lifesitenews--2020-03-12--The Church is a spiritual hospital. Don’t take away the Mass for coronavirus

March 12 , 2020 ( CatholicCulture.org ) — Let me confess in advance : if my diocese follows the example set by the Seattle archdiocese , and suspends the public celebration of Mass , I ’ ll be looking for a priest who leaves the door unlocked when he celebrates a “ private ” Mass .
It ’ s not essential that I receive Communion .
If public-health concerns make that impossible , so be it .
But I need to participate regularly in the holy Sacrifice ; without it , life makes no sense .
So if the Mass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I. Fortunately my own pastor has moved in the opposite direction .
Like Archbishop Gadecki , he has decided that the coronavirus epidemic calls for scheduling more public Masses , so that the pews will be less crowded and the likelihood of contagion diminished .
The mathematical logic of the Polish archbishop ’ s directive is flawless : Acknowledging the recommendation of the Chief Sanitary Inspector that there not be large gatherings of people , I ’ m asking for the increase — insofar as this is possible — in the number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that at any one time the number of faithful participating in the liturgies are according to the sanitary regulation .
Yes , of course there is some risk in any public gathering .
But I take a risk every time I step into a car .
Sensible people take sensible precautions in the face of any danger , and during the length of this epidemic those precautions will rightly be heightened .
But there is no way to eliminate all risk .
We make our choices ; we set our priorities .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Catholic Church is the salvation of souls .
If I do catch the coronavirus , I want it to happen while I am in a state of grace .
And old friend , a soldier with an enormous amount of combat experience , told me that he and his comrades would encourage each other , on the eve of battle , to “ stay ’ fessed up and prayed up.
” Good advice , that .
Let public health officials set guidelines for curbing the spread of the epidemic .
Pastors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as they do not interfere with their central mission ) , but they have their own important role to play .
Archbishop Gadecki made sense on this point , too : In Tyler , Texas , Bishop Joseph Strickland has gone a step further , seizing the offensive : Will a Eucharistic procession halt the spread of the coronavirus ?
I don ’ t know .
I do know that the Lord can stop it , if He chooses .
More to the point , it ’ s the role of the Church @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the Lord is in charge—that our encounter with Him is infinitely more important than a possible encounter with a virus .

Yes, of course there is some risk in any public gathering. But I take a risk every time I step into a car.
March 12, 2020 (CatholicCulture.org) — Let me confess in advance: if my diocese follows the example set by the Seattle archdiocese, and suspends the public celebration of Mass, I’ll be looking for a priest who leaves the door unlocked when he celebrates a “private” Mass.
It’s not essential that I receive Communion. If public-health concerns make that impossible, so be it. But I need to participate regularly in the holy Sacrifice; without it, life makes no sense. So if the Mass goes “underground,” so will I.
Fortunately my own pastor has moved in the opposite direction. Like Archbishop Gadecki, he has decided that the coronavirus epidemic calls for scheduling more public Masses, so that the pews will be less crowded and the likelihood of contagion diminished. The mathematical logic of the Polish archbishop’s directive is flawless:
Acknowledging the recommendation of the Chief Sanitary Inspector that there not be large gatherings of people, I’m asking for the increase — insofar as this is possible — in the number of Sunday Masses in the churches, so that at any one time the number of faithful participating in the liturgies are according to the sanitary regulation.
Yes, of course there is some risk in any public gathering. But I take a risk every time I step into a car. Sensible people take sensible precautions in the face of any danger, and during the length of this epidemic those precautions will rightly be heightened. But there is no way to eliminate all risk. We make our choices; we set our priorities.
And especially in dangerous times, the priority of the Catholic Church is the salvation of souls. If I do catch the coronavirus, I want it to happen while I am in a state of grace. And old friend, a soldier with an enormous amount of combat experience, told me that he and his comrades would encourage each other, on the eve of battle, to “stay ’fessed up and prayed up.” Good advice, that.
Let public health officials set guidelines for curbing the spread of the epidemic. Pastors should follow those guidelines (as long as they do not interfere with their central mission), but they have their own important role to play. Archbishop Gadecki made sense on this point, too:
In the current situation, I wish to remind you that just as hospitals treat diseases of the body, so the Church serves to, among other things, treat illness of the soul; that is why it is unimaginable that we not pray in our churches.
In Tyler, Texas, Bishop Joseph Strickland has gone a step further, seizing the offensive:
I call on every Catholic priest to lead a simple Eucharistic Procession around your Church sometime before the Feast of St Joseph, March 19, for repentance, Christ’s healing hand on the Coronavirus & that all men may be Godly, manly sons & disciples of His Son Jesus Christ.
Will a Eucharistic procession halt the spread of the coronavirus? I don’t know. I do know that the Lord can stop it, if He chooses. More to the point, it’s the role of the Church to remind a confused and panicky population that the Lord is in charge—that our encounter with Him is infinitely more important than a possible encounter with a virus.
Published with permission from CatholicCulture.org.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-03-12--US archbishop bans all public masses due to coronavirus

SEATTLE , Washington , March 12 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Archbishop Paul Etienne has ordered all parishes of the Archdiocese of Seattle to suspend public celebration of Mass following an emergency declaration by Washington Governor Jay Inslee .
Inslee announced on Wednesday : “ Starting today , events that take place in King , Snohomish , and Pierce counties with more than 250 people are prohibited by the state .
This order applies to gatherings for social , spiritual and recreational activities .
These include but are not limited to : community , civic , public , leisure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parades ; concerts ; festivals ; conventions ; fundraisers and similar activities.
” Archbishop Etienne said that the announcement “ certainly speaks to us as an institution of faith.
” “ I want to acknowledge the best science that is out there , that basically says despite our best efforts , this epidemic is going to continue to spread , ” Etienne said in a short video .
“ That doesn ’ t mean that we shouldn ’ t be doing everything we possibly can to restrict the spread of this virus , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s bishops , however , have called for more Masses as a response to the coronavirus epidemic .
Archbishop Stanisław Gądecki , writing as the leader of the Polish bishops ’ conference , released a statement this week asking that the extra Masses be made available so that the congregations will be smaller .
“ Acknowledging the recommendation of the Chief Sanitary Inspector that there not be large gatherings of people , I ’ m asking for the increase – insofar as this is possible – in the number of Sunday Masses in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one time the number of faithful participating in the liturgies are according to the sanitary regulation , ” Gądecki wrote .
The Polish archbishop of Poznań declared that it was “ unimaginable ” for Polish Catholics not to pray in their churches .
“ In the current situation , I wish to remind you that just as hospitals treat diseases of the body , so the Church serves to , among other things , treat illness of the soul ; that is why it is unimaginable that we not pray in our churches @ @ @ @ @ @ @ characterized his decision as an extreme cautionary measure .
“ There may be other measures that will be introduced , ” he warned .
“ We want to do our part to prevent the spread of this virus , of this epidemic , ” Etienne said .
While public Masses are suspended , “ every priest has an obligation to celebrate the Eucharist every day and certainly I want our priests to continue to do that , ” the archbishop clarified .
“ And I want all of us to continue to pray @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so many others to care for the sick and to slow down the spread of this virus.
” Just days ago , archbishop Etienne had banned the reception of communion on the tongue .
While claiming not to refuse Communion to anyone , he stated that “ to do our part to contain the spread of a new virus , while at the national epicenter of the outbreak , we are limiting the option at this time to receive Communion in the hand.
” “ People are free to either receive Communion under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” the archbishop said .
Meanwhile , south of Seattle , the archdiocese of Portland , Oregon , declared that “ a parish can not ban the reception of Holy Communion on the tongue.
” The archdiocese , whose head is archbishop Alexander Sample , had consulted two doctors on the question of the manner of receiving Holy Communion .
Ever since the outbreak of the coronavirus , countless bishops and bishops ’ conferences had recommended , if not mandated , to receive the Eucharist in the hand .
The doctors “ agreed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Communion on the tongue or in the hand pose a more or less equal risk.
” “ The risk of touching the tongue and passing the saliva on to others is obviously a danger however the chance of touching someone ’ s hand is equally probable and one ’ s hands have a greater exposure to germs , ” the statement of the archdiocese pointed out .
In addition to suspending all public Masses , the archdiocese of Washington has also decided to close all Catholic schools within the Seattle Public School District @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We recognize the hardship this places on families ; at the same time , we must protect the common good .
Our government leaders urge us to take these steps to slow the spread of this global pandemic .
Our Catholic faith compels us to consider and protect those most vulnerable in our society , ” explained Kristin Dixon , the archdiocese ’ s superintendent of schools .
At the time of this writing , the state of Washington reported 366 cases of coronavirus .
Almost 3,500 people were tested .
29 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Roberto de Mattei has described how Pope St. Gregory the Great responded to a deadly plague during his pontificate .
After his election in the year 590 , Gregory led a penitential procession of the faithful throughout Rome .
“ While the multitude traversed the city , in sepulchral silence , the pestilence reached such a point of fury , that in the brief space of an hour , eighty people fell dead to the ground .
However , Gregory didn ’ t cease for a second in exhorting the people to continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Virgin painted by St. Luke and kept in Santa Maria Maggiore , be brought to the front of the procession , ” de Mattei recounted .
The plague of the 6th century was seen as a punishment .
After the procession , Gregory saw how angels settled themselves in a circle around Our Lady ’ s picture , and , raising his eyes , he “ saw at the top of the castle an angel , who , after drying his sword dripping with blood , put it back in its sheath @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was over .
”

