Attorneys from the Thomas More Society said the judge refused to consider their important separation of powers arguments 'in any meaningful fashion' and essentially 'ducked the issue.'
Fri Sep 11, 2020 - 9:06 pm EST
By Thomas More Society
By Thomas More Society
Thomas More Society
LOS ANGELES, September 11, 2020 (Thomas More Society) — The Los Angeles Superior Court issued a preliminary injunction on September 10, 2020, against Grace Community Church and Pastor John MacArthur, refusing to follow the U.S. and California State constitutional protections for churches. The ruling fails to apply the appropriate constitutional standard of review. The order prohibits the church from “conducting, participating in, or attending any indoor worship services” and also bans outdoor worship unless onerous restrictions are followed in a heavy-handed move against the internationally known preacher and his congregation. MacArthur and Grace Community Church’s attorneys from the Thomas More Society said the judge refused to consider their important separation of powers arguments “in any meaningful fashion” and essentially “ducked the issue.”
Thomas More Society Special Counsel Charles LiMandri said, “We are disappointed in the ruling on the preliminary injunction as the court did not apply the strict scrutiny analysis to the government order that we believe is required by the California Constitution and legal precedent. The court also did not properly consider the medical and scientific evidence that the current number of people with serious COVID-19 symptoms no longer justifies a shuttering of the churches. Nor do we believe that the court gave adequate consideration to the fact that churches have been treated as second-class citizens compared to the tens of thousands of protestors. More than ever, California’s churches are essential. Therefore, we plan to appeal this ruling to ultimately vindicate our clients’ constitutionally protected right to free exercise of religion.”
Thomas More Society Special Counsel Special Counsel Jenna Ellis said, “Although this is a temporary setback, we will continue to fight for Pastor MacArthur and Grace Community Church’s constitutionally protected right to hold church. While the judge did go out of his way to repeatedly state that he is not ruling on the merits, only a ruling at this very preliminary stage, Pastor MacArthur is still harmed because he has every right to hold church. Church is essential, and no government agent has the runaway, unlimited power to force churches to close indefinitely. The County’s argument was basically ‘because we can,’ which is the very definition of tyranny. Without limiting government’s power in favor of freedom and protected rights, we have no liberty. We will fight for religious freedom, as our founders did when they wrote the First Amendment.”
Pastor John MacArthur said, “In an inexplicable ruling, the judge said the ‘scale tipped in favor of the county.’ 1/100th of 1% of Californians with a virus apparently wins over the U.S. Constitution and religious freedom for all? That is not what our founders said. Nor is that what God says, who gave us our rights that our government — including the judicial branch — is supposed to protect. The scale should always tip in favor of liberty, especially for churches.”
Read the Ruling explaining the Order Granting Preliminary Injunction, issued September 10, 2020, by Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff in the Superior Court of California – County of Los Angeles – Central District in County of Los Angeles et al. v. Grace Community Church et al.here.
Wisconsin Supreme Court hands huge victory to schools to teach kids in classrooms
The government had hoped to restrict private schools to 'remote learning' for ostensible fear of COVID-19 fallout.
Fri Sep 11, 2020 - 8:55 pm EST
By Thomas More Society
By Thomas More Society
Thomas More Society
MADISON, Wisconsin, September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The Wisconsin Supreme Court handed a victory to the private schools, students, and school families in Dane County, Wisconsin, on September 10, 2020. Dane County, in which the state capital of Madison is located, sought to ban private schools, religious and independent, from providing in-person, in-classroom education to students and families that desire it and are willing to pay for it.
“The court recognized this attempt to shut down private schools for what it is — a slap in the face to educational choice, an affront to families who believe that children should be in school, and a direct violation of parental rights,” explained Thomas More Society Special Counsel Erick Kaardal, who is part of the team representing the independent schools and their constituencies and working directly with St. Ambrose Academy, one of the schools petitioning for relief.
On August 21, 2020, reacting to fears about the potential spread of COVID-19, Public Health Madison & Dane County issued Emergency Order #9, which as amended September 1, 2020, purports to prohibit schools throughout Dane County from providing in-person instruction to students.
Thomas More Society Executive President and General Counsel Andrew Bath responded to the Wisconsin Supreme Court Order. “We are pleased that the court has seen the problems with Dane County’s illegal order and has issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting the county from enforcing it.”
The court’s opinion declared that the petitioners “have substantial interests in advancing childhood education and providing students a stable and effective learning environment,” and noted that they “went to great lengths — and expended non-negligible sums — to provide students, teachers, and staff the ability to resume in-person instruction with safety precautions in place.”
Additionally, the court observed that these “educational institutions and parents voluntarily seek in-person instruction, understanding the health risks associated with doing so,” and labeled the county order that attempts to shut the schools down as “both broad and without apparent precedent.”
Most significantly, observed Bath, “The state’s high court stated unequivocally that ‘Overriding the choices of parents and schools, who also undoubtedly care about the health and safety of their teachers and families, intrudes upon the freedoms ordinarily retained by the people under our constitutional design.’ That’s something that none of us can allow to go unchallenged.”
Dane County is ordered to file a response to the court within thirty days, and the court set forth a briefing schedule as three consolidated lawsuits proceed together to the next hearing in the matter.
Read the Supreme Court of Wisconsin Order issued September 10, 2020, regarding three cases, James v. Heinrich, Wisconsin Council of Religious and Independent Schools, et al. v. Heinrich, et al., and St. Ambrose Academy, Inc., et al. v. Parisi, et al., granting leave to commence an original action relating to Dane County Emergency Order #9, as requested on plaintiffs behalf by the Thomas More Society here.
“The huge number of people who have already signed this petition indicates the faithful’s concern for direction and want for leadership in the Church,” said Gualberto Garcia Jones, LifeSite’s director of advocacy. “People are really looking for guidance in this election cycle, and that’s why Fr. Altman’s message resonates so deeply with them.”
In the YouTube video, Fr. Altman says, “Here’s a memo to clueless baptized Catholics out there: you cannot be Catholic and be a Democrat. Period. Their party platform absolutely is against everything the Catholic Church teaches. So just quit pretending that you’re Catholic and vote Democrat. Repent of your support of that party and its platform, or face the fires of hell.”
Fr. Altman’s video is presented as an earnest warning to his flock about the grave dangers that would cause them to lose their eternal souls. Not only does the Democratic party platform advocate for abortion on demand, but it also promotes the dismantling of the natural family structure and supports the desecration of human nature through the homosexual and transgender agendas.
LifeSite’s petition points to three incidents when the Democratic party attempted to force its agenda on others:
The Obama-Biden administration tried to force the Little Sisters of the Poor to provide their employees with abortion-inducing drugs and contraceptives and threatened to withdraw federal funding from schools that refused to let boys in girls’ bathrooms and vice versa.
Democratic senators Kamala Harris and Mazie Hirono interrogated a judge regarding his membership in the Knights of Columbus and suggested that his membership should disqualify him sitting on the bench.
In 2017, the chairman of the DNC said there is no room for pro-lifers in the Democratic party.
Fr. Altman states in his video that no Catholic can support the Democratic party in good conscience because of what their platform stands for today.
In their document “Resolution on Abortion,” the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops instruct the faithful that “[n]o Catholic can responsibly take a ‘pro-choice’ stand when the ‘choice’ in question involves the taking of innocent human life.”
Most Rev. Joseph Strickland, the bishop of Tyler, Texas, tweeted in support of Fr. Altman’s statement: “As the Bishop of Tyler I endorse Fr. Altman’s statement in this video. My shame is that it has taken me so long. Thank you Fr Altman for your COURAGE. If you love Jesus & His Church & this nation...please HEED THIS MESSAGE.”
LifeSite’s hope is that this petition will encourage Bishop Callahan of the Diocese of La Crosse, Wisconsin to support his priest rather than bring canonical proceedings against him.
TEXAS, September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Texas legislator Matt Schaefer has called for an investigation into a new Netflix film accused by conservative commentators of promoting “child porn.”
Shaefer announced on social media that he is asking the state’s Attorney General’s Office to “investigate the Netflix film ‘Cuties’ for possible violations of child exploitation and child pornography laws.” Conservative commentators and social media–users are calling for Netflix to be “canceled” after the film about girls as young as 11 performing sexualized dance acts went live on the platform.
I have asked Texas Attorney General Paxton’s office to investigate the @netflix film “Cuties” for possible violations of child exploitation and child pornography laws. #CUTIES#txlege
Robby Starbuck, a director and producer, said, “The whole team behind Cuties needs to be investigated.”
Starbuck highlighted a January interview with Cuties director Maïmouna Doucouré in which she says that “more than 700 young girls” had auditioned for the film, “none of whom had ever done theatre before coming on set.”
“As a director I call [sic] tell you it’s not normal to audition 700 little girls with no acting experience,” Starbuck posted to Twitter. “What were they told to do during auditions? They preyed on inexperienced people starstruck by Hollywood.”
The whole team behind Cuties needs to be investigated. Look what I found. As a director I call tell you it’s not normal to audition 700 little girls with no acting experience. What were they told to do during auditions? They preyed on inexperienced people starstruck by Hollywood. pic.twitter.com/8hXBrVVvE0
Lila Rose, founder and president of the pro-life group Live Action, has posted a series of tweets making the case that the filmmakers have broken U.S. law on “child porn” because the film “blatantly zooms in on sexual parts of little girls as they dance suggestively, partially clothed, for adult audiences, as explicit sexual ‘exploration.’”
1. Whether the focal point of the visual depiction is on the child’s genitalia or pubic area;
2. Whether the setting of the depiction is sexually suggestive, that is, in a place or pose associated with sexual activity;
Writing earlier today for LifeSiteNews, Dr. Joseph Shaw, an Oxford University philosophy teacher and father of eight children, argued that the “producers of the series are themselves sexualizing and exploiting the child actors, and serving up their sexualized performances for consumption by male critics like themselves.”
“If there is a power dynamic going on here, the consumers are at the top, Netflix as pimp or enabler is in the middle, and these poor children are at the bottom,” Shaw writes.
“The real story here is not about girls spontaneously organizing a twerking troupe in order to stick to ‘the man’; no, that is a made-up story. What is happening in the real world is ‘the man’ corralling girls into a twerking troupe to tickle the jaded appetites of Netflix subscribers.”
NEW YORK, September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – In a finding that could have an enormous impact on lockdowns, social distancing, and mask wearing, The New York Times reported that “up to 90 percent of people testing positive (for COVID-19) carried barely any virus,” and thus are “not likely to be contagious.”
“The standard tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus,” the newspaper wrote on August 29.
The commonly used PCR tests, the article explained, amplify “genetic matter from the virus in cycles; the fewer cycles required, the greater the amount of virus, or viral load, in the sample. The greater the viral load, the more likely the patient is to be contagious.”
However, doctors aren’t told about the number of cycles needed to identify the viral load. One patient could be highly contagious, whereas another is not likely to spread the virus at all – the doctor doesn’t know and is unable to act accordingly.
“In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus,” The New York Times found by reviewing the data.
Instead of using 37 to 40 cycles, which is common practice right now, the article suggested anything under 30 to 35 cycles to indicate a positive.
“Tests with thresholds so high may detect not just live virus but also genetic fragments, leftovers from infection that pose no particular risk – akin to finding a hair in a room long after a person has left,” one doctor argued, according to the article.
If “up to 90 percent” of coronavirus cases are not actually contagious, the measures implemented by governors across the United States are called into question.
Governors generally look at the number of new cases to determine their course of action in easing or reinforcing lockdowns. The state of California, for instance, considers less than four daily cases per 100,000 people in any given county to be “moderate” risk level. Four to seven cases are categorized as “substantial,” and the risk level is deemed “widespread” as soon as more than seven people get a positive test result on any given day.
At a “widespread” risk level, many non-essential indoor business operations are closed, the official website explained. Most of the state is categorized at that level, and indoor church services, among other things, are officially prohibited.
Not only are the thresholds for California risk levels incredibly low, they also don’t take into account that a large number of positive tests could flag people who are not likely to be contagious, as The New York Times pointed out.
