Hilary White, Rome Correspondent

News,

Roundup: Brits don’t want to fund abortion with taxes, Bulgaria attacks parental rights…more

Hilary White, Rome Correspondent

Lithuania considers constitutional amendment supporting natural family

VILNIUS - The Lithuanian parliament is considering amending the country’s constitution to confirm the definition of the family as based on marriage or parenthood. After a debate in April, 62 MPs voted yes, 13 voted against, and 13 abstained. Another vote is scheduled for this month, after which a break of 3 months is required to make constitutional changes.

The vote came shortly after the house voted down a proposal from the Social Democrat party to recognise more than one type of family.

Lithuania has been under constant fire from European-based homosexualist groups since 2009 when parliament passed a law making it illegal to promote homosexuality as normal. The European Union, under pressure from organisations like the International lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA-Europe) has demanded that Lithuanians accept homosexuality, including “gay pride” demonstrations.

The country annoyed homosexualist activists again in 2011 when the government considered a law banning “gender reassignment” surgery.

~ * ~

Parents have responsibilities but no rights: Bulgaria

SOPHIA – The Christian Post reports that Bulgaria’s government is instituting new family law asserting that while parents have responsibilities towards their children, they have no rights to make educational decisions.

Viktor Kostov, a Bulgarian lawyer and human rights activist, reports that Bulgarian MPs have stated that “parents have only duties, no rights” and “do not hide their negative attitude to the ‘patriarchal family’.” Kostov has called the bill “dangerous and unnecessary” and a hold-over from Bulgaria’s communist, totalitarian past.

“Under the guise of ‘children’s rights,’ the bill contains a radical view of the state having more rights over children than their parents,” Kostov writes.

Among the bill’s provisions is one that allows the state to “protect” any child from “being involved in religious activities”. Parents who do not enroll their children in state schools could be subject to heavy fines. Mandatory sex education, without the right of parents to withdraw their children, will start at age five. The sex education programs will be decided by the state in conjunction with European NGOs.

Under the bill, reporting to authorities any “violence” against children is mandated, but the offence is broadly defined as the “causing of any pain or suffering” and can result in prison terms for parents. The bill also allows for anonymous reports of violence, leaving room for parents to be denounced to the state by anyone.

A statement by a Bulgarian representative of UNICEF, Kostov wrote, sums up the philosophy behind the bill: “We are not against the family; we simply want to give the children to those who can raise them.”

Kostov has worked in Bulgaria promoting religious and conscientious freedom as an advocate and Christian missionary. He is the founding editor of Freedom for All, an internet magazine for “dialogue on the issues of church, state and liberty for the Bulgarian context.”

He warns that should the bill pass, it could be used by state ideologues to quash the religious and political rights of citizens by threatening their custody over their children. Freedom for All Advocates, the Alliance Defense Fund, and the Home School Legal Defense Association have intervened in the debate over the bill, warning that similar measures in other EU countries have resulted in the state having near-total control over families and children.

Homeschooling families, parents who object to state-mandated sex education programs and families with strong religious beliefs have been forced to flee to the US and other countries from Germany and Sweden.

~ * ~

Majority of Brits don’t want abortion paid for on the public dime

LONDON – A recently published Angus Reid poll showed that 57 percent believe the National Health Service should only fund abortions in the case of medical emergencies. Forty-eight percent support reducing the gestational time limit on legal abortion to less than 24 weeks. Only 33 percent believe that there should be no restrictions.

Forty-two per cent of 2,018 randomly selected British adults said there is “no point in re-opening the debate on abortion; 40 percent thought a public debate in the UK is “long overdue”.

When asked about their personal feeling on abortion, 35 percent want more restrictions; 21 percent would permit abortion only in cases of rape, incest and to save the woman’s life and 5 percent would allow it only to save the woman’s life.

Government statistics show that nearly all of the abortions carried out in Britain are for “social or economic” grounds, with the use of so-called “medical abortion,” that is, abortions using deadly drugs to kill the child and induce premature labor, becoming increasingly popular. The majority of abortions are carried out in private facilities, run by groups like the British Pregnancy Advisory Service and Marie Stopes, who contract with the NHS. If the NHS were to cease funding all “social” abortions, these organizations would lose millions in annual revenue.

In 1991, an effort to reduce the gestational time limit for abortions from 28 to 24 weeks was successful, but the votes were bought at the price of allowing all eugenic abortion without any time restrictions. Under the current law, a child suspected of having a disability, including easily treatable problems like a cleft palate or clubfoot, can be killed up to the point of full-term gestation.