The archbishop’s decision comes after the Washington governor prohibited gatherings of more than 250 people.
SEATTLE, Washington, March 12, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Archbishop Paul Etienne has ordered all parishes of the Archdiocese of Seattle to suspend public celebration of Mass following an emergency declaration by Washington Governor Jay Inslee.
Inslee announced on Wednesday: “Starting today, events that take place in King, Snohomish, and Pierce counties with more than 250 people are prohibited by the state. This order applies to gatherings for social, spiritual and recreational activities. These include but are not limited to: community, civic, public, leisure, faith-based, or sporting events; parades; concerts; festivals; conventions; fundraisers and similar activities.”
Archbishop Etienne said that the announcement “certainly speaks to us as an institution of faith.”
“I want to acknowledge the best science that is out there, that basically says despite our best efforts, this epidemic is going to continue to spread,” Etienne said in a short video. “That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t be doing everything we possibly can to restrict the spread of this virus, and of this epidemic.”
Poland’s bishops, however, have called for more Masses as a response to the coronavirus epidemic. Archbishop Stanisław Gądecki, writing as the leader of the Polish bishops’ conference, released a statement this week asking that the extra Masses be made available so that the congregations will be smaller.
“Acknowledging the recommendation of the Chief Sanitary Inspector that there not be large gatherings of people, I’m asking for the increase – insofar as this is possible – in the number of Sunday Masses in the churches, so that at any one time the number of faithful participating in the liturgies are according to the sanitary regulation,”Gądecki wrote.
The Polish archbishop of Poznań declared that it was “unimaginable” for Polish Catholics not to pray in their churches.
“In the current situation, I wish to remind you that just as hospitals treat diseases of the body, so the Church serves to, among other things, treat illness of the soul; that is why it is unimaginable that we not pray in our churches,” he wrote.
Archbishop Etienne characterized his decision as an extreme cautionary measure. “There may be other measures that will be introduced,” he warned.
“We want to do our part to prevent the spread of this virus, of this epidemic,” Etienne said.
While public Masses are suspended, “every priest has an obligation to celebrate the Eucharist every day and certainly I want our priests to continue to do that,” the archbishop clarified. “And I want all of us to continue to pray for our efforts and the efforts of so many others to care for the sick and to slow down the spread of this virus.”
Just days ago, archbishop Etienne had banned the reception of communion on the tongue. While claiming not to refuse Communion to anyone, he stated that “to do our part to contain the spread of a new virus, while at the national epicenter of the outbreak, we are limiting the option at this time to receive Communion in the hand.”
“People are free to either receive Communion under this new temporary guideline or not,” the archbishop said.
Meanwhile, south of Seattle, the archdiocese of Portland, Oregon, declared that “a parish cannot ban the reception of Holy Communion on the tongue.”
The archdiocese, whose head is archbishop Alexander Sample, had consulted two doctors on the question of the manner of receiving Holy Communion. Ever since the outbreak of the coronavirus, countless bishops and bishops’ conferences had recommended, if not mandated, to receive the Eucharist in the hand.
The doctors “agreed that done properly the reception of Holy Communion on the tongue or in the hand pose a more or less equal risk.”
“The risk of touching the tongue and passing the saliva on to others is obviously a danger however the chance of touching someone’s hand is equally probable and one’s hands have a greater exposure to germs,” the statement of the archdiocese pointed out.
In addition to suspending all public Masses, the archdiocese of Washington has also decided to close all Catholic schools within the Seattle Public School District until the end of the month.
“We recognize the hardship this places on families; at the same time, we must protect the common good. Our government leaders urge us to take these steps to slow the spread of this global pandemic. Our Catholic faith compels us to consider and protect those most vulnerable in our society,” explained Kristin Dixon, the archdiocese’s superintendent of schools.
At the time of this writing, the state of Washington reported 366 cases of coronavirus. Almost 3,500 people were tested. 29 cases resulted in death.
Italian historian Roberto de Mattei has described how Pope St. Gregory the Great responded to a deadly plague during his pontificate. After his election in the year 590, Gregory led a penitential procession of the faithful throughout Rome.
“While the multitude traversed the city, in sepulchral silence, the pestilence reached such a point of fury, that in the brief space of an hour, eighty people fell dead to the ground. However, Gregory didn’t cease for a second in exhorting the people to continue praying and insisted that the picture of the Virgin painted by St. Luke and kept in Santa Maria Maggiore, be brought to the front of the procession,” de Mattei recounted.
The plague of the 6th century was seen as a punishment. After the procession, Gregory saw how angels settled themselves in a circle around Our Lady’s picture, and, raising his eyes, he “saw at the top of the castle an angel, who, after drying his sword dripping with blood, put it back in its sheath, as a sign that the punishment was over.”
Editor’s note: With files from Dorothy Cummings McLean.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-03-12--China expert: Chinese regime falsely telling Communist party members coronavirus is U.S. bioweapon

Steven Mosher details the claims being falsely made by the Chinese Communist Party which employ clever and convincing arguments so @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. rather than the Chinese government ’ s incompetence or worse for the epidemic @

Steven Mosher details the claims being falsely made by the Chinese Communist Party which employ clever and convincing arguments so Communist party members will blame the U.S. rather than the Chinese government’s incompetence or worse for the epidemic.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-03-12--Pro-lifers thank Sec. General of Org. of American States for saying right to life is ‘fundamen

Pro-lifers thank Sec. General of Org. of American States for saying right to life is ‘fundamental’

WASHINGTON , D.C. , March 12 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Pro-life leaders in the United States have commended the Secretary General of the Organization of American States ( OAS ) , Luis Almagro , for saying last week at a forum for Secretary General candidates with civil society organizations that “ definitely , the principles of religious freedom that I have mentioned and the principles of the right to life are fundamental principles and rights… ” Almagro is running for a second term .
Almagro also responded to the criticism by progressive groups that pro-life groups are “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no one can be considered ‘ anti-rights ’ within this organization .
The dialogue has to be respectful and absolutely inclusive.
” Pro-life leaders also thanked the Trump administration for helping to clarify the Secretary General ’ s position on the issue .
A coalition of U.S. based pro-life groups wrote to U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo last year requesting that the U.S. withdraw its support of Almagro ’ s re-election bid over concerns regarding comments Almagro made calling on countries in the region to legalize abortion .
The Trump administration responded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ General Almagro and the coalition , in which the Secretary General explained the context of his previous statements and stated that it had not been his intention to say that there was a “ right ” to abortion or that member states should legalize it .
In this sense , he said it would be improper for him to weigh in on the issue since it is an internal matter of member states .
“ Mr .
Almagro ’ s 180-degree turn on abortion is a testament to the administration ’ s efforts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its foreign policy , ” said Gualberto Garcia Jones , LifeSite ’ s Director of Advocacy .
“ From President Trump ’ s speech at the U.N. , to Secretary Pompeo ’ s enforcement of the Siljander Amendment , and U.S. OAS Ambassador Carlos Trujillo ’ s leadership in Latin America , the Trump administration has shown how American leadership can influence the hemisphere.
” “ We appreciate Secretary General Almagro ’ s remarks and we hope they are heard throughout the region and the world .
He could not have been clearer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fundamental principle and right , ” added Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser .

'Mr. Almagro’s 180-degree turn on abortion is a testament to the administration’s efforts to prioritize the right to life in its foreign policy,' said LifeSite's Director of Advocacy.
WASHINGTON, D.C., March 12, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Pro-life leaders in the United States have commended the Secretary General of the Organization of American States (OAS), Luis Almagro, for saying last week at a forum for Secretary General candidates with civil society organizations that “definitely, the principles of religious freedom that I have mentioned and the principles of the right to life are fundamental principles and rights…”
Almagro is running for a second term.
The Secretary General added:
“[t]he application of the fullest validity of Article 4 of the American Convention [of Human Rights, which states that ‘[t]his right shall be protected by law and, in general, from the moment of conception’] is essential.”
Almagro also responded to the criticism by progressive groups that pro-life groups are “anti-rights” groups by saying that “no one can be considered ‘anti-rights’ within this organization. The dialogue has to be respectful and absolutely inclusive.”
Pro-life leaders also thanked the Trump administration for helping to clarify the Secretary General’s position on the issue.
A coalition of U.S. based pro-life groups wrote to U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo last year requesting that the U.S. withdraw its support of Almagro’s re-election bid over concerns regarding comments Almagro made calling on countries in the region to legalize abortion.
The Trump administration responded swiftly by facilitating a dialogue between Secretary General Almagro and the coalition, in which the Secretary General explained the context of his previous statements and stated that it had not been his intention to say that there was a “right” to abortion or that member states should legalize it. In this sense, he said it would be improper for him to weigh in on the issue since it is an internal matter of member states.
“Mr. Almagro’s 180-degree turn on abortion is a testament to the administration’s efforts to prioritize the right to life in its foreign policy,” said Gualberto Garcia Jones, LifeSite’s Director of Advocacy. “From President Trump’s speech at the U.N., to Secretary Pompeo’s enforcement of the Siljander Amendment, and U.S. OAS Ambassador Carlos Trujillo’s leadership in Latin America, the Trump administration has shown how American leadership can influence the hemisphere.”
“We appreciate Secretary General Almagro’s remarks and we hope they are heard throughout the region and the world. He could not have been clearer: the right to life is a fundamental principle and right,” added Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-03-12--4 people held her down during the abortion. Now she’s a pro-life activist.

