lifesitenews--2020-06-23--An explanation and defense of Red Rose Rescues

June 23 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – On May 13 , 2020 a Red Rose Rescue ( RRR ) was conducted at the Heritage Women ’ s Center abortion facility in Grand Rapids , Michigan .
LifeSiteNews reporter Stephen Kokx was present and reported on the event .
Five Red Rose Rescuers were arrested after they entered the abortion center parking lot to counsel women arriving for their scheduled abortions .
I was among them .
We were charged with “ trespassing ” with a first court appearance scheduled July 14 .
Red Rose Rescue is a new initiative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ RRR is not a protest of abortion .
The mission statement posted on the Red Rose Rescue website states : During a Red Rose Rescue a team of pro-lifers enter the actual places where the innocent unborn are about to be ” dragged to death.
” In the words of Saint Mother Teresa , they enter the ” dark holes of the poor.
” Red Rose Rescuers peacefully talk to women scheduled for abortion , with the goal of persuading them to choose life .
They offer to them red roses as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ love .
Should the unborn still “ totter to execution ” Red Rose Rescuers stay in the place of execution in solidarity with their abandoned brothers and sisters performing a non-violent act of defense through their continued presence inside the killing centers remaining with them for as long as they can .
As a manifestation of love for them the Rescuers stay with the abandoned unborn , recognizing that unborn children , as members of the human family , have a right to be defended .
The rescuers will not leave the unwanted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” The RRR is capped at no more than six pro-lifers who seek to quietly “ blend ” into the waiting room and talk to the mothers about to kill their unborn children .
As long as pro-lifers remain in the abortion center the killing process is halted .
During the Grand Rapids RRR , two Sidewalk Advocates for Life ( SAFL ) counselors showed up who , concerned about the spread of the coronavirus , had been absent for several weeks .
SAFL vehemently disagrees with RRR .
Apparently distressed that RRR @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for helping turn a couple away from the Heritage clinic the day of the rescue , SAFL apparently felt a need to distinguish itself from RRR .
To this end , one month after the May 13 rescue , SAFL posted on Facebook a four-page treatise critical of Red Rose Rescue that presented arguments against what it derogatorily refers to as “ law breaking tactics.
” This article will present a response to accusations and criticisms of Red Rose Rescue and thus serve as a general explanation of what Red Rose Rescue is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ abandon the constitutionally-protected activity of sidewalk counseling.
” Not true .
Indeed , every RRR partners with local sidewalk counselors who are present outside of the abortion facility , before , during , and after the rescue .
A RRR is a multi-leveled defense of the unborn that incorporates the rescue , sidewalk counseling , and those who support the RRR in prayer .
RRR has never confirmed that “ a woman inside the abortion facility accepted their help at a life-affirming pregnancy center.
” This criticism of RRR is lame and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that during various RRRs women indeed left the abortion facility , some actually carrying the roses given to them by the rescuers .
And on May 13 a woman arriving for her scheduled abortion during the Grand Rapids RRR also left the clinic accompanied by her boyfriend as noted above .
Formal documentation exists that several women did not go through with their scheduled abortions during Red Rose Rescues—up to as many as 12 women during the RRR that that took place December 2 , 2017 at the Women ’ s Center abortion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court testimony was entered , complete with a chart , by the abortion clinic manager herself under oath that due to the RRR 12 women did not go through with their abortions that day .
By any sidewalk counseling standard , 12 babies spared abortion in one day would be considered an enormous pro-life victory !
One of those 12 left the clinic during the RRR specifically after rescuer Patrice Woodworth talked to her—and was noted on the chart as having done so .
RRR “ often counts anyone who simply leaves that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any knowledge of the woman ’ s heart or her plans for her pregnancy.
” This is exactly what a clinic “ turn-away ” is all about .
This statement is an attempt to belittle the success of Red Rose Rescues .
Women have at least “ turned away ” from abortion due to Red Rose Rescues .
If we knew that the woman decided to not abort her baby because she directly indicated she had changed her mind , we would be able to say “ the baby was saved ” in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” and not a “ mere ” turn-away .
If the woman who left the clinic indicated she still intended to get the abortion , she might be a “ hopeful ” and not a “ turn-away ” —as we can hope she will make a decision not to come back .
But if a woman who was scheduled for an abortion left the clinic , especially after being talked to , or who accepted a pamphlet from a sidewalk counselor , but never indicated why—that indeed is a turn-away !
Moreover , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ turn-away ” be confirmed by local pregnancy help centers ?
Many women who opt to leave an abortion clinic never check in with local pro-life PHCs .
Sidewalk counselors rarely , if ever , rely on reports from PHCs to verify that women turned-away from the abortion clinic .
RRR admits that : “ After everyone inside the abortion facility has apparently refused their help ” rescuers “ switch from a help-oriented disposition to one of protest by staging a sit-in and/or refusing to leave , leading to their arrest.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rescues .
The RRR is not a protest .
It is a peaceful , prayerful presence in the abortion facility in defense of the unborn scheduled for extermination .
Indeed , it is confirmed that as long as pro-lifers maintain a presence inside the abortion facility the killing is halted .
The unborn deserve this act of defense and act of witness to the sacredness of their lives .
Moreover , choosing to remain in the abortion facility is to place ourselves in solidarity with the unwanted and rejected .
We are with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those “ dark holes of the poor ” for as long as it is possible .
When women reject help offered to them by sidewalk counselors outside the abortion center , and continue to reject help offered to them by Red Rose Rescuers inside the abortion center—the rescuers make a decision not to simply walk away from the unborn who will most likely now go to their deaths .
During the May 13 rescue , RRR prevented SAFL counselors “ from fully conducting outreach to abortion-minded mothers.
” The fact is that full @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who were in full support of the RRR and by the Red Rose Rescuers who were willing to step beyond the boundaries set up by those who kill the unborn , by entering the actual lot that serves as a serious obstacle to that more personal , meaningful engagement with abortion-minded women .
By doing so , women were given more opportunity to choose life , not less .
In the Grand Rapids RRR the rescuers did nothing more than what a sidewalk counselor would normally do—except they did it on the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
RRR is the extension of the sidewalk into the abortion clinic .
Right Brain Research studies demonstrate that the “ tactics ” of RRR are “ ineffective as women need a calm , supportive environment to trust our offer of help and choose life.
” Right Brain Research studies were conducted through the Vitae Foundation in 1997 .
These were studies of women facing unwanted pregnancies many of whom were abortion-minded .
The summary of the research was published in a 1998 First Things article .
The studies are excellent and anyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ women choose life over abortion should read the First Things article .
The study provides valuable insight into the minds of women seriously considering abortion and rightly concludes most are concerned about “ self preservation.
” Thus the pro-life counselor must first empathize with the women ’ s own needs , fears , and self-perception .
Testimonials from actual women provide evidence that : “ Women who experience regret after an abortion say they wish that they had sought kind , loving guidance when struggling with their decision .
Many report that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ found such guidance.
” The fact is , nothing in the Right Brain Research studies indicate that the kind of counseling Red Rose Rescuers offer to women inside abortion center waiting rooms is not effective .
The abortion-bound woman needs a person of understanding who offers her hope and reassurance—exactly what a Red Rose Rescuer attempts to do .
Years ago I wrote a booklet entitled “ Effective Sidewalk Counseling ” that lays out principles consistent with Right Brain Research available at the Citizens for Pro-life Society website .
During an RRR abortion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” its clients and sequester them in a back area and are now “ away from life-saving assistance.
” This sequestering of abortion clinic clients doesn ’ t happen before rescuers have had a chance to engage these women and give them pro-life pamphlets and the red roses .
Moreover , the women were already “ away from life-saving assistance ” the moment they entered the abortion facility .
Yes , sometimes women will exit the clinic making it possible for sidewalk counselors to speak to them again .
But there is no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come out , and most do not .
RRR is subject to “ grave legal risks ” especially the possibility that “ jurisdictions ” will “ unjustly pass bubble and buffer zones across cities or states , among other laws.
” There is absolutely no evidence that buffer zones will be put in place due to Red Rose Rescue .
Indeed , after three years and 19 RRRs there has not been even a whisper of the threat that jurisdictions seek to implement buffer zones against anyone because of RRR activity—absolutely none .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ fear over a problem that simply does not exist .
Those who participate in RRR and others associated with an RRR could be charged with violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act .
FACE has to do with impeding access to reproductive rights , blocking ingress and egress to an abortion facility .
Red Rose Rescuers do not block doors .
Indeed , they do not block anything .
Such kinds of physical impediments are not necessary to provide an effective defense of the unborn .
All that is needed is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And again , after three years and 19 RRRs , there has not even been the whisper of a threat that Red Rose Rescue is subject to the FACE law .
Red Rose Rescuers , and those associated with the rescues , could face the Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organizations Act .
Very unlikely !
Pro-lifers have achieved significant vindication on this very point , due to the famous 2002 pro-life Supreme Court victory in NOW v. Scheidler .
This case was litigated for 20 years , at considerable expense to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not prevail .
It is hardly likely abortionists will bring RICO charges against pro-life rescuers now .
Moreover , even if the FACE act and RICO were brought against Red Rose Rescuers other pro-lifers would not be affected in any way .
Only the pro-lifers against whom such charges are brought would be affected .
It is up to them to stand up in court and witness to the world that their peaceful acts of defense against the killing of the unborn were morally right and just .
Pro-lifers standing trial in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attitude dismisses the powerful public witness provided by pro-lifers when they go to court .
They witness to the humanity of the unborn to judges , the jury , bailiffs , police officers , court clerks , abortion clinic staff who attend these trials or even take the witness stand , and the media who cover the RRR trials .
Other pro-lifers are encouraged by this witness and emboldened in their own pro-life work .
None of this constitutes “ needless litigation ” —no more needless than the acts of defense offered on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ center that leads to the court trials .
Furthermore , it is worth noting that virtually every single pro-life law passed , no matter how moderate , ends up being litigated in court .
Does this mean it ’ s never worth passing anti-infanticide bills or bans on late-term abortion ?
RRR believes that “ sidewalk counseling and prayer [ are ] insufficient or even ineffective at abortion facilities.
” This is absolutely false .
Red Rose Rescue stands behind the necessity of sidewalk counseling .
I have been a sidewalk counselor since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and can argue that sidewalk counseling is the backbone of pro-life activism .
Red Rose Rescue agrees that “ our primary audience at the abortion facility is the mother , not the preborn child.
” That ’ s why rescuers go into the abortion facility to make a final attempt to persuade women in the waiting room who did not accept the help offered by sidewalk counselors outside .
And here is where the spiritual and philosophical principles Red Rose Rescue need to be understood .
The vast majority of women scheduled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their unborn children no matter how much love and compassionate help is offered to them .
Now , we are dealing with the unwanted unborn—those innocents who will literally be cut to pieces and thrown in the trash .
Yes , the first goal of sidewalk counseling is to “ reach the heart of a troubled mother ” in order to “ rescue those who may be at risk of death.
” But , RRR also believes that those about to be dragged off to execution according to Prov .
24:11 , need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continue to advocate for them—rather than simply permitting them to be exterminated .
The unborn are the true victims of abortion .
Red Rose Rescuers seek to do for the unborn what we would want someone to do for us should we face execution .
The lives of the unborn count , even should their mothers not listen to us .
Their lives matter and Red Rose Rescue is a pro-life effort that seeks to witness to that truth .
The Red Rose Rescuer says to the abortionists : “ You have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them.
” The words of Monsignor Philip Reilly of Helpers of God ’ s Precious Infants applied to sidewalk counselors also apply equally to Red Rose Rescue when he said : “ The way of Christ is to use the overwhelming power of love.
” Monica Migliorino Miller , Ph .
D. , is Director of Citizens for a Pro-Life Society , a Founding Member of Red Rose Rescue , and the author of Abandoned : The Untold Story of the Abortion Wars ( Saint Benedict Press , 2012 ) .

