All articles from June 4, 2021


News

Opinion

Blogs

Episodes

Video

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

The Pulse

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

News

Ex-LGBT come to DC to warn senators against dangers of the so-called Equality Act

'‘Changed’ has come to DC to appeal to our president and to congress to focus on human dignity apart from identity politics. America deserves to know there’s more to the story when it comes to LGBTQ experience. Many, like us, have changed. We left LGBTQ because we wanted to, and others join us every day.' 
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 8:42 pm EST
Featured Image
The Changed movement comes to the U.S. Capitol to voice serious concerns over the Equality Act. LifeSiteNews
Doug Mainwaring Doug Mainwaring Follow Doug
By Doug Mainwaring

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

WASHINGTON, D.C., June 4, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Former gay, lesbian, and transgender individuals have come to the nation’s capital this week to warn members of the U.S. Senate against the dangers of the so-called Equality Act, which threatens to diminish religious liberty and severely hinder those seeking to deal with unwanted same-sex attraction and gender dysphoria. 

About 50 members of the “Changed” movement gathered at the foot of the U.S. Capitol to make their stories of personal transformation known – finding their way out of homosexuality and transgenderism – and to urge Congress not to cut off access to religious and personal counseling that often plays a role in healing childhood sexual and emotional abuse and trauma that led to embracing those lifestyles.  

Image
Elizabeth Woning SOURCE: LifeSiteNews

“Changed has come to DC to appeal to our President and to Congress to focus on human dignity apart from identity politics,” said Elizabeth Woning of California, co-founder of the Changed movement and a former lesbian, now married to her husband for 15 years.  “America deserves to know there’s more to the story when it comes to LGBTQ experience.” 

“LGBTQ is also becoming an ideological worldview that Americans must have the right to embrace or reject on the same terms as religion,” continued Woning. “Many, like us, have changed. We left LGBTQ because we wanted to, and others join us every day.” 

“‘Changed’ stands in the gap between religious liberty and gay rights,” she explained. “We are Christians with LGBTQ in our past. People like us could consider ourselves a sexual minority, but we don’t see that as the truth of our lives.”  

Image
Daniel Mingo SOURCE: LifeSiteNews

If the Equality Act is passed into law, “It will give unequal rights to a minority, taking away the rights of many, many more,” asserted Daniel Mingo of Kentucky.   

“I was sexualy molested at 13, which led to anonymous sexual encounters with other males for approximately the next 30 years,” recounted Mingo. “I chose to leave that life, going into recovery for sexual addiction. I also became a born again believer, and I have been following Jesus now for 51 years.”   

“By choosing to leave the gay life, by choosing to stop those anonymous sexual encounters, I was able to determine my own course of treatment, which others would not be able to do if the Equality Act is passed,” said Mingo.  

Image
Jason Maxwell SOURCE: LifeSiteNews

Jason Maxwell traveled from Arkansas to say, “I am a survivor and overcomer of LGBT indoctrination that many in our country and churches have falsely partnered with, that says, ‘I was born that way.’” 

“Other LGBTQ don’t have to choose to find healing from sexual and emotional childhood  trauma,” he explained, “but I want to make sure that they have the freedom to make that choice if they want to,” and have the option to seek “pastoral care, lay counseling, and professional counseling.”  

“Today I stand before you a fully changed man, a husband of almost 10 years, and a father of three beautiful girls,” said Maxwell. “I’m standing here for the future of this country, a future in which my daughters, their future spouses, their children, and their grandchildren will have the right to go to public schools without worrying about being sexually indoctrinated to believe that their daddy, their grandfather, was a hateful bigot for simply choosing to heal from his childhood trauma.”   

“Those who have experienced childhood sexual and emotional trauma and abuse deserve the right to heal,” he added.    

Image
Tamika Sanders SOURCE: LifeSiteNews

Tamika Sanders, founder and executive director of Coming Out, Inc., said “legislation that says that change is not possible says that we don’t exist,” and it “forces individuals to remain trapped.”   

Sanders’ organization offers support services and resources to men and women of all ages dealing with emotional, sexual, spiritual, and relational brokenness that may have contributed to alternative lifestyle choices regarding their identity and sexuality.    

Legislation that bans “any attempt to change a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression will force individuals to remain silent, with no voice, with no one to talk to about their internal conflict and struggles, and absolutely nowhere to find healing and wholeness,” asserted Sanders.  

Image
David Reece SOURCE: LifeSiteNews

“I had a hard enough time without the pressure of public school telling me what to believe about sexuality and identity,” said David Reece. “I grew up in the 90s, and thankfully we didn’t have to hear about gender identity, sexuality, and sex all the time. That is not the case today.”  

“Let me be clear: Government should not mandate what sort of sex ed should be received by students in public schools, and they should especially not tell children how they should form understanding of sexuality and sexual identity,” said Reece.   

“Government should not mandate how a child’s parents should interact with their sexuality,” said Reece. “The government’s job should be to empower families to raise children well, not undermine the parental role by subverting and indoctrinating children at a young age.” 

Image
Drew Berryessa SOURCE: LifeSiteNews

“The Equality Act threatens my freedom to offer the same pastoral counseling that I received, that delivered me out of sexual addiction, that healed the effects of abuse and neglect, that helped me live the life that I dreamed of living,” said Drew Berryessa, a pastor from Oregon. 

Berryessa believes strongly in preserving the dignity and freedom of the LGBTQ community, but “equality is never achieved by silencing another community.  It’s never achieved by persecuting another viewpoint, specifically people of faith and conviction.  The Equality Act does that.  

Image
Greg Quinlan SOURCE: LifeSiteNews

“Homosexuality doesn’t have to last a lifetime,” declared Greg Quinlan, also of New Jersey.  “All of us here prove that change is possible.”  

“The Equality Act is not about Equality,” said Quinlan. “The Equality Act has nothing to do with equality. It has to do with utter, absolute, dominance, and what we are doing with that is that we are erasing the truth from our children.”  

“We have the right to determine what happens to our children and to protect them from something we know to be harmful,” he continued. “So I urge Congress not to take up this bill. I urge Congress to table this bill.” 

Image
Bree Stevens SOURCE: LifeSiteNews

“The Equality Act would take away protections from women with stories like mine to access counseling that would help us heal from LGBTQ-related trauma,” said Bree Stevens of California.  

Image
Gabriel Pagan SOURCE: LifeSiteNews

The Equality Act, “HR5 eliminates the freedom that I found when I gave my life over to Jesus willingly,” said Gabriel Pagan of Georgia, now a happily married man with a young son and twins on the way. “HR5 eliminates truth, and the ability to choose counseling where people can explore for themselves, and not get their identity or their freedom from peoples’ opinions around them, or subcultures.”     

Image
Ken Williams SOURCE: LifeSiteNews

“America may soon make a dramatic turn,” announced Ken Williams, co-founder of the Changed movement, “based upon whether we choose to hang on to personal freedom, rights of conscience, rights of freedom of speech, freedom of religion; or whether we go with a now dominating mainstream ideology.” 

“What we’re asking is: Please don’t take away our rights. Please let us determine what our sexuality is,” said Williams.     

— 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

“Washington: Take your hands off of our sexual identities,” demanded Williams. “Please don’t oppress us. We have followed our convictions.  We left LGBTQ because we wanted to.”   

Williams pulled out a large poster with pictures of him with his wife and four children. “It’s the joy of my life that I had the freedom to experience this,” he said, pointing to his family.   

“Should everyone be forced to have this same thing?” he asked. “No. But I should have the right to have this life if I want to.” 

The Equality Act: A grave and treasonous threat to our nation's core values 

Earlier this year, Family Research Council (FRC) president Tony Perkins described the Equality Act as “a catastrophic loss of religious freedom in America.” 

The Equality Act is a grave and treasonous threat to our nation's core values contained in our First Amendment,” declared Perkins. “This is a radical bill that uses the government to control, through coercion, how every American thinks, speaks, and acts on issues of human sexuality. It may be named the Equality Act, but as the details make quite clear, the only equal thing about it is how much damage it does to many facets of American life.” 

“The bill erodes parental rights and positions the government as lord over churches and other faith-based institutions, potentially dictating how their facilities are used, who they hire, and even punishing them for not falling in step with a view of human sexuality that directly contradicts orthodox biblical teaching,” he continued. 

“No person of faith or religious institution, whether school, church, synagogue, mosque, business, or non-profit, will escape the Orwellian reach of the Equality Act,” Perkins warned.


  changed movement, equality act, gender dysphoria, homosexuality, lgbtq+, religious freedom, same-sex attraction, sexual abuse, sexual addiction, transgenderism, u.s. congress

News

Trudeau gushes about receiving vaccine: ‘Getting that shot really was an amazing feeling’

The prime minister wants Canadians to persuade the 'crusty old uncle' who chooses not to get the vaccine to change his mind.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 7:08 pm EST
Featured Image
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau
Anthony Murdoch
By Anthony Murdoch

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

OTTAWA, Ontario, June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau described in a euphoric-like manner getting the COVID-19 jab and emphasized that “everyone” needs to get the shot so life can return to normal. 

"You know, it's amazing, because we were talking about how important it was for everyone to get vaccinated and what a big deal it was to get vaccinated, so I thought that was all built in already. But getting that shot really was an amazing feeling. It, it hits you,” Trudeau told ET Canada host Sangita Patel on Tuesday. 

Since Canada approved for use the first COVID-19 jab in December 2020, the Trudeau government has been heavily promoting the jab via national ads as well as constant reminders from top cabinet ministers.

Health Canada has authorized four COVID-19 injections for adults, and one for kids ages 12 to 16. All of them have connections to abortion. The jabs have also have been associated with severe side effects such as blood clots, rashes, miscarriages, and heart attacks in young, healthy men.

In Canada, vaccines are not mandatory at the federal level. Some provinces — such as Ontario and New Brunswick — have made certain vaccines mandatory via legislation, with a few exceptions, for children to attend public schools.

In his interview with Patel, Trudeau said that for him, getting the shot wasn’t so much because he was at “high risk” because of his “young” age, (although it should be noted he is 49) but that it was him knowing that “each of us” are doing “our part.” 

Trudeau also said all Canadians should get the COVID-19 jab, adding that one’s “crusty old uncle” or friend who resists the injection should be “convinced” to get one. 

"It's knowing that each of us doing our part is getting through this, because we don't get through this unless the vast majority of the population gets that first shot, and then a few months later, gets that second shot,” said Trudeau.

— 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

“That's how we get through it, and it's something that everyone can do … the way to (get back to normal) is to make sure that everyone, even that crusty old uncle who resists, or that friend who's skeptical, encourage them, convince them."

Keean Bexte, former Rebel News reporter who now runs The Counter Signal, joked that Trudeau’s note of the “crusty old uncle” was in fact a description of the prime minister himself, due to him needing a cane at the moment because of a recent frisbee injury.

“Trudeau called Canadians who are hesitant or refuse the vaccine ‘crusty old uncles.’ Who was the creepy old man walking around Ottawa with a cane just yesterday?” tweeted Bexte

Roberto Wakerell-Cruz, editor for the Post Millennial, called out Trudeau for shaming Canadians into getting the Wuhan coronavirus vaccine.

“Trudeau describes the euphoria of getting a COVID vaccine, tells Canadians to shame their ‘crusty uncle who resists’ into getting their shots. What a lunatic,” tweeted Wakerell-Cruz

Trudeau mentioned to Patel that the pandemic was much more “real” for him after he found out his wife tested positive for the virus in March 2020. 

His interview with Patel also included him praising how working from home during the pandemic was “nice” in that he was “home all the time.”

When it comes to COVID-19 jabs and the idea of so-called “vaccine passports,” Trudeau said in late April his government was working on “certificates of vaccination” for travel with its allies, saying they are to be “expected.”

In late February, Trudeau said there were “pros and cons” to COVID-19 “immunity passports.”

Recently, Trudeau’s office claimed that a “broad consensus” has been reached among the nation’s premiers working to create “a proof of vaccine credential” system for travel.


  covid-19, health canada, justin trudeau, vaccine, vaccine passports

News

US bishop joins homosexual ‘blessing’ ceremony with accused sex abusers

Bishop John Stowe of Lexington, Kentucky, participated in a defiant event on Zoom this week with LGBT groups and dissident 'Catholics' accused of sexual abuse.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 6:12 pm EST
Featured Image
Bishop John Stowe of Lexington, Kentucky, in a video message for 2020 'Pride Month' YouTube
Raymond Wolfe Follow
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

LEXINGTON, Kentucky, June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Dissident Bishop John Stowe of Lexington, Kentucky, reaffirmed his longtime LGBT advocacy, joining a virtual “Pride Blessing” event earlier this week.

Stowe, a notorious homosexualist who once issued a “pride” “prayer card,” joined the Zoom meeting on Tuesday with activists and other dissident “Catholics.” The event was hosted by heretical pro-LGBT organization Dignity USA, which rejects Church teaching on several points of faith and morals. 

Dignity USA billed the event as a reaction to the Vatican’s pronouncement earlier this year that same-sex relationships cannot be blessed. The teaching, published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in March, declared that the Church lacks “the power to give the blessing to unions of persons of the same sex.” God “cannot bless sin,” it emphasized.

“In March, the Vatican released a statement saying that the Catholic Church could offer no blessings to the same-sex couples,” Dignity USA acknowledged ahead of the Zoom “blessing” event. The group called for an “empowering” “Pride Month” this year and urged “that the Vatican’s pronouncements on LGBTQI people and their love will not be the final word.” 

The meeting reportedly had an attendance of around 200 people. 

Bishop Stowe gave a general blessing at the event, highlighting the “annual celebration of Pride.” “Dear friends in the LGBTQ community. I offer a prayer, a blessing, for each of you during this annual celebration of Pride,” he said. 

His speech was preceded by a “Pride Blessing” from Dignity USA executive director Marianne Duddy-Burke, Catholic News Agency reported. “You have been judged worthy and holy of my delight,” Duddy-Burke said. “Therefore, go with pride, which is not sin for you but salvation, a promise of liberation for all.”

The Catholic Church holds that homosexual inclinations are “objectively disordered” and that homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered” and gravely sinful. “They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity,” the Catechism of the Catholic Church states. “Under no circumstances can they be approved.”

Stowe and Dignity USA’s dissident event reflects LGBT “blessing” ceremonies that proliferated across Germany last month in a wave of defiance by German priests and bishops that Catholic leaders decried as “schismatic” and blasphemous. 

— 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

Along with Stowe, other attendees at the meeting included Mary McAleese, a pro-abortion former President of Ireland; Miguel H. Diaz, an Obama-era U.S. ambassador to the Holy See; and Fr. Bernard Lynch, an actively homosexual priest in a same-sex relationship. 

Sponsors included Faith in Public Life, a nonprofit backed by George Soros that recently tried to get Archbishop Joseph Naumann removed from his post as the head of U.S. bishops’ pro-life committee. Top LGBT groups like Human Rights Watch sponsored the event as well.  

As Catholic News Agency noted, both Diaz and Lynch have been accused of sexual assault. After leaving the Obama administration and joining the University of Dayton as a professor in 2013, “reasonable cause” was found that Diaz targeted a married couple with “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature.”

Lynch likewise was accused in a 2019 lawsuit of abusing a teenage student while working as a campus chaplain at a New York high school in the 1970s. He previously had been accused of abusing another student who attended the same school, though he was acquitted in court.

Diaz and Lynch each referred to homosexuals as “prophets” at the Dignity USA event and purported to bless sodomitic and otherwise unnatural relations.


  bernard lynch, catechism of the catholic church, catholic, dignity usa, faith in public life, homosexuality, john stowe, lgbt, marianne duddy-burke, mary mcaleese, miguel diaz, vatican

News

DeSantis defies NCAA threats over women’s sports: ‘To hell with these events’

'You can’t be cowed by these organizations, or particularly by woke corporations, from doing the right thing.'
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 5:07 pm EST
Featured Image
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signs bill banning transgender girls from school sports 10 Tampa Bay / YouTube
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Boycott threats by institutions like the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) cannot be allowed to intimidate public officials from doing the right thing, Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis told Fox News primetime host Tucker Carlson Tuesday.

