All articles from January 4, 2021


News

Opinion

Blogs

Episodes

Video

  • Nothing is published in Video on January 4, 2021.

The Pulse

  • Nothing is published in The Pulse on January 4, 2021.

News

Pelosi helps COVID-positive and COVID-exposed members of Congress vote in-person to ensure re-election as Speaker

Democrat Rep. Gwen Moore of Wisconsin had not been in Washington for months and three others were still in their quarantine period.
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 7:14 pm EST
Featured Image
Rep. Nancy Pelosi reacts after being re-elected yesterday as Speaker of the House. Global News YouTube
Michael Haynes Michael Haynes Follow
By

Challenge to the Electoral College vote needs YOUR help! Contact your U.S. Rep and Senator today!

LifeSiteNews is facing increasing censorship. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library. 

WASHINGTON, D.C., January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Yesterday, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi allowed a Democrat Congresswoman to vote in-person on the U.S. House of Representatives floor, despite a recent positive test for COVID-19. Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Wisconsin, traveled to the nation’s capital to cast a vote for Pelosi in her bid to be re-elected Speaker of the House, which she won but with a number of defections from her own party.

Democrats had previously hounded Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, to be tested before holding confirmation hearings for now-Justice Amy Coney Barrett. 

Moore announced via Twitter on December 28 that she had tested positive for COVID-19. She did not mention if she had tested “negative” before leaving her isolation.

Moore did post a message on January 3 saying she completed her quarantine and was “medically cleared to travel.”

There are two shorter forms of quarantine currently promoted by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), with a 10-day version allowed if a person presents no symptoms without having a test, and a seven-day option permitted when done in conjunction with a negative test. It is not clear when Moore was diagnosed “positive” for COVID, or which of those two quarantine lengths she kept.

However, Pelosi managed to arrange the voting procedure to ensure that Moore, along with three other members of Congress, could partake in the vote for the Speaker of the House, despite the other three still being in their quarantine period. 

“The day also wasn’t without some coronavirus-related drama,” Politico reported. “In a sign of just how delicate the vote count was, and with a recognition of the surging pandemic, House officials constructed a special plexiglass box in the chamber Sunday so that members who tested negative for the coronavirus but were quarantining after exposure — two Democrats and one Republican — could still cast their vote.”

“The move sparked outrage and head-scratching among lawmakers and House officials, some of whom openly questioned whether the speaker’s vote mattered more than the safety of lawmakers and staff.”

Commenting on the move, Republican Rapid Response director Steve Guest noted, “The coronavirus won’t stop Nancy Pelosi’s quest for power. Democrat Rep. Gwen Moore announced a positive coronavirus test 6 days ago. She hasn’t been in DC since May & has been voting by proxy. But because Pelosi wants power, despite being COVID +, Moore is headed back to DC.”

Pelosi’s recent machinations of the voting logistics run in stark contrast to Democrats’ obsession with ensuring that Graham took a coronavirus test before the Barrett hearings. Senate Minority Leader Schumer, D–New York, demanded that GOP members of the Senate have mandatory testing for both senators and staff before the Barrett hearings, warning that not doing so would be “intentionally reckless.” 

Senators Kamala Harris, Patrick Leahy, and Cory Booker added their names to the hounding of Graham, warning that the Barrett hearings could become a “super-spreader” of the virus and asking that the hearings be cancelled until a “clear testing regime is in place.”

Responding to calls to postpone the hearing, Graham stated, “And, to my Democratic colleagues, America has to go to work Monday, including us. We’re going to work. We’re going to work safely. If you don’t want to come to the committee hearing, you can interview the judge virtually.”


  cdc, centers for disease control, chuck schumer, cory booker, covid-19, democrats, gwen moore, kamala harris, lindsey graham, nancy pelosi, patrick leahy, speaker of the house, twitter, u.s. house of representatives

News

March for Life 2021 is less than one month away – and it’s still happening in person

The theme of the 2021 March for Life is 'Together Strong: Life Unites!'
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 6:00 pm EST
Featured Image
Pro-life activists attend the 2015 annual March for Life in Washington, D.C. American Life League
Piero Maresca
By Piero Maresca

WASHINGTON, D.C., January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — On January 29, pro-life activists from across the United States will gather in person in Washington, D.C. for the 48th annual March for Life.

The theme of the 2021 March for Life is “Together Strong: Life Unites!”

Despite COVID-19 lockdowns and restrictions that have triggered protests from patriotic Americans, the March will still be held on Friday, January 29. The March for Life expo, usually held indoors at the Renaissance Hotel, is cancelled. Washington, D.C. is currently subject to draconian restrictions on indoor gatherings.

“Due to the uncertainty involved with the COVID-19 pandemic and greatly restricted DC protocols and mandates for indoor events, we have made the difficult decision to cancel the 2021 March for Life Expo,” the March for Life said via its website. The group says it is committed to hosting the expo in 2022.

The annual Rose Dinner will be held virtually this year, with tickets at $25 per person.

The March for Life’s website also says “All Marchers must wear masks or face coverings for the entirety of the March for Life Rally and March,” although it is unclear how that would be enforced. The website says children under two are not expected to mask their faces.

There have been a number of massive in-person protests in Washington, D.C. since the coronavirus outbreak began, including Black Lives Matter protests and riots and pro-President Donald Trump protests. They have not been linked to any notable spread of the coronavirus.

LifeSiteNews will once again provide on-the-ground coverage from our dedicated team of truth-seeking journalists. Be sure to follow our Twitter and Facebook accounts for our video live-streams.

Since the early 1970s, people of every age and background have peacefully marched on the nation’s capital to stand for the dignity of human life in the womb. The March for Life has become the largest annual human rights demonstration in the entire world. The March for Life marks the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that imposed abortion on demand across the country.

Prior to the march, a rally featuring music and speakers will take place. Christian artist Matthew West will preform. Announced speakers include professional athlete Tim Tebow, pro-life activist and former NFL player Benjamin Watson, and Christendom College student body president Elizabeth Eller. The full list of speakers can be found by clicking here.

Notably, last year, President Donald Trump became the first president in history to ever attend and speak at the March for Life.

As January 29 draws closer, LifeSite will be publishing more stories on the March for Life as well as a list of related, in-person events happening that same week.

LifeSiteNews is facing increasing censorship. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.


  2021 march for life, abortion, benjamin watson, coronavirus restrictions, march for life, tim tebow

News

NBC News smears pro-life, pro-family org as ‘hate group,’ defends PornHub

Ruth Institute president: NBC News lost all credibility when it defended PornHub
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 5:51 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
LifeSiteNews.com
By LSN

January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – “NBC’s hypocrisy is sickening,” said Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D., president of the Ruth Institute. “While it smears the Institute and other pro-family organizations as ‘hate groups,’ it defends PornHub, a major distributor of pedophilia videos.”

Morse reported: “On December 9 and December 12, NBC published stories claiming to expose how ‘anti-gay hate groups,’ including the Ruth Institute, benefited from the Pay Check Protection Program. The network’s stories relied on information from the notoriously partisan, and frequently inaccurate, Southern Poverty Law Center.”

Then, on December 15, Olivia Solon, co-author of the December 9 story, did a piece tacitly defending PornHub. She said “sex workers” were suffering since credit card companies cracked down on Pornhub for allowing videos showing rape and the sexual abuse of children.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

The move by Mastercard, Visa, and Discover was based on a New York Times article, which showed that the mega-porn site was one of the world’s leading purveyors of child pornography. A search on the site for keywords related to child abuse each yielded more than 100,000 videos.

“While we work to prevent sexual abuse and to help victims heal, NBC is an apologist for one the world’s leading sites promoting abuse,” Morse charged. “This is what makes its smears of the Ruth Institute and other groups defending children and the family particularly ironic.”

That’s only the latest instance of NBC’s credibility problems. Ronan Farrow, former NBC investigative reporter, says the network ordered him to stop investigating convicted sexual predator Harvey Weinstein. Farrow believes that was because Weinstein had evidence against Matt Lauer, NBC’s Today Show anchor fired in 2017 for inappropriate sexual behavior.

“For NBC, the best line of defense seems to be a smear,” Morse said. “No one should take NBC seriously as a news organization. A propaganda producer, sure. But a credible news source? I don't think so.”

Partnering with LifePetitions, the Ruth Institute has an online petition calling on NBC News to stop the smears. To date, it has collected more than 9,700 signers.

The Ruth Institute is a global non-profit organization, leading an international interfaith coalition to defend the family and build a civilization of love. Jennifer Roback Morse is the author of The Sexual State: How Elite Ideologies Are Destroying Lives.


  nbc news, pornhub, ruth institute, southern poverty law center, splc

News

NARAL president: We’re ‘certainly preparing’ for end of Roe v. Wade

'We absolutely could, and we're certainly preparing with our partners in the movement for that.'
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 5:42 pm EST
Featured Image
Ilyse Hogue, President of NARAL Pro-Choice America LifeSiteNews
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete
By Pete Baklinski

January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The president of the pro-abortion activist group NARAL let it slip in a recent interview that the organization is preparing for the overturn of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that imposed abortion on demand across the US.

NARAL Pro-Choice America president Ilyse Hogue, when asked in a January 3 Daily Beast podcast interview if the U.S. could “really lose Roe,” responded that her organization is preparing for it.

“We absolutely could, and we're certainly preparing with our partners in the movement for that,” Hogue said.

“A lot of our work over the last few years has been about making sure that we have what we call islands of access — blue states that are codifying the right to abortion, making sure that we have like practice in place where women can go,” she added.

Hogue’s comments come three months after President Donald Trump, described as America’s most pro-life president, saw the Supreme Court swear in the third judge — Amy Coney Barrett — that he had nominated as president. The swearing-in of Trump’s picks of Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh had already given the court a 5-4 conservative edge although the court has not always ruled that way, particularly in Bostock v. Clayton County. It is expected that Barrett’s swearing-in last October will now add conservative clout to cases that come before the country’s highest court.


  abortion, ilyse hogue, naral, roe v. wade

News

America looks to Tuesday Georgia run-off elections as future of country hangs in the balance

Tuesday’s run-off elections will determine who controls the U.S. Senate and have far-reaching consequences for the pro-life movement.
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 5:32 pm EST
Featured Image
Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R-Ga.). Twitter
Michael Haynes Michael Haynes Follow
By

Challenge to the Electoral College vote needs YOUR help! Contact your U.S. Rep and Senator today!

GEORGIA, January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – All eyes are on the state of Georgia tomorrow, as the long anticipated Senate run-offs take place, which are crucial in determining whether Republicans will be able to prevent Democrats from taking complete control of the American government.

Pro-abortion Democrats Jon Ossoff and Rev. Raphael Warnock are running against incumbent GOP Senators David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler respectively. In November, Perdue came closest to the required 50% majority, securing 49.7% of the vote, with his opponent Ossoff garnering 47.9%.

With Democrats maintaining their majority in the U.S. House, it is crucial for Republicans to secure these two Senate seats in order to prevent Democrats from having total control. Should both seats go to Democrats, then the party would control the House and the Senate – and the White House, should Joe Biden be sworn in as president. However, since the GOP currently has 50 seats to the Democrats’ 48, a win of one seat in Georgia should maintain their Senate majority.

The run-off is likewise crucial to defense of the pro-life cause. Warnock has previously called himself a “pro-choice pastor,” clearly aligning himself with the abortion lobby. In the wake of his message, over two dozen black pastors sent a letter to Warnock, calling him out for his pro-abortion position and asking him to reconsider his support.

Ossoff himself is also a vocal supporter of abortion company Planned Parenthood, and has previously declared that he would only vote for judges who support Roe v. Wade.

In fact, Planned Parenthood Votes has a “six-figure campaign” in the state, seeking to knock on five million doors in its efforts to win the state for the pro-abortion candidates, and attempting “to try to repeat the same thing that we did in the general election.”

Women Speak Out (WSO) PAC, partner of pro-life campaign group Susan B. Anthony List, issued a statement today on the pro-life campaigning in the state. The group has spent over $4 million and reached one million Georgia voters in an effort to elect Perdue and Loeffler. WSO national spokeswoman Mallory Quigley stated: “Pro-life victory in these two Senate seats is crucial to give the pro-life movement a fighting chance at combatting the worst of the pro-abortion agenda, including expanding the Supreme Court and forcing taxpayers to fund abortion on demand through birth.”

Both Perdue and Loeffler have warned about the crucial nature of the Georgia Senate election, jointly writing in the Washington Times that a Democrat win would see “an abrupt end” to the “American Dream.” The two Republicans wrote that Ossoff and Warnock “support open borders, taking away our Second Amendment rights and legalizing late-term abortion, sending your tax dollars to fund abortions,” and are in “a league of their own.”

“They are backed by radical defund the police groups,” continued the Republican duo. “They would vote to pack the U.S. Supreme Court. They would make Washington, D.C. a state and do away with the Electoral College — effectively silencing rural America. They have espoused the merits of socialism — and want to lock down our small businesses, churches and schools.”

Concluding, Perdue and Leoffler wrote that the two Democrats “certainly don’t believe in family values or the word of God. In short, they don’t believe in anything that has propelled this nation to success for hundreds of years. They’re fighting to tear it all down.”

Writing for LifeSiteNews last month, Father Jim Hewes warned that should Georgia be won by the two Democrats then the Hyde Amendment (widely preventing federal funding of abortion except in rare cases) would be abolished. Should this occur, “then taxpayers will be forced to be enablers of abortionists, to be a part of this brutal act of killing of innocent pre-born children.”

Just days ago, Big Tech appeared to be interfering in the election once again, as Facebook shut down the advertising account for the joint campaign of Perdue and Loeffler. The company declared that the campaign violated Facebook’s Unacceptable Business Practices Policy, and a warning stated that Facebook did not “promote products, services, schemes or offers using deceptive or misleading practices, including those meant to scam people out of money or personal information.” The account was since restored as Facebook claimed it had made an “automated error.”


  2020 elections, 2021 georgia special election, david perdue, georgia, georgia runoff elections, kelly loeffler, raphael warnock

News

Top Swiss bishop: ‘I can very well imagine women standing at the altar’

Following the example of Jesus who was a male and who only ordained males to the priesthood, the Catholic Church has always reserved the priesthood for males.
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 4:42 pm EST
Featured Image
Bishop Felix Gmür
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete
By Pete Baklinski

LifeSiteNews is facing increasing censorship. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library. 

BASEL, Switzerland, January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Switzerland’s top Catholic bishop stated that he can “very well” imagine women standing at the altar.

“Yes, I can very well imagine women standing at the altar. Women are already active in all church functions in which one does not have to be a priest,” said Bishop Felix Gmür of Basel and head of the country’s Conference of Bishops, in a Dec. 24 interview with Neue Zürcher Zeitung (NZZ).