March 11 , 2020 ( Society for the Protection of Unborn Children ) — A woman who was held down by four people during a traumatic abortion struggle has become pro-life activist who dedicates her life to fight against abortion .
Catherine Glenn Foster underwent a traumatic abortion when she was 19 .
Ms. Foster is now 38 and is the President and CEO of Americans United for Life , a pro-life legal team .
“ I Was Physically Struggling To Get Up Off The Table ” Ms. Foster realised that she was pregnant whilst studying in university .
She @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pregnancy with her parents and scheduled an abortion .
Ms. Foster said : “ I couldn ’ t have said , this is a child inside me and it ’ s wrong to go forward with this .
None of that was clear because all of this is in crisis mode , but I just knew very , very deep inside me that this was wrong and that I should not be there .
I should leave that room immediately.
” Ms. Foster said that when she tried to leave , the staff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to go .
She continued : “ I tried to , I was physically trying to get up off the table .
I ended up with four people holding me down , one on each arm , one on each leg.
” Ms. Foster said that she attempted to scream but the doctor entered the room and began the abortion regardless of her struggle .
She said : “ They kept me still enough that it was able to happen relatively safely , I guess .
And then it was just over.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where she made the decision to dedicate her work to prevent abortion and to protect other women and girls from undergoing the same traumatic experience she had faced .
Stories such as these are not uncommon in the pro-life movement .
Many of the most prominent figures in the pro-life movement have suffered similar abortion experiences and have dedicated their lives to protect others from suffering such harm .
Abby Johnson , who had her own abortion experience , was the former director of a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic , before becoming a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ establishing a pro-life advocacy group which helps abortion workers leave the industry .
Similarly , Sara Geromin had been heavily involved in protests in Brazil promoting abortion with the radical group , FEMEN .
After undergoing an abortion , Geromin suffered severe complications and nearly bled to death .
In 2015 , she gave birth to a child .
This changed everything for her .
She was so affected by the experience , that she wrote a book speaking against abortion .
She said : “ I do n't want [ others ] @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did.
” If you , or anyone you know has been affected by abortion , please contact the Abortion Recovery Care and Helpline ( ARCH ) for free , non-judgemental , confidential support : 0345 603 8501 or email : [ email protected ] .
Published with permission from the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children .

'I was physically trying to get up off the table. I ended up with four people holding me down, one on each arm, one on each leg.'
March 11, 2020 (Society for the Protection of Unborn Children) — A woman who was held down by four people during a traumatic abortion struggle has become pro-life activist who dedicates her life to fight against abortion.
Catherine Glenn Foster underwent a traumatic abortion when she was 19. Ms. Foster is now 38 and is the President and CEO of Americans United for Life, a pro-life legal team.
“I Was Physically Struggling To Get Up Off The Table”
Ms. Foster realised that she was pregnant whilst studying in university. She did not share the news of her pregnancy with her parents and scheduled an abortion.
Ms. Foster said: “I couldn’t have said, this is a child inside me and it’s wrong to go forward with this. None of that was clear because all of this is in crisis mode, but I just knew very, very deep inside me that this was wrong and that I should not be there. I should leave that room immediately.”
Ms. Foster said that when she tried to leave, the staff told her that she was not allowed to go.
She continued: “I tried to, I was physically trying to get up off the table. I ended up with four people holding me down, one on each arm, one on each leg.”
Ms. Foster said that she attempted to scream but the doctor entered the room and began the abortion regardless of her struggle.
She said: “They kept me still enough that it was able to happen relatively safely, I guess. And then it was just over.”
Hope After Abortion
Ms. Foster went on to study law where she made the decision to dedicate her work to prevent abortion and to protect other women and girls from undergoing the same traumatic experience she had faced.
Stories such as these are not uncommon in the pro-life movement. Many of the most prominent figures in the pro-life movement have suffered similar abortion experiences and have dedicated their lives to protect others from suffering such harm.
Abby Johnson, who had her own abortion experience, was the former director of a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic, before becoming a powerful voice in the pro-life movement and establishing a pro-life advocacy group which helps abortion workers leave the industry.
Similarly, Sara Geromin had been heavily involved in protests in Brazil promoting abortion with the radical group, FEMEN. After undergoing an abortion, Geromin suffered severe complications and nearly bled to death. In 2015, she gave birth to a child. This changed everything for her. She was so affected by the experience, that she wrote a book speaking against abortion. She said: “I don't want [others] to go through the same thing I did.”
If you, or anyone you know has been affected by abortion, please contact the Abortion Recovery Care and Helpline (ARCH) for free, non-judgemental, confidential support: 0345 603 8501 or email: [email protected].
Published with permission from the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-03-12--Blasphemies, threats, feminists greet Catholics praying for unborn at Georgetown

March 11 , 2020 ( TFP Student Action ) — For students at Georgetown University , March 2 was like any other Monday .
Some hurried through the Healy Gate on their way to class , others leisurely enjoyed the sunny day in Washington , D.C .
However , the humdrum monotony soon vanished .
TFP Student Action volunteers arrived .
This time , a contingent of enthusiastic high school seniors from the St. Louis de Montfort Academy joined them .
Standing near Healy Gate , they set up their banner : “ Pray and act to end the sin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign started with a prayer .
Then the young volunteers politely shared 10 Reasons to Protect the Unborn leaflets with students , while others held signs encouraging passing cars to “ honk ” for the unborn .
Would students at the oldest Catholic university in America be receptive to the cause of the unborn ?
Would they welcome peaceful fellow Catholics in prayer to end abortion ?
Almost immediately , a student yelled , “ I like killing babies.
” A group of feminists gathered to mock and laugh hysterically for about 30 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Murphy and said , “ You should be out here defending women ’ s rights.
” Gregory was quick to reply : “ We ’ re here standing up for the rights of all women no matter how small.
” The hostility only increased as a crowd of jeering pro-abortion students formed on the sidewalk across the street .
Their ringleader was a self-proclaimed “ indigenous ” man who shouted blasphemies against the Virgin Mary , using lewd language against the Catholic Church and TFP volunteers who calmly prayed the rosary .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ irate pro-abortion advocate , ironically ignoring the fact that more than 60 million unborn babies have been killed by surgical abortions in America since 1973 .
“ We are beyond a civilized debate , ” he shouted .
TFP volunteers continued to pray .
It seemed like the best response .
At this point , the spiritual aspect of the campaign became apparent .
On one side , the pro-abortion and pro-homosexual activists united in their hatred for purity , the unborn and Catholic morality .
On the other side of the street @ @ @ @ @ @ @ united in their love for purity , eager to follow the teachings of the Catholic Church , fighting for the God-given right to life .
What an extreme and vivid contrast .
This clash of ideas was tangible .
With the recitation of the rosary underway , the pro-abortion side became very agitated .
It was like holy water on the devil .
“ You ’ re weaponizing the rosary , ” shrieked one .
Others attacked prayer .
Infuriated , one pro-abortion student urged passing cars to run over the pro-life volunteers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ zipped past two TFP volunteers , only inches away from running them over .
Looking at the majestic TFP standard , a student sneered , “ you ’ re so medieval.
” “ Thank you .
That ’ s a compliment , ” replied a volunteer much to the man ’ s astonishment .
Indeed , modern society would benefit from the principles of the Gospel that sustained Medieval Christendom , which brought about so much authentic progress in education , healthcare , architecture , agriculture , and above all , virtue , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at Georgetown ended just as it had started , with a prayer .
The pro-abortion side responded by chanting what Nietzsche once said , “ God is dead !
God is dead !
” Well , the fact is Nietzsche has been dead for 120 years .
And God is eternal .
Yes , God ’ s grace continues to live in the hearts and souls of more and more young Americans who not only yearn but also fight for the day when the sin of abortion will be abolished forever in our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prayer and hasten the day when we can truly be one nation under God — a nation without the sin of abortion .
Our Lady of Victory , pray for us !