As a manifestation of love for them the Rescuers stay with the abandoned unborn, recognizing that unborn children, as members of the human family, have a right to be defended. The rescuers will not leave the unwanted, but must be 'taken away.'
June 23, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – On May 13, 2020 a Red Rose Rescue (RRR) was conducted at the Heritage Women’s Center abortion facility in Grand Rapids, Michigan. LifeSiteNews reporter Stephen Kokx was present and reported on the event. Five Red Rose Rescuers were arrested after they entered the abortion center parking lot to counsel women arriving for their scheduled abortions. I was among them. We were charged with “trespassing” with a first court appearance scheduled July 14.
Red Rose Rescue is a new initiative that began in September 2017. The RRR is not a protest of abortion. The mission statement posted on the Red Rose Rescue website states:
The ministry flows from and is strengthened by prayer and laboring in love to save the most vulnerable among us. We live the Gospel of Life by responding to and putting into practice Proverbs 24:11: “Rescue those being dragged to death, and those tottering to execution withhold not. If you say ‘I know not this man!’ does not He who tests hearts not perceive it?”
During a Red Rose Rescue a team of pro-lifers enter the actual places where the innocent unborn are about to be ”dragged to death.” In the words of Saint Mother Teresa, they enter the ”dark holes of the poor.” Red Rose Rescuers peacefully talk to women scheduled for abortion, with the goal of persuading them to choose life. They offer to them red roses as a sign of life, peace, and love. Should the unborn still “totter to execution” Red Rose Rescuers stay in the place of execution in solidarity with their abandoned brothers and sisters performing a non-violent act of defense through their continued presence inside the killing centers remaining with them for as long as they can.
As a manifestation of love for them the Rescuers stay with the abandoned unborn, recognizing that unborn children, as members of the human family, have a right to be defended. The rescuers will not leave the unwanted, but must be “taken away.”
The RRR is capped at no more than six pro-lifers who seek to quietly “blend” into the waiting room and talk to the mothers about to kill their unborn children. As long as pro-lifers remain in the abortion center the killing process is halted.
During the Grand Rapids RRR, two Sidewalk Advocates for Life (SAFL) counselors showed up who, concerned about the spread of the coronavirus, had been absent for several weeks. SAFL vehemently disagrees with RRR. Apparently distressed that RRR honorably credited one of the SAFL counselors for helping turn a couple away from the Heritage clinic the day of the rescue, SAFL apparently felt a need to distinguish itself from RRR. To this end, one month after the May 13 rescue, SAFL posted on Facebook a four-page treatise critical of Red Rose Rescue that presented arguments against what it derogatorily refers to as “law breaking tactics.”
This article will present a response to accusations and criticisms of Red Rose Rescue and thus serve as a general explanation of what Red Rose Rescue is all about.
RRR has chosen to “abandon the constitutionally-protected activity of sidewalk counseling.” Not true. Indeed, every RRR partners with local sidewalk counselors who are present outside of the abortion facility, before, during, and after the rescue. A RRR is a multi-leveled defense of the unborn that incorporates the rescue, sidewalk counseling, and those who support the RRR in prayer.
RRR has never confirmed that “a woman inside the abortion facility accepted their help at a life-affirming pregnancy center.” This criticism of RRR is lame and perplexing. Several news stories have reported that during various RRRs women indeed left the abortion facility, some actually carrying the roses given to them by the rescuers. And on May 13 a woman arriving for her scheduled abortion during the Grand Rapids RRR also left the clinic accompanied by her boyfriend as noted above. Formal documentation exists that several women did not go through with their scheduled abortions during Red Rose Rescues—up to as many as 12 women during the RRR that that took place December 2, 2017 at the Women’s Center abortion facility in West Bloomfield, Michigan. Court testimony was entered, complete with a chart, by the abortion clinic manager herself under oath that due to the RRR 12 women did not go through with their abortions that day. By any sidewalk counseling standard, 12 babies spared abortion in one day would be considered an enormous pro-life victory! One of those 12 left the clinic during the RRR specifically after rescuer Patrice Woodworth talked to her—and was noted on the chart as having done so.
RRR “often counts anyone who simply leaves that day as a ‘turnaway’ without any knowledge of the woman’s heart or her plans for her pregnancy.” This is exactly what a clinic “turn-away” is all about. This statement is an attempt to belittle the success of Red Rose Rescues. Women have at least “turned away” from abortion due to Red Rose Rescues. If we knew that the woman decided to not abort her baby because she directly indicated she had changed her mind, we would be able to say “the baby was saved” in which case that is a “save” and not a “mere” turn-away. If the woman who left the clinic indicated she still intended to get the abortion, she might be a “hopeful” and not a “turn-away”—as we can hope she will make a decision not to come back. But if a woman who was scheduled for an abortion left the clinic, especially after being talked to, or who accepted a pamphlet from a sidewalk counselor, but never indicated why—that indeed is a turn-away!
Moreover, why must a “save” or a “turn-away” be confirmed by local pregnancy help centers? Many women who opt to leave an abortion clinic never check in with local pro-life PHCs. Sidewalk counselors rarely, if ever, rely on reports from PHCs to verify that women turned-away from the abortion clinic.
RRR admits that: “After everyone inside the abortion facility has apparently refused their help” rescuers “switch from a help-oriented disposition to one of protest by staging a sit-in and/or refusing to leave, leading to their arrest.” This is a mischaracterization of Red Rose Rescues. The RRR is not a protest. It is a peaceful, prayerful presence in the abortion facility in defense of the unborn scheduled for extermination. Indeed, it is confirmed that as long as pro-lifers maintain a presence inside the abortion facility the killing is halted. The unborn deserve this act of defense and act of witness to the sacredness of their lives. Moreover, choosing to remain in the abortion facility is to place ourselves in solidarity with the unwanted and rejected. We are with them and will stand with them in those “dark holes of the poor” for as long as it is possible. When women reject help offered to them by sidewalk counselors outside the abortion center, and continue to reject help offered to them by Red Rose Rescuers inside the abortion center—the rescuers make a decision not to simply walk away from the unborn who will most likely now go to their deaths.
During the May 13 rescue, RRR prevented SAFL counselors “from fully conducting outreach to abortion-minded mothers.” The fact is that full outreach was accomplished by other sidewalk counselors who were in full support of the RRR and by the Red Rose Rescuers who were willing to step beyond the boundaries set up by those who kill the unborn, by entering the actual lot that serves as a serious obstacle to that more personal, meaningful engagement with abortion-minded women. By doing so, women were given more opportunity to choose life, not less. In the Grand Rapids RRR the rescuers did nothing more than what a sidewalk counselor would normally do—except they did it on the “turf” of the abortion facility itself. RRR is the extension of the sidewalk into the abortion clinic.
Right Brain Research studies demonstrate that the “tactics” of RRR are “ineffective as women need a calm, supportive environment to trust our offer of help and choose life.” Right Brain Research studies were conducted through the Vitae Foundation in 1997. These were studies of women facing unwanted pregnancies many of whom were abortion-minded. The summary of the research was published in a 1998 First Things article. The studies are excellent and anyone who wishes to dedicate themselves to helping women choose life over abortion should read the First Things article. The study provides valuable insight into the minds of women seriously considering abortion and rightly concludes most are concerned about “self preservation.” Thus the pro-life counselor must first empathize with the women’s own needs, fears, and self-perception. Testimonials from actual women provide evidence that: “Women who experience regret after an abortion say they wish that they had sought kind, loving guidance when struggling with their decision. Many report that they would never have aborted if they had found such guidance.”
The fact is, nothing in the Right Brain Research studies indicate that the kind of counseling Red Rose Rescuers offer to women inside abortion center waiting rooms is not effective. The abortion-bound woman needs a person of understanding who offers her hope and reassurance—exactly what a Red Rose Rescuer attempts to do. Years ago I wrote a booklet entitled “Effective Sidewalk Counseling” that lays out principles consistent with Right Brain Research available at the Citizens for Pro-life Society website.
During an RRR abortion clinic staff will eventually “round up” its clients and sequester them in a back area and are now “away from life-saving assistance.” This sequestering of abortion clinic clients doesn’t happen before rescuers have had a chance to engage these women and give them pro-life pamphlets and the red roses. Moreover, the women were already “away from life-saving assistance” the moment they entered the abortion facility. Yes, sometimes women will exit the clinic making it possible for sidewalk counselors to speak to them again. But there is no guarantee that once inside, women will come out, and most do not.
RRR is subject to “grave legal risks” especially the possibility that “jurisdictions” will “unjustly pass bubble and buffer zones across cities or states, among other laws.” There is absolutely no evidence that buffer zones will be put in place due to Red Rose Rescue. Indeed, after three years and 19 RRRs there has not been even a whisper of the threat that jurisdictions seek to implement buffer zones against anyone because of RRR activity—absolutely none. To sound this alarm is to foment fear over a problem that simply does not exist.
Those who participate in RRR and others associated with an RRR could be charged with violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. FACE has to do with impeding access to reproductive rights, blocking ingress and egress to an abortion facility. Red Rose Rescuers do not block doors. Indeed, they do not block anything. Such kinds of physical impediments are not necessary to provide an effective defense of the unborn. All that is needed is a simple pro-life presence in the clinic. And again, after three years and 19 RRRs, there has not even been the whisper of a threat that Red Rose Rescue is subject to the FACE law.
Red Rose Rescuers, and those associated with the rescues, could face the Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organizations Act. Very unlikely! Pro-lifers have achieved significant vindication on this very point, due to the famous 2002 pro-life Supreme Court victory in NOW v. Scheidler. This case was litigated for 20 years, at considerable expense to the pro-abortionists, a case in which they did not prevail. It is hardly likely abortionists will bring RICO charges against pro-life rescuers now. Moreover, even if the FACE act and RICO were brought against Red Rose Rescuers other pro-lifers would not be affected in any way. Only the pro-lifers against whom such charges are brought would be affected. It is up to them to stand up in court and witness to the world that their peaceful acts of defense against the killing of the unborn were morally right and just.
Pro-lifers standing trial in court is “useless litigation.” This attitude dismisses the powerful public witness provided by pro-lifers when they go to court. They witness to the humanity of the unborn to judges, the jury, bailiffs, police officers, court clerks, abortion clinic staff who attend these trials or even take the witness stand, and the media who cover the RRR trials. Other pro-lifers are encouraged by this witness and emboldened in their own pro-life work. None of this constitutes “needless litigation”—no more needless than the acts of defense offered on behalf of the unborn inside the abortion center that leads to the court trials.
Furthermore, it is worth noting that virtually every single pro-life law passed, no matter how moderate, ends up being litigated in court. Does this mean it’s never worth passing anti-infanticide bills or bans on late-term abortion?
RRR believes that “sidewalk counseling and prayer [are] insufficient or even ineffective at abortion facilities.” This is absolutely false. Red Rose Rescue stands behind the necessity of sidewalk counseling. I have been a sidewalk counselor since 1978, with over 40 years experience, and can argue that sidewalk counseling is the backbone of pro-life activism. Red Rose Rescue agrees that “our primary audience at the abortion facility is the mother, not the preborn child.” That’s why rescuers go into the abortion facility to make a final attempt to persuade women in the waiting room who did not accept the help offered by sidewalk counselors outside. And here is where the spiritual and philosophical principles Red Rose Rescue need to be understood. The vast majority of women scheduled for abortion sadly, tragically will kill their unborn children no matter how much love and compassionate help is offered to them. Now, we are dealing with the unwanted unborn—those innocents who will literally be cut to pieces and thrown in the trash.
Yes, the first goal of sidewalk counseling is to “reach the heart of a troubled mother” in order to “rescue those who may be at risk of death.” But, RRR also believes that those about to be dragged off to execution according to Prov. 24:11, need someone to stand by them, and continue to advocate for them—rather than simply permitting them to be exterminated. The unborn are the true victims of abortion. Red Rose Rescuers seek to do for the unborn what we would want someone to do for us should we face execution. The lives of the unborn count, even should their mothers not listen to us. Their lives matter and Red Rose Rescue is a pro-life effort that seeks to witness to that truth. The Red Rose Rescuer says to the abortionists: “You have to remove us, before you can kill them.” The words of Monsignor Philip Reilly of Helpers of God’s Precious Infants applied to sidewalk counselors also apply equally to Red Rose Rescue when he said: “The way of Christ is to use the overwhelming power of love.”
Monica Migliorino Miller, Ph. D., is Director of Citizens for a Pro-Life Society, a Founding Member of Red Rose Rescue, and the author of Abandoned: The Untold Story of the Abortion Wars (Saint Benedict Press, 2012).
Share