The bishop made the comments as part of a double interview with Ritas Famos, the new President of the Evangelical Reformed Church in Switzerland. Gmür made the comment in the context of NZZ asking the bishop about positive comments that he had previously made about opening the priesthood to women.

Gmür, however, may be doing much more in his diocese than simply imagining women standing at the altar.

LifeSiteNews reported last July that women in the Diocese of Basel are putting on vestments, standing at the altar, and essentially simulating a Catholic Mass in Catholic churches. Video of one such service shows a woman performing what in a valid Mass would be the offertory, the preface, and a concluding prayer. The woman does not say the actual words of consecration.

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò characterized such simulations as “sacrilegious” and called upon Bishop Gmür to put a stop to them.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Following the example of Jesus who was a male and who only ordained males to the priesthood, the Catholic Church has always reserved the priesthood for males.

“Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination,” states the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

“The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry,” continues the Catechism, adding, “The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible.”

Pope John Paul II, in his 1994 Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, stated definitively the Church’s teaching about the impossibility of female ordination.

“Although the teaching that priestly ordination is to be reserved to men alone has been preserved by the constant and universal Tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the Magisterium in its more recent documents, at the present time in some places it is nonetheless considered still open to debate, or the Church’s judgment that women are not to be admitted to ordination is considered to have a merely disciplinary force,” he wrote.

“Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful,” he added.

Philosopher and Catholic commentator Dr. Peter Kwasniewski told LifeSiteNews last July that having women simulate a Mass, even though they are not acting as priests, causes confusion to the faithful and is a scandal.

“The faithful rightly expect, and the Church rightly demands, that the public worship offered in a Catholic church should correspond to what is given in the liturgical books, and should not cause confusion or scandal,” he said.

Kwasniewski referred to the Church’s instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum, which points out that anyone who meddles with the liturgy “injures the substantial unity of the Roman Rite, which ought to be vigorously preserved, and becomes responsible for actions that are in no way consistent with the hunger and thirst for the living God that is experienced by the people today.”

Kwasniewski said that Catholics in Basel should not attend such a service.

“And the personnel who are pushing it ought to be disciplined by the local authorities or at least by the Vatican,” he added.

Bishop Gmür was in the news in 2019 after he gave permission for a pastor who had been previously convicted of child sexual abuse to be placed in a parish. He also made news that same year for applauding initiatives in Switzerland to legalize same-sex civil “marriage.”


  catholic, felix gmür, female priests, switzerland, women's ordination

News

Massachusetts lawmakers override governor’s veto, expand abortion access for minors

The pro-life Massachusetts Family Institute called the legislation ‘Infanticide Act.’
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 3:48 pm EST
Featured Image
Massachusetts State House Shutterstock
Patrick Delaney Patrick Delaney Follow
By

LifeSiteNews is facing increasing censorship. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

BOSTON, Massachusetts, January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Despite efforts on the part of local pro-life activists, Massachusetts legislators last week overrode a veto of Governor Charlie Baker (R) and enacted a significant expansion of decriminalized abortion access in the state.

With required supermajorities in both legislative chambers, the Massachusetts House of Representatives voted 107 to 46 on Monday, December 28th; and without a statement or any debate, the Senate followed suite the next day with a vote of 32 to 8, effectively overriding the governor’s veto.

According to the Massachusetts Family Institute (MFI), the legislation enshrines the decriminalization of abortion prior to 24 weeks for any reason, while, for all practical purposes, extending abortion access up to the moment of birth.

Massachusetts law had allowed abortion after 24 weeks if the mother’s life is at risk. Under this new provision, that exception is expanded “to preserve the patient’s physical or mental health” — criteria which can be broadly interpreted to make almost any abortion legal.

But, according to MFI, the legislation goes even further and allows “passive infanticide.” Instead of directing abortionists to “take all reasonable steps” to save a child who has survived a botched abortion, the new law “simply requires that there be life-saving equipment present, but doesn’t require that the physician actually USE it.” Thus, MFI has labeled this legislation the “Infanticide Act.”

Further, the new law no longer requires abortions procured prior to 24 weeks to be performed by a physician, but allows non-doctors such as physician assistants, nurse practitioners or nurse midwives to kill preborn babies as well.

Finally, the law lowers parental consent for a minor to obtain an abortion from the age of 18 to 16. MFI considers this a “horrifying” prospect for “any sane parent” and “[f]or those concerned about sex trafficking,” as it “allows abusers to cover their crimes by taking underage girls to a Planned Parenthood clinic themselves and keeping parents out of the picture.”

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Even though he is a pro-abortion Republican, Gov. Baker expressed concerns about this latter measure, along with the expansion of access to “later-term abortions” in vetoing the bill and sending it back to the legislature on Christmas Eve.

Speaker of the Massachusetts House Bob DeLeo (D) promised on the same evening that his chamber “will seek to override the Administration’s veto,” in order to expand access to abortion, which they did on Monday, December 28.

Andrew Beckwith, president of MFI, noted the significance of these dates. In response to Baker’s veto, MFI expressed hope that a “Christmas Eve Miracle” would stop the “Infanticide Act.” Following the House override vote, Beckwith observed that December 28th “is also the Feast of the Holy Innocents, the day in the church calendar when we remember the baby boys killed by Herod’s decree.”

Beckwith concludes, “there is a deeper struggle at play here … [t]hese are all moral, spiritual battles with real, and often devastating, consequences.”

Myrna Maloney Flynn, president of Massachusetts Citizens for Life, stated, “Pro-lifers know setbacks. What we don’t know how to do is give up, look the other way, and allow injustice to stand.”

“We know the truth is worth pursuing!” she continued. “We know the lives we work to protect are worth every minute of our time in this life … And we look forward to continuing our work alongside the citizens of Massachusetts, who already know the value of human life and are eager to educate and support others and to ultimately illuminate the inherent right to life of the unborn.”

“As we have done since January 23, 1973, Massachusetts Citizens for Life will work tirelessly to make abortion unthinkable. And we will prevail.”


  abortion, charlie baker, infanticide act, massachusetts

News

Ohio gov. signs bill requiring women to cremate or bury their aborted children

‘[We] recognize that, at the very least, accounting for those precious bodies, and for their humane disposition is necessary,’ said Molly Smith of The Right to Life Action Coalition of Ohio.
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 2:58 pm EST
Featured Image
Shutterstock
Doug Mainwaring Doug Mainwaring Follow Doug
By Doug Mainwaring

LifeSiteNews is facing increasing censorship. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

COLUMBUS, Ohio, January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — The governor of Ohio has signed a bill into law which requires women who undergo surgical abortions to either bury or cremate the remains of their children.

Known as “The Unborn Child Dignity Act,” the measure was passed in the Ohio House on December 3 and signed by Republican Governor Mike DeWine on December 30. The new law states that a pregnant woman who kills her child through abortion “is responsible for the costs related to the final disposition of the fetal remains at the chosen location.”

Those who ignore the new law — whether the mother of the child or the abortion provider — could face a first degree misdemeanor charge which carries a $1,000 fine and/or a six month jail sentence.

“Although we work for a day when no unborn child in Ohio is killed by abortion, we recognize that, at the very least, accounting for those precious bodies, and for their humane disposition is necessary,” Molly Smith of The Right to Life Action Coalition of Ohio, told Cincinnati.com.

Lauren Blauvelt-Copelin, vice president of government affairs and public advocacy at Planned Parenthood Advocates of Ohio claimed the new law is “unconstitutional and medically unnecessary.”

“It also adds yet another barrier for patients who are trying to access abortion services — which is the legislature’s real goal,” Blauvelt-Copelin told Cincinnati.com.

Laurel Powell, also speaking on behalf of Planned Parenthood Advocates of Ohio, dismissed the bill as nothing more than a roadblock for women seeking abortions.

“This is honestly just a familiar ploy by these lawmakers who use the chaos of the end of year session to try and pass these unpopular bills,” Powell told Cleveland’s WEWS-TV.

“This is not something that is intended to promote patient safety or access to care,” continued the Planned Parenthood advocate. “Really, it’s just another attack.”

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Despite the claims by Planned Parenthood, Ohio’s pro-life community has welcomed the new law as an important step in respecting and honoring the humanity of unborn children.

“Although we work for a day when no unborn child in Ohio is killed by abortion, we recognize that, at the very least, accounting for those precious bodies, and for their humane disposition is necessary,” Molly Smith of The Right to Life Action Coalition of Ohio, told Cincinnati.com.

Mark Harrington, president of Ohio-based pro-life organization Created Equal, said, “While both pro-life and pro-abortion groups are focused on state abortion bans, these humane disposal bills are getting signed into law and in some ways pose a bigger threat than these bans do because they are now considered constitutional.”

“Because abortionists are the dregs of medicine they will be unable to comply with these new regulations,” he added.

“The Unborn Child Dignity Act will promote the dignity of the unborn through proper burial by requiring the Ohio Department of Health to establish rules for the proper disposal of products of conception and define ‘humane disposal’ as earthly burial or cremation,” declared a statement issued by Ohio Right to Life.


  abortion, abortion burials, created equal, mike dewine, ohio, ohio right to life

News

Is Europe’s flu vaccine campaign linked to ‘second wave’ of COVID attributed deaths?

From September 2020, in multiple European countries, there was a massive demand for the flu shot and in each of them slowly rising numbers of COVID-19 deaths suddenly spiked shortly after
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 2:40 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent
By Jeanne Smits

Analysis

January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Is there a link between the flu shot and excess mortality in Europe in the second half of November? A simple comparison of vaccination statistics and the number of deaths attributed to COVID-19 reveals what looks like a correlation between the two, according to a contributor to the French daily FranceSoir. His lengthy and carefully documented op-ed is unsigned, but he claims to have a scientific background and his statistical quotes come from verified scientific papers and studies. And he believes that the correlation he observed is significant enough for the authorities to act upon his hypothesis and to take precautions because of the risk that the effects of the SARS-COV-2 virus are being potentiated by the influenza vaccine.

Here below is a shortened presentation of his reasoning. Links to quoted studies are available in his op-ed.

When the flu shot arrived in France on October 13, 2020, with health authorities encouraging the population to take it in the context of the COVID-19 crisis, in particular so as to prevent hospital congestion, there was an unprecedented rush that led to the vaccination of 34.2 percent of elderly or fragile subjects by the end of the month, compared with just 19.0 percent by October 31, 2019. This despite the fact that at the time there was no official sign of the presence of a flu epidemic. To date, only a handful of flu infections have been identified in France, several of which were related to patients who had just returned from abroad.

5.3 million doses of the vaccine were sold within eight days, and there was a historic shortage of stock: ordinarily, some 10 million doses are sold each year, and administered over a period of two months.

There was a subsequent peak in deaths attributed to the Wuhan virus between November 15 and November 30, in what the government called a “second wave” (according Professor Didier Raoult, the world-famous French microbiologist specializing in infectious diseases, it would be more precise to call it a “new epidemic” because of significant mutations of the virus). At the beginning of October, recalled the op-ed’s author, the reproduction rate of the epidemic was equal to 1, which should have prevented a new “epidemic surge.” However, a sudden rise of hospital admissions and later, deaths took place starting on October 20, one week exactly after the start of the flu vaccination campaign.

The preliminary reason why the author of the op-ed believed a correlation may exist between the flu shot and COVID-19 is that contracting different respiratory infections at the same time is not very likely. Preventing flu (and other rhinoviruses) would therefore facilitate a SARS-COV-2 infection.

In Italy, the Northern regions where flu and meningitis vaccines had been widely distributed during the fall and winter of 2019-2020 were those that saw the highest number of COVID-19 deaths in March and April of last year, as lung specialist Alberto Rossi observed in an interview with LifeSiteNews: almost all of the COVID-19 patients he personally treated in Piacenza had received the flu shot.

Back to France and the autumn statistics: by November 11, 9 million Frenchmen had been vaccinated against the flu. Nine days later, a second shortage of the flu shot occurred. Daily COVID-19 deaths started rising on October 20, and spiked starting on November 10, with daily highs beyond 1,000, while average deaths significantly declined as of December 1st. 

Interestingly, a similar scenario played out in the Czech Republic, Poland, Slovenia, Hungary and Romania, that registered few COVID-19 deaths last spring. These Eastern European countries consistently had a very low influenza vaccine coverage until this fall, when aggressive campaigns led to an unprecedented number of flu shots.

In all these countries, there was a massive demand for the flu shot, leading to stock shortages similar to those in France, and in each of them slowly rising numbers of COVID-19 deaths suddenly spiked shortly after the campaign started, and are now descending once more.

Is this a mere coincidence? In Romania, where few COVID-19 deaths were registered last spring and where flu vaccination was rare, the exceptional flu shot campaign started mid-September and COVID-19 deaths started rising significantly as of October 7.

Most of these deaths are those of elderly or fragile patients.

The hypothesis is therefore: “The higher the vaccination rate for people over 65 years of age, the greater the mortality due to Covid-19.”

To answer this question fully, it would be necessary to evaluate the interaction between flu shots and SARS-COV-2 infections. In a context where side-effects of vaccines receive relatively little attention, notably because vaccine producers are not held responsible for them, these studies are few and far between and have not been made as a prerequisite for massive vaccination in the context of the coronavirus pandemic. There have been several warnings, however, on the grounds of several former whistle-blowing studies by medical specialists such as Michel Georget and Michel de Lorgeril, the latter having shown that people who had received the flu shot in 2008-2009 had a higher risk (40 to 250 percent higher) of contracting the pandemic A/ H1N1 than non-vaccinated patients.

The few existing studies in 2020 tend to go in the same direction.

“The first one is Spanish13 and was published on June 18 by Dr. Juan F. Gastón Añaños of the Pharmacy Service of the Spanish Hospital of Barbastro, in his own name. It concerns a town of 115,000 inhabitants, of which about 25,000 are over 65 years old. 20 people died. Of these 20 people, 90 percent were vaccinated against the flu during the winter, while only 63 percent of those over 65 were vaccinated. The small number of people who died can make interpretation hazardous. However, the study is continuing on a home for dependent elderly people: of 94 people, 25 there died from Covid-19. In this home, 80 residents were vaccinated against influenza and 14 were not. Of the 25 deaths, 24 were vaccinated; only 1 was not,” observes the author of the France-Soirop-ed.

Another statistical study, dated May 8, 2020, by two teachers of psychology and chemistry showed a correlation between flu-shot coverage and COVID-19 mortality last spring.

PEER journal published a wide-ranging study on October 1st analyzing data from 39 countries: “The results showed a strong correlation between Covid-19 deaths and the rate of influenza vaccination in people 65 years and older (R=0.687; P-value = 0.00015).”