This clash of ideas was tangible. With the recitation of the rosary underway, the pro-abortion side became very agitated.
March 11, 2020 (TFP Student Action) — For students at Georgetown University, March 2 was like any other Monday. Some hurried through the Healy Gate on their way to class, others leisurely enjoyed the sunny day in Washington, D.C. However, the humdrum monotony soon vanished.
Watch the amazing video here:
TFP Student Action volunteers arrived. This time, a contingent of enthusiastic high school seniors from the St. Louis de Montfort Academy joined them. Standing near Healy Gate, they set up their banner: “Pray and act to end the sin of abortion.”
As always, the campaign started with a prayer. Then the young volunteers politely shared 10 Reasons to Protect the Unborn leaflets with students, while others held signs encouraging passing cars to “honk” for the unborn.
Would students at the oldest Catholic university in America be receptive to the cause of the unborn? Would they welcome peaceful fellow Catholics in prayer to end abortion?
Almost immediately, a student yelled, “I like killing babies.” A group of feminists gathered to mock and laugh hysterically for about 30 minutes. One approached TFP volunteer Gregory Murphy and said, “You should be out here defending women’s rights.” Gregory was quick to reply: “We’re here standing up for the rights of all women no matter how small.”
The hostility only increased as a crowd of jeering pro-abortion students formed on the sidewalk across the street. Their ringleader was a self-proclaimed “indigenous” man who shouted blasphemies against the Virgin Mary, using lewd language against the Catholic Church and TFP volunteers who calmly prayed the rosary.
“You are killing people…” insisted an irate pro-abortion advocate, ironically ignoring the fact that more than 60 million unborn babies have been killed by surgical abortions in America since 1973. “We are beyond a civilized debate,” he shouted.
TFP volunteers continued to pray. It seemed like the best response. At this point, the spiritual aspect of the campaign became apparent. On one side, the pro-abortion and pro-homosexual activists united in their hatred for purity, the unborn and Catholic morality. On the other side of the street, a handful of young men stood united in their love for purity, eager to follow the teachings of the Catholic Church, fighting for the God-given right to life. What an extreme and vivid contrast.
This clash of ideas was tangible. With the recitation of the rosary underway, the pro-abortion side became very agitated. It was like holy water on the devil. “You’re weaponizing the rosary,” shrieked one. Others attacked prayer.
Infuriated, one pro-abortion student urged passing cars to run over the pro-life volunteers. Two enraged women driving a moped zipped past two TFP volunteers, only inches away from running them over.
Looking at the majestic TFP standard, a student sneered, “you’re so medieval.” “Thank you. That’s a compliment,” replied a volunteer much to the man’s astonishment. Indeed, modern society would benefit from the principles of the Gospel that sustained Medieval Christendom, which brought about so much authentic progress in education, healthcare, architecture, agriculture, and above all, virtue, sainthood and Faith.
The TFP campaign at Georgetown ended just as it had started, with a prayer.
The pro-abortion side responded by chanting what Nietzsche once said, “God is dead! God is dead!”
Well, the fact is Nietzsche has been dead for 120 years. And God is eternal. Yes, God’s grace continues to live in the hearts and souls of more and more young Americans who not only yearn but also fight for the day when the sin of abortion will be abolished forever in our beloved land.
May God hear our prayer and hasten the day when we can truly be one nation under God — a nation without the sin of abortion.
Our Lady of Victory, pray for us!
Published with permission from TFP Student Action.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-03-12--Women will beat feminism by reclaiming monogamy

March 11 , 2020 ( The Catholic Thing ) — Five decades ago , radical feminist Kate Millett and her eleven friends in New York City recited a type of litany , a feminist manifesto of sorts , that has proven to be remarkably effective : “ Why are we here today ?
” the chairwoman asked .
“ And how do we make Cultural Revolution ?
” “ How do we destroy the family ?
” “ And how do we destroy the American Patriarch ?
” “ How do we do that ?
” I ’ ve always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Did those 12 women ever dream that their tiny effort would be so wildly successful ?
We witness their success daily , from half-time shows to celebrities insisting their careers and awards are more important than their children , from royal tantrums even to the tragic gender confusion foisted upon children .
Recently , several female friends , old and new , gathered in a Virginia restaurant to celebrate the pending arrival of my fifth child .
After opening gifts , I asked this remarkable group of souls if they would humor me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I have wanted to gather a group of women for a special purpose .
Would they be willing to say with me a prayer to reclaim all that has been destroyed by radical feminism ?
Would they be willing to try to reverse the astronomical damage that had been unleashed through feminist ideology ?
Although I didn ’ t plan it , there were exactly 12 women present , the same symbolic number of Millett ’ s anti-apostles , who had gathered five decades ago , intent on destroying our culture .
My @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the old script .
I had never actually thought about how to rewrite their litany .
It seemed straightforward enough get rid of the Marxist overtones and reclaim all the things the radical feminists had claimed for themselves .
What I didn ’ t expect from our quick rewriting , however , was a new insight .
Our litany , preceded by an impromptu prayer to Our Lord and His Mother , read : “ Why are we here today ?
” said Dawn .
“ To reclaim our culture , ” the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would we build that culture ?
” “ How do we restore the family ?
” “ How do we do that ?
” “ How do we do that ?
” Most feminism has been a relentless quest to help women figure out who we are , and what we can do to be happy .
The problem , however , is that it takes our vices and uses them against us .
Feminism , by its nature , is a vain effort to look to ourselves for answers , at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ others .
Its first impulse is to have what men have .
Starting with Eve , women have always sought that which we don ’ t have — from the forbidden fruit to the perfect job , partner , property , wardrobe , body , etc .
The feminist quest has left no stone unturned , no rule or duty un-flaunted , and no commandment sacred .
The evidence shows that it continues to disappoint , leaving a trail of broken and wounded women , while leading to further confusion about what makes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the answer to restoring the culture and the family doesn ’ t focus upon women at all , but starts with restoring what we deliberately called the “ American Patriarch , ” by which we mean the natural authority of men , real men .
The old litany was effective because it started by destroying the authority of men .
In rewriting the litany , we realized that the restoration of manhood was required , and with it , what would follow was the restoring of the women , the family , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ often reminded me that in the Old Testament , whenever the Israelites are disobedient , God takes away their leadership , which results in weak kings or corrupt rulers — at best — or at worst , slavery and widespread slaughter .
If you consider women over the last fifty years and the annihilation of every virtue , particularly with respect to our fertility , the question arises : Has our disobedience led to the decapitation of leadership in our families ?
Our Church ?
Our countries ?
If we look around , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corruption everywhere , in society and the Church .
Human trafficking is now rampant , with women and children treated like sexual chattel .
And we live daily with the slaughter of U.S. children , now well into 60 million .
These are similar to what the Israelites suffered for their disobedience .
What if women start looking for answers beyond themselves and to start asking instead , What is God ’ s will ?
We have plenty of evidence of what it looks like when we flout His will .
But history @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is powerful .
Mary ’ s obedience produced more fruit than Eve ’ s disobedience .
Men , of course , carry their own share of guilt , but women ’ s continued efforts to look to ourselves as the answer hasn ’ t gotten us anywhere .
We have instead enshrined a matriarchy that grasps at power , while neglecting the relationships that have so animated the lives of women since the beginning of time .
We have grown comfortable with the lie that men and children are the obstacles to our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Israelites learned the hard way , over and over again ; the way back requires a return to obedience , a return to faithfulness to God .
To do that , women must surrender the desire for power and control that is so en vogue today .
As the old and new litanies inform us , to renew the culture and restore the family , women must , once again , embrace the beautiful order that comes from valuing true , honest , and strong men .
Published with permission from The @ @ @

To renew the culture and restore the family, women must embrace the beautiful order that comes from valuing true, honest, and strong men.
March 11, 2020 (The Catholic Thing) — Five decades ago, radical feminist Kate Millett and her eleven friends in New York City recited a type of litany, a feminist manifesto of sorts, that has proven to be remarkably effective:
“Why are we here today?” the chairwoman asked.
“To make revolution,” they answered.
“What kind of revolution?”
“The Cultural Revolution.”
“And how do we make Cultural Revolution?”
“By destroying the American family!”
“How do we destroy the family?”
“By destroying the American Patriarch.”
“And how do we destroy the American Patriarch?”
“By taking away his power!”
“How do we do that?”
“By destroying monogamy!”
“How can we destroy monogamy?”
“By promoting promiscuity, eroticism, prostitution, abortion, and homosexuality!”
I’ve always been struck by the last line. Did those 12 women ever dream that their tiny effort would be so wildly successful? We witness their success daily, from half-time shows to celebrities insisting their careers and awards are more important than their children, from royal tantrums even to the tragic gender confusion foisted upon children.
Recently, several female friends, old and new, gathered in a Virginia restaurant to celebrate the pending arrival of my fifth child. After opening gifts, I asked this remarkable group of souls if they would humor me.
Since writing The Anti-Mary Exposed, I have wanted to gather a group of women for a special purpose. Would they be willing to say with me a prayer to reclaim all that has been destroyed by radical feminism? Would they be willing to try to reverse the astronomical damage that had been unleashed through feminist ideology?
Although I didn’t plan it, there were exactly 12 women present, the same symbolic number of Millett’s anti-apostles, who had gathered five decades ago, intent on destroying our culture.
My friend Dawn and I took to rewriting the old script. I had never actually thought about how to rewrite their litany. It seemed straightforward enough
get rid of the Marxist overtones and reclaim all the things the radical feminists had claimed for themselves. What I didn’t expect from our quick rewriting, however, was a new insight.
Our litany, preceded by an impromptu prayer to Our Lord and His Mother, read:
“Why are we here today?” said Dawn.
“To reclaim our culture,” the 11 of us replied.
“What kind of culture?”
“A Christian culture.”
“How would we build that culture?”
“By restoring the American family.”
“How do we restore the family?”
“By restoring the American Patriarch.”
“How do we do that?”
“By restoring his power and authority.”
“How do we do that?”
“By reclaiming monogamy.”
“How do we reclaim monogamy?”
“By rejecting pornography, abortion, eroticism, prostitution, and homosexuality.”
Most feminism has been a relentless quest to help women figure out who we are, and what we can do to be happy. The problem, however, is that it takes our vices and uses them against us.
Feminism, by its nature, is a vain effort to look to ourselves for answers, at the cost of constant comparing of ourselves to others. Its first impulse is to have what men have. Starting with Eve, women have always sought that which we don’t have — from the forbidden fruit to the perfect job, partner, property, wardrobe, body, etc.
The feminist quest has left no stone unturned, no rule or duty un-flaunted, and no commandment sacred. The evidence shows that it continues to disappoint, leaving a trail of broken and wounded women, while leading to further confusion about what makes us women.
Our new litany claims that the answer to restoring the culture and the family doesn’t focus upon women at all, but starts with restoring what we deliberately called the “American Patriarch,” by which we mean the natural authority of men, real men. The old litany was effective because it started by destroying the authority of men.
In rewriting the litany, we realized that the restoration of manhood was required, and with it, what would follow was the restoring of the women, the family, the culture.
A wise priest has often reminded me that in the Old Testament, whenever the Israelites are disobedient, God takes away their leadership, which results in weak kings or corrupt rulers — at best — or at worst, slavery and widespread slaughter.
If you consider women over the last fifty years and the annihilation of every virtue, particularly with respect to our fertility, the question arises: Has our disobedience led to the decapitation of leadership in our families? Our Church? Our countries?
If we look around, we see profound evidence of weakness and corruption everywhere, in society and the Church. Human trafficking is now rampant, with women and children treated like sexual chattel. And we live daily with the slaughter of U.S. children, now well into 60 million. These are similar to what the Israelites suffered for their disobedience.
What if women start looking for answers beyond themselves and to start asking instead, What is God’s will? We have plenty of evidence of what it looks like when we flout His will. But history also shows that a return to obedience is powerful. Mary’s obedience produced more fruit than Eve’s disobedience.
Men, of course, carry their own share of guilt, but women’s continued efforts to look to ourselves as the answer hasn’t gotten us anywhere. We have instead enshrined a matriarchy that grasps at power, while neglecting the relationships that have so animated the lives of women since the beginning of time. We have grown comfortable with the lie that men and children are the obstacles to our happiness and not avenues to it.
The Israelites learned the hard way, over and over again; the way back requires a return to obedience, a return to faithfulness to God. To do that, women must surrender the desire for power and control that is so en vogue today. As the old and new litanies inform us, to renew the culture and restore the family, women must, once again, embrace the beautiful order that comes from valuing true, honest, and strong men.
Published with permission from The Catholic Thing.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-03-12--UN report calls for gays, pro-abortion women to have say in ‘defining’ traditional faith