lifesitenews--2020-06-23--Join our daily worldwide rosary HERE

Join our daily worldwide rosary HERE

June 23 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – In response to the coronavirus crisis , LifeSite is offering Catholics throughout the world a chance to be united in praying the rosary together , at the same time , every day at 12:00 noon EST .
The rosary is led by Father Anthony Pillari , an American priest currently in Italy .
To date , Catholics from Israel , Uganda , Italy , France , Germany , Ireland , the United Kingdom , the U.S. , Canada , Mexico , Chile , Brazil , Australia , New Zealand , the Philippines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as well as other countries , have been joining in .
The whole world – including the Church – has been thrown into chaos because of the coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) .
Thousands of people have passed away as a result of the viral outbreak , while thousands more have been sickened .
And , across the world , business has come to a grinding halt , resulting in sudden job loss and threatening economic recession .
If there ever was a time for prayer , this is it .
Catholics around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Sacraments , but in many places are unable to access them because of bishops ’ orders or government restrictions .
We know that community with other believers is vital all the time , but especially during this time of global calls for “ sheltering-in-place ” and quarantine .
“ The rosary is the weapon for these times , ” St. Padre Pio said .
Through prayer , we can shape history , change the world , and bring this painful crisis to an end .
Join us today !
Send photos or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rosary with Father Pillari to [ email protected ]

(LifeSiteNews) — In response to the crisis unfolding in our world and in the Church, LifeSite is happy to promote Regina Angelorum Press’s Daily Rosary, which is offering Catholics throughout the world the chance to be united daily in prayer, in the Our Lady of Fatima Rosary Crusade.
Catholics from all over the world — from Israel, Uganda, Italy, France, Germany, Ireland, Pakistan, Singapore, the Philippines, India, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, the United Kingdom, the U.S., Canada, Brazil, and other countries — are gathering daily to pray the Rosary, led by Father Pillari, JCL, MCL, STL, an American priest currently studying in Italy.
The Daily Rosary is being offered each day at 12noon EST through Regina Angelorum Press’ YouTube Channel to which you can subscribe HERE.
The goal is, by means of this Daily Rosary and by embracing and living out the message given by the Virgin Mary at Fatima, the triumph of Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart.
To help obtain that goal, Bishop Athanasius Schneider graciously composed the following prayer for this worldwide Rosary crusade:
O Immaculate Heart of Mary, you are the holy Mother of God and our tender Mother. Look upon the distress in which the Church and the whole of humanity are living because of the spread of materialism and the persecution of the Church. In Fatima you warned against these errors, as you spoke about the errors of Russia. You are the Mediatrix of all graces. Implore your Divine Son to grant this special grace for the Pope: that he might consecrate Russia to your Immaculate Heart, so that Russia will be converted, a period of peace will be granted to the world, and your Immaculate Heart will triumph, through an authentic renewal of the Church in the splendor of the purity of the Catholic Faith, of the sacredness of Divine worship and of the holiness of the Christian life. O Queen of the holy Rosary and our sweet Mother, turn your merciful eyes to us and graciously hear this our trusting prayer. Amen. + Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
To learn more about the urgency of responding to Our Lady’s message at Fatima, and about what you can do, please read Cardinal Burke’s 2017 address at the Rome Life Forum.
As St. Padre Pio once said, “The Rosary is the weapon for these times.” Through prayer, God can shape history, change the world, and bring about a great time of renewal and peace for the Church and for the world, through the triumph of Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart. Join us today!
If you would like to follow along with the prayers said during this Rosary, you can access them HERE. The document also includes a brief F.A.Q. pertaining to the daily Rosary.
You can send your prayer requests to https://reginangelorumpress.com/prayer-intentions/
Share


lifesitenews--2020-06-23--SNEAK PREVIEW: Introduction to ‘Patriots: The Untold Story of Ireland’s Pro-Life Movement’