The author of the op-ed added personal evaluation of statistics from European countries, excluding those that had closed down their borders early such as Iceland, or that made extensive use of the “Raoult protocol” as it is known in France: hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and zinc. He also found that the higher the vaccination coverage in one of the 21 European countries he retained for his calculations, the higher the mortality in relation to the total population or to the number of people falling ill with COVID-19.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Counter-studies contradicting these studies do exist, and the author quoted them, but showed that they had little statistical significance for various reasons; he also rejected studies favorable to his hypothesis for the same type of reason.

He quoted a further study that was presented as proving that there is no relation between flu vaccination and COVID-19 hospitalizations or deaths, while in fact the study shows that 17 percent of non-vaccinated infected patients needed hospital care, against 41 percent of patients who had received the flu shot. The authors of this study used “corrections” without giving details. In a general way, according to the France-Soirop-ed, studies that contradict the flu shot link suffer “weaknesses” and are indeed “cautious” as to their results.

The op-ed added that there can be other factors explaining the sudden surge in COVID-19, such as the fact that countries that have not been affected by a respiratory virus often observe a surge in infections later on (but usually, the virus is weaker by then). 

“What is troubling is that all European countries that have been spared so far are being impacted by an outbreak at the same time. An epidemic does not spread uniformly in time and space. Unless there is a common trigger in time and space. The European Union conducted a campaign in early October to encourage all European countries to implement influenza vaccination campaigns. It seems legitimate to ask the question of the impact of influenza vaccination on mortality in case of infections with other respiratory viruses,” it said.

There is also the “climate factor,” linked to less sun, colder weather and lower immunity of the population. But on the other hand, it recalled that last spring, Europe had exceptionally warm and sunny weather. Also, temperatures fall earlier in Eastern Europe than in the west, but its COVID-19 mortality did not rise earlier in consequence.

As to how the vaccine can favor COVID-19, the op-ed quoted several studies published in 2020 in The LancetScience Direct and the Journal of Medical Virology suggesting that viral infections such as the rhinovirus and coronaviruses can stop flu epidemics by activating the immune system against future flu viruses.

This “viral interference” can affect a current epidemic, these studies suggested. Other pathogens, including common rhinoviruses, could in this way “suppress” the replication of SARS-COV-2 whose growth factor is lower than theirs.

Quoting Georget and de Lorgeril, the author wrote: “We are wrong to believe that vaccines ‘magically’ stimulate our immune system with an attenuated or dead virus without any collateral effects. Why shouldn't the exact opposite happen? The presence of the dead or attenuated virus can be interpreted as benign by our immune system and thus facilitate a future infection. This is called an immune response that facilitates the infection. This phenomenon has been observed for several viruses such as measles, respiratory viruses (RSV), dengue fever, but also HIV. It is also known that vaccination in some cases leads to a drop in immune defenses contrary to what one might expect, and this drop can last several weeks.”

He also observed that “social distancing” and frequent hand-washing possibly blocked benign infections that actually activate our immune systems in winter, thus giving wider scope to more dangerous and contagious infections when contracted.

So the immune response to COVID-19 might block the flu, and at the same time the flu shot might “deprive people of a strong immune activation that could have protected them against SARS-COV-2.”

Virological surveillance in France showed how a rise in SARS-COV-2 infections corresponded to a decrease in common benign rhinoviruses, together with the absence of flu infections. In the same way benign rhinoviruses tend to disappear at the height of a flu epidemic and return after it ends.

Finally, side-effects of the flu shot may also make patients more vulnerable with regard to COVID-19, according to the author. These include bronchial damage, asthma and diabetes, and all these conditions are related to increased morbidity and mortality among COVID-19 patients.


  coronavirus restrictions, coronavirus vaccine, covid-19, flu shot, vaccines

News

Nurses, hospital staff refuse to take COVID vaccine in large numbers

The governor of Ohio said that 60% of nursing home staff in his state had not taken the vaccine after being offered.
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 2:23 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
David McLoone David McLoone Follow
By

January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A significant portion of frontline workers in hospitals and nursing homes would refuse to take a COVID-19 vaccine, according to recent reports, despite a huge effort of the political establishment to make the vaccines appear safe and reliable.

A Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) report showed that 29% of hospital staff “definitely or probably would not get vaccinated,” that number being only slightly lower among the general public, which sits at around 27%. According to the KFF, the main reason cited among those who would refuse the vaccine is concern over the side effects (59%).

Over half of the same group also had concerns regarding the safety, the rushed nature, and the politicization of the vaccines’ development (55%, 53%, and 51% respectively).

A slew of hospitals and clinics say there is an even larger share of their healthcare staff taking a stand against being vaccinated.

In Northern California, less than half of the eligible staff at St. Elizabeth Community Hospital took the vaccine when offered, the Los Angeles Times reported. Public health records in L.A. show that between 20% and 40% of all frontline workers also refused to be vaccinated. Riverside County, California, has reported that around 50% of their frontline workers have turned down the opportunity to receive a vaccine.

The Los Angeles Times also reported that a nurse from Providence Holy Cross Medical Center, herself six months pregnant, refused to be vaccinated on the grounds that the vaccine is potentially unsafe for pregnant women.

The U.K. government released a document in December advising that pregnant or breastfeeding women do not receive a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine on the basis that there is “no or limited data” on the effects to the child and to fertility.

“For women of childbearing age, pregnancy should be excluded before vaccination,” the document stated, with further advice that pregnancy be avoided for the first two months after receiving COVID-19 shots.

The Republican governor of Ohio, Mike DeWine, stated in a press conference on December 30 that 60% of nursing home staff in his state had not taken the vaccine after being offered. Although the governor promised that he isn’t “going to make them” take the vaccine, he expressed his wish that “they had a higher compliance.”

Speaking of the opportunity to avail themselves of a vaccine, DeWine added: “Our message today is the train may not be coming back for a while,” and “[e]veryone makes their own choice about this, but we want to make it clear that opportunity may not come back for a while.” This, he hopes, will inflame a “sense of urgency,” encouraging uptake.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

In Houston, Texas, Dr. Joseph Varon of the United Memorial Medical Center told NPR’s Morning Edition that he is experiencing resistance from his staff concerning COVID vaccines.

“Yesterday I had a — not a fight, but I had a friendly argument with more than 50% of my nurses in my unit telling me that they would not get the vaccine,” he said. Varon claims that “[m]ost of the reasons why most of my people don’t want to get the vaccine are politically motivated,” adding that, apparently based on discussions with those who would refuse the vaccine, “the fact that [President] Trump is in charge of accelerating the process bothers them.”

Varon intends to influence many of his staff to take the vaccine, saying that he hopes he can convince them “to do the right thing.”

Firefighters in New York City, too, have reported a low willingness to take a COVID vaccine. Over half of the 2,000 members of New York’s Uniformed Firefighters Association (UFA) would refuse the vaccine when offered.

Like Gov. DeWine, the UFA’s president, Andrew Ansboro, has said that the union is “encouraging [its] members to get the vaccine, but we are defending that right to make that choice.” Ansboro and the UFA’s Health and Safety Officer Michael Schreiber have both received the vaccine as a way of encouraging their colleagues to do the same.

The Pew Research Center’s most recent information on vaccine uptake, published before the vaccine rollout in the U.S. but after the clinical trials, shows that 39% of Americans would not take a COVID-19 vaccine, and that over half of those people were “pretty certain” they would not take a vaccine even after others begin taking it.

The research goes on to show that there has been an increase in public confidence that a safe and effective vaccine will be developed in the U.S., with 75% of those surveyed reporting at least “a fair amount of confidence” as of November last year. Interestingly, 62% of participants reported that they would be “uncomfortable” to be among the first to receive the vaccine. Only 37% said they would be “comfortable” despite the reportedly high confidence that a safe vaccine will be developed.

LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page. View it here.


  andrew ansboro, coronavirus vaccine, covid-19, joseph varon, mike dewine

News

UK okays mixing doses of different COVID vaccines, raising concerns about safety, efficacy

The CDC in the United States had explicitly advised against this practice.
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 1:51 pm EST
Featured Image
Shutterstock
Michael Haynes Michael Haynes Follow
By

LONDON, England, January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Official guidance issued by the U.K. government has outlined that people receiving COVID-19 vaccines can mix the vaccines they receive. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), on the other hand, had advised against this practice, stating that COVID vaccines are “not interchangeable.”

The U.K. governments document, published in November and quietly updated on New Year’s Eve, now supports the mixing of COVID vaccines, suggesting that patients could receive Pfizer’s vaccine and afterwards get the newly approved Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine. Both vaccines require two doses in the administration process.

The U.K. guidance notes, “For individuals who started the schedule and who attend for vaccination at a site where the same vaccine is not available, or if the first product received is unknown, it is reasonable to offer one dose of the locally available product to complete the schedule.”

“This option is preferred if the individual is likely to be at immediate high risk or is considered unlikely to attend again,” the document adds. “In these circumstances, as both the vaccines are based on the spike protein, it is likely the second dose will help to boost the response to the first dose. For this reason, until additional information becomes available, further doses would not then be required.”

Only a few lines before, the document had encouraged that both doses be of the same vaccine, admitting that there is “no evidence on the interchangeability of the COVID-19 vaccines although studies are underway.” Notwithstanding this lack of evidence, the guidance defends its decision to mix vaccines by saying it is “reasonable” to do so.

This goes against the CDC’s advice, which states that “mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are not interchangeable with each other or with other COVID-19 vaccine products.” Neither the “safety” nor the “efficacy” of such mixing of vaccines has been examined, the CDC notes, and thus both doses “should be completed with the same product.”

The CDC even advises that COVID-19 vaccines are not to be administered around any other vaccines, calling for a “minimum interval of 14 days before or after administration with any other vaccine.”

Reporting on the news, The New York Times called the idea a “scientific gamble,” reminding readers of the very different composition of the two vaccines, with Pfizer’s being an mRNA vaccine, while the Oxford vaccine is DNA based. The Times also added that by mixing the various vaccines, it could be “more difficult to collect clear data on vaccine safety.”

Speaking to the Times, virologist John Moore of Cornell University said: “There are no data on this idea whatsoever,” adding that British officials “seem to have abandoned science completely now and are just trying to guess their way out of a mess.”

Head of Immunisations at Public Health England, Dr. Mary Ramsay, also warned against mixing vaccines, yet echoed the government in supporting the move if the initial vaccine could not be given for the second dose.

Moore’s words and the Times’ article sparked a reaction from the editor of the renowned British Medical Journal, Fiona Godlee, who styled the news of mixing vaccines as “seriously misleading,” despite the official document clearly stating that such an event could occur.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Yet these were not the only recent surprise vaccine news to emerge from the U.K., as just a few days previously the U.K. Chief Medical Officers (CMOs) managed to change the vaccination roll-out timeline, lengthening the gap between the two jabs from around 21 days to 12 weeks.

The letter from the CMOs claimed that the initial jab “provides substantial protection within 2-3 weeks of vaccination,” and while the second jab would “likely … be very important for duration of protection,” it was unlikely to add any substantial protection to that offered by the first one.

Pfizer itself has tested its vaccine doses 21 days apart, but evidence has not been presented as to how efficacious it would be with a gap of 12 weeks between doses. However, the CMOs mentioned that the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation was “confident” that 12 weeks would be a “reasonable dosing interval.”

The Chair of the British Medical Association’s (BMA) General Practitioners Committee, Dr. Richard Vautrey, called the change “grossly and patently unfair.” In a statement made on the BMA website, Vautrey declared, “Local leaders are telling us that is unprofessional and impractical to amend the appointments for thousands of frail elderly patients.”

While the U.K. medical officers are proceeding at rapid pace in drawing up, and changing plans for the COVID vaccine roll-out, former vice president of Pfizer, Dr. Michael Yeadon, has flatly rejected the need for vaccines.

“There is absolutely no need for vaccines to extinguish the pandemic,” he argued. “I’ve never heard such nonsense talked about vaccines. You do not vaccinate people who aren’t at risk from a disease. You also don’t set about planning to vaccinate millions of fit and healthy people with a vaccine that hasn’t been extensively tested on human subjects.”

LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page. View it here.


  cdc, centers for disease control, coronavirus vaccine, covid-19, united kingdom, vaccines

News

Trump Jr.: Police raid on Canadian home during lockdown is coming to US ‘if you don’t wake the hell up’

Canadian police stormed a family’s private gathering after a neighbor snitched on them for breaking lockdown rules.
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 1:47 pm EST
Featured Image
Donald J. Trump Jr. in a 2020 political ad. Donald J. Trump Jr. / Twitter
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete
By Pete Baklinski

LifeSiteNews is facing increasing censorship. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library. 

GATINEAU, Quebec, January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – After a New Year’s Eve video went viral of Canadian police storming a family’s private gathering when a neighbor snitched on them for breaking lockdown rules, Donald J. Trump Jr. tweeted that such “insanity” is coming to America if people “don’t wake the hell up.”

Video posted to social media on January 1 shows about seven police officers at the doorstep of a private residence in Gatineau, Quebec, forcibly dragging out and pinning to the ground a young man who was arguing with them. Video also shows a woman, the owner of the house on rue le Baron, being detained by police outside the home, standing in her bare feet on the snow. Video shows that one of the officers who is dragging a man out of the home is not wearing a mask.

Six people were in the home celebrating New Year's Eve. These included the female owner of the home, her mother and stepfather, her brother and his girlfriend, and one other guest. The police had received an anonymous complaint that the revelers were breaking Quebec's COVID-19 lockdown rules that currently prohibit indoor gatherings. Two people were ultimately arrested and all were fined $1,546 each for being at the gathering.

Video of the police raid on the home has been viewed over 5 million times on Twitter.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Trump Jr., the eldest child of U.S. President Donald Trump, tweeted his alarm about the raid on Jan. 3:

“This is insanity and it’s coming here soon if you don’t wake the hell up,” he stated.

Police in Gatineau defended their actions on Twitter, saying in a Jan. 2 post that the “individuals were recalcitrant and refused to cooperate,” adding that the “individual arrested in the video had assaulted a police officer, hitting him in the face a few times.”

“We ask for your collaboration to continue to respect health measures and collaborate during any police intervention,” the police warned.

But Mathieu Tessier, one of the two arrested, told CBC News that the police used excessive force during the raid.

"The police cannot do what they did to us. They treat us like animals, like criminals," he said.

Tessier said that it was his sister, the owner of the home, who was the other person arrested. It was his mother who was standing at the doorway. Tessier said his sister stepped out of the house, not wearing any shoes, to speak with police. The situation escalated, he said, when his mother opened the door to ask his sister to come back inside the home.

“The policemen took (my mother's) arms from the house and pulled to get her out," he related.

That’s when Tessier said he intervened to get between his mother and the police officer. It was at this moment that Tessier’s girlfriend started filming the video that has since gone viral.

"When I see that he was pulling my mother out, I go in the middle of them so they can leave my mother alone so I can close the door and talk," Tessier said.