DeSantis signed into law this week the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act, which excludes biological males who claim transgender status from competing with the opposite sex in sex-specific athletic programs. The law is meant to protect female high-school and college athletes from having competitive and scholarship opportunities undermined by male students who claim to be “transgender women.”

“As these bills were going through various legislatures, I remember the NCAA put out a statement saying any state that enacts this, we’re not going to hold events there. And so I called the Speaker of the House in Florida and I said, ‘Did you hear what they said?’ And he’s like, ‘Yeah.’ I said, ‘We definitely got to get this done,’” DeSantis recounted to Carlson. “You can’t be cowed by these organizations, or particularly by woke corporations, from doing the right thing.”

“And so my view was throughout this whole time, we have to protect our girls, it is discriminatory to force them to compete against biological males,” he continued. “And so if the price of having a tournament is that I have to deny equal opportunity to hundreds of thousands of young girl and women athletes throughout Florida, I am much more willing to stand with the girls. And to hell with these events.”

The governor added that he does not expect Florida to be punished for defying outside pressure, because “we just made it clear. We’re standing with our folks, we’re gonna do the right thing. And so if corporations want to come in and try to bully us around, they are going to go nowhere. It’s going to be like hitting their head against a brick wall.”

LGBT activists claim it’s “discriminatory” to reserve female competitive sports for actual females, but scientific research affirms that testosterone suppression does not eliminate all the physical advantages that come with male physiology. 

In a paper published by the Journal of Medical Ethics, New Zealand researchers found that “healthy young men [do] not lose significant muscle mass [or power] when their circulating testosterone levels were reduced to [below International Olympic Committee guidelines] for 20 weeks,” and “indirect effects of testosterone” on factors such as bone structure, lung volume, and heart size “will not be altered by hormone therapy”; therefore, “the advantage to transwomen [biological men] afforded by the [International Olympic Committee] guidelines is an intolerable unfairness.”

Such laws are now on the books in eight states. In thanking DeSantis for signing the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act, American Principles Project president Terry Schilling noted that the more states come on board, the less power the NCAA’s threats have: “While economic boycott threats might have worked against a single state, the strength of many state leaders standing together to defend women’s sports is certain to neutralize the left’s favorite playbook.”

DeSantis’s approach contrasts sharply with that of South Dakota Republican Gov. Kristi Noem, who in March declared she was “excited” to sign a similar bill, but following a barrage of media and corporate pressure, Noem reversed herself at the last minute, announcing she was sending the bill back to the legislature over sudden reservations about its “vague and overly broad language,” and suggesting various “style and form” changes that would have effectively gutted the bill.

DeSantis reiterated the importance of standing up and representing conservatives in an interview with The Federalist published Wednesday. “You can have a successful economy, but if the underpinnings of the culture are being torn apart, I don’t think that’s a society that will be very successful over the long term,” he said.

“I don’t think there’s ever been as many hostile cultural forces, whether it’s corporate media, universities, big tech, now big business,” he argued. “If you’re an American who believes in the core values of this country — faith, family, opportunity — you are absolutely on the defensive in many respects, so the question is, how do you fight back effectively.”

“If you lead and particularly if you’re willing to take some arrows along the way, there are voters that will do whatever they can to make sure they have your back,” the governor noted. “Stop trying to grovel in front of [corporate media outlets], stop thinking that they’re going to like you.”

— 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 sports law is only the latest in a string of actions DeSantis has taken that have pleased conservatives, such as banning left-wing critical race theory from public schools, forbidding “vaccine passports” that would coerce Floridians into taking a COVID-19 vaccine against their will, pardoning residents who violate local COVID-19 restrictions, increasing penalties for rioting, limiting social media giants’ power to deplatform their political enemies, and signing an election law that strengthens signature verification for mail ballots and bans ballot harvesting. This record has made DeSantis a top contender for the GOP’s 2024 presidential nomination in the minds of many conservatives.


  boycotts, florida, lgbt, national collegiate athletic association, ncaa, ron desantis, transgender athletes, women's sports

News

Trump teases 2024 run in blistering response to Facebook censors

Trump has so far refused to state whether he intends another presidential run in 2024, but this latest statement offers the strongest hint yet in the affirmative.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 4:08 pm EST
Featured Image
Pe3k/Shutterstock
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Former President Donald Trump berated Facebook and its CEO Mark Zuckerberg Friday for the company’s announcement that Trump would remain banned from the platform for two years, calling it an “insult” to his supporters. He also hinted at another run for the White House.

Earlier Friday, Facebook’s Vice President for Global Affairs Nick Clegg announced “new enforcement protocols to be applied in exceptional cases” such as Trump’s, starting with Trump’s suspension from the platform, which will remain in effect until January 7, 2023, two years after his suspension began at the beginning of this year.

Facebook used the January 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol building, which Democrats and their allies tried to argue was “incited” by Trump, as a pretext to ban Trump from the platform. The company’s “Oversight Board” announced last month it was upholding Facebook’s decision, while at the same time calling its indefinite nature “standardless,” and calling on the company to “review this matter to determine and justify a proportionate response that is consistent with the rules that are applied to other users of its platform” within six months.

Citing the Oversight Board (an “independent” body set up by Facebook itself last year) as vindicating Facebook’s original suspension of Trump as “right and necessary,” and claiming that Trump’s speech constitutes a “risk to public safety,” Clegg added that after the period is over Facebook may prolong Trump’s suspension pending “risk” evaluation. If his suspension is ever lifted, he would then be subject to a “strict set of rapidly escalating sanctions that will be triggered if Mr. Trump commits further violations in future, up to and including permanent removal of his pages and accounts.”

The decision limits Trump’s ability to directly impact the 2022 midterm elections via social media, angering conservative opponents of social media bias, but ironically some liberals are upset for the opposite reason: that Facebook’s timeline leaves the door open for Trump to return in time for another presidential run.

“Facebook’s ruling is an insult to the record-setting 75M people, plus many others, who voted for us in the 2020 Rigged Presidential Election,” Trump responded. “They shouldn’t be allowed to get away with this censoring and silencing, and ultimately, we will win. Our country can’t take this abuse anymore!”

“Next time I’m in the White House there will be no more dinners, at his request, with Mark Zuckerberg and his wife,” he added in a follow-up statement. “It will be all business!”

Trump has so far refused to state whether he intends another presidential run in 2024, but this latest statement offers the strongest hint yet in the affirmative. The former president’s emotional connection with many Republican voters keeps him at the top of theoretical Republican primary polls, as conservatives vigorously debate his political viability and whether he would be the best choice available next time.

Regardless of the Trump ramifications, the increasing brazenness of Big Tech’s actions against conservative speech has elicited numerous calls from conservatives for government intervention. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, another potential 2024 Republican contender, signed last month a new law imposing strict limits on social media platforms’ ability to censor political candidates and journalistic enterprises, and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has suggested social media companies be regulated akin to “common carriers” of information such as phone companies.


  2024 presidential election, big tech, censorship, donald trump, facebook, free speech, oversight board, social media bias

News

Transgender ideologues dub women who disagree with them ‘trans-exclusionary radical feminists’

Trans activists are on a witch-hunt to persecute anyone who disagrees with them—and in Scotland, the law may be on their side.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 3:57 pm EST
Featured Image
Transgender symbol Shutterstock
Jonathon Van Maren Jonathon Van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon Van Maren

June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — While the trans movement has made enormous gains across the West over the past few years, nowhere has the gender revolution leveled boundaries as swiftly as in Scotland. Scottish public schools teach five-year-olds that they can decide their gender. The Scottish Justice Committee has proposed a hate crime bill making gender identity a “protected characteristic” with the intention of banning criticism of transgender ideology, while Scottish feminists have warned that such moves would eliminate sex-based protections for women.

Feminists have been told to shut up in no uncertain terms — in many cases, they have been mansplained to by fellows in drag identifying as women. This weird patriarchy must be a perverse irony for feminists, who were fellow travelers with the gay rights movement for so long. Now, those who refuse to accept that some of their sisters have penises or that lesbians are transphobic for not being attracted to biological males or that men identifying as women can head on into the girls’ room have been dubbed “trans-exclusionary radical feminists,” or TERFs.

If trans activists get their way, pointing out that the emperor has no clothes — and specifically, that his lack of clothes makes it clear that she’s a he — will be illegal and prosecutable. In the U.K. in the past couple of years, a 39-year-old mother was arrested in front of her children and locked up in a cell for alleged transphobia in Hertfordshire; a docker in North England was investigated by police for retweeting a limerick about transgenderism; a 74-year-old woman was contacted by the cops in Suffolk and asked to remove social media posts critical of transgenderism.

And a young man in Scotland was fined and ordered to pay a transgender person a thousand dollars by a judge for daring to laugh as he walked by. Trans activists are deadly serious, and no laughing is allowed—regardless of how absurd everything is.

The latest example out of Scotland is particularly insidious. Marion Millar, a feminist campaigner from Airdrie, has been formally charged with a hate crime. As The Herald reported on June 3:

Marion Millar, from Airdrie, was charged under the Malicious Communications Act for tweets posted in 2019 and 2020, and could face two years in jail if convicted. It is understood one tweet included a picture of a ribbon in the purple, white and green of the suffragette movement. Ms Millar, who has autistic twin boys and who runs an accountancy business, was bailed to appear to Glasgow Sheriff Court on July 20.

She is a supporter of sex-based rights for women, and opposes simplifying transgender self-identification. Her critics claim she is a trans-exclusionary radical feminist, or Terf. After a two-hour interview at Coatbridge police station, she was met by supporters, many wearing T-shirts with the “#WomenWontWheesht” hashtag she promotes.

She tweeted later: “I have been charged, I am absolutely gutted, I can’t describe in words the stress this is causing me.”

Marion Calder, of For Women Scotland, which campaigns for sex-based rights, said the police’s decision to press charges had been “incredibly disappointing”. She said: “Marion is naturally upset that the police have decided to press ahead with charges. The past few weeks have been a nightmare for Marion and her family and it seems there is no end in sight. Sadly, in Scotland, it seems both free speech and women’s rights are under attack. Marion is very grateful for the support and would like to thank those who have stood by her."

The group said it planned to discuss the way forward with Ms Millar and her lawyers today, and it expected there to be a fundraising appeal for legal costs.

Police Scotland confirmed that a 50-year-old woman had been arrested and charged in connection with online communications offences. It added: “She has been released on an undertaking to appear at court at a later date. A report will be sent to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service.”

Ms Millar has not been charged under the recent Hate Crime Bill passed at Holyrood, which she campaigned against.

Just to summarize: A feminist has been arrested, charged, and could face two years in prison for defending sex-based rights and stating her beliefs in public. Trans activists are on a witch-hunt to persecute anyone who disagrees with them — and in Scotland, the law may be on their side. We are entering an era in which stating the truth about gender (and other issues) in public may soon be illegal.

— 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 don’t yet know what the outcome of this case will be — in England, the first transgender hate crime trial collapsed in a single day back in 2019. A 51-year-old woman was accused by trans activists of harassment on Twitter, and the judge dismissed the case almost immediately. Perhaps that will be the case here, too. If not, a woman could be jailed in a Western country for disagreeing with the transgender movement. Let that sink in.


  gender ideology, trans-exclusionary radical feminists, transgenderism

News

Canada first gave Big Pharma immunity, but now launches ‘ Vaccine Injury Support Program’

The purpose of the program is to ‘ensure that all people in Canada who have experienced a serious and permanent injury as a result [of vaccination] have fair and timely access to financial support.’
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 3:43 pm EST
Featured Image
Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP) VISP website screenshot
Anthony Murdoch
By Anthony Murdoch

OTTAWA, Ontario, June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – After announcing last year vaccine makers would be shielded from liability regarding COVID-19 jab related injuries, the Canadian federal government has launched the nation’s first-ever program designed to financially compensate those who have suffered adverse side effects from any type of vaccines.

The Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP) was officially announced in December 2020, around the time the federal government under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau allowed the first COVID-19 injections for use in Canada.

Canada’s Chief Medical Officer Dr. Theresa Tam announced the launch of VISP on Tuesday.

According to the VISP website, the purpose of the program is to “ensure that all people in Canada who have experienced a serious and permanent injury as a result of receiving a Health Canada authorized vaccine, administered in Canada on or after December 8, 2020, have fair and timely access to financial support.”

In December 2020, Canada’s Procurement Minister Anita Anand was quoted as confirming to reporters that “indemnification clauses in vaccine contracts are standard,” and that they would be used for COVID-19 vaccine makers.

“All countries, generally speaking, are faced with the issue of indemnification of companies, especially in cases of novel technologies like this,” said Anand. “Yes we are, and we are definitely not any different than any other country in this world.”

In a Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) document from 2017, which was updated in 2019, the agency stipulated that in times of pandemic, indemnity clauses should be used so there is no supply disruption.

“To prevent delays in release of the vaccine at time of pandemic, the pandemic vaccine supply contract stipulates that the Government of Canada will indemnify the manufacturer against any claims or lawsuits brought against it by third parties,” the document reads.

Shortly after the Canadian government announced VISP, the government put out a tender contract notice to “eligible organizations to submit an application to administer a no-fault support program for people in Canada with a serious and permanent vaccine injury.”

According to the VISP website, the program is being administered and delivered “independently” by the Canadian accounting and tax firm Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton, with funding from PHAC.

“Decisions on individual claims are made by a committee of independent medical experts and neither PHAC nor Health Canada is involved in the decision of individual claims,” says the VISP website.

Health Canada has authorized four COVID-19 injections for adults, all of which are connected to abortion. All of them have also been associated with severe side effects such as blood clots, rashes, miscarriages, and even heart attacks in young healthy men.

The Pfizer vaccine has been approved for use in kids aged 12 to 16, and just recently, the National Advisory Committee on Immunization stated that the “mixing” of COVID-19 jabs is permissible for those who had the AstraZeneca vaccine.

Health Canada states that all COVID-19 vaccines on offer are allowed to operate under an interim order, which is in effect until September 16, 2021.

In Canada, health is under the full authority of the provinces, and vaccines are not mandatory at the federal level. Some provinces — such as Ontario and New Brunswick — have made certain vaccines mandatory via legislation, with a few exceptions, for children to attend public schools.

The VISP website states that all current and “future Health Canada authorized vaccines or immunoglobulins” will be covered on the program which is open to all ages.

One does not need to be a Canadian citizen to be awarded a settlement from the program, but the vaccine must have been administered in Canada.

When it comes to compensation under the program, VISP states that eligible individuals can file a claim, but only up to three years after receiving a jab, “or at the apparent onset of injury, or death.”

Individuals who are awarded a settlement will receive “income replacement indemnities; injury indemnities; death benefits; coverage for funeral expenses; reimbursement of eligible costs such as otherwise uncovered medical expenses.”

“The amount of financial support an individual will receive will be determined on a case by case basis. Amounts will be based on a pre-determined financial support payment framework,” states the VISP website.

The province of Québec has its own vaccine injury program, so those who have been jabbed in that province are not eligible under the new VISP program.

For many years, Canada was one of a very small numbers of countries which did not have some sort of national vaccine injury compensation program.

— 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

To submit a claim, applicants or those authorized to do so if their loved one has died from a jab must work in conjunction with the physician who “assessed the injury,” and who is required to produce a long list of documentation.

Information required includes physician and patient contact information, vaccine information, patient medical history, and a report from the first medical consultation.

According to VISP, a claimant’s application will be reviewed by a committee made up of three physicians who will review the “claimants’ medical records to determine if a probable link exists between the injury and the vaccine.”

“This process is based on internationally recognized causality assessment protocols, standards, and existing frameworks, such as those established by Québec’s Vaccine Injury Compensation program and the World Health Organization (WHO),” says the VISP website.