UN report calls for gays, pro-abortion women to have say in ‘defining’ traditional faiths

March 11 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — A recently published U.N. report on freedom of religion argues that it is a vital part of respecting the rights of women and people who identify as LGBT that they are able to “ belong to a faith of their choice without being discriminated against ” for their “ right ” to abortion and LGBT practices .
The report goes on to claim that international law may recognize “ the right of those persons to take part on an equal basis in the process of defining that community ” — in other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may have the right under international law to redefine their faith community , whether it be Christian , Muslim , or Jewish .
The report , authored by Ahmad Shaheed , the U.N. special rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief , states : For women and LGBT+ individuals , realizing religious freedom is often about realizing their agency and equality within religion .
The Special Rapporteur submits that the ability of women , girls and sexual orientation and gender identity minorities to belong to a faith of their choice without being discriminated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right to freedom of religion or belief , as well as their right to be free from gender discrimination .
International law protects the right of persons to exit a religious or belief community , but it may also recognize the right of those persons to take part on an equal basis in the process of defining that community .
In the context of the report , when Shaheed writes about women being able to exercise their rights free from “ discrimination , ” this includes women ’ s so-called “ sexual and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a regular theme of U.N. reports and historically a euphemism for access to contraception and abortion .
The report calls for “ transformational policies ” in order to achieve “ gender equality and full respect for the human rights of women , including sexual and reproductive health and rights.
” These so-called “ sexual and reproductive rights , ” according to the report , are restricted by laws that institute “ partial or total bans on access to abortion and contraception [ and ] prohibitions on assisted reproductive technologies and gender reassignment [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ limits on what Shaheed calls “ evidence-based sexuality education.
” Shaheed calls on “ States ” — i.e.
, national governments — to “ ensure that all individuals are able to effectively enjoy their human rights ” and for governments to “ combat gender-based violence and discrimination , ” including where this occurs “ on the basis of … religion or belief.
” According to the report , the obligation of states to “ ensure gender equality ” is not limited to the public realm but extends “ into areas of religious life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of women , girls and sexual or gender identity minorities to enjoy their human rights on an equal footing.
” While noting the “ right to maintain the internal institutional affairs of religious community life without State intervention , ” Shaheed then asserts that this may be restricted “ in strict compliance with Article 18 ( 3 ) of the ICCPR.
” The ICCPR is the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights , and article 18 ( 3 ) says the freedom to manifest one 's religion or beliefs may be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of others .
Several commentators have pointed out that the report stops short of ordering religions to change their doctrines .
However , it is important to note what has been asserted : “ women and LGBT+ individuals ” must be able to belong to any religion of their choice , free from discrimination within that religion and to “ enjoy their human rights [ within religious communities ] on an equal footing.
” International law may recognize their rights to help define religious communities , and governments are obliged to go beyond @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of religious life ” to guarantee their rights .
The report also calls on states to “ develop human rights education and training ” for religious leaders .
The report ’ s purpose , as described in its summary , is addressing what it calls “ gender-based violence and discrimination in the name of religion or belief.
” It calls on states to repeal laws that “ criminalize abortion in all cases ” and argues that in a number of states , “ worldwide religious precepts underlie laws and state-sanctioned practices that constitute @ @ @ @ @ @ @ women , girls and lesbian , gay , bisexual and transgender ( LGBT+ ) persons.
” One of the “ key findings ” of the report is the “ increasing use of religion or belief to deny reproductive health and sexual rights ” and to “ deny the equal personhood of LGBT+ persons ; or to undermine the right to freedom of religion or belief to women , girls and LGBT+ persons.
” The report makes no acknowledgment of the significance to world religions of authoritative texts along with teachings and traditions that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ human rights .
Instead , Shaheed claims that religious communities are “ not monolithic ” and that “ [ a ] multitude of voices exist within religious groups and institutions , including faith-based actors who campaign for the rights of women , girls and LGBT+ persons and work to promote gender equality within their faith.
” According to Shaheed , the existence of such individuals within religious communities shows that religions are not necessarily the source of what he calls “ gender-based discrimination.
” Rather , it is only “ interpretations of those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ discrimination , ” and Shaheed says such interpretations “ are not protected , per se.
” In other words , a traditional religious teaching or belief that the U.N. considers “ gender-based discrimination ” may be regarded as merely a “ religious interpretation ” and not recognized under laws protecting religious freedom .
The report also describes as an “ area of particular concern ” national laws that protect the “ conscientious objection by healthcare providers and institutions unwilling to perform abortions or provide access to contraception on religious grounds.
” Shaheed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) statement that calls on states to “ ensure that women have access to legal abortion notwithstanding conscientious objection by medical practitioners , ” noting that the HRC has described conscientious objection as “ a ‘ barrier ’ to [ abortion ] access , and has suggested that conscientious objection should only be permitted , if at all , for individual medical providers.
” And , in an attack on pro-family groups working to defend marriage , the report criticizes what it calls “ religious interest groups ” for having attempted in three @ @ @ @ @ @ @ define 'the family ' according to religiously grounded heterosexual norms.
” Shaheed complained that such interest groups are also reportedly “ misusing freedom of religion or belief to oppose self-determination rights for gender diverse persons.
” The Vatican ’ s permanent observer to the United Nations , Archbishop Ivan Jurkovič , has described the report as an “ attack on freedom of religion or belief as well as freedom of conscience ” and a “ sort of ideological colonization.
” “ Particularly unacceptable and offensive are the numerous references that recommend that freedom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must be surrendered for the promotion of other so-called ‘ human rights , ’ which certainly do not enjoy consensus , thus being a sort of ‘ ideological colonization ’ on the part of some States and international institutions , ” the archbishop declared .
Jurkovič said the Vatican defines “ gender ” and related terms “ according to the ordinary , generally accepted usage of the word ‘ gender , ’ based on the biological identity that is male and female.
” However , Jurkovič did not directly address the report ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the right of individuals to “ take part on an equal basis ” in the process of defining religious communities .
“ My delegation can not but lament that the report seems to focus less on the protection of men and women , of any faith or personal belief , that are persecuted or discriminated against — a still too vivid reality for millions of persons worldwide — and more on pushing a vision of human society that is not shared by all and does not reflect the social , cultural and religious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
Jurkovič said Pope Francis and others in the Vatican have noted the “ growing influence within the international organizations of powers and interest groups that impose their own visions and ideas , sparking new forms of ideological colonization , often in disregard for the identity , dignity and sensitivities of peoples.
” “ It is rather unfortunate , yet increasingly less surprising given its frequency , that a U.N. report , which should defend the fundamental and universal human right of freedom of religion or belief as well as the right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the very reality it is called to defend , ” he said .
In an article re-published last week by LifeSite , C-Fam ’ s Rebecca Oas explains that while such reports are advisory and nonbinding , nevertheless , “ they feed into the UN ’ s library of human rights documents that frequently cite each other in defending interpretations of human rights that are far from gaining widespread support among UN Member States .
”

