All articles from July 14, 2021


News

Opinion

Blogs

Episodes

Video

  • Nothing is published in Video on July 14, 2021.

The Pulse

  • Nothing is published in The Pulse on July 14, 2021.

News

NARAL angers state abortion affiliates with move to consolidate power at national level, push diversity initiatives

The abortion organization recently decided to change state affiliates into chapters that directly report to the national office.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 8:50 pm EST
Featured Image
Shutterstock
Matt Lamb
By

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

July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – As NARAL president Ilyse Hogue leaves the organization, state affiliates are rebelling a recent reorganization by the national pro-abortion group.

NARAL, one of America’s biggest pro-abortion lobby groups, recently decided to dissolve its 11 state affiliates and bring them under one national umbrella.

NARAL Pro-Choice America “is undergoing some soul-searching as it searches for a new president,” the Huffington Post reported. The latest decision has “fractur[ed] members of the NARAL community and bringing long-simmering grievances and frustrations out into the open.”

The decision comes as a record-breaking number of pro-life laws have been introduced (“2021 Is Already the Worst Year for Abortion Rights on Record,” reads a headline from the pro-abortion site Rewire) and the Supreme Court is set to hear a law that could lead to a reversal of Roe v. Wade.

In May, the nation’s highest court agreed to hear arguments regarding Mississippi’s ban on aborting babies older than 15 weeks. A decision to overturn Roe would supercharge pro-life enthusiasm almost overnight by instantly banning abortion in the handful of states with either pre-Roe bans or “trigger laws” still on the books, and by empowering state legislatures to directly end abortion.

A decision upholding Roe would likely have the opposite effect on pro-life morale while also forcing activists to re-evaluate their current political and legal strategies. Another possible outcome would be a ruling that redefines Roe’s parameters to allow bans at earlier gestational lines while leaving the general “right” to abortion intact.

The pending case, coupled with a number of pro-life laws introduced in states, is creating a tense situation for NARAL.

The pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute said 2021 has been the “worst” year for supporters of the intentional killing of a preborn 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

“More abortion restrictions — 90 — have already been enacted in 2021 than in any year since the Roe v. Wade decision was handed down in 1973,” the Guttmacher Institute reported.

The new pro-life laws include complete bans on abortion, heartbeat bills that ban abortions when a pre-born baby’s heartbeat can be detected (as early as six weeks), bans on aborting babies specifically because they’ve been diagnosed with Down syndrome, and “trigger laws” that would make abortion illegal if Roe is reversed.

A “Strategic Roadmap” will reorient NARAL to focus on diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. 

“White supremacy and racism have for too long stood in the way of achieving reproductive freedom and ensuring access to abortion care for every body,” the document said. “Organizationally, we contributed to and benefitted from this injustice. We better understand now that we cannot advance reproductive freedom without actively working to dismantle white supremacy.”

Several state affiliates plan to break away from NARAL because of the decision to move to a chapter model.

“We are disappointed by this decision, especially as it was made without our input and against our recommendation,” Christel Allen, executive director of the Oregon affiliate, told donors on July 13, according to the Willamette Week.

“NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia will no longer be an affiliate of NARAL Pro-Choice America,” the state group announced July 13. “While we are disappointed that NARAL Pro-Choice America has chosen a path forward that doesn’t include state affiliates, we feel we can accomplish more as a local, individual organization — and we’re ready to fight harder than ever.”

The Missouri affiliate released a statement condemning the decision but did not make a clear comment on what it planned to do.

“Unfortunately, our national organization, NARAL Pro-Choice America, has made the decision to fully nationalize the organization and disaffiliate all 11 state-level affiliates, including NARAL Missouri,” the Show Me State pro-abortion group wrote. “This decision was made despite protest from affiliates and without regard to the impact this decision will have on communities across the country.”

Some affiliates appeared fine with the decision.

“Regardless of the decisions made in DC, my team in OH will continue to serve people who need abortion care in our state,” Kellie Copeland of NARAL Pro-Choice Ohio wrote on Twitter. “It is a privilege to work with our partners in Ohio and at the other state Affiliates across the country.”

An abortionist named Dr. Bernard Nathanson first started NARAL in 1969 as the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws. Nathanson later became pro-life and converted to Catholicism.

Another founder, Larry Lader, lied about the number of women dying from abortion, settling on 10,000 because he thought it would scare enough people.

“There were perhaps 300 or so deaths from criminal abortions annually in the United States in the sixties,” Nathanson wrote in his book, though “NARAL … claimed to have data that supported a figure of five thousand.”


  abortion, ilyse hogue, missouri, naral, naral pro-choice virginia, oregon, roe v wade

News

Seneca College becomes first Canadian university to mandate COVID-19 vaccine for all students and staff

Beginning in September, the Toronto-area school will require the experimental shot in order to come on campus.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 8:26 pm EST
Featured Image
Shutterstock
Clare Marie Merkowsky
By

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

TORONTO, July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Seneca College recently announced that all students and staff will be required to take the COVID-19 vaccine by this fall, making Seneca the first postsecondary institution in Canada to mandate the experimental vaccine.  

True North reported that Seneca president David Agnew released a statement explaining the Toronto area college’s move to mandate vaccinations.  

“Seneca will be making vaccinations a condition for students and employees to come on campus for the fall term, starting Tuesday, Sept. 7, 2021,” he said.  

Agnew claimed that the college will not force anyone to be vaccinated, maintaining that the college will “respect medical exemptions upon presentation of appropriate documentation.”  

However, this does not seem to include individuals who do not have a medical exemption but are unwilling to take the vaccine because of its adverse effects.  

He did not explain why young adults should receive the experimental vaccine when the recovery rate for COVID-19 is between 97 percent and 99.75 percent. The COVID-19 vaccines have not been approved as safe or effective by the FDA, are still experimental, and only meant for emergency use.  

— 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

Seneca College Student Federation president Ritik Sharma claims that students support the new policy. “They are very much liking this policy,” she told the National Post. 

Other Ontario universities, including Ryerson, Ontario Tech, and Western University, will require the vaccine for students who wish to live in residence but not physically present on campus in general.  

In Manitoba, universities have assured students and staff that they will not mandate the vaccine. “We can’t demand anybody to get the vaccine. That’s not within our power or the province’s power,” Brandon University president David Docherty told CBC News. 

Recently, an American high-school student developed a heart condition after his school forced him to take the inoculation to play soccer.  

While Alberta premier Jason Kenney has joined Ontario premier Doug Ford in rejecting the idea of vaccine passports, some organizations, including the Toronto Region Board of Trade, are pushing for a vaccine passport system.  

Quebec recently threatened to enforce vaccine passports for access to non-essential businesses, which may include churches, if there is a further outbreak of COVID-19. 


  covid-19: make it the last pandemic, ontario tech, ryerson university, seneca college, vaccine mandates, western university

News

Rand Paul initiates bill to repeal federal mask mandate on public transportation

Many traveling Americans ‘live in fear that an untimely tantrum or bad day could ruin their trip and cost them more than a thousand dollars in fines,’ co-sponsor Sen. Tom Cotton explained.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 7:42 pm EST
Featured Image
Shutterstock
Clare Marie Merkowsky
By

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., July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Republican U.S. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky introduced legislation to repeal the current mask mandate on American public transportation. Shortly after Joe Biden became president, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) announced that it’s a federal crime to use public transportation without a mask

The CDC was able to do this thanks to a 1944 law, the Public Health Service Act.  

In a press release, Paul revealed his plan to propose the Travel Mask Mandate Repeal Act of 2021. Later this week, Republican U.S. Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona will introduce companion legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.  

Co-sponsors of the Senate version of the bill are Republican Senators Mike Braun of Indiana, Tom Cotton of Arkansas, Roger Marshall of Kansas, and Roger Wicker of Mississippi.  

Today, Paul tweeted that the legislation will “put a stop to this nanny state mandate of requiring masks on public transportation.” In addition to being a senator, Paul is a doctor who is both pro-life and pro-family.  

Paul has also spoken about the damage done by lockdowns, warning that Biden intends to continue their implementation.   

“The federal government forcing the American people to continue to wear masks despite the fact that we’ve already reached herd immunity is ridiculous and needs to end immediately,” Paul said in the press release.  

“In a free county, people will evaluate their personal risk factors and are smart enough to ultimately make medical decisions like wearing a mask themselves,” he continued.  

Evidence shows that masks are not only ineffective in stopping the spread of COVID-19 but are also dangerous, both psychologically and physically.   

Sen. Cotton explained that these mandates hurt families.  

“This policy discourages family travel and forces Americans with children – especially those with disabilities – to cancel travel or else live in fear that an untimely tantrum or bad day could ruin their trip and cost them more than a thousand dollars in fines,” he said. 

Rep. Biggs pointed out the lack of scientific evidence for the continuation of mask mandates, saying, “Bottom line, mask mandates are old news, and are only being kept in place by those who relish controlling our day-to-day lives.” 

“The viral spread is collapsing, and our normal lives are returning. It's time for the CDC to follow the science and end the tyrannical COVID-19 restrictions once and for all,” Briggs continued.  

In May, Southwest Airlines removed a mask-compliant child with disabilities and his family from a Denver flight, citing the federal mask mandate enacted by the Biden administration.  

A Colorado family said they were booted from a Southwest flight because the captain “did not feel comfortable” with their son’s sensory processing disorder, 9NEWS reported. Their three-year-old was wearing his mask as required, but the possibility that he might take it off was enough to get the family booted from the flight. 

RELATED:  

Southwest Airlines removes masked toddler with disabilities from flight citing Biden mandate 
WATCH: United Airlines kicks family off flight after 2-year-old refuses to wear mask


  andy biggs, covid-19, joe biden, mask mandate, mike braun, public transportation, rand paul, roger marshall, roger wicker, southwest airlines, tom cotton, u.s. centers for disease control

News

Arizona State prof calls for end to parental veto over puberty blockers

The author of an article in the Journal of Medical Ethics argues that 'LGBT testimony' ranks higher than informed medical opinion and that only a patient, no matter how young, should be able to decide whether to pursue treatment.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 7:19 pm EST
Featured Image
Shutterstock
Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy
By Dorothy Cummings McLean

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

TEMPE, Arizona, July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A philosophy professor at Arizona State University has published a paper in which she says it isn’t fair that some children don’t get puberty blockers because their parents are against it.  

In a recent issue of the Journal of Medical Ethics, Dr. Maura Priest responded to a lengthier essay about the ethics of giving or refusing puberty blockers to a “non-binary” adult for as long as “they” [she] wants them despite the risk of harming “their” [her] physical health. Noting that the parents of the hypothetical patient, “Phoenix”, had consented to “their” [her] medication, Priest said the article had presented a “related ethical challenge.” 

“Thanks to guardian consent, as a youth Phoenix had received paediatric PS [prescriptions] making OPS [ongoing puberty suppression] possible,” Priest stated in “LGBT Testimony and the Limits of Trust.”  

“However, some guardians of non-binary patients withhold this consent and then androgynous [sic] puberty is inevitable,” she continued. 

“The aligning of the parental stars can thus determine whether adulthood begins with either, (1) a confidence-inducing, gender-affirming body or (2) a confidence-undermining body that intensifies gender dysphoria.”  

The choices Priest presents are overly narrow. In fact, only a minority of children who experience gender dysphoria continue to do so in adolescence or adulthood. According to Dr Lawrence S. Mayer, a professor of statistics and biostatistics at Arizona State University, there is no evidence that all children should be encouraged to become transgender, given hormone treatments or surgery.   

In the original paper “Forever young: the ethics of ongoing puberty suppression (OPS) for non-binary adults,” the fictional Phoenix is 11 when “they” [she] is first distressed by the early signs of puberty and given puberty blockers. However, in her own response “LGBT testimony and the limits of trust,” Priest goes on to speak of “teens,” saying that all “non-binary” teens who want them deserve puberty blockers. 

“Two non-binary teens desiring comparable treatments are like cases, hence just demands like treatment,” she stated.  

“Guardian veto power over identity-affirming care thus results in injustice whenever such power means one trans child [sic] is denied the care that another receives.”  

Priest went on to say that parents’ right to say no to their children receiving puberty blockers violates the principles: the duty not to hurt someone, a person’s right to self-determination, and the duty to act for the benefit of others.  

“This veto power also conflicts with the principles of non-maleficence, autonomy, and beneficence. Autonomy is infringed because medical options are forever closed off to those who (through no choice nor fault) miss PS [prescriptions] in adolescence. Frustrating a trans person’s desire to affirm identity is harmful, that is, in tension with non-maleficence. Lastly, parents’ veto power over PS keeps many identity-affirming benefits out of reach, thus failing compliance with beneficence.”  

In this discussion of a distressed 11-year-old's reaction to developing a sexually mature body, Priest rates “LGBT testimony” higher than informed medical opinion.  

“[I]t is no longer the job of physicians to do their own weighing of the costs and benefits of transition-related care,” she wrote. 

“Assuming the patient is also informed and competent, then only the patient can make this assessment.” 

— 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

However, this should not be assumed in children about to enter puberty. The High Court of Justice for England and Wales determined that prepubescent children, and, indeed, all children under 16 do not have the capacity to consent to transgender transition. The court decided that it was “highly unlikely that a child aged 13 or under would be competent to give consent to the administration of puberty blockers” and added that it was “doubtful” that children age 14 or 15 could properly and understand and appreciate the gravity of the process.  

Priest’s stance seems to have been informed by her solidarity with the LGBT community as a whole and resentment for the way the medical community has viewed people with “LGBT identities,” particularly that those identities were “illnesses best treated and cured.” She worries that medical experts will trust in “LGBT testimony” only when they deem it reasonable.  

The assistant professor posited another “non-binary” patient, this time named Chicago, and for the sake of argument, that OPS carried a 90 percent risk of osteoporosis. Priest argued that, even though Chicago has a 90 percent risk of developing osteoporosis, if Chicago understands that and “still insists that OPS is necessary for their [sic] wellness,” it would not be okay to give Phoenix (who has less of a risk) the drugs, but not Chicago. 

“Increased risk itself is not enough to justify disparate treatment,” Priest stated. 

“Risk must be weighed against reward, and enough of the latter can overcome the former.”  

In her view, it is “ethically dubious” to prioritize “physical over psychological health … in assuming that osteoporosis is worse than gender dysphoria.” Priest also believes that “skepticism” toward Chicago’s “testimony” is also problematic. She did not give a hypothetical age for Chicago or any guidelines for determining at what age “LGBT testimony” can be considered a suitable cause for physically harmful medical treatment.  

Priest also believes that doctors have nothing to lose or gain when it comes to giving people potentially harmful medical treatment. Regarding OPS for “non-binary” people, Priest wrote, “Patients, not physicians, have something to both lose and gain.” There is no suggestion in the articles that doctors have consciences, only grievances stemming from “medicine’s history with LGBT patients.”  LGBT “testimony”, i.e. subjective wants, trump medical expertise. 