The large number of positive tests increased fear in the population. However, beyond The New York Times’ findings, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that in 94 percent of cases of death linked to COVID-19, other “health conditions and contributing causes” were present, as well.
“For 6 percent of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death.”
With that in mind, protests against mask mandates, mandatory vaccines, church closures, and business lockdowns appear to be very reasonable acts.
“I work in rural America and I’ve seen three cases in eight months,” Dr. Leland Stillman told LifeSiteNews at the “March Against Mandates” in Virginia earlier this month. “And one of them was a false positive. You’re going to tell me everybody ought to be vaccinated over a virus that seems to be harming a very, very small proportion of Americans, most of whom were already extremely old or malnourished or extremely sick? That doesn’t hold water.”
‘Stunning irony’: Pro-abortion Biden quotes St. John Paul II’s famous motto in slam against Trump
'Biden flip-flopped in order to get his party’s nomination, endorsing taxpayer funded abortion throughout pregnancy, whereas Saint John Paul II tirelessly proclaimed that ‘The Gospel of life is at the heart of Jesus' message'
September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – In a rare televised address characterized by Tucker Carlson as “The most dishonest speech ever given by a major presidential candidate,“ Democratic nominee Joe Biden spoke before a group of approximately half-a-dozen reporters, and no audience, in Pittsburgh on August 31.
Capping off his remarks, which were largely seen by critics as an attempt to blame President Trump for the ongoing violent riots by leftists in democrat-run cities, Mr. Biden evoked St. John Paul II, asserting, “Donald Trump is determined to instill fear in America. That’s what his entire campaign for the president has come down to, fear. But I believe we’ll be guided by the words of Pope John Paul II, words drawn from the scriptures. Be not afraid, be not afraid.”
The former vice president has often emphasized his Catholic identity throughout his political career. In a formal statement just last month he asserted, “my faith has been the bedrock foundation of my life.” More recently during the Democratic National Convention, the theme of Mr. Biden’s Catholic faith was routinely highlighted by headline speakers including Michelle Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Jill Biden, and former Republican governor of Ohio, John Kasich.
But while Mr. Biden publicly emphasizes his being a practicing Catholic, he remains a zealous supporter of decriminalized preborn child killing, which the Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms to be always “gravely contrary to the moral law” and an “abominable crime”. Though the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops ranked opposition to legal abortion as the “preeminent priority” for faithful citizenship, Mr. Biden advocates the codifying of Roe v. Wade into federal law and promises to appoint pro-abortion justices to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In addition, he has promised to reimpose Obamacare mandates forcing the Little Sisters of the Poor and other Christian organizations to violate their religious principles in the funding of contraception and abortifacients.
And after many decades of supporting the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits U.S. tax dollars from funding abortion, Mr. Biden buckled to leftist pressure last year and flip-flopped to the opposing position of favoring taxpayer-funded abortions throughout pregnancy.
Maureen Ferguson, Senior Fellow for The Catholic Association, a group dedicated to being a faithful Catholic voice in the public square, noted the inconsistency. “Joe Biden invoking Saint John Paul II to tell us to ‘be not afraid,’ represents a stunning irony, given Biden’s cowardly cave to the extreme pro-abortion wing of his party. Biden flip-flopped in order to get his party’s nomination, endorsing taxpayer funded abortion throughout pregnancy, whereas Saint John Paul II tirelessly proclaimed that ‘The Gospel of life is at the heart of Jesus' message.... there exists a great multitude of weak and defenseless human beings, unborn children in particular, whose fundamental right to life is being trampled upon.’”
Having authored the Church’s major work on the sanctity of human life, Evangelium Vitae, John Paul affirmed "Nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being, whether a fetus or an embryo, an infant or an adult” (52), and civil leaders "have a duty to make courageous choices in support of life, especially through legislative measures." The saint maintained that this responsibility can never be renounced, for which they will “answer to God” (90).
Regarding Mr. Biden’s primary topic of violent leftist riots in democrat-run cities, St. John Paul also provides a rational explanation based on this movement’s radically pro-abortion agenda: “Only respect for life can be the foundation and guarantee of the most precious and essential goods of society, such as democracy and peace”(101).
As St. Mother Teresa of Calcutta affirmed at the 1994 National Prayer Breakfast, “the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is war against the child … if we accept that a mother can kill her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?”
Malta police add LGBT rainbow to coat of arms beside motto ‘Lord, guide us’ for ‘Pride’ month
The 'gaying' of Malta’s police is not surprising given that, when it comes to homosexuality, the Mediterranean island nation has long gone the way of Catholic countries such as Ireland and adopted laws directly opposed to its traditional faith.
PETITION: Stand with priest who faces Church penalties for saying "You can't be a Catholic and a Democrat."! Sign the petition here.
FLORIANA, Malta, September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The police force of the predominantly Catholic country of Malta added the pro-homosexual rainbow to its coat of arms this September to mark “Pride” month.
Malta Police Force added the rainbow to the right of its insignia, which bears the Latin motto: “Domine, dirige nos,” or, “Lord, guide us.”
Police with Pride - supporting pride month in #malta ♂️
The force unveiled the pro-LGBTQ version of its emblem in a September 2 Facebook post with the explanation: “Policing with Pride — supporting Pride Month in #malta.”
The “gaying” of Malta’s police is not surprising given that, when it comes to homosexuality, the Mediterranean island nation has long gone the way of Catholic countries such as Ireland and adopted laws directly opposed to its traditional faith.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered” and that the homosexual inclination itself is “objectively disordered.”
In 2016, Malta became the first European nation to ban counselling to help an individual overcome or deal with unwanted same-sex attraction. Those convicted of violating the Affirmation of Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and Gender Expression Bill can be sentenced to up to five months in jail.
In July 2017, three years after Malta legalized same-sex civil unions, its parliament passed a law on a whipped vote to allow two men or two women to call their homosexual relationship a “marriage.”
The bill legalized homosexual “marriage” by replacing the words “husband” and “wife” in the Marriage Act and other related laws with the gender-neutral word “spouse.” The words “mother” and “father” were likewise replaced by “parent.”
“The object of this Bill is to modernise the institution of marriage and ensure that all consenting, adult couples have the legal right to enter into marriage,” stated the legislation.
Moreover, two months earlier, Archbishop Charles Scicluna of the Malta archdiocese criticized as “propaganda” an advertisement by the lay group Maltese Catholics United for the Faith which defended marriage and denounced same-sex “marriage” as unnatural.
Formerly the Vatican’s chief prosecutor of clerical sexual abuse, Scicluna also lends tacit support to Drachma LGBTI — a group campaigning for the Catholic Church to accept homosexual “marriage,” sodomy, and adoption of children by same-sex couples — by allowing it to operate freely though unofficially in his archdiocese.
In 2014, the Toronto-born archbishop presided at a Eucharistic celebration organized by Drachma LGBTI that was aimed at ending “homophobia.”
In 2013, the Malta archdiocesan website posted a report of Drachma LGBTI presenting Scicluna with the group’s newly published pro-homosexual book titled “Our Children.” The archbishop called the book a “tool to help parents of LGBTI children.”
But despite its capitulation on homosexuality, Malta remains one of the few countries in Europe where the child in the womb is legally protected.
“The deliberate killing of unborn children in their mother’s womb by abortion in any form is illegal in Malta, as is homicide,” Maltese pro-life activist Dr. Miriam Sciberras told LifeSite’s Jonathan Van Maren in June.
However, national and global abortion advocates abetted by media are lobbying Malta relentlessly to decriminalize abortion, she warned.
“We face intense media pressure that markets abortion as a basic choice that needs to be available to women,” Sciberras said.
Moreover, Maltese Members of the European Parliament and “government representatives working at EU level” are also under pressure to accept abortion, “especially with EU-level policies, as abortion is now almost always included with sexual and reproductive health,” she said.
“World-wide, we are in desperate need of politicians who will courageously defend life without compromise,” Sciberras told Van Maren.
“The international community needs to appreciate and acknowledge that there are still countries that are pro-life sanctuaries. These countries are under attack as pan-global giants and pro-abortion lobbies set their eyes on making them a conquest,” she said, referring to the sitiontions in Ireland, Argentina and Gibraltar.
“A unified front in the face of this onslaught is critical and could be a starting point to turning things around if we support and learn from each other.”
Note: LifeSite’s Pete Baklinski contributed to this article.
September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds) is speaking out against divisive California legislation that would empower judges to forgo adding those who engage in homosexual sex with certain minors to the state sex offender registry, demanding that lawmakers strengthen existing laws instead of weakening them.
California law forbids performing sex acts with a minor, but oral and anal intercourse requires that the older partner register as a sex offender, wheras in the case of vaginal intercourse judges have the discretion to choose whether to require registration. Senate Bill 145, introduced by Democrat state Sen. Scott Wiener, extends that judicial discretion to all three acts, so long as the victim is at least 14 and the offender “is not more than 10 years older than the minor.”
Lawmakers gave their final approval to the legislation earlier this week. Supporters claim it merely eliminates inequities in how homosexual and heterosexual acts are treated. Opponents argue the bill will empower pedophiles should it become law.
“The existing laws in question were placed into the California Statutes to prevent the abuse of minors, whose intellectual immaturity makes them vulnerable,” former ACPeds president Dr. Joseph Zanga said in a press release. “These proposed modifications put more children at increased risk of abuse. It strains the bounds of common sense that any legislator (some of whom must be parents) would allow such proposals to pass out of Committee much less to pass them into law.”
The group noted that even non-forcible statutory rape is recognized as childhood sexual abuse because children “cannot consent to sexual relations with adults due to their cognitive immaturity and the psychological power differential inherent to the relationship,” and that childhood sexual abuse is “associated with elevated rates of mental illness including depression, anxiety, substance use, altered body image, self-mutilation and suicide attempts.”
All eyes are currently on Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has yet to reveal whether he will sign SB145 into law. As a liberal Democrat, Newsom generally supports the priorities of LGBT activists, but some say his pro-LGBT record could also give him cover to veto the bill, at least in its current form.
“There might be some wisdom in Gov. Newsom rejecting this draft and asking for modifications to eliminate the 10-year age gap,” former Newsom aide Nathan Ballard told the Los Angeles Times on Friday.
September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A new pro-life documentary is slated for release on September 17, this time centering around New England Patriots tight end Benjamin Watson’s in-depth conversations with Americans on both sides of the abortion debate.
Watson is executive producer of Divided Hearts of America, a film centered around interviews with 30 Americans, including U.S. Housing & Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Dr. Ben Carson, pro-life activist Alveda King (the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.), abortion survivor and pro-life speaker Melissa Ohden, Democrat Louisiana state Sen. Katrina Jackson, Republican U.S. Sen. Tim Scott, journalist Roland Martin, New York state Sens. Liz Krueger and Gustavo Rivera, and more.
“There are many people in Hollywood who would consider themselves pro-life, but they feel as though their viewpoint is unacceptable in the industry,” says Watson, an outspoken pro-life Christian and father of seven with a history of using his celebrity to aid the pro-life cause, such as donating a state-of-the-art ultrasound machine to Severna Park Pregnancy Clinic in Maryland. “No one should feel like their job is in danger because of their convictions on this issue.”
“In Divided Hearts of America, Benjamin Watson discovers the secret that will unite us,” Jason Jones, the founder and president of Movie to Movement, told LifeSiteNews. “A secret that was first revealed through the Jewish Scriptures, then made fully known when the Second Person of the Trinity because incarnate in the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary. And 18 centuries later, our founding fathers mistook this truth of human dignity as self-evident.”
“My hope is our film reminds our nation that Black lives matter because black lives are sacred,” continued Jones, a prolific pro-life activist who has produced numerous pro-life and faith-affirming films, including Voiceless and Bella. “Black lives are sacred because we are all made in the image of God. We are one family, descended from the same parents and called to the same destiny, to know God to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, and to be happy with Him forever in heaven.”
“I believe in the sanctity of life, be it in the womb or on your deathbed. That’s my conviction,” Watson declares. “But with the film, I’ll engage those who disagree and hear their reasoning. The No. 1 thing I’m looking for is empathy on both sides.” He hopes his film will help “unveil the truth about abortion, the laws, the history and where our country is headed.”
