Although he admits it “sounds blatantly authoritarian” and “violates just about every core value we possess in a free society,” a noted transhumanist author has said a world government body should forcibly sterilize anyone “deemed unworthy” of parenthood by using implanted microchips.

Constitutional attorney and civil liberties expert John W. Whitehead, founder of The Rutherford Institute, warned LifeSiteNews earlier this year that political officials would long to use this seminal technology.

In an article for Wired.com today, philosopher Zoltan Istvan wrote that the notion first crossed his mind when he heard a blonde nurse say, “with 10,000 kids dying everyday around the world from starvation, you'd think we'd put birth control in the water.”

After careful thought, in an effort to “give hundreds of millions of future kids a better life, I cautiously endorse the idea of licensing parents,” Istvan wrote today.

The process, he said, “would be little different than getting a driver's license.” Parents must “pass a series of basic tests” in order to “get the green light to get pregnant and raise children.”

“Those applicants who are deemed unworthy” for a variety of reasons – he lists homelessness, criminal history, and poverty among his examples – “would not be allowed until they could demonstrate they were suitable parents.”

However, he questions how far governments would go to enforce its birth control mandate. “Would governments force abortion upon mothers if they were found to be pregnant without permission?” he asked, saying the idea seems “unimaginable in most societies around the world.”

Istvan writes that he finds “near-term hope” in a contraceptive technology funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a remote-controlled injectable microchip that could effectively sterilize someone for up to 16 years.

“The implanted microchip lasts for up to 16 years -- three times current implantable devices, including IUDs -- and can deliver hormones into the body via an on-off switch on your mobile phone,” he wrote. “It's not a huge jump to imagine governments seeing opportunity in using this.”

However, due to the national government's spotty record on fiscal and other issues, he believes its control should be outsourced to a world government. “Perhaps a nonprofit entity like the World Health Organization might be able to step in,” he wrote, adding WHO's participation would inspire “more confidence.”

The concept of a birth licenses, even those run by the United Nations, is not new. Istvan noted the support of ethics professor Hugh LaFollette and Paul Ehrlich, author of The Population Bomb.

The Ehrlichs co-authored the 1977 book Ecoscience with current Obama Science Czar John Holdren. They endorsed a “comprehensive planetary regime” to control fertility, adding that “compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.” President Obama recently said he relies on Holdren to formulate his science policy.

The concept of government-regimented reproduction was also supported by Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger some 80 years ago. Sanger wrote in a column for America Weekly in March 1934 that even then it may have “become necessary to establish a system of birth permits.”

Istvan believes new technology places their dream closer than ever to reality. Pre-clinical testing of the new microchip begins next year. A development team at the Massachusetts-based MicroCHIPS Inc. hopes to introduce the product by 2018, pending approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

TRENTON, NJ, February 13, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- A New Jersey state judge ruled Tuesday that Jewish-based reparative therapy group JONAH may have violated consumer fraud laws in advertising counseling services for individuals struggling with same-sex attraction who wish to be rid of their homosexual inclinations.

"It is a misrepresentation in violation of the CFA (Consumer Fraud Act), in advertising or selling conversion therapy services to describe homosexuality, not as being a normal variation of human sexuality, but as being a mental illness, disease, disorder, or equivalent," wrote Superior Court Judge Peter F. Barsio Jr., siding with the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center, which brought the lawsuit.

But Barsio left room for the possibility that a jury might disagree, writing, “a jury could find, based on evidence presented at trial, that JONAH represented homosexuality not as a mental disorder, but as 'disordered' and prohibited by its religion,” in which case “First Amendment protections would be applicable.”

Barsio’s decision means that the case will progress to the trial phase, set to begin June 1. 

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

Charles LiMandri, an attorney with Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund, which is representing JONAH in court, said in a statement that he is optimistic the jury will side with JONAH this summer.

“Americans have a constitutionally protected freedom to decide how they want to live or change their lives, and that includes what counseling they wish to receive," LiMandri said. "[Barsio’s] decision doesn't change any of that for the people whom JONAH has served. We are confident that a jury will not shut down their freedom to voluntarily seek help from a religious nonprofit like JONAH if they so choose.”