This is the introduction to my new book Patriots : The Untold Story of Ireland ’ s Pro-Life Movement .
If you ’ re Irish , you can order your copy here .
If you ’ re from North America , you can order your copy here .
Irish journalist John Waters , May 28 , 2018 , three days after the abortion referendum I touched down in Dublin two weeks before the Irish abortion referendum with my wife Charmaine , my daughter Charlotte , and two of my colleagues from the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform , Nick and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Irish officials were turning back foreigners who had come to join the pro-life movement ’ s final push before the deciding votes were cast on May 25 but my eight-month-old daughter ’ s beaming face warded off any awkward questions .
Who would take a baby on a political campaign , after all ?
We were waved through into a country in the throes of a culture war .
We left the city and headed out into the countryside , our surroundings exploding into a hundred hues of green .
We wound our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stone walls once intended to fence in the sheep picking their way across the pastures and around the bunches of yellow flowers dotting the rolling hills .
Ancient stone houses and outbuildings almost disappeared behind creeping ivy .
And everywhere , the signs : If abortion at six months horrifies you , vote NO .
Another , featuring a baby in the womb sucking her thumb : A Licence to Kill ?
Vote NO to abortion on demand .
A similar sign simply cited facts : I am 9 weeks old .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t repeal me .
It is scarcely an exaggeration to say that there were signs affixed to every lamppost , traffic light , and road sign in the country .
The signs urging voters to bring abortion to the country were more Orwellian , remaining conspicuously vague as to what they were actually advocating for : Vote YES for Compassion , For Dignity , For Care .
And : Vote YES : Care , Compassion , Trust .
The first victim of a war on children is always truth , and the Yes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unlikely to score points in their battle for legal abortion by actually mentioning abortion .
It was far wiser , they had decided , to appeal soothingly to vaguely positive human emotions .
Signs of resistance to the threat were everywhere .
A clergyman was balanced precariously atop a stepladder in front of his grey stone church , affixing a “ Vote No to Abortion on Demand !
” sign to his flagpole , the Irish tricolor flapping in the wind above him .
Further down the road , someone had used black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a traffic sign into a message urging voters to protect life , an enormous “ NO !
” followed by a spray-painted X in a ballot box .
When I stopped at a gas station and asked a white-haired man behind the counter what he thought of it all , he replied that he hoped Ireland could “ keep the Eighth , ” but shook his head worriedly : “ But the media , you know .
They are so biased.
” Coming from a nation where politicians consistently insist that the abortion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attempt to suppress pro-life activism , it was hard for a Canadian pro-life activist like myself not to be encouraged by the vibrancy and volume of the Irish abortion debate .
Not only that , but there seemed to be something different about the Irish pro-life activists that we joined on the Vote No Roadshow caravanning across the country and the men and women we went canvassing with in Dublin and the passionate young people we campaigned with in front of the bullet-scarred General Post Office .
It took me days to figure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an innocence that North American pro-life activists lacked .
Not naivete , not at all—they certainly knew that they could lose the referendum .
That is why they were pounding the streets , manning the phones , and working from door to door .
It was the sort of innocence one has when they possess both the courage to fight evil and the faith that good can defeat it .
More than that , it was the faith that good could defeat evil again .
Abortion activists had been striving to destroy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but always the pro-life movement had fended them off .
Time and again , the sweaty panic of the final countdown to the campaign ’ s end had given way to an explosion of celebration .
This time , it had to be that way , too .
The dragon had to die , the knight had to win , and the innocents had to be saved .
In some ways , any other result was almost unfathomable .
Those of us from America and Canada lacked this faith simply because we were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Betrayal by politicians is the rule rather than a rarity .
Working alongside the Irish pro-lifers of the Vote No Roadshow and feeling their beautiful optimism , I genuinely envied them their lack of cynicism .
I said as much to Tim Jackson , the leader of the Vote No Road Show that had been criss-crossing Ireland for weeks .
He smiled wryly .
“ Be careful , ” he said .
“ This country ’ ll break your heart.
” On May 25 , 2018 , Ireland became the first nation on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by popular demand .
Her citizens knew what they were voting for .
They had been warned by the tireless men and women who worked themselves to the bone to plead for the lives of pre-born children and warn of the grotesque horrors that are spawned when an abortion regime takes root .
They were tragically ignored by 66.4 % of those who cast their votes .
The grief that followed was raw and awful , and the depression was deep and dark .
It felt , as one pro-life activist said shortly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ family .
In so many ways , that is precisely what it was .
Over the months that followed , I kept in touch with many of the pro-lifers I had been privileged to work with during my short time in Ireland .
The triumphalism of the media was nauseating , and the emerging narrative in not only the Irish press but around the world was a simple one : Legalized abortion is inevitable .
Ireland ’ s Eighth Amendment had merely been a hangover from a different time , and Ireland ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a nation that no longer existed .
The tide of what is today perversely called progress is unstoppable , the media declared , and those few Western nations clinging to protections for pre-born children were put on notice that they would fall next .
The eye of Sauron swung to Northern Ireland within hours .
The story that the media , the politicians , and the abortion activists want to tell about the abortion referendum of 2018 is the story of scrappy progressives and feminists who wanted to modernize their country , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and tears ( and there will be much , much more of all that to come in the years ahead ) .
Because the elites own the media , the entertainment industry , and every major political party , that is the only story being told .
They must persuade us all that they are on the right side of history , and delude themselves into believing that a future can be built by shedding the blood of generations unborn .
Their triumphant shouts and cheers of celebration at Dublin Castle on May @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drown out their own whispering consciences .
The inverse of that story , of course , is that the pro-lifers who fought so hard were simply the flagging vanguard of the patriarchy , those who wished to oppress women and drag Ireland back to a different time .
The media ignored the fact that those on the frontlines were fighting for the children of other people–they had nothing to personally gain for their sacrifices .
I met students who were skipping university courses to hit the streets from dawn ‘ til dusk , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stiffly walking from door to door each evening for years , a middle-aged man who had sold his business so he could live off the proceeds and campaign against abortion .
Young parents were out pushing children in strollers with others strapped to their backs .
The passion of these people was not rooted in the desire for a totalitarian society that is a figment of the feminist imagination .
It was rooted in a genuine , palpable , love for little children .
But that the media could not report on , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact that it was , in fact , little children who were at stake in the referendum .
“ What about the babies ?
” one elderly woman asked a Yes voter sorrowfully as she walked door to door in the Dublin suburbs with our canvass team a week before the vote .
A shrug , and the door closed .
That was a question that only the pro-lifers seemed to want an answer to .
Loving both the mother and the child , it seemed , was not something many abortion supporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is being ignored .
It is being ignored because it is an inconvenient and far different narrative , and also because pro-life activists have become masters at telling the stories of the babies lost to abortion and the men and women left broken in their wake , but have never quite learned how to tell their own stories .
We often look back to other social reform movements : the abolitionists , the civil rights activists , the Holocaust rescuers .
But we seldom tell the stories of those ordinary men and women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in anonymity for years to save children not their own , persevering in the face of a hostile culture , a contemptuous media , and an entertainment industry selling death with glamour and a smile .
That story is the story of men and women who responded to the news of Roe v. Wade in the United States by fighting to insert protections for pre-born children into Ireland ’ s constitution with the Eighth Amendment , saving hundreds of thousands of lives over the ensuing decades while nation after nation succumbed to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the story of the thousands of people who put boots on the ground to fight tooth and nail for the life of every pre-born baby—while abortion was still illegal .
It is the story of the men and women who fought with their ancestors at their backs and their children in their hearts , fired by the rock-solid conviction that Ireland ’ s babies were worth fighting for .
It is time to tell this story .
In the wake of death ’ s temporary victory , it is essential .
Upcoming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but pro-lifers around the world should know that for thirty-five years , babies in their untold tens of thousands ended up in bassinets instead of dumpsters because there were champions willing to speak for them .
They should know that abortion activists right around the globe despised the pro-life Irish activists precisely because their defensive war on behalf of the pre-born proved that an abortion regime is never inevitable , and that a culture that loves both mothers and children is possible if we only love hard and fight harder .
They should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s ancestors are those who fought for her future , not the gloaters who believe her children can be sacrificed on the altar of sex and selfishness .
The loss of the Eighth Amendment was a crushing one , and the Irish pro-life movement will need encouragement in the years ahead .
That encouragement can be found in the examples of the very men and women who made up her ranks in years past , and those who make up her ranks today .
To see glimmers of light at the end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ today must climb onto the shoulders of the giants who went before .
On many days , it may seem as if the pro-life cause is a lost cause .
But there is perhaps nothing as Irish as a lost cause , and nothing as Irish as defying those odds .
It is , after all , what Irish patriots have always done .