The Rebel’s Ezra Levant commented that the police raid on the home was performed “Gestapo style.”

“There were six people in a house in Gatineau, Canada. A neighbour snitched. Police went in, Gestapo style. Assaulting citizens,” he commented on Twitter.

“This video is the tipping point for me,” commented Levant. “For 48 years I have been pro-police, almost fanatically so. I cannot say that anymore. I know there are still good cops out there. Some are my friends. But as the violent enforcers of the lockdown I no longer support them.”

“I will not take out my rage against the cops, because then I will wind up dead. So I will focus my rage on their bosses, the lockdown politicians,” he added.


  canada, donald trump jr, ezra levant, lockdown orders, lockdowns, new year's eve, police state, police violence

News

11 Senators refuse to certify 2020 election results, demand emergency congressional audit

A joint statement calls for immediate emergency audit of disputed election returns in light of 'unprecedented allegations of voter fraud'
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 1:24 pm EST
Featured Image
Senator Ted Cruz of Texas was one of the 11 signatories Washington Post / YouTube
Emily Mangiaracina Emily Mangiaracina Follow
By

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

WASHINGTON, D.C., January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A cohort of Republican senators are taking a stand against the election returns of disputed states by calling for an emergency 10-day congressional audit of the contested returns.

“We intend to vote on January 6 to reject the electors from disputed states as not “regularly given” and “lawfully certified” unless and until that emergency 10-day audit is completed,” Ted Cruz and 10 other senators and senators-elect declared in their letter on Saturday.  

CBS News described the move as “more symbolic than practical,” as a majority in both the Senate and the Democrat-controlled House would have to vote to repeal election returns.

The senators themselves acknowledge this in their letter. “We are not naïve. We fully expect most if not all Democrats, and perhaps more than a few Republicans, to vote otherwise,” the statement concedes.

They maintain, however, that they owe the people a “fair and credible audit,” which would “dramatically improve Americans’ faith in our electoral process and would significantly enhance the legitimacy of whoever becomes our next President.”

The senators noted that the 2020 election “featured unprecedented allegations of voter fraud, violations and lax enforcement of election law, and other voting irregularities.”

“By any measure, the allegations of fraud and irregularities in the 2020 election exceed any in our lifetimes,” the letter continues.

The senators note that despite these unparalleled allegations of voter fraud, the Supreme Court has twice declined the opportunity to hear evidence of these allegations. 

The senators also point out, however, that “there is long precedent of Democratic Members of Congress raising objections to presidential election results, as they did in 1969, 2001, 2005, and 2017. And, in both 1969 and 2005, a Democratic Senator joined with a Democratic House Member in forcing votes in both houses on whether to accept the presidential electors being challenged.”

They call for following the precedent of the 1877 presidential election, during which Congress appointed an electoral commission consisting of Senators, House members, and Supreme Court Justices to resolve disputed election returns following serious allegations of fraud.

The senators specifically call for a congressional Electoral Commission “with full investigatory and fact-finding authority, to conduct an emergency 10-day audit of the election returns in the disputed states. 

Once completed, individual states would evaluate the Commission’s findings and could convene a special legislative session to certify a change in their vote, if needed,” the statement continues.”

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

“We are acting not to thwart the democratic process, but rather to protect it. And every one of us should act together to ensure that the election was lawfully conducted under the Constitution and to do everything we can to restore faith in our Democracy,” the senators conclude.

Signatories of the letter include U.S. Senators Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), John Kennedy (R-La.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), and Mike Braun (R-Ind.), and Senators-Elect Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), and Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.)

Act now and all the way up until January 6 to contact your elected officials, and demand that they guarantee the integrity of the 2020 election.

Help stop voter fraud:Project Veritas is accepting voter fraud tips here.


  2020 election, 2020 election fraud, election fraud, republicans, ted cruz, voter fraud

News

Prominent clergy on social media oppose abortion-tainted COVID vaccines

While the Vatican affirms a situation of ‘grave danger’ must be present to justify the use of these vaccines, thousands of medical and scientific experts indicate this threshold is not met.
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 12:54 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
Patrick Delaney Patrick Delaney Follow
By

January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — As moral debates over the use of abortion-tainted COVID-19 vaccines swirl in social media, two activist members of the Catholic clergy, Fr. Dave Nix and Deacon Nick Donnelly, have independently joined their voices to those who oppose the use of such vaccines.

Last month, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, along with co-signers Cardinal Janis Pujats, Bishop Joseph Strickland, and Archbishops Tomash Peta and Jan Pawel Lenga, released a paper expressing the strong conviction that any use of a vaccine tainted with the “unspeakable crime” of abortion, under any circumstances, “cannot be acceptable for Catholics.”

These prelates cited the teaching of St. John Paul II affirming the duty of every Catholic and person of goodwill to defend “the most basic and fundamental right” to life “with maximum determination.” To make use of vaccines “made from the cells of murdered unborn children contradicts [this] ‘maximum determination’ to defend unborn life.”

“The crime of abortion is so monstrous that any kind of concatenation with this crime, even a very remote one, is immoral and cannot be accepted under any circumstances by a Catholic once he has become fully aware of it,” they wrote. “One who uses these vaccines must realize that his body is benefitting from the ‘fruits’ … of one of mankind’s greatest crimes.”

Partially in response to “diverse and sometimes conflicting pronouncements in the mass media by bishops, Catholic associations, and experts,” the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) issued a statement on December 21 affirming the judgement the Church has espoused for many years.

The CDF argued that “when ethically irreproachable Covid-19 vaccines are not available … it is morally acceptable to receive Covid-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from aborted fetuses in their research and production process” (emphasis in original).

“The fundamental reason for considering the use of these vaccines morally licit,” the statement continued, “is that the kind of cooperation in evil (passive material cooperation) in the procured abortion from which these cell lines originate is, on the part of those making use of the resulting vaccines, remote.”

In response to this statement from the CDF, author and former news editor for EWTN Great Britain, Deacon Nick Donnelly, tweeted, “On the eve of the Church celebrating the birth of the Son of God, and Catholics around the world venerate and love the baby in the crib, the Vatican approves the use of cells from babies murdered through abortion. I can’t express how upset this makes me.”

Considering a spiritual side of this question, Catholic priest-hermit, Red Rose Rescuer and host of the “Padre Peregrino” YouTube channel, Fr. Dave Nix, proposed in a tweet, “God would not allow your health to be aided in any way by any vaccine connected to abortion.”

The CDF doctrinal note goes on to articulate another important criterion for the use of such tainted vaccines affirming that while there is normally a “moral duty to avoid such passive material cooperation” with abortion in this way, this “is not obligatory if there is a grave danger.”

The document continues stating that such a grave danger presently exists in “the pandemic spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes Covid-19,” though the CDF was not explicit on where the Church has competence to make that determination.

Others with due competence have come to the opposing conclusion that vaccines are not needed at all for this pandemic, which they state is effectively “over.” Several thousand doctors in Belgium also affirmed that “[i]f 95% of people experience Covid-19 virtually symptom-free, the risk of exposure to an untested vaccine is irresponsible.” And over 51,000 affirm that due to the relatively mild danger of COVID-19 to the vast majority of the population, “those who are at minimal risk” should be permitted “to live their lives normally [and] build up (herd) immunity to the virus.”

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Author and editor of Catholic World News, Phil Lawler, observed, “The Vatican’s doctrinal congregation says that it will not judge the safety or efficacy of vaccines, because those are medical rather than moral judgments. However, the statement says that the Covid epidemic constitutes a ‘grave danger,’ and thus justifies the use of vaccines developed by immoral methods. Wait a minute. Isn’t that a medical rather than a moral judgment?”

In response, theologian, author and composer Dr. Peter Kwasniewski commented to LifeSiteNews: “The Vatican’s reasoning about the permissibility of a morally tainted vaccine rests entirely on a prudential judgment that we are in a major pandemic that requires the suspension of economy, mental health, optimal education, and a host of other social goods. That judgment is no more than a popular political stance that conflicts with the actual data. The catastrophic effects we see around us are enough to show that too high a price has been paid for ‘security’ or ‘safety.’ We are straining the gnats and swallowing the camels.”

LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page. View it here.

RELATED

Bishop Schneider explains why Christians must never take abortion-tainted COVID vaccine

On the moral illicitness of the use of vaccines made from cells derived from aborted human fetuses

Vatican doctrine dept permits abortion-tainted vaccines for ‘grave danger’

Former Pfizer VP: ‘No need for vaccines,’ ‘the pandemic is effectively over’

Physicians: ‘Masks don’t control viruses, they control you,’ ‘pandemic is over’


  abortion, athanasius schneider, cdf, congregation for the doctrine of the faith, coronavirus vaccine, covid-19, dave nix, nick donnelly, peter kwasniewski, phil lawler

News

UPDATED: Scotland bans public worship for second time during COVID-19 crisis

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon's justification for the ban, and other restrictions on the movements of people in Scotland, is an increase of reported COVID-19 infections
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 11:21 am EST
Featured Image
Nicola Sturgeon Edinburgh Live
Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy
By Dorothy Cummings McLean

LifeSiteNews is facing increasing censorship. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

EDINBURGH, Scotland, January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Scotland has banned public worship across the country for the second time since the coronavirus crisis started almost a year ago.

Speaking from Holyrood, Scotland’s devolved parliament, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon expressed “regret” for closing all places of worship to private prayers and regular services. Her justification for the ban, and other restrictions on the movements of people in Scotland, was an increase of reported COVID-19 infections.

“It is with real regret that we consider it necessary for places of worship to close during this period for all purposes except broadcasting a service, or conducting a funeral, wedding or civil partnership,” she said.

“I am well aware of how important communal worship is to people. But we believe that this restriction is necessary to reduce the risk of transmission,” the First Minister continued.

“While up to 20 people will still be able to attend funeral services, wakes will not be possible during January. And a maximum of 5 people will be able to attend wedding and civil partnership services.”

People in Scotland will be permitted to leave their homes only for reasons the government deems “essential,” like grocery shopping, paid work that cannot be done from home, and outdoor exercise. People 12 years old and above will no longer be allowed to meet outdoors in groups of 6, but only in groups of 2. Visiting other households has been forbidden across Scotland since March, with the exception of Christmas Day.

A spokesperson for the Archdiocese of St. Andrews and Edinburgh confirmed that the ban on public worship in Scotland came as a surprise to him.

The ban begins on Friday.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Since Christmas Day, all Scotland has been plunged into “Tier 4” restrictions, which meant that churches previously permitted to host 40 worshipers per service were now allowed only 20. In response, some priests celebrated additional Masses to accommodate the faithful.

In December, the Congregation for Divine Worship granted permission to priests to say four Masses on Christmas Day, New Year’s Day, and Epiphany. The usual limit to the number of Masses priests can say per day in times of priest shortages or other difficulties is three.

Public worship in Britain was first banned in late March 2020. The last public Catholic Masses took place in Scotland on March 19, and in England and Wales on March 20. The faithful were allowed to return to public worship in Scotland from July 15, and in England and Wales from July 4. However, public worship was again suspended in England and Wales for most of November, resuming on December 2.

Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, is expected to announce tightened lockdown restrictions on residents of England and Wales tonight.

The media office of the Scottish government is closed today.

[UPDATE: January 4, 2021, 10:06 a.m.]

Sir Edward Leigh, an English Member of Parliament and the President of the Catholic Union of Great Britain, has written a letter to Scotland’s First Minister to suggest she show evidence that the heavily restricted religious services of recent months are indeed a danger to the public.

“I hope that in closing places of worship to the public, you will be presenting evidence for this decision to the Scottish Parliament in order for people to understand the public health requirement for this action,” Sir Edward wrote. “Freedom to worship in accordance with religious belief is one of the most fundamental and most precious freedoms that we enjoy. Interference or suspension with this right should not be done lightly.”

Leigh pointed out that Article 9 of the European Convention of Human Rights forbids governments from interfering with religious practise unless the restriction “is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”

He suggested that it is not lawful for Scotland to ban public worship, therefore, without ascertaining that “churches are a significant source of spread of the virus.”


  coronavirus restrictions, covid-19, lockdowns, nicola sturgeon, scotland

News

Canadian priest explains why he is challenging Ontario’s abortion center ‘bubble zone’ law

Fr. Tony Van Hee, an 83 year old Jesuit, recently spoke to LifeSiteNews about his landmark case and the importance of continuing pro-life witness.
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 8:35 am EST
Featured Image
Father Anthony Van Hee on Parliament Hill prior to National March for Life, Ottawa, Ontario, May 9, 2019. Pete Baklinski / LifeSiteNews
Lianne Laurence Lianne Laurence Follow Lianne
By Lianne Laurence

OTTAWA, January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) --Fr. Tony Van Hee, S.J., well known for his 29 years fasting and praying on Parliament Hill for an end to abortion, was arrested on October 24, 2018 for breaking Ontario’s “bubble zone” law, Bill 163, or the Safe Access to Abortion Services Act, which Premier Kathleen Wynne’s Liberal government passed in October 2017 and which took effect February 1, 2018.

The far-reaching bill bans all pro-life activity — including sidewalk counselling and showing “disapproval” of abortion — within 50 meters of Ontario’s eight abortion centers, a distance that can be increased to 150 meters on request.

Bill 163 also allows hospitals, pharmacies, and healthcare facilities that commit abortions, including chemical abortions — to apply for “bubble zones” banning all pro-life activity of up to 150 meters.

Those convicted of breaching Bill 163 face a fine of up to $5,000 and a jail sentence of up to six months, which increases to a fine of up to $10,000 and a jail sentence of up to one year for a second and subsequent convictions.

When Fr. Van Hee, then 83 years old, was arrested, he was sitting on his trademark hunting and golfing chair on the sidewalk across from the Morgentaler Clinic on 65 Bank Street, with a sandwich board displaying signs not about abortion, but free speech.

One read: “The Primacy Of Free Speech: Cornerstone Of Western Civilization.” The other: "Without Free Speech The State Is A Corpse.”

The Crown initially charged the Jesuit priest with intimidating or attempting to intimidate the women going into the abortion center, a charge it later dropped and substituted charges relating to informing people within the bubble zone of issues pertaining to “abortion services” and to “performing an act of disapproval concerning issues related to abortion services by any means.”  

His lawyers, Toronto-based Philip Horgan and Ottawa-based Albertos Polizogopoulos, are challenging Bill 163 as violating Section 2 of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedom, which guarantees of freedom of speech and religion.

“We are challenging the legislation by way of a constitutional application.  Fr. Tony could have merely defended himself in the Ontario Court, by asserting that the charges were over broad, which may have allowed him to be acquitted, but would leave the legislation in place,” Horgan told LifeSiteNews.

 “We are seeking to have the underlying legislation quashed.”