VISP offers no information as to how long a claim could take to process.

Stats show 6,408 COVID-19 vaccine-related ‘adverse events’ have been reported thus far

According to official Canadian government statistics, there have been a total of 6,408 COVID-19 vaccine-related “adverse events” since the first shots were issued back in late 2020, of which 1,262 were deemed serious. In Canada, 22,806,404 COVID-19 jabs have been administered.

To date, Canada has reported a total of 25,644 deaths which have been attributed to COVID-19, out of 1,387,455 “confirmed” cases.

Side effects noted include — but are not limited to — blood clots, anaphylaxis, nervous system issues, miscarriages, and heart attack. The Pfizer jab has the highest levels of reported side effects, followed by the Moderna jab.

To date there has been an official total of 94 deaths after the administration of the COVID-19 jab, according to the government.

Canada’s Adverse Events Following Immunization (AEFI) relies on individuals to ask their doctor, nurse, or pharmacist to complete the AEFI form, which sometimes can be difficult for individuals to obtain.

The Canadian Adverse Events Following Immunization Surveillance System is managed by PHAC.


  coronavirus vaccine, health canada, vaccine injury support program, vaccine side effects, visp

News

Conflict of interest? Fauci’s wife runs bioethics department at NIH

As Chief of the Department of Bioethics at the NIH, Fauci’s wife, Dr. Christine Grady, is responsible for guiding the ‘ethics’ of the government organization’s work. She is also Head of the Section on Human Subjects Research. Fauci's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases is a division of the NIH.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 3:40 pm EST
Featured Image
Dr. Anthony Fauci and his wife, Dr. Christine Grady, at an Obama White House event in 2016 Alex Wong / Getty Images
Michael Haynes Michael Haynes Follow Michael
By Michael Haynes

BETHESDA, Maryland, June 4 (LifeSiteNews) – Dr. Anthony Fauci’s wife, Dr. Christine Grady, heads the Department of Bioethics at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and has quietly become a key figure in medical research and medical ethics in America.

Christine Grady married Dr. Anthony Fauci in 1985, and together they worked on the AIDS crisis during the 1980s. Grady, 68, is a nurse-bioethicist and a senior investigator who is now Chief of the Department of Bioethics at the NIH, and also Head of the Section on Human Subjects Research.

Having moved to the NIH clinical center in 1983, Grady also worked with NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), although never as part of that division, which her husband runs.

In addition to her work at the NIH, Grady is also a senior research fellow at the Kennedy Institute of Ethics and an elected fellow of the Hastings Center and the American Academy of Nursing.

She received the NIH director’s award four times between 1999 and 2017. Along with being a part of numerous other task forces, Grady acted as a member of President Barack Obama’s Presidential Commission for study of bioethical issues from 2010-2017.

Already in 1997, Grady’s role in the bioethics department involved her participation in the Institutional Review Board of clinical protocols, informing and advising health officials in the establishment of policy, particularly members of the NIH. The department itself was founded in 1996, and Grady made its head in 2012, having been deputy director since 1996.

Meanwhile, Fauci was appointed as Director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) in 1984, one year after Grady joined the NIH, and one year before they married.

Grady’s NIH and Fauci’s NIAID

NIAID “conducts and supports basic and applied research to better understand, treat, and ultimately prevent infectious, immunologic, and allergic diseases.” Indeed, among the 27 comprising institutes and centers of the NIH, NIAID has the “unique mandate” to “respond to emerging public health threats.”

In its research and operation, the NIAID is guided by the ethics of the NIH. This means essentially that Grady’s decisions on ethics are intimately linked to, and inform her husband’s decisions on vaccine research and development. The NIAID participated in the development of COVID-19 vaccines (namely the Moderna jab), and the trialing of the vaccines.

One of the most controversial projects in which NIH has been involved has been the creation of “humanized mice,” transplanting into mice tissue from aborted babies.

And now, as Elle gushingly reported, Grady is “spearheading research into the ethics of America's COVID-19 response.”

However, despite the NIH developing and giving the ethical green light to coronavirus injections – particularly Moderna’s, which was made with help by NIAID scientists – the number of deaths and adverse reactions continue to grow each week following administration of the injection.

READ: WATCH: University experiments on aborted baby parts, funding linked to Fauci

The official data released by the U.S. government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) now numbers a total of 122,712 adverse reactions related to the Moderna injection since it began to be given last December. Of those, 2,077 patients died following the injection, around half of the total deaths following COVID-19 vaccines in the U.S., and 8,822 serious reactions were recorded.

Yet the injection continues to be a success for all those who have invested in it. Moderna’s coronavirus vaccine has received $2.5 billion in funding from the U.S. government so far. The company predicts it will garner $18.5 billion from sales of the injection, a product of which the NIH has ownership of some of the “intellectual property,” revealed NIH director Francis Collins.

This injection was co-developed by NIAID scientists, whose practice is guided by Grady’s ethics. In fact, Collins described Grady’s analysis of the COVID-19 situation as “invaluable” to the NIH.

Grady’s vaccine ‘ethics’ and predictions about digitized medical records in 2021

Grady herself has authored numerous papers and articles on the subject of ethics and vaccines, often proposing radical steps regarding vaccination. A 2004 paper entitled “Ethics of vaccine research” was prefaced by her stating that the goal of vaccination is “to benefit the community at large rather than the individual.” Such philosophy is echoed by governing health bodies today, who continue to recommend the COVID-19 injections as a good for the wider community, despite the growing number of adverse reactions, arguing that the benefits outweigh potential risks.

Then again, in 2012, she penned an article reflecting on her time in the field, and predicting what life could look like in the year 2021, painting a picture that eerily mirrors the current calls for health records to be digitized and utilized in the form of vaccine passports: “In 2021, most people in the U.S. have had their whole genome sequenced by their health care provider as a routine part of care and have access to their own sequence data stored in the cloud. Each person can decide whether or not and how she wants to share her sequence data with researchers through a menu of research studies publicly listed on a smart phone application.”

Grady also predicted the manner in which bioethicists and health ministers could become influential in the years around 2021, responsible for coordinating global health policy: “By 2021, international collaborators from around the globe, who had been committed to working together as partners to design and conduct research of high ethical and scientific quality research, were now collaborating on other issues of importance to global health and global justice. Bioethicists serve as clinical and research consultants, members of oversight committees and policy bodies.”

— 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

Another paper alluded to radical experiments on fetal therapy trials, under a “new ethical framework.” Considering only “biomedical benefits” in fetal therapy was not enough, co-wrote Grady. Under the new framework for such a medical field, “Studies that meet this overall proportionality criterion but have mildly unfavorable risk–benefit ratios for pregnant women and/or fetuses may be acceptable.”

Bill Gates connections

LifeSite co-founder and president Steve Jalsevac has written extensively on the link between Fauci and billionaire globalist Bill Gates in regards to their vaccine advocacy.

Gates is an ardent advocate for the roll-out of experimental coronavirus vaccines throughout the world, and has engaged in developing micro-chip style COVID-19 tracking platforms, in a style envisaged by Grady in her article looking to the future she envisaged in 2021.

Gates has publicly called for vaccines to be delivered to the entire world, declaring back in April 2020 that the world would not return to normal until the population had been “widely vaccinated.” He later ridiculed suggestions that the experimental COVID-19 vaccines could be unsafe, dismissing contrary opinions as “conspiracy views.”

A whistleblower from the World Health Organization (WHO) even revealed that Gates exerted so much influence in the WHO as to effectively control the organization, and was treated as a nation state in his own right.

Indeed, Fauci and Gates have long been partnered in rolling out vaccines to the global population. Back in 2010, Fauci’s NIAID partnered with the WHO and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to enact Gates’s plan for a decade of vaccines. A detail of particular importance is that Fauci was part of the five-man Leadership Council of the plan.

The Gates Foundation has also already donated many hundreds of thousands of dollars to both the NIH and the NIAID, calling into question the unbiased nature of any decision made by either Grady or Fauci regarding development, testing, and roll-out of the COVID-19 vaccines.

Hence, as numerous emails are currently being released revealing Fauci’s own actions at the start of the Wuhan coronavirus last year, and the “gain-of-function” experiments at the laboratory in Wuhan funded by NIAID, evidence suggests that his wife could well be in a position of severe conflict of interest as regards her own ethical guidance to the NIH.

RELATED:

Fauci knew about possible COVID lab leak evidence, ‘gain of function’ concerns, emails reveal

Tucker Carlson: Fauci committed perjury, might be under criminal investigation already

Facebook CEO offered Dr. Fauci ‘very exciting’ proposal, vaccine ‘resources’

Gay activist to Fauci in 1988 amid AIDS crisis: ‘You are an incompetent idiot’


  anthony fauci, bioethics, coronavirus, coronavirus vaccine, coronavirus vaccines, national institute of allergy and infectious diseases, national institutes of health

News

Archbishop tells Tucker Carlson: Transgenderism is ‘final rebellion against God’

Archbishop Emeritus Chaput of Philadelphia joins a growing chorus of Catholic leaders pushing back against the transgender movement and gender ideology.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 3:10 pm EST
Featured Image
Archbishop Charles Chaput Patrick Craine / LifeSiteNews
Raymond Wolfe Follow
By

June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Archbishop Emeritus of Philadelphia, Charles J. Chaput, spoke out against sexual immorality and the transgender movement on Fox News’ Tucker Carlson Today last week, calling transgenderism “the final rebellion against God.”

The recently retired archbishop, appointed to the Philadelphia archdiocese by Pope Benedict XVI in 2011, linked “sex-change” attempts with the “foundational sin” of idolatry in an interview with Tucker Carlson on Friday. “You know Catholics talk about original sin, other Christian communities talk about the sin of Adam and Eve, which was they wanted to be like God. They didn’t want God to tell them what to do. They wanted to do it their way,” he said.

“Instead of giving God his due, you give to someone else or something else what belongs to God,” he continued. “That’s called idolatry. It’s a foundational sin. It’s the most dangerous sin and it’s led us down this path of making ourselves a center of creation.”

When asked about the desire of people to take on the role of God, the archbishop said, “I think that the gender issues today are the prime example of that, where we’re not even satisfied with the body that we’re born with, that we think we have the power to become something that we were not created, that I can become a woman or a woman can become a man.”

“That’s something God does, not something we do, but in some ways that’s the final rebellion against God,” Chaput added.

He also discussed the sexual revolution, describing it as another “great rebellion” against the creator and a direct contributor to sexual and gender pathologies like transgenderism. “You know, the sexual revolution was a great rebellion against God,” he said. “It was rebelling against the way God made our bodies and the way God created human sexuality, but now it’s come to the point where we even think that we should have control over the kind of human beings we are.”

Archbishop Chaput joins a growing chorus of American prelates decrying LGBT and gender ideologies in recent months. In May, Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco condemned what he called the “terrible” and “very alarming” trend of minors being chemically castrated or even surgically mutilated due to gender dysphoria.

“There’s so much scientific evidence of the harm this does to children, giving them puberty blockers, and not just in terms of their sexual development but otherwise, too, [and] in other aspects of physical health,” he told the Daily Caller. “I think it’s the next step of getting further and further away from the original created order of ‘male and female he created them.’”

“A person cannot change his or her sex,” a policy enacted earlier this year by Bishop Earl Boyea of Lansing, Michigan, noted. “The human person is a body-soul union, and the body — created male or female — is a constitutive aspect of the human person.”

“Procedures, surgeries, and therapies designed to assist a person in ‘transitioning’ his or her sex are morally prohibited,” the policy, which echoes one published by Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield, Illinois, adds.

— 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

Archbishop Chaput’s comments to Tucker Carlson also come as the LGBT movement and its supporters, including some dissident Catholics, ramp up “pride” month propaganda — much of it sexually explicit and aimed directly at children. More than a dozen leading kids’ TV shows have begun peddling LGBT “pride” content, like Nickelodeon’s Blue’s Clues and You, which released a video starring a real-life drag queen last week.

Both the Vatican and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) have denounced gender ideology and transgenderism, the USCCB particularly highlighting the risks the ideology poses for children. “Children especially are harmed when they are told that they can ‘change’ their sex or, further, given hormones that will affect their development and possibly render them infertile as adults,” an open letter signed by the USCCB in 2017 read.

Further guidance on transgender issues from the bishops is currently “in the works,” Archbishop Cordileone told the Daily Caller last month.


  catholic, charles chaput, gender ideology, homosexuality, transgenderism, tucker carlson

News

GOP national chair endorses LGBT ‘pride’ month, vows to keep growing ‘big tent’

The incident brings to the foreground long-simmering divisions between the Republican Party’s national leaders and the grassroots voters that sustain it.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 2:51 pm EST
Featured Image
Ronna Romney McDaniel Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

WASHINGTON, June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — In the latest manifestation of tensions between party leadership and the GOP’s conservative base, Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel issued a statement celebrating LGBT “pride” month Wednesday.

“Happy Pride Month!” McDaniel wrote. “[The Republican Party] is proud to have doubled our LGBTQ support over the last 4 years, and we will continue to grow our big tent by supporting measures that promote fairness and balance protections for LGBTQ Americans and those with deeply held religious beliefs.”

McDaniel’s tweet won the approval of homosexual GOP group Log Cabin Republicans, but many conservatives had the opposite reaction. At the same time, most of the liberal respondents made clear they would never accept the GOP as LGBT-friendly unless and until Republicans fully abandon their opposition to same-sex “marriage” and support for conscience rights and women’s athletics.

The incident brings to the foreground long-simmering divisions between the Republican Party’s national leaders and the grassroots voters that sustain it, as well as conservatives versus more libertarian members who prioritize the “big tent” mentality over taking a stand on social issues.

Florida Republican Governor and potential presidential candidate Ron DeSantis rebuked arguments for compromising on cultural battles in an interview with The Federalist published Wednesday. “You can have a successful economy, but if the underpinnings of the culture are being torn apart, I don’t think that’s a society that will be very successful over the long term,” he said.

“I don’t think there’s ever been as many hostile cultural forces, whether it’s corporate media, universities, big tech, now big business,” DeSantis argued. “If you’re an American who believes in the core values of this country — faith, family, opportunity — you are absolutely on the defensive in many respects, so the question is, how do you fight back effectively.”

He also argued that the establishmentarian approach was politically foolish in addition to being wrong on principle. “If you lead and particularly if you’re willing to take some arrows along the way, there are voters that will do whatever they can to make sure they have your back,” DeSantis noted. “Stop trying to grovel in front of [corporate media outlets], stop thinking that they’re going to like you.”

The niece of 2012 GOP presidential nominee and current establishment-affiliated Utah Sen. Mitt Romney, McDaniel was selected by former President Donald Trump in December 2016 to take over as head of the RNC. Trump, whose own record is mixed on LGBT issues, reaffirmed his support of McDaniel for another term last November.


  conservatism, donald trump, gop, homosexuality, lgbt, republican establishment, republican national committee, republican party, republicans, ronna mcdaniel, ronna romney mcdaniel, social issues

News

International Society for Stem Cell Research updates rules to allow experimentation on human embryos older than 14 days

Students for Life of America president Kristan Hawkins slammed the decision as 'abhorrent.'
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 2:41 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy
By Dorothy Cummings McLean

SKOKIE, Illinois, June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews— A group of scientists have called for an end to rules preventing research on unborn babies older than 14 days gestation.  

Last month the International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) published new guidelines expanding research on living human embryos. British geneticist Robin Lovell-Badge celebrated the recommendations in a May 26 article published in the online Nature magazine. The article is misleadingly entitled, “Stem-cell guidelines: why it was time for an update.”  

The updated guidelines, published this week, are the product of a task force, which I chaired,” Lovell-Badge wrote.   

“It comprised 45 international experts, including scientists, clinicians, ethicists, lawyers and policy specialists,” he continued.   