This is the introduction to my new book Patriots: The Untold Story of Ireland’s Pro-Life Movement. If you’re Irish, you can order your copy here. If you’re from North America, you can order your copy here.
Introduction
On Thursday I had a strange sense that the day had the tenor of a Holy Saturday—a day lifted out of history. Except that here, history seemed to have gone into reverse: the Resurrection behind, Calvary in front. On Friday, the Irish people climbed Calvary backwards, in the name of progress.
Irish journalist John Waters, May 28, 2018, three days after the abortion referendum
***
I touched down in Dublin two weeks before the Irish abortion referendum with my wife Charmaine, my daughter Charlotte, and two of my colleagues from the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, Nick and Maaike Rosendal. We had heard that Irish officials were turning back foreigners who had come to join the pro-life movement’s final push before the deciding votes were cast on May 25 but my eight-month-old daughter’s beaming face warded off any awkward questions. Who would take a baby on a political campaign, after all? We were waved through into a country in the throes of a culture war.
We left the city and headed out into the countryside, our surroundings exploding into a hundred hues of green. We wound our way down twisty roads lined with slumping stone walls once intended to fence in the sheep picking their way across the pastures and around the bunches of yellow flowers dotting the rolling hills. Ancient stone houses and outbuildings almost disappeared behind creeping ivy. And everywhere, the signs: If abortion at six months horrifies you, vote NO. Another, featuring a baby in the womb sucking her thumb: A Licence to Kill? Vote NO to abortion on demand. A similar sign simply cited facts: I am 9 weeks old. I can yawn and kick. Don’t repeal me.
It is scarcely an exaggeration to say that there were signs affixed to every lamppost, traffic light, and road sign in the country. The signs urging voters to bring abortion to the country were more Orwellian, remaining conspicuously vague as to what they were actually advocating for: Vote YES for Compassion, For Dignity, For Care. And: Vote YES: Care, Compassion, Trust. The first victim of a war on children is always truth, and the Yes campaign seemed acutely aware that they were unlikely to score points in their battle for legal abortion by actually mentioning abortion. It was far wiser, they had decided, to appeal soothingly to vaguely positive human emotions.
Signs of resistance to the threat were everywhere. A clergyman was balanced precariously atop a stepladder in front of his grey stone church, affixing a “Vote No to Abortion on Demand!” sign to his flagpole, the Irish tricolor flapping in the wind above him. Further down the road, someone had used black spray paint to turn the back of a traffic sign into a message urging voters to protect life, an enormous “NO!” followed by a spray-painted X in a ballot box. When I stopped at a gas station and asked a white-haired man behind the counter what he thought of it all, he replied that he hoped Ireland could “keep the Eighth,” but shook his head worriedly: “But the media, you know. They are so biased.”
Coming from a nation where politicians consistently insist that the abortion debate is closed and local authorities often attempt to suppress pro-life activism, it was hard for a Canadian pro-life activist like myself not to be encouraged by the vibrancy and volume of the Irish abortion debate. Not only that, but there seemed to be something different about the Irish pro-life activists that we joined on the Vote No Roadshow caravanning across the country and the men and women we went canvassing with in Dublin and the passionate young people we campaigned with in front of the bullet-scarred General Post Office.
It took me days to figure out what it was: They had an innocence that North American pro-life activists lacked. Not naivete, not at all—they certainly knew that they could lose the referendum. That is why they were pounding the streets, manning the phones, and working from door to door. It was the sort of innocence one has when they possess both the courage to fight evil and the faith that good can defeat it. More than that, it was the faith that good could defeat evil again. Abortion activists had been striving to destroy and undermine the Eighth Amendment for decades, but always the pro-life movement had fended them off. Time and again, the sweaty panic of the final countdown to the campaign’s end had given way to an explosion of celebration.
This time, it had to be that way, too. The dragon had to die, the knight had to win, and the innocents had to be saved. In some ways, any other result was almost unfathomable. Those of us from America and Canada lacked this faith simply because we were accustomed to evil winning the day. Betrayal by politicians is the rule rather than a rarity. Working alongside the Irish pro-lifers of the Vote No Roadshow and feeling their beautiful optimism, I genuinely envied them their lack of cynicism. I said as much to Tim Jackson, the leader of the Vote No Road Show that had been criss-crossing Ireland for weeks. He smiled wryly. “Be careful,” he said. “This country’ll break your heart.”
On May 25, 2018, Ireland became the first nation on earth to bring abortion to her shores by popular demand. Her citizens knew what they were voting for. They had been warned by the tireless men and women who worked themselves to the bone to plead for the lives of pre-born children and warn of the grotesque horrors that are spawned when an abortion regime takes root. They were tragically ignored by 66.4% of those who cast their votes. The grief that followed was raw and awful, and the depression was deep and dark. It felt, as one pro-life activist said shortly afterward, like a death in the family. In so many ways, that is precisely what it was.
Over the months that followed, I kept in touch with many of the pro-lifers I had been privileged to work with during my short time in Ireland. The triumphalism of the media was nauseating, and the emerging narrative in not only the Irish press but around the world was a simple one: Legalized abortion is inevitable. Ireland’s Eighth Amendment had merely been a hangover from a different time, and Ireland’s pro-lifers were the last defenders of a nation that no longer existed. The tide of what is today perversely called progress is unstoppable, the media declared, and those few Western nations clinging to protections for pre-born children were put on notice that they would fall next. The eye of Sauron swung to Northern Ireland within hours.
The story that the media, the politicians, and the abortion activists want to tell about the abortion referendum of 2018 is the story of scrappy progressives and feminists who wanted to modernize their country, and succeeded after years of blood, sweat and tears (and there will be much, much more of all that to come in the years ahead). Because the elites own the media, the entertainment industry, and every major political party, that is the only story being told. They must persuade us all that they are on the right side of history, and delude themselves into believing that a future can be built by shedding the blood of generations unborn. Their triumphant shouts and cheers of celebration at Dublin Castle on May 26 were perhaps just loud enough to drown out their own whispering consciences.
The inverse of that story, of course, is that the pro-lifers who fought so hard were simply the flagging vanguard of the patriarchy, those who wished to oppress women and drag Ireland back to a different time. The media ignored the fact that those on the frontlines were fighting for the children of other people–they had nothing to personally gain for their sacrifices. I met students who were skipping university courses to hit the streets from dawn ‘til dusk, elderly men and women who had been stiffly walking from door to door each evening for years, a middle-aged man who had sold his business so he could live off the proceeds and campaign against abortion. Young parents were out pushing children in strollers with others strapped to their backs. The passion of these people was not rooted in the desire for a totalitarian society that is a figment of the feminist imagination. It was rooted in a genuine, palpable, love for little children. But that the media could not report on, because that would draw attention to the fact that it was, in fact, little children who were at stake in the referendum.
“What about the babies?” one elderly woman asked a Yes voter sorrowfully as she walked door to door in the Dublin suburbs with our canvass team a week before the vote. A shrug, and the door closed. That was a question that only the pro-lifers seemed to want an answer to. Loving both the mother and the child, it seemed, was not something many abortion supporters thought possible or desirable.
This story is being ignored. It is being ignored because it is an inconvenient and far different narrative, and also because pro-life activists have become masters at telling the stories of the babies lost to abortion and the men and women left broken in their wake, but have never quite learned how to tell their own stories. We often look back to other social reform movements: the abolitionists, the civil rights activists, the Holocaust rescuers. But we seldom tell the stories of those ordinary men and women, those unlikely heroes, who fought in anonymity for years to save children not their own, persevering in the face of a hostile culture, a contemptuous media, and an entertainment industry selling death with glamour and a smile.
That story is the story of men and women who responded to the news of Roe v. Wade in the United States by fighting to insert protections for pre-born children into Ireland’s constitution with the Eighth Amendment, saving hundreds of thousands of lives over the ensuing decades while nation after nation succumbed to the abortion juggernaut all around them. It is the story of the thousands of people who put boots on the ground to fight tooth and nail for the life of every pre-born baby—while abortion was still illegal. It is the story of the men and women who fought with their ancestors at their backs and their children in their hearts, fired by the rock-solid conviction that Ireland’s babies were worth fighting for.
It is time to tell this story. In the wake of death’s temporary victory, it is essential. Upcoming generations of not only Irish pro-life activists but pro-lifers around the world should know that for thirty-five years, babies in their untold tens of thousands ended up in bassinets instead of dumpsters because there were champions willing to speak for them. They should know that abortion activists right around the globe despised the pro-life Irish activists precisely because their defensive war on behalf of the pre-born proved that an abortion regime is never inevitable, and that a culture that loves both mothers and children is possible if we only love hard and fight harder. They should know that the true heirs of Ireland’s ancestors are those who fought for her future, not the gloaters who believe her children can be sacrificed on the altar of sex and selfishness.
The loss of the Eighth Amendment was a crushing one, and the Irish pro-life movement will need encouragement in the years ahead. That encouragement can be found in the examples of the very men and women who made up her ranks in years past, and those who make up her ranks today. To see glimmers of light at the end of the tunnel, the patriots of today must climb onto the shoulders of the giants who went before. On many days, it may seem as if the pro-life cause is a lost cause. But there is perhaps nothing as Irish as a lost cause, and nothing as Irish as defying those odds.
It is, after all, what Irish patriots have always done.
Follow Jonathon Jonathon Van Maren is a public speaker, writer, and pro-life activist. His commentary has been translated into more than eight languages and published widely online as well as print newspapers such as the Jewish Independent, the National Post, the Hamilton Spectator and others. He has received an award for combating anti-Semitism in print from the Jewish organization B’nai Brith. His commentary has been featured on CTV Primetime, Global News, EWTN, and the CBC as well as dozens of radio stations and news outlets in Canada and the United States. He speaks on a wide variety of cultural topics across North America at universities, high schools, churches, and other functions. Some of these topics include abortion, pornography, the Sexual Revolution, and euthanasia. Jonathon holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree in history from Simon Fraser University, and is the communications director for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform. Jonathon’s first book, The Culture War, was released in 2016.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-06-23--Sci-fi legend praised eugenics: ‘Injurious to the race of man’ to let ‘inferiors’ breed