Reparative therapy groups like JONAH have been under attack nationwide by homosexual activists who object to their promotion of the “dangerous” notion that sexual preference is something that can be changed.  Most of the attacks have come in the form of legislation banning reparative therapy for minors. As of now, bans have been passed in California, New Jersey, and Washington, D.C.  

February 13, 2015 (40DaysforLife.com) -- Prayer is the foundation of 40 Days for Life. It was one hour of prayer around a table in Texas that led to the first 40 Days for Life campaign.

It is prayer that moves hearts and minds. Prayer is what speaks to the thousands of women who have turned around at the very last moment before their abortion. It is prayer that opens the hearts of abortion workers, and prayer that offers hope and healing to women as they leave the abortion facility after they’ve had an abortion. It is prayer that sustains a discouraged volunteer or motivates a hopeful leader to bring this campaign to their community.

Prayer is our strongest weapon because it takes the focus off ourselves and places our hope in God and His holy will. Prayer prevents us from getting overwhelmed and it humbles us when God answers.

As peaceful and prayerful as the 40 Days for Life campaigns have been — as selfless and loving as the hundreds of thousands of participants have been to women, men and workers — not everyone feels warm and fuzzy about 40 Days for Life.

We never expected the abortion industry to be supportive of what we do. They ramble on about “anti-choice protesters.” But the irony is that without the presence of prayer volunteers, the woman has no real choice once she arrives at their door. In fact, Planned Parenthood actively discourages their clients from speaking with prayer volunteers or taking free information about local alternatives. Countless are the times I’ve witnessed escorts and employees in the parking lot ripping up information about adoption or free pregnancy help in the community.

Of all the hostile and sometimes just plain bizarre reactions to 40 Days for Life from the abortion industry, perhaps the most outlandish unfolded during the spring 2012 campaign. I had just landed in Omaha, Nebraska to give a speech at Creighton University when my phone began buzzing with texts and emails from media outlets wanting comments on the new campaign from Planned Parenthood.

“Now what?” I thought to myself.

I got to my hotel and went through the calls and emails and couldn’t believe what was happening.

A Planned Parenthood affiliate in California had launched a mock 40 Days for Life campaign called “40 Days of Prayer.” Planned Parenthood had teamed up with Clergy for Choice and even created daily devotionals and prayer requests that matched the 40 Days for Life model. While they say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, this was appalling – all one had to do was read the prayer requests for each day.

Here are a few:

• DAY 1: Today we pray for women for whom pregnancy is not good news, that they may know they have choices.
• DAY 5: Today we praye for medical students who want to include abortion care in their practice. May they receive good training and find good mentors.
• DAY 7: Today we pray for the 45 million American women who have had safe, legal abortions. May they stand tall and refuse shame.
• DAY 14: Today we pray for Christians everywhere to embrace the loving model of Jesus in the way he refused to shame women.
• DAY 18: Today we pray for all the staff at abortion clinics around the nation. May they be daily confirmed in the sacred care that they offer women.
• DAY 21: Today we pray for women in developing nations, that they may know the power of self-determination. May they have access to employment, education, birth control and abortion.
• DAY 36: Today we pray for the families we’ve chosen. May they know the blessing of choice.

The most telling thing about these daily “prayer” intentions is what they reveal about Planned Parenthood. They show the huge disconnect between the talking points of the abortion industry and the reality of women seeking abortions – and especially with the women who have had abortions. They also reveal the lengths the abortion business will go to in order to justify the unjustifiable. Although abortion has been permitted for decades, those who believe in it still have to justify and rationalize it every day.

How many advocates of other causes will not discuss the specifics of the cause they stand for? Environmentalists will talk about the environment, anti-war activists will talk about war, anti-capitalists will talk about Wall Street. But abortion advocates won’t talk about abortion. They will always steer the conversation away from the details of abortion and focus on this vague, abstract notion of “choice.”

These prayer intentions reveal a mindset that sees abortion as “sacred” and that wants medical students to have “good training” in abortion. Even worse, they see power in abortion. They put abortion in the same critical, must-have category as education or employment for women in developing countries.