Because of COVID-19, the case is taking longer to go through the courts, but in 2019, Fr. Van Hee’s lawyers provided six affidavits in support of their constitutional challenge, including support from Archbishop Terrence Prendergast, then archbishop of Ottawa, and Dr. Christian Elia, Executive Director of the Catholic Civil Rights League. 

In response, the Crown served 15 affidavits of various witnesses, from abortion industry advocates, to Ministry of the Attorney General and civic officials. As a result of more recent developments, one of the Crown’s affidavits has been withdrawn, rather than face further exposure through the court process. Cross examinations on these materials will occur over the next few weeks, with an expected hearing date in 2021.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Fr. Van Hee recently spoke to LifeSiteNews about his landmark case and the importance of continuing pro-life witness.

LSN: What made you decide to protest the bubble zone? 

Fr. Van Hee: 1. In a private letter from prison dated August 12, 2018, Mary Wagner was encouraging us to be closer to the women about to have an abortion. She wrote: 

Just look at the entrances to the killing places where, for the most part, there is rarely a single human being present to offer hope. These women are utterly abandoned at what would be the last few minutes of hope for their child's life (and their own protection).

2. The Parliamentary Protective Service, PPS, had taken over enforcement of regulations on Parliament Hill from the RCMP and had already reduced my signs from seven to two. It was only a matter of time when they would insist that those two signs be half the size and handheld, rather than as a sandwich board over the shoulders.

I left Parliament Hill after the Thanksgiving break in October 2018 before they could get around to telling me anything more. 

In summary, Mary Wagner’s plea for us to be closer to the women going in for an abortion, and the increasing lessening of freedom on the Hill were the two factors which led me to see if I could take up a place closer to the women about to undergo an abortion without breaking the bubble zone. I tried everything I could not to break the bubble zone so that I might remain closer to the women.

LSN: Why did you decide to focus on the free speech aspect, and not abortion? 

Fr. Van Hee: Firstly, because I was trying to avoid being arrested. 

Secondly, because a good part of my final letter to the Interdepartmental Committee on the Use of Parliament Hill, May, 2018, was in defense of free speech, having understood the foundational importance of this from a talk Jordan Peterson gave at the Ottawa Public Library, March 11, 2017, emphasizing the primacy of free speech as the cornerstone of Western Civilization.

(The Interdepartmental Committee, established early in 2006, 17 years after I had begun my witness on Parliament Hill, from the very beginning began to micro-manage demonstrators. Rather than give them as much leeway as possible they were giving them as little leeway as possible.  To counteract this policy, I would write letters to the Committee without ever getting an acknowledgement or a response, except once. In September 2016, CWO Paul (Smokie) Leblanc, chairperson for the Committee, rejected my request to be considered an exception to their regulations under the grandfather clause, since I was witnessing for 17 years before they were established.)

Thirdly, because the very purpose of the bubble zone law was to make free speech about abortion a criminal offence.

LSN: Can you describe the sequence of events that led to your arrest on October 24, 2018?

On Saturday, October 20, I went opposite the Bank Street Morgentaler Clinic to challenge them on freedom of speech. I was across from the clinic but closer to the government building, called the C.D. Howe Building, with an entrance at 240 Sparks St and another on 235 Queen St. I was told that this building was on Crown Land. 

On Monday, October 22, one of the C.D. Howe security guards asked me to move a couple of feet in order to be off their property and so I did. For whatever reason, I decided not to challenge him about Crown Land.

Sunday, I stayed home. Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, October 22 to 24, I continued the challenge on Bank Street opposite the Morgentaler Clinic. On Wednesday, I was arrested and charged. The police issued to me a summons to appear in court and confiscated my signs right there on the sidewalk across from the Morgentaler Clinic.

LSN: Were you surprised that you weren’t arrested sooner or surprised you were arrested at all, given that your sign was not about abortion?

Fr. Van Hee: I did expect to be arrested Monday, rather than Wednesday, but I was not surprised that I was arrested and had prepared a written statement for the Police which said in part: “In order that there may be no doubt about my reason for this witness, defending the primacy of free speech, I make this written statement of my intent.”

LSN: Your lawyers said in an interview on Counterpoint with Tanya Granic Allen that you had a copy in your hand of the bill you were protesting, which you were willing to give to people who asked what you were doing there, and that this was providing information on abortion services, which is breaking the bubble zone law. Can you elaborate on this?

Fr. Van Hee: I had three copies of the bill and three copies of my letter of intent but only to give to the police. I intended to give them to the two arresting officers and one for their Superior Officer but they only took one copy of the written material I had prepared for them. I had no other literature with me at that time. I had a copy of the bill because I wanted them to show me what part of the bill I was violating. They said “intimidation”. That was the original charge, later dropped in favor of:

3 (1) While in an access zone [it is prohibited to] … (b) inform or attempt to inform a person concerning issues related to abortion services, by any means, including oral, written or graphic means; (c) perform or attempt to perform an act of disapproval concerning issues related to abortion services, by any means, including oral, written or graphic means.

LSN: Were you intending from the outset to bring a constitutional challenge to the bubble zone law? 

Fr. Van Hee:The word “constitutional” had not entered my mind, nor had going all the way to the Supreme Court, but I did intend to challenge the law on the grounds of our right to free speech. 

LSN: Regarding your cross-examination, was it the first time you have ever been cross-examined? If not, what was the other occasion?

Fr. Van Hee:My affidavit was submitted November 14, 2019. I was cross-examined on it Friday, May 29, 2020. It was the first time I was cross-examined on an affidavit but I was cross-examined as a witness by prominent lawyer, John Nelligan, representing Mike Duffy, M.P., accused of stealing Glen Kealey’s sign on Parliament Hill and dumping it in the garbage inside the House of Commons 1990 or 1991.

LSN: How long did it last? What was your impression of the experience, or how would you describe it, and does anything about it stand out for you? Were you taken by surprise at anything? 

Fr. Van Hee:It was about two hours. My impression, after the fact, was that it was pleasant, rather than stressful. It was by video. Nothing stands out and I was not taken by surprise on anything.

LSN: Were you expecting this court challenge to take as long as it is?

Fr. Van Hee:No, but I understand that Covid-19 played a part in the length of the process.

LSN: How can people help out in this effort? 

Fr. Van Hee:Praying for the success of the constitutional challenge is the most important. Secondly, by donating financially whatever they are able. (Campaign Life Coalition has set up a legal defense fund on WonderWe for Fr. Van Hee, here.)

LSN: You’ve also been arrested twice on the Hill, first in 1990, which landed you in jail. Can you describe what happened in the first arrest?

Fr. Van Hee:On Monday, March 19, the Feast of St Joseph, 1990, around 3:00 pm, Glen Kealey and I were arrested by the RMCP for violating a new cabinet order requiring protesters to stay at least 50 meters (164 feet) from entrances to the Parliament buildings. 

Glen was the target of this regulation because, since the November 21, 1988, Federal Election in which Brian Mulroney was re-elected, Glen had been shouting rhyming insults and accusations of crime and corruption at Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and his cabinet ministers as they left their limousines on their way into the House of Commons.

I just happened to be there and they couldn’t very well arrest him and not me.

Glen Kealey and I spent four nights and five days: from Monday 19, about 3:00 pm to Friday around noon, if my memory serves me right. 

Our trial was Friday morning, March 24 at the Elgin Street Courthouse. Since the regulation violation was equivalent to a parking infraction, for which the maximum penalty was $400, and our incarceration of five days and four nights, amply overpaid the penalty, the judge said we were free to go.

LSN: You also were arrested and successfully beat another charge concerning free speech in 1991.  Can you describe what happened then?

Fr. Van Hee: I was arrested on Parliament Hill on March 7, 1991. Here is a summary from a June 23, 1991 Ottawa Citizenreport on my acquittal: “Anti-abortion protester Fr. Anthony Van Hee was acquitted Friday [June, 21, 1991] of obstructing police after an Ottawa judge deemed the charges ‘arbitrary, unnecessary and unjust … Van Hee was arrested [March 7, 1991] by RCMP after he refused to stand behind a barricade erected as a security measure during the Persian Gulf war [August 2, 1990-February 28, 1991].”

The most important outcome of this arrest was the June 21, 1991 decision of Senior Judge P.R. Belanger of the Ontario Court of Justice in Her Majesty the Queen against Father Anthony Van Hee, which gave demonstrators the inherent dignity of Canadian citizenship, which was being eroded by the Interdepartmental Committee, seemingly, in every way possible. 

I quoted the pertinent parts of Judge Belanger’s ruling in a May 2, 2016 letter to the Committee:

Parliament Hill is arguably the most public place in this country and nowhere should the lawful exercise of Canadian citizen’s rights and freedoms be more scrupulously respected. Is there a tribune better suited for ordinary Canadians upon which to fearlessly voice their opinions and to circulate freely?  

Bearing in mind that the accused was exercising one of our most fundamental freedoms in this particular place, it follows, it seems to me, that the court should be particularly careful in its insistence that the Crown prove [its case]” …

Taking these facts into account, I find that the restrictions imposed upon the accused to have been arbitrary, unnecessary and unjustified in the circumstances which prevailed on March 7, 1991. I emphasize those words, and I consequently conclude that he ought to be acquitted ... 

If freedom of speech is not patently and conspicuously seen to be cherished and protected there [on Parliament Hill], how can it meaningfully be seen to be protected and cherished anywhere else in Canada?’

LSN: Are you still on the Hill praying and fasting when Parliament is in session?

Fr. Van Hee:No, I left Parliament Hill for the reasons given above, after the Thanksgiving break 2018. After my arrest I spent three days, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, from 9:15 am to 3:15 pm at the corner of Bank and Queen Streets, as close to the place where the abortions are committed, but outside the bubble zone, until March 12, 2020, when more stringent Covid-19 restrictions were introduced. I did, however, take part for those same three days and times in the 40 Days for Life, September 23 to November 1, 2020.

LSN: Could you briefly describe, if you would, why you decided to take up this singular witness on Parliament Hill? What insights has it given you?

Fr. Van Hee:From pro-life literature, audio and video tapes I was convinced that worldwide abortion was the greatest single evil in all of human history, apart from the death of Christ, and the testimonies of many Pastors in Randall Terry's half hour video on Operation Rescue convinced me that we had to treat abortion as the crime it truly is.

Because I have a strong contemplative tendency and a need for solitude, my 29 years of praying, fasting and witnessing on Parliament Hill and two years at the Morgentaler Clinic have been the best years of my life. It seems odd that in such a public place as Parliament Hill I should have those needs met more than anywhere else in my life, but it is true.

LSN: What would you say to pro-life advocates just starting out and are facing these bubble zones, as well as a very hostile social and cultural environment?

Fr. Van Hee:Read LifeSiteNews’ coverage by then Rome correspondent, Hilary White, of a private meeting of pro-life leaders in Rome, which took place September 10, 2013, entitled, “GAP founder [Gregg Cunningham] says fear of 'prophetic' confrontation of abortion culture is crippling pro-life efforts.” What Gregg is reported to have said over seven years ago is still as relevant now as it was then, maybe even more so.

LSN: What would you say to pro-life advocates who may be getting discouraged?

Fr. Van Hee:Don’t sweat! God’s world is perfect for His purposes. The checks and balances are all in place. Even the hairs of our head are numbered. God doesn’t do anything imperfectly. He only allows evil in order to bring about a greater good. You can’t possibly imagine the great good which God is bringing about by the great evil of worldwide abortion, like the great good He brought about by His Son’s death. And the same goes for all the other evils all over the world. And He is with every one of His children in their suffering, torture, and death, holding them in His hands. It is true what the song says: “He’s got the whole world in His hands.” “He guides the nations on earth” (Ps 67:4).

LSN: Why is pro-life witness so important at this time?

Fr. Van Hee:The late Cardinal Carlo Caffarra said it best: “Testimony means to say, to speak, to announce openly and publicly. Someone who does not testify in this way is like a soldier who flees at the decisive moment in a battle. We are no longer witnesses, but deserters, if we do not speak openly and publicly.”

LSN: Is there anything else you would like to comment on?

Fr. Van Hee: In Isaiah we read, “In that day: ‘A pleasant vineyard, sing of it! I, the Lord, am its keeper; every moment I water it. Lest anyone harm it, I guard it night and day’.”

We are that vineyard! Not only does He water it every moment, but He repairs, restores and purifies it every moment, pouring over it the Blood of Christ.

To donate to Fr. Van Hee’s legal defence fund, “Help Fr. Tony Van Hee,” on WonderWe, go here


  abortion, bubble zone, fr. tony van hee, free speech, tony van hee

News

One million Trump supporters to meet in DC on Jan. 6 to support election integrity

Both houses of Congress will convene on Wednesday to decide whether or not to certify the results of the Electoral College vote in December.
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 8:17 am EST
Featured Image
Trump supporters marched to the Supreme Court on Nov. 14 to protest election fraud Shutterstock
Raymond Wolfe
By

Challenge to the Electoral College vote needs YOUR help! Contact your U.S. Rep and Senator today!

LifeSiteNews is facing increasing censorship. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

WASHINGTON, D.C., January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Over 1 million supporters of President Donald J. Trump are expected to meet in Washington, D.C., between Tuesday and Wednesday to rally for the president and show support for election integrity.

This week’s events are being touted as the “biggest rally in history” by top Trump backers and may last several days. The organizers have already raised over $170,000 in advance.

Both houses of Congress will convene on Wednesday, January 6, to decide whether or not to certify the results of the Electoral College vote in December.

Following a meeting in December with Republican congressmen who plan to contest electoral votes, Trump tweeted his expectation of a “[b]ig protest in D.C. on January 6th” that “will be wild.”

Conservative groups had planned several rallies, which have now merged into a larger event called March to Save America.

“On January 6, 2021, millions of Americans will descend upon Washington DC to let the establishment know we will fight back against this fraudulent election,” the event page for the march announced.

A pre-rally at Freedom Plaza will be held from 1 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. on Tuesday. Protestors will then convene at the Ellipse in the President’s Park, near the White House, for an all-day rally attended by President Trump that starts at 7 a.m. the next day.

Readers may RSVP here.

“Take a stand with President Trump and the #StopTheSteal coalition and be at the The Ellipse (President’s Park) at 7am. The fate of our nation depends on it,” the March to Save America wrote.

Wild Protest,” a rally organized with Stop the Steal that has joined with March to Save America, anticipates at least 1 million attendees, according to Ali Alexander, head of Stop the Steal.

“Our presence in Washington D.C. will let Members of Congress know that we stand with Rep. Mo Brooks and his colleagues in the House of Representatives who will bravely object to the certification of the Electoral College,” the Wild Protest organizers have said.

Dozens of Republicans members of the next Congress, including Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks, have committed to contesting the electoral votes of certain swing states. At least four of them are slated to speak at the march on Tuesday.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Multiple state representatives will join the event as well, as will Dr. Simone Gold of America’s Frontline Doctors, a popular medical group that promotes alternative measures to combat COVID-19, and Trump confidant Roger Stone.