“[A] clash between a patient’s and physician’s cost/benefit analysis in itself implies that the latter understands the patient better than the patient does themselves,” she wrote. 

“Given medicine’s history with LGBT patients, this is not only implausible, but arrogant and ethically suspect.” 

Priest’s previous publications include an article entitled “Transgender Children and the Right to Transition: Medical Ethics When Parents Mean Well but Cause Harm.” 

Arizona mother-of-five Loretta Myler had some tart words for the idea that parents should not have the right to veto puberty blockers for their children.  

“If parents are nothing more than incubators and babysitters for the state, then we should get paid by the state to have children and keep them alive," she told LifeSiteNews. 

Myler, who has a M.A. in Theology from the University of Toronto, also stated that Priest is a substandard teacher of philosophy. 

“Philosophy understands the progression of human self-understanding,” she said.  

“An 11-year-old does not have the kind of sexual awareness that would allow for decisions that will forever change his or her anatomy.” 

Myler, whose eldest is 14, added her opinion that if a child is confused about sexual identity, it’s because he or she has received confusing information at too young an age. 

“Kids are not just blank slates, and I do not trust an 11-year-old who has to be reminded to wipe his bottom …  in some cases to choose anything, much less their sexual identity.”  

Best-selling author and columnist Rod Dreher was horrified by just the abstract to “LGBT testimony and the limits of trust,” which clearly states that “parents should lose veto power over most transition-related paediatric care.”  

“Got that?” Dreher asked in The American Conservative on Monday.   

“Maura Priest, the philosopher writing here, says that Love Will Not Win unless parents have no right to say whether or not their children can be injected with sex hormones, have their breasts removed, be treated with psychotherapy to convince them that they are the opposite sex, and so forth.” 

Dreher noted that Priest had argued in a similar fashion in a 2019 bioethics seminar.  

“[S]he claims, for example, that children should be seized from parents for sex changes on the same principle that allows the state to force blood transfusions on the children of Jehovah’s Witnesses, over parental objections," he wrote.  

Author and bioethicist Wesley Smith of the National Review stated in 2019 that he thought Priest’s ideas against the parental veto were “utterly nuts” and “should alarm the hell out of everyone.” 


  gender dysphoria, hormone treatment, journal of medical ethics, lawrence s. mayer, lgbt, maura priest, non-binary, puberty blockers, transgender, university of arizona

News

Univ. of North Alabama student body president facing impeachment for writing ‘Born this way? You must be born again’

Students plan to impeach Jake Statom for a post criticizing homosexuality, though he has apologized for publishing his Christian message.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 6:47 pm EST
Featured Image
University of North Alabama, Florence, AL Facebook/University of North Alabama
Emily Mangiaracina Emily Mangiaracina Follow
By

FLORENCE, Alabama, July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The University of North Alabama's student government plans to impeach its president for posting the message, “Born this way? You must be born again” to social media.

Jake Statom’s temporary Instagram story post provoked outrage from fellow students, who started a petition calling for his resignation from the position of Student Government Association (SGA) president. The petition now has just 1,100 signatures.

The SGA condemned Statom’s message as “homophobic” and warned that if Statom didn’t resign by June 30, he would be formally impeached during the first meeting of the fall semester on August 26.

While Statom has apologized on Instagram for the post, he has refused to resign.

Statom wrote on June 23, “I am deeply sorry that my Instagram story offended members of our community. I now see the story from a different perspective and apologize. My role as SGA President is to honorably represent all UNA students, and I fell short of this ideal.”

His words did little to appease the students he had angered. One response to his apology read, “I’m sorry you were offended’ is not an apology.” Someone else wrote, “THIS IS LITERALLY SO INSINCERE! You are only apologizing because it’s something that you feel like you’re being forced to do!” Both criticisms received about 100 “likes.”

The University of North Alabama issued a statement claiming that Statom’s Instagram message was “not representative” of their “commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion.” It acknowledged, however, his “right to freedom of speech, even when it is offensive to others.”

The university’s letter cited the recent Mahanoy Supreme Court case, which “observed that public schools have ‘an interest in protecting a student’s unpopular expression, especially when the expression takes place off-campus, because America’s public schools are the nurseries of democracy.’”

After his apology, Statom wrote a letter to the SGA expressing his intent to continue as SGA President, referencing UNA’s defense of his freedom of speech. Statom wrote, “we, the UNA SGA, have a unique opportunity to be an example to others on how people with differing beliefs can and should work together.”

— 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

Statom’s supporters have launched a counter-petition in his defense, which has collected twice as many signatures as the petition calling for his resignation. It declares that UNA “wants him to resign simply because he expressed his freedom of speech and religion.”

Statom has also attracted the support of Republicans in the state legislature, who have written a resolution “strongly oppos[ing] any effort to impeach, remove, or apply political pressure intended to force” Statom’s removal as SGA president.  

The resolution defends Statom’s Instagram message as having “sought to promote traditional morals and biblical values,” and decries the “dangerous ‘Cancel Culture’” of college campuses that “seeks to silence opinions that are deemed to be politically unacceptable to leftist ideologues and punish those who continue to adhere to traditional values.”

In the minds of many of his critics, Statom’s message that those who identify as “LGBTQ” should be “born again,” a reference to Jesus Christ’s call for all to be “born again of water and the Holy Ghost,” amounts to a message of hate or fear.

“Members of the LGBTQ community don’t want him in that position of power, because he doesn’t think that we have the right to exist,” claimed student Sarah Arnsparger.

The petition to have Statom resign stated, “As long as our SGA President is openly homophobic, it will be impossible for UNA to truly be a safe space for the LGBTQIA+ Community,” while one petition-signer claimed Statom is “against the existence of those he is supposed to represent.”

Such critics fail to acknowledge that Christianity’s call to repentance always goes hand-in-hand with the commandment to “love thy neighbor as thyself.” The planned “reparative therapy” ministry of “ex-gay” Milo Yiannopoulos is one of the clearest examples of the practice of this towards those who identify as LGBT.

Yiannopoulos recently released a video message for his “gay brothers and friends” to offer them healing from the trauma that leads to same-sex attraction.

“‘Born this way’ is a lie. It’s propaganda. It’s not true,” declared Yiannopoulos. “What you feel at the moment — an inexorable and unavoidable sexuality — is just the product of trauma that you might not even realize you suffered, but you did.”  

It remains to be seen whether Statom will take legal action against UNA for failing to halt the impeachment process against him. Greg Piper at Just the News noted, “Florida State University paid nearly $100,000 this spring to settle a lawsuit stemming from its refusal to overturn the student government’s removal of its Senate president, Jack Denton, for sharing Catholic beliefs in a private group chat.”


  alabama, homosexuality, jake statom, milo yiannopoulos, university of north alabama

News

Governments rack up record debt as Great Reset seeks to ‘reimagine’ capitalism

'Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a ‘Great Reset’ of capitalism,' wrote World Economic Forum founder Klaus Schwab.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 5:57 pm EST
Featured Image
Ashley Sadler Ashley Sadler Follow
By

July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — With global debt levels already at their highest point since the Second World War and predicted to increase by $92 trillion before the end of the year, the architects of the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” are poised to counter the economic crisis by enacting their plans to “reimagine” and “reset” capitalism. 

According to the Wall Street Journal, measures implemented by governments around the world in response to COVID-19 have “pushed global government debt to the highest level since World War II, surpassing the world’s annual economic output.” 

The Journal notes that despite the waning of the pandemic and the subsequent relaxation of many of the economy-crushing restrictions imposed upon profit-generating industries, “governments, especially in rich countries, are borrowing still more, partly to erase the damage of Covid-19.”

Massive spending programs like the Biden Administration’s recently announced six-trillion-dollar budget will test the ability of nations to adapt to changing market conditions amid massive government spending programs which may only “be absorbed only via inflation, high taxes or even default,” according to the Journal, even though advocates of the initiatives insist the borrowing might “usher in a period of robust global growth.”  

Perhaps one of the biggest advocates of the big-government spending, World Economic Forum (WEF) founder and executive chairman Klaus Schwab anticipated and encouraged the unprecedented spending packages as long ago as June 2020.  

In articles, talks, and a book entitled “Covid-19: The Great Reset” published last year, Schwab has persistently argued that the coronavirus pandemic ought to be used to instigate a “Great Reset” to “revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions.” 

Noting that the public health response to COVID-19 “will have serious long-term consequences for economic growth, public debt, employment, and human wellbeing,” Schwab argued last year in favor of the kind of huge spending programs which have spiked global debt to unprecedented levels, calling them a “major opportunity for progress” in attaining “equality and sustainability.” 

“The European Commission, for one, has unveiled plans for a €750 billion ($826 billion) recovery fund,” Schwab said approbatively. “The US, China, and Japan also have ambitious economic-stimulus plans.” 

The 83-year-old’s foundation, which is funded by its more than 1,000 member companies (including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation), puts on yearly gatherings in Davos, Switzerland, at which wealthy celebrities, members of the media, and world leaders gather to discuss global “crises,” and seek to enact policies favorable to worldwide centralization of power, socialistic economics, and, recently, the integration of modern technology and human biology. 

Architects and proponents of the WEF’s “Great Reset” have been clear about the purpose and scope of their plans.  

— 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

According to the organization’s founder, “[e]very country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a ‘Great Reset’ of capitalism. 

While promoting massive spending, Schwab has advocated against using the money for traditional programs which he said would only “fill cracks in the old system.” 

Instead, Schwab argued, “we should use them to create a new [system] that is more resilient, equitable, and sustainable in the long run. This means, for example, building ‘green’ urban infrastructure and creating incentives for industries to improve their track record on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics.” 

Schwab’s reference to “green urban infrastructure” mirrors the “Green New Deal” agenda advanced by leftist politicians in the U.S. in response to the allegedly existential threat of “climate change.”  

The plan would obliterate the fossil fuel industry, destroy reliable access to electricity, implement a “universal basic income,” and replace traditional energy industry jobs with guaranteed government positions protected by unions.  

If implemented, the American Action Forum estimates the plan would cost between $51 and $93 trillion dollars. 

At present, the debt held by the world’s governments is already at a startling high. With $24 trillion added to the global debt since last year, the worldwide tab now stands at just over $228 trillion, according to the global debt monitor from The Institute of International Finance (IIF)

The IIF said it expects “global government debt to increase by another $10 trillion this year and surpass $92 trillion” in added debt by the end of 2021, Reuters reported.

According to Reuters, “the rapid build-up was mostly driven by governments” rather than private spending, “particularly in Greece, Spain, Britain and Canada.” 

“In emerging markets, China saw the biggest rise in debt ratios excluding banks, followed by Turkey, Korea, and the United Arab Emirates. South Africa and India recorded the largest increases just in terms of government debt ratios,” the report said.

Meanwhile, in the United States, the “national debt is rising at a pace never seen,” according to an article published by Forbes in May.  

“With a current debt exceeding $28 trillion – an increase of nearly $5 trillion in 14 short months… the national debt will approach $89 trillion by 2029,” Forbes reported. “This would put the country’s debt-to-GDP ratio at 277%, surpassing Japan’s current 272% debt-to-GDP ratio.”

According to Klaus Schwab, the financial crisis brought about by massive government spending due to COVID-19, combined with other so-called crises such as “climate change,” means world governments “must build entirely new foundations for our economic and social systems.” 

“There are many reasons to pursue a Great Reset,” Schwab alleged, “but the most urgent is COVID-19.”

“[T]he pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future,” Schwab said. 


  biden administration, covid-19, government debt, great reset, klaus schwab, world economic forum

News

Tokyo archbishop tells Catholics coming for Olympics to ‘refrain from visiting churches’ due to COVID fears

Archbishop Kikuchi's July 12 directive asked athletes and any visitors to Tokyo to stay away from Catholic churches, referencing the 'important duty' of protecting those who 'have received God's gift of life.'
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 4:00 pm EST
Featured Image
Archbishop Kikuchi in 2019. YouTube screenshot
Michael Haynes Michael Haynes Follow Michael
By Michael Haynes

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

TOKYO, Japan, July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – With the postponed 2020 Olympics due to begin in Tokyo on July 23, the city’s Catholic prelate, Archbishop Tarcisio Isao Kikuchi, has asked all Catholics arriving to Tokyo to “refrain from visiting churches,” in an attempt to reduce COVID-19 transmission. 

Archbishop Kikuchi issued the directive on July 12, in light of the Japanese government’s declaration of yet another “state of emergency” due to COVID-19, which is in place from July 12 through August 22. The Olympics themselves run from July 23 through August 8, with the Paralympics held from August 24 through September 5.  

The Tokyo metropolitan area is included in the restricted zone, which is where a large number of the Olympic events will also be held.  

Spectators at the games have already been largely banned, although stadiums in the more distant regions of Fukushima, Miyagi and Shizuoka will be allowed up to 50 percent capacity and up to 10,000 people watching the events.   

The archbishop stated that while these measures had been implemented by the civil authorities, the Church wished to take extra precautions. The “gathering of the athletes and their support staff coming from all over the world raises concerns about causing further increase in number of coronavirus cases,” he stated. 

Although the Tokyo archdiocese had been planning how to “address the spiritual needs” of those who would have been coming to the Olympics, Archbishop Kikuchi now revealed that “we have decided to cancel all plans and thus, will not take any special involvement in the Olympics and Paralympics.” 

He also issued a blanket preventive ban on any Catholics from visiting churches whilst in Tokyo: “In addition, all those who will be coming to the Tokyo Metropolitan area during this period will be provided with information concerning the precautionary measures implemented against COVID-19 infection in the parishes and will be requested to refrain from visiting churches.” 

“Let us keep in mind that it is an important duty for us to protect not only our own lives but also to protect all those who have received God’s gift of life,” added the archbishop. 

Such a recommendation by a Catholic prelate for Catholics to avoid availing of the sacraments has become more common since the emergence of COVID-19 related restrictions. Indeed, the faithful in the Archdiocese of Tokyo are still dispensed from their obligation to attend Sunday Mass. 

As part of the current measures in place in Catholic churches in the diocese at this time, physical distancing and limits on the size of the congregation would be enforced. Parishioners are told to only attend Mass in their area.  

In addition, the Church will maintain attendance records, should they be required by the civil authorities with reference to a potential increase in COVID-19 infections. Mask wearing is demanded, and parishioners are asked to refrain from singing or responding together. 

— 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

Holy Communion is directed to be received on the hand, with hand sanitisation occurring before and after, although for those wishing to avail of their right to receive on the tongue, they are instructed to “consult the parish priest beforehand.” 

Meanwhile, figures for the presence of COVID-19 in Tokyo as of July 14 reveal that there are 2,023 people in hospital with the virus, with 54 patients having “severe symptoms.” A total of 2,262 people have died with COVID-19 since the public emergence of the virus early in 2020.  