Furthermore, their insistence that women seeking abortion are looking for a spiritual reward for their “determination” has no basis in reality. These women are scared. They feel alone. They see no other way out. That’s not determination; that’s fear. It’s not their mission to have an abortion – it’s something they want to forget about the moment it is over.

It’s even more extreme when you consider women who have had abortions. The abortion industry’s attitude towards them is simply cold and uncompassionate. Planned Parenthood has historically been unable to connect with the majority of women who have had abortions because of their ideological view that abortion empowers women.

This was never more evident than in 2006 with their failed campaign to push t-shirts that said, “I had an abortion.” They thought that women would claim they were proud of their abortions. The media had a field day with it. Of course, no one bought the t-shirt, and it was quietly pulled off the market not long after it was released.

The prayer intentions show once again how out of touch Planned Parenthood is with real women by praying that they “refuse shame,” as if something is wrong with a woman who regrets her abortion or is even uncomfortable with the fact that she has an abortion in her past. It is not odd to feel shame after an abortion – just ask a woman who has had one.

If you want to know if shame is something women can just refuse and move on from, just ask groups like the Silent No More Awareness Campaign or Rachel’s Vineyard, which have reached out and helped hundreds of thousands of post-abortive women. These groups tirelessly help women find hope and healing when Planned Parenthood expects them to move on like it’s not that big a deal.

After abortion, there is no follow-up appointment at Planned Parenthood. They want to control how women feel about it afterwards. Not only are they praying for these women to “refuse shame,” they demand that they “know the blessing of choice.” I have met hundreds of women who have had abortions and there is not one who would label their abortion as a “blessing.” The disconnect between the abortion industry’s radical view of women and the human heart is scary.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Because of that disconnect, this mock prayer campaign became a public relations nightmare for Planned Parenthood, as the brochures with the daily prayer intentions quickly circulated online. In my hotel room in Omaha, I pulled up Foxnews.com – and there it was on the home page!

That night Fox News invited our good friend Marjorie Dannenfelser in studio for an interview. Marjorie is the director of the Washington, DC based Susan B. Anthony List, which identifies pro-life political candidates. Marjorie is a major supporter of 40 Days for Life and has seen the campaign’s grassroots impact firsthand. During the interview, Marjorie said, “Prayer is authentic. A prayer reflects exactly where you are. If it’s used as a political instrument, it’s not okay. And that’s what Planned Parenthood’s effort is.”

Fox News reported that effort was done “as a direct response to the 40 Days for Life campaign that has had support from 15,000 churches nationwide.”

Planned Parenthood’s response from their California CEO, Denise Vanden Bos, was even worse. Vanden Bos said, “Clergy for Choice believe that human life is holy and believe in all parents choosing to be a parent or not.”

Human life is holy but not as holy as the right to get rid of it?

While Planned Parenthood might have intended this as a campaign to mock you – and all people of faith who recognize the God-given dignity of every human life – it backfired, giving 40 Days for Life a massive publicity boost in more than 400 media outlets.

It is in prayer, not abortion, where real power is found. Planned Parenthood’s mock 40 Days for Prayer campaign was simply an effort to make abortion appear mainstream and even to make it sound Godly. It was extremely encouraging to see that campaign fail.

The good news is that as frustrated as we can become with our secular culture, the culture still does not accept the idea that abortion is empowering, or good – or from God.

As 40 Days for Life’s new campaign kicks off in 252 cities in 19 countries, you have the opportunity to pray on behalf of the unborn – and the opportunity to be mocked. But know that the abortion business mocks us because 40 Days for Life has an impact … and it has an impact because prayer works.

Reprinted with permission from 40 Days for Life. 

KANSAS CITY, KS, February 13, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback barely survived his 2014 re-election race, but he hasn't let that keep him from controversy.

Even as he proposed cutting the state's education budget this week, Brownback also rescinded a 2007 executive order – implemented by his predecessor, former HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius – creating special protections for homosexual and ‘transgender’ employees.

