorship, free speech, google, the federalist, zerohedge


Petitioners demand Canadian mayor’s resignation after he objected to flying LGBT ‘Pride’ flag

'Identity politics has been running rampant for decades…it hasn’t really been solving things,' said Mayor Dave Bylsma.
Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 6:23 pm EST
Featured Image
Paul Smeaton Paul Smeaton Follow Paul
By Paul Smeaton

Ontario, CANADA, June 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Petitioners are calling for the mayor of West Lincoln, Ontario, to resign after he said he was opposed to flying flags which represent “identity politics” when he was asked to fly the homosexual “Pride” flag over the local city hall.

Mayor Dave Bylsma said it was his preference that only the Canadian flag be flown over municipal buildings, saying that it “includes everybody.”

Speaking to CKTB's Matt Holmes last week, Bylsma said that he took ownership for the rainbow “Pride” flag not currently being flown over West Lincoln city hall.

The local mayor said that not actioning the request to fly the “Pride” flag had been an “oversight” amidst dealing with the coronavirus crisis, but that a special council meeting had been scheduled for this morning in order to discuss the request. That meeting has now confirmed that the “Pride” flag will be flown over West Lincoln city hall.

Bylsma said that years ago, the municipality made the decision that they “weren’t going to make any proclamations” and questioned the wisdom of flying a flag that represents “identity politics” over a municipal building. Bylsma confirmed that the chair of Pride Niagara has been invited to make a presentation to the council meeting this morning.

Linking the issue with the demands of groups such as Black Lives Matter, Bylsma said identity politics “hasn’t really been solving things.”

“Identity politics has been running rampant for decades…it hasn’t really been solving things. If you look at race relations and Black Lives Matters and the response that ‘all lives matter,’ for many people kind of strikes at the core of identity politics,” he said.

The mayor said that the West Lincoln municipality wanted to have a policy that “didn’t single out any one category of people as a subset over the other ones” and questioned “what’s wrong with just the Canadian flag flying over the municipal office? Does identity politics even belong on a municipal flag pole?”

A petition calling for Bylsma’s resignation says that he “made comments against LGBTQ, Indigenous, and Black communities” during the interview and is calling on him both to apologize and to resign.

Chris Bittle, a Liberal MP for the St. Catharines district, called Bylsma a bigot on Twitter.

Bylsma also spoke of his Christian faith during the interview.

When questioned why the LGBT “Pride” flag hadn’t simply been flown without reference to a council meeting, Bylsma replied that “democracy still is important.” 

“A fulsome discussion at our municipal council chambers just makes it open and transparent for everyone,” he said.

  dave bylsma, homosexuality, rainbow flag


Vatican hospital performs potential life-saving surgery on baby in mother’s womb

The 28-week-old unborn child was suffering from congenital diaphragmatic hernia, a major congenital anomaly.
Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 6:11 pm EST
Featured Image
Doctors perform fetal surgery at the Vaticans children's hospital. YouTube
Martin Bürger Follow Martin
By Martin Bürger

ROME, Italy, June 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Doctors at the Vatican’s Bambino Gesù Children’s Hospital successfully performed a rare surgery on a 28-week-old unborn baby with a major congenital anomaly, thereby significantly increasing the child’s chance for survival.

The hospital released a stunning video showing glimpses of the procedure, which lasted about 45 minutes.


��#buonenotizie Il Covid-19 non ferma l'impegno per la vita. Una delicata procedura ha permesso di posizionare un palloncino nella trachea di un feto di 28 settimane colpito da una grave forma di ernia diaframmatica congenita, prima della nascita. L'intervento, il primo di questo tipo effettuato in Ospedale, è stato realizzato in collaborazione con gli specialisti del Policlinico di Milano e dell'Ospedale San Pietro - Fatebenefratelli per consentire lo sviluppo dei polmoni e aumentare le chances di sopravvivenza del feto. A distanza di 10 giorni dall'operazione, i controlli ecografici hanno rilevato un significativo aumento del volume dei polmoni fetali. #ospedalebambinogesu #erniadiaframmatica #chirurgiafetale #gravidanza #feto #nuovavita

A post shared by Ospedale Bambino Gesù (@ospedalepediatricobambinogesu) on

Italian news agency ANSA reported in late April that the baby was suffering from congenital diaphragmatic hernia.

According to Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, this anomaly occurs “when the diaphragm, the muscle that separates the chest from the abdomen, fails to close during prenatal development. This opening allows contents of the abdomen (stomach, intestines and/or liver) to migrate into the chest, impacting the growth and development of the lungs.”

As a consequence, the baby’s lungs “will be smaller than expected (pulmonary hypoplasia), and will have less developed blood vessels. This causes high blood pressure in the lungs (pulmonary hypertension).”

The surgery performed at the Vatican hospital is not yet fully approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. However, as part of a clinical trial, fetoscopic endoluminal tracheal occlusion (FETO) is performed by Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, as well as a few other hospitals across the country.

During a FETO procedure, a balloon is placed “in your unborn baby’s airway. The balloon blocks the baby’s airway and remains in place for a few weeks. Fluid builds and the lungs grow. Bigger lungs may improve survival.” In a separate procedure several weeks later, the balloon is removed so the baby’s lungs can mature.

Both procedures take place in the mother’s womb.

According to Bambino Gesù Children’s Hospital, an ultrasound revealed a significant increase in the baby’s lung volume 10 days after the surgery on April 17.

A Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia video goes into more detail regarding the FETO procedure, as well as what parents of a child with congenital diaphragmatic hernia need to expect during pregnancy.

Dr. Lester A. Ruppersberger, an OB/GYN and former president of the Catholic Medical Association, told LifeSiteNews that the “significance of the ability to perform life-saving, life-enhancing in-utero fetal/maternal surgeries is as important as life itself,” adding that procedures like FETO are “a stark reminder that life is meaningful and precious, from the moment it begins in the womb.”

He expressed hope that these procedures “will help change minds and hearts of the opposition. The more success medicine has in these procedures, the fewer abortions will be performed for life-threatening congenital anomalies, not that there is any justifiable reason to terminate any pregnancy for any reason.”

Advancements in fetal surgery have led to lives of babies being saved that otherwise would have been aborted, often at the recommendation of doctors.

According to a 2019 article by the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute, the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology “reported in 2012 that maternal-fetal medicine specialists are more likely than fetal-care pediatric specialists to support termination of babies with spina bifida,” another congenital disorder.

“Similarly, a more recent 2017 study found that maternal fetal medicine specialists are more likely than neonatologists or pediatric surgeons to recommend termination of babies with spina bifida and less likely to recommend prenatal surgery compared to their colleagues,” the Charlotte Lozier Institute continued.

“And several parents have reported how they were pressured by physicians to terminate their child upon receiving a prenatal diagnosis of a severe congenital disorder.”

Ruppersberger said fetal therapy is “one of the most promising fields of pediatric surgical medicine, and prenatal surgery is becoming an option for a growing number of babies with congenital anomalies and birth defects.”

He mentioned a wide variety of fetal surgeries currently being developed, helping, for instance, with “bronchogenic cysts, congenital diaphragmatic hernia, congenital high airway obstruction, fetal lung lesions, hydrocephalus, lower urinary tract obstruction, spina bifida, meningomyelocele, amniotic bands and many others.”

There are also maternal pregnancy-related surgeries that are “more focused toward correction of maternal pathologies that may compromise the life and health of the mother and/or successful outcomes of the pregnancy,” Ruppersberger said.

Among those are “uterine anomalies/growths, ovarian cysts, cervical incompetence, cervical/ovarian cancers, and any other non-reproductive organ pathologies such as appendicitis, gallbladder disease, bowel obstruction, trauma, etc.”

The Charlotte Lozier Institute, which is the research and education arm of pro-life organization Susan B. Anthony List, expressed hope that “perceptions will change with further advancements in the field that minimize fetal and maternal risks, as well as wider education of physicians on the promising techniques available.”

  bambino gesù hospital, catholic medical association, charlotte lozier institute, children's hospital of philadelphia, fetal surgery, holy see, unborn baby, vatican


Dutch doctor admits to euthanizing dementia patient who didn’t want to die

The geriatric physician who avoided murder charges expressed no remorse for her actions.
Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 4:43 pm EST
Featured Image
Calvin Freiburger
By Calvin Freiburger

June 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The Hague geriatric physician who faced and evaded murder charges for euthanizing an elderly dementia patient in 2016 has broken her silence on the case for the first time since it happened … and showed no signs of regret even while admitting that she killed the woman despite being told that she didn’t want to go through with it.

Marinou Arends was working at Mariahoeve care home in The Hague when she killed a 74-year-old woman who had consented to die in advanced care directives written when she was still of sound mind, but had since deteriorated, and would not reiterate her consent when the time came.

“Although the woman repeatedly said she wanted to die, when asked directly, she would then say ‘not yet,” Dutch News summarized. “A second specialist agreed she was ‘suffering unbearably’ in the home and in the end, Arends put a sleeping drug in her cup of coffee; when the woman later appeared to sit up and draw back from the lethal infusion, her son-in-law pushed her down in her bed again.”

Arends was charged with illegally going through with a euthanization without ensuring consent, but was cleared last September, with the judge essentially concluding that following the patient’s earlier wishes trumped any obligation to heed her most recent ones.

“It is good to get the confirmation: do it, just do it,” Arends said this week in an interview with Dutch News. “But I couldn’t get this confirmation, and without it I had to take this step. It was tremendously difficult, but for the best. I believed I was working within the boundaries of the law.”