“We deliberated over 18 months and more than 100 Zoom calls. We consulted relevant polls and public-engagement projects. The guidelines were then peer reviewed by a similar set of experts.” 

Lovell-Bridge said the most “striking” change the Society recommended was “relaxing the ‘14 day rule’, the limit to culturing intact human embryos in the laboratory, which has been written into law by some dozen countries, including the United Kingdom and Australia.” 

According to current rules, after two weeks of being experimented on, human embryos must be killed. According to Lovell-Bridge, this is because the “first signs” of their central nervous systems would appear shortly afterwards. He argued, however, that although the limit has previously “served science well,” it prevents “study of a critical period, between 14 and 28 days, when the beginnings of tissues are established.” This is to say, he believes scientists should be allowed to experiment on unborn babies whose brain, heart, and spinal cord have begun to form. 

Apparently, scientists can already use stem cells to grow “structures” very much like human embryos, and Lovell-Bridge believes that it would be helpful to compare them to real human embryos to “assess their relevance” and “use them for experiments that would otherwise require embryos.” Here the scientists seem to be arguing that some human embryos should be subject to experimentation so as to spare … other human embryos.   

Lovell-Bridge believes that the “14-day rule” helped research that was “essential” for “many assisted-conception techniques” — that is, artificial conception — to flourish despite “strong opposition, notably from religious groups.” And there were “even” some scientists who were “reluctant to discard” this “workable compromise.” But, he says, the rule was composed 40 years ago, when it was impossible to keep an embryo alive for experimentation for more than five days. Times have changed.  

Many religions, notably Catholicism, believe that innocent human life is sacred from conception until natural death. All human beings have the right to live and possess an inherent dignity by virtue of their participation in the human family, made in the image and likeness of God.  

In Donum Vitae, promulgated in 1987, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith completely vetoed harming living embryos or violating their integrity, saying:

Medical research must refrain from operations on live embryos, unless there is a moral certainty of not causing harm to the life or integrity of the unborn child and the mother, and on condition that the parents have givers their free and informed consent to the procedure. It follows that all research, even when limited to the simple observation of the embryo, would become illicit were it to involve risk to the embryo’s physical integrity or life by reason of the methods used or the effects induced. As regards experimentation, and presupposing the general distinction between experimentation for purposes which are not directly therapeutic and experimentation which is clearly therapeutic for the subject himself, in the case in point one must also distinguish between experimentation carried out on embryos which are still alive and experimentation carried out on embryos which are dead. If the embryos are living, whether viable or not, they must be respected just like any other human person; experimentation on embryos which is not directly therapeutic is illicit. (29) No objective, even though noble in itself, such as a foreseeable advantage to science, to other human beings or to society, can in any way justify experimentation on living human embryos or fetuses, whether viable or not, either inside or outside the mother’s womb.  

Early in his article, Lovell-Bridge acknowledged that people find such embryonic exploitation as creating human-animal hybrids “scary and uncomfortable.” He wrote that the International Society for Stem Cell Research has offered a “solution” to opposition to research on older embryos by requiring “review and approval of proposals” to study them. 

Importantly, each proposal should be judged individually, on whether the research is justifiable in terms of the value of the information obtained, whether there are alternative ways to obtain the information and so on. The more embryos that would be used, or the longer they would be kept in culture, the higher the bar,” he wrote.  

This is unlikely to placate people who hold the lives of every unborn human sacred, however. The same day Lovell-Bridge's article was published, Students for Life Action President Kristan Hawkins called the ISCCR recommendations to allow experimentation on older embryos “abhorrent.” 

Just because something can be done isn’t an argument for allowing it to be done,” she added.  

This kind of policy undermines the respect we owe to human beings not yet born and further empowers abortion vendors who profit by degrading preborn life,” Hawkins continued.  

“Allowing research on human life opens hideous doors that historically we have fought to close. Congress and those leading our scientific communities should end this type of research before it begins.” 

RELATED: 


  abortion, embryos, human embryos, international society for stem cell research, kristan hawkins

News

12-year-olds to be vaccinated without parental consent in San Francisco

The coronavirus vaccines are not fully approved by the FDA, but merely granted emergency use authorization.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 2:33 pm EST
Featured Image
Young woman getting vaccinated Shutterstock
Kenton Biffert Kenton Biffert Follow Kenton
By Kenton Biffert

SAN FRANCISCO, June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — In a health order released April 28, 2021, the City of San Francisco officially allowed children as young as 12 to take the coronavirus vaccine without parental notification or consent.

The health order was issued even though the vaccines have not been fully approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but are merely given an emergency use authorization.

Indeed, the order argues that “[i]n the coming months, not only is it likely that the authorization for such vaccines will be expanded (both in terms of the numbers of vaccines but also in terms of non-emergency approval), but it is also likely that the age range of those who are authorized to receive the vaccine in the United States will be expanded to allow for more minors to receive the vaccine.”

The document urged that “although many people have received the COVID-19 vaccines, it is critical from a public health perspective that as many people as possible, including minors, receive the vaccine.”

The San Francisco Department of Health justified this decision by referring to prior cases that allowed for children to give their own consent: “This ability to consent is similar to the concept used elsewhere in state law that minors 12 years old or older may consent to the diagnosis or treatment of infectious diseases, including specifically COVID-19, without parental consent. Allowing prevention of the disease via vaccination is just as important as allowing a minor to be tested for that disease or to be treated for it.”

LifeSiteNews reached out to Executive Director, Michael Ramey of ParentalRights.org, a non-profit political action group working to pass legislation that protects families, to comment on the issue of consent.

“The U.S. Supreme Court recognized decades ago that most children, even in adolescence, are not yet ready to make the kind of long term, potentially life-altering decisions often involved in their medical care,” he said. “The Court rightly declared that it is the proper role of parents to make those judgments. Yet today, we are seeing a flood of orders like this one that ignore this vital parental role. Claiming to give a child ‘freedom’ to make their own decision, all they really do is rob the child of the protection that fit, loving, older and wiser parents can give them from a wrong decision. Such orders put children’s lives at risk, and should be discarded for the unconstitutional rubbish that they are.”

“It isn’t ‘freedom’ if the only time the law empowers a minor to defy her parents is when she’s making the decision the government wants her to make in the first place,” Ramey continued. “That's not freedom: it’s coercion of a minor who has been stripped of her defenses.”

Children and vaccines

The coronavirus is no grave threat for children and teenagers.

America’s Frontline Doctors issued a white paper indicating that the survival rate of children under 19 years that have contracted the coronavirus is 99.997%. There are known complications with the vaccines, the white paper declares, including the immune enhancement whereby “antiCOVID antibodies, stimulated by a vaccine, amplify the infection rather than prevent its damage.” Other possible side effects, as listed by the FDA, include death, heart attacks, stroke, and blood disorders.

Dr. Paul Alexander, a physician writing for the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER) explains that there are almost no instances of asymptomatic spread of the virus. Further, he is arguing that children do not need to be vaccinated, and that herd immunity can happen through day-to-day contact in schools. Alexander told Laura Ingraham on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle” that “[t]he risk to children is so small, there is no reason to put our children in harm’s way at this point. Not with these untested vaccines. This is reckless.”

Alexander said, “Ludvigsson published a seminal paper in the New England Journal of Medicine on COVID-19 among children 1 to 16 years of age and their teachers in Sweden. From the nearly 2 million children that were followed in school in Sweden, it was reported that with no mask mandates, there were zero deaths from COVID and a few instances of transmission and minimal hospitalization.”

— 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

There is hesitancy to vaccinate children due to “lack of confidence in the vaccine” according to the WHO.

Emergency Use Authorization for vaccines

The FDA has issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for three coronavirus vaccines. An EUA can only granted to a medication or vaccine if there are no alternative treatments available, but it doesn’t amount to an actual approval of that medication of vaccine, with proper testing before.

On May 10, 2021, the FDA officially extended the EUA to include children aged 12 to 15 for the Pfizer vaccine. The Moderna and Johnson & Johnson vaccines have still not been given an EUA for adolescents.

The Order, the San Francisco Department of Health claims, is both reasonable and necessary because it is “issued based on evidence of continued community transmission of COVID-19 within the City, throughout the Bay Area, across California, and across the United States; evidence that most COVID-19 infections are caused by people who have no symptoms at all of illness.”

The health risks, the department argues, are serious enough to warrant such an order.

“[T]he age, condition, and health of a significant portion of the population of the City places it at risk for serious health complications, including death, from COVID-19; further evidence that others, including younger and otherwise healthy people, are also at risk for serious outcomes including death; evidence that breakthrough infections can occur in fully vaccinated people; and the reality that SARS-CoV-2 infections and COVID-19 diagnoses remain prevalent throughout the world.”


  coronvavirus vaccine, parental consent, san francisco

News

Pro-life victory in Texas: Judge dismisses Planned Parenthood lawsuit against abortion ban

The lawsuit dismissal upholds an ordinance that allows surviving relatives of aborted preborn babies to sue those who “aid and abet” an abortion.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 2:10 pm EST
Featured Image
Lubbock, Texas Shutterstock
Emily Mangiaracina Emily Mangiaracina Follow
By

LUBBOCK, Texas, June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A Planned Parenthood lawsuit challenging an abortion ban in the city of Lubbock, Texas, has been dismissed in federal court on Tuesday due to “lack of jurisdiction.”

Judge James Wesley Hendrix of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas declared that Planned Parenthood does not have standing to sue the city of Lubbock, because “the ability to remedy a plaintiff’s injury through a favorable decision” is “absent.”

On May 1, voters in Lubbock passed a “sanctuary city for the unborn” ordinance by about 62% to 37%, stating, “Abortion at all times and at all stages of pregnancy is declared to be an act of murder.”

The “sanctuary city” ordinance declares it unlawful “to procure or perform an abortion of any type and at any stage of pregnancy in the City of Lubbock, Texas,” or “to knowingly aid or abet” such an abortion.

Providing transportation to an abortion facility, giving instructions on how to self-administer an abortion, and helping to pay for an abortion all fall under the ordinance’s definition of aiding an abortion.

While the ordinance allows surviving relatives of aborted preborn babies to sue abortion providers for punitive and compensatory damages, including for emotional distress, penalties can “under no circumstance” be “imposed on the mother of the unborn child that has been aborted.”

No exceptions are made for facilitating abortions of children conceived as a result of rape or incest, but under the ordinance, “an act doesn’t qualify as an abortion if it is done to save the life of the mother, remove a fetus whose death was the result of a miscarriage or remove an ectopic pregnancy,” reported KXAN.

In addition, only private citizens — “not state or local actors” — may impose or threaten to impose the stated penalty, until the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark pro-abortion decisions Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey are overruled, or other conditions are met.

Lubbock, with a population of about 259,000 people, is the largest city in the United States to ban abortion. While other cities in Texas and a few other states have passed similar “pro-life sanctuary” ordinances, Lubbock is the only town with such an ordinance to have an active abortion clinic.

In fact, the initiative to create the ordinance was spurred on by Planned Parenthood’s announcement that it would open an abortion center in the city. State Sen. Charles Perry circulated a petition in response to the announcement, calling on the Lubbock City Council to declare their city a sanctuary for the unborn.

Perry said during the opening prayer for a news conference last year, “I want us to be able to say as a community from Lubbock, Texas, that we stood against the killing of an innocent baby.”

— 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

Last year, the Lubbock city council and Mayor Dan Pope, who has compared Planned Parenthood centers to churches, voted unanimously against the measure.

However, “Since the vote of the council was forced by the Initiative and Referendum process, this allowed for Lubbock residents to take the opportunity to get the ordinance on the ballot and to vote on the ordinance themselves on May 1, 2021,” explained Mark Lee Dickson, director of Right to Life of East Texas and founder of the Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn Initiative.

“The city of Lubbock said in a news release it would continue to ‘vigorously defend the ordinance’ if additional litigation was filed,” reported the Texas Tribune.


  abortion, lubbock, planned parenthood, sanctuary cities, us district court for the northern district of texas

News

Divorce court judge orders Texas father of four to be vaccinated before seeing his children

Chris Staley explained his understanding that his ‘civil rights were kind of violated there, whenever a judge is ordering me to take a vaccination.’
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 1:45 pm EST
Featured Image
Man refusing to take vaccine Shutterstock
David McLoone David McLoone Follow
By

June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – A Texas man has been ordered by the judge presiding over his divorce to receive a vaccine against COVID-19 in order to see his four children, FOX26 Houston reported.

District Judge Travis Kitchens handed down the vaccine order as part of the requirements in the divorce proceedings for Chris Staley to qualify for visitation with his children, according to court records seen by FOX26.

In fact, a May 10 court summary detailed the judge’s requirement that “[b]oth parents are to get vaccinated for COVID by end of this week.”

Staley, who lives roughly two hours from his wife and four children, stated that he “didn’t agree” with the judge’s vaccine order on the grounds that Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) signed an April 5 executive order “prohibiting state agencies or political subdivisions in Texas from creating a ‘vaccine passport’ requirement, or otherwise conditioning receipt of services on an individual’s COVID-19 vaccination status.”

Staley explained his understanding that his “civil rights were kind of violated there, whenever a judge is ordering me to take a vaccination,” emphasizing that, as things stand, the available vaccines for COVID are “not FDA approved.”

Staley’s concern arises from the terms under which all of the currently available vaccines against COVD-19 are marketed in the U.S. As things stand, the mRNA vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna, as well as the attenuated viral vaccine from Johnson & Johnson, are all approved for use under the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) “emergency use authorization” (EUA) protocol.

EUAs are granted to medications for which there is a perceived immediate need but which have not yet been through the rigors of a fully FDA-licensed drug. This renders EUA products experimental, with attending legal differences from their licensed counterparts.

“[T]hey really have no idea what the side effects could be down the road, you know — what it could do to me in a year or five years,” Staley said.

The FDA states that as EUA products, each vaccine is “an investigational vaccine not licensed for any indication,” and the agency requires that all “promotional material relating to the COVID-19 Vaccine clearly and conspicuously … state that this product has not been approved or licensed by the FDA, but has been authorized for emergency use by FDA.”

Furthermore, federal law states, “to protect public health,” that all manufacturers of products authorized for emergency use are required to provide “[a]ppropriate conditions designed to ensure that individuals to whom the product is administered are informed … of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that are available and of their benefits and risks.”

In fact, based on federal law, Children’s Health Defense (CHD) chairman Robert F. Kennedy Jr. filed a citizen petition with the FDA to immediately overturn the EUA given to COVID vaccines, in the hope that full licensing may be prohibited.

Kennedy cited the stipulation “that to grant EUA status, no other effective intervention may exist.” But since ivermectin has been proven to reduce the severity of illness arising from the SARS-CoV-2 virus, as well as working as an effective prophylactic, Kennedy said the FDA should fulfil its obligation to “immediately amend its existing guidance for the use of chloroquine drugs, ivermectin, and any other safe and effective drugs against COVID.”

Kennedy also made efforts to remind FDA officials that they are duty bound to “ensure all parties are aware of the ‘option to accept or refuse’ administration of all EUA products and that alternatives are available.”

— 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 Staley’s hesitation and justifiable concerns about vaccine safety, the judge “pretty much told me and her both that we were to get a COVID vaccination,” he said.

Staley refused to take one of the experimental jabs before the deadline against the advice of not only the judge, but also his own lawyer, Lana Shadwick, who counseled Staley to take the vaccine and not to challenge Kitchens’ ruling.

Shadwick advised that Kitchens will be “the one who’s going to set my visitations and be the one that handles all my stuff — pretty much be the lawyer who oversees my case until my kids are 18 and that it would be in my best interest not to upset him, and she pretty much said you probably should just go get [the vaccine],” informed Staley.

Regardless, the father of four decided to spend the following weekend with his children, technically in violation of the court order. “[I] kind of rolled with it and just kind of took my kids for the day without anyone saying whether I’ve gotten this vaccination or not,” he said.