Other March to Save America partners include March for Trump, Turning Point Action, Eighty Percent Coalition, and the Phyllis Schlafy Eagles.

Eighty Percent Coalition will host speakers on Tuesday, such as former New York City police commissioner Bernard Kirk and recently-pardoned Trump aide George Papadopolous.

Turning Point Action is offering free transportation for attendees between the ages of 18-30 who live in certain areas of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, North Carolina, and Virginia.


  donald trump, election fraud, march to save america, stop the steal, voter fraud

Opinion

TRANSCRIPT: Steve Bannon’s ‘War Room’ interview with Abp. Viganò

The Truth can be denied by the majority for a certain amount of time, or by some people forever, but it can never be hidden from everyone forever. This is the lesson of History, which has inexorably revealed the great crimes of the past and those who perpetrated them.
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 2:01 pm EST
Featured Image
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
By

January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Editor’s note: The following is a transcript of an interview Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò gave on the “War Room” with Steve Bannon.  

1. Now that the Vatican has renewed its insidious secret agreement with China, a deal which you have repeatedly condemned as promoted by Bergoglio with the assistance of McCarrick, what can the “children of light” of the Great Awakening concretely do to undermine this unholy alliance with this brutal Communist regime?

The dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party is allied to the global deep state, on the one hand so that together they can attain the goals that they have in common, on the other hand because the plans for the Great Reset are an opportunity to increase the economic power of China in the world, beginning with the invasion of national markets. At the same time that it pursues this project in its foreign policy, China is pursuing a domestic plan to restore the Maoist tyranny, which requires the cancellation of religions (primarily the Catholic religion), replacing them with a religion of the State which definitely has many elements in common with the universal religion desired by globalist ideology, whose spiritual leader is Bergoglio.

The complicity of Bergoglio’s deep church in this infernal project has deprived Chinese Catholics of the indefectible defense that the Papacy had always been for them. Up until the papacy of Benedict XVI, the papacy had not made any agreements with the Beijing dictatorship, and the Roman Pontiff retained the exclusive right to appoint bishops and govern dioceses. I recall that even at the time of the Bill Clinton administration during the 1990’s, former Cardinal McCarrick was the point of contact between the deep church and the American deep state, carrying out political missions in China on behalf of the US administration. And the suspicions that the resignation of Benedict XVI involved China are quite strong and coherent with the picture that has been emerging in recent months.

Thus we find ourselves faced with an infamous betrayal of the mission of the Church of Christ, carried out by her highest leaders in open conflict with those members of the Chinese Catholic underground hierarchy who have remained faithful to Our Lord and to His Church. My affectioned thoughts and prayers are with them and with Cardinal Zen, an eminent confessor of the faith, whom Bergoglio recently shamefully refused to receive.

We believers must act on the spiritual level by fervent prayer, asking God to give special protection to the Church in China, and also by continually denouncing the aberrations carried out by the Chinese regime. This action must be accompanied by a work of raising awareness within governments and international institutions that have not been compromised by the Chinese communist dictatorship, so that the violations of human rights and the attacks on the freedom of the Catholic Church in China may be denounced and punished with sanctions and strong diplomatic pressure. And this is the line that President Trump is pursuing with decisive courage. Beijing’s complicity with political and religious elements that are involved in murky operations of speculation and corruption must likewise be exposed. These profit-driven dealings constitute a very grave act of treason by politicians and public officials against their nation and also a grave betrayal of the Church by the men who lead her. I also think that in some cases this betrayal is not only carried out by individuals but also by the institutions themselves, as in the case of the European Union, which is currently finalizing a commercial agreement with China despite its systematic violation of human rights and its violent repression of dissent.

It would be an irreparable disaster if Joe Biden, who is heavily suspected of being complicit with the Chinese dictatorship, would be designated as President of the United States.

2. You have been very confident that God desires a Trump victory in order to defeat the forces of evil inherent in the globalists’ Great Reset. What would you say to convince the naysayers who are ambivalent to the idea that this is a momentous battle between the children of light and the children of darkness?

I simply consider who Trump’s adversary is and his numerous ties to China, the deep state, and the advocates of globalist ideology. I think of his intention to condemn us all to wear masks, as he has candidly admitted. I think of the fact that, incontestably, he is only a puppet in the hands of the elite, who are ready to remove him as soon they decide to replace him with Kamala Harris.

Beyond the political alignments, we must further understand that – above all in a complex situation like the present one – it is essential that the victory of the one who is elected President must be guaranteed in its absolute legal legitimacy, avoiding any suspicion of fraud and taking note of the overwhelming evidence of irregularities that has emerged in several states. A President who is simply proclaimed as such by the mainstream media affiliated with the deep state would be deprived of all legitimacy and would expose the nation to dangerous foreign interference, as has already been shown to have happened in the current election.

3. You seem to suggest that the Trump Administration could be instrumental in helping to return the Church to a pre-Francis Catholicism. How does the Trump Administration accomplish that, and how can American Catholics work to save the world from this globalist ‘reset’?

Bergoglio’s subservience to the globalist agenda is obvious, as well as his active support for the election of Joe Biden. In the same way, Bergoglio’s hostility to Trump and his repeated attacks against the President are evident. It is clear that Bergoglio considers Trump as his principal adversary, the obstacle that needs to be removed, so that the Great Reset can be put in motion.

Thus on the one hand we have the Trump administration and the traditional values that it holds in common with those of Catholics; on the other hand we have the deep state of the self-styled Catholic Joe Biden, who is subservient to the globalist ideology and its perverse, anti-human, antichristic, infernal agenda.

In order to put an end to the deep church and restore the Catholic Church, the extent of the involvement of the leaders of the Church with the Masonic-globalist project will have to be revealed: the nature of the corruption and crimes that these men have carried out, thereby making themselves vulnerable to blackmail, just as happens in a similar way in the political field to members of the deep state, beginning with Biden himself. Thus it is to be hoped that any proof of such crimes that is in the possession of the Secret Services would be brought to light, especially in relation to the true motives that led to the resignation of Benedict XVI and the conspiracies underlying the election of Bergoglio, thereby permitting the expulsion of the mercenaries who have seized control of the Church.

American Catholics still have time to denounce this global subversion and stop the establishment of the New Order: let them think about what sort of future they want for the coming generations, and of the destruction of society. Let them think about the responsibility that they have before God, their children, and their nation: as Catholics, as fathers and mothers of their families, and as patriots.

4. Against all odds, average Americans are fighting to expose the massive and coordinated theft of our election: what advice would you give to our recalcitrant politicians about what is at stake for our nation and the world if we submit to this theft?

The Truth can be denied by the majority for a certain amount of time, or by some people forever, but it can never be hidden from everyone forever. This is the lesson of History, which has inexorably revealed the great crimes of the past and those who perpetrated them.

Thus I invite politicians, beyond their political loyalties, to become champions of the Truth, to defend it as an indispensable treasure which alone can guarantee the credibility of institutions and the authority of the people’s representatives, in accord with the mandate they have received, the oath they have sworn to serve their country, and their moral responsibility before God. Each one of us has a role that Providence has entrusted to us, and which it would be culpable to shrink from. If the United States misses this opportunity, now, it will be wiped out from History. If it allows the idea to spread among the masses that the electoral choice of the citizens – the first expression of democracy – can be manipulated and thwarted, it will be complicit in the fraud, and will certainly deserve the execration of the entire world, which looks to America as a nation which has fought for and defended its freedom. 

5. In your letter to the President on October 25, the Solemnity of Christ the King, you spoke of the efforts of the deep state as “the final assault of the children of darkness.” There is a concerted effort by the globalists and their media partners to conceal and obscure the true tyrannical agenda implicit in the Great Reset, by calling it a wild conspiracy theory. What would you say to the skeptics who blissfully ignore the signs and plan to submit humanity to the domination of the global elites?

The plan of the Great Reset makes use of the mainstream media as an indispensable ally: the media corporations are almost all actively part of the deep state and know that the power that will be guaranteed to them in the future depends exclusively on their slavish adherence to its agenda.

Labeling those who denounce the existence of a conspiracy as “conspiracy theorists” confirms, if anything, that this conspiracy exists, and that its authors are very upset at having been found out and reported to public opinion. And yet they themselves have said it: Nothing will be the same again. And also: Build Back Better, in an effort to make us believe that the radical changes they want to impose have been made necessary by a pandemic, by climate change, and by technological progress.

Years ago, those who spoke of the New World Order were called conspiracy theorists. Today, all of the world’s leaders, including Bergoglio, speak with impunity about the New World Order, describing it exactly in the terms that were identified by the so-called conspiracy theorists. It is enough to read the globalists’ declarations to understand that the conspiracy exists and that they pride themselves on being its architects, to the point of admitting the need for a pandemic in order to reach their objectives of social engineering.

To the skeptics I ask: if the models that are proposed to us today are so terrible, what will our children be able to expect when the elite will have succeeded in taking total control over the nations? Families without father and mother, polyamory, sodomy, children who can change their sex, the cancellation of Religion and the imposition of an infernal cult, abortion and euthanasia, the abolition of private property, a health dictatorship, a perpetual pandemic. Is this the world that we want, that you want for yourselves, your children, and your family and friends?

We must all become aware of how much the proponents of the New World Order and the Great Reset hate the inalienable values of our Greco-Christian civilization, such as Religion, the family, respect for life and the inviolable rights of the human person, and national sovereignty.

6. You have repeatedly warned that the ‘deep state’ and ‘deep church’ have colluded to plot in various ways to overthrow Benedict as well as President Trump. Besides Theodore McCarrick, who else is behind this infernal alliance, and how do Catholics undermine and expose it?

It is apparent that McCarrick acted on behalf of the deep state and the deep church, but he certainly did not do it alone. All of his activity suggests a very efficient organizational structure composed of people whom McCarrick had promoted and covered by other accomplices.

The events that led to the resignation of Benedict XVI still need to be clarified, but one of the members of the deep church, the deceased Cardinal Danneels admitted that he was a part of the so-called Saint Gallen Mafia, which essentially worked to bring about the “springtime of the Church” which John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s chief of staff, wrote about in his emails published by Wikileaks.

Thus there is a group of conspirators who have worked and still work in the heart of the Church for the interests of the elite. Most of them are identifiable, but the most dangerous are those who do not expose themselves, those whom the newspaper never mentions. They will not hesitate to force Bergoglio to resign also, just like Ratzinger, if he does not obey their orders. They would like to transform the Vatican into a retirement home for popes emeriti, demolishing the papacy and securing power: exactly the same as what happens in the deep state, where, as I have already said, Biden is the equivalent of Bergoglio.

In order to bring down the deep state and the deep church, three things are essential:

  1. first of all, becoming aware of what globalism’s plan is, and to what extent it is instrumental to the establishment of the kingdom of the Antichrist, since it shares its principles, means, and ends;
  2. secondly, firmly denouncing this infernal plan and asking the Shepherds of the Church – and also the laity – to defend her, breaking their complicit silence: God will demand of them an account for their desertion;
  3. finally, it is necessary to pray, asking the Lord to grant each one of us the strength to resist – resistite fortes in fide, Saint Peter warns us – against the ideological tyranny that is daily imposed on us not only by the media but also by the cardinals and bishops who are under Bergoglio’s thumb.

If we can prove ourselves strong in facing this trial; if we know how to hold ourselves anchored to the rock of the Church without allowing ourselves to be seduced by false christs and false prophets, the Lord will permit us to see – at least for now – the defeat of the assault of the children of darkness against God and men. If out of fear or complicity we follow the prince of this world, denying our Baptismal promises, we will be condemned with him to inexorable defeat and eternal damnation. I tremble for those who do not realize the responsibility that they have before God for the souls that He has entrusted to them. But to those who fight courageously to defend the rights of God, the Nation, and the Family, the Lord assures his protection. He has placed His Most Holy Mother at our side, the Queen of Victories and the Help of Christians. We invoke Her faithfully during these difficult days, confidently certain of Her intervention.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop

Die Octavæ Nativitatis Domini
January 1st, 2021


  build back better, cardinal joseph zen, carlo maria viganò, catholic, china, great reset, pope francis

Blogs

The best Christmas gift from a bishop this Christmas 

US Bishop Joseph Strickland has provided his flock with a tremendous gift this Christmas season.
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 3:57 pm EST
Featured Image
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

January 4, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The best Christmas gift is always that which is rare and truly needed and of great value. Naturally, for all of us, the very greatest Gift is Christ Himself in the Holy Eucharist, and that is offered to us by priests. But apart from the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass there are other gifts most valuable due to their rarity, our own need of them, and their importance for us. 

US Bishop Joseph Strickland, who is without doubt one of the most faithful bishops in North America, and indeed the world, offered what some may have thought strange gift to his flock this Christmas. On December 22, Bishop Strickland published a blogpost called, “A very special Christmas blessing.” 

He admitted himself that many may find it “a very strange Christmas blessing,” but, he added that it was his prayer that would “enhance our celebration of the Nativity of Our Lord Jesus Christ.” 

What was the Christmas blessing? What is so valuable, so rare, and so sorely needed by the faithful today so as to make this blogpost the best Christmas gift this year? 

It was the description of Hell from St. Faustina’s vision of hell. Read it below and see if you’ve every heard anything like it before. We are always supposed to contemplate the four last things. And here is that description taken from the diary of St. Faustina Kowalska. I warn you that this description is quite disturbing but most beneficial and necessary, especially today. 

In her “Diary: Divine Mercy in My Soul,” St. Faustina writes: 

Today, I was led by an Angel to the chasms of hell. It is a place of great torture; how awesomely large and extensive it is!  

The kinds of tortures I saw; the first torture that constitutes hell is the loss of God; the second is perpetual remorse of conscience; the third is that one’s condition will never change; the fourth is the fire that will penetrate the soul without destroying it — a terrible suffering, since it is a purely spiritual fire, lit by God’s anger; the fifth torture is continual darkness and a terrible suffocating smell, and, despite the darkness, the devils and the souls of the damned see each other and all the evil, both of others and their own; the sixth torture is the constant company of Satan; the seventh torture is horrible despair, hatred of God, vile words, curses and blasphemies.  

These are the tortures suffered by all the damned together, but that is not the end of the sufferings. There are special tortures destined for particular souls. These are the torments of the senses. Each soul undergoes terrible and indescribable sufferings, related to the manner in which it has sinned. There are caverns and pits of torture where one form of agony differs from another. I would have died at the very sight of these tortures if the omnipotence of God had not supported me. Let the sinner know that he will be tortured throughout all eternity, in those senses which he made use of to sin. 

I am writing this at the command of God, so that no soul may find an excuse by saying there is no hell, or that nobody has ever been there, and so no one can say what it is like. 