She admitted that the patient refused to consent to being euthanized no less than three times. “If you asked her, ‘What would you think if I were to help you to die?’” Arends recalled, “she looked bewildered and said: ‘That’s going a bit far.’”

The ex-physician also defended placing a sedative in the patient’s coffee without her knowledge, claiming it was an “accepted practice” to prevent “panic,” so long as the person with power of attorney (her husband) had consented. 

In the end, she felt vindicated by the “unanimous” decision to clear her, defending her actions as a “choice between an average residency of seven years, seven years of suffering, or – on the basis of the fundamental message in her living will – giving her the euthanasia she longed for.”

“This involuntary euthanasia was motivated by bigotry against people with dementia, masked as compassion,” lamented Wesley Smith, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center on Human Exceptionalism who covers end-of-life issues. “What other conclusion can we reach? That she was no longer compos mentis, so her opinion about her own life was unimportant?”

As for Arends’ original exoneration, Smith explained that there was “was never any chance the doctor would lose her license or do any jail time for the homicide,” and that the purpose of the case was “not to punish wrongdoing, but rather, to set precedents for death doctors to follow going forward. Indeed, this is why supposedly restrictive guidelines don’t restrict much of anything. It’s all a big fat fraud.”

  assisted suicide, consent, dementia, end of life, euthanasia, marinou arends, murder, netherlands


Chinese scientist expelled from Canadian bio lab shipped lethal viruses to Wuhan

'She sent one of the deadliest viruses on a laboratory in China.'
Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 4:29 pm EST
Featured Image
Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy
By Dorothy Cummings McLean

Matthew Cullinan Hoffman contributed to this report.

WINNIPEG, MB, Canada, June 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) ― An award-winning Chinese scientist expelled from Canada’s most secure microbiology lab sent several vials containing dangerous viruses from the lab to China last year. 

According to documents acquired by the state-funded Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), Xiangguo Qiu sent 15 different strains of Ebola and Henipah viruses to Wuhan, China at the end of March 2019. Bound ultimately for the city’s now-infamous Institute of Virology, the package was shipped from Canada’s National Microbiology Lab in Winnipeg, Manitoba to Beijing, China, via Toronto. The dangerous cargo was carried overseas to the communist dictatorship on a commercial Air Canada flight. 

Four months later, Qiu, her husband Keding Cheng, and their Chinese national students were expelled from the National Microbiology Lab. 

Canada’s Public Health Authority has stated that the expulsion and the ongoing RCMP investigation into the Chinese scientists are not related to the shipment of the pathogens. 

The CBC reported last August that the viruses “may have been shipped to the Chinese Academy of Sciences in a way that circumvented” the Canadian lab’s “operating procedures, and without a document protecting Canada’s intellectual property rights.” At the time, it was still unknown that Qiu was the scientist responsible for sending the dangerous material. 

In a recent interview with the national broadcaster, Ottawa university professor Amir Attaran told the CBC that Qiu’s actions were “suspicious,” “alarming,” “frightening,” and “perhaps life-threatening.” 

“She sent one of the deadliest viruses on Earth, multiple varieties of it to maximize the genetic diversity and maximize what experimenters in China could do with it, to a laboratory in China that does dangerous Gain of Function experiments,” Attaran said. 

He explained that “Gain of Function” experiments attempt to make viruses more dangerous or even deadly and that they are not allowed in Canada and many other countries.  

The Population Research Institute’s Steven Mosher, an expert on China’s communist regime, told LifeSiteNews that researchers at the Wuhan institute are working for the Chinese military.  

“Chinese scientists [in Canada] were shipping dangerous pathogens to the Wuhan Institute of Virology [WIV] where they were being ‘enhanced’ with Gain of Function research as part of the PLAs bioweapons program,”  Mosher explained via email.

The Wuhan lab’s affiliation with the Chinese military was confirmed this January 26 when Chen Wei, the major general in China’s People’s Liberation Army who leads the Institute of Bioengineering at the Academy of Military Medical Sciences, was put in charge of it. One of the members of the WIV board, Professor Wu-Chun Cao, is the director of the State Key Laboratory of Pathogen and Biosecurity, also a part of the Academy of Military Medical Sciences. He holds the rank of colonel in the People’s Liberation Army.  

Qiu’s association with the Wuhan Institute of Virology was well-known to her colleagues in Canada, who discussed her with the CBC. In October 2019, the national broadcaster reported that the Chinese national had made five trips to Wuhan during the 2017-2018 period. The CBC reported that “there have always been questions about Qiu’s trips to China — and what information and technology she was sharing with researchers there.” 

One of the employees of the National Microbiology lab told the CBC, “It’s not right that she’s a Canadian government employee providing details of top-secret work and know-how to set up a high-containment lab for a foreign nation.”   

In 2018, Qiu was honored with a Canadian Governor-General Innovation Award for her work creating an effective treatment, ZMapp, for people sick with the Ebola virus. According to the GG Innovation Awards, the first human trials for ZMapp led “to the recovery of two medical missionaries and 25 first responders and residents during a 2014 Ebola outbreak in Liberia.”   

“My son was so excited,” Qiu said for a promotional video about her award. “He said, ‘Wow! My mother has found a cure for Ebola!’”  

This week LifeSiteNews published an extensive report by Matthew Hoffmann about the complicity of Dr. Anthony Fauci and other American health officials in the Chinese laboratory’s dangerous “Gain of Function” research. Hoffman named both the National Institutes of Health and the U.S. Agency for International Development as patrons of the Wuhan Institute of Virology. France has also contributed to the Chinese institution, as has the World Health Organization.

All the foreign support for the Wuhan laboratory has not ensured public safety. The French organization charged with certifying the safety of the WIV facility completed in 2015 refused to do so. Moreover, there is mounting evidence that the current COVID-19 pandemic has its origins in the Institute.

  communist china, coronavirus, national microbiology lab, wuhan, wuhan institute of virology


Court prevents hospice from voting to become Christian, avoid euthanasia

'We are highly concerned with the lack of justice in the court system today,' said the society’s board chair Angelina Ireland.
Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 2:49 pm EST
Featured Image
Lianne Laurence Lianne Laurence Follow Lianne
By Lianne Laurence

DELTA, British Columbia, June 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — A Canadian judge has blocked a hospice society from initiating a vote by membership on becoming a Christian society, which if adopted would have exempted it from the legal obligation to allow euthanasia — the killing of sick patients by lethal injection — onsite.

The Delta Hospice Society, which runs the 10-bed Irene Thomas Hospice, planned to launch the mail-in vote to its 1,500 members at a special meeting this Monday.

But British Columbia Supreme Court Judge Shelley Fitzpatrick ordered the meeting cancelled at the request of three pro-euthanasia ex-board members, the CBC reported.

“We are highly concerned with the lack of justice in the court system today,” the society’s board chair Angelina Ireland said in a statement to the B.C. Catholic.

“We are appealing,” the society’s lawyer Albertos Polizogopoulos told LifeSiteNews in an email.

Pro-euthanasia petitioner Chris Pettypiece told CBC the judge ruled June 12 that the society’s board acted in bad faith to manipulate the vote by rejecting membership applications.

Pettypiece said the judge ordered the board to provide a list of all members and all rejected applications to the petitioners, who also include former board chair Jim Levin and former hospice acting executive director Sharon Farrish.

But Ireland argued in an affidavit that the board rejected 310 membership applications and accepted others based on whether or not it could determine if an applicant would uphold the society’s constitution, in compliance with the Societies Act stipulation that members “must uphold the constitution and bylaws.” 

She pointed out that the society would lose $11,500 in “lost sunk costs,” including the $8,500 it spent on printing and postage, if the special meeting were cancelled or postponed.

Ireland also stated in her affidavit that the three petitioners “colluded” with Alex Muir of the Vancouver chapter of the Dying with Dignity in their efforts to change the hospice’s position to not allow euthanasia onsite. 

Seizure of hospice building, loss of tax status possible  

In a further setback, Delta city council unanimously approved a motion Monday to notify the society’s board that its thrift store — which raises money for the society’s home-based programs — will lose its tax exemption if the society changes its constitution to restrict membership, the Delta Optimist reported.

Delta Mayor George Harvie promised as much during a pro-euthanasia rally Saturday, where he urged the hundreds in attendance to buy memberships for the society and called on Ireland and the current board to “do the right thing, resign on Monday.” 

The Delta Hospice Society has been under increasing pressure by the NDP government and the Fraser Health Authority to allow euthanasia onsite ever since Canada legalized the lethal injection of sick patients, or “Medical Aid in Dying” (MAiD), in 2016. 

The media and euthanasia advocates, who have mounted personal attacks against Ireland on social media, have inflamed the dispute, which has bitterly divided the West coast community south of Vancouver.

Hospice founder and longtime executive director Nancy Macey steadfastly opposed euthanasia as incompatible with palliative care, and asserted that the society’s constitution does not allow any practice that would hasten a patient’s death.

Both the Canadian Hospice Palliative Care Association (CHPCA) and the Canadian Society of Palliative Care Physicians (CSPCP) are backing the society. 

“National and international hospice palliative care organizations are unified in the position that MAiD is not part of the practice of hospice palliative care,” the organizations said in a joint statement in November.

However, in September 2019, the board, which then included Levin and Pettypiece, fired Macey and hired Farrish as acting executive director, and two months later voted to allow euthanasia onsite.

A week later, the society’s membership ousted the pro-euthanasia board members during a turbulent annual general meeting in which Ireland was elected chair.