The new executive order, Brownback wrote, "ensures that state employees enjoy the same civil rights as all Kansans without creating additional ‘protected classes’ as the previous order did." According to the governor, “any such expansion of ‘protected classes’ should be done by the legislature and not through unilateral action.”

Critics immediately assailed the decision, with Equality Kansas Executive Director Thomas Witt saying in a statement, "Discrimination against State of Kansas employees, in every state agency, is now permitted under Brownback’s order."

"This action by the Governor is an outrage," said Witt. "Gay, lesbian, and transgender state employees across Kansas have trusted they would be safe from discrimination and harassment in their workplace but Sam Brownback has, by erasing their job protections, declared 'open season' on every one of them."

Likewise, Center for American Progress senior fellow Ian Millhiser indicated that Brownback's executive order was unconstitutional and done to target homosexuals and transgendered people. In a post entitled "Kansas Governor Takes Mean-Spirited Swipe At Gay Rights, Forgets To Read The Constitution," Millhiser wrote, "If Kansas actually fires someone for being gay or trans, they are likely to find themselves on the wrong end of a federal lawsuit."

Millhiser, however, also acknowledged that the Supreme Court has not yet given strict guidance or constitutional interpretation on how employers treat homosexuals and transgendered persons.

Philip Cosby, executive director of the American Family Association of Kansas and Missouri, praised Brownback. "This is who Gov. Brownback is," Cosby told LifeSiteNews. "To affirm one man and one woman is not inconsistent with who he is. So those that are of the faith should be encouraged, as we do see the cultural war rage, redefining the family at a rapid rate."

Heritage Foundation legal fellow Andrew Kloster said that while "you can't target people just because you don't like them," it is legal to "hire or fire someone because of their sexual orientation due to the effect that person has on office moral."

"Brownback rescinded a lot of Executive Orders," said Kloster. "Elections have consequences. And he's allowed to manage his ship, within the confines of the Constitution of Kansas and the United States, as he sees fit. I do not believe his rescission of the order means he intends to discriminate against folks based on sexual orientation or anything, based upon his explanation of this."

In a conversation with LifeSiteNews, Witt said he's not just concerned about Brownback's policy -- he's also concerned with what he indicated is hypocrisy by his state's highest executive.

"That is not the kind of thing that needs to go through the legislative process," said Witt. "If you'll notice, right after Governor Brownback rescinded protections for gay and transgender Kansans, he added protections for veterans and disabled people. There is no need for the legislative process because EOs are only applicable to the Executive Branch employees. They are setting employment policy for state agencies under the direct control of the governor, not statute via the legislative bodies."

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

A spokesperson for Brownback, however, disagreed with Witt's accusation of hypocrisy. "The Governor rescinded an Executive Order that unilaterally, and without engaging the people’s elected representatives, established additional ‘protected class rights’ for state employees," Eileen Hawley told LifeSiteNews. "Through the Governor’s Executive Order 15-02, State employees are protected by the same civil rights afforded to all Kansans – that they will not be discriminated against based on race, color, gender, religion, national origin, ancestry or age."

Regarding Witt’s point about veterans and the disabled, Hawley said the difference between the new policy and the one by Sebelius is that "the Governor is not expanding civil rights or creating a new protected class. He is simply encouraging state agencies to reach out to and hire our nation’s veterans and individuals with disabilities.”

While he agreed with Hawley, Kloster took a different tack. "He is not required to put everything in one basket," said Kloster. "There are a lot of reasons," he said, why any governor would choose to enact Executive Orders, and that choosing who to protect or not "is not hypocritical at all."

Kloster said that if Equality Kansas and other groups want to lobby for extra protection through the legislature "more power to them. But what they shouldn't try to do is suggest ill will where there is none."

However, he also said action on this matter by the legislature would impinge upon the power of the executive branch in Kansas, and could lead to a state Supreme Court challenge.

The governor can protect whomever he wishes with Executive Orders, according to Kloster, from "gays, lesbians, veterans, or underwater basket weavers. Presumably, he can do whatever category he wants."

AFA’s Cosby said Gov. Brownback "has stood where the Constitution of Kansas is, and he has stood where his conviction is. That's kind of rare, to not shy away.”