I, Sister Faustina, by the order of God, have visited the abysses of hell so that I might tell souls about it and testify to its existence. I cannot speak about it now; but I have received a command from God to leave it in writing. The devils were full of hatred for me, but they had to obey me at the command of God. What I have written is but a pale shadow of the things I saw. But I noticed one thing: that most of the souls there are those who disbelieved that there is a hell. 

Bishop Strickland noted that as St. Faustina speaks of her vision of hell she reminds us that this is a destiny we can avoid because, “God so loved the world that He gave us His only Begotten Son.” Bishop Strickland concludes: “Let us listen to Him, repent of our sins, seek reparation for our sins and embrace the fullness of His Mercy! May our celebration of Christmas this year be enhanced by a sober realization of what Jesus Christ God's Divine Son has saved us from! 

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

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

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

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

Subscribe

* indicates required

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

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

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


  christmas, hell, salvation, sister faustina, sr. faustina

Blogs

Two German cardinals oppose head of German bishops’ support of female ‘priests’

'One should remind you that, before your episcopal ordination, you had confirmed your loyalty to the teaching and order of the Church with an oath. Without this oath, you would have never been consecrated.'
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 2:31 pm EST
Featured Image
Bishop Georg Bätzing YouTube / screenshot
Maike Hickson Maike Hickson Follow Maike
By Maike Hickson

January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Bishop Georg Bätzing, the head of the German bishops’ conference, supported in a new interview the idea of “ordaining” women to the diaconate and the priesthood and a blessing for homosexual and cohabitating couples. He also defended the idea of intercommunion. And he even claimed that the German bishops could make some of these changes without approval from Rome. In a response, both Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller and Cardinal Walter Brandmüller expressed their opposition to these ideas.

Bätzing revealed in an interview with the German Catholic journal Herder Korrespondenz that already in the 1980s, he participated in discussions about the female “priesthood.” He argued that there are “well-developed arguments in favor of opening the sacramental [priestly] office also for women.” That is why he himself “often mention[s] the female diaconate, because I see there some more possibilities.” Mentioning the fact that Pope John Paul II and his successor “unanimously” stated that “this question has been answered,” the German bishop sees that “nevertheless, it [the question] is on the table.”

The bishop of Limburg also raised the question of the married priesthood (viri probati), asking how much “substance,” that is to say priestly vocations, “that we could have as an asset for the Evangelization” is being lost “because we hold on to the traditional conditions for admission [to the priesthood]?” Later on, he refers back to the question of the married priesthood, wondering “which authority finally decides whether or not the process [of discernment] has been accomplished,” and saying that “at some point, there needs to be a decision.”

When asked by the journalists whether this authority was not the Pope himself, Bätzing commented that “it is not in all questions up to the Pope. The Pope is responsible to make decisions only in clearly defined questions of the Faith.” But then, after mentioning the bishops and the college of bishops as part of the government of the Universal Church, he admitted that the question of the so-called female priesthood “cannot be answered by us here in Germany,” but, rather, only on the level of the Universal Church. But he proposed that not only women, but really all laymen should be able to deliver homilies during the sacrifice of the Holy Mass, something that heretofore was only possible for priests.

But with regard to the possibility of a liturgical blessing of so-called irregular couples – homosexual and cohabitating couples – the German bishop claimed that such a decision can indeed be taken by the German bishops “without Roman approval.” Bätzing then went on to say that he, however, is of the opinion “that we should change the Catechism in this respect.”

Bätzing is one of the two presidents of the so-called German Synodal Path which aims at reforming the Catholic Church in Germany. It especially aims at changing the Church's teachings regarding these above-mentioned topics such as female “ordination,” homosexuality, cohabitation, and lay governance. This Synodal Path has received much opposition in Germany, as well as in the world.

The German bishop also defended a document that argued in favor of a decision of conscience of the individual Christian – Protestant or Catholic – with regard to the question of whether or not he wishes to receive (Catholic) Holy Communion or the (Protestant) bread of the Last Supper. This document, which was written by an ecumenical group headed also by Bishop Bätzing, found strong criticism from the Vatican, with Cardinal Luis Ladaria Ferrer writing an opposing letter to this German bishop.

These comments by Bätzing provoked strong opposition first from Cardinal Brandmüller and then from Cardinal Müller. Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, in a short open letter to the head of the German bishops' conference, first asked the German bishop: “Did you really claim, against the the uninterrupted Tradition of the Church and while disregarding the final and infallible declaration by Pope Saint John Paul II, that the ordination of women to the diaconate and to the priesthood is possible, yes, even desirable?” He then went on to say that, if this is the case, “one should remind you that, before your episcopal ordination, you had confirmed your loyalty to the teaching and order of the Church with an oath. Without this oath, you would have never been consecrated.”

Cardinal Gerhard Müller responded today to the words of Bishop Bätzing, in an interview with Petra Lorleberg of the Austrian website Kath.net. “The so-called Synodal Path of the German dioceses has no authority whatsoever in order to introduce a teaching and practice in questions of Faith and Morals that stand in contradiction to the binding doctrine of the Catholic Church,” he stated. He even went so far as to say the attempt to impose upon the faithful such “decisions against the Faith” made by the German bishops is “null and void” since it is “in opposition to the Catholic Church's constitution.”

“The disciplinary power of the bishops,” Cardinal Müller continued, “may never serve the enforcement of heretical teachings or immoral acts.”

The former head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith went on to explain that many of the themes of the Synodal Path are based on “an anti-Catholic resentment” and remind him “somehow of Nietzsche's idea of the ‘eternal return of the same.’”

Cardinal Müller also commented on the German bishop’s proposal to re-write the Catechism with regard to homosexual and cohabitating couples. “To think that one can arbitrarily rewrite the ‘Catechism of the Catholic Church’ by making revealed truth a function of human desires (blessing sexual relations outside of marriage),” the German cardinal wrote, “is to invert the justification of the sinner by God’s Grace into the justification of sin by man’s disobedience.”

Concerning the question of the “ordination” of women to the diaconate and to the priesthood, Cardinal Müller re-affirmed in this new interview the Church’s judgment “that only a baptized man can validly receive the Sacrament of Holy Orders in all of its three degress.” Neither sociological, nor naturalistic or historical analyses can here be quoted.

Finally, Cardinal Müller also rejected the idea of Intercommunion, even if only individuals were to decide to participate in it. He pointed to the “inner relationship between Church and Holy Eucharist” and “its reciprocal constitution” which are “alien to the normal Protestant way of thinking.”

The differences between Protestant and Catholic positions here concern “both the nature of the Church and, in addition to the five other sacraments not recognized by the Protestants (Confirmation, Penance, Extreme Unction, Holy Orders and Holy Matrimony), especially the Eucharist (as a sacramental realization of Christ's sacrifice),” Müller expounded. “The Catholic celebration of the Eucharist is by no means identical with the Protestant Lord's Supper, not only in its external rite, but also in its dogmatic content.”

“A Catholic cannot at all go to the Last Supper without contradicting the Faith of the Catholic Church,” he concluded.


  cardinal gerhard müller, catholic, female priests, georg batzing, homosexuality, intercommunion, walter brandmuller, women's ordination

Blogs

Governments must stop trying to replace families, and support them instead

The most fundamental step of all, however, is for young people to believe in the family enough to form and maintain one
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 10:31 am EST
Featured Image
shutterstock
By Dr. Joseph Shaw

January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – During the Coronavirus epidemic high-profile British soccer-player Marcus Rashford called for the extension of free school lunches over the school holidays. School meals are free in the U.K. for the children of poorer families, and Rashford thought that it would make sense for this concept to be extended to the time when schools are out. Prime Minister Boris Johnson caved in to the campaign in the summer, giving poorer families vouchers to use in supermarkets, but refused to do so again for the Christmas break, though a lot of volunteers did step in with offers of free cooked meals, and the government promised help through the normal channels of the welfare system. In the meantime Rashford was given an honor—“Member of the British Empire” (MBE)—usually given to people who have spent a lifetime volunteering, at the age of 23.

Rashford’s initiative was prompted by a commendable compassion, but there is something slightly troubling about the terms in which his campaign took off. Feeding the very poor is a fundamental category of good work, but what have schools got to do with it? It was difficult to shake off the impression that Rashford was benefitting from an unfortunate idea which seems to have taken hold: that schools are primary care-givers. If they are, the periods of time in which schools are not in session, for whatever reason, become problematic. Who is going to look after the children then?

Christina Odone summarizes the results of an Ipsos opinion poll conducted in January this year.

Almost six in ten parents believe that schools and parents should be equally responsible for reading and writing (59 per cent) as well as non-academic skills such as imagination and creativity (57 per cent), speaking and listening (54 per cent) and physical skills (53 per cent). Almost half feel schools and parents should have equal responsibility for social skills and behaviors (49 per cent) and almost the same proportion (43 per cent) believe that schools and parents should have equal responsibility for children’s emotional awareness.

Another opinion poll, conducted by YouGov, shows that 46% of children arriving in school at the age of 5 are not “school ready:” in diapers, not familiar with cutlery, not talking properly, not able to respond to questions, and so on.

It is not so very surprising that parents who expect their children’s schools will teach them “speaking and listening” may present these schools with children not very good at speaking and listening. As the second poll found, “some kids can’t pronounce their own names.”

What is the solution to a problem created by a shift of expectations and resources from families to impersonal, state-run institutions? Why, obviously, it is a greater shift of expectations and resources from families to impersonal, state-run institutions. Reporting the YouGov finding, the TES laments that pre-school children have missed out of four months of nursery. You know, those institutions where under-5s are stressed by the absence of their parents, and are often cared for by staff with poor English, if not actual sex-abusers.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

And so failures by families are addressed not by supporting families but by undermining them further, leading to more failures. 

Schools which see themselves as correcting or supplanting the ideas parents have inculcated into their children are not just a problem insofar as their ideas are wrong. They are a problem because they undermine the authority of parents. If they rubbish parents’ moral and religious values, how can they expect those parents to continue to present to them children who are disciplined, hard-working, and polite?

The undermining of the family also includes the systematic dis-incentivizing of married, single-earner families by the tax and welfare system: to such an extent that in the U.K. the “tax credit” system favors single-parent families. Again, the legal status of marriage has been manipulated in such a way that it is impossible to get a truly life-long, legally-binding union between a man and a woman, to say nothing of the way that same-sex unions have been forced on nations around the world.

It doesn’t have to be this way. In light of the fact that stable families, where biological parents look after their offspring and are legally married to each other, are associated with vastly better outcomes, it would be perfectly reasonable for the state to make forming and maintaining such families easier, not harder. Whenever policies in this direction are proposed, we hear the bizarre objection that they are intrusive and engaging in social engineering, as if policies which push things the other way are perfectly neutral.

This is something which Catholics and others should insist on when politicians come seeking our votes. The most fundamental step of all, however, is for young people to believe in the family enough to form and maintain one: when they do do so, they deserve our support.


  families, parents as first educators, primary educators

Blogs

House Dems ban words like ‘father’ and ‘mother,’ end prayer with ‘Amen and Awoman’

We are witnessing a coup against reality — against science and nature, and above all, truth — as liberal elites seek to establish and enforce a false construction of reality.
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 10:05 am EST
Featured Image
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO) C-SPAN
Doug Mainwaring Doug Mainwaring Follow Doug
By Doug Mainwaring

LifeSiteNews is facing increasing censorship. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

WASHINGTON, D.C., January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — It’s now clear that U.S. House Democrat leadership’s descent into depravity is complete. According to newly revealed House rules for the just-begun 117th Congress, terms such as “father, daughter, mother, and son” as well as gendered pronouns are banned.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the new rules reflect “the views and values of the full range of our historically diverse House Democratic Majority.”

And as if to make the depravity of their obsession with gender inclusiveness abundantly clear, during yesterday’s first session of the new year Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO) ended the opening prayer by declaring “Amen, and Awoman.”

To the ancient Biblical Hebrew word “Amen,” which means “May it be so,” Cleaver added a made-up nonsensical word, because “Amen” sounds to Democrats like an offensive reference to males.

All this cannot be written off as the silliness of political correctness within the Democratic Party. It’s not silly at all; it’s diabolical.

A coup against reality

What is going on?

This is a pivotal moment in the history of the United States, one which reveals the determination of many in leadership to reject reality and embrace delusion in the name of totalitarian power.

We are witnessing a coup against reality — against science and nature, and, above all, truth — as liberal elites seek to establish and enforce a false construction of reality, an ideological pseudo-reality.

The events of this past weekend create a public record documenting the transformation of liberal leadership into cult leadership.

Psychopaths, cowards, and rationalizers

“It must be observed that people who accept pseudo-realities as though they are ‘real’ are no longer normal people,” wrote Dr. James Lindsay in “Psychopathy and the Origins of Totalitarianism,” presciently published just a few days before the new Congress began. Lindsay’s work draws heavily upon Catholic philosopher Josef Pieper’s “Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power” published five decades ago.

While Lindsay addressed no specific social issue or personalities in his excellent essay, it sheds bright light on recent developments in the newly-seated U.S. House of Representatives led by Democrats.

“The ultimate purpose of creating a pseudo-reality is power,” said Lindsay.

“Pseudo-realities, being false and unreal, will always generate tragedy and evil on a scale that is at least proportional to the reach of their grip on power — which is their chief interest — whether social, cultural, economic, political, or (particularly) a combination of several or all of these,” he warned.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Such false realities “require power, coercion, manipulation, and eventually force to keep them in place. Thus, they are the natural playground of psychopaths, and they are enabled by cowards and rationalizers,” wrote Lindsay.

“Most importantly, pseudo-realities do not attempt to describe reality as it is but rather as it ‘should be,’ as determined by the relatively small fraction of the population who cannot bear living in reality unless it is bent to enable their own psychopathologies, which will be projected upon their enemies, which means all normal people.

Deadly language games

Democrats’ control over the meaning and usage of words in the 117th Congress is an abuse of language which will enable abuse of power. The Democrats are employing “discourse engineering” in order to achieve their larger goal of “social engineering.”

“These manipulations are therefore attractive to people with strong inclinations to control other people or to take power, particularly when they are of moderately high intelligence, relatively well-off, and linguistically savvy (while, perhaps, lacking in other more concretely valuable skills),” said Lindsay.

“The real alchemy of the pseudo-realist ideological project” is, according to Lindsay, “turning normal, mostly healthy people into psychologically, emotionally, and spiritually broken water-carriers who can no longer cope adequately with the features of reality and thus must prefer the pseudo-reality that was built to receive them — and, more importantly, to make strategic use of them.”

“The true alchemy of the pseudo-realist program; it transforms normal, moral people into immoral agents who must perpetrate evil to feel good and perceive as evil those who do good,” he reiterated.