The cumulative total of people who have tested “positive” for the virus since its emergence in Tokyo is 184,119, of which 174,993 people have either been discharged from a hospital or recovered. 


  archbishop kikuchi, catholic, church closures, coronavirus restrictions, tokyo 2020 olympic games

News

Texas has more vote fraud cases than ever on the docket, state attorney general says

While Democrats argue that election integrity is not a problem, Ken Paxton says more than 500 cases are waiting to go to trial.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 3:56 pm EST
Featured Image
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

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

AUSTIN, Texas, July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The record number of vote fraud cases currently awaiting trial in the Lone Star State is more than enough to show that election integrity is a real issue necessitating legislation, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton argued Monday.

State and national Democrats have been intensifying their opposition to Republican-backed legislation to strengthen the state’s election rules, with President Joe Biden calling it “21st-century Jim Crow assault” on voting rights and dozens of Democrat state legislatures fleeing the state in hopes of denying the Texas House the quorum necessary to pass the bill (which passed the Texas Senate 18-4 Tuesday evening).

“In my office we have over 500 cases waiting to go [to] trial,” Paxton told Fox & Friends host Todd Piro in response to the talking point that vote fraud is a manufactured issue, CNS News reported. “We have other investigations, over 300. We have more voter fraud cases than we have ever had. That's just a fact.”

“And so we need to talk about the fact that we are dealing with this issue and that we do need legislation to make sure that voter fraud is not prevalent so people can count on the elections being true and that the right people are being elected,” Paxton continued.

— 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 reality, the proposed law is much milder that Democrat characterizations suggest, and in some ways even milder than what many conservatives would prefer. 

According to a summary from Business Insider, the bill specifies the number of hours counties must allow early voting with localities no longer being able to offer 24-hour overnight early voting; requires early voting to be conducted in a fixed building instead of a “moveable structure” (i.e., “drive-thru voting”); requires voters to submit a number from a state-issued identification with absentee ballots; makes it a felony to send unsolicited absentee ballot applications (regardless of the recipients’ eligibility); strengthens partisan observers’ equal access to the polls; toughens penalties for paid ballot collection (i.e., “vote harvesting”); and requires that individuals “assisting” impaired or elderly voters fill out ballots state their relationship to the voter. 

While many of the above changes are welcome news to those concerned about election integrity, many would prefer that voting by mail either be abolished entirely or confined to certain circumstances, such as U.S. soldiers stationed overseas. The legislation also has a few provisions included at Democrat insistence, including a requirement that election officials notify anyone who sends in an absentee ballot with a missing or mismatched signature and gives them an opportunity to correct it, and a provision in the House version of the bill protecting “against a person being convicted of a crime for voting a provisional ballot while unknowingly ineligible.”

These concessions have done nothing to soften the left-wing furor against the bill and others like it across the country, which were driven by widespread fears over fraud in last November’s presidential election. Conservatives have accused Democrats and their allies of trying to intimidate states that persist in questioning Biden’s victory, which came under suspicion thanks in large part to last year’s drastic expansion of no-excuse mail voting and relaxed standards for absentee ballots.

Meanwhile, Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott says of the Democrat lawmakers who fled the capitol, “"As soon as they come back in the state of Texas, they will be arrested, they will be cabined inside the Texas Capitol until they get their job done.” He also vowed to “call a special session after special session after special session all the way up until election next year” if Democrats continue to obstruct the legislative process.


  2020 presidential election, democrats, election integrity, ken paxton, texas, vote fraud

News

Weeks after rescinding COVID-19 emergency order, Maryland gov. issues another one

‘This is irrational and oppressive as it keeps Maryland under the unitary rule of one man rather than our system of checks and balances ruled by the People, and for the People, with the elected Legislature,’ said Delegate Dan Cox.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 2:11 pm EST
Featured Image
Gov. Larry Hogan Governor of Maryland website
Doug Mainwaring Doug Mainwaring Follow Doug
By Doug Mainwaring

ANALYSIS

ANNAPOLIS, Maryland, July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Despite having terminated previous coronavirus-related emergency orders just a few weeks ago, Maryland Governor Larry Hogan has done a startling about-face, claiming that “the emergency conditions, state of emergency, and catastrophic health emergency continue to exist.”

The liberal Republican governor yesterday issued a new executive order which is designed “for intimidation and control, as in the coerced vaccine program,” said Maryland Del. Dan Cox (R-4), a Republican gubernatorial candidate.    

“Once again, the ‘state of emergency’ was issued and extended by Gov. Hogan by proclamation,” Cox said in a Facebook posting. “This is irrational and oppressive as it keeps Maryland under the unitary rule of one man rather than our system of checks and balances ruled by the People, and for the People, with the elected Legislature.”

Ominous-sounding decree

“The spread of COVID-19 and variants in the state continues to pose an immediate threat to all Marylanders of extensive loss of life or serious disability,” asserted Hogan’s ominous-sounding decree.

“All levels of government in Maryland must deploy resources to protect public health and safety; continued emergency response by the State is needed,” said Hogan, who is again recommending the use of face coverings for unvaccinated people in indoor public settings, continued so-called social distancing, and avoiding large public gatherings, while “executing a robust contact-tracing operation, and continuing the deployment and administration of COVID-19 vaccines.”

The July 12 executive order concludes: 

I, Lawrence J. Hogan, Governor of the State of Maryland, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Maryland Constitution and the Laws of Maryland … and in an effort to control and prevent the spread of COVID-19 within the State, hereby declare that a state of Emergency and Catastrophic Health Emergency continues to exist with the entire State of Maryland,”

Hogan added:

Health care providers who act in good faith under this catastrophic health emergency proclamation, including orders issued under the proclamation by the Governor and other State officials acting at the direction of or under delegated authority from the Governor, have immunity.

Hogan simultaneously unveiled a program to strong-arm the state’s young people into taking coronavirus vaccines, allocating one million dollars in college scholarships for Marylanders aged 12 to 17 who receive the experimental shots. 

“All you have to do is go out and get your shot to have a shot at winning a scholarship for the college of your choice,” noted Hogan’s official Facebook page.

Hogan’s history of heavy-handed, uneven COVID-19 governance

The socially liberal Republican governor has repeatedly come under fire for his heavy-handed, uneven response to the coronavirus. 

In April 2020, Bishop Joseph Coffey led a protest in Annapolis against Hogan after the “Catholic” governor banned all so-called non-essential business, including elective surgeries and medical procedures, supposedly in order to limit the spread of the coronavirus, while permitting abortions to continue in the Old Line State. 

In a statement to Politico, Hogan’s office confirmed that abortionists were allowed to continue operating during the pandemic, signaling that the Republican governor views abortion as an essential procedure.   

Perhaps ironically, Hogan’s late father, Congressman Larry Hogan, Sr., made history on Tuesday, January 23, 1973 – the day after the U.S. Supreme Court imposed abortion on demand across the nation – when he was the first on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives to condemn Roe v. Wade.

CONTACT YOUR FEDERAL AND STATE LEGISLATORS: Tell them to reject door to door vaccinations! Click to contact your lawmakers now.

Also in April 2020, Maryland’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) published guidance on Hogan’s order to state residents to “shelter in place,” which had decreed “Churches, synagogues, mosques, and other similar religious facilities are considered ‘Non-Essential Businesses.’” Clergy were essentially limited to “facilitating remote worship,” virtually reducing religious services to those conducted via the Internet. 

More recently, under Hogan’s leadership the Maryland’s state attorney general’s office has led an effort to force college students to take the experimental COVID-19 injections as a prerequisite to attending school in the fall.  

In an extraordinary four-page letter sent to members of the Maryland House and Senate, as well as to the University of Maryland Board of Regents, Cox, the state delegate, expressed his opposition to the mandatory vaccination of students and employees as a condition of education and jobs.

Cox spelled out how the attorney general attempting to mandate vaccinations for students goes against U.S. case history and that “undisclosed or forced human science experiments” go against “the eternal and universal principles of human rights upheld in our Constitution and in nearly every declaration of human rights in civilization.’

“If we start with forcing college students to take an experimental vaccine in order to obtain their college degree, it will not end,” Cox predicted in a previous video interview with LifeSiteNews, noting that the Biden administration is already informing contractors that they should start forcing their employees to take the vaccine in order for their companies to be able to continue to do business with the government.

‘We’re going to be Americans. We’re going to be free.’

“We have to hold the line here” in Maryland, said Cox, because the government should not have the power to force people, against their will, to do what they believe is wrong: “No state, no person, should be able to force you to do that.”

“Religious freedom is sacred,” Cox told LifeSite, noting that “Maryland was founded as a religious freedom colony, and that’s why we have the memory of that in the cross on our state flag.”

— 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

“Enough is enough. We are not simply going to pretend that these regulations and burdens on our freedom are normal or that they are some kind of a ‘new normal.’ No.” said Cox. “We’re going to be Americans. We’re going to be free. We’re not going to muzzle our faces for the rest of our lives. We’re going to stand up, we’re going to go to church on Sunday with our kids.”


  abortion, coronavirus, coronavirus vaccine, larry hogan, maryland

News

UK Parliament votes to force healthcare workers to take COVID jab

'Ninety minutes on a statutory instrument to fundamentally change the balance of human rights in this country is nothing short of a disgrace,' Conservative MP William Wragg lamented. 'Is that what we’re prepared to do to our fellow citizens as a Conservative government? It’s absolute lunacy. You’d expect this in a communist country.'
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 2:04 pm EST
Featured Image
UK Prime Minister Boris has led the national COVID vaccine campaign and a series of lockdowns since March 2020 WPA Pool / Getty
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.

WESTMINSTER, England, July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Legislators in Britain voted Tuesday evening to force healthcare employees in England to receive one of the experimental jabs against COVID-19 as a requirement to continue in their job.

In a vote of 319 to 246, Britain’s House of Commons voted to mandate the reception of experimental jabs among health and social care workers, with an exemption to the rule built in based solely on “evidence” of medical complications. As a result, anyone working in a care home registered under the Care Quality Commission (a regulatory body for health care services in England) will be required to have received a full regimen of “vaccination” against COVID-19. There is a 16-week “grace period” to facilitate unvaccinated staff members receiving the jab before the end of October, when the rule will come into force.

A spokesman for the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) stated that staff who refuse to take the jab “may be asked to find alternative employment that does not involve working in a care home.” The legislation will extend to those who have temporary contact with people in residential care homes, including tradesmen, delivery people, and stylists, for example. Breaking the new law could result in a fine of up to £4,000.

LifeSiteNews corresponded by email with Edward Timpson, the Conservative Member of Parliament for Eddisbury in Cheshire. Timpson, who voted in favor of the legislation, told LifeSiteNews that the decision of Parliament to impose mandatory vaccination on healthcare employees stemmed from advice from the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) which indicated an apparent need for “uptake rates of 80 per cent in staff and 90 per cent in residents in care home settings … to provide a minimum level of protection against further outbreaks” of the virus.

Since around 35 percent of care homes are below the advised threshold of vaccinated staff, “the Government is now taking steps to require care providers to deploy only staff who have been vaccinated within older adult care homes,” Timpson said.

Conservative MP William Wragg said that the “government is treating this House with utter contempt” after the vote favored requiring “vaccination.” 

“Ninety minutes on a statutory instrument to fundamentally change the balance of human rights in this country is nothing short of a disgrace,” he lamented.

Wragg presented the case of a healthcare worker who expressed her fear that the new law will result in her losing her job. “Is that what we’re prepared to do to our fellow citizens as a Conservative government?” Wragg asked. “It’s absolute lunacy. You’d expect this in a communist country.”

Jacob Rees-Mogg and Sir Edward Leigh, both of whom are Conservative MPs and notable Catholics in British public life, backed the draconian legislation. Last year, Mogg also lent his support to harsh restrictions on civil liberties in a Parliamentary vote, including a stipulation that communal worship be curtailed.

Despite being noted for his anti-abortion views and open commitment to traditional Catholic piety, Mogg voted to impose hefty £10,000 fines on civilians in England who dared to attend communal worship services in November 2020, including Holy Mass. Mogg was again joined by Leigh in favoring the restrictive legislation.

— 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

French President Emmanuel Macron also signaled a move towards mandatory vaccination during an announcement on Monday. Anyone working in health care in France is to be required to take one of the experimental COVID jabs, Macron said, in an effort to boost the number of citizens “vaccinated” against COVID-19.

Any healthcare employee, whether they work directly with patients or not, who has not had the jab before September 15, will “no longer be allowed to work and will receive no pay,” according to the country’s health minister Olivier Véran. The French Parliament will convene on July 21 to implement the law officially.

Macron announced the “vaccine” requirement alongside a more ominous message about an “immense project … to vaccinate the entire world.” The president refused to rule out the eventual requirement of vaccination for “the millions of you who have not yet been vaccinated.”

“[D]epending on the evolution of the situation,” Macron said, “we will have to raise the question of compulsory vaccination for all French people. But for now, I chose trust, and I solemnly call on all our fellow citizens who haven't yet been vaccinated to do so today. Nine million doses are ready for you.”

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

RELATED

France to make COVID jabs mandatory for many, life ‘totally impossible’ without COVID passport

Will COVID vaccines really bring us back to normal?

EXCLUSIVE - Former Pfizer VP: ‘Your government is lying to you in a way that could lead to your death.’

Eminent doc: Media censored COVID-19 early treatment options that could have reduced fatalities by 85%

Frontline Doctors: Experimental vaccines are ‘not safer’ than COVID-19

Eminent doctor: COVID vaccine is ‘bioterrorism by injection’ and has likely caused at least 50K deaths in the US

Tucker Carlson: ‘Vindictive’ and ‘scary’ forced vaccination promoted, despite ‘waning’ pandemic

Australian state law empowers officials to forcibly remove underwear to administer vaccine


  coronvavirus vaccine, covid tyranny, edward leigh, jacob rees-mogg, mandatory vaccines, uk parliament, united kingdom, william wragg

News

Priest defends Fr. Altman: John the Baptist and Our Lord also ‘stood up to the hierarchy of their time’

'I’m talking about John the Baptist, Jesus Christ. People who stood up to the hierarchy of their time, and said ‘No, you can’t do this.’ That isn’t disobedience. That’s shining a light in our times,' popular priest Father Richard Heilman said during a homily he gave this past Sunday.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 12:36 pm EST
Featured Image
Father Richard Heilman Alpha News / YouTube
Emily Mangiaracina Emily Mangiaracina Follow
By

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

CROSS PLAINS, Wisconsin, July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — The popular Father Richard Heilman has firmly defended Father James Altman amid his sanctions, saying that the saints and Christ Himself also “overstepped their boundaries” by calling out the hierarchy of their time.

Heilman, who is pastor of St. Mary of Pine Bluff Catholic Church in Wisconsin, and a friend of Altman’s, expressed his shock and dismay over the removal of Altman’s faculties during a homily he gave this past Sunday.  

“We’re living in a tumultuous time,” said Heilman, who was quick to add, “I always qualify by saying I have great hope. And I believe and I hope I'm right about this, that this is a time when evil is being drawn out from the darkness, so it can be seen easily for what it is.”

Heilman believes that “we have some bishops that are trying to be in league with the powers that be,” and that these bishops now “compromise their morals, ethics, truth,” to “keep the money train coming.” 

“And so there are those bishops that are appeasing the tyrants, and there are those bishops afraid of the bishops who are appeasing the tyrants. It’s hard to find any bishops who don’t fall into one of those two categories right now,” continued Heilman.

“And you have Fr. Altman who is shining a bright light on all this, and it’s almost like you can see the panic. ‘No, you can’t say that, you can’t do that.’ And it’s happening to other priests, those who are offering a reverent Mass and speaking the truth. That pretty much sums up the identity of those who are being persecuted right now.

“But what’s very disheartening is to see as they are being assaulted, attacked, censored, persecuted, is to see those who you thought, aren’t you in our company? Aren’t you in our kind of inner circle, our family of God? Yet you see people joining ranks with those who are persecuting these priests.

“One of the accusations that’s thrown, for instance, at Fr. Altman, is that it’s the cult of personality, like Father Corapi, they’ll say.

“And I’m going ‘really? So what you’re saying then is that anyone who inspires people, and they appreciate his message and look forward to the next message that he offers, automatically that places them in a category of cult of personality.’

“I said, ‘then you have to say that about Jesus’,” Heilman continued.

Heilman said that “you’ll see saints” who spoke in a vein similar to St. John the Baptists’ rebuke to Pharisees and Sadducees, “You brood of vipers!”

“Google Saint Peter Damian’s quotes,” said Heilman. St. Damian is known in part for his searing denunciation of sodomy among the clergy in his Book of Gomorrah.

“I’m talking about John the Baptist, Jesus Christ. People who stood up to the hierarchy of their time, and said ‘No, you can’t do this.’ That isn’t disobedience. That’s shining a light in our times.”

By contrast, Heilman said, there are those who try to hush such truth-tellers, who say, “Wait wait wait — the elites, the cabal, the tyrants of our times are going to get upset with your truth. You’re being divisive.”
“You’re upsetting people who want to hold onto their worldly sins while counting themselves as a child of the light, and then come and receive Communion and model that for the rest of the kingdom of God,” Heilman continued.

“And then you have hierarchy who are saying ‘come on, yes, this is the new normal. Go ahead and believe whatever horrendous thing, abomination unto God. Practice it, promote it, and then come and receive communion. And if you dare speak out against that, you’re divisive. And you need to be put out.’ That’s where we’re at right now.

“And some are saying ‘Shhh! we’re taking the long view here. We’ll chip at this piece by piece.’”

Heilman said he was reminded of the movie “Sing a Little Louder,” in which a minister tells his choir to sing louder in order to drown out the cries of prisoners on their way to concentration camps, who are crying out for help from their train.

“What’s that like?” said Heilman.

“1.7 billion babies. Under our watch. I gotta watch as a cardinal says ‘come on, President, and receive your Communion, even though you are the number one most influential and powerful person promoting tearing apart children from limb from limb.’ 1.7 billion worldwide since 1973.

But we're taking the ‘long view.’” 

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

“And we want to be like the saints who never upset anybody and went over in their hermitage and prayed.” But they didn’t just pray, Heilman pointed out.

“They were thrown to the lions. They were hung on trees. Because they dared to threaten the agenda of the ruling class. That’s it in a nutshell,” said Heilman.

“You’ll be hated by all because of me, Jesus said.

“I believe we're facing a watershed moment, and I think we all have to do a heart check. Am I willing to lose family members, for instance, because I ain't gonna call a guy a girl when he's not a girl? Am I going to get active to stand against this surge of tyranny that has come? Am I going to pray and discern, ‘what are the gifts that you gave me, God?’”

Heilman called on his listeners to pray to God to “Help us to fight off our weariness, our weakness, our fearfulness, our cowardliness, anything that's standing in the way to stand with the Saint Peter Damians, the John the Baptists of the world.”


  crisis in the catholic church, james altman, richard heilman

News

UN LGBT czar says changing gender is an ‘entitlement’ under international law

'Gender is not inherent to persons. There is no evidence to that effect,' claimed the United Nations' expert on LGBT issues.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 12:11 pm EST
Featured Image
Victor Madrigal-Borloz speaking at Harvard Law School, October 2019. YouTube Screenshot/Harvard Law School
Stefano Gennarini, J.D.
By Stefano Gennarini J.D.

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

GENEVA, Switzerland, July 14, 2021 (C-Fam) – A human rights expert charged with promoting LGBT issues through the United Nations said that changing one’s sex or gender based on self-identification is an “entitlement” under international human rights law.

Victor Madrigal-Borloz, the U.N. Independent Expert on LGBT issues, said gender is “firmly incorporated” in human rights law and that “it is the obligation of states to acknowledge and provide legal recognition of gender identity based on self-identification,” including for minors. He made the comments during a press conference to present his latest report on gender to the Human Rights Council.

Madrigal-Borloz did not shy away from controversy during the press conference on June 25, even calling into question Hungary’s fitness as a member of the European Union because of the country’s stance against promoting LGBT issues in schools.

“Gender is not inherent to persons. There is no evidence to that effect,” Madrigal-Borloz said.

“Gender is, in fact, the relationship between a person’s free will and a series of stereotypes that assign behaviors or patterns or roles to a particular sex,” he explained.

“I see nothing within the limits of a democratic society that would justify restricting that freedom (to change sex or gender),” he concluded.

He was openly critical of Hungary’s laws prohibiting the legal change of sex or gender based on self-identification and the teaching of LGBT issues in schools. He said the laws promote an “upbringing based on Christian values and Hungarian identity” and that they “perpetuate stigma.”

“A human rights-based approach requires that limitations to freedom be justified by a valuable societal objective. And what is valuable societal objective to restricting a person’s decision related to gender?” he added.

He also said the Hungarian laws interfered with the ability to deliver comprehensive sexuality and gender education, which he said were necessary for the “deconstruction of stigma.”

In the report, Madrigal-Borloz said comprehensive sexuality education was helpful to “deconstruct stereotypes about sex, sexuality and pleasure” and when he presented the report to States before the press conference, he said it would help train teachers to talk to children about their sexuality and sexual orientation.

Madrigal-Borloz also questioned Hungary’s membership in the EU bloc based on the shared values of the bloc.

“To what extent can you bend that value base and remain in the bloc?” he asked.

Hungary supported the creation of the LGBT Czar position that Madrigal-Borloz now occupies in 2016.

When asked about transgender athletes, he brushed aside concerns asking, “Whether there is any evidence that these discussions reflect any real problematics?”

Madrigal-Borloz said his findings had a “significant connection to the culture wars” and added that he hoped his report would provide “some tools so that the debates are not held on the basis of prejudice and stigma, but rather on the basis of evidence and legal analysis.”

— 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

While Madrigal-Borloz claimed wide support for LGBT issues in non-binding recommendations from international mechanisms, he did not acknowledge the lack of consensus among U.N. member states on this topic.

Nor did he address the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in his report or the press conference. The binding treaty, which establishes international criminal jurisdiction for crimes against humanity, defines gender as “the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society.” And it expressly excludes any other meaning.

Despite the controversial subject, no UN member states spoke against Madrigal-Borloz when he presented his report to the Human Rights Council. This is likely because the member states who opposed the mandate in 2016 promised not to engage the mandate and to consider it not legitimate.

Madrigal-Borloz’s will publish the second part of his 2021 report on gender to the General Assembly this summer. It is anticipated to include a black list of individuals and organizations who oppose the LGBT agenda globally. He also said he plans to issue a report on the clash between religious freedom and LGBT issues in 2022.

Reprinted with permission from C–Fam.org


  lgbt ideology, lgbt indoctrination, lgbt intolerance, united nations, united nations human rights council, victor madrigal-borloz

News

Ex-Planned Parenthood CEO demands Biden do more to push vaccine mandates and COVID passports

In an op-ed for The Washington Post Leana Wen lauded the efforts of colleges and universities which have implemented stringent vaccine mandates for returning students. 'More workplaces should be instituting these mandates to protect employees and their families,' Wen insisted, before demanding that the Biden administration 'assist with these efforts.'
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 11:45 am EST
Featured Image
Leana Wen
David McLoone David McLoone Follow
By

CONTACT YOUR FEDERAL AND STATE LEGISLATORS: Tell them to reject door to door vaccinations! Click to contact your lawmakers now.

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

July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Dr. Leana Wen, former CEO Planned Parenthood, has said that President Joe Biden should have required all attendees at a recent White House event to have received a COVID-19 vaccine because, according to Wen, “vaccination isn’t just an individual decision, but one that affects the health of others.” Planned Parenthood is the biggest abortion provider in the United States.

Wen made the comment in an op-ed titled “It’s time for Biden to make the case for vaccine requirements,” published in the Washington Post July 6. 

The former Planned Parenthood CEO, who was axed from the leadership position less than a year into the job, wrote that Biden “missed an important opportunity” to showcase vaccine requirements at his Fourth of July event, hosted at the White House and at which “more than 1,000 attendees” were not mandated to have had the jab.

After issuing a nod of approval towards Biden’s comment at the event in which he said vaccinating against COVID is “the most patriotic thing you can do,” Wen complained that, in her opinion, Biden’s COVID-19 coordinator, Jeff Zients, has a “live and let live” attitude towards vaccination. Wen said that this gives rise to “an obvious problem … which is the danger to those who do not have immune protection and not by choice.”

As an example, Wen pointed to those yet ineligible to receive the vaccine (under 12’s) and people who are “immunocompromised” – both categories of which she said are “at risk around unvaccinated people.”

Wen previously argued for the vaccination of children against COVID-19, the rollout of which she called an “urgent priority” based on the spurious claim that “COVID-19 is now one of the leading causes of death among children.” Wen made the comments without a hint of irony and without any reference to the fact that she is the former leader of America’s leading child killing organization.

In fact, the most recent American Academy of Pediatrics report on COVID-19 cases in children, from July 8, shows that in 43 states “Children were 0.00%–0.25% of all COVID-19 deaths, and 8 states reported zero child deaths.” Additionally, within those states that submitted reports, “0.00%–0.03% of all child COVID-19 cases resulted in death.” These numbers represent cumulative counts from the onset of state reporting on COVID-19.

Wen proceeded to make a string of claims around the COVID jabs that run against one another, writing on the one hand that even if one has received the jabs if one is “constantly surrounded by unvaccinated people, the risk of getting infected increases.” But in the following paragraph she then claimed that the risk of ill health associated with infection after getting a COVID shot reduces dramatically, adding that “99 percent of people dying from COVID-19 are unvaccinated. That’s testament to the extraordinary power of the vaccines.”

Not only is there mounting evidence that receiving a COVID jab does not grant near-guaranteed protection against infection with the virus, but multiple COVID-related deaths have occurred among the “fully vaccinated.” A total of 10,262 “breakthrough” infections were recorded in 46 U.S. states before April 30. Deaths from COVID in those who have been fully vaccinated against the disease increased from 160 as of April 30 to 535 as of June 1, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

After May 1, the CDC decided that it would no longer record COVID breakthrough cases in vaccinated individuals, unless those individuals “are hospitalized or die” following infection.

After staking the claim that COVID jabs are highly effective at preventing serious injury from the virus, Wen suddenly pivoted on the efficacy of COVID vaccines, stating that “[e]ven the best vaccine doesn’t work 100 percent of the time.” Presenting an analogy between the jabs and a raincoat, Wen said “If it’s drizzling, it will probably protect you. But if you go from thunderstorm to thunderstorm, at some point you will get wet.”

This led Wen to argue that vaccinated people ought to keep company with fellow vaccinated people and avoid the unvaccinated as an “additional protective measure that could help” vaccinated people stay safe from the virus. To this end, Wen lauded the efforts of colleges and universities which have implemented stringent vaccine mandates for returning students in the autumn.

“More workplaces should be instituting these mandates to protect employees and their families,” Wen insisted, before demanding that the Biden administration “assist with these efforts.” Despite Biden’s continued initiatives to increase vaccine uptake, such as offering free beer incentives and deploying door-to-door vaccine distributors, Wen asserted that the administration is falling behind on its rollout of the jabs. “That’s not nearly enough,” Wen said of the incentives, suggesting that Biden must now “get behind proof of vaccination.”

“A gathering touting the United States’ progress toward independence from the virus should have been the ideal opportunity to make the case for vaccine requirements. It matters for everyone, including the vaccinated,” she concluded.

Meanwhile, in Europe, a number of leaders are beginning to implement mandatory COVID “vaccination” for various sections of the population. French Prime Minister Emmanuel Macron announced Monday that all health workers and those who work with “fragile” people will be required to take the experimental jab in order to keep their job, reportedly affecting people in “70 professions.”

— 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

From September 15, those who have not received the shot will “no longer be allowed to work and will receive no pay,” according to the country’s health minister Olivier Véran. Macron confirmed that “controls will be carried out and sanctions applied” from September 15 in order to halt “even more dangerous variants” of the virus from developing.

In like manner, on Tuesday evening the U.K. Parliament voted by 319 votes to 246 in favor of mandating the experimental jabs for healthcare workers, with an exception built in on medical grounds alone.

Conservative MP William Wragg lamented that the “government is treating this House with utter contempt” after the vote favored requiring “vaccination.” “Ninety minutes on a statutory instrument to fundamentally change the balance of human rights in this country is nothing short of a disgrace,” the legislator added.

Wragg presented the case of a healthcare worker who expressed her fear that the new law will result in her losing her job. “Is that what we’re prepared to do to our fellow citizens as a Conservative government?” Wragg asked. “It’s absolute lunacy. You’d expect this in a communist country.”

Jacob Rees-Mogg and Sir Edward Leigh, both of whom are Conservative MPs and notable Catholics in British public life, backed the draconian legislation.


  coronavirus vaccine, jeff zients, joe biden, leana wen, vaccine passports

News

DNC planning to ‘fact-check’ COVID-19 vaccine ‘misinformation’ in private text messages

It is unclear how the DNC and ‘fact-checkers’ intend to increase vaccine confidence by surveilling and censoring private communications, and how exactly they plan to ‘work with SMS carriers.’
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 11:02 am EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
Ashley Sadler Ashley Sadler Follow
By

CONTACT YOUR FEDERAL AND STATE LEGISLATORS: Tell them to reject door to door vaccinations! Click to contact your lawmakers now.

July 13, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — The Biden administration has had enough with conservative opposition to its vaccination campaign, according to Politico. An article published on the left-learning site Monday said the White House considers those opposed to the administration’s COVID-19 campaign to be “dangerous and extreme” and is taking “a more aggressive political posture” in response.

According to Politico, “[t]he White House has decided to hit back harder on misinformation and scare tactics after Republican lawmakers and conservative activists pledged to fight the administration’s stated plans to go ‘door-to-door' to increase vaccination rates.’”

As the article noted, the Biden administration drew the ire of many a conservative with the announcement of its new door-to-door strategy last week, urging “remaining” unvaccinated Americans to get the experimental shot.

“Now we need to go community by community, neighborhood by neighborhood, and oftentimes door by door — literally knocking on doors to get help to the remaining people,” President Joe Biden said.

The plan was later confirmed by White House press secretary Jen Psaki, who said the administration’s coronavirus approach throughout the summer would involve a “targeted community-by-community, door-to-door outreach to get the remaining Americans vaccinated by ensuring they have the information they need on how both safe and accessible the vaccine is.”

‘Your private conversations will be controlled by the DNC. Is that the picture of a free country?’ asked Tucker Carlson. ‘Looks like we should have worried about civil liberties last year when all this started. If the government can ban discussion of the drug they’re making you take, what can’t they do?’

Conservative social media users and elected officials immediately responded with outrage to the plan, accusing the Biden administration of invading the privacy of Americans and attempting to pressure citizens into accepting a vaccine they do not want to take. The experimental coronavirus vaccines are already widely available – and free – in every U.S. state.

But Politico suggested the White House will now directly confront those opposed to the controversial strategy.

“The pushback will include directly calling out social media platforms and conservative news shows that promote such tactics,” the outlet reported.

Beyond simply “calling out” conservatives who support the free choice of Americans above government intrusion in personal medical decisions, Politico hinted the administration may join with groups such as the Democratic National Committee to use “fact-checkers” to “dispel misinformation,” even in private messages sent via social media platforms and private cell phones.

According to Politico, “Biden allied groups, including the Democratic National Committee [DNC], are also planning to engage fact-checkers more aggressively and work with SMS carriers to dispel misinformation about vaccines that is sent over social media and text messages. The goal is to ensure that people who may have difficulty getting a vaccination because of issues like transportation see those barriers lessened or removed entirely.”

It is unclear how the DNC and “fact-checkers” intend to increase vaccine confidence by surveilling and censoring private communications, and how exactly they plan to “work with SMS carriers.” It also remains to be seen whether the Biden administration will publicly affiliate itself with the effort.

FOX’s Tucker Carlson said Politico’s statement was one “we never thought we’d see written in English: The DNC is planning to censor any ‘misinformation about vaccines’ that you receive privately over text message.”

“What does ‘misinformation’ mean?” Carlson asked. “It’s not the same as false information, as factually inaccurate information. Misinformation can be factually true. In fact, it very often is factually true. That’s why they’re angry about it.”

The host of America’s highest rated cable television show went on to suggest that “misinformation is anything the Biden administration doesn’t want you to know – including, for example, how effective the COVID vaccines actually are, and what the potential side effects from them might be from taking them.”

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

Politico’s article included quotes from left-wing figures who have begun using increasingly harsh and political rhetoric in defense of their strong-arm COVID-19 tactics.

Prominent figures have accused conservatives of threatening the lives of Americans by raising concerns about the hastily produced experimental drugs and the increasingly brazen moves by corporations, governments, and other institutions to mandate the shots.

The article cited White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki’s response when pressed by a reporter to respond to South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster, who asked his state’s health department to forbid the federal government’s door to door initiative.

Psaki called McMaster’s response, which is aligned with that of many conservatives, a “disservice to the country.”

“[F]ailure to provide accurate public health information, including the efficacy of vaccines and the accessibility of them to people across the country, including South Carolina, is literally killing people, so maybe they should consider that,” Psaki said.

John Bridgeland, co-founder of a national assembly called the COVID Collaborative, told Politico it was “completely illogical” and “potentially a death sentence” for Americans to question the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 drugs on the market, noting that members of his organization, which already goes door-to-door to encourage Americans to take the experimental drug, have already experienced people slamming doors “in their faces because they don't want to get vaccinated.”

In his commentary, Tucker Carlson raised concerns about the extent of the federal government’s attempt to censor information that runs contrary to the prevailing narrative.

“Let’s say you’re interested in finding out that information and looked it up from the administration’s own official websites, starting with the VAERS database,” Carlson said.

“You’re no longer allowed to text what you find on their database to other people in this country – the country you were born in. Your private conversations will be controlled by the DNC. Is that the picture of a free country?”

“Looks like we should have worried about civil liberties last year when all this started,” the popular FOX News host said. “If the government can ban discussion of the drug they’re making you take, what can’t they do?”


  biden administration, biden regime, dnc

News

Government of Washington, DC must pay $200k to church it restricted during lockdown

‘Government officials need to know that illegal restrictions on First Amendment rights are intolerable and costly,’ said executive general counsel for First Liberty Institute Hiram Sasser.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 10:16 am EST
Featured Image
Twitter / screenshot
Clare Marie Merkowsky
By

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The District of Columbia will pay $200,000 as part of a settlement of a lawsuit for restricting religious services during the coronavirus lockdown.

Last September, Capitol Hill Baptist Church sued the district after the government banned outdoor religious services with more than 100 people in attendance. They argued that the restrictions unfairly burdened religious institutions compared to secular entities.

In October 2020, Trump-appointed U.S. District Court Judge Trevor McFadden ruled in favor of the church, maintaining that the “current restrictions substantially burden the church’s exercise of religion.”

He continued to explain that “the District has failed to offer evidence at this stage showing that it has a compelling interest in preventing the church from meeting outdoors with appropriate precautions, or that this prohibition is the least-restrictive means to achieve its interest.”

Later, the church hosted their first outdoor service, following the current the official public health recommendations by practicing so-called physical distancing and wearing masks.

Associate Pastor Bobby Jamieson preached at this service, saying, “It is absolutely appropriate to take stock, to give thanks, to give honor to whom honor is due, to recognize the many blessings that our government continually secures and provides for us.”

“The only conditions that justify disobedience to legitimate government authority, legitimate earthly authority are when they either command something God forbids or forbid something God commands,” he continued.  

— 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 March 2020, as part of their lockdown measures, D.C. restricted the capacity for religious services of 10 or more people. Later, this was changed to 100 people or 50% of the building capacity.

The lawsuit was finalized this Thursday, with the city agreeing to pay $220,000 to the lawyers representing the church. This meant that the law firm WilmerHale will receive $210,000 while the national legal non-profit First Liberty Institute will be given the remaining $10,000. The district also must allow Capitol Hill Baptist Church to hold indoor religious services.

“The District agrees that it will not enforce any current or future COVID-19 restrictions to prohibit CHBC from gathering as one congregation in the District of Columbia,” the settlement stated.

“The District further agrees that, should it decide that new restrictions on religious gatherings are necessary during the current, or any future, COVID-19 (or variant thereof) public health emergency, it will not impose restrictions on CHBC that are more restrictive than the restrictions on comparable secular activities, as defined by the Supreme Court.”

Executive general counsel for First Liberty Institute Hiram Sasser said in a statement that Capitol Hill Baptist Church “is relieved and grateful that this ordeal is behind them.”

“All Capitol Hill Baptist Church ever asked is for equal treatment under the law so they could meet together safely as a church,” Sasser continued. “Government officials need to know that illegal restrictions on First Amendment rights are intolerable and costly.”


  capitol hill baptist church, coronavirus, washington, d.c., washington, dc

News

White House to ask SMS carriers to monitor vaccine ‘Misinformation’ in private text messages

According to Politico, the Biden administration may be taking a step further in curbing vaccine misinformation by monitoring private social media and text messages.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 9:30 am EST
Featured Image
Megan Redshaw, J.D.
By Megan Redshaw J.D.

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

July 14, 2021 (Children’s Health Defense) – The Biden administration and allied groups, including the Democratic National Committee (DNC), are “planning to engage fact-checkers more aggressively and work with SMS [Short Message Service] carriers to dispel misinformation about vaccines sent over social media and text messages,” according to a report today in Politico by White House correspondents Natasha Korecki and Eugene Daniels.

The initiative is part of the administration’s attempt to get more people vaccinated for COVID after failing to reach its goal of having 70% of American adults receive at least one vaccine dose by July 4.

“We are steadfastly committed to keeping politics out of the effort to get every American vaccinated so that we can save lives and help our economy further recover,” White House spokesperson Kevin Munoz said, according to Politico. “When we see deliberate efforts to spread misinformation, we view that as an impediment to the country’s public health and will not shy away from calling that out.”

Politico’s Korecki tweeted this:

Politico did not clearly define what the administration meant by “monitoring” of text messages, including if messages would be flagged or if they would be prevented from being delivered.

The media outlet also did not clarify how the administration or social media platforms would determine what exactly constitutes “misinformation.”

Critics were quick to condemn the administration’s latest move. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), a constitutional lawyer, tweeted this:

This isn’t the first time the White House signaled its intent to work with social media platforms to monitor or suppress information it believes will deter people from getting the vaccine.

As The Defender reported in February, the White House asked Big Tech giants Facebook, Twitter and Alphabet Inc.’s Google to “clamp down on chatter that deviates from officially distributed COVID-19 information,” according to the New York Post and other news reports.

Reuters reported that Biden, concerned that “fear about taking the vaccine has emerged as a major impediment” to his administration’s pandemic plan, wants help from the social media moguls to keep “misinformation” from going viral.

Biden’s door-to-door vaccine campaign

The Biden administration faced backlash last week after President Biden announced plans to ramp up the federal government’s efforts to get more Americans vaccinated by going “door-to-door” to encourage Americans to get vaccinated.

In response, critics accused the administration of “tyrannical” government overreach. But Dr. Anthony Fauci, Biden’s chief medical advisor, replied Sunday accusing them of misinterpreting Biden’s program.

“The big misinterpretation that Fox News or whomever else is saying is that they are essentially envisioning a bunch of federal workers knocking on your door, telling you you’ve got to do something that you don’t want to do,” said Fauci.

“That’s absolutely not the case, it’s trusted messengers who are part of the community doing that — not government officials,” he added. “So that’s where I think the disconnect is.”

White House press secretary Jen Psaki offered similar pushback in a White House press briefing July 9, when asked about South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster’s push for the state’s Department of Health to prohibit “‘door-to-door’ tactics in the state’s ongoing vaccination efforts.”

Last week South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster, in a letter to the South Carolina Board of Health and Environmental Control, wrote: “Enticing, coercing, intimidating, mandating or pressuring anyone to take a vaccine is a bad policy that will deteriorate the public trust and confidence in the state’s efforts.”

— 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

McMaster said he was going to prohibit the state health agency from using the administration’s targeted tactics.

Psaki responded to McMaster’s letter, saying it was a disservice to the country to provide “inaccurate disinformation at a moment when we’re still fighting a pandemic” and that “the failure to provide accurate public health information, including the efficacy of vaccines and the accessibility of them to people across the country, including South Carolina, is literally killing people, so maybe they should consider that.”

Psaki said the administration has “engaged with local community groups and pastors to handle door-to-door sharing of information with neighbors about the vaccines” for months.

According to Politico, the Biden administration has teamed up with the COVID Collaborative, which describes itself as a “diverse and comprehensive team of experts, leaders and institutions in health, education, and the economy” which works to “develop consensus recommendations, and engage with local, state and national leaders.”

The collaborative, an initiative of the Office of American Possibilities, charted vaccine hesitancy by zip code and is working to convince people to get vaccinated as part of the door-to-door campaign.

The COVID Collaborative has partnerships with the CDC Foundation, which partners with Pfizer and the Pfizer Foundation. It also has partnerships with The American Medical AssociationAmerican Academy of Pediatrics, The Rockefeller Foundation, National Association of Manufacturers (which also partners with Pfizer), and numerous organizations that receive funding from pharmaceutical companies that  manufacture COVID vaccines.

COVID Collaborative co-founder John Bridgeland said his group had already seen a shift on the ground with people shutting doors “in their faces because they don’t want to get vaccinated.”

Bridgeland’s biggest concern is that “these lies convince communities [who] are already wary of the vaccines, creating sects of the country where the virus just bounces among the unvaccinated.”

© July 13, 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.


  big tech censorship, children's health defense, coronavirus vaccines, joe biden, vaccine mandate

News

‘Coercion’: Comedian of Saturday Night Live fame denounces mass vaccination agenda

‘We should never abandon our liberal principles... and support unprecedented coercion of professional health workers, patients and people to have experimental treatments with limited safety data,’ wrote former Saturday Night Live comedian Rob Schneider.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 8:28 am EST
Featured Image
Rob Schneider performs onstage during the 'Comedy in Your Car's' drive-In concert at Ventura County Fairgrounds and Event Center on August 28, 2020 in Ventura, California Frazer Harrison / Staff / Getty
Ashley Sadler Ashley Sadler Follow
By

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

July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Outspoken conservative comedian Rob Schneider took to Twitter Saturday to slam the ongoing COVID-19 mass vaccination agenda, arguing that the “unprecedented coercion” is “more of a danger to our society than anything we have faced during this last year.”

Schneider, who was a Saturday Night Live cast member from 1990 to 1994 appearing in comedic sketches with the likes of Adam Sandler, Dana Carvey, and Chris Farley, has been outspoken about his conservative views, including his opposition to the prevailing COVID-19 narrative. 

In a tweet published July 10, Schneider condemned the efforts of government leaders and media members to push Americans to get injected with what he called “experimental treatments with limited safety data.”

“We should never abandon our liberal principles and international stance on body autonomy, free informed choice and human rights, and support unprecedented coercion of professional health workers, patients and people to have experimental treatments with limited safety data,” Schneider wrote. 

“This and the policies that go with it are more of a danger to our society than anything we have faced during this last year.”

In another tweet posted Monday, Schneider encouraged Americans to “just say no” to the COVID-19 drugs, which he called “experimental gene therapy,” a claim shared by health experts who have raised concerns about the mRNA technology which has never been fully approved for use in human beings.

As previously reported by LifeSiteNews, business ethicist and former professor at the University of Virginia’s school of medicine Dr. David Martin, Ph.D said in an interview that the mRNA drugs created by Moderna and Pfizer are not vaccines at all, but “gene therapy.” 

Schneider’s tweet expressing his opinion on the jabs earned a warning label from Twitter. The Big Tech platform called the message “misleading” and added a weblink to encourage readers to “[f]ind out why health officials consider COVID-19 vaccines safe for most people.”

The link directs users to a series of tweets by the World Health Organization (WHO), the Associated Press (AP), National Public Radio (NPR), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), among others. The sources insist that the hastily produced drugs are safe and effective and include vaccination guidance for “children and pregnant people.”

The former Saturday Night Live star’s opinions on personal liberty and government overreach are not new. Shneider has not been shy about sharing his opinion of the excessive measures put in place over the past eighteen months allegedly to combat the novel coronavirus.

In February Schneider retweeted an image of an elementary school classroom with plexiglass shields set up on students’ desks, calling the extreme COVID-19 prevention measures “a new kind of child abuse,” and adding “[h]istory will not look back at this kindly.”