Neither Staley nor Shadwick were able to be reached for comment before publishing.

Staley is reportedly awaiting a court hearing in July to determine custody of his children.


  chris staley, coronavirus vaccine, forced vaccination

News

German Cdl. Marx offers resignation: Church has reached ‘dead end’

‘I continue to enjoy being a priest and a bishop of this Church and I will keep committing myself in pastoral matter, wherever you deem it reasonable and useful,’ Marx told the Pope.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 1:38 pm EST
Featured Image
Cardinal Reinhard Marx. Lisa Bourne / LifeSiteNews
Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent Follow Jeanne
By Jeanne Smits

ANALYSIS

MUNICH, June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — In a move that appears to have been totally unexpected, Cardinal Reinhard Marx has revealed that he has tendered his resignation to Pope Francis as Archbishop of Munich and Freising. The German cardinal, who also holds top positions in the Vatican, obtained permission from the Pope to make public the letter of resignation he had sent him on May 21; it was posted on the Archdiocese’s website this Friday morning, together with a statement from Marx, who also answered questions at a press conference in the early afternoon.

The reason Marx gave for his offer to resign, long before the “legal” age of 75 (he is only 67 and has stressed that he is not “tired of office or demotivated”) was the personal responsibility he feels for the failure of people in the Church, but also of the Church itself as an institution, in handling the sex abuse crisis over the last decades.

The Church has reached a “dead end,” the cardinal stated.

Beyond the acceptance of personal accountability — not only does the resignation place the cardinal in a favorable light, it also automatically puts pressure on others to take similar steps — the rationale behind the move is quite clear: It makes out that the Church’s profound state of crisis requires new solutions, including the “Synodal Path” which has been undertaken by the Catholic Church in Germany, opening the way to revolutionary consensus with its most progressive sections.

Indeed, in some ways the resignation appears as a way or even a maneuver to promote Pope Francis’ own project of a “synodal” Church — although the more cynical are saying that Marx wants to step down to preempt problems related to his own management of the sex abuse crisis that are sure to come to the light in the near future. Die Welt called the resignation a “humility maneuver” prompted by the fact that Marx would soon be facing further accusations of mishandling the sex abuse crisis.

Whether this is true or not is not the main issue. The resignation appears to be more of a gesture than anything else, as Reinhard Marx has not voiced any intention whatsoever of backing down from his eminent roles in the Vatican, both as a member of Pope Francis’ “privy council” of cardinal advisers for the reform of the Curia, now known as the C6, and as the president of Francis’ Council for the Economy.

It will now be up to the Pope to accept or refuse his resignation; meanwhile, Cardinal Marx will remain at the head of his archdiocese for business as usual. One senior Vatican source is even of the opinion that Pope Francis wants to call Cardinal Marx to Rome.

What is plain to the eyes is that even in his resignation letter Marx is using language and ideas that are in agreement with Pope Francis’ objectives. From there to wondering whether this is a deeply “political” move is but a step.

In his May 21 letter, whose English translation was made available online together with the original German text, cardinal Marx said the present crisis affecting the Church in Germany and in the whole world “has also been caused by our own failure, our own guilt.” “My impression is that we are at a ‘dead end’ which, and this is my paschal hope, also has the potential of becoming a ‘turning point,’” he added in the opening lines of his letter.

Which clearly puts his initiative in a dynamic setting: the objective is change.

Marx’s decision to offer his resignation was a personal one, he stated in his letter. “In essence, it is important to me to share the responsibility for the catastrophe of sexual abuse by Church officials over the past decades. The investigations and reports of the last ten years have consistently shown that there have been many personal failures and administrative mistakes but also institutional or ‘systemic’ failure. The recent debates have shown that some members of the Church refuse to believe that there is a shared responsibility in this respect and that the Church as an institution is hence also to be blamed for what has happened and therefore disapprove of discussing reforms and renewal in the context of the sexual abuse crisis.”

Marx is on a different path, his letter made clear. He wrote: “I firmly have a different opinion. Both aspects have to be considered: mistakes for which you are personally responsible and the institutional failure which requires changes and a reform of the Church. A turning point out of this crisis is, in my opinion, only possible if we take a ‘synodal path,’ a path which actually enables a ‘discernment of spirits’ as you have repeatedly emphasized and reiterated in your letter to the Church in Germany”

Both expressions: “Synodal Path” and “discernment of spirits” are dear to the Pope and have been used repeatedly to justify developments beyond the traditional doctrine and discipline of the Church. They point to a democratic approach to power and the definition of what is to be believed and to be done, with a possibility of change as a result of the will of the people, both the ordained and the laity. They also point to a subjective understanding of morality, where circumstances trump principles.

In Germany, under Cardinal Marx’s leadership — he was at the head of the country’s bishops’ conference until 2020 — the Synodal Path is open to the progressive German laity and is set to promote all manner of modern reforms, from the place of women in the Church to the revamping of sexual morality, as the German grumbling at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s responsum regarding the impossibility of blessing same-sex unions has shown.

By focusing not on the faults and errors of individual pastors of the Church in the sex abuse crisis, but by taking the responsibility for it as a bishop who represents “the institution of the Church as a whole,” Marx has actually designated the Church as responsible. In his letter to Pope Francis, he wrote: “I feel that through remaining silent, neglecting to act and over-focusing on the reputation of the Church I have made myself personally guilty and responsible.”

But the words make clear that in the cardinal’s mind, it is the Church as such that is guilty and responsible. “In the aftermath of the MHG survey commissioned by the German Bishops’ Conference I stated in the Cathedral of Munich that we have failed. But who is this ‘We’? In fact, I also belong to this circle. And this means I must also draw personal consequences from this. This is becoming increasingly clear to me,” he wrote.

But by the resignation through which he wants to assume responsibility, Marx wants to obtain results. He says it very plainly at the end of his letter: “In doing so, I may be able to send a personal signal for a new beginning, for a new awakening of the Church, not only in Germany. I would like to show that not the ministry is in the foreground but the mission of the Gospel.”

— 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

Is Marx talking about a great reset of the Church? Where priesthood (“ministry”) is downplayed — as well as the Tradition of the Church — to go back to “the Gospel”?

Interestingly, the new papal Nuncio in Paris, Archbishop Celestino Migliore, had not unsimilar thoughts to offer to the clergy of the diocese of Rennes in Brittany, France, earlier this year. In his January 28 conference, Migliore explained that he wanted to present Pope Francis’ vision for the Church in a secularized world that is experiencing not a “time of change” but a “change of times.”

“Pope Francis has understood that the Church, similar to the human society inside of which it is placed, has reached a breaking point. Not a break with its biblical foundations, its doctrine and its tradition, but truly a break with its way of incarnating the Word of God, the doctrine and the tradition of the Church. A break in the domain of governance and the relations between the different members of the Church … In our world, the faith shall only be saved if it returns to the power of its original Word: the Word of Jesus Christ and, therefore, the Word transmitted by the four evangelists.”

He also stressed “another focus dear to Pope Francis, synodality,” which he equated with an “outward-going Church” that meets the world in “dialogue” in a “mystique of fraternity” while abandoning “ecclesio-centrism.”

He went on to complain about the excessive focus (in his view) on the Eucharist — “so much so that when the urgency of the pandemic in practice made its public celebration impossible, the whole edifice collapsed and it seemed that nothing was left standing.”

This is a far cry from Bossuet’s definition of the Church: “Jesus Christ spread and communicated.”

“There is a serious risk of regression — after fifty years of conciliar reform — to a conception of the sacrament as a rite that always functions, because it is endowed with a supernatural automatism,” said Migliore. He went on to speak about synodality which calls for going beyond “certain paradigms … such as the concentration of responsibility in the ministry of Pastors.”

This exposé of the Pope’s politics for the Church by one of his senior ambassadors strongly resonates with Marx’s latest move — Marx who is so close to Francis, and whose publication of his private resignation letter was approved, if not willed by the Pope.

In Germany, cardinal Marx’s resignation elicited both praise and dismay from the most progressive faction of the Church. Bishop Georg Bätzing, the current head of the bishops’ conference, expressed “great respect” for the cardinal’s decision, acknowledging his role in showing the way for the “Church in Germany” at the head of that institution. Recalling the sex abuse crisis, Bätzing added:

Cardinal Marx sees his offer of resignation from office as a personal response to this situation. Irrespective of this, however, the German Bishops’ Conference and the dioceses must continue to fulfill their responsibility to continue on the path of coming to terms with the cases of sexual abuse that they embarked upon in 2010. The Synodal Path was launched to search for systemic answers to the crisis. The fundamental theological discussions that inform the Synodal Path are therefore an essential and important part in this process.

Confirming the importance of Marx’s offer of resignation from the point of view of Church politics, Bätzing’s statement concluded:

“I can understand Cardinal Marx’s decision. His offer of resignation makes it clear that the Church in Germany must continue the Synodal Path it has embarked upon. Pope Francis himself emphasizes that he wants synodality and the Synodal Path as a discernment for the whole Church.”

The president of the progessive Central Committee of German Catholics (ZdK, one of the official interlocutors of the Synodal Path), Thomas Sternberg, said he was “deeply shocked” by Marx’s offer to step down. “There goes the wrong one,” he told the Rheinische Post. “What Marx achieved in ecumenism, in the Synodal Path, and also in dealing with abuse, was very important.”

Sternberg added that Marx intended to spend part of his private fortune to fund the “Spes and Salus” Foundation created by the cardinal of Munich and Freising to help those affected by sexual abuse: the €500,000 gift (more than $600,000) was announced last December.

Others, such as the German child protection expert from the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome,” the Jesuit priest Hans Zollner, said the offer of resignation was an “extremely important sign that deserves great respect.” The word “respect” frequently appears in the reactions of German leaders, while Maria Flachsbarth, president of the Catholic German Women’s Association, added her thanks for Marx’s “clear words for the renewal of the Church and for the continuation of the Synodal Path.”

Marx himself wrote:

An American journalist asked me during a conversation about the sexual abuse crisis in the Church and the events of the year 2010: „Eminence, did this change your faith?“ And I replied: „Yes, it did!“ Afterwards it became clearer to me what I had said. The crisis not only concerns a required improvement of the administration — although it does concern it — but it is even more about the question of a renewed form of the Church and a new way to live and proclaim faith today.

Finally, in his letter to Pope Francis, Cardinal Marx said: “I continue to enjoy being a priest and a bishop of this Church and I will keep committing myself in pastoral matter, wherever you deem it reasonable and useful. In the next years of my service, I would like to increasingly dedicate myself to pastoral care and support an ecclesiastical renewal of the Church which you also call for incessantly.”


  catholic, pope francis, reinhard marx, synodal path, vatican

News

Another study shows natural COVID-19 immunity lasts for ‘substantial’ period of time

The latest study adds to a growing body of literature and medical opinion indicating that natural immunity is long-lasting even without vaccination.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 12:26 pm EST
Featured Image
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Yet another study has been published supporting the conclusion that people who contract COVID-19 and recover remain immune to reinfection for a “substantial” period of time, potentially dashing health bureaucrats’ hopes of making COVID vaccinations and booster shots a long-term feature of American life.

The study, published in The Lancet’s journal EClinicalMedicine, examined data from antibodies in 39,086 individuals who tested positive for COVID-19 from March 2020 and January 2021, taking advantage of Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings (Labcorp), “one of the United States’ largest diagnostic laboratories, which has access to some of the most substantial longitudinal data on COVID-19.” It found an “encouraging timeline for the development and sustainability of antibodies up to ten months from natural infection.”

The researchers caution that their findings were limited by the lack of “advanced demographic (race, ethnicity, etc.) and diagnostic information (disease severity)” in the data they were using, and their reliance on multiple types of antibody tests limiting the “specificity of how much antibodies remain in the system.” Therefore, “true SARS-CoV-2 antibody kinetics are still unknown, and require more time from sample collection and monitoring.”

Still, they say their findings show a “sustained positivity rate of antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein past ten months post-PCR [polymerase chain reaction test] confirmed COVID-19 infection using data from over 39,000 patients, with linear trends indicating a substantial population half-life.” This, the team explained, “may help guide current and future post-pandemic planning, such as public health restrictions.”

The latest study adds to a growing body of literature and medical opinion indicating that natural immunity is long-lasting even without vaccination.

One study, published on May 24 in Nature, found that COVID-19 infection “induces a robust antigen-specific, long-lived humoral immune response in humans,” with antibodies “remaining detectable at least 11 months after infection.” Another, published at BioRxiv, found that even without vaccination, antibodies in the infected “remain relatively stable from 6 to 12 months,” while “B cell clones expressing broad and potent antibodies are selectively retained in the repertoire over time and expand dramatically after vaccination.” A third study out of Israel found that natural immunity was slightly more effective against reinfection than the Pfizer vaccine, at 94.8% versus 92.8%.

“There is more data on natural immunity than there is on vaccinated immunity, because natural immunity has been around longer,” says Dr. Marty Makary, professor of surgery at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. “We are not seeing reinfections, and when they do happen, they’re rare. Their symptoms are mild or are asymptomatic.” 

Makary argues that natural immunity and vaccinated immunity are equally effective and “probably life-long,” and that, between the roughly 50% of Americans he thinks are naturally immune and the 41% fully vaccinated so far, the United States has already reached herd immunity – the point at which enough of the population is impervious to COVID-19 that the virus will run out of places to spread and die out.

Makary goes so far as to urge Americans to “ignore” the guidance of what he calls the “most slow, reactionary, political [US Centers for Disease Control] in American history” and “live a normal life, unless you are unvaccinated and did not have the infection, in which case you need to be careful. We’ve got to start respecting people who choose not to get the vaccine instead of demonizing them.”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), an ophthalmologist  who contracted and recovered from COVID-19 last year, says he is supportive of the COVID-19 vaccines but feels no need to take one himself. “Until they show me evidence that people who have already had the infection are dying in large numbers, or being hospitalized or getting very sick, I just made my own personal decision that I’m not getting vaccinated because I’ve already had the disease and I have natural immunity,” Paul said.

— 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

If the above conclusions are correct, they would effectively gut the case for all remaining COVID-19 restrictions, and especially for the intensity with which many political and media figures have been pressuring Americans to vaccinate in the name of protecting their neighbors.

Both the restrictions and the vaccine push are predicated on the idea that COVID-19 can easily be spread through casual contact in public, regardless of whether a carrier is displaying or experiencing symptoms. Therefore, lockdown and vaccine supporters argue, only those who have been vaccinated can forego masks and social distancing in public spaces.

These arguments have already been undermined by research indicating that masks were ineffective at containing COVID-19 and that the risk of asymptomatic spread is very low, as well as public health officials’ March admission that the six-foot distancing rule was arbitrary from the start. 

If spread can be prevented simply by the symptomatic infected isolating until recovery (and the rest of the public generally engaging in conscientious sanitation practices), past infection is at least as protective as vaccination, and enough Americans are immune that risk of infection will continue to shrink regardless of what individuals or policymakers do, then restricting the general public’s interactions and additional COVID-19 vaccination are simply not necessary to protect one’s neighbors. 

With the “social responsibility” argument for COVID vaccination dispatched, the question then turns to one of both personal medical autonomy and medical ethics. To the first point, many Americans remain concerned that the three COVID vaccines currently available in the United States have not been sufficiently studied for negative effects.

While many officeholders and media figures blame online “misinformation” for lingering vaccine hesitancy, considerably less contemplation has been spent on how the government’s own actions contribute to mistrust, such as mixed messaging about vaccinated people still potentially transmitting the virus to others, as well as the fact that clinical trials for the currently-authorized COVID-19 vaccines were performed in less than a year, when such trials traditionally take a minimum of two to four years

One of the innovations of the Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed was conducting various aspects of the development process concurrently rather than sequentially, but that does not fully account for the condensing of clinical trial phases — each of which can take anywhere from 1-3 years on its own — to just three months apiece. 

