All articles from June 30, 2020






  • Nothing is published in Video on June 30, 2020.

The Pulse

  • Nothing is published in The Pulse on June 30, 2020.


As UK public Masses resume, bishops demand Communion in the hand only while standing

One option is to distribute the Eucharist after Mass before congregants leave the church.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 8:18 pm EST
Featured Image
Paul Smeaton Paul Smeaton Follow Paul
By Paul Smeaton

LONDON, June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales (CBCEW) has released guidance for the resumption of the public celebration of Mass, which includes members of the congregation wearing face coverings, only allowing Holy Communion in the hand while standing, and not allowing congregational singing.

“The government maintains that the 2m social distancing requirements should be applied where possible. The government has said (it) is possible to go to ‘1m plus;’ this means you can space people more closely (with a minimum of 1m) providing a mitigation of risk is also applied,” the CBCEW document states. 

“In the case of our churches, this would mean the compulsory wearing of a face covering for members of the congregation. If those on the sanctuary are sufficiently distant from the congregation, there is no need to wear face coverings.”

The bishops’ document also insists that “Communion must be given silently in the hand only, with the communicant standing, and avoiding any physical contact.”

The guidance gives two options for Communion for the congregation. The second of these options suggests distributing Communion after Mass has ended and says members of the congregation should “immediately leave the Church” after receiving Communion.

The guidance, which is published on the CBCEW website, bears the name only of Rev. Canon Christopher Thomas, the CBCEW general secretary.

In March, the Catholic bishops of England and Wales prohibited the celebration of public Masses before the lockdown came into force and, according to their own statement, played a crucial role themselves in convincing the government to require that churches be closed altogether.

Last week, Archbishops Vincent Cardinal Nichols of Westminster, Malcolm McMahon of Liverpool, Bernard Longley of Birmingham and John Wilson of Southwark released a letter anticipating the “Resumption of Collective Worship” in which they said Catholics “must now rebuild what it means to be Eucharistic communities, holding fast to all that we hold dear, while at the same time exploring creative ways to meet changed circumstances.”

Catholic journalist Damian Thompson described the guidance from the bishops on Communion as “outrageous” and said, “This is not about Covid. It’s a power grab.”

Dr. Joseph Shaw, chairman of The Latin Mass Society Society of England & Wales, told LifeSiteNews that the CBCEW’s document is “puzzling.” 

“Although introduced by a letter from the Archbishops of England and Wales, it is signed simply by Canon Chris Thomas, who is the secretary to the Bishops' Conference, but it is not clear that he is even signing in an official capacity. Such documents from Bishops' Conferences are not, in any case, binding, and the government guidelines on the distribution of 'consumables' which it follows are only recommendations, not legally binding rules,” Shaw said.

“Priests must keep in mind the universal law of the Church, which prevents them from refusing Communion to those who wish to receive on the tongue -- and indeed this is the only way Communion may be received in the Traditional Latin Mass. The document makes no reference to this, or the intinction method used by the Eastern Rites celebrated in England and Wales,” he continued.

“It remains open to priests to pay heed to the many experts who have now said that the distribution of Holy Communion on the tongue is no more dangerous than in the hand.”

Maria Madise, director of Voice of the Family, told LifeSiteNews that when reading the guidance “one cannot help but wonder whether these have been written by a Catholic?”

“So much is lacking in understanding of the Holy Eucharist, which is manifest in these guidelines by ways of radically limiting devotion and thanksgiving for receiving Our Lord,” Madise said.

“Most particularly the new regulations, issued by the bishops of England and Wales, recommend that the faithful receive Holy Communion in the hand only. Such recommendation contradicts the divine and Church law, it denies the reality of the Real Presence, and leads the faithful, albeit in most cases unintentionally, to commit serious offences against the divine life,” she continued.

“The faithful are being misled into believing that the responsible option is to receive Our Lord in the hand despite the very real danger of losing and desecrating fragments of our Eucharistic Lord. This can only lead to the Body of Christ being trampled on by the feet of clergy and laity in Catholic churches around the world on an unprecedented scale.”

Yesterday, the UK government published guidance “for the safe use of places of worship from 4 July,” which strongly advises that food or drink essential to services only be distributed into the hand. The government’s guidance makes no comment on whether people should be standing or kneeling when receiving what they refer to as “consumables.” The government’s guidance also strongly encourages faith communities to avoid singing at services and for face coverings to be worn.

The government’s guidance also outlines the possibility of how failure to adequately comply with regulations and the enforcement of these by local authorities could in some instances result in criminal prosecution and even prison sentences. 

“Where the enforcing authority (your local authority) identifies responsible individuals who are not taking action to comply with the relevant public health legislation and guidance to control public health risks (including this guidance), they will consider taking a range of actions to improve control of risks,” the guidance states.

“The actions the enforcing authority can take include the provision of specific advice to employers to support them to achieve the required standard, through to issuing enforcement notices to help secure improvements. Serious breaches and failure to comply with enforcement notices can constitute a criminal offence, with serious fines and even imprisonment for up to two years,” the document continues.

The guidance states that “inspectors are carrying out compliance checks nationwide.”

A group of 25 UK Christian leaders, including Church of England bishop Michael Nazir-Ali, announced yesterday that they will continue their legal challenge against the government enforced closure of churches during the lockdown.

In an open letter published in May, Catholic clergy led by former papal nuncio Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò and Cardinals Gerhard Ludwig Mueller, Joseph Zen, and Janis Pujats reminded politicians around the world that “(t)he state has no right to interfere, for any reason whatsoever, in the sovereignty of the church.”

“This autonomy and freedom are an innate right that Our Lord Jesus Christ has given her for the pursuit of her proper ends. For this reason, as Pastors we firmly assert the right to decide autonomously on the celebration of Mass and the Sacraments, just as we claim absolute autonomy in matters falling within our immediate jurisdiction, such as liturgical norms and ways of administering Communion and the Sacraments,” the signatories stated.

  bernard longley, catholic, catholic bishops conference of england and wales, christians, communion in the hand, covid-19, damian thompson, john wilson, joseph shaw, latin mass society, lockdown, malcolm mcmahon, maria madise, traditional latin mass, uk government, vincent nichols, voice of the family


Navy bans troops from indoor religious services while allowing protests, house parties

'The U.S. Navy has threatened to court-martial service members if they go to church.'
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 7:40 pm EST
Featured Image
Kenneth J. Braithwaite, secretary of the U.S. Navy, at his confirmation hearings in May 2020. Al Drago-Pool / Getty Images
Doug Mainwaring Doug Mainwaring Follow Doug
By Doug Mainwaring

WASHINGTON, D.C., June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The U.S. Navy is facing backlash after issuing a directive banning personnel from attending off-base religious services due to a recent uptick in COVID-19 cases while greenlighting participation in protests and parties.

“In open defiance of the Commander in Chief, who recently declared churches as essential to America, the U.S. Navy has threatened to court-martial service members if they go to church,” said Mike Berry, First Liberty Institute general counsel.  

First Liberty, a legal organization dedicated to defending religious freedom, is representing Major Daniel Schultz, who is seeking religious accommodation.

“It is absolutely outrageous that our troops can’t go to church, but they can attend a protest or host house parties of any size,” said Berry in a statement.

“On June 24, the Navy issued an order that banned troops from attending indoor religious services, although other activities such as using mass transit, hosting social gatherings of any size, and participation in protests are all permitted,” explains First Liberty. “But the order specifically states that “service members are prohibited from visiting, patronizing, or engaging in ... indoor religious services.” 

PETITION: Urge President Trump to rescind Navy order prohibiting attendance at religious services

“The Navy’s orders apply to everyone assigned to Navy units and vessels including, ironically, its chaplains. Sailors returning from duty are not permitted to leave their ship until they agree to abide by official U.S. Navy orders preventing them from attending ‘indoor religious services.’ Service members who fail to abide by the Navy’s orders may be prosecuted via court-martial,” the First Liberty statement explains.

President Trump should demand the ban be immediately rescinded

“This order is unlawful and immoral, and President Trump should immediately demand its removal,” said Berry. 

“The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (‘RFRA’), prohibits the federal government from substantially burdening an individual’s sincerely held religious beliefs without a compelling interest that is furthered by the least restrictive means,” wrote Berry in a letter to the U.S. Navy. 

“We are stunned that the Navy would issue this unlawful order,” said chaplain Col. Ron Crews, U.S. Army (ret.), executive director of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty, which represents 2,700 active-duty chaplains serving the Armed Forces.

“Our chaplains have fought, bled, and even died for the right of every service member to enjoy religious freedom wherever they are, at home and abroad,” Crews told Fox News. “For the Navy to strip away that freedom in this manner is unconscionable.”

“As the peer organization for nearly every chaplain endorser to the US Armed Forces, the National Conference on Ministry to the Armed Forces (NCMAF) is gravely concerned with this order, which we understand was not vetted by the Navy’s senior chaplain leadership,” said Bishop Derek Jones, chairman of the National Conference on Ministry to the Armed Forces, in the same Fox News report. 

“This order affects millions of service members who are willing to risk their lives for the very freedom that has been taken away from them,” he added.

A concerned member of the U.S. Navy stationed at an East Coast base, alarmed at the troubling directive, reached out to LifeSiteNews:

Our sailors ... are now expected to go into harm’s way without the sacraments. (Yes this includes confession.) We are being asked to potentially die for our nation, yet our nation is withholding the graces we will need to battle. They have stranded our souls to the wolves.

This sounds like the beginning of those stories we hear of superior armies losing battles, why? Because they have abandoned God.

LifeSiteNews reached out to Archbishop Timothy Broglio, who heads the Archdiocese for the Military Services (AMS). Spokesperson Taylor Henry explained that some of the orders “have already been rescinded and the AMS is working to see all of them rescinded.”

“The AMS is following the situation closely and always advocates to protect the rights of the faithful recognized by the First Amendment that the men and women of the military swear to uphold,” said Henry.

LifeSiteNews also reached out to secretary of the Navy Kenneth Braithwaite and the Joint Chiefs of Staff for comment but received no response by press time. 


  coronavirus, religious freedom, u.s. navy


Heralded orchestra conductor traces musical gifts to training in the womb

Conductor Boris Brott remembers pieces his cellist mother played while she was pregnant with him.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 7:22 pm EST
Featured Image
Clare Marie Merkowsky

HAMILTON, Ontario, June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) –  World renowned Canadian conductor explained that his musical career began “before birth” when he heard music from inside his mother’s womb.  

During a radio interview, recounted in Dr. Thomas Verny’s 1982 book, The Secret Life of the Unborn Child, Boris Brott, then-conductor of the Hamilton Philharmonic Orchestra in Ontario, was asked how he had become interested in music.

“You know this might sound strange,” Brott answered, “but music has been a part of me since before birth.”  

“As a young man,” he continued, “I was mystified by this unusual ability I had -- to play certain pieces sight unseen. I'd be conducting a score for the first time and, suddenly, the cello line would jump out at me; I'd know the flow of the piece even before I turned the page of the score.”

“One day, I mentioned this to my mother, who is a professional cellist. I thought she'd be intrigued because it was always the cello line that was so distinct in my mind,” Brott recalled.

“She was; but when she heard what the pieces were, the mystery quickly solved itself. All the scores I knew sight unseen were the ones she had played while she was pregnant with me.”

Brott heard the music while in his mother’s womb and, remarkably, remembered it well enough to conduct an orchestra years later. Brott’s prenatal story demonstrates the intelligence of babies in the womb.

An unborn baby begins to hear outside noises at 18 weeks. In addition to identifying his mother’s voice, a newborn baby is often calmed by his father’s voice, demonstrating the child’s memory from hearing soothing sounds in the womb.  

A microphone placed inside a pregnant mother’s womb revealed that sounds are clearly heard by the baby. While words are difficult to distinguish, voice patterns and tones are easily recognized. Music is also clearly heard in the womb.  

Womb Songs, an online company, helps mothers bond with their unborn children by singing them a song in the womb.

“This Womb Songs website and the Sound Beginning program are designed to change the direction of the emotional consciousness of mankind into a more trusting peaceful calm and loving state of mind,” stated Dr. Brian Satt, the founder of Womb Songs.

The scientific technique is called musical bonding; it consists of teaching your unborn baby a song and using it as a bonding and calming tool before and after birth.  

“This experience,” the website reads, “has been showing mothers for decades that their babies can be born into a loving, safe, trusting environment, where babies rarely cry at birth and instead are calm, making eye contact and listening to their womb song!”

Boris Brott’s prenatal experience happened accidently and developed into a lifelong love of music; now the opportunity to expose their unborn babies to the joy of music is open to all parents.

Correction: This article originally indicated Brott was the current conductor of the Hamilton Philharmonic Orchestra. However he left that role in 1989, and currently serves as director of the National Academy Orchestra of Canada and the Brott Music Festival.

  boris brott, conductor, hamilton philharmonic orchestra, music, the secret life of the unborn child, unborn babies, womb, womb songs


President of Vatican’s new Amazon study ‘conference’ supports married priests

The Amazon Ecclesial Conference was formed to 'be open to the Spirit's boldness' regarding the implementation of Pope Francis's post–Amazon Synod exhortation.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 7:18 pm EST
Featured Image
Cardinal Cláudio Hummes.
Martin Bürger Follow Martin
By Martin Bürger

June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Eight months after the conclusion of the Amazon Synod in the Vatican, bishops and other Catholic leaders from across the Amazon region on Friday have founded the Amazon Ecclesial Conference. Cardinal Cláudio Hummes, who is a supporter of having married priests, was elected as president of the new organization.

While not much is known yet about the goals of the Amazon Ecclesial Conference, newly elected president Hummes, from Brazil, shortly after the publication of Querida Amazonia, stated that the discussion of married priests has not been closed. Hummes is also the head of REPAM and was a member of the drafting committee of the synod’s final document calling for female deacons and married priests.

According to the Spanish edition of Vatican News, the conference’s approach “highlights two orientations, following the apostolic exhortation Querida Amazonia: the ecclesial and ministerial incarnation” according to section 85 of the document and the development in the Church of the capacity “to be open to the Spirit’s boldness, to trust in, and concretely to permit, the growth of a specific ecclesial culture that is distinctively lay. The challenges in the Amazon region demand of the Church a special effort to be present at every level, and this can only be possible through the vigorous, broad and active involvement of the laity (QA 94).”