June 23 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) -- The news cycle seems never to be lacking novel horrors in the battle against the sanctity of human life , as when we heard that Chairman Cuomo ’ s regime had approved the rental of wombs and the sale of babies .
One insane idea after another is floated by people who have no moral or metaphysical bearings , in a relentless quest to inaugurate the “ brave new world ” of limitless possibilities — which proves to be a world of limitless exploitation .
Sound arguments in defense of moral absolutes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ always needed , and it is important that these arguments be given philosophically , not just on the basis of religious convictions , even where such convictions are a deeper and firmer foundation for the truth .
The right to life includes the right to be born of the natural union of husband and wife — the context within which human beings are most fittingly welcomed and brought up in love , in accordance with their dignity .
Children are the gift par excellence of marriage ; they define it as the type @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and give it its inherent structure and duties .
In an earlier article , I looked at British philosopher Stephen R.L .
Clark ’ s new book Can We Believe in People ?
Human Significance in an Interconnected Cosmos ( Brooklyn , NY : Angelico Press , 2020 ) , in which he spells out why protecting the innocent and the weak is distinctive to our humanity and separates us from the beasts of the field who , in many cases , care little or nothing for their offspring .
I wish now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the eugenicism of H.G .
Wells , which he cites as an example of the evils to which so-called “ scientific ” reasoning will lead among those who are blindly led by it .
Clark notes that Wells and his circle thought that “ living in accord with nature ” meant imitating a “ kill or be killed ” mentality of the wild , and that this , in turn , meant ridding the world of those they considered inferior or inconvenient or defective : He reminds us that the Scopes Trial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a contest over evolution , concerned a textbook that expressed an extreme eugenicist point of view : George William Hunter ’ s A Civic Biology : Presented in Problems ( New York : American Book Co. , 1914 ) .
In a section called “ Parasitism and its Cost to Society , ” this textbook stated : Hundreds of families such as those described above exist today , spreading disease , immorality , and crime to all parts of this country .
The cost to society of such families is very severe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ become parasitic on other plants or animals , these families have become parasitic on society .
They not only do harm to others by corrupting , stealing , or spreading disease , but they are actually protected and cared for by the state out of public money .
Largely for them the poorhouse and the asylum exist .
They take from society , but they give nothing in return .
They are true parasites .
The Remedy .
— If such people were lower animals , we would probably kill them off to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not allow this , but we do have the remedy of separating the sexes in asylums or other places and in various ways preventing intermarriage and the possibilities of perpetuating such a low and degenerate race .
Remedies of this sort have been tried successfully in Europe and are now meeting with some success in this country .
( cited in Clark , p. 50 ) H.G .
Wells gave consummate expression to this way of thinking : It has become apparent that whole masses of the human population are as a whole @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to other masses , that they can not be given opportunities or trusted with power as the superior peoples are trusted , that their characteristic weaknesses are contagious and detrimental in the civilizing fabric , and their range of incapacity tempts and demoralises the strong .
To give them equality is to sink to their level , to protect and cherish them is to be swamped in their fecundity .
… There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands , who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to smallpox @ @ @ @ @ @ @ societies propagate their kind .
No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man .
It is surprising how soon a want of care , or care wrongly directed , leads to the degeneration of a domestic race ; but excepting in the case of man himself , hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed .
( cited in Clark , pp .
95–96 ) This side of Wells is expounded in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ H.G .
Wells : Darwin ’ s Disciple and Eugenicist Extraordinaire.
” Also illuminating is Peter Kemp ’ s H. G. Wells and the Culminating Ape : Biological Imperatives and Imaginative Obsessions ( New York : St. Martin ’ s Press , 1996 ) .
How often do we hear people say they oppose racism , when in fact they support organizations like Planned Parenthood that trace their origins directly to Wellsian eugenicism , and when they continue to target the poor , needy , vulnerable , and underprivileged , getting rich off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their kind ” from reproducing ?
It is one of the most disgusting examples of hypocrisy and cynicism to be met with in human history .
Clark cites approvingly what Pope John Paul II formulated with precision the fundamental problem of a subjectivist equation of highly functional rationality with personhood : The theory of human rights is based precisely on the affirmation that the human person , unlike animals and things , can not be subjected to domination by others .
We must also mention the mentality which tends to equate personal dignity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or at least perceptible , communication .
It is clear that on the basis of these presuppositions there is no place in the world for anyone who , like the unborn or the dying , is a weak element in the social structure , or for anyone who appears completely at the mercy of others and radically dependent on them , and can only communicate through the silent language of a profound sharing of affection .
In this case it is force which becomes the criterion for choice and action in interpersonal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this is the exact opposite of what a State ruled by law , as a community in which the “ reasons of force ” are replaced by the “ force of reason , ” historically intended to affirm .
( Evangelium Vitae , §19 , cited in Clark , 100–1 ) .
Clark reasonably objects to the word “ can not ” in the first sentence , the use of which is factually untrue ; probably the intention was to say “ may not be subjected to domination by others , ” as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do this .
Those who choose to subject human persons to domination lose their own dignity and plummet into a sickly caricature of humanity .
Force is not and can never be the “ criterion for choice and action in interpersonal relations , ” as it was for H.G .
Wells and Margaret Sanger , and as it remains for Planned Parenthood , Andrew Cuomo , and many others who , day by day , undermine the “ force of reason ” by “ reasons of force .
”

June 23, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The news cycle seems never to be lacking novel horrors in the battle against the sanctity of human life, as when we heard that Chairman Cuomo’s regime had approved the rental of wombs and the sale of babies. One insane idea after another is floated by people who have no moral or metaphysical bearings, in a relentless quest to inaugurate the “brave new world” of limitless possibilities — which proves to be a world of limitless exploitation.
Sound arguments in defense of moral absolutes and the fundamental right to life are always needed, and it is important that these arguments be given philosophically, not just on the basis of religious convictions, even where such convictions are a deeper and firmer foundation for the truth. The right to life includes the right to be born of the natural union of husband and wife — the context within which human beings are most fittingly welcomed and brought up in love, in accordance with their dignity. Children are the gift par excellence of marriage; they define it as the type of communion of persons it is, and give it its inherent structure and duties.
In an earlier article, I looked at British philosopher Stephen R.L. Clark’s new book Can We Believe in People? Human Significance in an Interconnected Cosmos (Brooklyn, NY: Angelico Press, 2020), in which he spells out why protecting the innocent and the weak is distinctive to our humanity and separates us from the beasts of the field who, in many cases, care little or nothing for their offspring. I wish now to look at Clark’s exposé of the eugenicism of H.G. Wells, which he cites as an example of the evils to which so-called “scientific” reasoning will lead among those who are blindly led by it.
Clark notes that Wells and his circle thought that “living in accord with nature” meant imitating a “kill or be killed” mentality of the wild, and that this, in turn, meant ridding the world of those they considered inferior or inconvenient or defective:
The New Republicans (a term from Wells’ A Modern Utopia) will have no pity for such “contemptible and silly creatures” and “to make life convenient for the breeding of such people will seem to them not the most virtuous and amiable thing in the world … but an exceedingly abominable proceeding. … The procreation of children who by the circumstances of their parentage, must be diseased bodily or mentally … is absolutely the most loathsome of all conceivable sins.” (Clark, p. 50)
He reminds us that the Scopes Trial in 1925, which is now remembered as a contest over evolution, concerned a textbook that expressed an extreme eugenicist point of view: George William Hunter’s A Civic Biology: Presented in Problems (New York: American Book Co., 1914). In a section called “Parasitism and its Cost to Society,” this textbook stated:
Hundreds of families such as those described above exist today, spreading disease, immorality, and crime to all parts of this country. The cost to society of such families is very severe. Just as certain animals or plants become parasitic on other plants or animals, these families have become parasitic on society. They not only do harm to others by corrupting, stealing, or spreading disease, but they are actually protected and cared for by the state out of public money. Largely for them the poorhouse and the asylum exist. They take from society, but they give nothing in return. They are true parasites. The Remedy. — If such people were lower animals, we would probably kill them off to prevent them from spreading. Humanity will not allow this, but we do have the remedy of separating the sexes in asylums or other places and in various ways preventing intermarriage and the possibilities of perpetuating such a low and degenerate race. Remedies of this sort have been tried successfully in Europe and are now meeting with some success in this country. (cited in Clark, p. 50)
H.G. Wells gave consummate expression to this way of thinking:
It has become apparent that whole masses of the human population are as a whole inferior in their claim upon the future to other masses, that they cannot be given opportunities or trusted with power as the superior peoples are trusted, that their characteristic weaknesses are contagious and detrimental in the civilizing fabric, and their range of incapacity tempts and demoralises the strong. To give them equality is to sink to their level, to protect and cherish them is to be swamped in their fecundity. … There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to smallpox. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed. (cited in Clark, pp. 95–96)
This side of Wells is expounded in Dr. Jerry Bergman’s article “H.G. Wells: Darwin’s Disciple and Eugenicist Extraordinaire.” Also illuminating is Peter Kemp’s H. G. Wells and the Culminating Ape: Biological Imperatives and Imaginative Obsessions (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1996).
How often do we hear people say they oppose racism, when in fact they support organizations like Planned Parenthood that trace their origins directly to Wellsian eugenicism, and when they continue to target the poor, needy, vulnerable, and underprivileged, getting rich off of their woes, and preventing “their kind” from reproducing? It is one of the most disgusting examples of hypocrisy and cynicism to be met with in human history.
Clark cites approvingly what Pope John Paul II formulated with precision the fundamental problem of a subjectivist equation of highly functional rationality with personhood:
The theory of human rights is based precisely on the affirmation that the human person, unlike animals and things, cannot be subjected to domination by others. We must also mention the mentality which tends to equate personal dignity with the capacity for verbal and explicit, or at least perceptible, communication. It is clear that on the basis of these presuppositions there is no place in the world for anyone who, like the unborn or the dying, is a weak element in the social structure, or for anyone who appears completely at the mercy of others and radically dependent on them, and can only communicate through the silent language of a profound sharing of affection. In this case it is force which becomes the criterion for choice and action in interpersonal relations and in social life. But this is the exact opposite of what a State ruled by law, as a community in which the “reasons of force” are replaced by the “force of reason,” historically intended to affirm. (Evangelium Vitae, §19, cited in Clark, 100–1).
Clark reasonably objects to the word “cannot” in the first sentence, the use of which is factually untrue; probably the intention was to say “may not be subjected to domination by others,” as in: no one has the right to do this. Those who choose to subject human persons to domination lose their own dignity and plummet into a sickly caricature of humanity. Force is not and can never be the “criterion for choice and action in interpersonal relations,” as it was for H.G. Wells and Margaret Sanger, and as it remains for Planned Parenthood, Andrew Cuomo, and many others who, day by day, undermine the “force of reason” by “reasons of force.”
Peter Kwasniewski, Thomistic theologian, liturgical scholar, and choral composer, is a graduate of Thomas Aquinas College in California (B.A. Liberal Arts) and The Catholic University of America in Washington, DC (M.A. and Ph.D. in Philosophy). He taught at the International Theological Institute in Austria and the Franciscan University of Steubenville’s Austria Program, then helped establish Wyoming Catholic College in 2006. There he taught theology, philosophy, music, and art history and directed the choirs until leaving in 2018 to devote himself full-time to writing and lecturing. Today he contributes regularly to many websites and publications, including New Liturgical Movement, OnePeterFive, LifeSiteNews, Rorate Caeli, The Remnant, and Catholic Family News, and has published thirteen books, including four on traditional Catholicism: Resurgent in the Midst of Crisis (Angelico, 2014, also available in Czech, Polish, German, Portuguese, Spanish, and Belarusian), Noble Beauty, Transcendent Holiness (Angelico, 2017), Tradition and Sanity (Angelico, 2018), and Reclaiming Our Roman Catholic Birthright: The Genius and Timeliness of the Traditional Latin Mass (Angelico, 2020). His work has been translated into at least eighteen languages. Kwasniewski is a scholar of The Aquinas Institute in Green Bay, which is publishing the Opera Omnia of the Angelic Doctor, a Fellow of the Albertus Magnus Center for Scholastic Studies, and a Senior Fellow of the St. Paul Center. He has published over a thousand articles on Thomistic thought, sacramental and liturgical theology, the history and aesthetics of music, and the social doctrine of the Church. For news, information, article links, sacred music, and the home of Os Justi Press, visit his personal website, www.peterkwasniewski.com.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-06-24--Trump accuses Obama of ‘treason’ for ‘spying’ on his 2016 presidential campaign