On February 25, 2020, NDP health minister Adrian Dix announced the province was cutting the society’s $1.5 million in public funding effective February 2021.

Dix also said the province is considering expropriating the hospice building, which was built by the society with $8.5 million in privately raised funds, but which sits on land leased to the society by the Fraser Health Authority.

As a result, the society accelerated its plans to vote on becoming a Christian entity. The government exempts faith-based institutions from having to allow euthanasia onsite.

“Since its founding, the Society operated successfully with foundational Christian principles of service, love, kindness, honesty, integrity, and excellence and support the sanctity of life. Palliative medicine has the tools to manage suffering,” Macey wrote in an affidavit submitted to the court.

“As the founder and former Executive Director of the Society and as a current member in good standing, I continue to support the interpretation of the Society’s Constitution being that its purposes are to provide palliative care and the medical, emotional and spiritual components of care that offer comfort, meaning, dignity and hope.”

The vote the board planned to launch at Monday’s meeting was to amend the society’s constitution to include this clause as part of its mandate: “to fulfill God’s calling to serve the sick and dying, and to follow Christ’s teachings and example in all we do,” the B.C. Catholic reported.

The vote would have been open until June 26, and two-thirds of the membership would have to approve the change for it to pass.

Euthanasia advocates are alleging that if the hospice become a Christian society, it won’t welcome non-Christians, a false claim Ireland has consistently refuted, but which has nevertheless created “this big backlash,” Alex Schadenberg, executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, told LifeSiteNews.

The Delta Hospice Society has to appeal the judge’s order, he said.

“They don’t have a choice. It doesn’t make any sense if such a decision could hold. If this decision holds, it changes the nature of non-profit corporations or independent corporations anywhere in Canada,” Schadenberg said.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition has launched a petition supporting the hospice that has more than 26,000 signatures, but now the society “is going to need people to donate toward the legal funds,” he added.

“It’s David and Goliath here,” said Schadenberg. “They’re fighting the government which has unlimited resources.” 

Donations to the Delta Hospice Society can be made at

  assisted suicide, british columbia, delta hospice society, euthanasia


Left-wing activists to protest California church for hosting Family Research Council VP

The ministry will be meeting any protesters at their driveway with free food and drink. 'They have the potential to be our future brothers and sisters who have yet to place their faith in Jesus Christ,' said Pastor Dave Atkins.
Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 2:36 pm EST
Featured Image
Lt. Gen. (Ret.) William G. 'Jerry' Boykin U.S. Army via Getty Images
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

SOULSBYVILLE, California, June 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A coalition of area left-wing groups are banding together to attack a California church for hosting a prominent pro-family leader as part of its reopening, accusing the church of legitimizing “hate.”

Calvary Chapel Sonora Men's Ministries in Soulsbyville has announced its sixth annual men’s conference for this weekend, which will kick off the reopening of the Church of Tuolumne County with a catered lunch, activities, and a guest speaker: Lt. Gen. (Ret.) William G. “Jerry” Boykin, an ordained minister, founding member of the U.S. Army’s Delta Force, former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, and current Executive Vice President of the Family Research Council (FRC).

Several left-wing organizations intend to respond to Boykin’s involvement by protesting the event, according to Left Coast Right Watch (LCRW), a Bay Area site that bills itself as a monitor against “extremism.” The article, by LCRW’s editor in chief Abner Hauge, accuses Boykin of “campaigning against LGBTQ+ rights” for his Christian stances on marriage and sexuality, and of “vilifying Muslims.” Hauge even writes that Boykin is “likely guilty of war crimes,” though he offers no evidence for the explosive claim.

As for the charge of Islamophobia, Hauge claims that “Boykin has a long and well-documented history of bigoted statements against Muslims,” but acknowledges that “LCRW didn’t bother tracking down the specific quotes,” because Calvary Pastor Dave Atkins’ defense of Boykin was “in obvious bad faith.” 

Hauge’s sole example is Boykin decrying the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is not a general reference to Muslims but a specific organization with deep, documented ties to global terrorism.

Nevertheless, LCRW’s allies are planning to demonstrate against Boykin's remarks. “It’s hard to see a church and the Family Research Council out here,” complained Julie Gorgas, Vice President of Tuolumne County Indivisible (TCI). “I’m really against conversion therapy and this guy is responsible for thousands of LGBTQ suicides. I just think it’s really disappointing that a Christian church would invite someone like that to speak–as if he’s a good moral leader.”

Flyers being distributed around Soulsbyville implores people to protest to “celebrate Pride Month,” stand in solidarity with “black trans lives,” and “remind Calvary Church that hate is not a Christian value.” Activists are also circulating phone numbers and email addresses of the church’s leadership. 

As a result, Cavalry has been deluged with hostile emails and Facebook comments attacking them for “having a bigot appear at a Christian event,” for inviting “controversy and conflict” over “inclusion,” and calling them “despicable” and even “neo-fascist.”

In response to the attacks, Atkins released a statement defending Boykin and rejecting any notion that the event is meant to “cause offense to our friends in the LGBTQ community.”

“It is true that I support our keynote speaker and have promoted his arrival for some time now. It is also true that Boykin has made some comments in the past that are currently being used against him,” Atkins said. “He has made public clarifications pertaining to those comments and you can research them on the web on your own time. The protest against his coming to speak to our men, during pride month, is a distraction from the greater message that he proclaims – The Gospel. He is an American hero with a stellar military record in the United States Army.”

Atkins announced that the ministry will be meeting any protesters at their driveway with free food and drink, and implored the event’s regular guests to keep their focus on the spirit of the event, not potential confrontation.

“Do not come to pick a fight,” he said. “Come with a humble heart ready to hear from God’s Word. Do not invite friends on the basis that this is being protested. Do not rant on Facebook on behalf of CCS. If you have a chip on your shoulder leave it at home. Those protesting this event are not our enemies. They have the potential to be our future brothers and sisters who have yet to place their faith in Jesus Christ.”

“Since the beginning [the] problem hasn’t been a skin issue,” but rather a “sin issue,” Atkins continued. “The issue is a moral rebellion against a plan that a loving God has laid out in His word. The issue and the solution have never changed. The more biblical we become, the less racial we will be. The same Bible that teaches marriage is only between male and female is the same Bible that teaches us to ‘love our neighbor.’”

Tuolumne County Indivisible is under the nationwide banner of Indivisible, a “movement of thousands of group leaders and more than a million members taking regular, iterative, and increasingly complex actions to resist the GOPs agenda, elect local champions, and fight for progressive policies. 

The group admits to receiving a “modest general operating grant” from far-left financier George Soros’ Open Society Foundations (OSF) in 2017, but denies the connection goes further than that.

Many of those attacking Calvary cite as their source for labeling Boykin and FRC “hateful” the infamous Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a far-left group known for its efforts to drive conservative and pro-family organizations out of mainstream society. Despite its popular media framing as an authority on “extremism,” SPLC has found itself on the losing end of at least one defamation suit for its work, and has been called by insiders a “highly profitable scam” that uses “civil-rights work mainly as a marketing tool for bilking gullible Northern liberals.”

  abner hauge, calvary chapel sonora men's ministries, church of tuolumne county, dave atkins, family research council, homophobia, indivisible, islamophobia, jerry boykin, julie gorgas, left coast right watch, left-wing hate, lgbt, protests, soulsbyville, southern poverty law center, tuolumne county indivisible


Are we entering the Dark Ages that G.K. Chesterton predicted?

Dale Ahlquist, famed G.K. Chesterton scholar and founder of the Chesterton society and the Chesterton schools, joins Jonathon Van Maren to discuss what the philosopher would think of the state of the world.
Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 12:07 pm EST
Featured Image
LifeSiteNews staff
By LifeSiteNews staff

June 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – G.K. Chesterton is a famous 20th century author and philosopher. During his time, Chesterton saw the beginnings of civilization crumbling and predicted a dark age was coming. With everything that is going on with the lockdowns and now the riots, it is difficult not to think that this time may be coming sooner than we thought.  

In today’s episode of The Van Maren Show, Dale Ahlquist, famed Chesterton scholar and founder of the Chesterton society and the Chesterton schools, joins Jonathon Van Maren to discuss what G.K. Chesterton would think of the state of the world. Ahlquist and Van Maren speak about the riots, the upcoming “dark ages” of society, and what we need to do to save the culture for future generations, including taking kids out of public schools. 

Ahlquist is based outside of Minneapolis and begins by sharing the devastation that swept through the city. Parts of the city were left in rubble. Buildings were covered with plywood with spray-painted pleas to the rioters not to destroy family businesses. Some areas still smoldered from the fires.  

Watch the full interview: 

Thankfully, the suburbs were left largely untouched, but Ahlquist shares that some people could see the glow of the Twin Cities on fire from 20 miles away. 

Chesterton said that every city was “built on a volcano” and is just waiting to erupt. Ahlquist tells listeners, “every place where there is this concentrated group of people, they are really in a sense of tension at all times and things could blow for one reason or another. Civilization is hard work and you have to work at it. And as soon as you stop working at it, it comes apart in a hurry.” 

Chesterton spoke of the coming of the “dark ages” as our moral, religious, and cultural bases began to degrade. Ahlquist blames the public education system for accelerating this decline. Ahlquist points to the need to teach truth, goodness, and beauty to restore the culture and civilization.  

Ahlquist points out that progressives often seek progress for the sake of progress, and spurn history. 

“They look forward with enthusiasm because they are afraid to look back,” Chesterton wrote. 