Last year, Schneider mocked California Governor Gavin Newsom’s (D) restrictive Thanksgiving coronavirus “guidelines.” The guidelines sought to restrict holiday gatherings to outdoor events attended by no more than three households, with participants masked, surfaces sanitized, and singing and shouting discouraged. 

In response Schneider referred to Gov. Newsom as “Emperor” and asked “During our allotted 3 family limit this Thanksgiving, if my Aunt comes over, can I throw her a slice of turkey from the window?”

 “We promise NOT to sing,” Schenider added, “we will all just whisper, ‘PLEASE RECALL DIPS*** GAVIN NEWSON!’[sic]”

Schneider’s most recent tweets promoting liberty have come amid increasing pressure from public health officials, members of the media, and the White House, to encourage more Americans to get the jab. 

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), over 67 percent of Americans over the age of 18 have received at least one shot, with more than 157 million “fully vaccinated.”

Yet a recent poll suggests that almost a third of all Americans likely won’t opt to get the shot, while 20 percent of Americans say they definitely won’t.

Methods to encourage more Americans to get vaccinated have ranged from incentive programs to effectively penalizing Americans who opt out of taking the experimental injection.

— 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

Former Planned Parenthood director and current medical analyst for CNN Dr. Leana Wen  recently suggested life should be made difficult for unvaccinated Americans.

“It needs to be hard for people to remain unvaccinated,” Wen said. “Right now, it’s kind of the opposite.”

Wen advocated for mandates to be imposed at workplaces and schools. 

“I think it will be important to say, ‘Hey, you can opt out, but if you want to opt out, you have to sign these forms, you have to get twice-weekly testing,” she said. “Basically, we need to make getting vaccinated the easy choice.”

Wen’s recent comments align with similar remarks she made in April, when she lamented that there was a “very narrow window to tie reopening policy to vaccination status,” asking “if everything is reopened, then what’s the carrot going to be? How are we going to incentivize people to actually get the vaccine?”

“So that’s why I think the CDC and the Biden administration needs to come out a lot bolder and say, ‘If you’re vaccinated, you can do all these things. Here are all these freedoms that you have,’ because otherwise, people are going to go out and enjoy these freedoms anyway,” Wen said.

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

RELATED

France to make COVID jabs mandatory for many, life ‘totally impossible’ without COVID passport

Will COVID vaccines really bring us back to normal?

EXCLUSIVE - Former Pfizer VP: ‘Your government is lying to you in a way that could lead to your death.’

Eminent doc: Media censored COVID-19 early treatment options that could have reduced fatalities by 85%

Frontline Doctors: Experimental vaccines are ‘not safer’ than COVID-19

Eminent doctor: COVID vaccine is ‘bioterrorism by injection’ and has likely caused at least 50K deaths in the US

Tucker Carlson: ‘Vindictive’ and ‘scary’ forced vaccination promoted, despite ‘waning’ pandemic

Australian state law empowers officials to forcibly remove underwear to administer vaccine


  coronavirus vaccine, covid tyranny, leana wen, rob schneider, vaccine side effects

News

Planned Parenthood files ‘scare tactic’ lawsuit to ‘intimidate and bully’ Texans over heartbeat abortion bill

The Texas Heartbeat Act makes it nearly impossible for the courts to block, but abortion advocates are attempting a 'scare tactic' to 'intimidate and bully' Texans.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 8:22 am EST
Featured Image
LifeSiteNews.com
By LSN

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

AUSTIN, Texas, July 14, 202 (LifeSiteNews) – Yesterday, July 13, Planned Parenthood and a cadre of other pro-abortion organizations in Texas, filed a lawsuit against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, Texas district judges, Texas Health and Human Services, and others in a desperate attempt to scare and bully them over the Texas Heartbeat Act. The pro-abortion groups also wished to influence any potential suing parties, by pushing them into submission regarding the Texas Heartbeat Act (S.B. 8), which prohibits abortions after the detection of the preborn baby’s heartbeat. 

Regarding today’s challenge, Jonathan Saenz, president and attorney for Texas Values called it a “complete joke,” adding that it was a “desperate attempt” by the abortion lobby to “intimidate and bully Texan citizens.”

“This lawsuit is a complete joke and is nothing more than a baseless scare tactic with no legal footing. This predictable filing sues government officials who are already excluded from being involved in the enforcement of this law. It is also a desperate attempt by abortion advocates to intimidate and bully Texan citizens hoping they will be afraid to protect babies with a detectable heartbeat. Planned Parenthood and abortion groups massively profit from the killing of babies, and this heartbeat law has real teeth that threatens their bloody pocketbooks.”

On May 19, 2021, Governor Greg Abbott signed into law the Texas Heartbeat Act which requires physicians to check for a baby’s heartbeat and inform the mother if the presence of a heartbeat is detected, which is around 5 to 6 weeks gestation.  

A preborn baby’s beating heart has become a key medical predictor that he or she will reach live birth. Once a heartbeat is detected, the doctor must take all medically appropriate steps to protect the baby’s life.

The Texas Heartbeat Act makes it nearly impossible for the courts to block. It creates a civil liability for a person who performs, aids, or abets in an abortion after a heartbeat is detected and empowers citizens to file civil actions to enforce it.  The act is not enforced by any officer or employee of a state, or local governmental entity in the state.  

— 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 City of Lubbock, Texas recently passed an ordinance that bans all abortions within its city limits, and just like the Texas Heartbeat Act, this ordinance is also enforceable through a private right of action. Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit there but the judge threw it out saying that Planned Parenthood did not have standing to sue the city.  

The law went into effect on June 1 as prescribed and as a result, Planned Parenthood in Lubbock has been banned from committing abortions there since then. 

The Texas Heartbeat Act will go into effect on September 1, 2021.

Texas Values is the largest statewide nonprofit organization dedicated to standing for faith, family, and freedom in Texas. More information is available at txvalues.org.


  abortion, heartbeat abortion ban, ken paxton, planned parenthood, texas, texas heartbeat act, texas values

Opinion

Numerous deaths, injuries following COVID jabs are increasing, as governments commit wilful misconduct

It’s clear that deaths and injuries from these shots are being swept under the rug, and we cannot allow that to continue.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 11:30 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

  • Reports of deaths and serious injuries from the COVID-19 jabs mount by the day. As of June 11, 2021, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) had posted 358,379 adverse events, including 5,993 deaths and 29,871 serious injuries
  • In the European Union’s database of adverse drug reactions from COVID shots, called EudraVigilance, there were 1,509,266 reported injuries, including 15,472 deaths as of June 19, 2021. EudraVigilance only accepts reports from EU members, so it covers only 27 countries. Remarkably, about HALF of all reported injuries — 753,657 — are listed as “serious”
  • The British Yellow Card system had, as of June 9, 2021, received 276,867 adverse event reports following COVID “vaccination,” including 1,332 deaths
  • Before you make the decision to participate in this unprecedented health experiment, it may be wise to assess your personal insurance and financial ability to handle a serious injury, as pandemic vaccine manufacturers are indemnified against lawsuits
  • If you are injured by a COVID shot and live in the U.S., your only recourse is to apply for compensation from the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Act (CICP). Payouts are rare, cover only lost wages and unpaid medical bills, cannot be appealed, are capped around $370,000 for death, and require you to exhaust your private insurance before kicking in

July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Reports of deaths and serious injuries from the COVID-19 jabs have been mounting with breakneck rapidity. Those who look at the numbers and have some awareness of historical vaccine injury rates agree we’ve never seen anything like it, anywhere in the world. While data can be hard to come by for some countries, the ones we can check reveal deeply troubling patterns.

United States — As of June 11, 2021, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) had posted 358,379 adverse events, (1) including 5,993 deaths and 29,871 serious injuries. In the 12- to 17-year-old age group, there were 271 serious injuries (2) and seven deaths. Among pregnant women, there were 2,136 adverse events, including 707 miscarriages or premature births. (3)

All of these are bound to be undercounts as, historically, less than 10% of vaccine side effects are reported to VAERS. (4) An investigation by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services put it as low as 1%. (5,6)

Be that as it may, the reported rate of death from COVID-19 shots now exceeds the reported death rate of more than 70 vaccines combined over the past 30 years, and it’s about 500 times deadlier than the seasonal flu vaccine, (7) which historically has been the most hazardous.

The COVID shots are also five times more dangerous than the pandemic H1N1 vaccine, which had a 25-per-million severe side effect rate. (8,9) Assuming the COVID shots had the same side effect rate, and assuming some 200 million got the vaccine, the estimated number of people suffering a serious side effect would be about 5,000. We’re well past that already, as 35,864 (10) people have been seriously injured or killed.

Even though there are nearly 6,000 reported deaths in VAERS, this number is likely seriously compromised. I recently interviewed Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, who has treated COVID patients quite successfully, and we discussed the very distinct possibility that everyone who receives the COVID jab may die from complications in the next two to three years.

He personally knows of 28 COVID jab deaths that were not accepted by VAERS. Zelenko suspects the number of deaths may exceed 100,000 already.

Getting the COVID jab immediately places the injected individual in the very high risk of dying from COVID. Most have the false assurance that they are protected, but in reality, they are far more vulnerable and as a result will not take very aggressive proactive measures to avoid dying from pathogenic priming or paradoxical immune enhancement before it is too late.

Please be sure and make a notation in your calendar to review my groundbreaking interview with Zelenko this Sunday, July 4, 2021, which is only three days away. We will review protocols you can use to protect you and your family or those you love, who now regret getting the COVID jab.

European Union — In the European Union’s database of adverse drug reactions from COVID shots, called EudraVigilance, there were 1,509,266 reported injuries, including 15,472 deaths as of June 19, 2021. (11) EudraVigilance only accepts reports from EU members, so it covers only 27 of the 50 European countries.

Remarkably, about HALF of all reported injuries — 753,657 — are listed as “serious,” meaning the injury is life-threatening, requires hospitalization, results in a medically important condition, significant disability or persistent incapacity.

U.K. — The British Yellow Card system had received, as of June 9, 2021, 276,867 adverse event reports following COVID “vaccination,” including 1,332 deaths. (12)

Israel — According to a report by the Israeli People Committee, a civilian body of health experts, “there has never been a vaccine that has harmed as many people.” (13) For example, Israeli data show boys and men between the ages of 16 and 24 who have been vaccinated have 25 times the rate of myocarditis (heart inflammation) than normal. (14)

(Myocarditis is also affecting teens and young adults in the U.S. Although CDC officials say no confirmed deaths have been reported, at least two deaths have been linked temporally to the vaccine. 15, 16, 17, 18, 19)

Australia — In Australia, two people have died from blood clots after taking AstraZeneca’s COVID shot. Meanwhile, only one person — an elderly woman — has died from COVID-19 this year. (20, 21)

If something goes wrong, you’re on your own

The pain and suffering these shots have already created is hard to imagine. Clearly, millions around the world have had their lives turned upside down by them. Many may not recover, physically or financially. It's really important to realize that if something goes wrong, you're largely on your own.

Before you make the decision to participate in this unprecedented health experiment, it may be wise to assess your personal insurance and financial ability to handle a serious injury, as pandemic vaccine manufacturers are indemnified against lawsuits. You cannot sue them for damages. Nor can you sue the government or anyone else.

If you are injured by a COVID shot and live in the U.S., your only recourse is to apply for compensation from the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Act (CICP), under which COVID-19 vaccines are a covered countermeasure. (22) The CICP is run by a sparsely staffed agency under the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Details and hyperlinks to benefit request forms can be found in the Congressional Research Service’s legal sidebar, “Compensation Programs for Potential COVID-19 Vaccine Injuries.” (23) You cannot apply for and will not receive compensation from the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), which covers other vaccines, including the flu vaccine.

Compensation from CICP is very limited and hard to get. In its 15-year history, it has paid out just 29 claims, fewer than 1 in 10. (24, 25, 26) You only qualify if your injury requires hospitalization and results in significant disability and/or death, and even if you meet the eligibility criteria, it requires you to use up your private health insurance before it kicks in to pay the difference.

The average CICP award is $200,000, and death cases are capped around $370,000. Meanwhile, you can easily rack up a $1 million hospital bill if you suffer a serious thrombotic event.

There’s no reimbursement for pain and suffering, only lost wages and unpaid medical bills. This means a retired person cannot qualify even if they die or end up in a wheelchair. Salary compensation is of limited duration, and capped at $50,000 a year. On top of all that, you cannot appeal the CICP’s decision. Appeals simply get reviewed by another staff member in the same office.

Can you afford a COVID shot injury?

Even if they can get it, CICP awards are likely to be a drop in the bucket for most people. The average award is $200,000, and death cases are capped at $370,376. (27) Meanwhile, you can easily rack up a $1 million hospital bill if you suffer a serious thrombotic event. (28) You must also pay for your own legal help and any professional witnesses you may need to support your claim.

In early June 2021, KRDO news reported (29) on the case of Kendra Lippy, a 38-year-old woman who had no health complaints prior to getting her Johnson & Johnson shot. Within a week, she developed headaches, abdominal pain and nausea. Her diagnosis: Severe blood clots that progressed into multiple organ failure and coma.

She had to have most of her small intestine removed and will need total parenteral nutrition for the rest of her life — a feeding method that bypasses her gastrointestinal tract. She was hospitalized for 33 days, including 22 days in the intensive care unit. She now needs occupational and physical therapy to regain basic functions like walking, writing and holding a fork.

Lippy’s hospital bill already exceeds $1 million, a sum she’ll likely never be able to pay off, and there’s no telling what kind of medical treatment she’ll need in years to come. Clearly Lippy is headed for bankruptcy, and medical bills are the most common cause in the U.S.

Additional stipulations that make payouts rare

There are also time stipulations. You must file a request for benefits within one year of the date the vaccine was administered in order to qualify. This is a serious barrier, as serious side effects can take time to develop. For example, after the 2009 swine flu pandemic, people started reporting Guillain-Barre syndrome years after getting the pandemic H1N1 vaccine. At that point, they no longer qualified. (30)

Worst of all, however, is the fact that it is now your responsibility to prove your injury was the “direct result of the countermeasure's administration based on compelling, reliable, valid, medical and scientific evidence beyond mere temporal association.”

In other words, you basically have to prove what the vaccine developer itself has yet to ascertain, seeing how you are part of their still-ongoing study! The CICP is also notoriously secretive about why claims are approved or rejected. As reported by the Insurance Journal, “it doesn’t release even the most basic details such as the kinds of sicknesses people claim they got from vaccines.” (31)

As of June 1, 2021, 1,360 Americans had sought compensation from the CICP for injuries and deaths arising from pandemic countermeasures, but only 869 were deemed eligible to file a claim. (32) None has been adjudicated. Professor Peter Meyers, a former director of the Vaccine Injury Litigation Clinic, who has referred to the CICP as a “black hole process,” (33) warns that it's a “lousy 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

He told Life Site News: (34)

“It’s a secretive, opaque program whereby some unknown officials within the Department of Health and Human Services will make decisions; we don't know how many people are adjudicating, who they are, or what the process is.”