September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – With the November elections less than two months away, Priests for Life has prepared a nonpartisan voter guide to inform the public of the differences between Republicans and Democrats on issues such as abortion, sex education, and more.
The printable, unbiased document presents every stance as a direct quote from both parties’ official platforms, not a summary by someone favorable to either side, so it can be freely posted and distributed at churches and 501-(c)-3 organizations without threat to their tax status.
On abortion, it notes that the GOP “assert(s) the sanctity of human life and affirm(s) that the unborn child has a fundamental right to life which cannot be infringed,” and “oppose(s) the use of public funds to perform or promote abortion or to fund organizations, like Planned Parenthood”; whereas the Democrat Party “will fight to overturn federal and state laws that create barriers to women’s reproductive health and rights,” and wants to “restore federal funding for Planned Parenthood.”
The GOP platform says the type of federal judges it favors “respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life,” while the Democrat platform touts judges who “respect and enforce foundational precedents, including … Roe v. Wade.”
On sex education, the GOP platform advocates “replacing ‘family planning’ programs for teens with sexual risk avoidance education that sets abstinence until marriage as the responsible and respected standard of behavior.” By contrast, the Democrat platform favors what it calls “medically accurate, LGBTQ+ inclusive, age-appropriate sex education,” which in practice often means explicit lessons on sex acts that promote pormiscuity and abortion.
This voter guide is just one of numerous resources Priests for Life has prepared in the run-up to the elections. Others include voter registration and polling place information; links to finding candidates’ positions on abortion and how incumbents voted on banning late-term abortion; charts detailing how party control of the House and Senate has historically affected the courts and abortion-related legislation; volunteer training assistance; an inter-denominational prayer that also can be freely distributed; and more.
SHANKSVILLE, Pennsylvania, September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – President Donald Trump commemorated a pregnant mom and her unborn baby who died aboard Flight 93 in a speech he gave this morning on the anniversary of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Trump related the story of how passengers on Flight 93 decided 19 years ago to unite together and not allow the terrorists who hijacked their plane to use it as a weapon against Americans.
“The terrorists on Flight 93 had a fourth target in mind. It was called our nation’s capital. They were just 20 minutes away from reaching their sinister objective. The only thing that stood between the enemy and a deadly strike at the heart of American democracy was the courage and resolve of 40 men and women, the amazing passengers and crew of flight 93,” Trump said in Shanksville, Pennsylvania at the memorial site of the plane crash.
It was here that the president mentioned Lauren Catuzzi Grandcolas, who was “three months pregnant with her first child.”
“Every passenger and crew member on the plane had a life filled with love and joy, friends and family, radiant hopes, and limitless dreams,” said Trump.
“When the plane was hijacked, they called their families and learned that America was also under attack. They faced the most fateful moment of their lives. Through the heartache and the tears, they prayed to God, they placed their last calls home, they whispered the immortal words, ‘I love you.’ Today those words ring out across these sacred grounds and they shine down on us from heaven above,” he continued.
“When terrorists raced to destroy the seat of our democracy, the 40 of Flight 93 did the most American of things: They took a vote, and then they acted. Together, they charged the cockpit, they confronted pure evil, and in their last act on this earth, they saved our capital.”
The U.S. government says that Flight 93 was headed toward the U.S. Capitol. The White House’s transcript of Trump’s remarks today uses the broader “capital.”
Trump said that the Pennsylvania field where the plane crashed is the site where “40 intrepid souls of Flight 93 died as true heroes.”
A childhood friend of Lauren told LifeSiteNews how she was so excited that President Trump not only acknowledged Lauren, but her friend’s preborn baby.
“Lauren was a dynamo. She sparkled. She was one of these people who was pretty, funny, and outgoing, friendly. She would walk into the room and just light up the place. She had a gusto for life,” the friend related.
On September 11, 38-year-old Lauren was returning from her grandmother's funeral in New Jersey to her home in California. Lauren managed to make a call to her husband via the plane’s airphone and leave a message saying that there was a “problem with the plane.”
“Jack, pick up sweetie, can you hear me? Okay. I just want to tell you, there's a little problem with the plane. I'm fine. I'm totally fine. I just want to tell you how much I love you,” she said.
Lauren and her unborn child are memorialized at the National September 11 Memorial & Museum in New York. Her name appears in the South Pool, on Panel S-68.
In his speech this morning, Trump praised the men and women aboard Flight 93 as heroes who stand for what is best in America.
“The heroes of Flight 93 are an everlasting reminder that no matter the danger, no matter the threat, no matter the odds, America will always rise up, stand tall and fight back,” he said.
Many in the pro-life and family movement say Trump is the most pro-life president America has ever had.
During his speech at the January 2020 March for Life, which was the first time any U.S. president has attended the event, Trump called it an “eternal truth” that “every child is a precious and sacred gift from God.”
“Together, we must protect, cherish, and defend the dignity and the sanctity of every human life. When we see the image of a baby in the womb, we glimpse the majesty of God's creation,” he said.
September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Actor Jim Caviezel, most famous for portraying Jesus Christ in Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ, said that Christians are being persecuted in the United States by being prohibited from going to church amid the coronavirus crisis.
Caviezel talked to Breitbart News Daily on Thursday about his new movie Infidel, described as a “contemporary Middle East thriller starring Jim Caviezel as an American kidnapped while attending a conference in Cairo, who ends up in prison in Iran on spying charges. His wife goes to Iran, determined to get him out.”
“There are Christians right now being persecuted for their faith, whether it be in Iran or in China or other parts of the world,” Caviezel said, before turning to his home country. “And we need not go any further than the United States where you’re not allowed to go into churches.”
“Now, the inalienable rights, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Pursuit of happiness. Why can't I go to church?” he asked.
“So now let’s go over to this character that I’m playing in Infidel, where his rights are taken from him,” Caviezel continued. “And you’re an American. You’re standing here, and say, ‘Why should I go to this film? What is going on here?’ Let’s put this together.”
“You go into an airplane. You see a lot of people. They’re wearing masks. They’re right next to each other. But the COVID-19, for some reason, doesn’t spread. It's so smart. It knows not to do that,” he said sarcastically. “But when you go into a church, the COVID-19 goes everywhere.”
“This is patty cake, kindergartner stuff,” Caviezel commented. “This is the conversation that we’re having right now. When we turn on the media, the media no longer represents a lot of Americans, because some of them still like this stuff. But most of us, we don’t trust them anymore. And so when you tell me that I’m doing an anti-Semitic movie or a film on Infidel, that is somehow immoral. Tell me, you know, to quote Jesus, ‘If evil I have spoken, tell me what evil that is. If not, why do you strike me?’”
Caviezel also spoke about his new movie in relation to cancel culture.
“One of the interesting things about this script is that [the main character] stands up for what he believes in. And that is something that’s lacking today in cancel culture,” the actor is convinced.
As the root problem of cancel culture, he identified that people “are wanting to be liked so badly.”
“When I first came into this industry, you would see people sitting together reading books and say, ‘Oh, what book are you reading,’ getting each other’s address, talking, communicating,” he recounted. “It’s not that way anymore.”
“Their heads are in their phones,” he said. “Their heads are, ‘How many people are following me?’ And I would say that a lot has to do with wanting to be liked very badly, that they’re so misinformed. When you look at faith, what Jesus spoke about, what love really is.”
“Yes, you can be liked by the world. But do you want to be liked by many or loved by one that is a man’s – Viktor Frankl – search for meaning. You know, it’s not going to be some communist or Nazi that takes away your freedoms. It’s going to be you giving them away.”
Caviezel emphasized his strong Catholic message when talking about giving a speech at the University of Notre Dame. At the time, he told “pro-choice” students who were unwilling to stand up for the unborn that they “wouldn’t have been there for the Jew” in Nazi Germany.
“You wouldn’t have been there for the slave, and you certainly wouldn’t have been there for Jesus.”
At the end of the interview, Caviezel briefly mentioned the upcoming sequel to The Passion of the Christ. “Mel Gibson just sent me the third picture. The third draft. It’s coming. It’s called The Passion of the Christ: The Resurrection,” he said. “And it’s going to be the biggest film in world history.”
September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — LifeSiteNews and the Ruth Institute have launched a petition calling for an additional presidential debate to be held focusing on family issues, the cornerstone of American life.
“Everything begins with the family. Everything depends on the family. It impacts every area of life,” the petition reads.
“A strong economy depends on the next generation learning the virtues of hard work and discipline in the family. Strong national defense requires individuals who are willing to sacrifice for their families, even more than the national interest.”
Three debates are scheduled on September 29, October 15, and October 22, to cover public health, including COVID-19, public safety, the economy, and defense/foreign policy.
But Ruth Institute President Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D., says that there must be a debate focused on family issues, because “the decline of the family is at the root of most of our problems.”
“Honestly, I’m shocked that we even have to state this obvious point: Every human life begins with a family. Every significant challenge the United States faces can be improved by strengthening the family,” she said.
At such a debate, voters could hear clear answers on important questions from the two men bidding to become president. The debate could address questions such as:
What do you intend to do about the horror of legalized abortion?
What are your views on sex-selection abortion and disability-selection abortion?
What are your views on medically unnecessary surgeries, puberty blockers, and cross-sex hormones for minor children?
Would your administration declare pornography a public health crisis, as 16 states have already done?
Morse points out that the breakdown of the family and the over-sexualization of society create massive problems which affect the economy, the criminal justice system, public health, education, and even national defense.
“The rioting in our cities is in part the result of family breakdown,” she said.
“We’re calling for one debate focused exclusively on what the candidates will do to support the family.”
Morse says that unless pro-family advocates raise their voices then issues like marriage, the right to life, parental rights in education and health, sex education in schools, pornography, population control, and declining fertility will be overlooked entirely or treated as an afterthought during this election.
“We believe this is the first time such a debate has been proposed by anyone,” Morse said. “We at the Ruth Institute and our friends at LifePetitions think it’s about time.”
Warning: This article contains extremely disturbing and disgusting content.
September 10, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Conservative commentators and social media users are calling for Netflix to be “cancelled” after a new film about girls as young as 11 performing sexualized dance acts went live on the platform.
The French film “Cuties” (titled “Mignonnes” in French) follows the story of 11-year-old Amy, a Senegalese Muslim girl who lives in a poor neighborhood in France. She joins a group of other young girls who perform hyper-sexualized dance routines, including imitating an adult “twerking dance crew.”
Clips from the film released on social media have provoked increased outrage online, with many saying the film is promoting pedophila. Some are too disgusting and disturbing to describe or share in this article.
IMDb’s guide for parents for the film currently details that in one scene “A pair of tight leather pants on an 11 year old girl are forcefully pulled down in the midst of a scuffle; the camera glances at her underwear exposed bum.”
Screenshots posted online show that IMDb’s guide previously gave much greater detail about some of the disturbing aspects of the film and even noted that some of the content of the film “is lawfully defined as pedophilia.” An archived version of the IMDb website also shows their original guidance for parents.
IMDB has to approve submissions for Parental Guides - meaning that IMDB approved removing the following language from "Cuties" Parental Guides description:
The text which previously appeared on IMDb’s website included the following:
Parental Warning : During one of the many highly sexualized & erotic dance scenes that purposefully exploit & objectify numerous scantily clad under age girls, one of the female child dancers lifts up her cropped top to fully display her bare breast. This is lawfully defined as pedophilia and can be extremely distressing to many viewers
Trigger Warning : An 11 year old girl watches a female rap music video where naked women role play through dance both heterosexual & lesbian sex acts. An 11 year old female dance group then mimics these sexual moves via on themselves and on each other while the camera zooms in on their sexual body parts as they erotically writher. This can be highly distressing to many viewers.
Female breast nudity of a minor during an erotic dance scene and lengthy & excessive closeup shots of breasts, bums and spread crotches of scantily clad 11 year old girls during numerous sexualized dance routines.
Conservative journalist and commentator Matt Walsh says that “Cuties” is a part of a “push to normalize pedophilia in our country.”
Netflix released that “Cuties” movie about twerking 11 year olds. Fuller clips of the film are now circulating. It’s way worse than I thought, and I thought it would be extremely bad. VERY explicit sexual dancing, girls grabbing themselves, crotch shots, etc. These are children.