WASHINGTON D.C. , June 23 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — President Donald Trump accused former president Barack Obama of “ treason ” for “ spying ” on Trump ’ s 2016 presidential election campaign in an interview aired yesterday with CBN News .
After referencing Trump ’ s claim that Obama had been involved in spying on his 2016 presidential campaign , CBN News political analyst David Brody asked Trump what crime could have been committed .
“ They were spying on my campaign , ” Trump continued .
“ I told you that a long time ago .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s see what happens to them now.
” “ I want to stay out of it because otherwise it ’ s going to look political , ” Trump said .
“ Let ’ s see what they come up with.
” Trump praised Attorney General Bill Barr during the interview , saying , “ he ’ s doing such a good job .
He ’ s law and order.
” “ I will say this : if it were reversed , and the other party were there in the Oval Office behind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opposite , two years ago , 25 people would have been convicted and they would have been sent to jail for 50 years , ” Trump claimed .
Trump also touted his pro-life credentials during the interview , in contrast to his presidential rival Joe Biden , and appeared to express disappointment with the Supreme Court ’ s recent ruling to redefine “ sex ” and write transgenderism into 1964 law .
Asked what a Biden win in November would mean , Trump replied “ that ’ s going to be the end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you ’ re going to put a radical lefty on the Court and that ’ s going to be the end of pro-life , it won ’ t even have a chance , ” he said .
PETITION : Urge U.S. Catholic Bishops Conference to defend Catholic heritage and statues !
Sign the petition here .
When asked about the Supreme Court ’ s recent ruling and the support it received from Trump-appointed justice Neil Gorsuch and President George W. Bush ’ s appointee , Justice John Roberts , Trump replied , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not doing too well.
” “ Look , we ’ ve had a lot of losses with a Court that was supposed to be in our favor , ” he continued .
Trump said the ruling showed just how significant the appointment of judges would be in the coming years .
“ You ’ ll probably have a couple of more judges in the next four years , it could even be more than that — could be three or four , ” he continued .
“ If you have a radical left @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be almost wiped out at America .
If you look at it , pro-life will be absolutely wiped out .
So if you have that happening , pro-life is going to be out .
It ’ s going to be gone .
”

WASHINGTON D.C., June 23, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — President Donald Trump accused former president Barack Obama of “treason” for “spying” on Trump’s 2016 presidential election campaign in an interview aired yesterday with CBN News.
After referencing Trump’s claim that Obama had been involved in spying on his 2016 presidential campaign, CBN News political analyst David Brody asked Trump what crime could have been committed.
“Treason. Treason. It’s treason,” Trump replied.
“They were spying on my campaign,” Trump continued. “I told you that a long time ago. Turned out I was right. Let’s see what happens to them now.”
“I want to stay out of it because otherwise it’s going to look political,” Trump said. “Let’s see what they come up with.”
Trump praised Attorney General Bill Barr during the interview, saying, “he’s doing such a good job. He’s law and order.”
“I will say this: if it were reversed, and the other party were there in the Oval Office behind the Resolute desk and it was the opposite, two years ago, 25 people would have been convicted and they would have been sent to jail for 50 years,” Trump claimed.
Trump also touted his pro-life credentials during the interview, in contrast to his presidential rival Joe Biden, and appeared to express disappointment with the Supreme Court’s recent ruling to redefine “sex” and write transgenderism into 1964 law.
Asked what a Biden win in November would mean, Trump replied “that’s going to be the end of pro-life.”
“It means that you’re going to put a radical lefty on the Court and that’s going to be the end of pro-life, it won’t even have a chance,” he said.
PETITION: Urge U.S. Catholic Bishops Conference to defend Catholic heritage and statues! Sign the petition here.
When asked about the Supreme Court’s recent ruling and the support it received from Trump-appointed justice Neil Gorsuch and President George W. Bush’s appointee, Justice John Roberts, Trump replied, “Well, so far we’re not doing too well.”
“Look, we’ve had a lot of losses with a Court that was supposed to be in our favor,” he continued.
Trump said the ruling showed just how significant the appointment of judges would be in the coming years.
“You’ll probably have a couple of more judges in the next four years, it could even be more than that — could be three or four,” he continued.
“If you have a radical left group of judges, religion I think will be almost wiped out at America. If you look at it, pro-life will be absolutely wiped out. So if you have that happening, pro-life is going to be out. It’s going to be gone.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-06-24--Trump says he’d ‘love’ to appoint top LGBT activist to ‘high level’ in his admin

WASHINGTON , D.C. , June 23 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — President Trump has said he would like to appoint former director of National Intelligence ( DNI ) and long-term LGBT activist Richard Grenell to a “ high level ” in his administration .
Grenell stepped down from his position as acting DNI earlier this month but is still serving in the administration as a special presidential envoy for Serbia and Kosovo peace negotiations .
“ Give him a breather , and I ’ d love to have him back , ” Trump told the Daily Caller .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d ] uring his brief time leading the intelligence community , Grenell released documents showing that Former Vice President Joe Biden , former FBI Director James Comey , former CIA Director James Clapper , and former DNI James Clapper all made requests to unmask Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn during the waning days of the Obama administration.
” “ He ’ ll come back in some form , at a high level .
He was fantastic , the job he did , ” Trump said .
“ He did a fantastic job @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be served .
I hope that justice will be served , and I believe justice will be served.
” Grenell was appointed as acting DNI in February this year , making him the first openly gay member of a White House Cabinet in history .
In April , he sent a letter all the agencies under his auspices in which he seemed to demand the complete normalization of homosexuality and transgenderism within all Intelligence Community ( I.C . )
operations .
“ While I will likely not be in this role for long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to drive lasting impact for the IC Pride community .
And I am asking every member of the IC leadership team to join me , ” wrote Grenell .
DROP Disney+ : New teen film 'Out ' features openly homosexual main character !
Sign the petition here .
In a separate letter that he sent to Adam Schiff this month , Grenell said , “ Diversity of the IC workforce should always be celebrated , and I am proud that we increased diversity within the ODNI ’ s senior ranks , to include @ @ @ @ @ @ @ community.
” In 2019 , Grenell was asked by President Trump to spearhead a global effort to get countries to end their criminalization of homosexuality .
That effort has now resulted in a policy that would limit the intelligence that U.S. spy agencies share with nations that continue to criminalize homosexuality in order to strong-arm them into conforming with Western norms .
According to multiple reports , the Trump White House is supportive of the initiative .
“ Rick Grenell has proven in his work for the Trump administration that he is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second , ” Peter LaBarbera , founder and president of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality ( AFTAH ) , told LifeSiteNews in February .
“ He has made it his primary mission to work for the normalization of homosexuality worldwide , which would seem to be more of an Obama foreign policy goal than a Trump goal , ” added the AFTAH head .