The secrecy means there are no official statistics on the types of injuries people are filing for, or what countermeasure is said to have caused their injury. By the way, vaccines are not the only countermeasures shielded from liability. Hospital treatment errors are shielded too, and we know some hospitals routinely killed patients, whether they had confirmed COVID-19 or not, by placing them on ventilators even when they didn’t need it. (35)

Can you trust these white-collar criminals?

As mentioned, pandemic vaccine makers are shielded from financial liability. The only way you can sue is if you can prove “willful misconduct,” such as deliberate deception, fraudulent behavior or hiding relevant information. To get around this, vaccine makers may simply not look for certain problems.

The potential for infertility is a perfect example. The spike protein is suspected of having reproductive toxicity, and Pfizer's biodistribution data show it accumulates in women's ovaries. (36) Despite that, Pfizer did not perform any reproductive toxicology tests. Since they didn’t look, they can with a straight face say they “didn't know” the shot might cause reproductive failure. The thing is, they should have suspected it, and done the tests to make sure.

Already, we’re seeing signs of reproductive toxicity. Data suggest the miscarriage rate among women who get the COVID “vaccine” within the first 20 weeks of pregnancy is a whopping 82%. The normal rate is 10%, so this is no minor increase. Infertility will be far more difficult to ascertain, and could take decades. (37)

In a May 28, 2021, letter to the editor of The New England Journal of Medicine, Drs. Ira Bernstein and Sanja Jovanovic and Deann McLeod, HBSc, of Toronto, pointed this out by highlighting that preliminary safety studies published in the NEJM in April 2021 were in error by including “clinically unrecognized pregnancies” in them. (38)

They included adjusted graphs reflecting this, and asked the study’s authors to remove the erroneous data but, interestingly, their letter disappeared from the internet the last week of June, although it was still in Wayback archives as of June 27, 2021. Coincidentally, June 17, 2021, the NEJM republished the April study with no explanation as to why it was being republished and with no adjustments to the data.

Considering the criminal history of Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca, it’s hard to understand how millions of people trust these companies not to lie in order to make a buck. As reported by Life Site News: (39)

“Just three main vaccine makers, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca, have been ordered by state and federal courts to pay a combined more than $8.6 billion in fines to resolve dozens of allegations of criminal and civil misconduct.

Pfizer alone was fined $2.3 billion — the largest such settlement in history, according to the Department of Justice — for willfully defrauding and misbranding its drugs that had already been yanked from shelves for their documented dangers.

But for six whistleblowers who brought evidence forward against the company, it may have continued misbranding and selling its dangerous wares.

‘We’ve made a trade-off in America,’ said Meyers, in giving vaccine manufacturers liability protection to ensure that they will keep making vaccines that, before legal immunity, were bogged down in lawsuit litigation for side effects.

Manufacturers who make cars or ladders or other products can be sued if they are faulty. Vaccine makers have blanket liability to ensure their products are produced, government funding to produce them, ensured government orders for products, government-paid mass-marketing and mandates …

‘The tradeoff seems unfair today because the CICP program is such as flawed program,’ said Meyers, particularly when vaccine companies are raking in colossal profits (Pfizer is set to haul in $26 billion from its COVID vaccines this year and COVID vaccine manufacturing is churning out billionaires whose annual salaries are multiples of a decade of CICP payouts to dozens of people).

The CICP benefits are ‘stingy compensations,’ he added, for people who are suffering and waiting in the face of corporate greed and government opacity. Notwithstanding the drug companies’ criminal records, Meyers thinks they would be ‘crazy to risk misconduct.’ If it turned out that vaccine makers were actually hiding information on risks of COVID vaccines, he said, ‘it would be a catastrophe’.”

Are government and Big Pharma guilty of willful misconduct?

I don’t know about you, but the feeling I get when I look at the cascade of injuries and deaths occurring within days or in many cases mere hours after injection is that something is terribly amiss, and vaccine makers are sweeping it all under the rug. Isn’t that willful misconduct? Failing to perform reproductive toxicology tests after they discover that spike protein accumulates in the ovaries — isn’t that reprehensible willful misconduct?

Continuing to claim that the mRNA stays in the shoulder muscle when they have data showing it gets distributed into virtually all organs in the human body — isn’t that hiding important information? Isn’t that reprehensible willful misconduct?

I would argue that government officials are also guilty of medical maleficence. As noted by Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA and DNA vaccine core platform technology, (40) the most current version of the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) that governs these COVID shots reveals the FDA opted not to require stringent post-vaccination data collection and evaluation, even though they had the power to do so.

Again, if you don’t look for injuries, you’re unlikely to find them. If there’s no robust data collection and review process, they can say the shots are safe and shuttle them through the licensing process far more easily. The problem they’re now facing is that VAERS is getting such an overwhelming number of reports that even if they account for only 10% of actual injuries, or less, it’s absolutely unmistakable that there are serious problems.

Failing to require vaccine makers to put together a comprehensive system to capture adverse event data is a sign of incompetence at best. But that’s not all. The FDA really starts appearing deceitful when refusing to acknowledge that the VAERS reports indicate there are problems.

To call “coincidence” more than 35,000 times is simply not believable, and to dismiss the risks of permanent disability and death as being “worth it” is beyond heartless, seeing how we have safe and effective treatments and no one actually needs to gamble their health on an experimental gene therapy.

COVID shots are clearly riskier than advertised

As noted in a June 22, 2021, Wall Street Journal article, (41) while VAERS cannot tell us whether the shots were causative in any given side effect report, when you see clusters of reports that form a trend, it’s time to investigate.

Four serious adverse effects that are currently trending are thrombocytopenia (low platelet count), non-infectious myocarditis (heart inflammation), especially in those under 30, deep-vein thrombosis and death. (42)

In order for such effects to be tolerable, even if rare, the vaccine (or drug) would need to be absolutely crucial for survival. Think of a highly infectious pandemic of Ebola, for example — something where death is swift and virtually assured, and treatment, once infected, is ineffective.

None of those criteria apply to COVID-19, which has a lethality rate on par with the seasonal flu for all but the elderly and those most frail. The vaccine would also need to be an actual vaccine — something that provides immunity. COVID-19 gene therapy injections don't do that either.

Overall, it’s clear that deaths and injuries from these shots are being swept under the rug, and we cannot allow that to continue. We must keep pushing for transparency, honesty and accountability.

Remember, mark your calendar to view my groundbreaking interview with Dr. Vladimir Zelenko this Sunday, which is only three days away. We will review protocols you can use to protect you and your family or those that you love who now regret getting the COVID jab.

Reprinted with permission from Mercola


  coronavirus vaccines, covid-19 vaccine, mercola, vaccine deaths, vaccine side effects, vaers

Blogs

Winnipeg man accused of murdering toddler after failing to abort her

His daughter did not magically become a person when she passed through the birth canal, as Canadian law ludicrously holds. She was a person then, and he tried to kill her. When she made it out of the womb alive, he tried again — and is now being tried for murder.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 7:15 pm EST
Featured Image
3-year-old Winnipeg girl killed after her father tried to abort her GoFundMe
Jonathon Van Maren Jonathon Van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon Van Maren

July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – In Canada, abortion is discussed in two primary ways. First, Liberals use the abortion issue to accuse Conservatives of having a hidden pro-life agenda to split the Conservative base. This happens, inevitably, during every single election. Concurrently, the Canadian media insists that when Conservatives lose elections, it is because they are too anti-abortion and are thus “scaring” the voting population. No evidence of this is ever provided, and this assertion can be used even when the Conservatives have a proudly pro-abortion leader like Erin O’Toole.

In fact, abortion at home and abroad has, under the Justin Trudeau government, become a fundamental part of the Canadian identity. Stephen Harper had his maternal care initiatives overseas; Justin Trudeau sends tens of millions of tax dollars to abort babies in developing nations (including those nations where abortion is still illegal). When abortion is brought up, it is as a wonderful aspect of women’s healthcare that everyone has a God-given right to.

This means that even popular pro-life legislation commanding support from a broad swathe of the public is condemned as an attack on “reproductive freedom.” Two bills from Saskatchewan MP Cathay Wagantall, for example, were used as evidence by the Liberals that the Conservative Party was “anti-choice.” One of these bills involved instituting criminal penalties for men who murder pregnant women or assault them so that their pre-born child dies, and the other was a ban on gender-selection abortion. Even these common-sense initiatives were deemed dangerous.  

So it is interesting to hear the silence when a story emerges that proves how abortion is not only a violent act that takes the life of a child — it is often a weapon used by deadbeat parents who wish to rid themselves of the responsibility of a child. For example, there is the horrifying case of a Winnipeg man who is accused of abducting and stabbing his toddler daughter to death.  

As it turns out, the stabbing was not this father’s first attempt on his daughter’s life. The CBC — a very pro-abortion media outlet — obtained court records that revealed the man assaulted the child’s mother during her pregnancy, hoping that the baby would die as a result. He also tried to force her to drink “a poison of some sort, a liquid … He put his hands against me and forced it into my face and I realized that [was] what his intention was … he wanted me to smell it so it would actually kill the baby. He wasn’t listening to me. I told him no, but he forced it on me.”

In fact, the first thing the man said when he discovered that she was pregnant was that she needed to get an abortion. “That was the first thing he said. He said he didn’t want to have anything to do with it and then he thought, yes, he wanted to abort the baby and he started to plan and I had told him, no, I don’t want to. But he said he wants to — he was going to force me to, and then he tried to. Frank said his only goal was to abort the baby.” At one point, he asked her to “remove the baby.”

This, it must be pointed out, is precisely the sort of thing Cathay Wagantall’s legislation sought to address.  

Even the media, when covering this story, recognizes that the alleged killer’s attempt to have the baby aborted is relevant to his murder of the toddler. That is for the simple reason that the pre-born baby and the toddler were the same person — his daughter.

His daughter did not magically become a person when she passed through the birth canal, as Canadian law ludicrously holds. She was a person then, and he tried to kill her. When she made it out of the womb alive, he tried again — and is now being tried for murder. Same girl — different location. If she’d been dismembered in the womb, it would have been a wonderful “choice” celebrated by Justin Trudeau and his colleagues, even if she was aborted just because she was a girl. But because her father killed her later, he will likely go to prison.

— 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

This awful story reminds me of a case from 2005, when a young Canadian woman strangled her newborn baby boy to death and threw his body over the fence into her neighbor’s yard. In 2011, her murder conviction was “downgraded” to infanticide, and she was given a suspended sentence — because the Edmonton judge said Canada’s pro-abortion ideology made her deed understandable. “While many Canadians undoubtedly view abortion as a less than ideal solution to unprotected sex and unwanted pregnancy,” the judge wrote, “they generally understand, accept, and sympathize with the onerous demands pregnancy and childbirth exact from mothers, especially mothers without support.”

In other words, by strangling her son this young woman had merely performed a very late-term abortion. So did the Winnipeg father who allegedly murdered his toddler. Canada accepts that parents can kill their children and lays out the framework for when they can do that. But occasionally, Canadian judges sympathize with those who kill their children a tad too late. Perhaps, if the Winnipeg man gets the right judge with the right views on abortion, he too will find mercy where his child found none.


  abortion, canada, cathay wagantall, erin o'toole, justin trudeau, winnipeg

Blogs

The January 6 ‘insurrection’ narrative debunked

LifeSite journalist Patrick Delaney has done an in-depth and explosive report into the events surrounding the events of January 6.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 5:35 pm EST
Featured Image
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The most incredible part of the entire “January 6 was an insurrection” narrative has been how it’s led to severe persecution of conservatives and pro-freedom Americans. LifeSite journalist Patrick Delaney has done an in-depth and explosive report into the Capitol riot, including the players involved, such as governmental agencies and Trump-supporting citizens, the latter of whom continue to be targeted for so-called domestic terrorism.

I brought Patrick on The John-Henry Westen Show today to discuss and analyze this story and to debunk the false “insurrection” angle pushed by the mainstream media, which he said has been used “as a justification for ever more intrusive infringements upon civil liberties.”

Patrick told me how the “Stop the Steal” rally on January 6, 2021 in Washington, D.C. was peaceful and prayerful. But, according to eyewitnesses on the ground, it was infiltrated by agent provocateurs dressed in “militant-like” clothing to instigate conflict. However, he noted how this element “was very much a minority of the crowd.”

He further said that these people were part of a “prearranged plan to storm the Capitol building and to manipulate the unsuspecting crowd as cover and as a ‘follow on force’ into the Capitol.” He stated that prior to the event and on the day of, police failed to secure the Capitol in advance. Video even shows them letting people enter the building.

But despite this, a furious campaign against the Trump supporters who innocently walked into the Capitol has been launched for months. Patrick highlighted exactly how these freedom-loving patriots have been treated, and said that “they are being tortured for their political beliefs.”

He mentions that it’s very possible that among these agent provocateurs were FBI operatives. In fact, the FBI actually suggested they knew, prior to January 6, that a “planned attack” would happen.

“It's been documented how the FBI uses entrapment and often encourages sort of hapless, often maybe even mentally deranged people to commit crimes, and then they swoop in, and they ‘save’ everybody from terrorism,” he said.

Our conversation concluded with Patrick calling on people to seek spiritual help and guidance. “We need to pray and we need to work together and ask the Lord's protection and the Holy Spirit’s guidance in how to engage [with] these serious injustices that are happening.”

I highly recommend you read Patrick Delaney’s analysis in full here.

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.


  capitol police, capitol riots, fbi, insurrection, jan. 6 capitol protest, january 6, january 6 riot, john-henry westen, john-henry westen show, patrick delaney, stop the steal, the john-henry westen show

Blogs

Bishop Schneider: Suppression of Summorum Pontificum would be an ‘abuse of power’

The auxiliary bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan discussed what would happen if the Vatican moved to restrict the Traditional Latin Mass. Commenting on the situation of the SSPX – and whether priests might seek to join the SSPX should the Old Mass be restricted – Schneider said it is ‘difficult' to say that SSPX priests 'are outside the church or are schismatic when they possess the ordinary faculties of Confession given by the Pope himself.’
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 5:09 pm EST
Featured Image
Bishop Athanasius Schneider during a 2016 traditional Latin Mass. Claire Chretien / LifeSiteNews
Maike Hickson Maike Hickson Follow Maike
By Maike Hickson

July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Bishop Athanasius Schneider, in a new radio interview, has commented on the rumors that Pope Benedict's motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, which freed the Traditional Latin Mass, might be soon altered so as to limit the use of this rite. The prelate thinks that such a move would be an “abuse of power” and a “great damage to the life of the Church.” Should it come, priests “can continue to celebrate this Mass because it is the Mass of the entire Church and the faithful have a right [to] what's holy.” Schneider also thinks that the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) is “not outside the Church,” that one can go there for the Sacraments, and that, in case Rome would insist other traditional priests concelebrate the Novus Ordo, some of these priests might actually join the SSPX.