Apart from factual questions about safety and effectiveness, some of the COVID-19 vaccines also carry grave ethical concerns for many, particularly religious and pro-life Americans, due to the use of cells derived from aborted babies in the development process. To help pro-lifers make an informed decision, the Charlotte Lozier Institute has a detailed breakdown of all the various COVID-19 vaccines in development and which ones used or did not use abortion-derived cells at any stage of the process.

According to the Lozier document, the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were not designed or produced with abortion-derived cells, but abortion-derived cells were used for some of the lab tests conducted on both vaccines. By contrast, the Johnson & Johnson vaccine was designed, produced, and tested using abortion-derived cells.


  coronavirus, covid-19, covid-19 immunity, covid-19 vaccine, herd immunity, lockdowns, natural immunity, public health

News

Amazon to enable internet sharing on its devices by default, raising fresh privacy concerns

The tech giant will enable users of Amazon’s Sidewalk function to automatically connect to private home wi-fi networks on the system, which is being implemented on an opt-out basis.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 11:56 am EST
Featured Image
Amazon Sidewalk Amazon screenshot
David McLoone David McLoone Follow
By

June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Online shopping giant Amazon is set to launch a new internet sharing feature on its devices, allowing strangers to access anyone’s Amazon-based home network, regardless of prior permissions to connect to it.

The Amazon Sidewalk feature is called a “wireless mesh service” (WMS) and will be made available to U.S. customers on numerous devices on June 8. The WMS allows a Sidewalk-capable device to sap a small percentage of another’s internet bandwidth in order to stay connected to the internet.

According to Ars Technica, a dedicated technology news agency and blog, the full list of Sidewalk-capable devices is: “Ring Floodlight Cam (2019), Ring Spotlight Cam Wired (2019), Ring Spotlight Cam Mount (2019), Echo (3rd gen and newer), Echo Dot (3rd gen and newer), Echo Dot for Kids (3rd gen and newer), Echo Dot with Clock (3rd gen and newer), Echo Plus (all generations), Echo Show (all models and generations), Echo Spot, Echo Studio, Echo Input, and Echo Flex.”

All listed devices will automatically implement the update, unless users specifically navigate their private settings and switch-off the function on purpose. Given the wide ownership of Sidewalk-compatible devices across the U.S. — with the Echo smart speaker system alone accounting for 58.3 million units in U.S. homes — and default enrollment in Sidewalk, Amazon is essentially creating a nationwide, distributed internet network with geolocation tracking functionality through private Wi-Fi connections.

Amazon has recently teamed up with Tile — a company making remote trackers to help find lost items and even pets — and with Level, which manufactures “smart-lock” security doors that are controlled via fingerprints, key-cards, and even mobile phones. This could mean that most Sidewalk users will be granted access to the same network to which many individuals technologically anchor their most valuable assets.

To offset privacy and security fears, Amazon is enabling the Sidewalk service free-of-charge and informing customers of the benefits of the system. “Sidewalk can help simplify new device setup, extend the low-bandwidth working range of devices to help find pets or valuables with Tile trackers, and help devices stay online even if they are outside the range of their home wifi,” an explanatory webpage reads.

Continuing, the e-commerce giant justified its new system by explaining that “Amazon Sidewalk helps your devices get connected and stay connected. For example, if your Echo device loses its wifi connection, Sidewalk can simplify reconnecting to your router. For select Ring devices, you can continue to receive motion alerts from your Ring Security Cams and customer support can still troubleshoot problems even if your devices lose their wifi connection.”

“Sidewalk can also extend the working range for your Sidewalk-enabled devices, such as Ring smart lights, pet locators or smart locks, so they can stay connected and continue to work over longer distances.”

Amazon has suffered serious security breaches in the past, supporting concerns about privacy and other issues regarding Sidewalk.

— 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 2018, Amazon customers’ names and email addresses were “inadvertently disclosed … due to a technical error.” At the time, Amazon told customers not to change any of their login details or passwords, but Richard Walters, chief technical officer of cybersecurity firm CensorNet, urged those affected to ignore Amazon’s cavalier advice.

Walters advised that, even though credit card details were not lost in the leak, “it would be wrong to assume that this makes the breach inconsequential. Cyber-criminals can do a lot of damage with a large database of names and emails.”

“A large majority of people still use predictable passwords, and thanks to previous high-profile breaches many people’s passwords are also readily available on the dark web. For cyber-criminals, it then just becomes an exercise in joining the dots.”

“If you’ve been affected, make sure you change your passwords quickly,” he cautioned.

For those who have a Sidewalk enabled device and don’t want to enroll in the internet-sharing service, Ars Technica provided a handy guide to opting out of the program:

  1. Open the Alexa app

  2. Open More and select Settings

  3. Select Account Settings

  4. Select Amazon Sidewalk

  5. Turn Amazon Sidewalk Off


  amazon, amazon sidewalk, big tech, privacy, privacy rights

News

California priest: Pope Francis ‘spreads … confusion like a virus’

He also lashed out at the President: ‘A good example of hypocrisy would be Joe Biden. He says he is a good Catholic, but he’s the opposite.’
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 10:54 am EST
Featured Image
Fr. Francis Gloudeman Rumble screenshot
Kenton Biffert Kenton Biffert Follow Kenton
By Kenton Biffert

GUASTI, California, June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A Norbertine priest from Orange County, California, pulled no punches in his Pentecost homily, blasting the reign of falsehoods in Church and society, including by leaders such as Pope Francis and President Joe Biden.

Fr. Francis Gloudeman explained that a falsehood can be identified by causing confusion. “A prime example of that would be Pope Francis,” the priest said. “A Jesuit education confused him, and he spreads this confusion like a virus.”

Gloudeman also pointed to hypocrisy as a sign of falsehood, mentioning pro-abortion President Biden — a self-described Catholic — by name.

A hypocrite, he explained, is saying “one thing and doing something [that is] the opposite. Fake. Being fake … A good example of hypocrisy would be Joe Biden. He says he is a good Catholic, but he’s the opposite. He supports those things, which are against Catholicism. That is hypocrisy on a grand scale — in front of the whole world!”

Regarding the recent statement signed by 14 U.S. bishops in partnership with a pro-homosexual advocacy group in support of young people who identify as LGBT, telling them that “God is on their side,” Gloudeman blasted his own bishop in the Diocese of San Bernardino.

“One sad example [of falsehood] in our diocese: Our bishop, Alberto Rojas, is one of the 14 bishops who made a big error. Right? He was one of the 14 that signed a document saying LGBT is healthy, normal … That is an error … It is a mortal sin. A sin that leads to hell, to condemnation … Insofar as one loves the sin, that person hates the sinner.”

Gloudeman also noted that his diocese was promoting a homosexual agenda in the formation of priests. Bishop Emeritus Gerald R. Barnes, he stated, “has been destroying vocations, making this diocese one of the worst in this country regarding vocations. Are we going to act like this is okay? … Is it okay that good young men are screened out of the seminary … because [they] are close-minded, [they’re] not open to married priests, and homosexual priests?”

In a conversation with LifeSiteNews, Gloudeman specifically encouraged fathers to gather where authentic Catholicism is preached and lived, and to support such places.

“Go to those priests that are acting like shepherds, that are acting like men with courage [and] speaking out,” he said. “Those are the examples you want for your children, especially for your boys … Our clergy are failing us … Go to those places where you can receive communion on the tongue, where you can receive confession … support those places.”

Gloudeman compared current events with the times of Pope St. Gregory VII: “There was lay investiture, simony, concubinage, and he was the first to speak out against these harshly. And it caused tremendous resistance in parts of Europe. And so he appealed to the lay people, and he said, ‘Do not go to those bishops, priests, religious who are being bad shepherds, who are … not following Church teaching — don’t receive their sacraments, don’t listen to their homilies, don’t go to their churches, don’t support them financially.’ Go to the obedient priests. Support them.”

On Pentecost, the Church celebrates the coming of the Holy Spirit.

— 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 Holy Spirit, Gloudeman explained, is the Spirit of Truth. Where there is falsehood and hypocrisy, “the Holy Spirit is not a part of that.” The answer to falsehoods, he continued, “is courage,” which comes from the Holy Spirit.

He said that all Catholics are called to “peace and war.” Pointing to a statue of Our Lady, Gloudeman declared, “This is peace.” At the same time, this is also war, he added, as she is crushing the head of the serpent.

“I will not put up with [these falsehoods] anymore,” Gloudeman concluded.


  catholic, francis gloudeman, joe biden, pope francis

News

‘This Week’ with Mary + Polly: White House teams up with Snapchat to encourage teens get vaccinated + more

In 'This Week' with Mary Holland, Children’s Health Defense president, and Polly Tommey, co-producer of 'Vaxxed,' Mary and Polly discuss the latest COVID vaccine news.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 10:22 am EST
Featured Image
Mary Holland, president of Children’s Health Defense (Right), and Polly Tommey, co-producer of 'Vaxxed' (left). THIS WEEK with Mary and Polly
Children’s Health Defense
By Children's Health Defense

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

June 4, 2021 (Children’s Health Defense) — This week, Mary Holland, Children’s Health Defense (CHD) president, and Polly Tommey, co-producer of “Vaxxed,” cover the latest COVID headlines, including heart problems in young people in Connecticut post-COVID vaccine, how Snapchat and the White House are teaming up to get teens vaccinated, and schools that are creating pep-rally atmospheres with mascots, food and prizes to encourage students to get the COVID vaccine. 

Mary and Polly also discuss how Merck is using celebs to push childhood vaccines, Germany’s plan to start vaccinating kids 12 to 15 for COVID and the enrollment of children ages 6 months to 11 years old in a Moderna vaccine study at the Henry Ford Health System in Detroit.

Here are a few of this week’s highlights:

  • The Telegraph issued a retraction for a May 11 article claiming children 12- to 15-years old are one of the age groups most responsible for spreading COVID. The Telegraph admitted it lacked evidence to back up the claim.

  • Texas pediatricians are sounding the alarm over a major drop in vaccination rates among Texas babies. A new study comparing vaccination rates from 2019 to 2020, found 5-month-old Texas babies saw a 47% decline, while 16-month-olds saw a 58% decline. Mary said, “That means young kids are going to be less likely to get autism.”

  • A young mom is fighting for her life after the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID vaccine caused 14 anaphylactic shocks and led her to be put into an induced coma. 

  • The AstraZeneca vaccine for the first time is linked to ischaemic strokes which occur when blood clots form and block flow of blood and oxygen to the brain. Two women in their 30s and a man in his 40s suffered ischaemic strokes after getting the vaccine. 

  • A healthy, 38-year-old Colorado woman nearly died after the COVID vaccine caused severe blood clots and organ failure. Now she’s calling for a federal compensation system for those injured by COVID vaccines. “It’s so irresponsible for the government to be urging everybody to get these shots when there’s no adequate reporting system for injuries and there’s no adequate compensation program,” said Mary. 

  • The Biden administration is considering vaccine passports for international travel. The U.S. doesn’t have requirements for international travelers to be vaccinated, but requires those traveling into the U.S. to test negative for COVID.

  • Microneedle patches are being developed to deliver vaccines without the pain caused by the traditional jabbing of a needle. “Do they really think we’re scared of a needle going in us?” asked Polly. “Is that what they think the problem is?”

  • Chicago restaurant owners plan to introduce vaccinated and unvaccinated sections. At one restaurant, those who prove their full vaccination history will be given a neon bracelet granting entrance to the unrestricted vaccinated section. “It’s this idea that vaccination is your ticket to the pre-pandemic lifestyle. If you want to be free, you have to go get the vaccine,” said Mary. “Let’s see how long this lasts. It’s such an obvious contradiction to the other narrative, which is diversity, inclusion and equity.”

  • A group of 117 unvaccinated staffers are suing a Houston hospital over its vaccine mandate. Plaintiffs say they don’t want to be “guinea pigs” and that the hospital’s vaccine mandate violates a set of medical ethics standards known as the Nuremberg Code. “We think that’s the correct interpretation of the law,” said Mary. “While this vaccine is Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) only, the statutory language in the federal code and the case law suggests that you cannot force people to take an EUA vaccine.” 

  • Follow Children’s Health Defense Live for more interviews by Polly, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and others. Tune into The People’s Statements with Polly to hear live testimonies from around the world about mask mandates, emergency use COVID vaccines and more. 

Watch “This Week” with Mary + Polly: 

— 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

© June 3, 2021 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

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


  biden administration, children’s health defense, coronavirus vaccine, mary holland, polly tommey, snapchat

News

San Diego Police to force cops to use ‘transgender,’ ‘nonbinary’ pronouns, alter body searches for LGBT individuals

Arrestees are to be assigned a male or female police officer according to the arrestee’s will; and officers must confirm with the arrestee the sex-allocated prison facility to which they would like to be taken.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 10:15 am EST
Featured Image
San Diego Police Chief David Nisleit CBS 8 San Diego / YouTube
David McLoone David McLoone Follow
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

SAN DIEGO, California, June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The San Diego Police Department (SDPD) are enforcing a new set of rules on interactions with individuals who identify as “transgender” and “nonbinary,” coercing their officers into using the preferred pronouns of such individuals, as well as accommodating body searches and transportation to the needs associated with their “gender identity.”

The SDPD published an updated set of guidelines on June 1 to coincide with the beginning of the so-called “Gay Pride” month, and Police Chief David Nisleit said that the rules have been developed in conjunction “with our LGBTQ community” in San Diego.

Based on a supposed commitment to “working with the diverse communities it serves,” the SDPD proceeded to implement measures that “create mutual understanding, prevent conflict, and ensure the appropriate interaction with transgender and gender non-binary individuals.” 

To this end, officers are now obliged to address transgender and non-binary-identifying individuals by their preferred pronouns, in spite of biological realities. Such individuals, once arrested, are to be assigned a male or female police officer for the purposes of transport and body searches according to the arrestee’s will; and officers must confirm with the arrestee the sex-allocated prison facility to which they would like to be taken.

Men who think that they are women are even to be treated like biological women regarding transport security, following standard bodycam recording procedures in transporting women and notifying a dispatcher of the beginning and ending mileage of the police vehicle used for the transfer.

In addition, the new guidelines instruct officers to avoid “outdated terms” like “transvestite” and “transsexual,” instead insisting that the “correct term to be used is ‘Transgender.’” Officers must also be careful not to base their assessment of a person’s sex by appearance. Rather, officers must stay alert for “visual or verbal cues” that an individual might identify as transgender.

If an officer is simply told by the arrestee that they identify as either transgender or non-binary, the officer is ordered that he must not only “accept their expressed gender identity,” but that he “shall not question it.”

Even government issue identification, such as a driver’s license from the DMV, is no longer considered as “proof of an individual’s gender identity” as, according to the guidelines “it can often reflect the gender from which the individual is transitioning (as part of the transition process) and not the biological gender or gender identity the individual possesses.”

In case an officer becomes confused or loses track of what terms can and cannot be used, or even what the terms designate, the procedural document includes a “definitions” section to point them towards currently-accepted standards of speech. For example, the SDPD defines “gender binary” as follows: 

[The] classification of sex and gender into two distinct, opposite and disconnected forms of masculine and feminine. This is the idea that a person who is male is masculine and a person who is female is feminine.

Otherwise known as male and female.

Contrary to numerous assertions made throughout the document suggesting a blanket acceptance of a female-identifying-males as female, and vice versa, the SDPD define gender identity in less concrete terms. The department categorize one’s gender identity as a mere “sense of being a man, a woman, both, or neither,” without confirming that sense to be in accord with reality.

With the terms having been laid out, official documentation of arrests and other reports must now take care to input names and pronouns according to the “transgender” individual’s stated name and sex, meaning that the officer cannot “refer to the person’s legal gender or legal name in the narrative of the report if the individual requests a preferred name and gender be used.” The “transgender” person must also be allowed to use whichever bathroom fits their gender identity on police property, regardless of whether that identity matches their biological sex.