Evil: The new ‘morality’ is a perversion of morality

The “paramorality” promoted in this pseudo-reality of gender politics “will always be repressive and totalitarian,” said Lindsay. “Dissent and doubt cannot be tolerated, and disagreement must be cordoned off into a moral pit that adherents dare not approach.”

Paramorality “is a particular type of perversion of morality that can feel more moral than moral [sic] but is, in fact, evil,” he said. It is “the domain of psychopathy, which, when inflicted on the normal masses, is evil.”

Lindsay elaborated:

The goal of the paramorality will always arise from and exist to favor people with particular psychopathologies who cannot otherwise cope with the discomforts of reality. This implies that an ideological pseudo-reality’s most successful means of gaining strength is through appealing to the perceived victimhood of those people and whipping up the grievances of those who have suffered similar injustices with more dignity.

When widely empowered, this should be treated as another symptom of impending civilizational calamity and a need to identify and reject the pseudo-reality manipulating these feelings.

“These people, as many have learned the hard way throughout history, are the otherwise good people who are capable of perpetrating genocides,” observed Lindsay.

In the end, the route that leaders of the Democratic Party have chosen will lead to “a complete reversal of sanity, and the conversion of normal to ideologically psychopathic,” and all of this will have been accomplished under the banner of the sexual revolution.

Will this be a turning point in the sexual revolution?

Liberal elites, led by five members of the U.S. Supreme Court, dealt a substantial blow to reality, as well as civil and religious liberty, in 2015 when they altered the immutable definition of marriage to include genderless, anti-complementary “marriage.” More recently they have “expanded” the definition of “sex” as a matter of civil rights to include “transgendered” individuals.

Something is desperately wrong when the supposed brightest legal minds in the nation determine that sodomy constitutes consummation of marriage and genitalia are no longer indicative of gender. Or where a child, whether unborn or recently born, is not considered a human being, but is something to be snuffed out and disposed of in the trash.

Sexual revolutionaries have succeeded in their quest against human dignity because a blanket of dullness, darkness and depravity has been settling over our nation and the rest of the “civilized” world for several decades.

Our only hope is to refute the Democrats’ embrace of unreality and reject it. Refuse to be coerced and resist participating in their distorted view of reality before their psychopathy attains totalitarian power.

May the corrupt prayerful declaration “Awoman,” uttered unselfconsciously in the halls of Congress, trivializing both God and humanity, be a turning point where Americans resolve to reject unreality and delusion and insist that our legislative leaders return to reality.

Use this link to read all of Dr. James Lindsay’s excellent essay: Psychopathy and the Origins of Totalitarianism


  democrats, emanuel cleaver, homosexuality, house democrats, james lindsay, transgenderism

Blogs

Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro leads condemnations of new Argentina abortion law

'“I deeply regret the lives of Argentine children, now subject to being cut from their mothers' wombs with the consent of the State'
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 9:22 am EST
Featured Image
Edilson Rodrigues/Agência Senado
Jonathon Van Maren Jonathon Van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon Van Maren

January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) –Across Latin America, politicians and pro-life leaders are responding to last week’s legalization of abortion in Argentina. Abortion activists have been hoping that the narrow Senate vote will herald a new shift away from protections for pre-born children across the continent, but the reactions thus far indicate that the pro-life majority is holding strong in the face of the Argentine tragedy.

President Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil condemned the vote in the strongest terms, releasing a statement on Twitter: “I deeply regret the lives of Argentine children, now subject to being cut from their mothers' wombs with the consent of the State. As far as it depends on me and my government, abortion will never be approved on our soil. We will always fight to protect the lives of the innocent!”

Brazil’s Foreign Affairs Minister Ernesto Araújo concurred, posting an article on the abortion vote and noting that his nation would remain “the vanguard of the right to life and in the defense of the defenseless…no matter how many countries legalize the barbarity of indiscriminate abortion disguised as ‘reproductive health’ or ‘social rights’.”

The Brazilian Minister for Women, Family and Human Rights Damares Alves stated that she "thanks God that our country is mostly pro-life” and that her government “works to protect the lives of our children even before they are born,” noting this is “the will of the people.” ​​​​​​

Journalists also pressed Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador on whether Mexico should legalize abortion the day after the Argentine vote. Abortion is only legal in Mexico City and the state of Oaxaca, and abortion activists recently faced a massive setback when the Mexican Supreme Court ruled against decriminalizing abortion in a devastating 4-1 vote. Lopez Obrador sidestepped the issue by stating that it is “a decision for women” and that a referendum should determine whether abortion is legalized. 

But the Mexican president appears to have no plans to introduce abortion legislation in the near future, especially as a nationwide poll of 15,000 adults published in September 2019 in the newspaper El Financiero indicated that a mere 32% of Mexicans favor legalization.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Cristina Valverde, a 34-year-old mother and pro-life activist from Ecuador who wrote a book on the subject in 2015, told me that she and many other activists were “very sad for unborn children and very disappointed with the politicians.” 

Valverde was watching the result of the vote with “several pro-life groups from across Latin America,” and all are determined to ensure that the abortion activists will be stopped cold. The Constitution of Ecuador protects life from conception, so she suspects that abortion activists will attempt to legalize abortion through the courts—and that pro-lifers must focus on electing anti-abortion politicians dedicated to the protection of human life. 

“Latin America is very pro-life, but we haven’t elected politicians with strong pro-life beliefs and that must change,” she told me. 

“Latin America is a region that loves life and family, but also has other problems such as poverty, inequality, and poor healthcare systems, which must be solved without abortion. Abortion is not the solution. In Ecuador, we have the presidential and congressional elections this February, and we have launched an initiative called Family Vote where the politicians are asked to sign a document that commits them to defending life and family as well as to be honest and end corruption.” This, pro-lifers hope, will prevent politicians from turning on them once they attain higher office.

The pro-life victory in Argentina in 2018 galvanized a continent-wide movement to push back against abortion activists; it appears that the 2020 defeat may do the same. Argentina’s pro-life activists fight on, and across Latin America, their comrades in the Blue Wave movement are redoubling their efforts.


  abortion, andrés manuel lópez obrador, argentina, jair bolsonaro, latin america, south america

Blogs

Pro-life leader after Argentina legalizes abortion: ‘We’ll fight’

‘First, we’re trying to brake this in court,’ said Camila Duro. After that, ‘the cultural battle is the priority. We’ll work to make abortion unthinkable.’
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 8:50 am EST
Featured Image
Pro-abortion protest in Argentina Shutterstock
Jonathon Van Maren Jonathon Van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon Van Maren

LifeSiteNews is facing increasing censorship. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina, January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — I have been following the war between the abortion activists, represented by their signature green gear, and the Blue Wave movement since 2018, when Argentina’s senate voted narrowly against legalizing abortion. Since then, I have been in contact with pro-life leaders and grassroots activists from across the continent as the anti-abortion movement has spread from country to country, culminating in massive marches. Pro-lifers not only in Argentina but in many Latin American nations were crushed by the narrow senate vote legalizing abortion last week.

When I spoke with Camila Duro, a 26-year-old Argentine pro-life leader who works for Frente Joven, and pro-life journalist José Carmuega shortly before the congressional vote in early December, they were concerned but cautiously optimistic that legalization would be avoided by a very narrow margin.

Millions of pro-lifers had taken to the streets across the country since 2018, and the victory two years ago had proven a catalyst for Latin America’s silent pro-life majority. Many people had been unaware that international organizations, global abortion giants, supposed human rights NGOs, and Western nations were pushing relentlessly to see abortion brought to their nations.

It was this pressure that pushed a handful of senators into the abortion camp. I reached Camila Duro two days after the vote, and she told me that the abortion activists had spared no effort to ensure that 2020 would not be a repeat of 2018.

“Senators from the party of President Alberto Fernández received a lot of pressure and blackmailing,” she told me. “The president himself went from province to province the weekend before the vote to make them change their votes. Many of them negotiated ‘favors’ in exchange for switching. It was outrageous.”

Despite this disappointment, Duro says there is one long-shot chance to halt legalization.

“There’s a judicial way, and we’ll take it,” she said. “There’s a double unconstitutional problem: our constitution was reformed in 1994 and we assumed international treaties with the reservation that we protect the right to life, incorporating the fact that life begins at conception. The second problem is with federalism, because here in Argentina, healthcare is a matter of each province. It is not a national thing. This law obliges provinces no matter what.”

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

The next steps for Argentina’s Blue Wave movement are simple.

“First, we’re trying to brake this in court,” Duro told me. After that, “the cultural battle is the priority. We’ll work to make abortion unthinkable. We’ll fight. Our doctors and the people are mostly against abortion. This is just a new start.” Millions of ordinary citizens put boots on the ground over the past two years, and the pro-life movement is ready for war — even if it proves to be a long one.

But first, many are still grieving. As someone working full-time in the pro-life movement, the result was heartbreaking for Duro.

“It was painful. Very painful,” she said. “In think the best we can do is to fight this battle till the end. The worst thing is to consider how many years this new battle is going to take, and how many babies are going to die because of this law, and how many women are going to be broken because of abortion. Many doctors pressure impoverished women to have abortions, and many may be tempted because of fear.”

First the courts; then the culture. Argentina has fallen, but her sleeping pro-life majority has awakened, and unlike many nations across the West, most of her citizens still do oppose abortion. Unfortunately, elections have consequences, and many left-wing Latin American politicians are determined to make their mark by bringing legal abortion to their impoverished nations, robbing the most vulnerable members of society of their rights to curry favor with the global elites.

Only the people can make a difference now.

Jonathon’s podcast, The Van Maren Show, is dedicated to telling the stories of the pro-life and pro-family movement. In his latest episode, he is is joined by Barbara Kay to discuss the ideologies which have influenced society’s institutions. Topics of the conversation include feminism, Marxist ideologies, transgenderism, and more.

You can subscribe here and listen to the episode below:


  abortion, alberto fernández, argentina, camila duro

Blogs

There will be a Constitutional rumble on Wednesday

Make sure that your congressman stands up for the Republic
Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 7:37 am EST
Featured Image
Evan El-Amin / Shutterstock.com
Steven Mosher Steven Mosher Follow Steven
By Steven Mosher

Challenge to the Electoral College vote needs YOUR help! Contact your U.S. Rep and Senator today!

WASHINGTON, D.C., January 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – We are living through history in the making, and it is not for the faint hearted.  What happens over the next week or two will arguably determine the fate of our Republic.  It will be written and talked about for generations to come.

The good news is that, as the irrefutable evidence of massive election fraud continues to pile up, things are starting to move in our direction.   

Despite the best efforts of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to hold them back, the Republicans in the U.S. Senate are starting to break for Trump.

It began with Senator Josh Hawley last week announcing that he would challenge the slates of Biden electors submitted from battleground states.  

Then came Senator Ted Cruz with ten more senators saying they would back Senator Hawley’s objection.

On the House side, the number of objectors has simply exploded. Chief of Staff Mark Meadows said Sunday that well over a hundred Republicans will raise objections. Some estimates run to over 140, over two-thirds of the entire caucus.

The numbers in both Houses will continue to grow as their angry constituents demand action.  Everyone should make sure that their congressmen and two senators, if they are Republicans, are committed to standing up and objecting to the Biden slate in stolen states. 

In the historic Constitutional rumble that will take place on January 6th, our side will go in well-armed with facts.  

More and more people are coming to understand that it is simply not possible that President Trump caused a seismic shift in voting patterns across the United States — which he did — and still lost.  A well-coordinated, nationwide fraud operation was necessary to overturn the will of the people and steal the election.  

Peter Navarro and Rudy Giuliani gave a master class on election fraud on Saturday to 300 state legislators from Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.  On Monday, the indefatigable Navarro will follow up his first report on election fraud, “Immaculate Deception”, by releasing a second, even more extensive report.  It will be called “The Art of the Steal.”

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Much new evidence emerged at last week’s hearing before Georgia lawmakers.  “Bar Code” Inventor Jovan Pulitzer was the star of the show as he remotely accessed a Dominion Voting Machine — live — during his testimony. So much for election security.

Pulitzer also testified that, by using optical scanning techniques that he developed, he can instantly tell whether mail-in ballots are paper frauds and forgeries.  He should be getting access to actual ballots today. 

Also testifying before the Georgia Senate were a team of data scientists, who demonstrated that 17,650 votes changed hands from the President to Biden in the Peach State on election night.  This is more than enough to give the state to Trump.

I need not tell you that all the whistle-blowers, data scientists, and computer software analysts who have come forward, at great risk to their reputations and even their persons, are heroes. Yesterday, Pulitzer reported that his team members who live in Atlanta are being attacked, tweeting, “One team member’s home took 5 shots through the windows in a drive by. Right through his daughter’s bedroom window.” 

When we are through this rough patch — and Trump is into his lawful second term — these people will be lauded as true “Heroes of the Republic.”

The list of “Villains of the Republic” is growing longer as well.  Among these will be the several Republican senators, led by Mitt Romney, who have declared that “The voters have spoken, and Congress must now fulfill its responsibility to certify the election results.”  One wonders what “voters” they are talking about—the ones who voted from beyond the grave? the ones who never existed at all? or perhaps those lucky ones whose ballots were fed into the tabulation machines and counted three or four times?

Besides contacting your elected officials, there are other ways you can help.  Go to the mega MAGA Rally on Wednesday in D.C. if you are within striking distance.  If you are not, go to one in your state capital, or organize one yourself in front of the office of a federal or state officeholder who refuses to act against the election fraud.

For example, today there is a massive gathering in Pennsylvania to stop the steal.  We now know that there were 170,830 more votes cast in Pennsylvania than there are voters.  How is this even possible.  And how can Biden be “certified” as the winner of the state when there are these kinds of grotesque ballot games being played?  

Hopefully Republican Senator Pat Toomey, who last week cast shade on the idea that there was any election fraud, will be paying attention to the demands of his constituents.  

All elected officials who do not take an unequivocal stand against election fraud should be considered to be forever corrupt.  We should work tirelessly to unseat them.

The Republican establishment needs to understand that, whatever happens, the Republican Party is Trump’s party now.  It is a pro-life, socially conservative, populist, pro-America party, comprised of people from all walks of life, from plumbers to small businessman, who put faith, family, and freedom first.

We intend to keep it that way.

Steven W. Mosher is the President of the Population Research Institute and the author of Bully of Asia: Why China’s Dream is the New Threat to World Order.


  2020 election, donald trump, election fraud, republican party, us politics, voter fraud

Featured Image

Episodes Mon Jan 4, 2021 - 4:56 pm EST

A reminder of Jesus’ love for us, told through a Christmas story

By Mother Miriam
By

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

In this episode, Mother Miriam speaks about how a Christmas family story demonstrates the importance of love, and 'the only reason we love is because He first loved us.'

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

Never miss a show! Subscribe to Mother Miriam Live email updates here.