'International law ... may also recognize the right of those persons to take part on an equal basis in the process of defining that community.'
Analysis
March 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — A recently published U.N. report on freedom of religion argues that it is a vital part of respecting the rights of women and people who identify as LGBT that they are able to “belong to a faith of their choice without being discriminated against” for their “right” to abortion and LGBT practices.
The report goes on to claim that international law may recognize “the right of those persons to take part on an equal basis in the process of defining that community” — in other words, LGBT people and pro-abortion people may have the right under international law to redefine their faith community, whether it be Christian, Muslim, or Jewish.
The report, authored by Ahmad Shaheed, the U.N. special rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, states:
For women and LGBT+ individuals, realizing religious freedom is often about realizing their agency and equality within religion. The Special Rapporteur submits that the ability of women, girls and sexual orientation and gender identity minorities to belong to a faith of their choice without being discriminated against, is vital to realizing their right to freedom of religion or belief, as well as their right to be free from gender discrimination. International law protects the right of persons to exit a religious or belief community, but it may also recognize the right of those persons to take part on an equal basis in the process of defining that community.
In the context of the report, when Shaheed writes about women being able to exercise their rights free from “discrimination,” this includes women’s so-called “sexual and reproductive health rights,” which is a regular theme of U.N. reports and historically a euphemism for access to contraception and abortion.
The report calls for “transformational policies” in order to achieve “gender equality and full respect for the human rights of women, including sexual and reproductive health and rights.” These so-called “sexual and reproductive rights,” according to the report, are restricted by laws that institute “partial or total bans on access to abortion and contraception [and] prohibitions on assisted reproductive technologies and gender reassignment [sic] surgery” and that place limits on what Shaheed calls “evidence-based sexuality education.”
Shaheed calls on “States” — i.e., national governments — to “ensure that all individuals are able to effectively enjoy their human rights” and for governments to “combat gender-based violence and discrimination,” including where this occurs “on the basis of … religion or belief.”
According to the report, the obligation of states to “ensure gender equality” is not limited to the public realm but extends “into areas of religious life, where discriminatory practices impair the ability of women, girls and sexual or gender identity minorities to enjoy their human rights on an equal footing.”
While noting the “right to maintain the internal institutional affairs of religious community life without State intervention,” Shaheed then asserts that this may be restricted “in strict compliance with Article 18(3) of the ICCPR.” The ICCPR is the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and article 18(3) says the freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject to the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.
Several commentators have pointed out that the report stops short of ordering religions to change their doctrines. However, it is important to note what has been asserted: “women and LGBT+ individuals” must be able to belong to any religion of their choice, free from discrimination within that religion and to “enjoy their human rights [within religious communities] on an equal footing.” International law may recognize their rights to help define religious communities, and governments are obliged to go beyond the public realm and into “areas of religious life” to guarantee their rights.
The report also calls on states to “develop human rights education and training” for religious leaders.
The report’s purpose, as described in its summary, is addressing what it calls “gender-based violence and discrimination in the name of religion or belief.” It calls on states to repeal laws that “criminalize abortion in all cases” and argues that in a number of states, “worldwide religious precepts underlie laws and state-sanctioned practices that constitute violations of the right to non-discrimination of women, girls and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT+) persons.”
One of the “key findings” of the report is the “increasing use of religion or belief to deny reproductive health and sexual rights” and to “deny the equal personhood of LGBT+ persons; or to undermine the right to freedom of religion or belief to women, girls and LGBT+ persons.”
The report makes no acknowledgment of the significance to world religions of authoritative texts along with teachings and traditions that contradict the U.N.’s understanding of human rights. Instead, Shaheed claims that religious communities are “not monolithic” and that “[a] multitude of voices exist within religious groups and institutions, including faith-based actors who campaign for the rights of women, girls and LGBT+ persons and work to promote gender equality within their faith.”
According to Shaheed, the existence of such individuals within religious communities shows that religions are not necessarily the source of what he calls “gender-based discrimination.” Rather, it is only “interpretations of those [religious] beliefs” that encourage “discrimination,” and Shaheed says such interpretations “are not protected, per se.”
In other words, a traditional religious teaching or belief that the U.N. considers “gender-based discrimination” may be regarded as merely a “religious interpretation” and not recognized under laws protecting religious freedom.
The report also describes as an “area of particular concern” national laws that protect the “conscientious objection by healthcare providers and institutions unwilling to perform abortions or provide access to contraception on religious grounds.”
Shaheed referenced a Human Rights Committee (HRC) statement that calls on states to “ensure that women have access to legal abortion notwithstanding conscientious objection by medical practitioners,” noting that the HRC has described conscientious objection as “a ‘barrier’ to [abortion] access, and has suggested that conscientious objection should only be permitted, if at all, for individual medical providers.”
And, in an attack on pro-family groups working to defend marriage, the report criticizes what it calls “religious interest groups” for having attempted in three states “to change the constitution to define 'the family' according to religiously grounded heterosexual norms.” Shaheed complained that such interest groups are also reportedly “misusing freedom of religion or belief to oppose self-determination rights for gender diverse persons.”
The Vatican’s permanent observer to the United Nations, Archbishop Ivan Jurkovič, has described the report as an “attack on freedom of religion or belief as well as freedom of conscience” and a “sort of ideological colonization.”
“Particularly unacceptable and offensive are the numerous references that recommend that freedom of religion or belief and conscientious objection must be surrendered for the promotion of other so-called ‘human rights,’ which certainly do not enjoy consensus, thus being a sort of ‘ideological colonization’ on the part of some States and international institutions,” the archbishop declared.
Jurkovič said the Vatican defines “gender” and related terms “according to the ordinary, generally accepted usage of the word ‘gender,’ based on the biological identity that is male and female.” However, Jurkovič did not directly address the report’s assertion that international law may recognize the right of individuals to “take part on an equal basis” in the process of defining religious communities.
“My delegation cannot but lament that the report seems to focus less on the protection of men and women, of any faith or personal belief, that are persecuted or discriminated against — a still too vivid reality for millions of persons worldwide — and more on pushing a vision of human society that is not shared by all and does not reflect the social, cultural and religious reality of many peoples,” he said.
Jurkovič said Pope Francis and others in the Vatican have noted the “growing influence within the international organizations of powers and interest groups that impose their own visions and ideas, sparking new forms of ideological colonization, often in disregard for the identity, dignity and sensitivities of peoples.”
“It is rather unfortunate, yet increasingly less surprising given its frequency, that a U.N. report, which should defend the fundamental and universal human right of freedom of religion or belief as well as the right to conscientious objection, is now attacking the very reality it is called to defend,” he said.
In an article re-published last week by LifeSite, C-Fam’s Rebecca Oas explains that while such reports are advisory and nonbinding, nevertheless, “they feed into the UN’s library of human rights documents that frequently cite each other in defending interpretations of human rights that are far from gaining widespread support among UN Member States.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-03-11--German chancellor predicts 70% of country in danger of contracting Coronavirus

BERLIN , Germany , March 11 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) ― The Chancellor of Germany has stated that up to 70 percent of her country ’ s inhabitants are in danger of contracting COVID-19 , the coronavirus infecting people across the world .
Angela Merkel , 65 , made the startling prediction today at a news conference in Berlin .
“ When the virus is out there , the population has no immunity and no therapy exists , then 60 to 70 percent of the population will be infected , ” she said .
“ The process has to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system by slowing the virus ’ s spread ...
It ’ s about winning time.
” Germany has 82.9 million inhabitants .
According to John Hopkins University , Germany currently has reported 1,629 cases of the coronavirus .
Three people in Germany have died of the disease , and 25 have recovered .
Merkel ’ s comments were criticized by Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babis , who suggested they could cause panic .
According to Czech news service CTK , Babis said , “ I don ’ t want to comment on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that such statements rather cause panic .
In any case , we have adopted strong measures for such worst-case scenarios to be out of the question.
” Researchers at the University of Toronto are predicting that between 35 percent and 70 percent of Canadians could contract the virus .
According to the National Post , interventions by public health authorities could reduce this number by “ about half.
” Epidemiologist Dr. David Fisman said it would take “ aggressive social distancing and large scale quarantines ” to spare more than that .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of people ill , ” Fisman told the National Post .
“ I ’ m not going to share more specific numbers because I think they will scare people to no particular end.
” Canada has 38 million inhabitants , and thus even if only 20 percent of the population contracts the virus , 7,600,000 people will get sick .
At present , however , only 93 infections have been reported in the country .
Of western nations , Italy has been hit particularly hard by the virus .
Reporting 10,149 cases , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infections , and 631 Italians have died .
The number of infections there is rapidly increasing .
According to the World Health Organization , over 1,000 new cases have been reported over three days .
Italian schools and universities have suspended classes , public religious services have been banned , and museums , theaters , cinemas and gyms have been closed until April 2 .
Italians are being warned to stay at least a meter away from each other .
Some nations that have so far experienced fewer cases are taking serious precautions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , universities , museums , theaters and cinemas to close for two weeks although only 27 cases of the coronavirus have been reported in the country .
In contrast to the Italian Catholic bishops , who bowed to their government ’ s request to suspend Sunday Masses , the Polish bishops have directed their priests to say more Masses so that congregations at each service will be smaller .
The World Health Organization announced today that the coronavirus epidemic is now classified as a pandemic .