In addition to the public education system, Ahlquist points to the media’s influence in filtering the truth and discouraging discussion. Chesterton preferred to encourage true discussion, rather than allowing the media to filter the truth and hinder actual dialogue.  

Ahlquist points to the media’s censorship of the March of Life despite the vast number of people who attend the event. Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood have targeted black babies for decades, killing millions of black lives, but the media and the rioters have completely ignored this fact.  

As society continues its downward slide into the “dark ages” Chesterton predicted, Ahlquist encourages people to find and form solid communities. People should “establish communities of believers who educate their children and teach them the truth and teach them what justice looks like and also what truth, beauty, and goodness look like.”  

Ahlquist, who founded the Chesterton Academies, sees that the public school system is fueling our moral decline.  

“The public school system has been on a steady road to self-destruction and we are seeing the fruits of public education when we are watching our cities burn down.” 

Ahlquist points to the disrespect people are having toward laws and law enforcement as an additional decline in civilization. 

“I think as we see a growing lawlessness that's going to that's going to have a ripple effect. People have lost respect for authority. And so normal law is going to be difficult to enforce because people do not recognize the authority of even our political and law enforcement officials,” Ahlquist shares.  

Listen to the full interview: 

With the COVID-19 lockdowns and the discrimination against churches, but not “essential” liquor stores or golf courses, people’s respect for the government is plummeting. 

As this sentiment continues, we will be forced to reshape our civilization from a top-down government run by a few big corporations to a bottom-up government run by and for the people as it was originally intended.  

Again, Ahlquist points to the importance of educating our children properly in order to save civilization. He encourages listeners to build their small communities around schools that teach about truth, goodness, and beauty, like the Chesterton schools.  

“I think people of all faiths have to get their kids out of public schools because they're destroying the souls of their children,” Ahlquist tells listeners. “And those schools are driving a wedge between student and parent by teaching them something completely alternative to what the parents are trying to teach them.”  

No one knows exactly when society will enter into the “dark ages” predicted by Chesterton, but today’s conversation with Dale Ahlquist provides families with great advice on how we can start preparing now. 

The Van Maren Show is hosted on numerous platforms, including Spotify, SoundCloud, YouTube, iTunes, and Google Play.

For a full listing of episodes, and to subscribe to various channels, visit our Acast webpage here.

To receive weekly emails when a new episode is uploaded, subscribe below: 


* indicates required

By selecting Email below, you agree to receive emails about The Van Maren Show Podcast.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. For information about our privacy practices, please visit our website.

We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By clicking below to subscribe, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing. Learn more about Mailchimp's privacy practices here.

  dale ahlquist, gk chesterton, rioting, riots, the van maren show


Sen. Josh Hawley reacts to SCOTUS trans ruling: ‘The end of the conservative legal movement’

The junior senator from Missouri called out the Republican Party for its treatment of religious conservatives and conservative legal groups for attacking his questioning of Trump judicial nominees.
Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 10:30 am EST
Featured Image
Sen. Josh Hawley YouTube / screenshot
Martin Bürger Follow Martin
By Martin Bürger

WASHINGTON, D.C., June 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Senator Josh Hawley, R-MO, decried “the end of the conservative legal movement” in a fiery speech before the U.S. Senate yesterday. He also called out the Republican Party for its treatment of religious conservatives.

Hawley made his remarks following Monday’s Supreme Court ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia. The ruling concluded that “sex discrimination” in Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act should be interpreted to mean “sexual orientation” and “gender identity,” in addition to its original biological meaning.

“After Bostock,” the 40-year-old senator said, the effort of the conservative legal movement, “as it has existed up to now, is over.”

Hawley referred to the legal philosophies of textualism and originalism, which were supposed to essentially interpret legal texts based on their ordinary meaning, as understood by regular citizens at the time the law was made.

He said that “if you can invoke textualism and originalism in order to reach such a decision—an outcome that fundamentally changes the scope and meaning and application of statutory law—then textualism and originalism and all of those phrases don’t mean much at all.”

“And if those are the things that we’ve been fighting for—it’s what I thought we had been fighting for, those of us who call ourselves legal conservatives—if we’ve been fighting for originalism and textualism, and this is the result of that, then I have to say it turns out we haven’t been fighting for very much,” Hawley pointed out.

“Or maybe we’ve been fighting for quite a lot, but it’s been exactly the opposite of what we thought we were fighting for,” he speculated.

According to the young senator, who had previously already served as the Missouri Attorney General, the conservative legal movement always depended on religious conservatives “in order to carry the weight of the votes to actually support this out in public, to get out there and make it possible electorally.”

“Evangelicals, conservative Catholics, conservative Jews: let’s be honest, they’re the ones who have been the core of the legal conservative effort,” he said.

Now, however, it has become evident that “the bargain that has been offered to religious conservatives for years now is a bad one. It’s time to reject it.”

“The bargain has never been explicitly articulated,” Hawley admitted, “but religious conservatives know what it is. The bargain is that you go along with the party establishment, you support their policies and priorities—or at least keep your mouth shut about it—and, in return, the establishment will put some judges on the bench who supposedly will protect your constitutional rights to freedom of worship, to freedom of exercise.”

Hawley went on to recount some of the policies pushed by the Republican Party that religious conservatives accepted, hoping for a strong defense of the First Amendment in return:

We were told that we’re supposed to shut up while the party establishment focuses more on cutting taxes and handing out favors for corporations, multinational corporations who don’t share our values, who will not stand up for American principles, who were only too happy to ship American jobs overseas. But we’re supposed to say nothing about that. We’re supposed to keep our mouths shut because maybe we’ll get a judge out of the deal. That was the implicit bargain.

We’re supposed to keep our mouths shut while the party establishment opens borders, while the party establishment pursues ruinous trade policies.

We’re supposed to keep our mouths shut while those at the upper end of the income bracket get all of the attention. While working families and college students and those who don’t want to go to college but can’t get a good job, while they get what? What attention?

Workers? Children? What about parents looking for help with the cost of raising children? Looking for help with the culture in which they have to raise children? Looking for help with the communities, rebuilding the communities in which they must carry out their family life?

What about college students trying to find an education that isn’t ruinously expensive and then figure out some way to pay back that enormous debt? What about those who don’t have a college degree and don’t want one, but would like to get a good job? What about them?

Hawley also seemed to reference his public disputes with the Judicial Crisis Network, a conservative legal group that backed President Trump’s nominees to the Supreme Court and lower courts:

...the truth is, to those who have objected to my own questioning of judicial nominees in this body, to those who said I was wrong to question judges who came for the Judiciary Committee, to those who chided me for asking tough questions even of nominees by a Republican president, for those who said that I was slowing the process down, that I was out of line, for the supposedly conservative groups who threatened to buy television time in my own state to punish me for asking questions about conservative judges, I just have this to say: this is why I asked questions. This is why I won’t stop. And I wish some more people would ask some harder questions. Because this outcome is not acceptable. And the bargain which religious conservatives have been offered is not tenable.

Hawley ended on a somewhat hopeful note.

He encouraged religious conservatives “to bring forward the best of our ideas on every policy affecting this nation. We should be out in the forefront leading on economics, on trade, on race, on class, on every subject that matters for what our founders called the ‘general welfare’ because we have a lot to offer.”

“It’s time for religious conservatives to stand up and speak out rather than being told to sit down and shut up,” he added. “So, let this be a departure. Let this be a new beginning, let this be the start of something better.”

Rod Dreher, author of The Benedict Option: A Strategy for Christians in a Post-Christian Nation, praised Hawley for what he called “a game-changing speech.”

“This speech is a call for religious conservatives to break away from the old way of doing political business — and, I hope, from the old leadership that has gotten very fat and happy networking with the GOP establishment over the years,” Dreher wrote.

“In this speech, Josh Hawley has made explicit the connections between class, culture, economics, and law in the Republican Party,” he explained. “This is heresy to the old guard. Good! Nail this speech to the doors of every Republican senator and political consultant, and every Christian Right lobbyist in Washington.”

Even though Hawley criticized the Supreme Court, this time led by Trump-appointee Justice Neil Gorsuch, for legislating from the bench instead of judging in a case, he did not criticize the content of the ruling as a deviation from natural law and traditional biblical morality.

Hawley said the ruling would be applied to cases involving questions of religious liberty in future cases. While explicitly mentioning churches, religious schools, and religious charities, he did not address, for instance, the case of a simple business owner who does not want his male employee to dress like a woman at work, even if the business owner is not religious. Cases like these, it appears, were already decided by Monday’s ruling.

  bostock v. clayton county, homosexuality, josh hawley, neil gorsuch, sex discrimination, transgenderism


Are riots rattling US cities part of Soros’ plan to re-shape America and take down Trump?

Soros and other leftists have been plotting against Trump since 2016.
Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 9:04 am EST
Featured Image
People look on as a construction site burns in a large fire near the Third Police Precinct on May 27, 2020 in Minneapolis, Minnesota during a protest after the death of George Floyd. Stephen Maturen / Getty Images
Gualberto Garcia Jones Gualberto Garcia Jones
By Gualberto Garcia Jones

PETITION: Investigate George Soros' role in funding domestic terrorism! Sign the petition here.

June 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – What in the world is happening in cities across America? Is it a peaceful, spontaneous modern civil rights movement, or is it a planned and orchestrated seditious revolution?

We will show you how the violent riots tearing American cities apart are part of the anti-American, anti-Trump Resistance movement. We will also show how the Resistance effort itself is part of a long string of Marxist efforts aimed at destroying what is left of Christian civilization in America, and how George Soros is likely playing a leading role in causing this mayhem.