Hummes said on Friday, “This conference is part of the new paths that the Special Synod of Bishops for the Amazon proposed. It is our responsibility to constitute this Conference, encouraged by our beloved Pope Francis. He himself suggested the name.”

At the first meeting of the Amazon Ecclesial Conference, several representatives of the Vatican were present, albeit only virtually due to coronavirus restrictions around the globe. Among them were Cardinal Baldisseri, secretary general of the Synod of Bishops; Cardinal Ouellet of the Congregation for Bishops; Cardinal Tagle of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples; and Cardinal Czerny, under-secretary of the Migrants and Refugees Section of the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development.

The creation of the Amazon Ecclesial Conference is an outgrowth of the final document of the Amazon Synod, which is not the same as Pope Francis’s post-synodal apostolic exhortation Querida Amazonia. The final document had proposed “the creation of a Bishops’ organism that promotes synodality among the churches of the region, helps to express the Amazonian face of this Church and continues the task of finding new paths for the evangelizing mission, especially incorporating the proposal of integral ecology, thus strengthening the physiognomy of the Church in the Amazon.”

According to the document, “[i]t would be a permanent and representative Bishops’ organism that promotes synodality in the Amazon region, connected with CELAM, with its own structure, in a simple organization and also connected with REPAM.”

CELAM is the Latin American Episcopal Council, created in 1955. REPAM, on the other hand, is the Pan-Amazonian Ecclesial Network, founded in 2014 to “bring to the world’s attention the fragile situation of indigenous people in the Amazon and the critical importance of the Amazon biome to the planet — our common home.”

According to Cardinal Gerhard Müller, former head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), the body was “tasked with the preparation” of the working document ahead of the Amazon Synod, adding it “was founded for that very reason in 2014.” The Vatican also signaled in comments to the National Catholic Register that REPAM’s purpose was to help draft the preparatory and working documents for the October synod.

REPAM and key figures from the Vatican’s Secretariat for the Synod were behind the private pre-synod “study-meeting” held in the summer of 2019, whose final report included a push for married priests and a reconsideration of the female diaconate. Cardinal Walter Kasper, Bishop Erwin Kräutler, and Bishop Franz-Josef Overbeck also participated in the private meeting.

Cardinal Müller has described REPAM as a “closed group” made up of “absolutely like-minded people, as can easily be gleaned from the list of participants at pre-synodal meetings in Washington and Rome, and it includes a disproportionately large number of mostly German-speaking Europeans.”

The newly constituted Amazon Ecclesial Conference was envisioned by the final document of the Amazon Synod to be “the effective instrument in the territory of the Latin American and Caribbean Church for taking up many of the proposals that emerged in this Synod. It would be the nexus for developing Church and socio-environmental networks and initiatives at the continental and international levels.”

The apostolic exhortation Querida Amazonia does not mention the idea of creating an ecclesial conference. However, Pope Francis said he “would like to officially present the Final Document, which sets forth the conclusions of the Synod, which profited from the participation of many people who know better than myself or the Roman Curia the problems and issues of the Amazon region, since they live there, they experience its suffering and they love it passionately.”

Observers have taken this to mean that the Holy Father did not want to take anything off the table that was proposed in the final document but not taken up by Querida Amazonia – specifically the ideas of female deacons and married priests.

  amazon synod, catholic, claudio hummes, married priests, priesthood, priestly celibacy, querida amazonia


Cardinal Zen contradicts Hong Kong cardinal: China’s new national security law will hurt freedom of religion

'We can see no benefit, no true religious freedom' from the Vatican's deal with China two years ago, Cardinal Zen says.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 6:22 pm EST
Featured Image
Cardinal Joseph Zen speaks with LifeSite in New York on February 14, 2020. Jim Hale / LifeSite
Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy
By Dorothy Cummings McLean

HONG KONG, June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) ― China has imposed a new security law on Hong Kong that Cardinal Joseph Zen believes will have a deleterious effect on religious freedom.

In a Cantonese video produced by the “Catholic Faithful Watching the Hong Kong National Security Law,” Cardinal Zen, 88, said the national security law imposed upon Hong Kong by the mainland government cannot guarantee “true” religious freedom. 

In doing so, he directly contradicted Cardinal John Tong Hon, 80, the Apostolic Administrator of the Diocese of Hong Kong since January 2019. Hon is known to be a booster of the unpublished agreement between the Holy See and China and recently voiced support for the new law.

“Cardinal Hon is very confident (in the law); I have no confidence,” Zen said. 

“Our religious freedom means that the affairs of the Church are handled by ourselves without the need to involve the government,” he said. 

Cardinal Zen stated that Hon had disappointed many people by supporting the mainland government’s new law for Hong Kong, but also that “there will be a lot of trouble” for the Church if Hon didn’t play along. 

Zen said the Hong Kong government’s liaison office had had a meeting with Hong Kong religious leaders on June 21, which he characterized not as a “rational discussion” but as a lecture in which the leaders were told they should thank the mainland authorities and support the new law.   

“We are not even informed of the details of the law, and we already have to agree,” he said. 

“This is wrong.”

In the interview, Zen said the Vatican’s concordat with China has not brought positive change to the beleaguered Church’s plight in the communist country.

“The Vatican signed the secret agreement with China two years ago already,” he remarked. 

“We can see no benefit, no true religious freedom.”

Zen observed that on the mainland, the Chinese government appoints the Catholic bishops. The Holy See says the pope has the right to remove inappropriate candidates, but Zen said he doubted that this is the case. He also referred to the government’s attempts to make Catholicism “more Chinese” and even to rewrite the Bible, something he finds particularly inappropriate. 

“The interpretation of the Bible should be left to the Church,” he said. 

He also stressed it was the Church’s “right and responsibility” to choose bishops, noting that the Chinese government doesn’t know what makes a good bishop. 

Zen stated that “even His Eminence Cardinal Hon” has to admit that there is “no true religious freedom” in mainland China and brought up the spectre of the ersatz government-approved “Catholic” church set up by Chinese government in 1957. 

“Please ask His Eminence this question,” he said to his interviewers. 

“What is he going to do if one day they set up a Chinese Patriotic Association in Hong Kong? Do you believe that Chinese patriotic associations can comply with the traditions of our Catholic faith?”

Cardinal Zen said there was no reason for the Vatican to remain silent on injustices perpetrated by China, as the Vatican does not have an economy that profits from doing business with the dictatorship. 

“I have no idea why the Vatican remains silent; perhaps she hopes to establish diplomatic relations with (China),” he said. 

“(But) why establish diplomatic ties if one has to obey the other afterwards?” 

Cardinal Zen believes that the new law will “destroy Hong Kong,” something he says will not benefit the mainland in any way. 

“Perhaps they are truly insane,” he said. “Who knows?”

China has just imposed its new law upon Hong Kong. According to the BBC, the still-secret law will “criminalize secession, subversion and collusion with foreign forces.” It will also “effectively curtail protests and freedom of speech.” The law is expected to undermine the freedoms that Hong Kong took for granted before it was returned to Chinese rule from Britain on July 1,1997. Between the handover and today, “one country, two systems” was a constitutional principle of China’s governance of the island nation.

  catholic, chinese patriotic catholic association, communist party, hong kong, john tong hon, joseph zen, religious freedom, vatican


Stephen King retweets then rebukes JK Rowling, declaring ‘trans women are women’

The horror novelist joins others in the entertainment industry denouncing the 'Harry Potter' author's transgender views.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 4:08 pm EST
Featured Image
J.K. Rowling Rob Stothard / Getty Images
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Horror novelist Stephen King has added his voice to the chorus of entertainers rejecting Harry Potter author JK Rowling’s dissent from LGBT orthodoxy on the issue of transgenderism, declaring that “trans women are women” in response to an inquiry from a follower.

Over the weekend, King retweeted the following tweet from Rowling, which was part of a longer thread on the feedback, both positive and negative, she has received for her willingness to publicly declare that identifying as female does not change gender-confused men into women:

A follower subsequently asked King to “address the TERF (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) tweet. By telling us constant readers if you believe trans women are women,” to which King agreed:

Newsweek reported that, after King’s initial retweet, Rowling had tweeted, “I've always revered @StephenKing, but today my love reached — maybe not Annie Wilkes levels — but new heights. It's so much easier for men to ignore women's concerns, or to belittle them, but I won't ever forget the men who stood up when they didn't need to. Thank you, Stephen." Rowling deleted the statement of gratitude after King’s follow-up statement.

King is only the latest to align against Rowling, joining a chorus that includes trans activists, staffers at the publishing company for her latest children’s book, the Canadian children’s show CBC Kids News, and even the stars of the Harry Potter film adaptations. Yet Rowling has consistently said she has no intention of backing down.

“But endlessly unpleasant as its constant targeting of me has been, I refuse to bow down to a movement that I believe is doing demonstrable harm in seeking to erode ‘woman’ as a political and biological class and offering cover to predators like few before it,” Rowling wrote in an essay response to her critics. “I stand alongside the brave women and men, gay, straight and trans, who’re standing up for freedom of speech and thought, and for the rights and safety of some of the most vulnerable in our society: young gay kids, fragile teenagers, and women who’re reliant on and wish to retain their single sex spaces. Polls show those women are in the vast majority, and exclude only those privileged or lucky enough never to have come up against male violence or sexual assault, and who’ve never troubled to educate themselves on how prevalent it is.”

Rowling's current leadership against the “gender-fluidity” movement is particularly striking in light of the fact that, on most issues, she is a doctrinaire partisan liberal.

She has made clear her support for abortion and homosexuality and disapproval of U.S. President Donald Trump, claiming Harry Potter villain Lord Voldemort is “kind of a nationalist,” a label associated with Trump in the United States and Brexit supporters in the United Kingdom. The Harry Potter series has grown closely aligned with young liberals in recent years, thanks in part to Rowling’s notorious decision to declare the wizard Dumbledore was gay all along after completing the original series, despite the character’s sexual attraction not being referenced in the books themselves. 

  books, jk rowling, lgbt, stephen king, transgenderism


New video reveals Planned Parenthood admitting under oath babies are born alive

'This is something that every obstetrician-gynecologist deals with on rare occasion,' said Jon Dunn, CEO of Planned Parenthood Orange & San Bernardino Counties.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 3:38 pm EST
Featured Image
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

PETITION: Demand Planned Parenthood return $80M improperly taken from coronavirus emergency fund! Sign the petition here.

June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The pro-life investigators of the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) released a new video Tuesday containing footage from the sworn testimony of abortion industry officials admitting that they are aware of babies having been born alive, and suggesting that they are murdered soon after.

In the new video, Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR) procurement manager Perrin Larton, one of the figures featured in CMP’s very first undercover videos, says that “intact” fetuses are delivered after attempted abortions “once every couple months,” which is a far cry from the prevailaing abortion industry narrative that such cases are extraordinarily rare.

As to whether “intact” means a child is still alive when the procurement technician comes in to “do a dissection” for the desired tissue samples, Larton denies seeing signs of movement, but admits, “I can see hearts that are not in an intact POC [product of conception] that are beating independently.”

Also testifying under oath was Dr. Deborah Nucatola, former Senior Director of Medical Services for Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), who was also seen in the original CMP videos. Nucatola became infamous for admitting that Planned Parenthood is “making money off of this” despite laws against profiting from human tissue, and that abortionists know how to get around the ban on partial-birth abortion. 

“I’m sure I have” had patients deliver a “nonviable fetus,” she admits, meaning a “fetus that’s not capable of survival.” Nucatola is initially evasive about defining viability, offering that it depends on a case-by-case basis, based on many criteria, and that it “depends on where you work.” She ultimately offers a few examples of factors to consider, most of which are not related to any fatal condition on the part of the baby: “estimated fetal weight, gestational age, the health of the fetus,” and, notably, “the availability of interventions.”

Jon Dunn, CEO of Planned Parenthood Orange & San Bernardino Counties, testifies that he can only recall one decades-old instance of a baby being delivered alive after an attempted abortion. In that case, he claims, the child was kept comfortable, and that he or she naturally died in a “matter of seconds,” meaning there would not have been time to call 911 for life-saving support anyway.

“This is something that every obstetrician-gynecologist deals with on rare occasion,” Dunn says. “It is their medical judgment what to do in that circumstance.”

“How long will public authorities permit Planned Parenthood and their associates to sell living children inside and outside the womb and then kill them through organ harvesting?” CMP project lead David Daleiden asked. “The DOJ has vigorously prosecuted the sale of eagle body parts. Surely selling human body parts after cutting them out of an infant with a beating heart is at least as grave of a crime.”

CMP’s original bombshell expose of Planned Parenthood’s sale of aborted babies’ body parts occurred late into former President Barack Obama’s second term, so naturally the abortion giant didn’t have to worry about a federal investigation. Late in 2017, the Trump administration requested documents from the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee’s review of the case, which led many pro-lifers to hope Planned Parenthood would finally face justice. But no charges were ever brought.

In June 2019, 67 members of Congress wrote a letter to Attorney General William Barr and FBI Director Christopher Wray seeking an update on the investigation, including why no actions have been taken yet. Neither the FBI nor the Justice Department has updated the public on the state of the investigation since.

  abortion, advanced bioscience resources, center for medical progress, deborah nucatola, infanticide, perrin larton, planned parenthood


Victory as British court grants judicial review of at-home abortions

The coronavirus crisis 'has been a convenient smokescreen for implementing home abortion which has long been a goal of abortion advocates,' said a U.K. pro-life advocate.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 2:29 pm EST
Featured Image
Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy
By Dorothy Cummings McLean

WESTMINSTER, England, June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) ― A British court has permitted a judicial review of a decision to allow home abortions during the coronavirus lockdown. 

Yesterday the Court of Appeal struck down the High Court’s decision to reject pro-life group Christian Concern’s challenge to the United Kingdom Health Secretary’s measure. 

The limits of the 1967 Abortion Act were relaxed in March to allow for early abortions during the lockdown. In late March the British government first permitted women who are up to ten weeks pregnant to receive abortion pills by mail to self-administer at home without a medical practitioner present. The Health Department flip-flopped on the decision twice, concluding on March 30 that DIY at-home abortions could go ahead.  