BERLIN, Germany, March 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) ― The Chancellor of Germany has stated that up to 70 percent of her country’s inhabitants are in danger of contracting COVID-19, the coronavirus infecting people across the world.
Angela Merkel, 65, made the startling prediction today at a news conference in Berlin.
“When the virus is out there, the population has no immunity and no therapy exists, then 60 to 70 percent of the population will be infected,” she said.
“The process has to be focused on not overburdening the health system by slowing the virus’s spread … It’s about winning time.”
Germany has 82.9 million inhabitants. According to John Hopkins University, Germany currently has reported 1,629 cases of the coronavirus. Three people in Germany have died of the disease, and 25 have recovered.
Merkel’s comments were criticized by Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babis, who suggested they could cause panic.
According to Czech news service CTK, Babis said, “I don’t want to comment on the situation in Germany, although I believe that such statements rather cause panic. In any case, we have adopted strong measures for such worst-case scenarios to be out of the question.”
Researchers at the University of Toronto are predicting that between 35 percent and 70 percent of Canadians could contract the virus. According to the National Post, interventions by public health authorities could reduce this number by “about half.” Epidemiologist Dr. David Fisman said it would take “aggressive social distancing and large scale quarantines” to spare more than that.
“That’s still a huge number of people ill,” Fisman told the National Post.
“I’m not going to share more specific numbers because I think they will scare people to no particular end.”
Canada has 38 million inhabitants, and thus even if only 20 percent of the population contracts the virus, 7,600,000 people will get sick. At present, however, only 93 infections have been reported in the country.
Of western nations, Italy has been hit particularly hard by the virus. Reporting 10,149 cases, it is second only to China in infections, and 631 Italians have died. The number of infections there is rapidly increasing. According to the World Health Organization, over 1,000 new cases have been reported over three days. Italian schools and universities have suspended classes, public religious services have been banned, and museums, theaters, cinemas and gyms have been closed until April 2. Italians are being warned to stay at least a meter away from each other.
Some nations that have so far experienced fewer cases are taking serious precautions now. Today, Poland ordered schools, universities, museums, theaters and cinemas to close for two weeks although only 27 cases of the coronavirus have been reported in the country. In contrast to the Italian Catholic bishops, who bowed to their government’s request to suspend Sunday Masses, the Polish bishops have directed their priests to say more Masses so that congregations at each service will be smaller.
The World Health Organization announced today that the coronavirus epidemic is now classified as a pandemic.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-03-11--Facebook censors expert’s post linking coronavirus to Chinese research lab

MENLO PARK , California , March 11 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) ― Social media giant Facebook censored a post by an expert on China that suggested that the coronavirus sweeping the world escaped from a Chinese laboratory .
On February 24 , the Population Research Institute published a post on Facebook linking to author and China expert Steve Mosher ’ s New York Post article about the origins of Covid-19 ( also known as SARS-CoV-2 ) .
Facebook blocked the post , however , stating that it was “ false information.
” Mosher ’ s argument is that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s National Biosafety Laboratory , which is part of the Wuhan Institute of Virology .
“ At an emergency meeting in Beijing held last Friday , Chinese leader Xi Jinping spoke about the need to contain the coronavirus and set up a system to prevent similar epidemics in the future , ” the author of Bully of Asia wrote on February 22 .
“ A national system to control biosecurity risks must be put in place ‘ to protect the people ’ s health , ’ ” Xi said , because lab safety @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issue , ” Mosher continued .
“ Xi didn ’ t actually admit that the coronavirus now devastating large swaths of China had escaped from one of the country ’ s bioresearch labs .
But the very next day , evidence emerged suggesting that this is exactly what happened , as the Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology released a new directive titled : ‘ Instructions on strengthening biosecurity management in microbiology labs that handle advanced viruses like the novel coronavirus.
’ ” Mosher revealed that China ’ s only microbiology lab that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Institute of Virology ’ s National Biosafety Laboratory .
After being posted on social media , the article went viral .
It got over 13 million views and 100,000 shares before it was blocked by Facebook .
In its explanation of why it had blocked the PRI ’ s post , Facebook linked to a review by an online organization called Health Feedback , a branch of Science Feedback .
Health Feedback stated that Mosher ’ s claims are “ inaccurate and misleading.
” It also quoted a coronavirus expert who took issue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ National Biosafety Laboratory as “ a bioweapons research lab.
” Danielle E. Anderson , a virologist at Duke-NUS Medical School in Singapore who helped develop an antibody test for COVID-19 , said this description was “ simply false.
” “ I have worked in this exact laboratory at various times for the past two years , ” she told Health Feedback .
“ I can personally attest to the strict control and containment measures implemented while working there .
The staff at WIV are incredibly competent , hardworking , and are excellent scientists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Chinese directive on biosecurity management was ” something that is put in place immediately when dealing with a new pathogen.
” She admitted , however , that Mosher ’ s reference to SARS escaping a Beijing lab twice was accurate .
In a March 9 statement , the Population Research Institute argued that “ every single data point used by Mosher to point to the Wuhan Institute of Virology as the source of the China Coronavirus is true.
” • Fact : China has a bioweapons program run out of two labs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Wuhan Institute of Virology ( WIV ) .
• Fact : Chinese agents have stolen dangerous coronaviruses out of North American labs and taken them to WIV .
• Fact : Chinese virologists , working under the direction of the People ’ s Liberation Army , have genetically engineered at least one coronavirus to make it more infectious , reporting their “ achievement ” in the pages of the Journal of Virology .
• Fact : Chinese biotechnology labs , such as the WIV , have a history of accidentally releasing dangerous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fact : The Chinese coronavirus epidemic began in the city of Wuhan , the city where WIV is located .
Health Feedback stated that Mosher “ lacks experience in virology or biological research.
” The Population Research Institute denied this and accused the group of a left-wing bias .
“ The ‘ fact-checkers ’ used by Facebook are a left-wing advocacy group which falsely accused Mosher of ‘ writing a clickbait headline without any previous experience in the medical field.
’ But Mosher actually has an advanced degree in the biological sciences and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it wrote .
“ More importantly , he is one of America ’ s leading experts on China , is fluent in Chinese , and understands the crimes that the Communist Chinese Party has committed against its own people.
” Mosher told LifeSiteNews that he found the relationship between Facebook and Health Feedback “ incestuous.
” “ It looks to me like a pretty incestuous relationship , ” he stated via email .
“ The left-wing censors on Facebook contract with left-wing ‘ fact-checkers ’ to reconfirm their prejudices.
” Science Feedback , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says that it is non-partisan “ Our first mission is to help create an Internet where users will have access to scientifically sound and trustworthy information , ” it states .
“ We also provide feedback to editors and journalists about the credibility of information published by their outlets , ” it continues .
“ Our mission is pedagogical : we strive to explain whether and why information is or is not consistent with the science .
We are nonpartisan and apply the same methodology to claims made in a variety of media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that either contradict or over-hype science .
We believe it is scientists ’ civic duty to better inform our fellow citizens in our area of expertise .
”

The social media giant blocked a credible report from the Population Research Institute that appeared in the New York Post and called it 'false information.'
MENLO PARK, California, March 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) ― Social media giant Facebook censored a post by an expert on China that suggested that the coronavirus sweeping the world escaped from a Chinese laboratory.
On February 24, the Population Research Institute published a post on Facebook linking to author and China expert Steve Mosher’s New York Post article about the origins of Covid-19 (also known as SARS-CoV-2). Facebook blocked the post, however, stating that it was “false information.”
Mosher’s argument is that the coronavirus most likely came from China’s National Biosafety Laboratory, which is part of the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
“At an emergency meeting in Beijing held last Friday, Chinese leader Xi Jinping spoke about the need to contain the coronavirus and set up a system to prevent similar epidemics in the future,” the author of Bully of Asia wrote on February 22.
“A national system to control biosecurity risks must be put in place ‘to protect the people’s health,’” Xi said, because lab safety is a “‘national security’ issue,” Mosher continued.
“Xi didn’t actually admit that the coronavirus now devastating large swaths of China had escaped from one of the country’s bioresearch labs. But the very next day, evidence emerged suggesting that this is exactly what happened, as the Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology released a new directive titled: ‘Instructions on strengthening biosecurity management in microbiology labs that handle advanced viruses like the novel coronavirus.’”
Mosher revealed that China’s only microbiology lab that can handle novel coronavirus is the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s National Biosafety Laboratory.
After being posted on social media, the article went viral. It got over 13 million views and 100,000 shares before it was blocked by Facebook.
In its explanation of why it had blocked the PRI’s post, Facebook linked to a review by an online organization called Health Feedback, a branch of Science Feedback. Health Feedback stated that Mosher’s claims are “inaccurate and misleading.” It also quoted a coronavirus expert who took issue with Mosher’s description of the National Biosafety Laboratory as “a bioweapons research lab.”
Danielle E. Anderson, a virologist at Duke-NUS Medical School in Singapore who helped develop an antibody test for COVID-19, said this description was “simply false.”
“I have worked in this exact laboratory at various times for the past two years,” she told Health Feedback.
“I can personally attest to the strict control and containment measures implemented while working there. The staff at WIV are incredibly competent, hardworking, and are excellent scientists with superb track records.”
Anderson said the Chinese directive on biosecurity management was ”something that is put in place immediately when dealing with a new pathogen.”
She admitted, however, that Mosher’s reference to SARS escaping a Beijing lab twice was accurate.
In a March 9 statement, the Population Research Institute argued that “every single data point used by Mosher to point to the Wuhan Institute of Virology as the source of the China Coronavirus is true.”
It provided a list:
Fact: China has a bioweapons program run out of two labs, the more advanced of which is the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).
Fact: Chinese agents have stolen dangerous coronaviruses out of North American labs and taken them to WIV.
Fact: Chinese virologists, working under the direction of the People’s Liberation Army, have genetically engineered at least one coronavirus to make it more infectious, reporting their “achievement” in the pages of the Journal of Virology.
Fact: Chinese biotechnology labs, such as the WIV, have a history of accidentally releasing dangerous pathogens into the surrounding population.
Fact: The Chinese coronavirus epidemic began in the city of Wuhan, the city where WIV is located.
Health Feedback stated that Mosher “lacks experience in virology or biological research.” The Population Research Institute denied this and accused the group of a left-wing bias.
“The ‘fact-checkers’ used by Facebook are a left-wing advocacy group which falsely accused Mosher of ‘writing a clickbait headline without any previous experience in the medical field.’ But Mosher actually has an advanced degree in the biological sciences and has published in medical journals,” it wrote.
“More importantly, he is one of America’s leading experts on China, is fluent in Chinese, and understands the crimes that the Communist Chinese Party has committed against its own people.”
Mosher told LifeSiteNews that he found the relationship between Facebook and Health Feedback “incestuous.”
“It looks to me like a pretty incestuous relationship,” he stated via email.
“The left-wing censors on Facebook contract with left-wing ‘fact-checkers’ to reconfirm their prejudices.”
Science Feedback, the parent group of Health Feedback, says that it is non-partisan
“Our first mission is to help create an Internet where users will have access to scientifically sound and trustworthy information,” it states.
“We also provide feedback to editors and journalists about the credibility of information published by their outlets,” it continues.
“Our mission is pedagogical: we strive to explain whether and why information is or is not consistent with the science. We are nonpartisan and apply the same methodology to claims made in a variety of media outlets, as well as exposing claims that either contradict or over-hype science. We believe it is scientists’ civic duty to better inform our fellow citizens in our area of expertise.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-03-11--Kentucky House passes amendment affirming state constitution has no ‘right to abortion’