If you would like to join your voice to ours, please sign our petition, which asks the DOJ, the FBI, and every appropriate state law enforcement agency to investigate George Soros, his Open Society Foundation, and the funding behind the domestic terrorism occurring in the streets of America.

From the very earliest moments of President Trump's inauguration, the radical left has been involved in a concerted effort to sow division. Consider how they have attempted to conflate President Trump's Make America Great Again and America First platforms with Nazi and White Nationalism. It is not coincidental that in response to the president's call for American unity, the left organized “the Resistance,” appropriating a term from those who fought the Nazi occupation forces in Europe during World War II.

The father of today's “progressive” radicals, Saul Alinsky, wrote in his Rules for Radicals that “an organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and discontent.” And that is exactly what the radical left did even before President Trump had been inaugurated as the 45th president of the United States.

As Politico Magazine reported, just six days after President Trump won the 2016 election, the Democracy Alliance, a George Soros funded dark money organization made up of 110 billionaires, met at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Washington, D.C. to formally organize the Resistance. If you don't believe this, check the sources for yourself. The story was published by Kenneth Vogel in the liberal Politico Magazine on November 14, 2016. The headline says it all: Soros bands with donors to resist Trump, ‘take back power’: Major liberal funders huddle behind closed doors with Pelosi, Warren, Ellison, and union bosses to lick wounds, retrench.

After four days of closed-door meetings, the Resistance army was formed. In total there were 172 organizations, many of them already active during other leftist uprisings such as Occupy Wall Street, the anti-capitalist riots at international financial meetings, the climate protests, the anti-war and of course the Black Lives Matter protests. But one of the most active groups in meeting was an anonymous organization named “indivisible” and in an online manual they concluded that “in spite of the fact that he has no mandate, Trump will attempt to use his congressional majority to re-shape America in his own racist, authoritarian, and corrupt image.”

The usual amalgamation of leftist issues suited the organizers’ purposes perfectly. You see, with the radical left, the issue is never the issue, the issue is always the revolution. It didn't matter that the nation had just peacefully coexisted under a black president who won reelection and served for eight years. If the character of a nation had to be destroyed in order to take back power, so be it. Soros and his cronies would not be stopped.

The election of President Donald Trump shattered the hopes of many progressives who thought they had succeeded in secularizing and guilting the most powerful nation in the world to submit to one-world-government power brokers. Instead, Trump's stunning victory proved that the ideal of a sovereign, vibrant nation of believers remained alive and well. Faced with this reality, any crisis would do to destabilize Trump's conservative administration, cause an uprising, and return the progressives to power to finish the job of destroying Christian civilization in America once and for all.

And so, one street protest led to another, from the rioting in New York around Trump Tower, to Madonna declaring at the pro-abortion Women’s March that “I've thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House.” Then came the protests against Trump's common-sense immigration travel restrictions from failed states rife with terrorism. After that came the constant and vicious attacks of any and all of President Trump’s nominees, starting with Jeff Sessions and culminating in the #MeToo inspired attacks on Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a judge who came with a rather centrist legal pedigree and is by no means a sure vote against Roe v. Wade.

That year we also saw the manufactured crisis at the border, with NGO-sponsored caravans traversing the American continent leading to the overwhelming of immigration enforcement and the call to abolish ICE. Should we be surprised that the same people who called for abolishing our law enforcement at the border are now demanding we abolish the police?

Throughout all of these conflicts, the dark money web of the Soros-funded organizations was present in the form of community organizations, the ACLU, and of course the leading Democrat politicians and their allies in the mainstream media.

While the community activists were sowing division and calling for the overthrow of law and order, the FBI and elements within the national security agencies continued to attempt to overthrow the president and entrap his supporters. False accusation after false accusation would be leaked from “top officials” enabled by their friends in the media. And although the president was eventually cleared of any wrongdoing, the House of Representatives nevertheless proceeded to impeach him.

By 2020, the radical left was well on its way to accomplishing its task of destabilizing the country and returning to power. The country was more divided than it had been since the civil war. But one thing was still holding the nation together. The economy was booming. We might not like our neighbors all that much anymore, but people could live and let live while the going was good. With a booming economy, all the dark plans of the Soros-funded meeting in Washington, D.C. from 2016 would fail. And then the coronavirus was released by Communist China and covered up by the World Health Organization.

The human and economic ravages brought upon by the coronavirus knee-capped the economy and agitated a people not used to having their liberty taken away. But all of this made one man very happy indeed. That man is George Soros. In an interview last month, Soros gloated that “we’re now in a ‘revolutionary moment’ that allows us to achieve the ‘inconceivable’.”

Then the inevitable catalyst happened. As shown in a gruesome video that instantly went viral, George Floyd was killed by police in Minneapolis. Everyone, from the president to the local dog catcher condemned the killing of George Floyd. And almost immediately, multiple federal and state investigations into the killing were undertaken and severe charges were filed in the case against the police officers. But as President Obama's Chief of Staff and Mayor of Chicago Rahm Emmanuel would say, you can never let a serious crisis go to waste.

Without a shred of evidence of racism on the part of the president or any other administration official, violent riots erupted around the country to protest alleged systemic racism. Instantaneously, seemingly spontaneous, but well-organized, violent and non-violent protests spread over the country. While the objectively peaceful protesters calling for an end to the coronavirus lockdown had been strongly derided by almost everyone in the media and by most politicians on the left and the center, the violent looting and rioting was being justified and excused because of the alleged collective sins of the nation. For the media and the left, the chickens were coming home to roost. As Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s spiritual mentor would state, “No, no, no, not God bless America — God damn America!”

To understand just how complicit the mainstream media and Big Tech are with the progressive leftist agenda of destabilization and anti-Americanism just do a quick experiment. Go onto and search for “who is behind the protests.” As of the production of this video the first page of that search yields articles from the New York Times, the Washington Post, and The Guardian questioning the funding behind the completely peaceful re-open protests. The two articles listed on the topic of who is funding the violent George Floyd protests – one from the New York Times and the other from the Soros-funded Politifact – are written specifically to dismiss as fake news any link between the organizations running the protests and George Soros.

But even with Google’s manipulation of search results, we can still easily find plenty of information that points directly back to Soros. Remember the big donor meeting organized by the Soros-funded Democracy Alliance just six days after the November election? The president of that organization – who, by the way, was a Soros employee prior to presiding the Alliance – is a man named Gara LaMarche. In his latest post on the Democracy Alliance’s website under the president’s blog section, Mr. LaMarche openly accuses the president of the United States of “blatant racism” and directs donors to the very organizations organizing the violent protests. This is not a conspiracy theory; it is right there on their website for all to see.

As this video is being produced it is still unclear what will happen in the short term. President Trump has taken a strong position to restore law and order, but rioters and leftists protesters have been emboldened and cheered on by celebrities, the media and Democrat politicians (among which are some prominent clerics).

George Soros and his radical leftist coalition has never been closer to achieving the “inconceivable” – the destruction of the remnants of order in the United States that afford us liberty to practice our faith, and fight for a renewal of virtue and basic sanity. It’s imperative that we stand between him and his goal of a one-world government of the elites, by the elites and for the elites. To do so, we must maintain cool heads and reject getting caught up in the violence which the agitators seek to perpetrate.

  coronavirus, george floyd, george soros, president trump, revolution


Supreme Court’s new LGBT decision makes a dangerous lie the law of the land

Bostock, like Roe and Obergefell — and for that matter like Dred Scott — threatens the stability of our Republic.
Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 9:57 am EST
Featured Image
President Trump's Supreme Court nominees, Neil Gorsuch (L) and Brett Kavanaugh (R). Gorsuch voted with the majority in Bostock; Kavanaugh celebrated the LGBT movement in his dissent. Doug Mills-Pool / Getty Images
Phil Lawler
By Phil Lawler

June 17, 2020 (  —  The US Supreme Court, which arbitrarily redefined human life in the Roe decision, and redefined marriage in Obergefell, has now redefined sex. There’s a frightening consistency to these decisions, a logic explained by Lewis Carroll in Through the Looking Glass:

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in a rather scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”

“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master — that’s all.”

In the Bostock decision, the Supreme Court interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to mean things that, in all likelihood, not a single member of Congress intended at the time the bill was enacted. At any time in the 56 intervening years, Congress could have amended that Act, or passed other legislation, to outlaw discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Congress never did so. This decision is a pure act of judicial legislation.

But this is nothing new. With Obergefell, the Court had legalized same-sex marriage without even a nod at Congress. In that case the Court had discovered the right to homosexual marriage in the “emanations from penumbra” of the Constitution. As Kevin Williamson wrote in National Review:

The gentlemen who wrote the Constitution did not get around to enfranchising women or abolishing slavery, but they snuck in a constitutional right to gay marriage that we’ve somehow overlooked for 228 years or so: No mentally functional adult, regardless of his views on gay marriage, should be expected to pretend that that is true.

Williamson pinpoints the most important argument against the Bostock decision: not that it is a usurpation of Congressional authority (although it is), nor that it will produce disastrous public policy (although it will), but that it is patently false. In this calamitous decision, six members of our nation’s highest court signed their names to a lie.

It’s manifestly untrue that when Congress outlawed discrimination on the basis of sex, the lawmakers intended also to outlaw discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity: concepts that had not even been introduced into the language of the American polity at that time. But again that is not the key point. Still more important, it’s untrue that the word “sex,” which denotes physical characteristics, can be stretched to include behaviors and attitudes.

With very rare exceptions — which are universally recognized as medical anomalies — human beings fall neatly into one of two categories. “Male and female He created them,” the Book of Genesis tells us, and science confirms that report. To discriminate on the basis of sex means to discriminate against someone because of his or her chromosomes.

But now the Supreme Court has cast aside the evidence of science in the matter of sexuality — just as, in 1973, the Court cast aside the evidence of science on the question of when human life begins. In each case, science and Scripture and settled law and centuries of tradition all pointed in one direction, yet the Supreme Court struck out on a different route.

To deny reality is to flirt with insanity, and the Court’s flights of illogic have spawned many other nonsensical judicial rulings and public policies. The Bostock decision is certain to cause regulatory nightmares, inviting new abuses and threatening ordinary civil liberties. Helen Andrews explored the unhappy prospects in The American Conservative:

Under Bostock, an LGBT employee could allege a hostile work environment if a coworker expressed the wrong opinion about Prop 8 or said he believed a person’s sex is determined at birth. Some employers are already justifying firing workers who won’t use someone’s preferred pronouns because discrimination law requires it. Misgendering, they say, is harassment.

Women will suffer as a consequence of this decision, because as Jennifer Roback Morse has observed Bostock effectively “erases womanhood.” Racial minorities will suffer, because the legislation intended to protect them will now be commandeered by the sexual revolutionaries. Christians and conservatives will suffer, because their beliefs will be deemed violations of human rights. Thousands of confused individuals will suffer, because they will be confirmed in their delusions.

Bostock, like Roe and Obergefell — and for that matter like Dred Scott — threatens the stability of our Republic, because in all these cases the Supreme Court has aggravated serious divisions among the American people. It might have been possible for skilled statesmen to reach an amicable resolution of our differences (although I see no such statesmen on the political horizon, and I wonder whether a peaceful resolution is still possible). By coming down squarely on one side of the deep divide, the Court has short-circuited the normal political process a nasty backlash is now almost unavoidable.

We are a house divided. Still worse, as long as the Supreme Court’s decision stands, we as a nation are living a lie. Our laws and our Constitution, as interpreted by our highest court, no longer satisfy the minimum demands of logic and sanity. When the people can no longer respect the law — can no longer predict or understand the law — the regime cannot survive.

Published with permission from

  bostock v. clayton county,, freedom of association, lgbt tyranny, neil gorsuch roe v wade, supreme court, transgenderism


Media won’t mention it, but Antifa is of a piece with the Muslim Brotherhood

Radical Muslims tend to see leftists as useful idiots.
Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 9:45 am EST
Featured Image
Kristoffer Trolle / Flickr / CC BY 2.0
William Kilpatrick
By William Kilpatrick

June 17, 2020 (Turning Point Project) — “There are decades where nothing happens, and there are weeks where decades happen.”

So wrote Vladimir Lenin. The Communist Revolution which he engineered did seem to pack many decades of change into a relatively short time. The old tsarist order was quickly overthrown, and, almost overnight, Russia was transformed from a Christian country to an officially atheist state.

The year 2020 may well be one of those times in which decades’ worth of change are compressed into a short time-frame. The Covid-19 pandemic brought with it a great deal of unexpected and unwelcome change. Many of those changes may turn out to be permanent.

What’s more, the economic effects of the epidemic (which have not yet fully unfolded) may be the chief factor in deciding the crucial 2020 election. That election is now shaping up as a contest between two parties with radically different views of life — perhaps not as radically opposed as monarchist Christians and communist revolutionaries, but somewhere in the same vicinity.

Should the party of the liberal-left come to power, the changes we can expect will be almost as sweeping and as swift as those that followed the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. That’s not an unreasonable prediction. The liberal-leftists of today share many of the same ideological, political, and economic views as the Leninists. For example, even though many on the left claim to believe in God, they are actually functional atheists. They act and legislate as though God does not exist, and they see traditional Christians as a threat to the secular heaven they hope to create on earth.

The leftists in our midst are a dangerous lot. Witness the role that various leftist groups such as Antifa are playing in organizing and encouraging violent riots in dozens of American cities. But even if the worst fears about leftists in power don’t materialize, another danger is close at hand. Even if America’s progressive socialists turn out to be as mild as the Swedish variety, they will — as the ever naïve Swedes have already done — pave the way for an even more dangerous and oppressive ideology — namely, Islam.

Although the left understands that Christianity is a competitor for the hearts and minds of people, it fails to realize that Islam is also. Why is that? Well, primarily because the left seems to have fallen for its own multicultural propaganda. It looks upon Muslims as a victim class which has been held back by capitalism, colonialism, racism, and, of course, “Islamophobia.” Left-liberals may even believe that Islam is a religion of peace which has gotten a bad press. A poll of Democrat voters taken a few years ago revealed that they believed Islam to be no more violent than Christianity. Leftists do, however, understand that Islam is no friend of Christianity. So they believe that they can work together with Islamic groups to achieve mutual goals.

For their part, radical Muslims tend to see leftists as useful idiots. They are willing to play the oppressed victim role that leftists have assigned to them if it will further their own interests. So, it’s not surprising that some of the most radical Democrats in Congress, such as Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, are also activist Muslims. Likewise, Linda Sasour, who is considered one of the leaders of the Women’s Movement in America, never appears in public without a hijab.

The fact that Sasour, a strong advocate of sharia law, is considered to be a champion of women’s rights reveals a lot about the liberal left’s inability to come to grips with the realities of Islam. So does the fact that Phyllis Chesler, the only prominent feminist who has criticized Islam’s treatment of women, is now shunned by her former feminist colleagues.

* * *

Extremist views of the Islamic variety are no bar to moving up the ladder in liberal social and political circles. Take Keith Ellison, for example. He embodies both the extremes of liberalism and the extremes of Islamism. Yet this didn’t prevent him from being elected several times to the House of Representatives, and after that to be named the Deputy Director of the Democratic National Committee.

Currently, Ellison is Attorney General for the State of Minnesota, and, as might be expected, he has had a few things to say about the riots in Minneapolis. Among other things, he has been retweeting theories that white supremacist groups may be responsible for the violence.

Well, actually, there is one, largely white group that is responsible for organizing much of the violence. But it’s mostly made up of left-wing college grads, not right-wing rednecks. But Antifa is not the white group Ellison suspects. In fact, he seems to favor it. Indeed, he once posed with a copy of Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook — today’s equivalent of Mao’s Little Red Book.

Ellison is very much a man of the left. His candidacy for Congress was supported by the Communist Party USA; he praised Fidel Castro and other leftist heroes; and he was a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

On the other hand, his radical Islamist credentials are just as solid. A convert to Islam, Ellison took his oath of office on the Koran at the photo-op re-enactment of his swearing-in ceremony. And he has disparaged moderate Muslims as “Uncle Toms,” which suggests that Ellison himself could, perhaps, be categorized as an immoderate Muslim.

His immoderation is confirmed by looking at the groups he has associated with over the years. He started off as a supporter of Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam. Later, he found it politically expedient to get the endorsement of more “respectable” groups such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the Muslim American Society (MAS), and a half-dozen other Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups. Over the years, Ellison has been the keynote speaker or featured speaker at dozens of conventions and conferences sponsored by what one commentator calls “suit-wearing jihadists.”

You can’t very well call Ellison an “infiltrator” of the liberal political establishment. He didn’t make much of an effort to conceal his leftist and Islamist leanings. In fact, he often flaunted them. The Democratic Party knew what it was getting when it appointed him the co-chair of the Democratic National Committee.

That doesn’t mean, however, that there hasn’t been genuine infiltration of the party. Take the case of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Ellison’s predecessor at the DNC. In 2005, after being elected to the House, Wasserman Schultz hired Imran Awan as an IT aide. To make a long story short, Awan and his two brothers were soon working as information technology managers for dozens of Democrat members of the House. Over the course of several years, they worked for three members of the House Committee on Intelligence, five members of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, and for various Democrat members of the Homeland Security Committee and the Armed Services Committee. In short, the Pakistani brothers had access to highly sensitive government information.

Doesn’t that require a security clearance? Well, yes. Did the brothers have one? Well, no. That requirement would have been Islamophobic. Finally, in 2016, in order to keep up appearances, the House Intelligence Committee Democrats requested “Top Secret” clearance for the Awan brothers. Yet the brothers were involved in various forms of financial fraud, and one of them had been twice arrested for public drunkenness. In addition, they had numerous close relatives in Pakistan — which alone would raise red flags in the security clearance process. Despite all this, Wasserman Schultz retained Imran Awan on her staff right up to the moment he was arrested at Dulles Airport for trying to flee the country.

* * *

There are numerous other examples of lax security in the government and the military. To name just a few:

In 2008, when Major Stephen Coughlin, the Pentagon’s top authority on Islamic war doctrine, reported on the connection between Islamic law and violence, he was fired at the behest of Hesham Islam, a special assistant to the deputy secretary of defense.

A year later, as if to prove Coughlin’s point, Major Nidal Hasan, who once lectured his colleagues on Islamic law, killed fourteen people at Fort Hood after successfully infiltrating the Army.

One might think that the Army would have tightened up its vetting procedure after that, but one would be wrong. Instead, the military tightened up its Islamophobia watch. One result was the penetration of Pensacola Naval Air Station in 2019 by a jihadist Saudi officer who killed three and wounded eight before he was shot and killed.

We tend to assume that our military and security establishment are always on high alert, but too often national security takes a back seat to diversity. One could be forgiven for thinking that the kitchen help at Downton Abbey are more carefully vetted than the people entering sensitive security positions in our politically correct government.