Lila Rose, founder and president of pro-life group Live Action, has posted a series of tweets making the case that the filmmakers have broken U.S. law on “child porn” because the film “blatantly zooms in on sexual parts of little girls as they dance suggestively, partially clothed, for adult audiences, as explicit sexual ‘exploration.’”
1. Whether the focal point of the visual depiction is on the child’s genitalia or pubic area;
2. Whether the setting of the depiction is sexually suggestive, that is, in a place or pose associated with sexual activity;
Nevertheless mainstream media outlets have lauded the film, with The Telegraph awarding it four out of five stars and describing it as a “provocative powder-keg for an age terrified of child sexuality.”
‘Shameful conduct’ prompts Alabama to revoke infamous Twitter-trolling abortionist’s medical license
The Alabama State Board of Medical Examiners has ordered abortionist Leah Nicole Torres to 'cease and desist the practice of medicine.'
Fri Sep 11, 2020 - 6:00 am EST
By Cheryl Sullenger
By Cheryl Sullenger
By Cheryl Sullenger
PETITION: Demand Planned Parenthood return $80M improperly taken from coronavirus emergency fund! Sign the petition here.
MONTGOMERY, Alabama, September 11, 2020 (Operation Rescue) — The Alabama State Board of Medical Examiners has suspended the temporary medical license of abortionist Leah Nicole Torres and has ordered her to cease and desist the practice of medicine after it found she had lied repeatedly on her permanent medical license application and committed unprofessional conduct.
She was ordered to immediately surrender her license certificate.
Torres began working at the West Alabama Women’s Center in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, in early August 2020, after the retirement of 82-year old abortionist Louis Payne, who left in the wake of an investigation into the death of a woman on May 7, 2020, who visited the abortion facility just before she died at nearby Druid City Hospital.
According to the Board order and a letter to Torres dated August 20, 2020 informing her of their findings, the Board found that she “committed fraud” her application for licensure by providing untrue or misleading statements to four application questions involving hospital privilege restrictions, medical malpractice claims, mental health conditions, and her work history.
“It is a relief to know that Torres is currently not able to conduct abortions in Alabama,” said Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue, which has been working with a coalition of state and national pro-life groups, including CEC for Life and Life Legal Defense Foundation, to investigate the May 7 Tuscaloosa death. “She apparently thought she could get away with anything, as so many abortionists do, but this time, she got caught lying to get a medical license. It makes me wonder what else has she lied about.”
Torres was found to have been untruthful about the following information on her 2020 Alabama medical license application:
Torres apparently denied disciplinary action while staffing a hospital, but the Board found that her “staff privileges at a hospital or health care facility had been revoked, suspended, curtailed, limited, or placed under conditions restricting your practice.”
Torres denied any medical malpractice claims on her application for licensing, but he Board found that “in fact, a medical malpractice action relating to your performance of professional service was settled on or about August 28, 2018.”
Torres denied any history of mental health conditions, yet the Board found that “on or about March 13, 2019, you, through counsel, raised the issue of a mental, emotional, nervous, or behavioral disorder or condition as a defense, mitigation, or explanation for your actions in the course of a judicial proceeding in the United States District Court for the District of Utah, case number 2:19-cv-175-BSJ.
Torres also claimed to have worked as “a locum tenens physician between June 2018 and February 2019” when the Board found that she had been “unable to find unemployment” during that time.
The Board also had strong words for Torres in an accusation that she committed unprofessional conduct, a charge that is grounds for license denial.
That you have committed unprofessional conduct as defined in the rules promulgated by the Medical Licensure Commission; specifically, you have made public statements related to the practice of medicine which violate the high standards of honesty, diligence, prudence, and ethical integrity demanded from physicians licensed to practice in Alabama and which evidence conduct which is immoral and which is willful, shameful, and which shows a moral indifference to the standards and opinions of the community, in violation of Rule 545-X-4-.06 of the Rules and Regulations of the Medical Licensure Commission, all in violation of Ala. Code ‘ 34-24-360(2).
Torres has stirred controversy in the past few years with her Twitter account on which she routinely posts outrageous comments in support of abortion. Today, her Twitter account has 26.9K followers.
In 2018, a tweet she posted made national news when the abortionist seemed to imply that she cut babies’ vocal cords during abortions, which would be both brutal and illegal. She later deleted the tweet (pictured below) and tried to clarify her comments, claiming she was referring to the umbilical cord.
Torres later filed a civil suit against the Daily Caller — the same suit referenced by the Alabama State Board of Medical Examiners – claiming that the news story caused her to lose her job and suffer mental health issues.
At the time she was on staff with a Utah hospital and conducted abortions at Planned Parenthood of Utah. Her license in that state is now listed as expired. Since her firing, Torres struggled to find employment until she was hired on at the West Alabama Women’s Center in Tuscaloosa.
Torres has until September 21, 2020, to file an appeal with the Medical Licensure Commission. A full hearing in the matter has been set for December 21, 2020, in Montgomery, Alabama.
Meanwhile, the WAWC has appeared to have replaced Torres and continues to remain open for now, pending a criminal investigation into the May 7 death.
September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Pro-lifers across the United States will gather Saturday, September 12 to pray around graves for aborted children, emphasizing that abortion is not an abstract issue, but a concrete human tragedy.
Cosponsored by Citizens for a Pro-Life Society, Priests for Life, and Pro-Life Action League, the eighth annual National Day of Remembrance for Aborted Children will consist of 181 memorial services across the country, 54 of which will take place at gravesites specifically recognizing children who were killed in the womb.
“When people become truly aware of the reality of abortion, they can more easily cut through the lies by which some try to justify it, and the natural apathy to which human nature is inclined,” the event page says. “Even pro-life people are thrust into a higher level of commitment and activism.”
While most of abortion’s victims are disposed of as medical waste, the page explains that “tens of thousands” of bodies of aborted babies have been retrieved and given proper burials, and the stories of their recoveries “are powerful tools to awaken the consciences of our fellow citizens.”
“By participating in the National Day of Remembrance, visiting these solemn memorial places at other times of the year, and spreading the word about this prayer campaign,” it adds, “you are helping to humanize our aborted brothers and sisters and deepening your own commitment to ending the injustice of abortion.”
Full information about the event, including a complete list of locations as well as prayers for both aborted children and their mothers, can be found at AbortionMemorials.com.
German Cardinal Marx pens book on ‘freedom’ at the service of ‘new epoch’ in Church, theology
The Cardinal’s new book does not mention the cross even once.
Fri Sep 11, 2020 - 5:45 pm EST
By Manfred Spieker
By Manfred Spieker
PETITION: Join faithful German Catholics in resisting bishops’ plan to ‘Protestantize’ Church! Sign the petition here.
September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Cardinal Reinhard Marx, the former head of the German Bishops’ Conference, has recently published a new book – Freedom – that doesn’t mention the cross even once. Prof. Dr. Manfred Spieker, an expert on Catholic Social Teaching, has reviewed the book.
It is not easy to do justice to a book of only 175 pages with such an ambitious title. Reinhard Marx wants to renew the language of faith in the context of freedom. His episcopal motto from 2 Corinthians, “But where the Spirit of the Lord works, there is freedom,” would have been a suitable starting point (p. 10), as would the passage he quoted from the Epistle to the Galatians, according to which in man’s relationship with God, God is the one who acts, who frees us to freedom (p. 40).
The book consists of two parts that have little more in common than the cover. In the first part Marx offers some fundamental reflections on freedom and the role of the Church in the history of modernity, which is interpreted as a history of freedom. In the second part he tries to legitimize the Synodal Path of the Catholic Church in Germany. A sustainable bridge between the two parts is not discernible.
In the central chapter of the first part Marx wants to “get to the bottom of freedom” (p. 31). He starts with the Exodus story of the Old Testament (p. 31). It is a story of liberation, but also of the fear of freedom. A really good life, a life that corresponds to our idea of happiness and success, is not conceivable without freedom. This freedom has two sides, freedom from something and freedom for something. The book Exodus is not only about liberation from bondage, but also about a new covenant. Only in the new covenant does freedom complete itself, “and that ultimately in love, the deepest human bond” (p. 34). That freedom “finds its goal in love” (p. 24 and 164) could be something like a guiding thread of the book. But Marx does not seem to have found the peace for even a halfway systematic reflection of this thought. Accordingly, the quotations from Kant to Habermas and from Adam Smith to Paul Kirchhof, which are interspersed again and again, seem rather artificial. Moreover, references to Catholic social teaching as an expression of the social love of the Christian faith and the safeguarding as well as the limitation of freedom remain strangely thin for a bishop who as a professor once taught the subject of Christian social doctrine. The encyclicals Deus caritas est and Caritas in veritate by Benedict XVI do not make an appearance. Deus caritas est especially shows the social dimension of love.
The critical remarks on the role of the Church in the history of modernity are in line with those of Church historian Hubert Wolf, who is also quoted several times. The Church was able to see the recognition of personal freedom in questions of philosophy and faith “obviously only as loss of power and therefore [had] to fight against it.” It was “a great tragedy that the history of freedom and the history of Christianity and the Church were distant from each other and sometimes even hostile to each other, sometimes even until today” (p. 59). A Church “which remains in a purely negative view of modernity and dreams itself back into an idealized past, in which the truth of Christianity could be interpreted and administered by a few and imposed on all people” is outdated and therefore to be prevented. The fact that such voices are “to be heard more often” worries him (p. 64). Unfortunately Marx does not mention a single one of these “voices to be heard more often.”
An astonishing blindness for a social ethicist is shown by his assertion that the Church had indeed “stood up for freedom, but just for the freedom of the Church, less for the freedom of people.” Only the Second Vatican Council had “opened new perspectives” (p. 64f). What then did Pope Leo XIII stand for when he argued in the encyclical Rerum novarum of 1891 for the freedom of association for workers, as well as their humane treatment? Or the Church in Poland, which during the communist rule under the leadership of Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński and the auxiliary bishop of Cracow, Karol Wojtyła, stood up for the freedom of all Poles even before the Council? Wojtyła later courageously continued this fight for freedom and human rights as Pope John Paul II on his travels to the military dictatorships of Latin America and Asia. Incidentally, the Council did not immunize the Church against the temptation to sometimes focus more on her own freedom than on the freedom of peoples, as was shown by the Vatican’s Ostpolitik under Cardinal Casaroli, to which Pope John Paul II put a quick end after he took office in 1978.
Also his assertion that it had remained “an open question” in theology up to the Second Vatican Council, “how the history of mankind and thus also the history of freedom could be interwoven with the history of the Kingdom of God” (p. 55), says more about the author than about the history of theology. For one thing, the relationship between Civitas Dei and Civitas Terrena has been a perennial feature of theology, not only since Augustin’s De civitate Dei. For another, the Second Vatican Council did not give a conclusive answer to it either. Thus Marx’ warnings of a “depoliticization of faith” on the one hand and of a “sacralization and politicization of religion” on the other are justified – the question of the “correlation of real history and the proclamation of the Kingdom of God” (p. 55f) will remain open until the end of days.
In the second part of his book, Marx attempts to present in various ways the Synodal Path of the Catholic Church in Germany as the solution to all ecclesiastical problems. A Church that is “in the service of freedom” must interpret “the signs of the times in the light of the Gospel.” The “signs of the times” are a “locus theologicus” that is still not systematically reflected enough (p. 95). This systematic reflection is also not provided by Marx. He does not even seem to be aware of the problems that arise when the “signs of the times” become a “locus theologicus,” i. e. a theological source of knowledge alongside Holy Scripture and the tradition of the Church. Who should determine what the “signs of the times” are? Based on what criteria should they be determined? With Peter Hünermann, one of the protagonists of the “signs of the times” theology, Marx could have found the admission that there are no criteria for determining the “signs of the times.” If the “signs of the times” are given a dogmatic rank alongside scripture and tradition, dogmatics is left to the judgment of the historian, the journalist, or the opinion pollster. It is hard to imagine which “signs of the times” such a theology would have assumed in 1914, 1933, 1968 or 1990 or would have assumed in 2020 after the coronavirus pandemic. Marx bypasses all these questions and assumes that the Synodal Path takes up the right “signs of the times,” namely “the questions of power, participation and separation of powers, of the role of women in ministries and offices of the church, of celibacy and sexual morality” (p. 105).