FRANKFORT , March 11 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — The Kentucky House voted 71-21 Tuesday for a measure that would amend the state ’ s constitution to clarify that it does not contain a “ right ” to abortion and 70-23 for legislation that would strengthen the state attorney general ’ s ability to investigate the abortion industry .
If subsequently approved by three fifths of the Kentucky Senate , House Bill 67 will place the constitutional question on the fall ballot , the Louisville Courier Journal reports .
It will add to the Kentucky Constitution the line , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in this Constitution shall be construed to secure or protect a right to an abortion or require the funding of abortion.
” Several states have pursued similar laws , which would not directly affect abortion policy but would prevent the courts from inventing a state-level “ right ” to abortion and using it as a basis to strike down duly enacted pro-life laws .
This amendment would help “ end the slaughter of unborn children in Kentucky , ” declared Republican state rep. Joe Fischer .
Several Democrats complained about the lack of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but Fischer pointed out that as H.B .
67 isn ’ t a direct abortion ban .
The legislature would be responsible for crafting specific details of abortion prohibitions .
House Bill 451 , meanwhile , would empower the attorney general ’ s office to take enforcement action against abortion facilities without the approval of the state Cabinet for Health and Family Services , enabling Republican Attorney General Daniel Cameron to act independently of Democrat Gov .
Andy Beshear .
The Lexington Herald-Leader reports that Democrat state rep. Mary Lou Marzian blasted the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of legislation , ” claiming that Kentucky women “ do not need a special prosecutor to come at them for myriad reasons that will , in the end , be very political ones.
” “ I understand that some people don ’ t believe that Kentucky women need a special prosecutor , ” responded Republican state rep. Stan Lee .
“ I will say that , statistically , at least half of these unborn babies that are killed , those little ladies need a special prosecutor.
” Beshear himself was previously the attorney @ @ @ @ @ @ @ governor Matt Bevin , who frequently accused Beshear of failing to adequately defend the state ’ s pro-life laws in court .

The House also moved to let the attorney general investigate Planned Parenthood without the approval of pro-abortion governor Andy Beshear.
FRANKFORT, March 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The Kentucky House voted 71-21 Tuesday for a measure that would amend the state’s constitution to clarify that it does not contain a “right” to abortion and 70-23 for legislation that would strengthen the state attorney general’s ability to investigate the abortion industry.
If subsequently approved by three fifths of the Kentucky Senate, House Bill 67 will place the constitutional question on the fall ballot, the Louisville Courier Journal reports. It will add to the Kentucky Constitution the line, “To protect human life, nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to secure or protect a right to an abortion or require the funding of abortion.”
Several states have pursued similar laws, which would not directly affect abortion policy but would prevent the courts from inventing a state-level “right” to abortion and using it as a basis to strike down duly enacted pro-life laws.
This amendment would help “end the slaughter of unborn children in Kentucky,” declared Republican state rep. Joe Fischer. Several Democrats complained about the lack of exceptions for rape or incest cases, but Fischer pointed out that as H.B. 67 isn’t a direct abortion ban. The legislature would be responsible for crafting specific details of abortion prohibitions.
House Bill 451, meanwhile, would empower the attorney general’s office to take enforcement action against abortion facilities without the approval of the state Cabinet for Health and Family Services, enabling Republican Attorney General Daniel Cameron to act independently of Democrat Gov. Andy Beshear.
The Lexington Herald-Leader reports that Democrat state rep. Mary Lou Marzian blasted the bill as a “power grab piece of legislation,” claiming that Kentucky women “do not need a special prosecutor to come at them for myriad reasons that will, in the end, be very political ones.”
“I understand that some people don’t believe that Kentucky women need a special prosecutor,” responded Republican state rep. Stan Lee. “I will say that, statistically, at least half of these unborn babies that are killed, those little ladies need a special prosecutor.”
Beshear himself was previously the attorney general during the tenure of Republican former governor Matt Bevin, who frequently accused Beshear of failing to adequately defend the state’s pro-life laws in court.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-03-11--Debunking the myth that unborn babies don’t feel pain until 24 weeks

March 11 , 2019 ( LifeSiteNews ) — The question of fetal pain was first raised decades ago .
During certain in utero surgeries , unborn children have been seen flinching , grimacing , and moving away from pain .
Because of this observation , it has become normal to use anesthesia during these in utero surgeries .
A common debate centers on when exactly an unborn baby begins to feel pain .
Abortions , which physically tear a baby apart , can be performed up until birth in every U.S. state and in some other countries , but some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 24 weeks since “ the baby can feel pain , ” according to previous standard thought .
But a brand-new study now shows that it is possible for a fetus to feel pain as early as 12 or 13 weeks gestation , which calls into question the accepted thoughts and practices on the matter in the medical field and in society at large .
In today ’ s episode of The Van Maren Show , Jonathon van Maren speaks with John Bockmann , one of the authors of a new study who discovered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earlier than people think .
This is a must-watch episode for any pro-life activist .
Bockmann is a physician ’ s assistant in the army .
David Daleiden ’ s videos exposing Planned Parenthood ’ s sale of baby body parts and the horrors of the abortion industry came out while Bockmann was in school to become a physician ’ s assistant .
The grotesque nature of the videos got Bockmann thinking about the pain experienced by a fetus during such procedures .
It was then that he began to turn his research @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delving into the topic of fetal pain , Bockmann realized that the previous understanding about fetal pain was based on a false presumption : that the cortex , which does not develop until about 24 weeks , is responsible for sensations , including the pain sensation .
It has been shown in other research that even humans born without a cortex can feel experience pain and emotion .
Bockmann continued to dig and further expose the shallow research basis supporting the idea that an unborn baby can not feel pain until 24 weeks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ show to really understand the science behind fetal pain .
This will help you become a better advocate for life .
The Van Maren Show is hosted on numerous platforms , including Spotify , SoundCloud , YouTube , iTunes , and Google Play .
For a full listing of episodes , and to subscribe to various channels , visit our Acast webpage here .
To receive weekly emails when a new episode is uploaded , subscribe below :

When does an unborn child begin to feel pain? A new study may hold the key to finding out.
March 11, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) — The question of fetal pain was first raised decades ago. During certain in utero surgeries, unborn children have been seen flinching, grimacing, and moving away from pain. Because of this observation, it has become normal to use anesthesia during these in utero surgeries.
A common debate centers on when exactly an unborn baby begins to feel pain. Abortions, which physically tear a baby apart, can be performed up until birth in every U.S. state and in some other countries, but some states restrict abortions in certain circumstances after 24 weeks since “the baby can feel pain,” according to previous standard thought. But a brand-new study now shows that it is possible for a fetus to feel pain as early as 12 or 13 weeks gestation, which calls into question the accepted thoughts and practices on the matter in the medical field and in society at large.
In today’s episode of The Van Maren Show, Jonathon van Maren speaks with John Bockmann, one of the authors of a new study who discovered that a fetus can feel pain much earlier than people think. This is a must-watch episode for any pro-life activist.
Watch the full interview:
Bockmann is a physician’s assistant in the army. David Daleiden’s videos exposing Planned Parenthood’s sale of baby body parts and the horrors of the abortion industry came out while Bockmann was in school to become a physician’s assistant.
The grotesque nature of the videos got Bockmann thinking about the pain experienced by a fetus during such procedures. It was then that he began to turn his research focus toward understanding fetal pain.
In delving into the topic of fetal pain, Bockmann realized that the previous understanding about fetal pain was based on a false presumption: that the cortex, which does not develop until about 24 weeks, is responsible for sensations, including the pain sensation.
It has been shown in other research that even humans born without a cortex can feel experience pain and emotion.
Bockmann continued to dig and further expose the shallow research basis supporting the idea that an unborn baby cannot feel pain until 24 weeks.
Tune in to today’s show to really understand the science behind fetal pain. This will help you become a better advocate for life.
_
Listen to the full interview:
The Van Maren Show is hosted on numerous platforms, including Spotify, SoundCloud, YouTube, iTunes, and Google Play.
For a full listing of episodes, and to subscribe to various channels, visit our Acast webpage here.
To receive weekly emails when a new episode is uploaded, subscribe below:
Email Address *
First Name *
Last Name *