The idea that vetting is somehow discriminatory may help to explain why there hasn’t been much investigation of Antifa — even though it’s been around for two decades in the U.S. and for much longer than that in Europe (where it often launches violent attacks on critics of Islam). Looking too closely into the activities of Antifa and into its sources of funding would be, well, downright “Antifa-phobic.” Sure, Antifa “leans” to the left, as one news outlet recently put it, but everyone knows there are no enemies on the left. On the other hand, if you’re anti-Antifa, you’re probably a conspiracy theorist, and ought to be investigated yourself.

Being pro-Antifa, however, is no problem. Just the other day, Jeremiah Ellison (son of Keith), a Minneapolis City Council member, declared “my support for Antifa.” He added: “I’ll keep focusing on stopping the white power terrorist[s that] are actually attacking us.”

Once again, if you’re an Ellison, you don’t have to hide what you believe. That’s because much of the media share the same beliefs. And if, perchance, there is anything to hide, they’ll hide it for you. I first read about Jeremiah Ellison on the Understanding the Threat (UTT) site in connection with a short video report by UTT president John Guandolo regarding the recent attacks across America. I clicked “Here” to see the video report, but all I was allowed to see was a black screen with the message “this video has been removed for violating YouTube’s terms of service.”

The internet giants have become like the school librarians of yore who decided what books you should and shouldn’t read. Meanwhile, TV news plays a similar role by telling you how to interpret the current disturbances. The screen shows you rows of broken store windows and streets lit up by burning cars, but the news commentator assures you that this only proves that the vast majority of protesters are peaceful.

Because our society is already flush with leftists in media, in politics, in academia, and in the streets, we are closer than most think to one of those tipping points in history where accepted norms are suddenly swept away.

And the left doesn’t stand alone. Islamic cultural jihadists are also interested in encouraging radical social change. It’s not exactly the same change that the left wants, but for the time being the two groups are willing to reinforce each other.

The possibility that we now stand on the brink of revolutionary change is difficult to entertain. In America, we have grown accustomed to long periods of internal peace and prosperity. When disruptions occur, we assume that we will soon return to normalcy. But that’s not always the case in history. “Current trends” are often replaced by new, radically different trends.

It’s said that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. But it’s difficult to be vigilant in a time of eternal distractions. The fact that many think of a return to normalcy as simply a return to shopping, sports, and mindless entertainments suggests that we are ill-prepared to cope with those single-minded people who have revolution, not normalcy, on their minds.

This article originally appeared in the June 9, 2020 edition of Crisis. It is published here with permission from the Turning Point Project.

  antifa, islam, jihad, muslim brotherhood, terrorism, turning point project


How the Supreme Court’s trans ruling will reshape federal law and further marginalize Christians

The ruling effectively passed much of the Democratic Party’s so-called Equality Act into law.
Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 1:20 pm EST
Featured Image
Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images
Jonathon Van Maren Jonathon Van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon Van Maren

June 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – In a devastating 6-3 ruling on Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt religious liberty a brutal blow and handed the LGBT movement a victory that stunned even them by deciding that both “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” are protected under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Antonin Scalia’s replacement Neil Gorsuch authored the majority opinion, and John Roberts joined him. President Donald Trump called it a “very powerful decision,” and most of the top GOP senators greeted the ruling with a collective shrug. Senators Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley offered criticism, but for the rest, it appears that Rod Dreher has been correct in his constant warnings that much of the Republican Party is disinterested in doing the tough work necessary to protect religious liberty.

To discuss the implications of the ruling, I contacted Dr. Darel E. Paul, professor of political science at Williams College and author of the essential book From Tolerance to Equality: How the Elites Brought America to Same-Sex Marriage, published by Baylor University Press. He writes regularly for First Things, and I’ve had him on my podcast several times to share his insights on the transformation of American values. He was kind enough to share his perspective once again. 

How would you explain this Supreme Court decision in layman’s terms?

In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court in Bostock v. Clayton County decided that the word “sex” in Title VII of the famous 1964 Civil Rights Act—the section that deals with employment—must be understood to include both sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI). President Trump’s first appointment to the Court, Justice Neil Gorsuch, wrote the majority opinion. This outcome was, suffice to say, quite a shock to conservatives. While social conservatives now worry over its implications for religious liberty and the state’s enforcement of progressive gender ideology, many liberal conservatives such as Mitt Romney and David French quickly reconciled themselves to the ruling.

What is the real-world impact of this Supreme Court decision for Christians and social conservatives?

The immediate effect is to effectively pass much of the Democratic Party’s Equality Act into law. This bill was passed by the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives in 2019 but never taken up by the Republican-controlled Senate. The Gorsuch majority in Bostock has thus effectively made an end run around the Congress and the President. During oral arguments in October 2019, Justice Alito proclaimed sarcastically to the attorneys for the plaintiffs, “We might as well just take the Equality Act and issue that as our opinion!” A prophetic statement indeed.

The short-term real-world impact, however, is small. The Bostock decision is limited to employment matters. About half the U.S. states and most of the largest cities in the other half already practice what the Gorsuch majority has now mandated. Thus much like the Supreme Court’s 2003 Lawrence decision striking down sodomy laws, this ruling is in some ways a mop-up operation against the few remaining resistors to the Sexual Revolution.

That being said, there will certainly be larger implications down the road that are thus far unknown. Observers on both the right and the left expect them to be sweeping. While currently limited to employment, there is no reason to believe this expansion of the word “sex” will not expand to public accommodations such as locker rooms or waxing salons, educational institutions and therefore to girls’ sports, and housing including room rental. Bostock will reshape federal law for years to come in ways that [will] increasingly marginalize social conservatives in the public sphere.

Why do you think so many of the Court’s conservatives voted the way that they did?

This case shows that it is too simplistic to break down the nine members of the Court into a “liberal” bloc and a “conservative” bloc. Justice Gorsuch adheres to the “textualist” school of Constitutional interpretation and goes on at considerable length in Bostock parsing the Title VII text “because of such individual’s … sex” to reach his decision. Justice Alito, another textualist on the Court, takes him to task precisely on textualist grounds. No matter which side of the arcane craft of “conservative” methods of interpretation you are on, it is now obvious that textualism is just a legal philosophy with no obvious relationship to conservative political or moral philosophy.

We don’t know why Justice Roberts voted the way he did. Many have speculated, however, that he did so less because he believes in Justice Gorsuch’s reasoning and more in order to ensure that Justice Ginsburg (the most senior justice in a hypothetical 5-person Bostock majority) did not assign the opinion to one of the more liberal members of the Court. By voting with the majority, Justice Roberts could ensure that Justice Gorsuch’s more limited textualist opinion would be the one that shaped American law rather than a culturally progressive opinion containing sweeping statements about human sexuality and social identity.

What are the potential implications for the Trump Administration?

President Trump has spent considerable effort since 2016 shoring up the white evangelical wing of his electoral base. His appointments to the courts are his primary—perhaps his only—positive argument to them for re-election. Now just five months before the election, the Court shows how limited even that victory is. Some are speculating that the disappointment arising from Bostock ends Trump’s re-election chances. Certainly he cannot win essential states like Ohio, North Carolina and Iowa without white evangelical votes.

Yet elections turn on negative as much as positive messages. Perhaps white evangelicals and other social conservatives will vote for Trump if only to stave off what they see as the more dangerous threat of a Democratic President (and perhaps Congress) picking up where the second Obama administration left off. I will simply echo Ross Douthat’s sentiment here: “so long as he remains in office, Trump will be an accelerant of the right’s erasure, an agent of its marginalization and defeat.” If social conservatives carry Trump to a second Electoral College win/popular vote loss, they will test the meaning of the phrase “Pyrrhic victory” as never before in American politics.

What do you think the implications of this decision are for Christians in politics, especially considering that judicial appointments have been the primary motivation for GOP voters for some time and do you believe that voting “for the courts” is still a viable political strategy for Christians seeking to protect religious liberty?

A primary strategy emphasizing religious liberty may yield temporary legal victories, but it is a stark loser socially and politically—and thus, eventually, even legally. Christians will have to start making moral, not merely procedural, arguments if they want to remain relevant in twenty-first century America. They will also have to embrace the suffering that will inevitably follow. This is especially true in professional-managerial class settings where social conservatism is becoming anathema. Consistently demanding exemptions on the grounds of what looks to much of the rest of the country like bigoted idiosyncrasies may save a school or a business today only to have it swept aside tomorrow by larger and more powerful cultural, social, political, and ultimately legal forces.

Jonathon’s new podcast, The Van Maren Show, is dedicated to telling the stories of the pro-life and pro-family movement. In his latest episode, he interviews Dale Ahlquist, famed Chesterton scholar and founder of the Chesterton society and the Chesterton schools, about what G.K. Chesterton would think of the state of the world, including the ongoing riots.

You can subscribe here and listen to the episode below: 

  bostock v. clayton county, homosexuality, neil gorsuch, transgenderism, us supreme court


How communists plotted to overthrow the US, as Fatima seer foretold

A former FBI agent wrote in 1962 a book outlining the strategies communists would use to overthrow America. Are we living through the times foretold in his book?
Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 9:21 am EST
Featured Image
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

PETITION: Tell Trump Christians can’t accept SCOTUS ruling imposing LGBT ideology Sign the petition here.

June 16, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Seattle was in mayhem last week as a six-block area was occupied by openly communist groups. The police were unwilling to enter the zone, and the Democratic governor was clueless. President Trump warned that he had to take action. Interestingly, we also learned last week that Heaven foretold there would be a communist takeover of America if Heaven’s warnings were not heeded. It seems that that is happening right before our very eyes. 