A further attempt to explain the Synodal Path as necessary is his reference to the study commissioned by the German Bishops’ Conference, which was to clear up sexual abuse in the space of the Catholic Church – after the origin of the commissioned researchers (Mannheim, Heidelberg and Gießen) abbreviated and called MHG study (p. 104f). This study had raised exactly those questions which the Synodal Path was supposed to deal with. Marx avoids a critical reflection of this study, as well as a justification for the fact that the issues of the Synodal Path should have something to do with sexual abuse in the space of the Church. The critical objections against the Synodal Path, both by German bishops and by Pope Francis in his letter to the German Catholics of June 29, 2019, are not even mentioned. The assertion that in the process of the Synodal Path “the various perspectives, ideas, and also concerns” regarding the future of the Church in Germany are “considered and continued together” (p. 92) is not confirmed either in the book or in the course of the Synodal Path so far. Several times Marx proclaims that the Church is “at the beginning of a new epoch of Christianity and thus also of theology” (p. 95 and 104). He warns against an “authoritarian restoration,” for which he again avoids any proof, but which should be prevented by the Synodal Path.
It is a matter, according to the last sentence of his book, “of giving new radiance to the Gospel when we speak of a God who leads us through Christ into true freedom and truly redeems us” (p. 164). A beautiful sentence! Who would not want to make it his own? However: In the center of the redemption through Christ are the cross and resurrection. A liberation that bypasses the cross is unthinkable for Christians – no matter what their confession. However, the cross does not occur in Marx’s book. On none of the 175 pages is it even mentioned – as if he wanted to confirm with this book his walk over the Temple Mount in Jerusalem on October 20, 2016, during which he, like the Protestant bishop Heinrich Bedford-Strohm, had taken down his pectoral cross. His episcopal motto, “But where the Spirit of the Lord works, there is freedom,” remains valid. But since Peter and Paul, this freedom is sealed by the cross.
The German version of the review appears in Die Neue Ordnung, September-October 2020. It was translated into English with permission by LifeSite’s Martin Bürger
Facebook gives pass to violent leftist orgs while banning groups they victimized
'A man wearing a Patriot Prayer hat was murdered in Portland by a criminal who said he was '100% Antifa' and instead of banning Antifa pages, Facebook banned Patriot Prayer.'
Fri Sep 11, 2020 - 6:14 am EST
By Alexander Hall
By Alexander Hall
By Alexander Hall
September 11, 2020 (NewsBusters) — Facebook vowed to crack down on political violence and election interference, but the result is far less than advertised. The platform allows Antifa organizations to organize and share content in apparent conflict with Facebook's official policies.
Rose City Antifa's alleged reputation for political violence has been reported on by Politico, The Washington Times, and The Washington Post. The Post featured a photo captioned: "Unidentified Rose City Antifa members beat up Andy Ngo, an independent journalist."
Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg explained his concerns about upcoming civil unrest in an early September interview with Axios where he expressed: "I think we need to be doing everything that we can to reduce the chances of violence or civil unrest in the wake of this election." Despite being contacted and presented with an extensive report on alleged violence from Rose City Antifa, Facebook has thus far refused to take action.
Zuckerberg then went on to profess: "We're trying to make sure that we do our part to make sure that none of this is organized on Facebook."
Antifa violence has made headlines for months because of ongoing political unrest and rioting in places like Portland and Seattle. "A statement from the [U.S.] Marshals Service confirmed that [Michael] Reinoehl was wanted as a prime suspect in the killing of 39-year-old Aaron 'Jay' Danielson, who was shot in the chest Saturday night," CBS News reported. Reinoehl had described himself in a social media post as "100% ANTIFA," and then reportedly engaged in an altercation with police to the point where he himself was killed.
Antifa organizations are known for violence. News reports about Rose City Antifa help make it one of the most public examples because of its social media presence. There is no indication Reinoehl had any connection to Rose City Antifa, however.
Federalist co-founder Sean Davis suggested that Facebook's response to Antifa has been bewildering in that: "A man wearing a Patriot Prayer hat was murdered in Portland by a criminal who said he was '100% Antifa' and instead of banning Antifa pages, Facebook banned Patriot Prayer." New York Times reporter Davey Albaquoted a Facebook spokesperson who reportedly explained, "[Patriot Prayer was] removed as part of our ongoing efforts to remove Violent Social Militias from our platform."
MRC TechWatch sent an extensive report to Facebook about the activities of Rose City Antifa, whose alleged political violence has been discussed by Politico,The Washington Times, and The Post. This record of alleged violence was then juxtaposed with Facebook's own Community Standards.
Facebook didn't respond. However, Patriot Prayer founder Joey Gibson said that the ban of his group "is the result of a media company reaching out to Facebook and claiming that they are violating the platform's 'dangerous groups' policy," the Gateway Pundit summarized.
Rose City Antifa posted praise after journalist Andy Ngo claimed he was beaten on June 29, 2019, Ngo claiming to have suffered a brain injury from the event. "[M]ilkshakes" were reportedly loaded with quick-drying cement and used at some of the Portland demonstrations. Rose City Antifa posted a comment about milkshakes as well: "When the Alt Right hands us lemons, we make delicious milkshakes! The J29 demo was an amazing success which is really very upsetting for the dwindling crew of fascists who come to our city in hopes of bullying vulnerable people." The post went on in an attempt to gaslight that Ngo was somehow weaponizing "victimhood" and exaggerating the extent of violence.
Some news organizations have called out Rose City Antifa's alleged violence. The Post featured a Getty Images photo with a caption that stated, "Unidentified Rose City Antifa members beat up Andy Ngo, an independent journalist, on June 29 in Portland, Ore." Politico reported the following Rose City Antifa statement: "'We are unapologetic about the reality that fighting fascism at points requires physical militancy.'" Politico commented that "The group does not specify what physical militancy means, but their page makes clear that the definition includes 'any means necessary.'"
The Washington Times reported that "Project Veritas, known for its hidden-camera investigations, released in June undercover footage of a Rose City Antifa training session in Portland that included tips on weapons and tactics, including eye-gouging."
Rose City Antifa's pinned post on its Facebook page cautioned its followers not to plan to engage in specifically criminal behavior while on its page. It did not discourage such actions, merely the appearance on its page:
"DO NOT discuss criminal activity or make any action plans on our Facebook wall. You should never make plans with a stranger on Facebook to do this work. Even trying to sort out ride shares, or similar is very unsafe on here. Undoubtedly enemies will fish around with posts of that nature so be wary."
Rose City Antifa has openly discussed the use of doxxing against political enemies on its Facebook page, i.e. exposing their personal information so they can be targeted. In one post the group declared in "a note on doxxing" that it has "very rigorous standards about the information we publish," stating that: "We encourage others to think carefully about the damage that could be caused by inaccurate doxxes and be diligent about what they are putting out there." Salon reported that "Rose City Antifa has unveiled a series of articles doxing each local member of the Proud Boys and calling for supporters to put pressure on their employers to fire them." While we do not defend the actions of the Proud Boys, this is clear proof that Rose City Antifa has weaponized the exposure of personal information of its apparent enemies.
Facebook's Community Standards specifically state in its "Violence and Incitement" "Do not post" section that users should not post "Any content containing statements of intent, calls for action, or advocating for high or mid-severity violence due to voting, voter registration, or the outcome of an election." [Emphasis added.] It should be noted that Antifa activists specifically ran rampant in response to the 2016 election on the day of President Donald Trump's inauguration in 2017. Mr. Zuckerberg's concern about the 2020 election's aftermath indeed is relevant here.
Facebook also specifically promised that it would crack down on "foreign interference." The social media giant explained in a company blog that it has shut down entire networks that "targeted the US, North Africa and Latin America." Yet, even so, when Facebook has been directly reached for comment regarding attempts by Adbusters to meddle in the American presidential election by organizing a "siege" of the White House, the platform has refused to take action. Adbusters has called for this "siege" to occur this September 17. It stated in a post: "Is it a beautiful jam? A civic exorcism? A spectacular sayonara party for Dear Donald? All of the above, absolutely — but let us not ignore the dark forces also at work."
Adbusters has made a powerful political impact in far-left activism and American politics. NPR summarized that in 2011 it had "proposed a Sept. 17 'occupation' of Wall Street, and the idea caught fire." That evolved into Occupy Wall Street, a precursor to the current unrest. Nine years of Big Tech and social media advancement later, it would have more power to organize civil unrest than before, and Facebook leadership appears to have no problem with that.
September 11, 2020 (Family Research Council) — President Trump took another step toward fulfilling his promise to "Drain the Swamp" on Friday when he authorized Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought to ensure that federal agencies no longer hold "woke" re-education trainings. The memo directs agency heads to "cease and desist from using taxpayer dollars to fund these divisive, un-American propaganda training sessions."
The White House directive was drafted in response to reports that mandatory trainings told employees in executive agencies that "virtually all white people contribute to racism," that racism is "embedded in the belief that America is the land of opportunity or the belief that the most qualified person should receive a job," or forced them to admit they "benefit from racism."
Christopher Rufo of the Discovery Institute has worked for the past six months uncovering how Marxist ideas have crept into our government on the taxpayers' dime. "What I've discovered," he said, "is that critical race theory has become, in essence, the default ideology of the federal bureaucracy."
Rufo's research has uncovered "wokeness" training programs in the Treasury Department, the National Credit Union Administration, Sandia National Laboratories, Argonne National Laboratories, the Department of Homeland Security, and the FBI. And of course, we've all seen more public examples, like the graphic from the taxpayer-funded Smithsonian Museum in July, which claimed to identify the nuclear family, Judeo-Christian values, and objective, rational, linear thinking aspects of "whiteness."
The "wokeness" trainings are part and parcel of the civil unrest afflicting our cities. Last year, the New York Times embarked on a massive propaganda campaign, known as the 1619 project, to redefine America's founding as irredeemably racist. The 1619 Project has ushered in a summer of rioting in America's cities (and now suburbs). What began as peaceful protests over police brutality and concerns about lingering racism has given way to looting, burning, direct assaults on America's most prominent founders, and organized, violent assaults on government property and law enforcement officers.
As a chronicle of history, the 1619 project is a failure; prominent historians quickly objected to its many errors, forcing a "muted, microscopic correction" from the Times. But as a propaganda campaign, the 1619 Project has found far more success than it deserved, largely because the mainstream media is willing to promote any argument, however bankrupt, which might damage their number-one enemy, President Donald Trump. The president has already instructed the Department of Education to investigate how the 1619 Project has infiltrated America's public schools. Now, President Trump has determined to root out the 1619's Marxist propaganda from the federal bureaucracy. The White House memo rightly condemned the "wokeness" trainings for opposing "the fundamental beliefs for which our Nation has stood since its inception."
The White House memo also disparaged the "division and resentment" engendered by critical race theory. Instead of celebrating the diversity of race, ethnicity, and religion in America, the doctrine seeks to paint some as evil oppressors and others as innocent oppressed.
More detailed guidance will follow, but the memo directed all agencies to identify and make plans to cancel any "training or propaganda effort that teaches or suggests either (1) that the United States is an inherently racist or evil country or (2) that any race or ethnicity is inherently racist or evil."
Americans face a critical juncture in the 2020 election. Openly Marxist forces in our schools, our media, our government, and our streets, threaten to destroy the liberties we prize. While most career politicians apologize and flip-flop at the first sign of conflict, President Trump is one of only a few public leaders who has demonstrated the courage to stand up to them.
September 11, 2020 (Catholic Family News) — Professor Armin Schwibach, a teacher of philosophy and Rome correspondent for the Austrian website Kath.net, has reported on Twitter that a cardinal has recently made to him some supportive comments about Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the deceased founder of the Society of St. Pius X.
On August 21, Schwibach wrote: “As a cardinal recently stated: Archbishop Lefebvre will one day recognized as a Doctor of the Church. Therefore, ‘others’ have to measure up to him.” Catholic Family News reached out to Professor Schwibach, and he confirmed that indeed these words have only recently been spoken to him by a cardinal of the Catholic Church. On another occasion, according to Schwibach, this same cardinal added that Lefebvre was “prophetic.” However, the cardinal spoke these words privately and does not wish to say so in public.