Richard Grenell, formerly U.S. ambassador to Germany, just finished a brief stint as director of the USA's intelligence agencies, where he prioritized hiring more homosexuals.
WASHINGTON, D.C., June 23, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — President Trump has said he would like to appoint former director of National Intelligence (DNI) and long-term LGBT activist Richard Grenell to a “high level” in his administration.
Grenell stepped down from his position as acting DNI earlier this month but is still serving in the administration as a special presidential envoy for Serbia and Kosovo peace negotiations.
“Give him a breather, and I’d love to have him back,” Trump told the Daily Caller.
The Daily Caller article reports that “[d]uring his brief time leading the intelligence community, Grenell released documents showing that Former Vice President Joe Biden, former FBI Director James Comey, former CIA Director James Clapper, and former DNI James Clapper all made requests to unmask Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn during the waning days of the Obama administration.”
“He’ll come back in some form, at a high level. He was fantastic, the job he did,” Trump said.
“He did a fantastic job. So I believe that justice will be served. I hope that justice will be served, and I believe justice will be served.”
Grenell was appointed as acting DNI in February this year, making him the first openly gay member of a White House Cabinet in history. In April, he sent a letter all the agencies under his auspices in which he seemed to demand the complete normalization of homosexuality and transgenderism within all Intelligence Community (I.C.) operations.
“While I will likely not be in this role for long, I plan to use this opportunity to drive lasting impact for the IC Pride community. And I am asking every member of the IC leadership team to join me,” wrote Grenell.
DROP Disney+: New teen film 'Out' features openly homosexual main character! Sign the petition here.
In a separate letter that he sent to Adam Schiff this month, Grenell said, “Diversity of the IC workforce should always be celebrated, and I am proud that we increased diversity within the ODNI’s senior ranks, to include more women and members of the LGBT community.”
In 2019, Grenell was asked by President Trump to spearhead a global effort to get countries to end their criminalization of homosexuality.
That effort has now resulted in a policy that would limit the intelligence that U.S. spy agencies share with nations that continue to criminalize homosexuality in order to strong-arm them into conforming with Western norms.
According to multiple reports, the Trump White House is supportive of the initiative.
“Rick Grenell has proven in his work for the Trump administration that he is a gay activist first and a loyal Republican second,” Peter LaBarbera, founder and president of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality (AFTAH), told LifeSiteNews in February.
“He has made it his primary mission to work for the normalization of homosexuality worldwide, which would seem to be more of an Obama foreign policy goal than a Trump goal,” added the AFTAH head.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-06-24--Trump says he was ‘surprised’ at SCOTUS transgender ruling: ‘We’ve had a lot of losses’

WASHINGTON D.C. , June 23 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — President Donald Trump said he was “ surprised ” at the U.S. Supreme Court ’ s recent ruling to redefine “ sex ” and write transgenderism into 1964 law , suggesting that it was a “ loss ” from a court that was “ supposed to be in our favor.
” “ Some people felt that it was a decision that they were n't as surprised as I was .
Yeah , I was surprised , ” Trump said in an interview with CBN News political analyst David Brody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him what he thought about Bush-appointed Justice John Roberts , who , along with the Trump-appointed Justice Neil Gorsuch , voted for the recent ruling , Trump suggested that he is disappointed by the result .
“ Well , so far we 're not doing too well , ” he said .
“ It says , look , we 've had a lot of losses with a Court that was supposed to be in our favor.
” Trump said the ruling showed just how significant the appointment of judges would be in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ probably have a couple of more judges in the next four years , it could even be more than that — could be three or four , ” he continued .
“ If you have a radical left group of judges , religion , I think , will be almost wiped out in America .
If you look at it , pro-life will be absolutely wiped out .
So if you have that happening , pro-life is going to be out .
It ’ s going to be gone.
” Last week , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be moving to challenge or mitigate the Supreme Court ’ s ruling .
`` I ’ ve read the decision , and some people were surprised , '' the president told reporters at the White House , The Hill reported .
`` But they ’ ve ruled and we live with their decision .
That ’ s what it ’ s all about .
We live with the decision of the Supreme Court .
Very powerful .
Very powerful decision actually .
But they have so ruled . ''
Trump did not discuss @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and he did not address the fact that his own administration weighed in against the position Neil Gorsuch , one of Trump ’ s Supreme Court appointees , ultimately chose , by filing an amicus brief that argued that Title VII “ simply does not speak to discrimination because of an individual ’ s gender identity or a disconnect between an individual ’ s gender identity and the individual ’ s sex.
” PETITION : Urge U.S. Catholic Bishops Conference to defend Catholic heritage and statues !
Sign the petition here .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he will be releasing a new list of conservative Supreme Court Justice nominees , adding that “ [ b ] ased on decisions being rendered now , this list is more important than ever before ( Second Amendment , Right to Life , Religious Liberty , etc . )
– VOTE 2020 !
” Trump also touted his pro-life credentials during the CBN interview , contrasting them with his presidential rival , Joe Biden .
Trump claimed that a Democrat victory in November would mean “ radical Left judges on the Supreme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” “ I think I 'll have close to 300 judges by the time I finish my first term , hopefully , a lot more than that , but it 's a record number and we have pro-life judges , and you look at the Supreme Court , they 're pro-life , so we 'll see what happens , ” he said .
Trump stressed that a Democrat victory would also be bad news for religious groups in America .
“ In terms of religion , in terms of Evangelical , in terms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in terms of Jewish , in terms of anything , you ’ re going to have radical left judges appointed , and in terms of pro-life , you can forget it , ” he said .

‘It says, look, we've had a lot of losses with a Court that was supposed to be in our favor,’ Trump said.
WASHINGTON D.C., June 23, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — President Donald Trump said he was “surprised” at the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling to redefine “sex” and write transgenderism into 1964 law, suggesting that it was a “loss” from a court that was “supposed to be in our favor.”
“Some people felt that it was a decision that they weren't as surprised as I was. Yeah, I was surprised,” Trump said in an interview with CBN News political analyst David Brody that aired yesterday.
When Brody asked him what he thought about Bush-appointed Justice John Roberts, who, along with the Trump-appointed Justice Neil Gorsuch, voted for the recent ruling, Trump suggested that he is disappointed by the result.
“Well, so far we're not doing too well,” he said. “It says, look, we've had a lot of losses with a Court that was supposed to be in our favor.”
Trump said the ruling showed just how significant the appointment of judges would be in the coming years.
“You’ll probably have a couple of more judges in the next four years, it could even be more than that — could be three or four,” he continued. “If you have a radical left group of judges, religion, I think, will be almost wiped out in America. If you look at it, pro-life will be absolutely wiped out. So if you have that happening, pro-life is going to be out. It’s going to be gone.”
Last week, Trump indicated that his administration would not be moving to challenge or mitigate the Supreme Court’s ruling.
“I’ve read the decision, and some people were surprised,” the president told reporters at the White House, The Hill reported. “But they’ve ruled and we live with their decision. That’s what it’s all about. We live with the decision of the Supreme Court. Very powerful. Very powerful decision actually. But they have so ruled.”
Trump did not discuss any of the details of the ruling, and he did not address the fact that his own administration weighed in against the position Neil Gorsuch, one of Trump’s Supreme Court appointees, ultimately chose, by filing an amicus brief that argued that Title VII “simply does not speak to discrimination because of an individual’s gender identity or a disconnect between an individual’s gender identity and the individual’s sex.”
PETITION: Urge U.S. Catholic Bishops Conference to defend Catholic heritage and statues! Sign the petition here.
Later in the week, Trump announced that he will be releasing a new list of conservative Supreme Court Justice nominees, adding that “[b]ased on decisions being rendered now, this list is more important than ever before (Second Amendment, Right to Life, Religious Liberty, etc.) – VOTE 2020!”
…Based on decisions being rendered now, this list is more important than ever before (Second Amendment, Right to Life, Religous Liberty, etc.) – VOTE 2020! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 18, 2020
Trump also touted his pro-life credentials during the CBN interview, contrasting them with his presidential rival, Joe Biden.
Trump claimed that a Democrat victory in November would mean “radical Left judges on the Supreme Court and all over the court system.”
“I think I'll have close to 300 judges by the time I finish my first term, hopefully, a lot more than that, but it's a record number and we have pro-life judges, and you look at the Supreme Court, they're pro-life, so we'll see what happens,” he said.
Trump stressed that a Democrat victory would also be bad news for religious groups in America.
“In terms of religion, in terms of Evangelical, in terms of Christian with or without evangelical, in terms of Jewish, in terms of anything, you’re going to have radical left judges appointed, and in terms of pro-life, you can forget it,” he said.
Share