At LifeSiteNews last week, writer Dr. Maike Hickson drew attention to a fascinating interview conducted in 1947 with the last remaining seer of Fatima, Sr. Lucia dos Santos. She was one of the three children of Fatima, Portugal who in 1917 saw the Mother of Christ and received secret messages from Our Lady. The truth of these apparitions was confirmed by a stupendous miracle witnessed by 70,000 people, and photographed and recorded in many newspapers, which involved the sun dancing in the sky.

Sr. Lucia told of how Our Lady had revealed to her that even the United States of America would be overcome by communism if Russia was not consecrated to Her Immaculate Heart by the pope in union with the world’s bishops.

Given what is happening in America right now and what communism is and its goals for America, the account from Sr. Lucia is truly remarkable.

Dr. Hickson wrote at LifeSiteNews of the interview conducted by the well respected American historian and author, William Thomas Walsh. In 1947, Professor Walsh authored a book about Fatima, titled Our Lady of Fatima, at the end of which he recounts an interview he conducted with Sister Lucia of Fatima the year before. 

One of the messages of Fatima received by the children in 1917 pertains to the then-impending Bolshevik Revolution in Russia.

“What Our Lady wants is that the Pope and all the bishops in the world shall consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart on one special day. If this is done, she will convert Russia and there will be peace. If it is not done, the errors of Russia will spread through every country in the world,” Lucia told Walsh.

“Does this mean,” Walsh then asked, “in your opinion, that every country, without exception, will be overcome by Communism?” And Sister Lucia answered: “Yes.”

The interpreter during the interview, allowing Walsh to converse with Sr. Lucia in her native Portuguese, was Father Manuel Rocha, who later revealed that Walsh had asked explicitly about the United States of America, adding: “And does that mean the United States of America, too?” Whereupon Sister Lucia responded once more: “Yes.”

That is to say, the seer of the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima, which have been approved by the Catholic Church, predicted that the United States, under certain conditions, would also be overcome by communism. 

Dr. Hickson notes that in 1946, Lucia’s response might have sounded somewhat unrealistic, given that it was just after the end of the Second World War and the beginning of the Cold War. 

But today we see revolutionary riots in many American cities. 

To appreciate how much communism has affected and, some might say, overcome America, requires an appreciation for communism itself and its goals.

Communism is thought mainly to be an economic system competing with capitalism. However, when we really comprehend communism, the spread of Russia’s errors becomes recognizable.

The Naked Communist is the most concise and straightforward source outlining communist goals and ideology. It was written in 1962 by W. Cleon Skousen, a former FBI agent who used many original sources and the best intelligence of the FBI during its investigation of communist infiltration into the United States. He published in the book a list of 45 “current communist goals” that was also recorded in the Congressional Record in 1963. President Ronald Reagan commented on Skousen, saying: “No one is better qualified to discuss the threat to this nation from communism.”

A selection of the goals of communism listed by Skousen serve to illustrate its spread to all nations, especially America. You can find the full list in the Congressional Record (see Appendix, pp. A34–A35 of the House of Representatives of January 10, 1963).

Here are just a few of those goals:

  • Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States
  • Get control of the schools
  • Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda
  • Soften the curriculum
  • Get control of teachers’ associations
  • Put the party line in textbooks

At LifeSite last year, we reported on the case of Rebecca Friedrichs, who spent 28 years teaching in California public schools and was the lead plaintiff in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, a 2016 Supreme Court case concerning forced union dues. She detailed how the California Teachers’ Association (CTA) and the National Education Association (NEA), which advocate and donate heavily to a wide range of left-wing causes including abortion and transgenderism, work with far-left groups such as the Women’s March, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN), and the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS) to “push a radical sexual agenda onto our kids and to punish teachers, parents and students who dare to speak out against it.”

Friedrichs cites the case of Judy Bruns, a Christian teacher in Ohio who took the opportunity at an NEA representative meeting to ask whether the phrase “reproductive freedom” in the group’s resolutions included support for abortion up to delivery and/or partial-birth abortions. Bruns was “mocked and shunned” by the Ohio Education Association’s leaders but got the answer: “We have no restrictions (or limitations).”

Friedrichs also quoted a former teacher and executive director of Christian Educators Association International (CEAI), who she said did some detailed research showing nearly $800,000 of roughly $1 million in donations by the NEA to a 2014 PAC was directed to Planned Parenthood.

The Communist Goals also include:

  • Gain control of all student newspapers
  • Infiltrate the press
  • Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions
  • Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures

The whole reason we started LifeSiteNews nearly 25 years ago is that it seemed that almost all the mainstream media had a left-wing, anti-life, and anti-family bias. That situation has only gotten worse. Without Fox News, there wouldn’t be a mainstream conservative television media outlet at all in America.

The Communist Goals continue:

  • Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression
  • An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
  • Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”

How of us have gone to parks and museums only to be disgusted or at least confused by the ugliness of the so-called art — which, it often seems, our 3-year-old children could do a better job with.

But oh, if you were to breathe such a thought, you’d be labeled a Neanderthal and wholly unsophisticated for not seeing the “deep art” at play.

Other communist goals include:

  • Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press
  • Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV

Check, check. Been there, done that. We’re teaching pole-dancing to children now, and the majority of movies today would have been considered pornographic years ago.

Here is another goal of communism:

  • Present homosexuality, degeneracy, and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy”

We’ve gone so far in this direction that we’ve made counseling for those wishing to leave the homosexual lifestyle illegal!

And another goal:

  • Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion

There can be no more obvious implementation of this than what has been seen in the Catholic Church in the USA over the last half-century.

Listen to these other communist goals:

  • Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch”
  • Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis
  • Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state”
  • Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity, masturbation, and easy divorce
  • Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute “prejudices, mental blocks, and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents”
  • Infiltrate and gain control of more unions
  • Infiltrate and gain control of big business

There is so much here to unpack, but I wanted to draw attention to a couple of items that are particularly striking, given the mayhem we’re experiencing in America today. Listen to these two goals:

  • Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use “united force” to solve economic, political or social problems
  • Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies
  • Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].

And those two items together are what we’ve witnessed since the riots began with the excuse of the tragic death of George Floyd.

President Trump recently described the situation in America in an eye-opening manner, which exemplifies just how far these communist ideals have entered America, even with the collusion of state governors and mayors.

“They’re actually talking about not having a police force. Well, that’s not happening,” Trump said.

Believe it or not, while all this was going down, six city blocks were seized in Seattle, and a police station was forced to be abandoned. Leftist Governor Jay Inslee of Washington claimed he knew nothing about it. 

So it definitely seems as though Our Lady of Fatima’s prophecy of the spreading of Russia’s errors — even in the United States — has come true. But we know that the solution Heaven proposed was the Consecration of Russia and also that that day is coming because she herself said it would be done. After that consecration comes, a never before experienced period of peace will happen. So there is hope in the not too distant future for peace, even though there may well be some tough times to go before we get there.

Here is a full list of the communist goals taken from Skousen’s “The Naked Communist”

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev’s promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.

10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, and policymaking positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, and healthy.”

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”

28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.” (Remember these goals were published to expose them in 1958) Coincidence?

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.” Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture — education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

33. Eliminate all laws or procedures, which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus. 34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.

36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].

39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [“]united force[”] to solve economic, political or social problems.

43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.

The John-Henry Westen Show is available by video on the show’s YouTube channel and right here on my LifeSite blog.

It is also available in audio format on platforms such as SpotifySoundcloud, and ACast. We are awaiting approval for iTunes and Google Play as well. To subscribe to the audio version on various channels, visit the ACast webpage here.

We’ve created a special email list for the show so that we can notify you every week when we post a new episode. Please sign up now by clicking here. You can also subscribe to the YouTube channel, and you’ll be notified by YouTube when there is new content.

You can send me feedback, or ideas for show topics by emailing [email protected].


* indicates required

By clicking subscribe, you are agreeing to receive emails about The John-Henry Westen Show and related emails from LifeSiteNews.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. For information about our privacy practices, please visit our website.

We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By clicking below to subscribe, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing. Learn more about Mailchimp's privacy practices here.

  antifa, atheism, communism, our lady of fatima, president trump, revolution, russia, the john-henry westen show, united states, usa

Featured Image

Episodes Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 4:33 pm EST

Restoring the beauty of the Eucharist during these trying times

By Mother Miriam

To help keep this and other programs on the air, please donate here.

Watch Mother Miriam's Live show re-aired on 6.17.2020. In today’s episode, Mother reads from Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s Rome Life Forum Talk on the Eucharist.

To view Bishop Schneider’s full talk, head to the Rome Life Forum talks here.

You can tune in daily at 10 am EST/7 am PST on our Facebook Page.

Subscribe to Mother Miriam Live here.

Featured Image

Episodes Wed Jun 17, 2020 - 12:49 pm EST

Are we entering the Dark Ages that G.K. Chesterton predicted?

By Jonathon Van Maren   Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon Van Maren

To help keep this and other programs on the air, please donate here.

In today’s episode of The Van Maren Show, famed Chesterton scholar and founder of the Chesterton society and the Chesterton schools, Dale Ahlquist joins Jonathon Van Maren to discuss what G.K. Chesterton would the riots happening in the United States and the current state of the world. Ahlquist and Van Maren speak about the riots, the upcoming ‘dark ages’ of society, and what we need to do to save the culture for future generations, including taking your kids out of public schools.