This reliable fact, as revealed by Schwibach, is of great importance for the Catholic Church since it shows that there are other high-ranking prelates besides Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò and Bishop Athanasius Schneider who are seeing the validity of Archbishop Lefebvre’s own sustained criticism of the Second Vatican Council, of aspects of the post-conciliar Magisterium, and of the Novus Ordo Mass.
Time for a Respectful Hearing
It is to be hoped that this cardinal, as well as other prelates who are thinking in similar terms, would come out candidly into the public. It is time for this traditionalist position, which has been suppressed and ostracized for so many decades, to now be respectfully heard. It is a fact that the Catholic mind shrinks when it is disallowed to look at reality and ask questions or present objections. One becomes accustomed to putting blinders on, yet Our Lord is the Light and the Truth, and we can always rest assured that He will bless us when we seek to please Him by searching for and speaking the Truth, without concern for human respect.
In addition to this, it is also my deep trust that we can only come to a fuller and more proportionate assessment of our current crisis and its roots when we commit ourselves to conducting an intellectual discourse in public, where arguments and counter-arguments are clearly presented, thus widening the perspectives and approaches to truth.
It is in this light that I personally regret the course recently taken by Fr. Thomas Weinandy, O.F.M. In his first July 14 response to the recent statements by Archbishop Viganò (specifically, His Excellency’s June 9 text), Fr. Weinandy said he had some sympathies with some of the prelate’s criticisms (“I sympathize with many of the concerns expressed and acknowledge some of the stated problematic theological and doctrinal issues enumerated.”). More recently, however, he proceeded to accuse Viganò in an August 13 essay of effectively serving Satan and of leading souls out of the Catholic Church. As Weinandy stated: “My concern is that, in his radical reading of the Council, the archbishop is spawning his own schism.” He furthermore wrote that Archbishop Viganò, with his criticism of the Second Vatican Council, “I fear, has played into the hand of the devil — the very devil he fears the most.”
This specious argument is old. It has been used for decades with regard to the SSPX, saying that they are “schismatics” in order to discourage faithful Catholics from even reading and considering the Society’s arguments.
Bishop Schneider’s Refreshing Candor
In Christus Vincit (Angelico Press, 2019), a book-length interview, Bishop Athanasius Schneider candidly describes his own reaction to Lefebvre and his movement when he said that he felt drawn to his arguments, but then was confused because the local bishops warned the faithful against this “disobedient” archbishop.
When he [Bishop Schneider] was 15 years of age, he started to read some texts written by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the founder of the Society of St. Pius X, but he “experienced a dilemma.” His own veneration for the reigning pope was in conflict with the insights of Lefebvre that he found “substantially right.” Since he at the time did not read the texts of the 1962–1965 Council directly, but, rather, commentaries by conservative authors presenting them, he had at first “no concern or suspicion that there might be problems with the texts of the Council.” At the time, he practiced a “total ‘infallibilization’ of the Council.”
Now Bishop Schneider sees that this conclusion was wrong. He says: “Nowadays, I realize that I ‘turned off’ my reason. However, such an attitude is not healthy and contradicts the tradition of the Church, as we observe in the Fathers, the Doctors, and the great theologians of the Church over the course of two thousand years.”
Such an attitude to “turn off” reason the bishop now calls “extreme ultramontanism” as well as a “blind defense of everything that was said by the Council, which seemed sometimes to require mental acrobatics and a ‘squaring of the circle.’”
This one example shows: instead of publicly discussing the objections of Archbishop Lefebvre — and several other traditional groups and individuals — many in the Church’s hierarchy ostracized him and thereby suppressed his sincere and well-reasoned arguments. Such a method, however, will not last forever, because the truth will always set itself free.
I have heard in the recent past from several conservative Catholics that they kept away from the publications of the traditionalist movement because they had been told that they are “schismatics”. However, now that they start reading some of their books and critiques, they say: I never knew that! I wish I had known. Others tell me: We have been deprived of so many beautiful elements of our Faith! The new prayer books are often so drab, while the old ones are so much more uplifting and inspiring! We feel our heritage has been stolen from us.
So it goes. The truth always sets itself free. And any prelate who would now honestly address these problems would do a great service to the laity and would thereby help us in the sense of a well-proportioned and well-reasoned debate, for the sake of the salvation of souls.
Disney’s ‘Mulan’ remake thanks Chinese communist propaganda departments in credits
One China researcher called Disney 'an international corporation profiteering in the shadow of concentration camps.'
Fri Sep 11, 2020 - 5:59 am EST
By Arielle del Turco
By Arielle del Turco
Arielle del Turco
By Arielle del Turco
September 11, 2020 (Family Research Council) — Coinciding with its long-anticipated release, Disney's live-action remake of Mulan has become the source of mounting international controversy. Fans of Disney's 1998 animated tale of a young Chinese woman who disguised herself as a man to fight the Huns in her ailing father's place may find themselves disappointed in the way Disney created the film.
Parts of the movie were filmed in Xinjiang, the northwest region of China where the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has launched an unparalleled campaign of suppression against Uyghur Muslims. Tucked away toward the end of the credits, Disney thanks eight Chinese government entities from Xinjiang. The region is now famous for its "re-education" camps where Uyghurs are detained without cause to be taught Party propaganda. Witnesses from the camps detail instances of torture, forced sterilization, and unsanitary living conditions.
Among the entities Disney is thankful for is a local branch of the regional Xinjiang public security bureau, which is directly involved in operating the camps. The entity is so clearly involved in human rights violations that the U.S. government issued Global Magnitsky sanctions against it, the hardest hitting sanctions that target human rights abusers. Disney also thanked local propaganda departments in Xinjiang.
The rise of China's "re-education" camps from 2017–2018 occurred within the likely timeline Mulan would have been filmed. The world was waking up to the stark reality that internment camps were operating in the 21st century. Disney, as a company that often prides itself on being progressive, should have shown concern over filming in the vicinity of an international human rights crisis. China researcher Adrian Zenz called Disney "an international corporation profiteering in the shadow of concentration camps."
But this isn't the film's first controversy. Hong Kong pro-democracy protestors first called for a boycott of the movie last year when lead actress Liu Yifei shared a social media post from a Chinese government-run newspaper that read: "I also support Hong Kong police. You can beat me up now." At the time, hundreds of thousands of young pro-democracy protestors were taking to the streets and enduring brutal and violent crackdowns from the police.
Liu lives in the United States as a naturalized citizen and benefits immensely from its freedoms. Thus, protestors were justifiably angered when she showed no concern for the Hong Kongers desperate to maintain their freedoms in the face of the encroaching Chinese government, which fails to respect rule of law, freedom of speech, or religious freedom, among other basic rights.
But Hong Kong activists have their own recommendation for the "real Mulan." They look to the soft-spoken 23-year-old Agnes Chow, a student leader of the pro-democracy movement. Chow was arrested for her activism earlier this summer under Hong Kong's new national security law when she was accused of "colluding with foreign forces."
A devoted Catholic, she points to her faith as a significant factor that motivates her advocacy, and that of other pro-democracy activists: "I do think that the religious belief and what we learn from our religion and the Bible gives us our belief and courage to fight for freedom and rights for Hong Kong people." Chow is the perfect example of standing firm with grace and courage in an impossible situation. When looking for a real-life hero, Hong Kongers are right to celebrate Chow.
The very way Disney chose to go about making this movie is a betrayal of the story's spirit. Mulan was defending China's people against invaders. But through the creation of the movie, the creators of the film acquiesced to the Communist Party, which threatens the freedoms of others.
To many, the story of Mulan represents courage and sacrifice in defense of one's family and country. It's disappointing that in the process of telling this story, Disney chose to collaborate with one of the world's worst violators of human rights — the Chinese Communist Party and the entities it controls. As long as Disney continues to choose profits over people, it will not bring honor to itself.
September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — As Ted Cruz noted on Twitter today, “Hollywood is funniest when they don’t intend to be.” He was referring to alleged comedian Trevor Noah’s recent comments on the massive wildfires originally sparked by a pyrotechnic device utilized in a gender reveal party that has since raged out of control and burned over 10,000 acres. When it started, I joked on social media that it was unbelievable that gender reveal parties are still a thing, considering that they are clearly transphobic. Predictably, Noah agrees — but he apparently isn’t joking.
Referring to the wildfires sparked by the gender reveal party, Noah noted that “aside from all the damage it can cause, celebrating a baby’s genitalia is starting to feel very outdated.” Why is that? Because “given everything we’re learning about gender, gender reveal parties should only happen when the child is old enough to know their actual gender.”
You’ll notice a few things about Noah’s comments. First, there’s the assumption that your genitals have nothing to do with your gender — which is, strictly speaking, nonsense. But if you believe that there are plenty of women who happen to have penises, then suddenly a gender reveal party instead becomes “celebrating a baby’s genitalia” rather than, you know, his gender. It appears that Noah has struck on the only thing dumber than causing a natural disaster by wildly overdoing your gender reveal party: believing that children choose their gender at some random point, presumably after they have been told they have options. These are the folks who believe that doctors “assign gender at birth,” as if physicians are just sort of taking a stab at it.
Comedians have been not been entirely on board with the trans agenda (or at least they cannot resist making jokes about such a bizarre phenomenon) and have pointed out many of the absurdities of transgender claims. Dave Chapelle attracted a lot of flak for mocking the idea that people could simply change genders and stating that the transgender experience is funny. Disgraced comedian Louis C.K. mocked transgender pronouns in a leaked profanity-laced set that was widely condemned. Bill Burr joked about a trans fighter pilot’s “discarded d---.”
Ricky Gervais famously went the farthest after being accused of “deadnaming,” the practice of using a transgender person’s given name, as opposed to the new opposite-sex name he has chosen for himself. He responded by doing an entire series of jokes on Bruce Jenner prior to his presenting himself as Caitlyn Jenner, replete with plenty of examples that highlighted just how ridiculous the entire charade is. He also attracted the ire of trans activists with a public Twitter spat on the case of Jonathan Yaniv, the man posing as a woman and suing beauticians who decline to wax his very male genitals. All attempts to re-educate him have failed miserably.
These days, telling jokes about the transgender community has become a mortal sin. We’re not supposed to joke about our new orthodoxies, especially not if the jokes actually make people laugh. Progressives have pushed out Christianity and guard their new dogmas with incredible fervor — and heresy-hunting is alive and well. Progressives also believe that sacred things are no laughing matter, but their sacred things are transition rather than conversion, and their confirmation rituals involve genital mutilation, hormone therapy, and new names. Nature may say one thing, but the trans movement defies nature itself — and Trevor Noah, like so many others, has abandoned humor for the pulpit, telling us we must get serious and get with the program.
The trans agenda, after all, is no laughing matter.
Alessandra Bocchi is an Italian journalist well-known for her freelance reporting all over the world. She believes the mainstream media is driven by ideology rather than a desire for truth. It’s “hard to find a nuanced and informed view” on current events, she says. Journalism today is “all about personalities and memes rather than substance.” It’s more concerned with “catering to [the progressive elite] as opposed to reporting the truth…they’ve lost their integrity and credibility in many respects.”
Jonathon’s new podcast, The Van Maren Show, is dedicated to telling the stories of the pro-life and pro-family movement. In his latest episode, Jonathon interviews Alessandra Bocchi, an Italian journalist well known for her freelance reporting all over the world. She believes that the mainstream media are driven by ideology rather than a desire for truth. It’s “hard to find a nuanced and informed view” on current events, she says. Journalism today is “all about personalities and memes rather than substance.” It’s more concerned with “catering to [the progressive elite] as opposed to reporting the truth…they’ve lost their integrity and credibility in many respects.” You can subscribe here and listen to the episode below:
People behind COVID scam said to be ‘deeply cruel, evil, and psychotic people’
If you continue to believe the lies being fed by most media, liberal political leaders, and by your governments and health ministries, then we are heading for a never-in-history level of grief, loss of freedoms, and tyranny all over the world that you cannot now even imagine.