~ * ~

Scots police ordered by homosexual police group to refuse Gideon bible gift

EDINBURGH – Scottish Police have been instructed, on the insistence of the Gay Police Association (GPA), to refuse the proffered gift of free bibles featuring the badge of the force, being offered by the Gideons International. The GPA issued a statement saying that the bible is “homophobic” and demanding that the police not involve themselves in the scheme.

The Gideons wanted to offer the Bibles as a “valuable guide to life,” saying they can “be offered to all members of the individual force, both serving police officers and civilian staff,” the Christian institute says.

The statement from the GPA said that their members had “contacted us expressing concern that their Force is officially endorsing a religious book containing text which condemns homosexuality.”

“The GPA does not feel that a public service, such as the police, should be seen to be endorsing, by their active involvement, any particular religion over and above any other religion or non-religion.”

If the Bibles were to be offered, “surely this can be done without the actual involvement of the police force concerned”.



Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon

Blogs,

Please, enough with the cult of pop stars. Our kids need real heroes.

Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon

April 29, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – Two things happen each time a significant pop culture figure dies: Christians attempt to dredge up some moderately conservative or traditional thing that figure said at some point during his long career, and mainstream media attempts to convince a society thoroughly bored with such things that the person in question was a ground-breaking radical. The two most recent examples are the androgynous David Bowie—a cringe-worthy and possibly blasphemous video of him dropping to his knees during a rock performance and uttering the Lord’s Prayer circulated just following his death--and the pop star Prince.

I’ve had to suppress my gag reflexes many times as I saw my Facebook newsfeed fill up with memes sporting quotes from Prince about his faith and articles announcing that the musician who “embraced gender fluidity before his time,” according to Slate and “will always be a gay icon” according to The Atlantic, was against gay marriage. Sure, maybe he was. But only a Christian community so shell-shocked by the rapid spread of the rainbow blitzkrieg and the catastrophic erosion of religious liberty would find this remarkable. After all, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton said the same thing barely one election cycle ago. As one obituary celebrating Prince’s paradigm-smashing sexual performances written by Dodai Stewart put it:

Dig, if you will, a picture: The year is 1980. Many states still have sodomy laws. The radio is playing feel-good ear candy like Captain and Tennille and KC and the Sunshine Band. TV hits include the sunny, toothy blond shows Three’s Company and Happy Days. There’s no real word for “gender non-conforming.” But here’s what you see: A man. Clearly a man. Hairy, mostly naked body…a satiny bikini bottom. But those eyes. Rimmed in black, like a fantasy belly dancer. The full, pouty lips of a pin-up girl. Long hair. A tiny, svelte thing. Ethnically ambiguous, radiating lust. What is this? A man. Clearly a man. No. Not just a man. A Prince.

Right. So let’s not get too carried away, shall we? I know Christians are desperate to justify their addictions to the pop culture trash that did so much to sweep away Christian values in the first place and I know that latching on to the occasional stray conservative belief that may manifest itself in pop culture figures makes many feel as if perhaps we are not so weird and countercultural, but this bad habit we have of claiming these figures upon their passing is downright damaging.

After all, parents should be teaching their children about real heroes, titans of the faith who changed the world. Heroes of the early church who stood down tyrants, halted gladiatorial combat, and crusaded against injustice in a world where death was all the rage. These men and women were real rebels who stood for real values. If we want to point our children to people they should emulate, we should be handing them books like Seven Men: And the Secret of Their Greatness by the brilliant writer Eric Metaxas rather than the pop albums Purple Rain or Lovesexy by Prince. If parents spend their time glorifying the predecessors of Lady Gaga and Miley Cyrus instead of highlighting heroes like William Wilberforce, they can hardly be surprised when their children choose to emulate the former rather than the latter.

The mainstream media’s adulation of these pop stars is equally irritating. The unspoken truth of these obituaries is that the flamboyant antics of Prince and the rest of the so-called rebellious drag queens populating the rock n’ roll scene have been mainstream for a long time already. Want to see dozens of bizarre body piercings? Weird hairdos? Purple mohawks? Dudes with nail polish? Strange tattoos? Easy. Just go onto any university campus, or any public high school without a dress code. With headphones wedged firmly in their ear canals, they can pump the cleverly commercialized “counterculture” straight into their skulls 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

More than that, some of these courageous rebels have actually sued their employers to ensure that they can let their establishment-smashing freak flag fly at work, too. An Edmonton woman with 22 visible body piercings complained that her employer was unfair because apparently she was being discriminated against “based on body modifications.” Yeah! The Man must be told, after all. And if he doesn’t agree, we will lawyer up. I wonder what the shrieking rebels of the early days would think about the snivelling children of the current grievance culture.