In his decision to allow Christian Concern’s challenge to the legality of self-administered abortion to go forward, Lord Justice Lewison wrote that it is “arguable” that Health Secretary Matt Hancock exceeded his powers under the Abortion Act when he defined “a pregnant woman’s homeas a place where abortions can be lawfully performed. According to Christian Concern, Lewison also said that their argument “has a real prospect of success.” 

The organization stated that the Court of Appeal will now hold a public hearing to decide if the Health Secretary’s decision “should be quashed.” 

Christian Concern reported that they will advance two arguments that may overturn the de facto legalization of at-home abortion. The first is that only Parliament, and certainly not the Health Secretary, can change the law. The Abortion Act stipulates that abortions may take place only in hospitals run by the National Health Service and in “approved” clinics. The second is that permitting women to perform abortions on themselves is directly contrary to the aims of the Abortion Act, “which is to prevent ‘backstreet abortions’ and ensure that the abortions take place in safe [sic] and hygenic conditions.”

The Department of Health released its abortion statistics for 2019 on June 11. They revealed a new abortion record for England and Wales: 207,384. The number of abortions in Scotland for 2019 are not yet known. However, they hit a ten-year high in 2018 with 13,286 babies aborted. Meanwhile, 129 babies were aborted in Northern Ireland within two months of its pro-life law being forceably altered. 

Christian Concern’s Andrea Williams blamed the rising abortion rate on the British government’s determination to liberalize the deadly practice. 

“Abortion numbers are at record highs,” she stated.  

“The government is making every effort to liberalize abortion to the point of decriminalization,” Williams continued.

“The Westminster government has forced abortion onto Northern Ireland. It is equally clear that the Department’s regulations on DIY abortions, being brought under the guise of being necessary due to coronavirus, were never meant to be temporary. I cannot overstate the importance of this appeal.” 

Williams believes that the challenge will also serve to expose the abortion industry to public scrutiny, which in turn will save some lives and protect more mothers. 

“What is truly shocking is the unfettered and inappropriate level of access to government that the abortion lobby has,” she added.  

John Deighan of Britain’s Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) told LifeSiteNews that they too are “appalled” by the permission granted for at-home abortions. 

“SPUC is strongly supportive of this case and the issues it raises,” he said by email.  

“We wish Christian Concern every success in convincing judges of their objections. We too are appalled that this policy of home abortions has been implemented, and our view is that the measure is beyond the powers of the government.”

Deighan noted that the Health Secretary’s relaxation of the law permitted such “dreadful occurrences” such as a home abortion that killed a 28-week-old unborn baby. In the United Kingdom, it is illegal to abort an unborn baby after he or she has reached 24 weeks’ gestation except for eugenic reasons, like the child having Down Syndrome or spina bifida. 

Deighan also pointed out that unsupervised abortion heightens the chance of forced abortion.  

“We have ... warned [the] government that their policy is open to all sorts of abuse and coercion,” Deighan told LifeSiteNews. 

“Women do not even have to see a medical professional before inducing an abortion in their own home. It is a perfect system for all sorts of people: abusers, traffickers or pimps, to cover their tracks and force women to have abortions without fear of professional intervention.”

Deighan also noted that abortion extremists have taken advantage of the ongoing coronavirus pandemic to further their ideological ends.

“The [COVID crisis] has been a convenient smokescreen for implementing home abortion which has long been a goal of abortion advocates,” he said.  

“We hope that some light on the issue will expose how dreadful this policy is to the wider public. Our abortion laws and policies are getting so extreme that awakening the hearts and minds of the public is an urgent necessity.”  

  abortion, abortion pill, coronavirus, home abortions, united kingdom


‘Unreal,’ ‘unjust’: Conservatives react to SCOTUS ruling helping ‘genocidal’ abortion industry

The Supreme Court yesterday struck down a Louisiana law requiring basic medical precautions in the event of abortion complications.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 1:42 pm EST
Featured Image
Alex Wong / Getty Images
Martin Bürger Follow Martin
By Martin Bürger

URGENT PETITION: Tell the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade! Sign the petition here.

June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Reacting to yesterday’s decision by the Supreme Court to strike down a Louisiana law requiring basic medical precautions in the event of abortion complications, conservatives criticized Chief Justice John Roberts’ siding with the liberals on the bench and reversing his own past decision to uphold a similar Texas law.

“Unreal,” commented Ryan T. Anderson of The Heritage Foundation on Twitter. “Justice Roberts just voted with the four liberals on an abortion case because of stare decisis... The precedent he’s upholding is from a case just four years ago, that he dissented on. If he thought the Court got it wrong four years ago, today was his chance to correct it.”

In his concurring opinion yesterday, Roberts, who was appointed by Republican President George W. Bush, invoked the legal doctrine of stare decisis, a controversial theory that claims past opinions gain legal weight simply by virtue of how long they last, regardless of how faithfully they reflect the law or the Constitution.

That doctrine, he wrote, “requires us, absent special circumstances, to treat like cases alike. The Louisiana law imposes a burden on access to abortion just as severe as that imposed by the Texas law, for the same reasons. Therefore Louisiana’s law cannot stand under our precedents.”

Roberts even acknowledged that he had “joined the dissent in Whole Woman’s Health,” the similar case in Texas, and continues “to believe that the case was wrongly decided. The question today however is not whether Whole Woman’s Health was right or wrong, but whether to adhere to it in deciding the present case.”

Ilya Shapiro of the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, characterized “Chief Justice Roberts’s capricious application of stare decisis” as “startling.”

Shapiro noted stare decisis didn’t stop Roberts from overturning precedent in Citizens United v. FEC (2010), Janus v. AFSCME (2018), and Knick v. Township of Scott (2019), “cases in which the precedent was much older and more entrenched.”

Now, however, “a very recent close decision in which he dissented apparently carries more weight. There are probably other examples, but those three come immediately to mind.”

Writing for National Review, Yuval Levin pointed out how Roberts had abused 18th-century conservative political philosopher Edmund Burke by writing about stare decisis, “This principle is grounded in a basic humility that recognizes today’s legal issues are often not so different from the questions of yesterday and that we are not the first ones to try to answer them. Because the “private stock of reason … in each man is small, … individuals would do better to avail themselves of the general bank and capital of nations and of ages.”

While Justice Clarence Thomas in his dissenting opinion had already emphasized how improper it was to refer to Burke in this context, Levin had a different angle.

“In the passage Roberts cites (as well as the one that Justice Thomas cites), Burke is talking about judgments made by statesmen, not by judges,” Levin wrote. “And it’s not as though he never expressed any views about how judges should think about precedent.”

“Burke described precedents as ‘one ground, though only one ground, of legal argument,’ and said that before they could be treated as authoritative they needed to be tested against five crucial criteria,” according to Levin.

He then proceeded to quote directly from Burke that precedents need to be “numerous and not scattered here and there;—secondly, concurrent and not contradictory and mutually destructive;—thirdly, to be made in good and constitutional times;—fourthly, not to be made to serve an occasion;—and fifthly, to be agreeable to the general tenor of legal principles, which over-ruled precedents, and were not to be over-ruled by them.”

Chief Justice Roberts, however, did not mention “any such criteria in thinking through his defense of a decision he disagreed with just four years ago. And if he had, it isn’t likely that his concurrence today would have withstood scrutiny under them.”

Lila Rose: Supreme Court is aiding ‘genocidal abortion industry’

Live Action President and Founder Lila Rose had particularly strong words about the decision and its ramifications for unborn children. 

“In the very act of bringing a case against Louisiana’s law, the abortion industry reasserted its obsession with profit, at any cost,” she said. “Abortion businesses claim to be healthcare entities, but resist any law that holds them to the same health and safety standards as the actual medical community. Abortion violently dismembers, decapitates, poisons, and crushes the living bodies of children. Abortion is not, has never been, and never will be healthcare.”

Rose said the “unjust ruling is a reminder that the lives of an entire people group have been wrongly placed in the hands of nine lawyers, several of whom abuse their power to violate the human right to life. With this decision, the Supreme Court has once again provided aid and comfort to the genocidal abortion industry which profits from the pain and fear of mothers and the deaths of their children.” 

‘Civil rights laws will continue to be interpreted by the High Court to favor the Sexual Revolution in all its manifestations’

Rod Dreher, author of The Benedict Option, commented, “Two years ago, Roberts signed the dissent in the 2016 Texas case — a dissent that said the majority decision ‘exemplifies the court’s troubling tendency ‘to bend the rules when any effort to limit abortion, or even to speak in opposition to abortion, is at issue.’ Today, only four years later, Justice Roberts has Grown In Office™, and has voted to uphold the abortion status quo. Good Catholic Justice Roberts.”

Dreher asked, “Can anyone understand SCOTUS abortion jurisprudence? Can it ever be applied logically? I think it can, if you understand this principle: Pro-lifers must lose.”

Referring to the 1973 Supreme Court decision to legalize abortion, and to recent decisions on homosexual “marriage” and gender ideology, Dreher wrote, full of pessimism, that “Roe v. Wade will never be overturned. Civil rights laws will continue to be interpreted by the High Court to favor the Sexual Revolution in all its manifestations. We are no longer a socially conservative nation, and have ceased to be a Christian nation in any historically orthodox sense.”

He then took a swipe at Republicans and those claiming to be conservatives.

“The Christian leaders who told you to be cool, and trust the Republican Party and its judges — they were wrong. Maybe they meant well, but they were wrong. If you want to be a useful pawn for Conservatism, Inc., be my guest — but please stop deceiving yourself that this strategy is a winning one,” he said.

Richard W. Garnett, who teaches law at the University of Notre Dame, circled back to stare decisis, which, he said, “is not an absolute rule. Every justice — including, in several important and high-profile cases, Roberts — has voted at one time or another and for one reason or another to abandon an earlier case.”

“There is general agreement that it is, all things considered, a good thing for the law to be settled, but it is just as clear that, sometimes, errors need to be corrected,” Garnett pointed out.

He also criticized the vetting process of new judges during confirmation hearings. “Disingenuous questions,” Garnett wrote, “and slippery answers, about Roe and abortion have become a familiar feature of judicial confirmation hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee.”

Josh Hammer of the First Liberty Institute tweeted in the same vein, “We need express litmus tests for the role of stare decisis in constitutional adjudication. Nothing less than Clarence Thomas’s position should suffice.”

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) lamented the Supreme Court’s “failure to recognize the legitimacy of laws prioritizing women’s health and safety over abortion business interests,” continuing “a cruel precedent.”

“As we grieve this decision and the pregnant women who will be harmed by it, we continue to pray and fight for justice for mothers and children,” said Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann of Kansas City, who serves as chairman of the USCCB Committee for Pro-Life Activities.

“We will not rest until the day when the Supreme Court corrects the grave injustice of Roe and [Planned Parenthood v.Casey and recognizes the Constitutional right to life for unborn human beings,” he added. “And we continue to ask all people of faith to pray for women seeking abortion, often under enormous pressure, that they will find alternatives that truly value them and the lives of their children.”

Marjorie Dannenfelser of the Susan B. Anthony List said the ruling was “a bitter disappointment. It demonstrates once again the failure of the Supreme Court to allow the American people to protect the well-being of women from the tentacles of a brutal and profit-seeking abortion industry.”

At the same time, she expressed her conviction that electing President Donald Trump to a second term would make things better.

“It is imperative that we re-elect President Trump and our pro-life majority in the U.S. Senate so we can further restore the judiciary, most especially the Supreme Court,” Dannenfelser wrote. “President Trump, assisted by the pro-life Senate majority, is keeping his promise to appoint constitutionalist Supreme Court justices and other federal judges. This is evidenced by Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, who joined with Justices Thomas and Alito and dissented from today’s ruling.”

Just a few days ago, Gorsuch wrote transgenderism into law in Bostock v. Clayton County. Kavanaugh dissented but praised the outcome of the case, only opposing how the Court decided it.

But Gorsuch and Kavanaugh joining the conservative dissenters in the Louisiana abortion case may help reassure social conservatives going into the 2020 election that, despite the former joining Roberts and the liberals on the Bostock LGBT ruling, Trump’s judicial nominees have still made and would continue to make a critical difference compared to the nominees of former Vice President Joe Biden.

Daniel Horowitz, senior editor of Conservative Review, looked at the recent Supreme Court decisions and came to the conclusion that “Republican-appointed justices, aside from Clarence Thomas and maybe one other, will never overturn even recent expansions of abortion ‘rights,’ much less the foundation of Roe and [Planned Parenthood v.] Casey.”

No justice, apart from Thomas, had “affirmed that Roe is a complete myth. No other justice joined his dissent,” Horowitz stressed. “They all wrote dissents focusing on how there should be no standing in this case.”

“Kavanagh [sic] focused on how it wasn’t even clear that the doctors in the case would have been denied admitting privileges if they applied for them,” he said. “Gorsuch and Kavanagh [sic] joined Alito’s dissent suggesting that this case should be remanded and judged by a different standard, rather than Thomas’ dissent suggesting that this entire case should be thrown out – along with every case predicated on a right to murder.”

Horowitz admitted that the justices are not wrong, but “they refuse to show their cards. It’s not even clear how many of them, aside from Alito and maybe Gorsuch, would overturn Hellerstadt on principle without these technicalities, much less Roe. We don’t know how Kavanagh [sic] would vote in a similar case, especially given his obsession with precedent.”

“Precedent is a one-way street,” Horowitz commented. “The left wing can overturn it after 200 years, but once it does so even once, Republican judges will worship it as God’s word.”


BREAKING: Supreme Court strikes down Louisiana abortion regulations

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas: Roe v. Wade ‘should be overruled’

  abortion, brett kavanaugh, june medical services llc v. russo, june medical services v. russo, lila rose, neil gorsuch, stare decisis, supreme court


Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas: Roe v. Wade ‘should be overruled’

'The Constitution does not constrain the States’ ability to regulate or even prohibit abortion,' wrote Justice Thomas. 'Moreover, the fact that no five Justices can agree on the proper interpretation of our precedents today evinces that our abortion jurisprudence remains in a state of utter entropy.'
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 12:12 pm EST
Featured Image
Justice Clarence Thomas in 2008 Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images
Paul Smeaton Paul Smeaton Follow Paul
By Paul Smeaton

URGENT PETITION: Tell the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade! Sign the petition here.

WASHINGTON, D.C., June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has condemned U.S. abortion law and called for Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision imposing abortion on demand across the country, and “its progeny” to be overruled as irreconcilable with the Constitution. 

Thomas made the comments during his dissenting opinion given during yesterday’s June Medical Services v. Russo ruling striking down a Louisiana law requiring basic medical precautions in the event of abortion complications.

“[W]e exceed our constitutional authority whenever we ‘appl[y] demonstrably erroneous precedent instead of the relevant law’s text,’” Thomas concluded.

“Because we can reconcile neither Roe nor its progeny with the text of our Constitution, those decisions should be overruled,” he stated.

Thomas said that the challenge to the Louisiana law should have been rejected for the simple fact that the abortionists in question had no legal standing to bring it in the first place. “Today a majority of the Court perpetuates its ill-founded abortion jurisprudence by enjoining a perfectly legitimate state law and doing so without jurisdiction,” he wrote.

Thomas said that the case had been brought by “abortionists and abortion clinics” whose sole claim was that Louisiana’s law “violated the purported substantive due process right of a woman to abort her unborn child.” 

“But they concede that this right does not belong to them, and they seek to vindicate no private rights of their own. Under a proper understanding of Article III, these plaintiffs lack standing to invoke our jurisdiction,” he stated. 

Thomas rejected the claim of Chief Justice John Roberts that according to the legal doctrine of stare decisis precedents set by previous Supreme Court rulings in similar cases required the Louisiana law to be overturned, but insisted that the justices should have rejected the challenge to the state law because it violated the Constitution.

“The Constitution does not constrain the States’ ability to regulate or even prohibit abortion,” he wrote.

“Moreover,” Thomas added, “the fact that no five Justices can agree on the proper interpretation of our precedents today evinces that our abortion jurisprudence remains in a state of utter entropy.”

Thomas has previously taken aim at the contemporary understanding of stare decisis (the concept that the longer a ruling stands, the greater weight it accrues as legal precedent) which is also the chief theory sustaining Roe v. Wade.

In his assenting opinion given in Gamble v. United States last year, a case not directly to abortion, Thomas took the opportunity to discuss that legal concept.

“In my view, the Court’s typical formulation of the stare decisis standard does not comport with our judicial duty under Article III because it elevates demonstrably erroneous decisions—meaning decisions outside the realm of permissible interpretation—over the text of the Constitution and other duly enacted federal law,” Thomas wrote. 

Criticising current U.S. abortion law in general in his opinion given yesterday, Thomas said that the Supreme Court had “created the right to abortion based on an amorphous, unwritten right to privacy, which it grounded in the 'legal fiction' of substantive due process."

“Roe is grievously wrong for many reasons,” he continued, “but the most fundamental is that its core holding—that the Constitution protects a woman’s right to abort her unborn child—finds no support in the text of the Fourteenth Amendment.” 

Thomas said that ”the idea that the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment understood the Due Process Clause to protect a right to abortion is farcical.” 

“Roe suggests that the Due Process Clause’s reference to ‘liberty’ could provide a textual basis for its novel privacy right,” he continued. 

“But that Clause does not guarantee liberty qua liberty. Rather, it expressly contemplates the deprivation of liberty and requires only that such deprivations occur through ‘due process of law.’” 

Citing the eighteenth century Irish statesman and philosopher Edmund Burke, Thomas said that “no one could seriously claim” that “revolutionary” pro-abortion Supreme Court rulings “are part of the ‘inheritance from our forefathers,’ fidelity to which demonstrates ‘reverence to antiquity’.” 

Earlier this year Thomas referred to Roe v. Wade as one of many “incorrect decisions” in relation to the Fourteenth Amendment and in the same context of “incorrect decisions,” also mentioned the 2015 ruling Obergefell v. Hodges, which guaranteed a “right” to homosexual “marriage.”

  abortion, clarence thomas, june medical services llc v. russo, june medical services v. russo, stare decisis, supreme court


States can’t use grant money to discriminate against religious schools, Supreme Court rules

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh joined Roberts, while Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor dissented.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 11:52 am EST
Featured Image
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

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

WASHINGTON, D.C., June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 Tuesday that states may not deny tuition grants to religious schools if they would award those same grants to secular private schools.

Espinoza v. Montana concerned Kendra Espinoza, a Montana mother who used a tax-credit-funded state scholarship to send her daughters to Stillwater Christian School. The Montana Supreme Court had struck down that tax-credit system on the basis of the Blaine Amendment to the Montana Constitution, which bans the use of taxpayer funds at “sectarian” schools.

Blaine Amendments, which are part of the constitutions of 37 states, were “added to state constitutions in order to enforce the nativist bigotry of the day” against Catholics, according to a Cardinal Newman Society report.

On Tuesday, the nation’s highest court sided with Espinoza and reversed the Montana justices. The majority opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, explained that while it’s ultimately up to states to decide whether to support private schools at all, if they choose to do so they cannot discriminate against some on the basis of their religious beliefs.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh joined Roberts, while Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor dissented.

“Disqualifying otherwise eligible recipients from a public benefit solely because of their religious character imposes ‘a penalty on the free exercise of religion that triggers the most exacting scrutiny,’” Roberts wrote, citing the court’s 2017 ruling in Trinity Lutheran vs. Comer. “Montana's no-aid provision bars religious schools from public benefits solely because of the religious character of the schools. The provision also bars parents who wish to send their children to a religious school from those same benefits, again solely because of the religious character of the school.” 

Calling the majority holding “perverse,” Sotomayor claimed in her dissenting opinion that the court “appears to require a State to reinstate a tax-credit program that the Constitution did not demand in the first place.” However, the issue was not whether Montana had to keep the program as a whole, but whether it could discriminate on the basis of religious status within it.

“Today, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a decision that affirmed one of America's first freedoms, established in the First Amendment -- the right of religious freedom,” said Family Research Council (FRC) research fellow for legal & policy studies Katherine Beck Johnson. “America was founded, in part, to apply the principle that a government may not tell anyone what to believe or how to worship. For many Americans, our religion informs every aspect of our lives, from where and how we worship, to how we interact with civil society, to how to educate our children. Americans of faith even come together to form institutions united around their common goals.”

“It was high time for the Blaine Amendments to bite the dust,” Becket Fund senior counsel Diana Verm added. “Our Constitution requires equal treatment for religious people and institutions. Relying on century-old state laws designed to target Catholics to exclude all people of faith was legally, constitutionally, and morally wrong. The Court was right to kick the Blaine Amendments to the curb.”

Tuesday’s victory for religious schools follows a string of defeats for social conservatives at the nation’s highest court, each of which involved at least one justice appointed by a Republican president. But while some conservative voters have said they feel demoralized by those defeats, the fact remains that Espinoza v. Montana would have been a 7-2 ruling against religious equality without Gorsuch or Kavanaugh, who were appointed by President Donald Trump.

  blaine amendments, espinoza v. montana, montana, private schools, religious discrimination, religious education, supreme court


‘Clueless’ Planned Parenthood staffer flounders with 911 while patient lies unresponsive

There are doubts that the Planned Parenthood caller even knew what a street address is.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 8:34 am EST
Featured Image
chainarong06 /
Cheryl Sullenger
By Cheryl Sullenger

AURORA, Illinois, June 30, 2020 (Operation Rescue) — As one of Planned Parenthood’s abortion patient was lying unresponsive, an employee of the abortion facility located in Aurora, Illinois, phoned 911 for help.

The conversation between the obtuse clinic worker and the 911 dispatcher revealed a familiarity that only comes from repeated interaction.


“It is obvious that the Aurora 911 dispatchers are very familiar with the Planned Parenthood in their community,” said Troy Newman. “That shows that women are being injured far too often and that abortions at Planned Parenthood are unsafe.”

In fact, with the help of the Pro-life Action League, which has supplied Operation Rescue with 911 records for this facility, there have been at least eleven documented medical emergencies known to have occurred at this facility since it opened in 2012.

The Planned Parenthood worker seemed to be completely incapable of answering questions made by the 911 dispatcher. Even a simple request for her to give a proper address seemed to be beyond her capacity.

911: 911, can I help you?

PP: Can I have an ambulance please?

911: Sure, what address?

PP: We’re at three-zero Planned Parenthood in Aurora.

911: I’m sorry, you broke up. [Audio did not actually break up.]

PP: Yes, Planned Parenthood in Aur—

911: I need you to provide the address, please.

PP: Sure, give me one second. [Pause.] 3051.

No street name was given. At this point, there are doubts that the Planned Parenthood caller even knows what a street address is. The dispatcher gives up and moves on.

911: And who needs the ambulance.

PP: Yes.

911: Who needs the ambulance is what I’m asking you.

PP: A patient. Yes. We have a patient here –

911: And what’s wrong with her?

PP: She’s not responding.

The dispatcher seems to understand very well the types of injuries to expect from this Planned Parenthood facility, and that is reflected in the questioning.

911: Did she have a procedure? [Aka, abortion.]

PP: Yes, she did.

911: Is she breathing, at least?

PP: She is.

911: Is she hemorrhaging at all?

PP: Um, no.

911: Any medical conditions we should know about?

PP: No, not on this one.

Having a patient who is not responsive is a very serious thing, and there are a number of things that could cause that, none of which were volunteered by the Planned Parenthood worker.

But that wasn’t all. The Planned Parenthood caller seemed completely unaware of her orientation to basic ordinal directions, something most people are taught how to determine as children.

911: What door do you want the ambulance to use?

PP: They can come to the side door.

911: Which side. You’ve got four sides to your building.

At this point the caller consults with others at Planned Parenthood and a debate begins about whether the side door is on the north side of the building. Finally, the caller returns to the dispatcher.

“It’s the west entrance. Use the west entrance,” she finally said.

“Planned Parenthood should never let this woman touch a telephone again. It would be laughable that someone could be this incapable, if the situation wasn’t so deadly serious,” said Newman.

The unresponsive woman was transported to a local hospital for emergency care that the Planned Parenthood facility could not provide.

“This was a very dangerous situation for the woman involved, and we hope she got the care she needed, despite the clueless Planned Parenthood caller. But honestly, women should think long and hard before submitting to an abortion at Planned Parenthood or any other abortion facility,” said Newman. “Abortion is fatal to the precious unborn baby, who deserves a chance a life. But it is also often extremely dangerous for women, and we have literally hundreds of documented cases of hor-rific abortion injuries and death to prove it.”

Read the CAD report

Published with permission from Operation Rescue.

  abortion, illinois, planned parenthood


Time to stop making excuses for Vatican II and the New Mass

Many good authors have told the tragic story well. Now it is time for clergy and laity both to do something about it.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 8:14 pm EST
Featured Image

Editor’s note: The following article comes from an anonymous priest.

June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — In several recent statements, culminating in an interview with Philip Lawler, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has traced the evils that afflict the Church today back to their root within the Second Vatican Council (1962–65) and the New Order of the Mass (1969). In this he has rendered a service to all Catholics, for while no problem can be solved until people will admit its existence, hardly anyone in authority in the Church has been willing publicly to admit that some evil spirit entered the Church by means of this council and the subsequent liturgical revolution. 

Not being an exorcist, I do not know the proper name of this spirit, unless perhaps it is Apollyon (Apoc. 9:11). Developing a suggestion of Archbishop Viganò, we might however call it “the spirit of rupture.” It established itself in the Church in two main ways: first by persuading a great ecumenical council to promulgate documents that would favor heresy, at least by silence, ambiguity, or style; secondly, by persuading a pope to break with all preceding tradition and promulgate a new Mass, and new rites for all the sacraments, which would be more acceptable to Protestants and to others who do not hold the Catholic faith. 

Either of these events would have been gravely harmful to the Church. Together, they have caused what Bishop Bernard Fellay of the Society of St Pius X has called “a disaster without a name.”

Many good authors have told the tragic story well. Romano Amerio’s Iota Unum is an almost miraculously objective survey of the changes in the Church caused by the council fathers and their heirs. Michael Davies’s works, especially Pope John’s Council and Pope Paul’s New Mass, offer a clear and even entertaining, as well as scrupulously accurate, account of how the thing was done. Dietrich von Hildebrand, in The Devastated Vineyard, shows us the supernatural spirit in which Catholics should respond. Marcel Lefebvre’s Open Letter to Confused Catholics and Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais’s biography of its author reveal indirectly the malice of the spirit of rupture by showing what happened to a Catholic bishop who resisted.  Roberto de Mattei’s Vatican II: An untold story and Paolo Pasqualucci’s The Parallel Council are scholarly accounts of the maneuvers by which those who are euphemistically called the innovators took the upper hand. Nor is this list complete.

It is perhaps impossible, also, to give a complete list of all the dogmas that have been undermined in the minds of clergy and laity by the prudential judgments that underlie the documents of the Second Vatican Council and the act of replacing the Catholic liturgy with a new liturgy. One could  mention these: the absence of salvation outside the Church; the evil of heresy; the retributive justice of God and our need to expiate our sins; the existence of an eternal Hell; the substantial and abiding presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament; the propitiatory sacrifice of the Mass; the inerrancy of the entirety of Scripture; the desirability of Christendom; and the need to evangelize Jews and pagans for their salvation.

More fundamentally, though, it is the very idea of revealed truth and unchanging dogmas that has been shaken. That is why we speak of the invasion of the Church by “neo-modernism.” Modernism is the heresy that denies the existence of unchanging truths, once revealed by God to the prophets and the apostles, and to be handed on with the same meaning by the successors of the apostles until Christ returns.

What is the way forward? I do not think it is to write scholarly commentaries showing how all the documents promulgated by the Second Vatican Council, and everything in the new liturgy promulgated afterward, can be read in an orthodox fashion. That has been done, and it has not succeeded in exorcising the evil. Something else must be tried.