Officer Christine Garcia, a biological man who identifies as a woman, took over as SDPD’s “LGBTQ Liaison” last year and was responsible for drafting the new procedure. 

“Since I am transgender myself, I took it upon myself to draw this up,” he said of the updated policy, adding that he does not believe there will be any significant pushback from within the force, according to a report in the LA Times. 

Another notable change in policy is in handling hormonal “medicines” from transgender-identifying arrestees. “Often transgender individuals take medications as part of their transition,” the SDPD recognizes, before adding that “[m]issing doses or coming off those medications can be life threatening to the individual.”

Accordingly, “The officer should make every reasonable attempt to recover medications for the individual and take those medications to the jail facility with their personal property. If the officer cannot retrieve the medications, a list of current medications should be gathered and given to the nurse at the jail facility.”

— 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

San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria, himself an open homosexual, also welcomed the changes in policing gender-confused individuals, touting the move as “a much-needed and welcome change that is symbolic of the respect we should have for one another and how we create a San Diego that is truly for all of us.”

“Historically, many members of our LGBTQ community — particularly those who identify as transgender or nonbinary — have not been recognized or respected for who they are. That changes with this procedure,” Gloria added.

Meanwhile, in Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) has signed into law a ban on male athletes competing in female sports at both high school and collegiate level. This follows Mississippi’s gov. Tate Reeves signing Mississippi State Senate Bill (SB) 2536 into law back in March, making Mississippi the first state in the nation to protect girls' sports.

DeSantis blasted attempts by the NCAA to coerce state legislatures into permitting males to compete against females at college level: “You can’t be cowed by these organizations, or particularly by woke corporations from doing the right thing. And so my view was throughout this whole time, we have to protect our girls, it is discriminatory to force them to compete against biological males.”


  san diego police department, transgenderism, woke orthodoxy

News

Supreme Court: J&J must pay $2.1 billion in baby powder lawsuit

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected an appeal by Johnson & Johnson to reverse a $2.1 billion verdict for plaintiffs who claim the company’s talc powder products gave them ovarian cancer.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 7:44 am EST
Featured Image
Sundry Photography / Shutterstock.com
Children’s Health Defense
By Children's Health Defense

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

June 4, 2021 (Children’s Health Defense) — The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected an appeal by Johnson & Johnson (J&J) to reverse a $2.1 billion verdict for plaintiffs who claim the company’s talc powder products gave them ovarian cancer.

The pharmaceutical company, which developed the Janssen COVID vaccine, asked the top court to review the verdict, arguing it didn’t receive a fair trial in Missouri where the court awarded a $4.7 billion payout to 22 women who developed ovarian cancer.

The verdict was reduced to $2.1 billion in June 2020, by a Missouri court of appeals.

— 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

J&J stopped selling talc powder products in the U.S. and Canada last year. But the company still faces more than 21,800 lawsuits alleging asbestos in its talc powder products, including baby powder, caused ovarian cancer.

Ken Starr, a prosecutor representing women who sued J&J, wrote in court briefings that the pharma company “knew for decades that their talc powders contained asbestos, a highly carcinogenic substance with no known safe exposure level.”

He wrote:

“They could have protected customers by switching from talc to cornstarch, as their own scientists proposed as early as 1973. But talc was cheaper and petitioners were unwilling to sacrifice profits for a safer product.”

J&J maintains its baby powder is safe and does not contain asbestos or cause cancer.

The lawsuits linking talc powder to cancer aren’t the first time J&J has been sued over the safety of its products.

Other major J&J lawsuits and recalls for faulty products include:

  • 1995: $7.5 million fine for destroying documents to cover up an investigation into wrongful marketing of its Retin-A acne cream to remove wrinkles.

  • 1996: An undisclosed settlement on false claims over condom protection claims to protect against HIV and other STDs.

  •  2001: Paid out $860 million in a class action lawsuit for misleading customers about prematurely discarding its 1-Day Acuvue soft contact lens. J&J recommended they should be worn only once, although it was discovered the lenses were no different than the regular Acuvue lens that would last for two weeks.

  • 2010: $81 million settlement for misbranding its anti-epileptic drug Topamax to treat psychiatric disorders and hiring outside physicians to join its sales force to promote the drug for unapproved conditions. The following year, J&J paid $85 million for similar charges against its heart drug Natrecor.

  • 2011: Several J&J baby products were discovered to contain carcinogenic ingredients.

  • 2013: The U,S. Justice Department charged the company $2.2 billion in criminal fines for marketing its autism and anti-psychotic drug Risperdal for unapproved uses. Forty-five states had filed civil lawsuits against J&J in the scandal. Janssen also had an aggressive campaign to market Risperdal for use in children with behavioral challenges. Other serious adverse effects from Risperdal reported by the FDA include diabetes mellitus, hyperprolactinaemia, somnolence, depression, anxiety, psychotic behavior, suicide and death.

© June 3, 2021 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

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


  big pharma, johnson & johnson

News

New perpetual rosary campaign launched to ‘protect the whole world’

'The rosary is a spiritual weapon, especially in these times when man wants to be a creator in the Creator’s place. But the world is in God’s hands. Our prayer and our confidence can allow Him to act.'
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 5:57 am EST
Featured Image
www.chapeletperpetuelpourlemonde.org/
Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent Follow Jeanne
By Jeanne Smits

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – What is there to be done facing the COVID crisis and the consequences of its “management” by the powers that be? A group of four friends living in the French Alps recently launched a “perpetual Rosary” which they hope will protect humanity from the evil that is so obviously surrounding it.

The story of their commitment to bring all Catholics to turn to the Virgin Mary and her powerful intercession in these times is a remarkable one. It finds its roots way back in the 13th century and the story of the miraculous survival of a group of Benedictine monks when a local mountain, Mont Apremont (now known as Mont Granier), partially collapsed, in what has become known as the deadliest catastrophe ever to have occurred in the Alps. On November 24, 1248, several villages were totally destroyed by a landslide of some 500 million cubic meters of mud and rocks, covering a total of at least 20 square kilometers. Four or five thousand people lost their lives, according to contemporary accounts.

But for the moment, back to the present. Three Catholic ladies (who were later joined by a fourth: Catherine, Irène, Françoise and Isabelle), all members of prayer groups and active in their local parishes, decided to pray together to discern what they could do in a situation where so many people are suffering: not only those who fall ill and die of COVID, but all those who are facing hardship because of the various measures which have been implemented in the past year. 

They had decided to come together in person in the fall of last year, but due to circumstances, only one of the group, Catherine, found herself in the Carmel of Chambéry – a convent dedicated to the adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. She had been praying for a long time, she told LifeSite, when suddenly she witnessed what she called an “interior image:” the fresco that adorns the crypt of the Sanctuary of Our Lady of Myans – the very place where the miracle of the 13th century has been commemorated for almost 800 years.

It is a place she knows well, as do all Catholics in Savoie: there are regular pilgrimages there and the chapel attracts up to 100,000 visitors each year. With her friends, she had prayed in the crypt two days previously, in front of a “Black Virgin” – one of the many ancient statues of Our Lady, the “Vierges noires” carved from dark wood that have been venerated in France from the Middle Ages. In Myans, the early mediaeval statue represents an image of Our Lady seated in majesty, presenting the Infant Jesus on her left arm, sitting on her knees: it was likely already there when the miracle mentioned earlier took place. She was crowned in 1905 at the behest of Pope Pius X.

The fresco bears a striking message: it shows the miracle of 1248 which at the same time bears witness to God’s Providence, the Virgin Mary’s protection and the evil intents of Satan against humanity.

It all started when a community of Benedictine monks, some miles away, was driven out of its monastery, the priory of Saint-Andrew, which the Count of Savoie wanted to add to his own domain. The Count had obtained permission to do so from Pope Innocent IV, as the Pope, being at the time at war with Frederick II of Prussia, did not want to risk making a new enemy. According to the medieval narrative, on the day that the Count’s secretary arrived back from Rome to tell the monks that they had lost their dispute, they were forced to leave immediately and sought refuge in the chapel where the Virgin had been venerated since the 11th century.

At eight in the evening, a horrible noise came from the mountains, and the landslide – probably accompanied by an earthquake – came crashing down on terrified local inhabitants in four or five surrounding villages. The monks prayed for their lives and for the eternal salvation of all the victims, believing that they also would perish. As the mud and rocks approached, the story goes, the monks saw demons pushing the rocks down to the chapel, but while some demons were encouraging others to destroy the sanctuary, those in front screamed: “We cannot, the Black One is preventing us!”

The deadly stream of mud and stones miraculously divided, going left and right of the chapel and leaving it intact. All the monks were saved, while the priory they had been forced to leave earlier that same day was totally destroyed.

From then onwards, the Black Virgin of Myans was venerated as the protector of those who turn to her in times of danger.

All this was in Catherine’s thoughts when a second image formed itself in her mind. As she continued to pray in front of the Blessed Sacrament: she saw the Chapel of Perpetual Adoration of Chambéry, which has been active since April 2014 with the approval of the local bishop. Inside the chapel, she saw a rosary with very large beads laid out on the floor. Part of rosary extended outside where it continued to expand, forming a chain of protection.

At the same time, she heard these words repeat themselves within her mind: “Perpetual Rosary! Perpetual Rosary!”

In the following days, together with her friends, Catherine tried to discern the meaning of her interior visions, with the help of the priest who is their spiritual director. They returned to adore the Blessed Sacrament, and continued to pray.

“Then we responded to the Lord’s call, convinced of the power of the Rosary, the extraordinary bulwark that will increasingly protect the whole world! This is how the ‘Perpetual Rosary for the World’ began on October 1, 2020,” the new website dedicated to the devotion explains.

At first, the four friends, under the guidance of a local priest and with the cooperation of the Superior, and also the approval of the local bishop, organized a weekly rosary at the Carmel of Chambéry, each Friday at 4 p.m. At the Sanctuary of Myans, the chaplain also decided to organize a monthly rosary.

On March 25, the feast of the Annunciation, a regular rosary was inaugurated at Myans. From there the conviction grew that the rosary must truly become perpetual thanks to the faithful who would commit to take turns to pray at every hour of the day and night.

The ladies also worked at making their initiative known and have now set up a website where all can register, committing to say a “chaplet”, five decades of the Rosary, once a week at a given time or on a given day, or if personal obligations make this difficult, once a week at least without a definite time. The website has been translated into English, Spanish and Portuguese and, to date, over 650 people have joined from 20 countries. All times are given in French metropolitan time (twelve noon in Paris when it is 6 a.m. in New York). Already, all the 30-minute shifts have been filled, but a number of them have only one or two registered participants, and the objective is to create a “rosary” of prayer that will embrace the whole world.

The organizers hope that the participation of Americans and Asians will help fill the time-shifts that are harder to complete in Europe: the middle of the night and also the middle of the afternoon.

Speaking at length with LifeSiteNews by telephone, Catherine, Irène and Isabelle told of their hopes for this initiative which they are working to promote worldwide, while remaining personally very discreet.

— 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

They said that they want to pray not only because of the sanitary crisis, but because it has caused people to be isolated and continuously in fear, while bringing about a “social and economic crisis” and leading to so many “lies.”

“The real battle is spiritual,” one of the ladies noted. “The rosary is a spiritual weapon, especially in these times when man wants to be a creator in the Creator’s place. But the world is in God’s hands. Our prayer and our confidence can allow Him to act.”

Another stressed that the prayers of children are especially powerful: the group has presented its initiative in a small local Catholic school where the directress has decided to join the weekly rosary with her sixty pupils.

“It is the most humble, the ill, the elderly whose prayer can exert great power on the heart of God,” she added. The group hopes to enroll people in hospitals and in homes for the elderly, and has prepared special rosary meditations for these groups.

Children – and also teenagers – have already joined the initiative, making crowns on which the names of those committed to a weekly rosary are inscribed.

“We can feel powerless on the human plane, but Our Lady always asks us to pray the rosary, and it is a powerful prayer,” the group concluded.

The website chapeletperpetuelpourlemonde.org is available here in English


  perpetual rosary, rosary crusade

Opinion

Media scrambles to save face after massive fail on COVID origins reporting

Many legacy journalists now find themselves in the uncomfortable position of being called out for their collusion with people who have worked to deceive the public about the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 originated in a lab.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 10:39 am EST
Featured Image
Dr. Joseph Mercola
By Dr. Joseph Mercola

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

Story at-a-glance:

  • For the past year, anyone who discussed the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 coming from a lab was slandered and censored. Mainstream media insisted SARS-CoV-2 made the jump from bats to humans at one of Wuhan’s open-air wet markets.

  • To support this assertion, mainstream journalists relied on papers and “scientific consensus” statements concocted by individuals who are deeply involved in the very research that might have created this pandemic.

  • Many legacy journalists now find themselves in the uncomfortable position of being called out for their collusion with people who have worked to deceive us.

  • If the world accepted the natural origin theory, those conducting dangerous gain-of-function research that may have caused this pandemic, would be able to justify the expansion of such research.

  • As it stands, evidence points to COVID-19 being the result of a lab leak, which would necessitate rethinking the legality of gain-of-function research that makes pathogens more dangerous.

June 4, 2021 (Children’s Health Defense) — I first mentioned that the COVID-19 outbreak had the hallmarks of a laboratory escape over 15 months ago in my Feb. 4, 2020, article, “Novel Coronavirus — The Latest Pandemic Scare.”

I, and anyone else who discussed this possibility, were roundly dismissed as unreliable kooks by mainstream media, who for well over a year have insisted SARS-CoV-2 made the jump from bats to humans at one of Wuhan’s open-air “wet markets.”

To support their assertion, mainstream journalists relied on papers and “scientific consensus” statements concocted by individuals who are in fact deeply involved in the very research that created this pandemic.

Individuals such as National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) director Dr. Anthony Fauci, National Institutes of Health director Dr. Francis Collins, Dr. Ralph Baric and EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak — four prominent natural origin promoters given plenty of airtime — have a lot to lose if it turns out the pandemic virus originated in a lab.

So, of course they would want everyone to think SARS-CoV-2 just arose naturally and jumped species. In fact, if the world embraced this notion, they’d be able to use this pandemic to justify the expansion of the dangerous gain-of-function research they were involved with, and which is now accused of causing the pandemic.

Mainstream media covered up the truth for over a year

Trusting biased or outright lying sources has its price, and now mainstream media are scrambling to save face as the public, political and scientific consensus is rapidly shifting to accept the lab leak theory as not only viable but probable. The new details are so compelling that President Biden has now ordered U.S. intelligence agencies to investigate the origins of the coronavirus.

In a May 18 National Review article, Jim Geraghty reviews how the official narrative has shifted in recent weeks. As reported by Rising with Krystal & Saagar host, Saagar Enjeti, in a May 19 newscast (video at the top of article), China and the U.S. public health establishment both worked to cover up the pandemic origin, but they would never have succeeded for as long as they did had it not been for the mainstream media, which willingly assisted in this effort.

Everywhere you looked, legacy media insisted the lab-leak theory had been “debunked,” without ever really presenting any evidence, over or beyond parroting the opinions of conflicted “experts.” As noted by journalist and documentary filmmaker Leighton Woodhouse, “’Disinformation’ is the New Disinformation.” In other words, whenever mainstream media declares that something is disinformation, they’re most likely misinforming you.

Indeed, mainstream media have become so consistently wrong over the past year, you’ve basically needed to interpret the news by turning it around 180 degrees to have any chance of not being grossly misinformed.

— 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

Lame excuses don’t cut it

Now, many legacy journalists find themselves in the uncomfortable position of being called out for their collusion with people who have worked to deceive us.

In a Twitter thread, freelance commentary writer Drew Holden reviews some of the many mainstream headlines deriding the lab leak theory as debunked disinformation. It’s a veritable Hall of Shame of the worst of the worst journalists out there.

If you want to get clued in on where the fake news is, take a look at that list. Some journalists are now trying to defend and justify their poor journalistic ethics by blaming others, but it’s not working so well.