September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – On August 14, I wrote a blog titled “The two most dangerous men in the world?” It was inspired by a video by Dave Cullen, the Irish Internet blogger whom I consider to be one of the more well-informed, brilliant, and bluntly honest research analysts on the Wuhan virus crisis. Today, I must present and comment on yet another of his videos, It’s time to wake up, that was published just today. It is a half-hour blockbuster. You absolutely MUST take the time to watch it.
Cullen astutely takes viewers through a series of charts, text excerpts, and video statements by various notable persons related to the pandemic. In the process, he presents what I consider to be a very solid case for the title of this blog post. My comments won’t do justice to the impact of the video, so please don’t rely on these limited details to understand the full, crucial video presentation.
Folks, if you continue to believe the lies that you are being fed by most of the media, liberal political leaders, and by your governments and health ministries, then we are heading for a never-in-history level of grief, loss of freedoms and tyranny all over the world that you cannot now even imagine.
Yes, it is that serious. And I say that not because of Dave Cullen’s video. I say it because I recognize from my own intensive research every day for the past several months that everything he presents in the video is likely true. And I also say it not to frighten you, but to warn you that it is indeed time to wake up and, by together taking strong actions, we can stop these murderous megalomaniac elites from successfully implementing their evil plans.
That’s strong language, but you know, it is now time for strong language. In past times of great turmoil where all seemed lost, leaders arose who spoke forcefully and bluntly and did not spare their hearers that truth so that they would be shaken awake and motivated to do necessary battle.
Winston Churchhill was one such leader who had harsh words for Hitler and for Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain who foolishly thought he could negotiate with the Devil. St. Joan of Arc is another who firmly believed that France could be saved when all others thought she was insane for thinking that France could defeat the British.
There are many more historic heroes who acted instead of wallowing in fear.
There has been a constant flood of new information in recent weeks about what is REALLY going on related to the virus and what the REAL agenda is of all those who are extending and adding to the mandates and restrictions on the public to prevent a supposed second wave of virus deaths. In the process, they are deliberately raising the fear level of the populations of various nations, cities, and U.S. states.
The result is that they are successfully conning citizens to believe that the destructive lockdowns and other measures are necessary – when in fact hardly any of it is necessary and the threat of the virus has almost disappeared.
What has been especially causing large numbers of deaths are the restrictions and lockdowns themselves – more deaths than from the virus that we now know could easily be prevented if there were not such cruel restrictions on the use of very inexpensive, totally safe meds.
The evidence is now overwhelming that Hydroxychloroquine, which is safer than Aspirin and Tylenol, could have prevented almost all the virus-related deaths that have occurred so far.
There is also evidence that the death rate from the virus itself is far, far below what we have all been led to believe and which most of the public sadly still believes. Polls have indicated that a majority believe that they will die or become seriously ill if they become infected with the Wuhan virus and their estimation of the actual number of deaths from the virus is from 30 to 50 times greater than the true number.
There is a type of mass, suicidal hysteria going on related to the virus.
Cullen says we are now in a “Casedemic.” Haven’t you noticed that all the news now is about the rise in “cases” in the states, provinces, countries, cities, schools, factories, and so on? Few bother to ask why we are being pummeled with constant stats about this term that we have never used before to such a public extent. What are “cases”?
Why are they using that now instead of hospitalizations and deaths?
It’s quite simple. Hospitalizations and deaths have plummeted. They have lost their fear factor. Something else was needed to keep the fear going so that the public could be convinced to accept increased limits on their freedoms as we have been seeing in Victoria, Australia, in California, in England, and elsewhere. And we need to be kept fearful so we will accept and even welcome the vaccine.
A “case” is just someone who has tested positive for the virus, has symptoms that seem to indicate infection, or were simply and ridiculously found to have been exposed to someone who tested positive for the virus. But now we know that this does not mean much, if anything at all.
These tests are notoriously unreliable. The vast majority who test positive for the Wuhan virus experience either no or slight symptoms. In other words, it is all to keep the fear going.
Most of the public has been falling for this con. More people are wearing masks than ever before. ALL the medical evidence of studies on the effectiveness of the type of masks the public is wearing reveals they are generally useless for preventing virus transmission and infection. And wearing masks for a long period of time every day can make you sick – even dangerously sick in some cases. They can even increase the possibility of viral infection.
Only people who are sick with a communicable disease should be wearing masks, but even then only when they are close to others for perhaps ten or more minutes, rather than briefly walking or bicycling by them.
Thousands upon thousands are still unnecessarily isolating themselves and afraid to go shopping, travel on transit, enter an elevator, go for a walk in the park, enjoy healthy exposure to fresh air and the sun, go to a movie or restaurant or, worst of all, afraid to go to a hospital or their doctor when they are sick.
They are not being told by anyone how to strengthen their immune system with exercise, healthy diet, fresh air, exposure to the sun, and regular consumption of Vitamins C and D and zinc. That alone could prevent a huge number of infections.
Many thousands have tragically died alone, with all not-sick family, even spouses, cruelly and unnecessarily being prohibited from visiting them. Parents and grandparents are not being visited by their children and grandchildren, who are not sick, for months on end with the children and grandchildren thinking the isolation is protecting them from dying from the virus.
They have been told that they could somehow kill mom and dad or their grandparents if they visit them. They have been warned, even though they have no symptoms at all, that they might be asymptomatically infected with the Wuhan virus and could unknowingly infect their vulnerable loved ones. Now we know that has not been correct.
All of a sudden studies are revealing that asymptomatic persons have such a low viral load that it is very unlikely they could infect others. And they don’t need to wear a mask unless they are sick. They have got to stop torturing and even killing their loved ones with isolation and loss of necessary close human contact.
Sure, wash your hands, make sure you are not sick when you visit them, use common sense, but stop hurting them with excessive isolation.
All of this is causing serious emotional distress, mental and other health issues, unbearable loneliness, general social disintegration, and death from lack of normal medical care, a major decline in quality of life, poor diet, no exercise, no exposure to the sun, loss of a sense of purpose, a huge increase in suicides.
It would also be incredibly simple to give the vulnerable a cheap, totally safe, low prophylactic dose of hydroxychloroquine and from then on people can be especially assured that they can visit them. The normally vulnerable can then also feel completely safe to go out to stores and onto transit, visit friends and family and so on. Instead, the very best and safest medicine in the world for COVID is banned from being used in almost all the developed western nations while it is freely available, in most cases over the counter, in all of Africa, in most of South America, and in many other nations.
In all those nations, the death rate from the Wuhan virus is far lower than that of nations where HCQ is prohibited or strictly limited.
Cullen states there is serious talk of another lockdown in Ireland just because of increased “cases” and yet what is going on health-wise is nothing out of the ordinary from previous years.
He and Wuhan virus commenter Jerry Day emphasize, as many others are now concluding, that there are in fact no reliable tests for coronavirus. But to fuel the pandemic narrative, the same scam is being engaged in other countries. “They start testing well people who are likely to have shreds of past coronavirus indicators and declare them a new case of the supposed pandemic,” Cullen states.
Most past colds are coronaviruses and people have residues of them in their system that come up as a supposed Wuhan virus-positive. Millions who were infected by Cov Sars 1 in 2005 will test as positive but have been found to be immune to Cov Sars 2 or, as it is currently called, COVID-19.
There is a video clip of Dr. Anthony Fauci strongly emphasizing that “there is no reason for people to be walking around with a mask.” Now he is advocating the exact opposite. “It appears that government health experts are getting their directions from the World Health Organization,” Cullen warns. And there has definitely been growing evidence of this. The WHO, itself a UN entity, is a corrupt organization with deep ties to the Chinese Communist Party, the IMF, and other untrustworthy groups.
Cullen reveals that financially collapsing airlines are being kept afloat by international financial bodies with grants and loans that have heavy strings attached. That explains why the airlines are putting severe demands on airports and passengers as we have been seeing in recent days where even families with one, two- and three-year-old children are being booted off flights for not having these young children wear masks. Air travel has become an oppressive, frightening experience.
One has to seriously question whether most of these rules and billions spent on new mitigation equipment and billions lost on many seats being blocked off to facilitate “social distancing” on flights are really necessary. Cullen explains the real purpose of these oppressive measures – population control and reducing man-made climate change. They have no intention of ever allowing carbon dioxide-producing air travel to return to previous levels.
Lockdowns have led to massive, man-made carbon dioxide and pollution drops. The globalists are forcing people to see what the world would look like if there were fewer people in the world, as though we will all be positively impressed with empty streets and highways, no cruise liners on the seas, and few aircraft in the skies. It is downright evil.
“We are experiencing a global coup” with the coronavirus, Cullen says. It is being used to change the entire world – permanently, to the “new norm” of a world controlled by totalitarian global elites who are among the highest CO2 emitters in the world with their private jets, multiple mansions and fleets of very expensive cars and yachts.
Cullen makes a strong case that our politicians are puppets for the IMF, the World Bank, the World Health Organization, and the UN. Crashing economies is deliberately ongoing to make it easier to control people.
Country after country is seeing high cases and low mortality. Useless testing has to be stopped. It is only facilitating the globalists' agenda.
The direction they are taking us is toward a borderless, cashless society, contact-tracing, mandatory vaccines and “vaccine passports” without which we will be prohibited from buying, selling, getting healthcare, traveling, and pretty well everything else – just as Communist China is now doing – greatly helped by Silicon Valley inventiveness.
Cullen proclaims, with good reason, “You were deceived. You are being played. You have a right to be angry. The people behind the climate change agenda who are accelerating their plans with the COVID scam are deeply cruel, evil, and psychotic people. They are obsessed with conversations like population control in every sense of that term.
It makes one wonder what is in the vaccine. The fight against this scam is a fight for the freedom of humanity.”
We all have to wake up and fight back. It is not an option. Sorry. Either comply and forever lose most of your freedoms, including the freedom to openly worship God, or prepare yourself to do things that you may have never done in the past.
Forget comfort, security, and the daily normal that you have always enjoyed. Everything is at stake. We are already in a war to destroy and replace what is left of Christian civilization, but most of the good have been missing in action.
Stop watching and reading all the mainstream media that are paralyzing you with lies and fear. Find and stick to only the more reliable alternative sources for your information.
What specific actions can you take in response to this disturbing situation? See my response to a reader in the comments related to this article.
PETITION: Authorities must shut down Pornhub after showing videos of 15-year-old trafficking victim! Sign the petition here.
September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Now that the new Netflix movie “Cuties” is available for viewing, we know that it is far worse than we imagined. Yet there are movie critics and movie stars who are celebrating this trash rather than denouncing it. What has happened to our culture? Have we lost all vestige of a conscience?
In the words of Kyle Hooten on Twitter, “‘Cuties’ just released and it's WAY worse than anybody expected. Netflix just published soft-core child pornography, and they'll probably get away with it.”
Jason Howerton’s tweet was even more emphatic: “I’m dead serious, people should go to prison for this. ‘Lawfully defines as pedophilia’ and look at the media ratings. All of you are going to hell. #Cuties.”
As my wife Nancy asked when I sent her some links, “How can this even be legal????” How indeed.
Before the movie came out, but based on initial reports, I asked, “At what point does this stop? At what point does our society say, ‘Enough is enough’ when it comes to the assault on our children? At what point do we stand up as a nation and put a stop to this attack on innocence?”
Now that the movie is out, with a sickening segment (WARNING: link leads to material where viewer discretion advised) posted for viewing on social media, we must say, “Enough!” as loudly and clearly as we can.
A good place to start would be canceling Netflix subscriptions. As Robby Starbuck tweeted, “The 11 year old girls who were sexually exploited filming Cuties shot those scenes in front of a director, a DP, a gaffer, their parents, a choreographer, a MUA, a hair person, a camera assistant, a wardrobe person, extras and more. Not one adult protected them. #CancelNetflix.”
Yes, these are young girls dancing sexually in the presence of adults (no doubt to be viewed online with glee by sexual perverts). Young girls who could be your daughters or granddaughters. Young girls being exploited for profit. And Netflix distributes this without consequences? Enough!
Yet, despite this outrage, one which is uniting social liberals with social conservatives, the movie has its admirers.