The way up and the way down are one and the same, said an ancient sage. It does not seem likely that the evil spirit will be expunged until the bishops shall have assembled again in council and anathematized by name each of the errors circulating in the Church, and until the successor of St Peter shall have declared the ancient rites of Mass and sacrament to be now and forever the proper liturgy of the Roman Church.  It would seem also wise to join to these definitions a further anathema against those who would use any of the documents of the last council to support the errors that this new one would condemn. After the poison had thus been drawn, theologians could consider at their leisure whether there were statements within those earlier documents that could not in any way be reconciled with orthodoxy. On this point, I believe I am more sanguine than Archbishop Vigano and Bishop Schneider.

That great day is still in the future, and divine providence alone knows when it will come. In the meantime, there is no divine or human law that forbids individual bishops from working for it, by two actions. First, any diocesan bishop of the Latin church may begin to say the ancient Latin Mass exclusively, in his cathedral and in the parishes he inspects. Secondly, he may draw up a list of the errors that have already been condemned by the Church, taken for example from the Syllabus of Errors, from the anti-modernist oath and Lamentabili of Pope St. Pius X, and from various 20th-century encyclicals, and require clergy and catechists to swear that they disavow them. If several diocesan bishops took those actions, it could unstop a flow of grace too strong to be resisted.

Five bishops, including Cardinal Raymond Burke and Cardinal Janis Pujats, have already done something that foreshadows the second of these two actions, by publishing last year a Declaration of Truths against the principal errors of our time. Unfortunately, of these five bishops, only one, Archbishop Tomasz Peta, governs a diocese. What is needed is for a similar group of diocesan bishops, on their own initiative, to unite their presbyterates to them in the great work of restoring orthodoxy. The frequent recitation, at least in private, by bishops and priests of the Leonine Prayer of Exorcism against Satan and the apostate angels would be helpful here.

What of the laity? They can assist the Church greatly by pursuing holiness according to the duties of their state in life. But in past years, it sometimes happened that laymen took the initiative in resisting some heresy. In the 5th century, when the patriarch of Constantinople preached against calling Mary the mother of God, a layman called Eusebius interrupted him and protested, and thus began the movement that led to the great Council of Ephesus. Of course, one has to be sure of one’s ground, but the grace of confirmation gives everyone the right and duty to witness to the Faith whenever silence would mean consent to error. If a bishop, even a bishop in some great patriarchal see, has taught heresy, the faithful need not take it lying down.

  athanasius schneider, carlo maria viganò, catholic, novus ordo, vatican ii


Supreme Court decision confirms what we already know: Expect betrayal

We know that killing babies is wrong and unjust. It does not require a law degree to understand this elementary truth. Yet the justices of the highest court in the land dare not affirm this basic truth. They prefer to betray it and follow the world’s sinful ways. 
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 3:50 pm EST
Featured Image
Supreme Court Justices John Roberts, Elena Kagan, and Neil Gorsuch attend the State of the Union address in the chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives at the U.S. Capitol Building on February 5, 2019 in Washington, DC. Photo by Doug Mills-Pool / Getty Images
John Horvat II

June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – We cannot say that the brutal Supreme Court June Medical Services v. Russo decision was a surprise to most veteran pro-lifers. The June 29 decision struck down a state’s requirement that abortionists have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals for cases of botched abortions. Regulations hoping to prevent the death of women from abortion complications were seen as an undue burden on women who seek abortions. 

The decision confirms what we already know about our judiciary: The killing of babies has priority over the lives of the preborn...and their mothers. Such has been the consistent message since 1973. 

Activists may have hoped that the justices might have conceded in this minor point since it involved the most elementary safety measures. What made this ruling particularly painful was that the swing vote in the 5–4 decision came from the supposedly conservative Chief Justice John Roberts. However, pro-lifers no longer expect justice from the Supreme Court. They have learned the hard way that they are much more likely to receive betrayal.

Expecting betrayal

Pro-lifers expect betrayal because they know that the Supreme Court does not recognize a supreme law—God’s Law upon which all human law is based. The justices prefer to dabble in liberal law theories, legal fantasies, and meaningless technicalities than to acknowledge a Divine Lawgiver. They craft their laws to adjust to an increasingly immoral society that needs such decisions to justify and legitimize its unbridled passions. 

Nor is justice to be expected from the justices. Even a child knows the most elementary notions of justice found in the moral law. Saint Paul says it is “written on our hearts.” We know that killing babies is wrong and unjust. It does not require a law degree to understand this elementary truth. Yet the justices of the highest court in the land dare not affirm this basic truth. They prefer to betray it and follow the world’s sinful ways. 

Thus, the Supreme Court decision is yet one more betrayal in a treacherous fight that has spanned nearly 50 years. The decision reflects the complicity of those in other fields that also have not the courage to confront a world gone awry. Pro-lifers know well the silence of those in the political, business, and religious establishments that join forces with or fail to speak out against the culture of death.    

This latest decision mocks the countless Americans who now fight against abortion. It exalts iniquity and creates a separate law for those who slaughter the unborn.    

Facing enormous odds

Some might think such betrayal would discourage the pro-life cause.  

Far from discouraging pro-lifers, it serves to make them more determined. The constant betrayals over the years have callused the movement. Pro-lifers have developed thick skins, taking such setbacks in stride, and continuing the fight.

From the very beginning, the pro-life movement has fought against all the odds. Such was the triumph of the sexual revolution of the 1960s that pro-abortion advocates calculated the pro-life resistance would gradually fade away. 

Indeed, in the early days, we could count on few legislators, clergy, or leaders to appear on the pro-life stage. Few dared to confront the pressure to conform to liberal norms.  

With grit and determination, pro-life activists have fought over the decades. Today, the movement has grown and become almost mainstream. Vast sectors of the public question procured abortion. We have transformed the debate from that of “women’s health” to a moral issue. Thus, nearly 50 years after Roe v. Wade, the controversy still rages. 

Recourse to the rejected lawgiver

This long history of facing the odds allowed the movement to accomplish amazing things. It forced activists to appeal to a higher authority. The pro-life cause has won many important legislative and political battles, but it has run on miracles right from the beginning.

Indeed, we did not close 1,707 abortion centers with the “normal means” by which these things are done. There were no government interventions, clerical excommunications, and few business boycotts to make the way easier. Undaunted, countless pro-life activists on the ground prayed and struggled. They had recourse to the Divine Lawgiver whom the Court justices rejected.

The pro-life movement also turned the tables upon the Court justices, who refused to uphold the moral law by condemning abortion. The judges are now the judged. Abortion has become a pivotal issue by which judges are judged.   

Tens of millions of Americans also used abortion to judge politicians, political parties, movements, and currents. It is a polarizing litmus test that brings back the moral law into society. The issue has proven an immense obstacle to those who want to destroy all legal restraints and throw our nation into ruin and anarchy. 

The abortion fight will continue despite the betrayals. To the degree that human solutions appear less likely, the more we must look to supernatural solutions to aid us in this moral fight for America’s soul. The latest ruling confirms what we already know: Expect setbacks and betrayals, but God always triumphs in the end.       

John Horvat II is a scholar, researcher, educator, international speaker, and author of the book Return to Order, as well as the author of hundreds of published articles. He lives in Spring Grove, Pennsylvania where he is the vice president of the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property.

  abortion, john roberts, june medical services llc v. russo, june medical services v. russo, supreme court


Huge number of COVID deaths in Canada were long-term care residents

The horrific number of Canadian nursing home deaths is twice the OECD average and worse than any other OECD country.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 9:41 am EST
Featured Image
Alex Schadenberg Alex Schadenberg Follow Alex
By Alex Schadenberg

June 30, 2020 (Euthanasia Prevention Coalition) — We need to rethink nursing homes and support community based care

A few days ago I republished an article by Michael Cook concerning the abuse of “palliative drug” cocktails in Sweden, during the COVID-19 crisis, that led to higher percentages of deaths and at least 50% of the deaths being residents of nursing homes.

Kelly Grant, the Globe and Mail Health Reporter, published a report on June 25, 2020 confirming that 81% of Canadian COVID-19 deaths were long-term care residents.

I published several articles (listed below) warning that the COVID-19 triage guidelines and protocols  were leading to many seniors being denied admittance to hospital and many others receiving morphine and comfort care rather than effective treatment. I knew that many of the seniors may have died anyway, but others, who would have survived, were denied the option of recovery. This was a form of discrimination, elder abuse and even murder.

The horrific number of Canadian nursing home deaths is twice the OECD average and worse than any other OECD country. Grant reports:

Canada has done a far worse job of protecting nursing-home residents from the coronavirus than other wealthy countries, according to a new analysis that shows the places that fared best made sweeping changes at seniors’ facilities as soon as they shut their societies down. 

Just over 80 per cent of Canada’s known COVID-19 deaths were in residents of nursing or retirement homes as of May 25, nearly double the average for countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, says a new report from Canada’s health care statistics agency. 

Spain was next, with 66 per cent of its total COVID-19 deaths in residents of seniors’ facilities, followed by Norway and Israel at 58 per cent and Ireland at 56 per cent. Some of the countries examined in the report, including Slovenia, Hungary and the Netherlands, had fewer than 20 per cent of their COVID-19 deaths in such homes.

Grant refers to the report from the Public Health Agency of Canada by stating:

The most recent in-depth report from the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), released last Friday, shows Canada has logged coronavirus outbreaks in 971 nursing and retirement facilities, leading to nearly 6,000 deaths. PHAC reported 8,454 COVID-19 deaths overall as of Tuesday. 

The tragedy that unfolded inside Canada’s long-term care homes during the first wave of the coronavirus pandemic has prompted Quebec to call a public inquiry and Ontario to launch an independent commission. Both provinces called in the military to help at the hardest hit homes.

Grant reported that Canada had fewer COVID-19 deaths in general but more nursing home deaths.

The flip side of the tragedy in long-term care is that Canada has done a better job of protecting people outside of seniors’ homes from the virus than many of its peer countries. 

As of May 25, Canada had recorded fewer COVID-19 deaths per million than the OECD average, better than Belgium, Spain, Britain, the U.S. and others, but worse than standouts such as Australia, Israel and Norway.

Canadian triage protocols, during the COVID-19 crisis denied many elderly people and people with disabilities hospital admittance and often only offered these people morphine and comfort measures rather than effective treatment.

More articles on this topic:

Published with permission from the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.

  coronavirus, euthanasia, nursing homes


Leftists are taking conservative Americans hostage through cultural tyranny

In many parts of the country, Republicans cannot even put a bumper sticker on their cars without fear of violent retaliation.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 9:27 am EST
Featured Image
Gina Buliga /
Fletch Daniels
By Fletch Daniels

June 30, 2020 (American Thinker) — Cultural tyranny reigns in America, the last step before full-fledged political tyranny. 

Lurking beneath the surface of virtue-signaling leftists are tyrants seeking to exert their will over those they despise. The defining leftist culture enables them to ruthlessly use all the power at their disposal, both real and imagined, to enforce a single acceptable viewpoint on society. 

In some geographic areas, this is more obvious than in others, but no area will ultimately be spared. This week, my wife volunteered during the Virginia Republican primary. As people came by the booth to get information on the candidates, she offered these Republican voters an opportunity to sign up for yard signs. Most whispered that they could never put something like that up in their neighborhood. That's understandable. Unless a family is willing to stand guard 24/7 over their property, a Trump bumper sticker or sign here is a risky proposition at best.

And so the Northern Virginia neighborhoods surrounding us are dotted with almost exclusively Democrat yard signs and the ubiquitous and unintentionally ironic "Hate Has No Home Here" signs that blare that their homes are sanctuaries of vile hatred and small-minded contempt. 

When people can't put a bumper sticker for their preferred candidate on their car, they have suffered a loss of liberty. No Republicans who have paid even a little bit of attention expect the prevailing powers in Democrat areas to safeguard their property or even their lives and liberty. The very reason for establishing a government has been upended. In this area, liberty-minded people almost operate like a secret society, sending quiet signals to one another. 

Democrats in this country do not feel they need to hide their political allegiance or culturally approved viewpoints. Most never shut up about it, believing they are speaking truth to power, even as they bask in the approval of the corrupt and wicked power centers. 

Nobody gets to sit this one out. The cultural enforcers expect everyone to parrot their talking points publicly, to destroy all resistance, forcing dissenters to grovel in submission. That's the whole idea behind the "silence is violence" aggression. Cultural violence is quite the opposite of silence; it is forcing people to say what no sane person should believe in order not to be destroyed. 

Few stand against this pressure, which is why nearly all major companies and organizations have come out with quisling statements of support of the name of a vile Marxist organization like Black Lives Matter. It's why Hillsdale College's response was so notable, because it was a rare exception to the rule. (This was not surprising coming from one of the only places in America still putting up statues to honor our tremendous heritage of liberty when the cultural zeitgeist is to rip them all down and start at a Marxist Year Zero.) Hate groups like Antifa and Black Lives Matter operate quite freely in this environment, serving as the cultural shock troops and the terrorist wing of the cultural tyrants who have taken over the Democrat party.

Consider just a few of the displays we've watched over the last few weeks. A football coach had to apologize for wearing a One America News Oklahoma. We watched as most of our senior military leaders bowed before their cultural masters. We watched as statues of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Francis Scott Key, Theodore Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, and even an assortment of abolitionists either were destroyed or came under attack, even as discussions of replacing the National Anthem erupted from the propaganda and activist cultural tyrants.

We watched as the weaponization of the federal bureaucracy by a U.S. president against a president of the opposite party was unveiled before our eyes to a massive shrug by the seditious media, who see it as a wonderful use of state power by their fellow leftist travelers in the bureaucracy. They are smug in their belief that they can use their cultural power to protect the perpetrators, whom they regard as heroes. 

We even watched as a sports league that caters to a conservative audience was complicit in perpetrating a crazy Jussie. We observed an emboldened social media giant censoring the president of the United States for promising to protect Americans.

We also watched what I believe is the vilest propaganda campaign of my lifetime, when every cop in America was slandered as a racist with barely a protest. The guardians of civil order, who put their lives on the line every day, often under unimaginably difficult circumstances, to protect their fellow Americans, are being demoralized and hounded out of service. This has created the fertile ground for a massive increase in lawlessness that will result in a significant rise in the deaths of black Americans, showing that black lives matter not a lick to those claiming that name. 

I wish I had a dollar for every American who uttered the phrase "never in my lifetime did I expect to see..." over the last few weeks. We are living in the upside-down when patriotism is outlawed, the vilest of criminals are celebrated, and brave law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line daily are slandered as the worst of society so thoroughly that it descended into evil farce, when a kid's show, Paw Patrol, came under attack since it is apparently racist to have a positive police character in a children's show.

This is war, and the left is playing to win. Anyone who doesn't get that by now, to include most of the NeverTrumps, is either irredeemably stupid or an active collaborator. Every pillar of cultural power in America, to include the unholy trinity of academia, the media, and government, has declared cultural war on at least half the country. Yet NeverTrumps reserve almost all of their scorn for those with the audacity not to drop to their knees and surrender. 

It is long past time for Republicans to fully understand the enemy and take up this fight. The phrase "silent majority" has been bandied around quite a bit in the last couple weeks. Americans are silent because the cultural tyrants ensure there is a price to pay for any peep of sane protest, which is also why Republican voters are undercounted in polls. 

The problem is that the silence enables the leftists to continue to drive the narrative and normalize ideas and behaviors that would have been considered unfathomable just a few short years ago while winning more converts, which shrinks that sane majority. It is their toxic ideas that are being force-fed to every young person in America, and we are paying a heavy price for that. 

I'd like to see far more people vocally pushing back against the mob within their social circles. Every person who pushes back emboldens others to do the same. There also needs to be a sustained and concerted effort to retake academia, the true center of gravity whose main product that it is returning to America is Marxist cultural tyrants.

The culture war matters when you are living in a cultural tyranny. If you believe Andrew Breitbart, that politics is downstream of culture, we are getting dangerously close to losing everything, to include our liberty.

Fletch Daniels can be found on Twitter at @fletchdaniels.

Published with permission from the American Thinker.

  2020 presidential election, democratic party


Liberal media outlet tries, fails to refute report on pro-abortion Ohio former health director

USA Today has taken a sudden interest in a series of articles related to former Ohio Department of Health Director Amy Acton.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 9:01 am EST
Featured Image
360b /
Cheryl Sullenger
By Cheryl Sullenger

June 30, 2020 (Operation Rescue) — USA Today has taken a sudden interest in a series of articles originally published at and reprinted by related to former Ohio Department of Health Director Amy Acton, who resigned on June 11, 2020. 

In particular, USA Today decided to “fact check” four claims made in a December 5, 2019, article, “Ohio Official that Licensed Dangerous Late-Term Abortion Mill Worked on Obama Presidential Campaign.”

USA Today’s “fact-check” can be read in its entirety here.

The four claims — and USA Today’s reactions to them — will be addressed one at a time.

1.“Acton was an ‘activist’ for the campaign of Barack Obama. 


While USA Today seemed to take issue with our calling Acton an “activist” instead of a “volunteer,” it found that our statement was factual.

There was also a discussion about claiming Acton was a Democrat, because in certain elections she did not declare a party. However, we stand by our statement that Acton identifies as a Democrat because every time she has declared a party affiliation, it has always been for the Democrat Party, even according to USA Today’s own information.

2. “Acton has ‘ties to abortion charities.’”

USA Today disputed this claim as “specious at best.” However, it admitted that before Acton accepted the job as Ohio Department of Health Director, she worked at the Columbus Foundation, where she served as a “Community Research and Grants Management officer” who directed funds to non-profit organizations specified by the donor. It also confirmed that NARAL Pro-Choice Ohio Foundation and Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio were among such accounts managed by Acton, along with various other non-profits, some of which were pro-life organizations.

USA Today noted that “Acton’s specialty was assisting homeless youth” because “Acton herself says she was homeless for a winter growing up.” It implied heavily, without documentation, that the 4% of undesignated funds went to help homeless youth. It insisted that Acton had no “connection” to abortion charities.

However, Operation Rescue never made any claims as to where Acton placed the 4% of undesignated gifts.


Acton’s claims of homelessness are disputed by her mother, Donna Arthur, who contacted Operation Rescue to tell her side of the story after reading Acton’s public claims about her childhood. Arthur insists her daughter was never homeless, was always fed, and was never neglected while Arthur had custody of her up until she was 12 years old. It is noteworthy that Arthur also claims that from early childhood, her daughter had a propensity to lie. Therefore, Acton’s homeless claims, repeated as fact by USA Today, are disputed by the one person who would actually know the truth.

We stand by our assertion that Action has “ties to abortion charities.” She arranged for designated financial gifts to go to NARAL of Ohio and Planned Parenthood. Because she serviced those accounts — apparently without known complaint — that makes her “tied” or connected to them. It would only be fair to say she was not connected to abortion charities if Acton had never serviced those accounts

3. “Acton used ‘a duplicitous paperwork shuffle’ to keep open a suburban Dayton abortion clinic.”

USA Today claims that statement is false because Acton followed the law.

The clinic, owned and operated by nationally-known late-term abortionist Martin Haskell had been engaged in a long-running licensing dispute with the Ohio Department of Health, which had acted to revoke its facility license due to failure to meet licensing requirements that mandated abortion facilities maintain a local hospital transfer agreement or an approved agreement with back-up physicians that could provide hospital care to patients since no abortionist on staff with the Women’s Med Center of Dayton held such privileges, including Haskell.

Those facts are not in dispute.

Operation Rescue stands by its claim that a license was granted due to Acton secretly working with the Women’s Med Center of Dayton to circumvent the abortion license revocation after the Ohio Supreme Court announced it would not hear Haskell’s appeal of a State Appellate ruling that cleared the way for the ODH to revoke the facility license.

A timeline with links to documents is presented here to help clear up the confusion.

§  March 29, 2019: State Appeals Court rules against Plaintiff Women’s Med Center of Dayton, clearing the way for abortion license revocation. (Ruling.)

§  June 26, 2019: Women’s Med Center of Dayton submits an agreement with three back-up physicians and requests it be used to grant a variance from the hospital transfer requirement. That agreement was not accepted.

§  August 21, 2019: Ohio Supreme Court refuses to hear an appeal of the March 29, 2019, ruling.

§  August 25, 2019: The Women’s Med Center of Dayton submits a new application changing the name of the clinic to Women’s Med Dayton — one day before Acton’s letter informing them one was needed. This indicates coordination between Acton and the Dayton abortion facility.


§  August 26, 2019: Acton sent a letter to Women’s Med Center of Dayton informing them that if they want an abortion facility license, they must refile a new application — something WMCD had already prepared.

§  Also that same day, Women’s Med Center of Dayton (not the new Women’s Med Dayton as on the application), resubmitted a revised variance application and back-up physician agreement.

§  October 25, 2020: Acton sends a letter to WMCD approving the August 26 variance even though it does not reference the Women’s Med Dayton. She also informs WMCD that the new application (under Women’s Med Dayton), will be reviewed and an inspection scheduled. She adds, “It is my expectation that the Women’s Med Center will comply with the requirements” for a new license.

§  October 29, 2020: The Ohio Supreme Court issues a refusal to revisit their decision not to hear the WMCD licensing case. This exhausts WMCD’s appeals.

§  Also that day, Acton revoked Women’s Med Center Dayton’s abortion facility license and listed it as “closed.”

§  The Women’s Med Dayton application was listed as pending.

§  November 5, 2019: Acton issues a new abortion facility license to the Women’s Med Dayton using the variance submitted in the name of the now shuttered Women’s Med Center Dayton, even though her August 26 letter notes that, “Any variance request would have to be in support of a new license application.”

Based on this documentation, it is clear that Acton acted in cooperation with Haskell to make sure the Dayton facility was licensed. She accepted a back-up physician agreement filed under the name of the shuttered Women’s Med Center Dayton to support the new Women’s Med Dayton application, and used it to make it appear the Women’s Med Dayton clinic complied with licensing requirements. This is the very definition of a “duplicitous paperwork shuffle” and Operation Rescue stands by that claim.

4. “The Dayton abortion clinic is allowed to ‘abort babies up to birth.’”


USA Today finds this claim to be false, which shows Darrel Rowland, who conducted the “fact check” has little understanding of how late-term abortions for “fetal indications” fit into the exemptions in Ohio law.

It is true, and the news organization states, that a 2017 state law prohibits abortions beyond 20 weeks gestation with exceptions for non-viable fetuses or if the mother will suffer a “substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function” if the pregnancy were allowed to continue.

Viability is always determined by the abortionist. An unborn baby may be considered “non-viable” at any stage of pregnancy — including up to the time of birth — if the abortionist decides that the baby will not survive birth, or will not experience “sustained survival” after birth.

Here is a quote from, which is the website for a California-based health care policy organization.

In a subsequent Supreme Court case on abortion, the court defined viability as follows:

“Viability is reached when, in the judgment of the attending physician on the particular facts of the case before him, there is a reasonable likelihood of the fetus’ sustained survival outside the womb, with or without artificial support. Because this point may differ with each pregnancy, neither the legislature nor the courts may proclaim one of the elements entering into the ascertainment of viability — be it weeks of gestation or fetal weight or any other single factor — as the determinant of when the State has a compelling interest in the life or health of the fetus.” Colautti v. Franklin (1979)

Therefore, if an unborn baby is determined by the abortionist attending the mother to be non-viable due to health conditions of the baby, a baby may indeed be legally aborted up until the time of birth, even in Ohio due to the non-viability exemption.

The Dayton clinic’s own website confirms that it does in fact offer abortions for “fetal indications” on unborn babies it deems “non-viable.”

In conclusion, the “fact check” done by USA Today inaccurately classifies various claims made by Operation Rescue as not factual or only partially factual, when in reality, every claim we have made is backed up by substantiating documentation. 

Operation Rescue President Troy Newman summarized, “It would be accurate and fair to say, based on the flaws in the USA Today’s fact-checking story, that their false conclusions are ‘fake news.’”

Published with permission from Operation Rescue.

  abortion, amy acton, fact-check, mainstream media, mike dewine, ohio, operation rescue, usa today


Prominent COVID-19 contact tracing org has strong ties to pro-abortion globalists

This system is ripe for abuse.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 12:01 am EST
Featured Image
George Soros. Antonio Scorza /
Cheryl Sullenger
By Cheryl Sullenger

June 29, 2020 (Operation Rescue) — The coronavirus pandemic has created a climate in the U.S. that favors the business of abortion. As legitimate businesses were forced to close, and non-essential surgeries were banned, abortion facilities remained open under gubernatorial and health department exemptions. States that attempted to shutter abortion businesses to prevent an overtaxing of the health care system were generally overruled in court.

During the coronavirus pandemic, there was a massive push — generally successful — to redefine the elective abortion procedures as “essential health care.” Limits on group sizes were waived for abortion clinics. At least in the early stages, women and their companions flocked into packed abortion clinic waiting rooms without personal protective gear such as masks or gloves, which were mandatory elsewhere — and still are in many places.

While Americans were ordered to stay in their homes, women — many who came from coronavirus “hot spots” — were free to travel through multiple states in order to get abortions. This raised a very real concern that these abortion travelers were accelerating the spread of the virus into areas where people were otherwise ordered to stay in their homes.

“It became obvious to me that the most important thing in America during the height of the pandemic was not to slow the spread of the China Virus, but to keep abortion facilities open and killing as many babies as possible,” said Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue. “The restrictive orders that put people out of work and shut down legitimate businesses were not about a virus, but were about control and advancing a political agenda that was provably pro-abortion, globalist, and Marxist in nature.”

Contact tracing

Now, as America opens up, the focus of efforts to control the virus has shifted to testing and contact tracing. Those who test positive for COVID-19 are required share the names of all people with whom they recently have been in contact, so that those people can be notified of their exposure. 

This allows contact tracing organizations and states to accumulate a massive data-base on people. But can these tracers, organizations, and governmental officials be trusted with such a huge database containing intimate information about Americans’ health, family, friends, movements, and way of life?

Partners in Health


One of the first organizations to offer state-wide contact tracing programs was Partners in Health, a Massachusetts organization co-founded by globalist Paul Farmer, who also serves as Chief Strategist and Co-Chairman of the Board for PIH. This organization does work around the globe, particularly in Rwanda and Haiti.

Farmer and the PIH openly espouses a Marxist, globalist world view

Partners in Health first came to Operation Rescue’s attention while researching now-former Ohio Department of Health Director Amy Acton, who resigned on June 3, 2020. Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine and Acton hired Partners in Health to manage its state-wide contact tracing program.

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine has extensive ties to Haiti and reportedly took Acton for a visit there before she became ODH Director in February 2019. It was in Haiti that Acton met Paul Farmer for the first time.

Also operating in Haiti is the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI), a program of the Clinton Foundation, which is tied closely to PIH.

In fact, both organizations share a common board member: Chelsea Clinton, daughter of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

To show how closely these organizations work, in 2012, the Clintons and CGI joined with Farmer and PIH and the Rwandan government to create a program that was meant to increase the number of physicians, nurses, and midwives in Rwanda.

More on Haiti

The Clinton Foundation has produced a series of videos with interviews related to the coronavirus pandemic, featuring former President Bill Clinton.

During an interview between Clinton and California Governor Gavin Newsom, conducted on April 23, 2020, Clinton mention his friend, Paul Farmer, and the Partners in Health.

Massachusetts has recently announced that they’re going to try to build a state-wide tracking program and they’ve asked Partners in Health to run it for them, and they’re one of my partners in the work we’ve done in Africa, Haiti, and other places.

This mention by Clinton of his work in Haiti, done in conjunction with Farmer and Partners in Health — who also worked with Gov. DeWine in Haiti — raises red flags.

In January 2010, while Hillary Clinton served as Secretary of State under President Barack Obama, a massive 7.0 earthquake struck Haiti causing the deaths of approximately 300,000 people and widespread damage. There was widely reported evidence that the Clinton Foundation profited from a pay-to play scheme where Secretary Clinton would direct millions in aid to companies and organizations, which would then contribute a portion of that money to the Clinton Foundation.

There are also reports that the Clintons may have been involved to some extent with Laura Silsby, the woman who was caught trying to smuggle 33 children out of Haiti in the aftermath of the earthquake. Many of these children were not orphans, but had family searching for them. This led to questions about the Clintons’ involvement in the sex-trafficking of Haitian children.

Wikileaks drop of some of Hillary Clinton’s e-mails showed that Clinton was kept informed of Silsby’s activities — perhaps as early as 2001 — and even made attempts to spin the Silsby story as Secretary of State. When Silsby was arrested, Bill and Hillary Clinton almost immediately intervened on her behalf.

Whether Clinton, PIH, DeWine and/or Acton was involved with the corruption and alleged child sex-trafficking trade that sprung up after the Haitian earthquake disaster is left up to the reader to decide.

Pro-Abortion, Pro-Surveillance (in every sense)

On May 13, 2020, PIH launched a new “domestic unit” with the official-sounding name “U.S. Public Health Accompaniment Unit.” Its purpose is to handle contract tracing in the U.S. Primarily, it provides small teams, which are embedded within Departments of Health for three months, to help establish a state-wide contact tracing program and establish “long-term” computer surveillance systems.

The PIH’s U.S. Public Health Accompaniment Unit (USPHAU) also provides advisory services for free through funding provided by the Audacity Project, (housed at TED, of TED Talk fame).

Already, PIH has contracted with several states to provide contact tracing, including Massachusetts, New Jersey, Ohio, and North Carolina. It serves in an advisory capacity in the states of California, Minnesota, Maryland, the Navaho Nation, and the City of Boston.

While Partners in Health downplays its position on abortion, it is obviously in favor of it. PIH released press statements opposing President Donald Trump’s reinstatement of the pro-life Mexico Policy and denouncing the U.S. defunding of the pro-abortion World Health Organization.

PIH Funding

But a closer look at its supporters and “partner” organizations is even more revealing of its leftist, anti-life agenda.

Partners in Health is funded by a who’s who list of global depopulation advocates, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, George Soros’ Open Society, and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation — all big supporters of Planned Parenthood. 

Microsoft, Facebook, Apple, Google, Bank of America, and the World Bank are named in the long list of globalist financial partners listed on PIH’s web site.

The PIH is also heavily funded by pharmaceutical companies. Molly Smith, Director of Cleveland Right to Life, discovered this disturbing connection and wrote about it in a recent article:

Funders to the organization include multinational pharmaceutical companies who make billions of dollars selling their deadly contraceptive products to 1st and 3rd world countries through programs established by the above-mentioned groups. Check it out for yourself — Pfizer, who manufactures Depo-Provera , and was one of the first pharma companies to develop and sell the contraception pill are listed as funders. Their deadly concoctions are marketed and distributed by … PIH! The same PIH who is now deeply embedded with our own ODH Director, the Governor, and Lt. Governor of Ohio.

What do contact tracers do?


When someone tests positive for the China virus, that person is assigned to a contract tracer. If possible, it is desirable for the infected person to isolate at home as long as it can be done without any contact with other family members, including pets. If that cannot be done, other housing accommodations may be needed. This is supposed to be voluntary, but the Centers for Disease Control states, “However, health departments have the authority to issue legal orders of quarantine, should the situation warrant that measure.”

According to a video recommended by Cleveland Right to Life, in order to ensure that the home is capable of isolating a sick individual, a cell phone video of the home may be required to determine suitability for home isolation.

The contact tracer will then need to know everyone with whom the infected person has recently had contact. Additional information will be collected on those people and they will be asked to self-quarantine for 14 days.

Contract tracers are supposed to connect individuals with social services, so if a single person with children must isolate or quarantine, and they have no one to care for their children, social services may remove the children from the home.

All information about anyone who has been infected or exposed is kept in a database, which is set up by the Marxist, globalists at PIH or some other similar entity — some of which share an agenda that includes the depopulation of Planet Earth through abortion or other means. 

Even though the CDC stresses the need to protect privacy, this system is ripe for abuse.

“If any of this sounds scary, that’s because it is,” said Newman. “It is ironic that pro-abortion organizations that scream about patient privacy when it comes to abortion are the same ones gathering extremely personal information about everyone that might be exposed to the China virus. We need to be vigilant and take responsibility for making sure our rights are protected.”

Published with permission from Operation Rescue.

  abortion, clinton global initiative, contact tracing, coronavirus, george soros, open society foundations, operation rescue, partners in health


What are you going to do when the mob comes for you?

Eventually, the leftist mob always turns on its own. You're been warned.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 8:18 pm EST
Featured Image
Hollie Adams / Getty Images
Michael L. Brown Michael L. Brown Follow Dr. Michael
By Dr. Michael Brown

June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – To all the wealthy, liberal elites who are cheering on the protests and riots, a word of warning is in order. The same holds true for the conservative Christians who are lining up to show their support for the BLM movement. To each of you I say: Do not be deceived. The cancel culture will soon be coming for you.

A few weeks ago, I read about a TV sports journalist who tweeted his support for rioters in a nearby city. “Burn that s— down. Burn it all down,” he tweeted with glee.

Later that same day, as the mob marched towards his private neighborhood, his tone had changed. He called them animals and – get this – noted how the crowds scattered when the police arrived. How ironic! The cry to defund the police lasts only so long.

Amazon’s Jeff Bezos is the latest to face the wrath of the mob.

As Breitbart reported, “According to a number of videos posted to social media, protesters in DC  placed a model guillotine in front of Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos’ Washington complex. A flyer for the event stated ‘End the abuse and profiteering. Abolish the police, the prisons, and Amazon.’”

And note that, “Alongside the guillotine [was] a sign reading ‘support our poor communities, not our wealthy men.’”

Oh, yes the guillotine once again. As in off with your head. As in CHOP. (See here for a sobering article, along with an even more sobering video clip.)

Conservative web host Drew Hernandez posted another video in which a D.C. protester said, “when they become threatened, and we have no voice, the knives come out.” And the protester delivered these comments while standing in front of the guillotine.

All clear on the meaning of “knives”!

It’s true that Bezos has come under attack for allegedly taking advantage of Amazon employees.

But Bezos is also famously liberal. He is the owner of the leftist Washington Post. In 2012, he pledged $2.5 million to support same-sex “marriage” in Washington State. And the award-winning transgender comedy series, Transparent, was produced by and aired on Amazon.

But Bezos is also rich. Very rich. And that makes him a target. After “defund the police,” it will probably be “defund the rich.”

Jemele Hill has also felt the wrath of the culture-cancelling mob. (Hill formerly worked for ESPN and is now a writer for the Atlantic.) But 10 years ago – yes, a decade ago – she cracked some jokes on Twitter that were considered “transphobic” and “homophobic.”

Yet as Breibart notes, “This is the same Jemele Hill who several years later went hammer and tong against Milwaukee Brewers relief pitcher Josh Hader for racist and homophobic tweets he posted when he was a kid in high school.”

“In her screed against Hader and those who supported him in 2018, Hill sneered, ‘Realize that when you chalk Hader’s remarks up to youth and immaturity or worse, and give him an over-the-top applause for God knows what, you’re simultaneously telling the people hurt by his remarks that their feelings of resentment and skepticism don’t matter.’”

Now, Hill is being targeted by the Twitter crowd, with comments like this: “Time's up. We are coming for every last one of you [expletives] right now. No more playing nice, we played by your rules, now you get to, and I've been waiting for this one for a long time now. #CancelJemele #CancelJemeleHill.”

Sounds like a scene straight out of Animal Farm. What goes around, comes around. You cancel one day, you get canceled the next.

This is especially important for conservative Christians to grasp, since we want to be on the front lines of racial reconciliation and since we reject racism as sin. And, understanding the significance of the phrase to our black brothers and sisters, we want to shout out, “Yes, black lives do matter.”

Many black Christians also want to stand arm in arm with their friends and colleagues who have joined together with the BLM movement.

But that movement is, at base, a Marxist-driven, “queer-affirming,” anti-Christian movement. And if you will not affirm transgender activism and march for Queer Pride, the knives will soon come out for you. I mean that both figuratively and literally.

You have been forewarned.

I find it even more disturbing when Christian leaders across the nation fall over each other in their zeal to prove their wokeness. They fail to realize that some of the very people they are trying to impress are the same ones who will turn on them in an instant the moment they take a strong stand for biblical values.

To repeat: You have been forewarned.

  black lives matter, cancel culture, leftist violence, rioting, riots


President Trump will ‘lead America back to God,’ according to 1983 prophecy

Tom Zimmer said in 1983 that 'right now, in the United States, there’s a man who has the hand of God on him...and God is going to use him in the future...his name is Donald Trump.'
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 5:47 pm EST
Featured Image
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — What if I told you that there was someone who prophesied in the early 1980s that Donald Trump would bring America back to God? 

The other day a close friend came over and mentioned such a prophecy. 

It was actually contained in a somewhat viral video from a few years ago done by a Catholic priest. 

That video was viewed over half a million times, and it recounted the story of this Catholic priest’s visit with a holy Catholic man in Loreto, Italy. He called him the “hermit of Loreto.” 

The prophecy about Trump, however, was told not directly to the priest by the hermit, but to the priest’s friend — and he relayed it in his video. 

When I heard this, I remembered the story and actually thought we already covered it at LifeSite at the time. When I looked in our archives, we hadn’t.

Now, when I reviewed the video I noticed that it was secondhand information. And, as things happen sometimes, the news cycle moved on, and we didn’t publish a story on it.

In the wake of the historic letter from Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò to President Trump and the president’s own recognition of it, that prophecy has taken on new significance. 

As Providence would have it, I was able to speak with the original source of the story — Dr. Claude Curran (more on him in a minute).

In 1997, a video by Fr. Giacomo Capoverde from Rhode Island went viral with over half a million views. 

The video is Fr. Capoverde talking about his friend Dr. Claude Curran, a psychiatrist who encouraged him when he was going on a visit to Rome to travel to Loreto, Italy to meet a holy man who spent all his life praying in churches. 

And in the video, he told the story related to him by Dr. Curran about the holy man’s prediction about Donald Trump.

That video was posted on February 17, 2017.

A few weeks later, on March 6, 2017, there was an intriguing confirmation of some aspects of the story.

An American living in Loreto working as a tour guide was barraged with emails asking him to check out the veracity of the story. 

So Bret Thoman, who runs St. Francis Pilgrimages, began an investigation, since he had never heard of the so-called “holy man” — whose real name is Tom Zimmer, a World War II veteran.

The tour guide, although a devout Catholic, described his reaction to the video as “somewhere between skepticism and suspicion.”

Knowing the friars who run the Church where Tom Zimmer was said to have spent almost all his time, Thoman spoke to one of the friars who remembered him as “L’Americano” (the American).

Thoman recounts that the friars “found him to be courteous and polite, if not a little ‘particular.’” 

Tom purportedly attended upwards of four or five Masses every day and spent the rest of his time praying.

Thoman was directed to another friar — Fr. Sanatarelli, who had been at Loreto for decades — and as soon as Thoman began describing the American who prayed, Fr. Sanaterelli cut him off, saying “Ah sì, Thomas Zimmer, si chiamava...certo che mi ricordo...” (“Ah yes, Thomas Zimmer was his name, of course I remember him...”). 

He went on to say everyone in Loreto knew of him.

Although Fr. Sanatarelli didn’t know anything about the Trump prophecy made by Tom, he could confirm that Tom was in Loreto going to Mass and praying most of the day before he returned to America in 2008.

The friar actually had a photo of Tom Zimmer, which he showed Bret Thoman, who included it in his blog post.

Bret Thoman concluded his investigation into Tom Zimmer this way: “I have no reason to doubt Fr. Capoverdi’s statements that Thomas Zimmer communicated to his friend that he received a ‘premonition’ that Donald Trump would ‘lead America back to God.’”

With regard to the Trump prophecy’s accuracy, he said, that remains to be seen.

I was able to track down Dr. Claude Curran, the original source of the information Fr. Capoverde shared in his video.

Dr. Curran is still a practicing psychiatrist in Fall River, Massachusetts. He too is a devout Catholic with five children. 

Dr. Curran met Tom Zimmer while in St. Peter’s Square when John Paul II was elected pope. 

Several years later, in 1983, Tom told Dr. Curran in St. Peter’s that “right now, in the United States, there’s a man who has the hand of God on him. He has the I.Q. of a genius. And a first-class education. And everything he approaches he attacks with blinding efficiency...his name is Donald Trump.” 

Dr. Curran informed Tom that the man he was speaking about was actually known to be a high-flying, jetsetting millioniare who dated models.

“No, Claude,” he said, “I’m telling you, the hand of God is on him, and God is going to use him in the future.”

“Claude, I am so convincd about what I’m telling you,” Tom continued, “that I have bought a memorial brick for Donald J. Trump, I put his name on it, and he will now benefit from all the masses and prayers in the Vatican for as long as that brick remains in the Holy Door.”

In 2017, Fr. Capoverde already believed that the prophecy of Tom Zimmer was fulfilled in President Trump because Melania Trump led a huge public meeting by praying the Lord’s prayer.

Just think how much more see we’ve seen Trump bring America back to God since then.

And there is no one better to describe that than the former apostolic nuncio — that is, papal representative to the United States of America — Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò.

At LifeSite, we were privileged to be asked by Archbishop Viganò to publish his open letter to President Trump, and when the president himself retweeted it and spoke of his thanks and admiration for Archibhsop Viganò, it was tremendous. 

It is in fact in the archbishop’s letter to President Trump that the fulfillment of that 1983 prophecy of Tom Zimmer can be seen even more clearly.

Archbishop Viganò wrote:

For the first time, the United States has in you a President who courageously defends the right to life, who is not ashamed to denounce the persecution of Christians throughout the world, who speaks of Jesus Christ and the right of citizens to freedom of worship. Your participation in the March for Life, and more recently your proclamation of the month of April as National Child Abuse Prevention Month, are actions that confirm which side you wish to fight on. And I dare to believe that both of us are on the same side in this battle, albeit with different weapons.

Mr. President, my prayer is constantly turned to the beloved American nation, where I had the privilege and honor of being sent by Pope Benedict XVI as Apostolic Nuncio. In this dramatic and decisive hour for all of humanity, I am praying for you and also for all those who are at your side in the government of the United States. I trust that the American people are united with me and you in prayer to Almighty God.

Tom Zimmer was real, and saintly. He did make that prophecy about President Trump in 1983, and, if it has at least in part been fulfilled already, maybe with Tom’s intercession for America — his homeland — and for President Trump, we’ll see the president do even more to bring America back to God in the future.

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.

  donald trump, president trump, prophesy, the john-henry westen show, united states, usa


Italian prelate to Viganò: We would like to ‘accompany your sure steps along the path of truth’

'We embrace you, Your Excellency, and as disciples we would like to be able to accompany your sure steps along the path of truth, beauty, and goodness.'
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 4:36 pm EST
Featured Image
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
Maike Hickson Maike Hickson Follow Maike
By Maike Hickson

June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Today, Italian Archbishop Luigi Negri published on his website and on the website of Italian journalist Marco Tosatti a public letter to Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, in which he gives him his full support for his “message which seems to me to have aptly expressed the living heart of our ecclesial experience.” Speaking about “elements of degradation both in the life of the Church as well as in civil society,” this recently retired Archbishop of Ferrara-Comacchio now endorses Archbishop Viganò's work and says he would like to “accompany” his “path of truth.”

Archbishop Negri clarified that his praise referred to Viganò’s early May interventions, not his June interventions on Vatican II.

Archbishop Viganò has made in recent months several statements that caught international attention. First, at the end of April, he opposed Pope Francis’ call to obey Italy’s continued coronavirus restrictions that continued a ban on Mass. The archbishop called this not only “undue, but is also a violation of conscience and harmful to the health of souls.”

On May 7, Archbishop Viganò issued, together with Cardinals Gerhard Müller, Joseph Zen, and Janis Pujats, as well as many scholars and journalists, an appeal concerning the dangers of the corona crisis being used to restrict our freedoms and those of the Catholic Church.

Then, on June 6, Archbishop Viganò published an open letter to President Donald Trump, in which he describes the recent corona crisis and the ongoing political crisis in the U.S. as a battle between the children of light and the children of darkness. That letter was subsequently endorsed by President Trump himself.

Please see here the letter written by Archbishop Luigi Negri, with Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò's own response, reprinted here with kind permission.

Archbishop Luigi Negri writes to Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò

Most Dear Excellency,

As the present circumstances are continually revealing to us elements of degradation both in the life of the Church as well as in civil society, I would like [to] send you a message relating my adhesion to your message, which seems to me to have aptly expressed the living heart of our ecclesial experience. This living heart of ecclesial experience carries with it the daily awareness that the time that has been given to us is fleeting and that our existence remains strongly conditioned by the temporary nature of events and facts. 

It seems to me that the Church, bit by bit, often by fits and starts, is recovering awareness of her own identity and the missionary task that characterizes her life and her history.

Each day we feel ever more keenly the pressure of events that demand to be judged according to the clarity of the Word of the Lord and lived out as obedience to His Will. In the midst of all this we are happy; we are happy because we abandon ourselves each day to the Lord, with the profound awareness that His presence sustains us at every moment, and that it is impossible for our existence to ever be separated from the companionship of the Lord Jesus Christ. Our strength is truly found in abandoning our lives to His will and above all in the desire that our life be alive with the great vibrancy of mission. Our life looks to the future as a reality in which to invest every moment, aware of the presence of Christ, asking that this presence of Christ run with us each day in the adventure of mission. Each morning our life opens in this and for this, with a great desire to sustain our own Christian life and that of our fellow men; each evening it closes with the awareness of having contributed poorly, but always sincerely, to the maturation of the Christian conscience in the world.

We embrace you, Your Excellency, and as disciples we would like to be able to accompany your sure steps along the path of truth, beauty, and goodness. May the Lord make his presence in the Church and among men a presence full of truth, the capacity for sacrifice and good will towards all men; thus may we be seen to correspond in a poor but real way to the great invitation of the liturgy at every moment: not to waste time but to give it back each day with our whole will and with great openness to the very heart of God, because in everyday life each of us is called to experience the greatness of God and the desire to contribute in some real way to bringing about the Kingdom of God in the world. 

May the Lord bless us and comfort us on our daily path.

+Luigi Negri – Archbishop Emeritus of Ferrara – Comacchio
Milan, 16 June 2020 

Abp. Carlo Maria Viganò replies to Abp. Luigi Negri

Most Reverend Excellency,

I read your words with great emotion; they were truly touching for me. It is a consolation to see that Your Excellency has grasped the heart of the problem with that acumen and lucidity that have always distinguished your judgment. 

The present time, especially for those who have a supernatural perspective, brings us back to the most basic things of life: to the simplicity of the Good and the horror of Evil, to the necessity of choosing which side we are on as we fight our daily battles, both small and large. There are those who see this as a banalization, as if the clarity of the Gospel was no longer capable of giving satisfying answers to a complex and articulate humanity. And yet, while some of our brother bishops are concerned almost obsessively with inclusiveness and green theology, hoping for the New World Order and a “Common Home” for the Abrahamic religions, the people and priests have an ever greater sense of being distant from their Pastors – fortunately, not all of them – right at the moment of epochal confrontation.

It’s true: time is slipping through our hands, Your Excellency, and as it does, the sandcastles of almost initiatory rhetoric are crumbling, sandcastles built by those who have wanted to base their own success on the fleetingness of time and the fragility of the contingent. There is something inexorable at work in what is happening today: the ephemeral mirages that were supposedly going to replace eternal truths are now revealing, in the harsh light of reality, their artificial and false squalor, their ontological and inexorable falsity. We discover that we are children, according to the words of Our Lord; we recognize almost instinctively those who are good and those who are evil, reward and punishment, merit and fault. But can we consider the serenity of the child resting on its mother’s breast, the strong trust of the child who grips his father’s hand, to be banal?

How many fatuous words have been spoken to us, how many useless sedatives have been delivered to us, thinking that the Eternal Word of the Father was inadequate, that it was necessary to update it in order to make it more seductive to the deaf ears of the world! Yet it would have been enough to simply make that Word our own, and we would have needed nothing else. If up until now we have allowed ourselves to be confused by the din of this present age, we can now abandon ourselves with filial trust and allow ourselves to be led, because we recognize the voice of the Divine Shepherd, and we follow Him where He wishes to lead us – even when others, who should speak, are silent. 

Our poverty is not an obstacle, but rather a help in these situations: the more humble we are, the more the skill of the Artist shines through us, holding us as an instrument in His skilled hands, like the pen with which the Scribe wisely writes the story. 

I ask Your Excellency to pray that all of us, who in the fullness of the Priesthood are called by the Lord not servants but friends, may succeed in making ourselves docile instruments of His Grace, rediscovering the divine simplicity of the Faith that He has commanded us to preach to all the nations. Everything else of our own that we would add through pride is a pathetic tinsel, which we must now learn to get rid of if we do not wish it to be done by the flames of Purgatory, in which our few gold flakes will be purified of their slag in order to make us worthy of the beatific vision. May we not waste the precious days in which illness and old age give us the opportunity to expiate our faults and the faults of others: they are blessed days which we can offer to the Majesty of God for the Church and her Ministers. 

Most Dear Excellency, receive this expression of my profound gratitude for your inspired words, with the assurance that I remember you in the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar. And pray for me.

Nunc dimittis servum Tuum,
Domine, secundum verbum Tuum in pace…

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
17 June 2020

Translated by Giuseppe Pellegrino @pellegrino2020

  carlo maria viganò, catholic, luigi negri


St. John Henry Newman would not tolerate leaving people outside the Church

Many modern bishops have hailed St. John Henry Newman as a forerunner of today’s ecumenism. He was, in fact, nothing of the sort.
Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 8:00 am EST
Featured Image
Peter Kwasniewski Peter Kwasniewski Follow Dr. Peter
By Dr. Peter Kwasniewski

June 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Today, on the traditional Roman rite calendar, is the Commemoration of the Apostle St. Paul. In olden times, June 29 was so focused on celebrating the figure of St. Peter (see Propers for June 29) that St. Paul was thrown somewhat into the shade, and, out of that sentiment of courtesy so characteristic of Western civilization at its height, the feast was extended into a second day on which Peter’s Roman companion Paul would receive the lion’s share of attention (see Propers for June 30).

St. Paul is often put forward as a representative of Protestantism or as an emblem of ecumenism, but he is neither; he is as Catholic a saint as St. Philip Neri or St. John Henry Newman.

Last month, I spoke about Newman’s devotion to St. Philip Neri, who lived at the time of the Protestant revolt, when Christians were abandoning Holy Mother Church in favor of self-constructed churchettes. Neri understood that a major incentive (if not justification) for such defections was the lack of fervor and the corruption displayed by the earthly members of the Catholic Church. For the love of God, he — like history’s greatest evangelist, St. Paul — devoted all his energies to the recovery and deeper conversion of nominal Catholics, a spiritual work of charity our age needs just as much as, if not more than, his own.

We can see an analogous passionate devotion to the revitalization of Catholicism in St. Philip’s most famous disciple, St. John Henry Newman, for whom it took two basic forms: first, an earnest attempt to “recatholicize” the Anglican Church; second, after abandoning the Anglican Church as a lost cause, a no less earnest attempt to help his fellow countrymen rediscover the truth of Catholicism and to embrace it wholly, as he had done, leaving behind a national church that had been fashioned by men out of bits and pieces of Christian tradition. A striking passage in the Apologia Pro Vita Sua (Note E) expresses just this point:

[U]nwilling as I am to give offence to religious Anglicans, I am bound to confess that [upon my conversion] I felt a great change in my view of the Church of England. I cannot tell how soon there came on me, — but very soon, — an extreme astonishment that I had ever imagined it to be a portion of the Catholic Church. For the first time, I looked at it from without, and (as I should myself say) saw it as it was. Forthwith I could not get myself to see in it any thing else, than what I had so long fearfully suspected, from as far back as 1836, — a mere national institution[.] ... And so I recognize in the Anglican Church a time-honoured institution, of noble historical memories, a monument of ancient wisdom, a momentous arm of political strength, a great national organ, a source of vast popular advantage, and, to a certain point, a witness and teacher of religious truth[]. ... [B]ut that it is something sacred, that it is an oracle of revealed doctrine, that it can claim a share in St. Ignatius or St. Cyprian, that it can take the rank, contest the teaching, and stop the path of the Church of St. Peter, that it can call itself “the Bride of the Lamb,” this is the view of it which simply disappeared from my mind on my conversion, and which it would be almost a miracle to reproduce.

In spite of passages like this, there were not lacking Catholic bishops and cardinals, shortly before and after Newman’s canonization on October 13, 2019, who hailed Newman as a forerunner of today’s ecumenism. He was, in fact, nothing of the sort. He would have held in contempt the idea that “we should all just faithfully continue to be whatever we are”: Lutherans should be good Lutherans, Anglicans should be good Anglicans, and so forth, until at some unspecified Omega Point all confessional differences melt away and we find ourselves as one Church, not through active conversion, but by a kind of passive convergence.

In truth, Newman expended himself in the effort to explain to non-Catholics why the Catholic Church was the one true Church, and consequently — with their prejudices removed and drawn by God’s grace — why they should become Catholics, even as he had done (and at immense personal cost, living for decades with the burdens of his decision).

On the day of his reception into the Catholic Church, October 9, 1845, he sent out thirty letters to his closest friends, in which he called the Catholic Church “the one true Fold of the Redeemer.” After 1845, he always prayed that England would return to the Faith, and he worried seriously about the salvation of those outside the fold.

In a letter of 1850, Newman shows that he considers other Christians to possess individual truths, but that these truths find their normal, natural, and complete form and home in the Catholic Church:

I do really think the character and variety of the converts to Catholicism of late in England form a most powerful argument, that there is such a thing as ascertainable truth in religion — and I am willing that a man should set against them, Luther, Cranmer, and Co., if he wishes. Next, it must be considered that, though there is a profession of certainty among Protestants, and pious earnest people among them, yet their certainty commonly relates to, and their religious life is seated in, doctrines which are included in Catholicism — so that their certainty cannot be considered to contradict and invalidate the certainty of Catholics. (Ward i, 622–24)

In a letter to Francis William Newman on January 18, 1860, he wrote: “I think many a Protestant has principles in him which ought to make him a Catholic, if he followed them out.”

In a letter to Lady Heywood, November 15, 1875, Newman assessed the benefits of the Anglo-Catholic movement precisely by its fruits of conversion:

The Catholic movement in the Anglican body has now been going on for forty years and more, and what has it actually done? May we not determine God’s purpose in it, by its effects? Well, then, has it not carried on a great number of earnest individual Anglicans to Catholicism? ... [C]an a divine work fail? and may we not determine what the movement was intended to do by what it has actually done? (Letters and Diaries 27:377–78)

In a letter on November 22, 1875, he advised one correspondent, Mrs. William Robinson Clark, to enter the Church because he saw that she was ready in conscience to do so:

I have but one answer to your questions — You say “Thank God, I have no longer any doubt about the Catholic Faith, I firmly believe Jesus Christ founded one Church, and that the head of the Church is the Pope.” Then you are bound to be received into that Church without delay. (Letters and Diaries 27:381)

To another who had already converted, Miss Emily Buchanan, he wrote on April 16 of the same year:

I am very glad to receive from you the tidings of your conversion, and am thankful to God both for it and for the circumstances under which it occurred. God has been very gracious to you — and you may feel confident that He who has done so much for you will do still more. (Letters and Diaries 27:278)

St. Paul lived and taught the Catholic faith in the 1st century, St. Philip Neri in the 16th, St. John Henry in the 19th, and every saint in every century did the same, regardless of changing circumstances and expressions. This is the Faith all of us, too, are called to embrace, profess, and live — persevering in the grace of God, fighting a good fight, witnessing bolding for God and religion in the midst of sinners, overcoming ourselves and doing our whole duty.

By the prayers of the great Apostles of Rome Peter and Paul, of the “Second Apostle” of Rome, Philip, and of his saintly follower, may God be very gracious to us, as He was to them.

  anglican, catholic, ecumenism, john henry newman, saints

Featured Image

Episodes Tue Jun 30, 2020 - 12:21 pm EST

Having true reverence for the Holy Eucharist

By Mother Miriam

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

Watch Mother Miriam's Live aired on 6.30.2020. In today’s episode, Mother speaks about the importance of true reverence for the Holy Eucharist. She continues speaking about the reasons to receive Holy Communion only on the tongue and how our loss of reverence for the Blessed Sacrament needs to be solved.

You can find the full podcast here.

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

Subscribe to Mother Miriam Live here.