In a series of tweets — responding to an article by former New York Times science writer Donald McNeil, in which McNeil admits he failed at his job because he got sucked into the politics of it and chose to trust Fauci and Daszak, both of whom he knows personally — Josh Rogin, a foreign policy columnist for the The Washington Post, wrote:

“If you are writing a piece defending yourself for being wrong for a year about the lab leak hypothesis by blaming everyone else except yourself for your own wrongness, you haven’t learned a thing and you are just engaged in bullshit navel-gazing that literally nobody cares about.

“What all these science journalists won’t admit is they got took by their best scientist sources, who misled them, on purpose, to the detriment of science, journalism and our public health. The scientists who got it right were the ones who had no conflicts of interest.”

Conflicted scientists push for more dangerous research

Indeed, it’s high time to recognize that conflicts of interest matter, and relying on experts who have everything to gain by a particular narrative being projected as the correct one is a very bad idea.

If mainstream journalists want to end up on the right side of history — and not the side that ends up killing millions by spreading medical and scientific ignorance — they have to stop parading conflicted individuals before us as paragons of truth while dismissing experts that have no skin in the game and actually come from a position of neutrality.

Going forward, listening to independent experts may be more important than ever, because as noted by Enjeti, the same scientists who misled us about the origin of SARS-CoV-2 are now busy planning an even bigger research project focused on the same dangerous research that may have brought us COVID-19.

The $1.2 billion Global Virome Project will expand worldwide collaboration on risky virus research sixfold, and as noted by Enjeti, “Turning the spigot on for gain-of-function research while so many questions remain unresolved, is absolutely the last thing that we should do.”

Lab-leak theory gains traction

In the video above, Freddie Sayers interviews Nicholas Wade, a former New York Times science writer, about his widely-read article detailing the evidence supporting the two primary origin theories.

As reported by Wade in “Origin of COVID — Following the Clues: Did People or Nature Open Pandora’s Box at Wuhan?” if we are ever to solve the mystery of where this novel virus came from, we must be willing to actually follow the science, as “it offers the only sure thread through the maze.”

“It’s important to note that so far there is no direct evidence for either theory,” Wade writes. “Each depends on a set of reasonable conjectures but so far lacks proof. So I have only clues, not conclusions, to offer. But those clues point in a specific direction.”

As even mainstream media pundits will now admit, the preponderance of clues leans toward SARS-CoV-2 originating in a lab, most likely the WIV. Evidence further suggests the virus underwent some sort of manipulation to increase infectiousness and disease in humans.

There’s research dating as far back as 1992 detailing how inserting a furin cleavage site right where we find it in SARS-CoV-2 is a “sure way to make a virus deadlier.” Coincidentally, one of 11 such studies were written by Dr. Shi Zhengli, head of coronavirus research at the WIV.

The arguments laid out in support of the natural origin theory, meanwhile, are grounded in inconclusive speculations that require you to throw out scientifically possible scenarios. From a scientific standpoint, doing so is ill advised.

“It seems to me that proponents of lab escape can explain all the available facts about SARS2 considerably more easily than can those who favor natural emergence,” Wade writes.

Protecting dangerous research

In a May 19 publication, Peter Gøtzsche with the Institute for Scientific Freedom, summarized and provided additional commentary on Wade’s article. One obvious point that legacy media have completely ignored is that the idea that a virus can escape from a lab is not a conspiracy theory. It is a fact. Lab leaks have caused several outbreaks through the years, and lab accidents occur daily.

Like Wade, Gøtzsche also highlights how the very people arguing for the natural origin theory were the ones with the most to lose, were the virus to be a lab creation. For whatever reason, legacy media near-universally ran with the opinion of these conflicted experts while smearing many other highly-esteemed scientists who presented evidence to the contrary.

We know with great certainty that researchers at the WIV had access to and were doing gain-of-function research on coronaviruses. We also know that they collaborated with scientists in the U.S., and received funding from the National Institutes of Health for such research. As noted by Gøtzsche:

“Researchers at the Wuhan Institute were led by China’s leading expert on bat viruses, Dr. Shi Zheng-li. Shi teamed up with Ralph S. Baric from the University of North Carolina who pioneered techniques for genetically manipulating these viruses, which became a major aspect of research at the Wuhan Institute. Their work focused on enhancing the ability of bat viruses to attack humans so as to ‘examine the emergence potential.’

“In 2015, they created a novel virus by taking the backbone of the SARS virus, replacing its spike protein with one from another bat virus known as SHC014-CoV. This manufactured virus was able to infect a lab culture of cells from the human airways.

“They wrote that scientific review panels might deem their research too risky to pursue but argued that it had the potential to prepare for and mitigate future outbreaks. However, the value of gain-of-function studies in preventing the COVID-19 pandemic was negative, as this research highly likely created the pandemic.

“On 9 December 2019, just before the outbreak of the pandemic, Daszak gave an interview in which he talked in glowing terms of how his researchers at the Wuhan Institute had created over 100 new SARS- related coronaviruses, some of which could get into human cells and could cause untreatable SARS disease in humanized mice …

“China is responsible for over 3 million deaths so far and the United States is complicit. Whatever one thinks of the origin of SARS-CoV-2, it is clear that if the Wuhan Institute of Virology had not conducted gain-of- function research, and therefore had not collected more than a thousand samples of coronaviruses from bat caves, there would have been no pandemic.

“As suggested by others, it is clear that this type of research should never have been funded and should never have been performed. The WHO and the United Nations should issue a call to stop all gain-of-function research permanently. All governments should make gain-of-function research illegal, with stiff penalties for breaking the law. This research is a great threat to mankind. It must stop.”

First step taken, but doesn’t go far enough

Mainstream journalists aren’t the only ones searching for an acceptable cover story right now. In a remarkable — and wholly unbelievable — about-face, Fauci and NIH director Dr. Francis Collins now insists that none of the research they’ve ever funded qualifies as gain-of-function, and that evidence used to prove that funding did go to gain-of-function research has been misinterpreted.

Regardless, May 25 Sen. Rand Paul announced the U.S. Senate passed an amendment that permanently bans all federal funding on gain-of-function research in China. While that’s great news, it doesn’t go nearly far enough, and will in no way prevent another manmade pandemic. The reason is obvious. This kind of research is being done all around the world, not just in China.

Unless the U.S. government bans gain-of-function research within its own borders, and encourages the rest of the world to ban it as well, there’s nothing to prevent researchers from cooking up another deadly pathogen that would never have arisen naturally.

As noted by Wade, the “lab escape scenario for the origin of the SARS2 virus … is not mere hand-waving in the direction of the Wuhan Institute of Virology … [it is] based on the specific project being funded there by the NIAID.”

Indeed, blaming the WIV and calling it a day is not acceptable. We need to get to the bottom of what happened and close down loopholes that can lead to a repeat. That, without a doubt, includes shutting down gain-of-function research everywhere, not just our collaboration with China.

While some journalists are trying to deflect heat by referring to the recent acceptance of the lab leak theory as a “pro-Trump culture war on American scientists,” this won’t work in the long run, because facts are facts.

Scientists who are conducting dangerous research capable of killing us all — regardless of their nationality — need to be held accountable, if culpable, and prevented from going too far. End of story.

This is not a partisan issue. It’s a matter of right and wrong. As long as gain-of-function research is being conducted, regardless of where, we face the possibility, if not probability, of another perhaps even more lethal outbreak.

Originally published by Mercola.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children's Health Defense.

© June 3, 2021 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

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


  anthony fauci, covid-19 origins, francis collins, global virome project, mainstream media, nicholas wade, peter daszak, ralph baric, shi zhengli

Opinion

Previous infection is superior to vaccine for COVID protection

For previously infected people, there are real risks from being injected with the vaccine, and the benefits, if any, are minimal.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 6:41 am EST
Featured Image
shutterstock
Cassandra Chambers
By Cassandra Chambers

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

June 4, 2021 (American Thinker) – Millions of Americans have been infected with COVID and survived. We must examine the important question of whether they are now immune to the disease or whether it is advisable for them to receive injections of one of the Emergency-Use-Authorized shots – Pfizer, Moderna, or Jansen (Johnson & Johnson).

In a news briefing on May 5, Dr. Anthony Fauci highlighted three recent studies addressing immune response with and without vaccination (Reynolds et al, Leier et al, Stamatatos et al.) and declared, “We need to get vaccinated because vaccines are highly efficacious. They are better than the traditional response you get from natural infection.” The net conclusion of the studies he cited was that, based on antibody response, vaccinated people who had a previous infection are more protected from future COVID infection than both people vaccinated but not previously infected and people who are unvaccinated but previously infected.

As these declarations of virus protection and vaccine efficacy were based on antibody response, it would make sense to check current immunity status by having antibody levels checked, but that is not what is happening. According to the CDC,

Antibody testing is not currently recommended to assess for immunity to COVID-19 following COVID-19 vaccination or to assess the need for vaccination in an unvaccinated person. Since vaccines induce antibodies to specific viral protein targets, post-vaccination serologic test results will be negative in persons without history of previous natural infection if the test used does not detect antibodies induced by the vaccine.

In other words, even though scientists typically make conclusions about potential immune response based on antibodies in the lab, checking for antibodies in the real world – in your body – is not a valid way to detect your immune status. Also, the reference to “antibodies induced by the vaccine” seems to indicate that people who have been previously infected may have a broader immune response than vaccine recipients who were not previously infected.

Is there any real data (not lab-based) demonstrating an expected immune response for people who have been previously infected compared to vaccinated people? As a matter of fact, there is. A U.K. study with over 25,000 participants published in The Lancet on April 17 showed that having had a previous infection “reduced the incidence of reinfection by at least 84%.”

Even more convincing, an Israeli study with over 6 million participants directly compared the risk of infection (or reinfection) of people who had been vaccinated with that of people who had not been vaccinated but who had survived a COVID infection. They found that the risk of infection for both groups was equivalent:

Vaccination was highly effective with overall estimated efficacy for documented infection of 92·8% (CI:[92·6, 93·0]); hospitalization 94·2% (CI:[93·6, 94·7]); severe illness 94·4% (CI:[93·6, 95·0]); and death 93·7% (CI:[92·5, 94·7]). Similarly, the overall estimated level of protection from prior SARS-CoV-2 infection for documented infection is 94·8% (CI:[94·4, 95·1]); hospitalization 94·1% (CI:[91·9, 95·7]); and severe illness 96·4% (CI:[92·5, 98·3]).

It is unbelievable that this information is not more widespread: A careful study involving over 6 million participants clearly demonstrated that having had a previous infection is equivalent to the Pfizer vaccine in preventing future COVID infections.

— 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

OK, so maybe having survived COVID provides good immunity, but why not just get the shot anyway – as a booster or an insurance policy? The advisability of getting the shot depends on the risk. The CDC says that vaccines are safe and effective and that serious safety problems are rare. These conclusions are based on the Phase 1/2/3 clinical vaccine safety trials. For COVID survivors, the problem with the clinical trial results is that COVID survivors were specifically excluded from the safety trials. News reports, though, highlight that side effects are more common in COVID survivors.

As of May 21, the CDC’s own Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) lists 262,521 reports of adverse events. Here are some of the events associated with COVID vaccination included in these reports: 4,406 deaths; 14,986 hospitalizations; 6,494 blood clots and strokes; 1,598 heart attacks; and 511 miscarriages. Since previously infected people were excluded from the safety trials, we have no comprehensive safety data for them. With the clinical trial safety data for vaccination of never-infected showing very minimal adverse effects, it is possible that serious adverse effects such as heart attack, stroke, and death occur far more frequently in previously infected than in never-infected people. Maybe many, if not most of the deaths, heart attacks, and strokes reported to VAERS were in previously infected vaccine recipients. If so, what is the likelihood of an adverse event for a previously infected person? We just don’t know.

Here is what we do know: Serious studies in the U.K. and Israel show that a previous infection reduces the infection risk to a level equivalent to the vaccine. No large-scale studies document the safety of the vaccine for previously infected people, and anecdotal evidence indicates a higher risk of complications for COVID survivors compared to non-infected. If you are a COVID survivor and feel pressure to “just get the shot” so that you will not be a second-class citizen, think about this:

  1. The vaccine manufacturers have been indemnified and have zero liability for any harm or death that may come to you from the vaccine.

  2. OSHA has announced they won’t hold employers liable for vaccine-related injuries if they mandate them for their employees.

  3. The complete burden of liability falls on you, the vaccine recipient, which you acknowledge in an informed consent declaration.

A portion of Walgreen’s consent form is here:

. . . I understand the risks and benefits associated with the above vaccine(s) and have received, read and/or had explained to me the EUA Fact Sheet on the vaccine(s) I have elected to receive. I also acknowledge that I have had a chance to ask questions and that such questions were answered to my satisfaction . . . On behalf of the patient, the patient’s heirs and personal representatives, I hereby release and hold harmless each applicable Provider, its staff, agents, successors, divisions, affiliates, subsidiaries, officers, directors, contractors and employees from any and all liabilities or claims whether known or unknown arising out of, in connection with, or in any way related to the administration of the vaccine(s) listed above . . .

By signing the consent form, you declare that you know the risks and benefits and that you personally assume all responsibility for the effects of the vaccine. Evidence presented in this article indicates that for previously infected people, there are real risks from being injected with the vaccine, and the benefits, if any, are minimal. This may not be part of the “conventional wisdom” but it is echoed by respected doctors such as Florian Krammer from Cedars Sinai, Marty Makary from Johns Hopkins, and in a very thorough manner by respected Dr. Peter McCullough in this video. Beware of people insisting you, “get the shot” without addressing the safety vs. efficacy for your particular health history. They do not have your best interests at heart. They are not responsible for you and your family – you are.

Cassandra Chambers is a pseudonym.

Published with permission from the American Thinker.

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


  anthony fauci, cdc, coronavirus vaccine, covid immunity, vaers

Blogs

Steve Mosher exposed the COVID lab leak a year ago

Fauci, government agencies, Big Tech, and the media are all coming under fire for their knowledge of the lab-leak theory.
Fri Jun 4, 2021 - 12:05 pm EST
Featured Image
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

June 4, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — More than a year after he exposed the origins of the coronavirus, and after his article was censored on social media, author and pro-life leader Steve Mosher is now speaking out on the massive cover-up of the lab-leak theory. This comes as Fauci, government agencies, Big Tech, and the media are all coming under fire for their knowledge of this.

In this episode of The John-Henry Westen Show, I speak with Mosher about this important issue. Besides being a leader in the pro-life movement as president of the Population Research Institute, he is also an expert on China and author of Bully of Asia: Why China’s Dream is the New Threat to World Order.

Mosher tells me that the purpose of silencing the voices reporting the lab-leak theory by Facebook and other Big Tech companies, “succeeded in the minds of a lot of people.” He says that not not only was he censored, but also news organizations such as LifeSiteNews and the fourth largest newspaper in the United States, the New York Post, were banned and suspended.

But what did Mosher and others expose that drew the fury of the Silicon Valley fact-checkers?

He connected how China’s People’s Liberation Army was involved in experiments at the bioweapons lab Wuhan Institute of Virology that were “not just purely scientific research.” He also highlighted the involvement of Anthony Fauci in not only covering up this information, but even in helping the Wuhan lab with funds, training, and support.

Mosher discusses how he has become frustrated with many government institutions. “I’m very disappointed in our intelligence agencies, which have misled us in various matters over the last couple of years. I’m very disappointed in the FBI. I’m also disappointed in the media.”

He says that we are currently undergoing an information war, where it is important for people to choose wisely which news source to read and trust. “Knowledge is power … and this war, this information war is going to be won or lost in the sharing and understanding of information.”

I encourage all of you to watch or listen to this eye-opening interview.

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.


  china, covid-19 origins, john-henry westen, john-henry westen show, lab-leak theory, stephen mosher, the john-henry westen show, wuhan institute of virology