Speaking on radio with Joe McClane of Catholic Drive Time, Bishop Schneider, the auxiliary bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan, first discussed the matter of Summorum Pontificum. As LifeSite has reported, there are numerous rumors that the Pope is planning to restrict the use of the Traditional Latin Mass. Catholic author Dr. Taylor Marshall thinks that the Pope could do so by insisting that all traditional priests occasionally concelebrate with their diocesan bishop and priest in a Novus Ordo Mass. The traditional Catholic blog Rorate Caeli reported that a document modifying Summorum Pontificum might come as early as this Friday. The French national newspaper Le Figaro also had a report saying that the document has already been signed and is awaiting publication.

When asked about this possible development, Bishop Schneider stated that “it would be a great damage for the life of the Church.” He insisted that “the traditional liturgy is a treasure of the entire Church, not only of the present day, but also of the Church of the past centuries.”

“It is a treasure of the saints; almost all the saints we know grew up in this form of the liturgy,” the prelate added. To limit the use of the traditional rite, Bishop Schneider insisted, is “an abuse of power.”

Speaking about such “a possible hypothetical situation, if it will really happen,” Schneider expounded, then priests “can continue to celebrate this Mass because it is the Mass of the entire Church and the faithful have a right [to] what's holy.” He thinks that the priests and “especially the young people” will not allow themselves “to be deprived of this great treasure of faith, of spirituality.”

When asked by his radio host Joe McClane whether Rome can “force traditional priests to say the New Mass,” Bishop Schneider responded by saying that the Vatican would have the “right” to do so, but “I think it would be a violation of the spirituality.” To force these priests to celebrate the New Mass (the Novus Ordo), Schneider went on to say, would be a “violation, kind of spiritual, of their rights, which the Church gave them.”

Many traditional priests were ordained in the traditional rite, and they grew up in it, noted Schneider. He reminded his audience that when priests are ordained in a certain rite – for example, an Eastern Catholic rite –they cannot be forced to offer Mass in another rite. Stated the bishop:

The Church cannot force someone from another rite, for example, to celebrate another rite. And these two forms of the…Mass, the Novus Ordo and the traditional one, are really [different] when we are honest. They are two different rites, not only forms, because this is, it's a difference, a very great difference. And so I think they should not be forced to do this.

Commenting on the possibility that traditional priests would be forced to celebrate a Novus Ordo Mass – for the sake of “unity,” as some would say – and that some priests, for example of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), might refuse to do so, Bishop Schneider was not sure what the Vatican would then do. But he insisted that concelebration in one rite was “never a requirement” as “a sign of unity.”

“The concelebration was never a requirement in the entire history of the Church as a sign of unity with the local bishop or with the pope,” he said.

Here, he referred to clergy from the Eastern rite churches, whose priests “when uniting themselves with Rome in the past centuries,” were not asked to concelebrate with the Holy Father.

‘Let us pray first that the Holy Spirit will illuminate the Pope not to limit the motu proprio of Pope Benedict and also that the Society of Saint Pius X can receive a fuller recognition from the Church.’

Bishop Schneider also explained that concelebration was very limited in the past 1,500 years and “forbidden by the old canon law.” For priests, there was only case of concelebration: at their own priestly ordination, they would then concelebrate with their bishops. Such an obligation to concelebrate, he continued, “will contradict the entire history of the Church.” Therefore, “it would be an abuse of power for force a priest to concelebrate.”

Unfortunately, as Bishop Schneider expounded, it is not possible for those priests who would refuse to concelebrate and receive penalties, to appeal against the penalties, because there can “never be an appeal against the Vatican.”

Radio host McClane then raised the question of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), admitting that “there are a lot of myths and misconceptions about what the average layperson thinks and knows about the SSPX.” He asked Bishop Schneider to comment on the canonical status of the SSPX, since the bishop was a member of the visitation of the SSPX that the Vatican had undertaken under Pope Francis in 2015, thus having been able to receive “incredible insight into this.” The speaker admitted to having had “false information for the longest time.”

“The Society of Saint Pius X,” Schneider responded, “was founded by Marcel Lefebvre, a very holy man, I think, a man of God, who had a lot of merits in a difficult time of the Church, even during the Council and after the Council.”

Founded 50 years ago in Switzerland with the approval of the local bishop and of the Vatican, the SSPX later came “into conflict with the Vatican” over some criticism of the statements of the Second Vatican Council. They also wanted to celebrate exclusively the traditional Latin Mass, Schneider explained. Then “mistrust” grew between the SSPX and the Vatican when the Pope would not approve of their proposed four candidates for the episcopal consecrations. It was then clear to Lefebvre, Schneider continued, that the Holy See would not “approve” a future SSPX, with its “constructive” criticisms of some “expressions of Vatican II.”

The 1988 consecrations of four of their own bishops then led to the excommunication of Lefebvre and his four bishops (next to Bishop de Castro Mayer who had been present at the consecrations).

Under Pope Benedict XVI, however, “there were made two very important steps to normalize the situation,” Schneider went on to say. In 2007, “Pope Benedict issued a Summorum Pontificum, giving the freedom to the priests to celebrate this Mass; in some way he re-established the rite of the traditional Mass of the Church, which was always one of the main demands of Archbishop Lefebvre and the Society of Pius X.”  

Two years later, Bishop Schneider continued, Pope Benedict removed the excommunication of the four bishops. However, this still left some canonical problems open. It was under Pope Francis that “two other important steps” were taken, according to the Kazakh prelate. Pope Francis granted SSPX priests faculties to hear Confessions, extended “all over the world.”

“That was very generous,” Bishop Schneider commented, and then continued:

It's difficult to say that these priests are outside the church or are schismatic when they possess the ordinary faculties of Confession given by the Pope himself. And then the pope authorized the bishops of the parish priests to grant the priests of SSPX the faculties to assist canonically at marriages, matrimonies.

The German prelate went on to explain that there are now, next to these two steps, several bishops in the world who already gave a general faculty to SSPX priests to assist witness marriages in their respective dioceses, in addition to telling the faithful who attend such SSPX marriages that to assist at these Masses is licit.

Comments the bishop: “So we see there is a situation which is always closer to a canonical normalization and this is good. We have to be happy that this situation can be resolved and the SSPX can be present and operate inside the Church for the benefit of the Church, for the renewal of the Church” for the sake of preserving “the tradition of the faith, in the liturgy, and the spiritual life, because basically, actually the SSPX does no other thing as the Church believed, as the Church worshiped, as the Church lived, until the Council, all these centuries.”

Bishop Schneider concluded that “we have to hope they [the SSPX] will get the full recognition. I hope soon, it would be good. And then the SSPX will be a normal reality as other realities inside the Church. It is necessary for our time in this crisis, in these times of darkness and confusion.” According to the prelate, it is necessary that the Church be enriched by such communities as the SSPX, “priests and laypeople who simply keep the faith of all ages, the Mass of all ages, and this they will do, the priests and faithful of the SSPX.”

Asked by the radio host as to whether it is licit to attend SSPX chapels, Bishop Schneider answered that if there are no other possibilities, “of course, because they can confess licitly,” one can “go to the [Sacrament of] Confession with the approval of the pope. And the same priest who gave them…absolution – it would be strange that they cannot assist at his Mass.”

He went on to say that “the Sacraments, the Holy Mass are given for the salvation of souls, for the benefit of the souls. I think that when it is difficult for the normal Catholics to reach the Traditional Mass and there is a possibility closer to the Society of St. Pius X, they can go there or to get a good catechism for the children or young people. Therefore, I think since they are not outside the Church – in spite of some unresolved canonical problems, it seems to me that it is licit that laypeople can goto SSPX Masses.

Speaking of a situation in which Summorum Pontificum were to be suppressed or limited and traditional priests were asked to celebrate the Novus Ordo Mass, the radio host also asked, “if that were to happen and God forbid, but if that were to happen, how would that affect the SSPX? Would those priests also be asked to celebrate the Novus Ordo? Would they do that?

Bishop Schneider, in his final answer, responded by saying:

I think not [that they will be asked to celebrate the Novus Ordo Mass], and even if they will be asked, they will not do this because they are not yet under complete submission to the Holy See. Therefore they will not be forced, I think. And in this case, I think, if the other priests of the Fraternity of St. Peter and others will be forced to concelebrate the New Mass, I think that there will be priests who will join the Society of Saint Pius X because they have, in this case, some more independence to keep the tradition of the Church. But I hope that it will not happen. Let us pray first that the Holy Spirit will illuminate the Pope not to limit the motu proprio of Pope Benedict and also that the Society of Saint Pius X can receive a fuller recognition from the Church.

As one senior Vatican source told LifeSite with regard to the possible restriction of Summorum Pontificum, this probable approach of canceling or limiting the traditional Mass is being done over the heads of the faithful concerned. He stated:

The rumors about Summorum Pontificum are not only about the matter of the rite itself, but about the dictatorial way of deciding (quite antisynodally) over the heads of the people concerned, treating them like little defiant children who are forced by force to follow the (supposedly) better insight of their parents, or like recruits in a Prussian barracks yard drilled by an obdurate sergeant without any sense or reason.

It is important to point out, even before the publication of the dictate, the totally impossible way in which the Fratelli tutti ideologues tend to behave. Others are defamed as rigid in order to make plausible against them a rigorous action before the world that contradicts all the principles of Christian fraternity and the so often quoted “tenderness.”

Wounds are constantly being reopened and trouble spots opened that are in opposition to St. Peter's service to the unity of the whole Church in faith and fidelity to the revealed truth.


  catholic, society of st. pius x, sspx, sspx marriage, summorum pontificum

Blogs

Netflix star dons latest LGBT fashion trend to promote gender confusion in young girls

The reality of Emma Corrin's transgender hinting photo shoot is not beautiful, but actually a celebration of self-hatred and self-harm, which will fuel the transgender craze.
Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 11:14 am EST
Featured Image
Corrin at a 2019 premiere, Los Angeles. DFree/Shutterstock
Jonathon Van Maren Jonathon Van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon Van Maren

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

July 14, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – When Netflix drama The Crown makes the news, it’s usually because something has happened with the actual Royal Family. Prince Phillip’s death, for example, or the ongoing American soap opera with Harry and Meghan. But earlier this month, the show went viral for an entirely different reason: Emma Corrin, who plays Princess Diana, posted a photograph of herself to Instagram wearing a “breast binder.”

For those of you who aren’t aware of this phenomenon, breast binders are chest wraps used by girls seeking to present as male to flatten their breasts and hide their busts. As the number of girls identifying as boys skyrockets across the West, breast binders are now the subject of scores of viral transgender how-to YouTube videos and tutorials. Getting a breast binder is an experience often shared on social media, and start-up companies have begun providing them. Girls frequently order these chest wraps without the knowledge of their parents.

Emma Corrin, interestingly, has never identified as transgender. She attended a Catholic school in the U.K. growing up, but nonetheless came out some time ago as “queer” and stating that her pronouns were “she/they.” All of this is vague, as “queer” has no specific meaning and adding the non-binary “they” to “she” accomplishes nothing (although woke journalists scrambled to butcher their copy by referring to her as “they,” despite the fact that she also still identifies as a “she,” if you’re tracking with me.) Despite that, the actress had photographer David-Simon Dayain photograph with her chest bound with boxing wrap and dressed in designer shorts.

“[S]ome time before I bought my first proper binder, messing around with @sirdavidsimon, we used boxing wrap, thanks for capturing this with me, very intimate, very new, very cool,” she wrote under the picture. “It’s all a journey right. Lots of twist and turns and change and that’s ok! Embrace it. Bind safely, find what works for you-I use binders from @gc2b and @spectrumoutfitters is great too.”

The two companies Corrin refers to are outfits oriented towards people identifying as transgender, and they were no doubt glad for the boost. Corrin’s post has 178,130 likes and thousands of comments. The blue check brigade was out in affirming force to celebrate her choice, while others asked why she was promoting self-hatred of her body to her legions of young female fans.

It is a good point. Chest binders, as you might suspect, are dangerous. It is unhealthy and damaging to chest-bind (one is reminded of foot-binding in China years ago), and the physical effects can be permanent. Breast binders often cause back pain, shoulder pain, chest pain, shortness of breath, and even fractured ribs. Abigail Shrier, who documented her years of research into the issue in her essential book Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters, noted that breast binders can “permanently damage tissue, leaving breasts looking like deflated balloons, flat and wrinkled.”

— 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 reality is a far cry from the artsy black-and-white shot of Corrin with her head thrown back and a blissful expression on her face. Corrin and the photographer want us to believe that breast-binding is beautiful, but self-hatred and self-harm should not be celebrated or promoted. Corrin’s “first breast-binder” photo, unfortunately, will torque the transgender craze and assist in the normalization of the medicalization of childhood, adolescence and adulthood. For many girls considering taking this step, a faux-sexy celebrity photo shoot will go a long way towards convincing them that this is a safe and normal step to take.

Transgender “treatments” have entered the mainstream. Protect your families. This is going to get much worse before it gets better.


  emma corrin, lgbt ideology, netflix, transgenderism

Featured Image

Episodes Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 3:59 pm EST

‘Don’t take the vaccine no matter what:’ How the COVID injection is controlling humanity

By Mother Miriam
By

In today's episode, Mother Miriam points out the dangers of the coronavirus vaccines, and urges listeners to refuse them.

 

To help keep this and other programs on the air, please donate: https://give.lifesitenews.com/sustainlife?utm_source=mml_071421

 

You can tune in daily at 10 am EST/7 am PST on our Facebook Page: http://FB.com/mothermiriamlive

 

Subscribe to Mother Miriam Live at: http://bit.ly/submml


Featured Image

Episodes Wed Jul 14, 2021 - 10:41 am EST

‘God is faithful’: Doug’s powerful story from gay lifestyle to pro-family fighter

By LifeSiteNews.com
By LSN

  doug mainwaring, ladies of lifesite, lifesite, lifesitenews


“As promised, God is faithful.”

In this week's episode, Rebekah and Clare are joined by Doug Mainwaring, LifeSite’s US Bureau Chief. 

Doug talks about his very interesting life and the road back to his faith. He delves deep into his life on the fast lane- from flying first class all over the world, hanging with celebrities and the DC elite, and living a homosexual lifestyle-to now working endlessly defending truth, marriage, and the family.

Doug also gives us a commentary on what feels like a losing battle on the LGBTQ+ agenda. 

Please remember to take our survey to let us know what you want to hear! It takes less than 5 minutes. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/KLV3H7R

Click here to receive email updates from the Ladies. We promise not to spam. Just friends spreading some love your way. http://eepurl.com/hr7i_X

Please feel free to reach out to us anytime at [email protected]. If you’d like to reach Doug or any of our other guests, please use the same email address and we will be glad to pass it on to them. 

Until next week. 

Lots of love,

The Ladies