In the words of actress Tessa Thompson, “#CUTIES is a beautiful film. It gutted me at @sundancefest. It introduces a fresh voice at the helm. She’s a French Senegalese Black woman mining her experiences. The film comments on the hyper-sexualization of preadolescent girls. Disappointed to see the current discourse. ��”
So Thompson is disappointed to see mothers and fathers and others grieved over “the hyper-sexualization of preadolescent girls,” failing to realize that they are being exploited in this very movie.
In other words, the movie does not simply tell a sad story about young girls being sexually exploited (many would argue it celebrates their sexploitation). The movie itself exploits the children. But rather than being broken hearted over the contents of the movie, Thompson is “disappointed” to see the negative reaction to the flick. This is turning morality upside down.
Yet Thompson is not alone, and what I am about to report provides a glimpse into the morally confused bubble in which many in the film industry live.
On the Rotten Tomatoes website, viewers gave the movie a rating of 3% an incredibly low (but rightly deserved) score. (As of this writing, there were 1,047 viewer ratings.) But film critics gave it a score of 88%, a very good rating. (This was based on 32 reviews.) They really loved the film!
This sums up the perversion of much of the film industry – the lack of morality, the lack of conscience, the lack of family awareness.
And what is the critics’ description of the film? “A thoughtful look at the intricacies of girlhood in the modern age, Cuties is a coming-of-age film that confronts its themes with poignancy and nuance.”
Only one word comes to mind to describe my reaction to their words: sick.
No wonder America is so morally lost. These critics are our guides and our prophets.
So, it is not just the film critics who are sick. It is not just those who exploited those young girls in “Cuties” (this includes their parents, who allowed it) who are sick. No, our whole nation is sick, drowning in a sea of depravity.
It is that serious. There is no hyperbole in my words.
And so, while canceling our Netflix subscriptions is a good place to start – in recent weeks, the series “Lucifer” was trending at the top of the charts – it can only be a starting point.
This is a time for deep personal reflection. A time for searching of soul and heart. A time of sweeping repentance.
In short, either we have a massive spiritual and moral awakening, or we perish. What will it be?
Shortly before the coronavirus epidemic, I went to see a major exhibition of the work of William Blake in London’s Tate gallery: artistic visionary, political radical, and follower of the peculiar religious opinions of Swedenbourg. One of the exhibits was a book about the horrific treatment of African slaves in the plantations in Blake’s time, which he had illustrated. The book was open at a page illustrating the torture of a slave. Blake is most famous for his naïve and fantastical drawings, but he was classically trained and understood anatomy and realism. The illustration is absolutely unbearable. Like the famous illustration of slaves crammed into a ship used by abolitionists, it was part of a movement that successfully brought home the horrors of slavery to the British public.
The information card next to this item noted that, according to some critics, Blake’s illustration was voyeuristic. This is an indication of the extreme sensitivity affected by some progressives over anything to do with race. It strikes me as an extraordinary feature of modern society that this coexists with a complete lack of sensitivity by the cultural elite to anything to do with sexuality.
I’m not going to review Cuties because I’ve not watched it, and I have no intention of doing so. What I can comment on is the reaction to it, particularly those of people defending it. One might expect defenders of the series to claim that it does not endorse what it depicts — sexualized dancing by underage girls — and they do say this, up to a point. But actually, they do want to endorse it. Here is the New York Timesreviewer, Richard Brody:
The subject of “Cuties” isn’t twerking; it’s children, especially poor and nonwhite children, who are deprived of the resources — the education, the emotional support, the open family discussion — to put sexualized media and pop culture into perspective.
What does this story tell us, exactly? Brody patiently explains that in the oppressive, patriarchal society these girls are supposedly part of, despite their complete lack of supervision or effective moral formation, their adoption of sexualized dancing is a way of rebelling and establishing their own identities. So it’s actually good. But it’s also bad, because they are doing it only because they lack resources and education, and are oppressed.
Tim Roby, the film critic of the Daily Telegraph, supposedly a conservative newspaper, does the same thing. First, he tells us that “its very subject is the disturbing, premature sexualization of young girls in French society.” So this is bad, right? But then he adds that critics of the series are “terrified of child sexuality.” It is the second statement that The Telegraph chose to make its headline, not the first.
It would be perfectly understandable to claim that underage girls who engage in sexualized dance routines or get drawn into prostitution do so because of poor education and bleak prospects. What does not make sense is to lament the fact that they end up being sexualized and exploited by predatory men and simultaneously claim that premature sexualization and prostitution are actually life-affirming, positive choices expressive of female liberation. I’m used to the idea of progressives trying to have their cake and eat it, but they really need to make up their minds on this one.
What the defenders of the series like Brody and Roby have strangely missed is that the producers of the series are themselves sexualizing and exploiting the child actors, and serving up their sexualized performances for consumption by male critics like themselves. If there is a power dynamic going on here, the consumers are at the top, Netflix as pimp or enabler is in the middle, and these poor children are at the bottom. Brody and Roby are in danger of mistaking fiction for reality. The real story here is not about girls spontaneously organizing a twerking troupe in order to stick to “the man”; no, that is a made-up story. What is happening in the real world is “the man” corralling girls into a twerking troupe to tickle the jaded appetites of Netflix subscribers.
Netflix is not just giving us a story about the sexual exploitation of children. It is engaging in the sexual exploitation of children.
How convenient and delightful it would be for the consumers of pornography and prostitution if everyone involved in the industry were empowered and validated by it. This is the message of “sex positive feminism,” which has got such a hold on our cultural elite that Amnesty International, which once stood up for the persecuted, now condemns laws restricting the exploitation of women in prostitution. But it is a lie. However miserable the prospects of children in French immigrant communities, pushing them into the sex trade makes those prospects a whole lot worse.
September 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — If you were living in a dystopia, how would you even know it?
The current situation certainly raises the question, as we experience unprecedented restrictions on individual freedom adopted in response to the Chinese coronavirus, coupled with left-wing riots that undermine the legitimacy of America’s core institutions. It’s becoming clear that these social changes are dystopian, not merely because they are harmful and coercive, but because they seek to replace the American way of life with a new social order rooted in utopian visions.
In a January 2019 essay on the overuse of the word “dystopia” in American political discourse, Miami University of Ohio professor Ryan J. Barilleaux wrote that the defining features of an actual dystopia are “social regimentation, dehumanization, abuse of technology, state terror, a new class of rulers, propaganda instead of truth, inevitable totalitarianism, and the tragedy of the individual.”
“When combined, these features sketch the map of dystopia,” wrote Barilleaux.
“Dystopia is what results from the attempt to create utopia,” he explained. “Consider the society of Brave New World, which is horrible precisely to the extent that the World State was designed to be exactly as it is.”
This year’s warp-speed cultural transformation has brought about all of Barilleaux’s hallmarks of a dystopia. The utopia today’s bureaucrats and elitists are striving toward is a global, communistic police state. This police state is sold to ordinary people not as that, but as a safe, virus-free society. Who wouldn’t want that?
Its architects admit that they won’t stop at a vaccine. “We will not, we cannot go back to the way things were,” World Health Organization (WHO) director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said August 21.
Nonsensical “virus prevention” measures — forcing people to wear masks alone outside, curfews suggesting that the virus is more deadly at night than during the day — are priming the public to submit to increasingly arbitrary forms of government control and surveillance.
The social regimentation of our new COVID world is ritualistic and religious. Hand-washing, staying physically away from others, walking only in certain directions at the grocery store, and not socializing are sacrosanct practices.
So are “social distancing” rules limiting human contact, dorm visits, and parties. Will this mean the death of hook-up culture? Will “virtual” sex and more pornography simply fill its gap? Or will sexual license trump Wuhan virus prevention measures, just as Antifa and BLM riots have been exempt from the supposedly anti-coronavirus standards now applied to churches?
Dehumanization and the tragedy of the individual
Face masks, now required in public or to enter businesses in many places, are one of the most obvious mechanisms of dehumanization. Other people are now faceless potential virus-carriers to be avoided at all costs.
Enforcing limited or no social gatherings also dehumanizes the population. Humans are social creatures. Can existence be joyful, meaningful, and fulfilling if human contact is as severely limited as it has been ordered to be?
The crushing discouragement of family life is not only dehumanizing, but also one of the coronavirus power-grab’s greatest contributions to the tragedy of the individual.
As Barilleaux explained:
The ultimate result of dystopia can be seen in the tragedy of an individual. In dystopian stories and novels, the [protagonist] (such as John the Savage or Winston Smith) is crushed — or nearly so — as a way to make clear just how brutal the prevailing order is. In the real dystopias of modernity, individuals come to symbolize the oppression of the regime: the survivors of Hitler’s death camps, figures such as Andrei Sakharov and Alexander Solzhenitsyn, or Otto Warmbier, the American student who died from mistreatment while in North Korean custody.
Today’s suffering individual is best exemplified by Shelley Luther, the Texas beauty salon–owner arrested and jailed for opening her business. A judge said she could avoid jail time by apologizing for being “selfish” and paying a fine, but she refused to “bend the knee,” as her lawyer put it.
For every fighting Shelley Luther, how many Americans are there who simply gave up their dreams of running a small business because the coronavirus and its accompanying restrictions robbed them of all ambition and hope?
Abuse of technology and state terror
Big tech and liberal establishment media censor any news that counters the narrative that the coronavirus — which the vast, vast majority of healthy people survive — is the most serious disease of the century.
A press conference by the pro-hydroxychloroquine America’s Frontline Doctors group was infamously scrubbed from social media despite its massive support, even from President Trump.
At the beginning of the lockdown, authorities in the United Kingdom used drones to capture footage of and subsequently shame people who were exercising. A “social distancing” robot dog — which looked eerily like a machine from Black Mirror — prowled a Singapore park telling people to stay apart.
In Kentucky, supposedly virus-positive individuals have even been fitted with electronic ankle monitors.
Unmasked Utah kindergarteners now face misdemeanor charges.
Police in Victoria, Australia have been granted authority to enter homes without a warrant to carry out “spot checks.”
The combination of 21st-century technology and petty, power-hungry bureaucrats (as my grandmother astutely put it, “some people like to exercise what little authority they have”) has created a perfect storm. And terror isn’t coming only from the state: tech companies voluntarily pick up the slack for government incompetence.
A new class of rulers
“[D]ystopia empowers a new class of rulers and uses propaganda and state terror to maintain the power of the regime,” wrote Barilleaux. “Dystopian regimes employ propaganda (‘Freedom is Slavery,’ ‘Community, Identity, Stability,’ ‘Workers of the world, unite!’) to mislead the populace and state terror (disappearances, reeducation camps, gulags, the Thought Police, the Firemen of Fahrenheit 451) to enforce conformity.”
Our new class of rulers are “public health experts.” Many of these people say there are an infinite number of genders, men can get pregnant, a human in the womb with a beating heart is just a “clump of cells,” and children should be able to attempt to “change” their sex.
They are now the ones whose interpretations of data and projections (projections being guesses) are infallible. Questioning them is to denyscience, a cardinal sin.
Propaganda instead of truth
The coronavirus outbreak has produced a host of creepy “war is peace” phrases such as “staying apart keeps us together” and “social distancing.”
Actually, staying apart...keeps us apart. Staying as far as possible from other people isn’t social...it’s anti-social.
This has never been about a virus
For today’s revolutionaries, this was never about any virus; rather, it is about a crisis that can be used to usher in a new world order, a “new normal,” where human beings live in fear and under constant surveillance by an all-powerful regime.
In this atomized, isolated state, the populace is easier to control, and the supposedly “virus-free” utopia can be brought about.
However, nothing in history is inevitable. Dystopias are created only by and through the consent of those who stand by and say nothing while their liberties are taken. Americans mustn’t give tyrants a single inch. The time to fight is now, before it’s too late.
Thank God for Fr. James Altman preaching the truth about Democrats
By Mother Miriam
To help keep this and other programs on the air, please donate here. In this episode, Mother Miriam further expresses her support for the remarks made by Fr. James Altman. You can tune in daily at 10 am EST/7 am PST on our Facebook Page. Subscribe to Mother Miriam Live email updates here