So these days, the media’s eulogizing about aging culture warriors who went mainstream a long time ago rings a bit hollow. After all, most rock n’ roll stars these days look tame compared to what shows up in the children’s section at Pride Week. Freaky is normal now. Normal is radical. Welcome to 2016.

When Christians are posting nostalgic tributes to the rebels who helped inoculate their children against the radical views of Christianity in the first place, you know that the victories of the counterculture are complete and Stockholm syndrome has set in.



Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Paul McKinnon / Shutterstock.com
Claire Chretien Claire Chretien

News,

Target boycott climbs to over 1 million

Claire Chretien Claire Chretien

April 29, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – Over 1 million people have signed a pledge to boycott Target over its new policy allowing men to access women’s bathrooms. 

The American Family Association’s Boycott Target petition gained traction immediately, reaching the one million mark in only nine days.

“Corporate America must stop bullying people who disagree with the radical left agenda to remake society into their progressive image,” said AFA President Tim Wildmon. “#BoycottTarget has resonated with Americans.  Target’s harmful policy poses a danger to women and children; nearly everyone has a mother, wife, daughter or friend who is put in jeopardy by this policy.  Predators and voyeurs would take advantage of the policy to prey on those who are vulnerable.  And it’s clear now that over one million customers agree.”

Target defended its policy in a statement saying that it believes everyone “deserves to be protected from discrimination, and treated equally” and earlier this week, a Target spokeswoman defended the policy as “inclusive.” 

The AFA said that unisex bathrooms are a common-sense alternative to allowing men unfettered access to women’s bathrooms.

“Target should keep separate facilities for men and women, but for the trans community and for those who simply like using the bathroom alone, a single occupancy unisex option should be provided,” the petition says. 

The AFA warned that Target’s new policy benefits sexual predators and poses a danger to women and children. 

“With Target publicly boasting that men can enter women's bathrooms, where do you think predators are going to go?” the petition asked. 

There have been numerous instances of predatory men accessing women’s bathrooms and intimate facilities in the wake of “transgender” bathroom policies allowing them to do so. 

“We want to make it very clear that AFA does not believe the transgender community poses this danger to the wider public,” said Wildmon. “Rather, this misguided and reckless policy provides a possible gateway for predators who are out there.”



Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

News,

Amazing new video captures the flash of light the moment life begins

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

CHICAGO, April 29, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – Life begins with a spark – literally.

Researchers at Northwestern University have documented the striking event in a new video that accompanies a study published this week.

At the moment of conception, the egg releases massive amounts of zinc, which creates a spark that can be seen with the aid of a microscope.

“It was remarkable,” said Teresa Woodruff, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Northwestern University's medical school. “To see the zinc radiate out in a burst from each human egg was breathtaking.”

The research team had noted the zinc sparks before in mice eggs but had never observed the process in human beings.

“All of biology starts at the time of fertilization,” Woodruff said, “yet we know next to nothing about the events that occur in the human.”

One of the researchers, Northwestern chemistry professor Thomas O'Halloran, explained the science behind the process in 2014.

“The egg first has to stockpile zinc and then must release some of the zinc to successfully navigate maturation, fertilization and the start of embryogenesis,” he said. “On cue, at the time of fertilization, we see the egg release thousands of packages, each dumping a million zinc atoms, and then it's quiet.”

“Each egg has four or five of these periodic sparks,” O'Halloran said. “It is beautiful to see, orchestrated much like a symphony.”

Since the amount of zinc in an egg correlates with successful implantation and birth, the Northwestern researchers are highlighting that their research may be used to assist in vitro fertilization.

But that raises concerns given the grave moral issues with IVF, which involves creating numerous embryos that are either killed or frozen. Moral theologians also emphasize that IVF is an injustice even for the children who are born as a result, as they are created in a lab rather than in the union of man and woman.

The study may have far-reaching consequences the research team did not intend, such as strengthening public belief in the longstanding scientific consensus that life begins at the moment of conception/fertilization.

Many of those who saw the Northwestern video said it testifies to the beauty of life and the shallow lies that buttress the argument of abortion-on-demand.

“I saw this, and I was blown away by it,” said Rush Limbaugh on his nationally syndicated radio program Thursday afternoon. “For anybody in the mainstream media to openly admit that life begins at conception” defies arguments that an unborn child is only “tissue mass.”

Researchers released a separate video of the zinc spark taking place in a mammalian egg more than a year ago:

The paper, which is entitled “The Zinc Spark is an Inorganic Signature of Human Egg Activation,” was published by Scientific Reports on April 26.



Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook