lifesitenews--2020-01-07--Vatican caught up in scandal over ‘queer’ rave in Rome

ROME , January 7 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — The Vatican has been caught up in a scandal over a drug-fueled New Year ’ s Eve party in Rome attended by minors and featuring Italy ’ s “ most alternative , underground and political queer ” techno band .
Last May , the cardinal appointed to handle the Pope ’ s charitable works broke the law to turn the electricity back on for what appeared to be a group of families occupying the building where the 2020 rave was held .
The papal almoner defended the act as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these families .
Yet a closer look reveals that the far-left activists illegally managing the building ( and squatters ) are running tax-free businesses in the complex , including a disco that hosts homosexual rave parties .
This raises the question : Why is the Vatican supporting a radical far-left group that is creating a potentially abusive environment for families , minors and children ?
According to Italian media , the New Year ’ s Eve rave , hosted at Spin Time Labs in an occupied building in Rome ’ s historic center @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , drugs and crime.
” Il Messagero , the Italian capital ’ s main centrist daily , reported that problems intensified after midnight , when hundreds of people ( some of whom had bought tickets online ) found the gates to the disco locked and entrance denied ( see video here ) .
“ Yelling , shoving , and people falling to the ground ” ensued , with inadequate security to handle the crowds .
At 2 a.m. , local police were reportedly alerted that a fight had broken out , and an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a 22-year-old young man who was intoxicated .
Local residents , who said they witnessed the midnight commotion , also complained of blaring music and the entrances to their homes being mistaken for a bathroom .
Organized by Spin Time Labs and under the leadership of Action , a far-left group that has occupied the building since 2013 , the event was promoted on Facebook , saying : “ In Rome , there ’ s an open , young , queer , free and rebellious New Year ’ s Eve !
” Several @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were reportedly in attendance .
Themed “ New Year ’ s Eve in the Skyscraper ” ( L ’ ultimo nel Grattacielo ) , each of the building ’ s seven floors featured a dance floor to “ suit all tastes : from electro-swing to cumbia , Latin American music and techno by LaRoboterie , a queer group that plays throughout Italy , ” La Repubblica , a left-leaning Italian daily that Pope Francis regularly reads , said in a decidedly more favorable article on December 31 .
It even noted that there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for children to “ draw and play ” until 12:30 a.m. LaRoboterie , which co-hosted the rave , describes itself on Facebook in this way : “ LaRoboterie is techno , queer , gay , lesbian and transexual , is feminist , anti-fascist , anti-sexist , is a refugee and a homeless , a gypsy , a bitch and a weirdo , a slut and an addict , is an immigrant and a prisoner , is freak and punk , HIV positive and bizarre , is drag and crooked but most of all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she wants to be .
Since 2007 the most underground , alternative and political Italian queer crew .
In more than 11 years LaRoboterie has hosted hundreds of events all across Italy and beyond with lots of guests from all around the globe .
Music , video art , mapping , performances and an innate attitude to break the borders between genders .
No rules , only the will to share the dance floor dancing and sweating to the beats .
( … ) Wandering through all Italy from south to north , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mixing the deepest techno to some electro beats , acid drifts and downtempo , sophisticated rhythms and melancholic melodies .
Queer performances where sexuality is a complex world made of everyone tastes , no limits in expressing ourselves , no limits in the freedom of being whatever everyone wants.
” Boasting that it was “ the most beautiful New Year ’ s Eve in Rome , ” event photos posted on Spin Time Lab ’ s Facebook page on January 7 , 2020 feature two lesbians kissing on a dance floor and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Before entering we remind you that in our skyscraper every person has to feel received and welcomed .
Homo-transphobia , sexism , fascism , machismo and racism are not permitted .
Differences are always an enrichment .
No means no.
” The occupied building , located at Via Santa Croce in Gerusalemme 55 in Rome , is just five minutes ’ walk from the Basilica of the Holy Cross in Jerusalem .
Built in 325 to house the relics of the Passion of Jesus Christ brought to Rome from the Holy Land @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Roman Emperor Constantine , the Basilica ’ s relics include a piece of the True Cross and two thorns that pierced Our Lord ’ s Sacred Head .
Turning the lights back on to illegality ?
In May 2019 , the Apostolic Almoner , Cardinal Konrad Krajewski , 56 , drew controversy after he climbed down a manhole and broke a seal to reconnect electrical circuit breakers for the building ’ s over 400 inhabitants ( including numerous children ) .
At least 70 percent of those occupying the building are migrants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some are Italians who have lost their homes .
Electricity had been cut to the building in early May for failure to pay 300,000 euros in electric bills that had piled up since 2013 .
That year , “ Action ” — one of the most active right to housing movements in Rome — seized the disused government building to create housing for squatters , while dedicating other parts of the complex for business activities like Spin Time Labs .
The activities going on at the building ’ s social center , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already generally known when the papal almoner intervened to restore electricity .
At the time , Cardinal Krajewski , who has been the only Polish prelate to receive the red hat from Francis , said the act was a “ desperate and humanitarian gesture to help families struggling to survive.
” The cardinal , who has carried out many charitable acts for the poor in Rome , said he was aware of the possible consequences he might face and would pay a fine if necessary but insisted that it was necessary for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ children .
La Repubblica hailed Cardinal Krajewski as a modern-day Robin Hood .
But then-Minister of the Interior , Matteo Salvini , was more critical , saying : “ I will count on the Pope ’ s almoner , who intervened to turn the power back on in an occupied building in Rome , to pay the 300,000 euros in overdue bills.
” According to Italian media , the electric bills still aren ’ t being paid .
Meanwhile , the New Year ’ s Eve party took in 80,000 euro in entrance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Organizers denied the figure , however , saying proceeds totaled only 33,000 euros .
They also denied claims that drug dealers were at the rave , claimed security was more than adequate , and said they look forward to the next Spin Time Labs event .
Asked how it is possible that all seven floors of the building were used for a New Year ’ s Eve rave , with families and children living in the building , Italian sources told LifeSite that it ’ s a “ complex situation ” and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through ” and “ submit to ” these events in exchange for rent-free housing .
LifeSite contacted the Holy See Press Office to inquire if the Pope ’ s almoner is aware of the scandalous New Year ’ s party that was held in the building where he illicitly reactivated the electricity .
We also asked why the Vatican is supporting a group that allows such events to be held , particularly with minors present and families with children in the building .
As of this report , we have not received a @ @

The wild party took place in the building where a papal representative reconnected the electricity last May.
ROME, January 7, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The Vatican has been caught up in a scandal over a drug-fueled New Year’s Eve party in Rome attended by minors and featuring Italy’s “most alternative, underground and political queer” techno band.
Last May, the cardinal appointed to handle the Pope’s charitable works broke the law to turn the electricity back on for what appeared to be a group of families occupying the building where the 2020 rave was held.
The papal almoner defended the act as a “humanitarian gesture” aimed at protecting these families.
Yet a closer look reveals that the far-left activists illegally managing the building (and squatters) are running tax-free businesses in the complex, including a disco that hosts homosexual rave parties. This raises the question: Why is the Vatican supporting a radical far-left group that is creating a potentially abusive environment for families, minors and children?
New Year’s rave
According to Italian media, the New Year’s Eve rave, hosted at Spin Time Labs in an occupied building in Rome’s historic center, was a “triumph of degradation, drugs and crime.”
Il Messagero, the Italian capital’s main centrist daily, reported that problems intensified after midnight, when hundreds of people (some of whom had bought tickets online) found the gates to the disco locked and entrance denied (see video here). “Yelling, shoving, and people falling to the ground” ensued, with inadequate security to handle the crowds. At 2 a.m., local police were reportedly alerted that a fight had broken out, and an hour later an ambulance was called for a 22-year-old young man who was intoxicated.
Local residents, who said they witnessed the midnight commotion, also complained of blaring music and the entrances to their homes being mistaken for a bathroom.
Organized by Spin Time Labs and under the leadership of Action, a far-left group that has occupied the building since 2013, the event was promoted on Facebook, saying: “In Rome, there’s an open, young, queer, free and rebellious New Year’s Eve!”
Several thousand people (including many minors) were reportedly in attendance.
Themed “New Year’s Eve in the Skyscraper” (L’ultimo nel Grattacielo), each of the building’s seven floors featured a dance floor to “suit all tastes: from electro-swing to cumbia, Latin American music and techno by LaRoboterie, a queer group that plays throughout Italy,” La Repubblica, a left-leaning Italian daily that Pope Francis regularly reads, said in a decidedly more favorable article on December 31. It even noted that there would be a “dedicated space” for children to “draw and play” until 12:30 a.m.
LaRoboterie, which co-hosted the rave, describes itself on Facebook in this way:
“LaRoboterie is techno, queer, gay, lesbian and transexual, is feminist, anti-fascist, anti-sexist, is a refugee and a homeless, a gypsy, a bitch and a weirdo, a slut and an addict, is an immigrant and a prisoner, is freak and punk, HIV positive and bizarre, is drag and crooked but most of all is free and proud to be whatever she wants to be. Since 2007 the most underground, alternative and political Italian queer crew. In more than 11 years LaRoboterie has hosted hundreds of events all across Italy and beyond with lots of guests from all around the globe. Music, video art, mapping, performances and an innate attitude to break the borders between genders. No rules, only the will to share the dance floor dancing and sweating to the beats. (…) Wandering through all Italy from south to north, from the coast to the islands and mixing the deepest techno to some electro beats, acid drifts and downtempo, sophisticated rhythms and melancholic melodies. Queer performances where sexuality is a complex world made of everyone tastes, no limits in expressing ourselves, no limits in the freedom of being whatever everyone wants.”
Boasting that it was “the most beautiful New Year’s Eve in Rome,” event photos posted on Spin Time Lab’s Facebook page on January 7, 2020 feature two lesbians kissing on a dance floor and a pamphlet attendees received, which reads: “Before entering we remind you that in our skyscraper every person has to feel received and welcomed. Homo-transphobia, sexism, fascism, machismo and racism are not permitted. Differences are always an enrichment. No means no.”
The occupied building, located at Via Santa Croce in Gerusalemme 55 in Rome, is just five minutes’ walk from the Basilica of the Holy Cross in Jerusalem. Built in 325 to house the relics of the Passion of Jesus Christ brought to Rome from the Holy Land by Empress St. Helena, mother of the Roman Emperor Constantine, the Basilica’s relics include a piece of the True Cross and two thorns that pierced Our Lord’s Sacred Head.
Turning the lights back on to illegality?
In May 2019, the Apostolic Almoner, Cardinal Konrad Krajewski, 56, drew controversy after he climbed down a manhole and broke a seal to reconnect electrical circuit breakers for the building’s over 400 inhabitants (including numerous children). At least 70 percent of those occupying the building are migrants (from 29 countries), while some are Italians who have lost their homes.
Electricity had been cut to the building in early May for failure to pay 300,000 euros in electric bills that had piled up since 2013. That year, “Action” — one of the most active right to housing movements in Rome — seized the disused government building to create housing for squatters, while dedicating other parts of the complex for business activities like Spin Time Labs.
The activities going on at the building’s social center, including for-profit but untaxed rave parties, were already generally known when the papal almoner intervened to restore electricity.
At the time, Cardinal Krajewski, who has been the only Polish prelate to receive the red hat from Francis, said the act was a “desperate and humanitarian gesture to help families struggling to survive.” The cardinal, who has carried out many charitable acts for the poor in Rome, said he was aware of the possible consequences he might face and would pay a fine if necessary but insisted that it was necessary for the sake of the families, and especially children.
La Repubblica hailed Cardinal Krajewski as a modern-day Robin Hood. But then-Minister of the Interior, Matteo Salvini, was more critical, saying: “I will count on the Pope’s almoner, who intervened to turn the power back on in an occupied building in Rome, to pay the 300,000 euros in overdue bills.”
According to Italian media, the electric bills still aren’t being paid.
Meanwhile, the New Year’s Eve party took in 80,000 euro in entrance fees alone, according to Il Messagero. Organizers denied the figure, however, saying proceeds totaled only 33,000 euros. They also denied claims that drug dealers were at the rave, claimed security was more than adequate, and said they look forward to the next Spin Time Labs event.
Asked how it is possible that all seven floors of the building were used for a New Year’s Eve rave, with families and children living in the building, Italian sources told LifeSite that it’s a “complex situation” and often these families have to “suffer through” and “submit to” these events in exchange for rent-free housing.
LifeSite contacted the Holy See Press Office to inquire if the Pope’s almoner is aware of the scandalous New Year’s party that was held in the building where he illicitly reactivated the electricity. We also asked why the Vatican is supporting a group that allows such events to be held, particularly with minors present and families with children in the building.
As of this report, we have not received a reply.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-01-07--Model in labor responds to Michelle Williams: ‘Babies do not keep us from our dreams’

January 7 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – After Michelle Williams used her award acceptance speech to promote abortion at the Golden Globes on Sunday , a Catholic model in labor took the time to record an Instagram video challenging Williams ’ statement that abortion was integral to her success as an actress .
“ I ’ m here getting ready to deliver my fifth baby , ” said Leah Darrow , a former contestant on America ’ s Next Top Model , from her hospital bed .
“ And I want to let all you women know , all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had babies or are maybe listening to what the culture says about birth , and women , and babies , and choice.
” “ Babies don ’ t keep us from our dreams , ” she declared .
“ I ’ m getting ready to deliver a baby that will not keep me from my professional growth , but will make me better because of it , ” she continued .
“ And I ’ m so honored and excited , and I can ’ t wait to have this baby.
” Darrow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ took to social media to push back against Williams ’ Golden Globe speech in which she hinted that having an abortion enabled her to succeed professionally .
“ How sad it must be to trade an innocent human life for a tiny golden statue .
Praying for Michelle Williams , ” tweeted Abby Johnson , the former Planned Parenthood director whose conversion to pro-life activism is depicted in the film Unplanned , drawing a comparison that many others did as well .
“ Only in Hollywood are you able to announce that you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hunk of metal with your name on it and have the crowd cheer for you , ” said Elizabeth Fortmeyer in a video she posted on Twitter .
“ Abortion is not birth control .
Abortion is premeditated murder of an innocent child , depriving them of their right to life , ” she continued .
“ As a woman , I am sick of this belief that all women should be okay with murdering their children for personal gain , ” said Fortmeyer .
“ Real women are pro-life.
” Sara Gonzales @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Michelle Williams ’ pro-abortion speech , “ Why are they clapping ?
You ’ re clapping for dead babies .
Stop !
” “ Only in Hollywood can you get [ cheers ] for telling the crowd that you traded a baby for an award , ” said Gonzales .
“ That a piece of metal is infinitely better than the tiny human life that you created inside you .
That the fancy gown and the jewelry that you ’ re wearing is way more important than your own flesh and blood.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up , ” she added .
“ Michelle Williams , while visibly pregnant , claims she would n't have won her Golden Globe Award if she did n't kill her previous child , ” tweeted Live Action Founder and President Lila Rose , who gave birth to her first child days ago .
“ No trophy is worth more than a child 's life , ” said Rose .
“ Sacrificing our children to pursue our dreams is the total antithesis of women 's empowerment.
” Chris Stefanick , a well-known speaker , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Catholic , pointed out : Princeton Professor Robert George , former Chairman of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom , described the Hollywood crowd ’ s response to Williams as “ Pavlovian ” and “ drearily predictable.
” “ Dear Michelle Williams , ” wrote Kristan Mercer Hawkins , President of Students for Life , on Facebook : “ Your remarks at the Golden Globes were heartbreaking .
Like many post-abortive mothers , you disguised your hurt with a political speech to seek absolution from the world for your past abortion decision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so sad that you credit an act of violence , abortion , for your career success .
The second wave of Feminism has clearly failed as millions of women like you have been deceived into believing that you must kill another in order to succeed in your career.
” “ Abortion is the opposite of female empowerment , ” said Hawkins .
“ An abortion says you thought you weren ’ t strong enough to achieve your goals and care for the new human you created .
It ’ s the pro-life movement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , showing women they are superheroes and can do both.
” Joy Pullman , writing at The Federalist , explained what Williams got wrong in her speech : Chiefly , it ’ s the underlying idea that human lives are a worthy trade-off for career achievement .
If someone put a gun to a child ’ s head on the Golden Globes stage and said to Williams , “ You can have your award , but the price is this child ’ s life , ” hopefully she would have said “ F— @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But here she is on a global stage , not only admitting that she has already done essentially the same thing to an even smaller human , but also encouraging other girls and women to do likewise — to repeated Hollywood applause .
I can think of few stronger expressions of moral corruption than “ This child must die so I can live as I please.
” Yet this is the tradeoff we are constantly told epitomizes women ’ s empowerment .
Bunk .
What does it profit a woman to gain a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the life of an innocent child ?
What kind of “ success ” is it to rise at the cost of other people ’ s existence ?
What kind of society encourages people to think and live this way ?
A sick , self-cannibalizing one .
National Review ’ s Alexandra DeSanctis took Williams to task for couching her message in terms of “ a woman ’ s right to choose ” rather than speaking straightforwardly about abortion .
A man who wishes to remain anonymous remarked to LifeSiteNews :

Pro-life leaders and regular citizens took to social media to express horror and sadness at Michelle Williams' Golden Globes speech, during which she credited abortion for her successful career.
January 7, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – After Michelle Williams used her award acceptance speech to promote abortion at the Golden Globes on Sunday, a Catholic model in labor took the time to record an Instagram video challenging Williams’ statement that abortion was integral to her success as an actress.
“I’m here getting ready to deliver my fifth baby,” said Leah Darrow, a former contestant on America’s Next Top Model, from her hospital bed. “And I want to let all you women know, all you young ladies who haven’t had babies or are maybe listening to what the culture says about birth, and women, and babies, and choice.”
“Babies don’t keep us from our dreams,” she declared.
“I’m getting ready to deliver a baby that will not keep me from my professional growth, but will make me better because of it,” she continued. “And I’m so honored and excited, and I can’t wait to have this baby.”
Darrow wasn’t the only one who took to social media to push back against Williams’ Golden Globe speech in which she hinted that having an abortion enabled her to succeed professionally.
A little reminder to last night’s Golden Globe winners, especially Michelle Williams. pic.twitter.com/c7UHCOOTGO — Eric Sammons (@EricRSammons) January 6, 2020
“How sad it must be to trade an innocent human life for a tiny golden statue. Praying for Michelle Williams,” tweeted Abby Johnson, the former Planned Parenthood director whose conversion to pro-life activism is depicted in the film Unplanned, drawing a comparison that many others did as well.
How sad it must be to trade an innocent human life for a tiny golden statue. Praying for Michelle Williams. — Abby Johnson (@AbbyJohnson) January 6, 2020
“Only in Hollywood are you able to announce that you murdered a baby in exchange for a hunk of metal with your name on it and have the crowd cheer for you,” said Elizabeth Fortmeyer in a video she posted on Twitter.
“Abortion is not birth control. Abortion is premeditated murder of an innocent child, depriving them of their right to life,” she continued.
“As a woman, I am sick of this belief that all women should be okay with murdering their children for personal gain,” said Fortmeyer. “Real women are pro-life.”
Yesterday, Michelle Williams accredited ABORTION for her Golden Globe, and suggested that all women should be in favor of it. As a woman, I am sick of this belief that all women should be okay with murdering their children for personal gain. Real women are pro-life. pic.twitter.com/F5G1CUafes — Elizabeth Fortmeyer ���� (@eafortmeyer) January 7, 2020
Sara Gonzales asked those in the audience who applauded Michelle Williams’ pro-abortion speech, “Why are they clapping? You’re clapping for dead babies. Stop!”
“Only in Hollywood can you get [cheers] for telling the crowd that you traded a baby for an award,” said Gonzales. “That a piece of metal is infinitely better than the tiny human life that you created inside you. That the fancy gown and the jewelry that you’re wearing is way more important than your own flesh and blood.”
“Hollywood, you all are messed up,” she added.
Michelle Williams proudly thanked her abortion for her Golden Globe…WHAT is WRONG with these people?!pic.twitter.com/hRtTZ4gFqb — Sara Gonzales (@SaraGonzalesTX) January 7, 2020
“Michelle Williams, while visibly pregnant, claims she wouldn't have won her Golden Globe Award if she didn't kill her previous child,” tweeted Live Action Founder and President Lila Rose, who gave birth to her first child days ago.
“No trophy is worth more than a child's life,” said Rose. “Sacrificing our children to pursue our dreams is the total antithesis of women's empowerment.”
Michelle Williams, while visibly pregnant, claims she wouldn't have won her #GoldenGlobes Award if she didn't kill her previous child. No trophy is worth more than a child's life. Sacrificing our children to pursue our dreams is the total antithesis of women's empowerment. pic.twitter.com/McGZDEVmo5 — Lila Rose (@LilaGraceRose) January 6, 2020
Chris Stefanick, a well-known speaker, author, and President of Real Life Catholic, pointed out:
This is survival of the fittest:
I’m big-You’re small.
I’m strong-You’re weak, and you’re standing between me and my “success.”
Humans were made for more than this. But when we abandon God, we applaud as we return to acting like animals on a Savannah. https://t.co/8wgbIXoNDq — Chris Stefanick (@ChrisStefanick) January 7, 2020
Princeton Professor Robert George, former Chairman of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, described the Hollywood crowd’s response to Williams as “Pavlovian” and “drearily predictable.”
Michelle Williams' little speech and the crowd's drearily predictable–nearly Pavlovian–response crystallized the self-focus, shallowness, narrowness of vision, insularity, parochialism, and groupthink of the celebrity culture. There it was, on full display, for all to see. https://t.co/bMm2HDwMpG — Robert P. George (@McCormickProf) January 6, 2020
“Dear Michelle Williams,” wrote Kristan Mercer Hawkins, President of Students for Life, on Facebook: “Your remarks at the Golden Globes were heartbreaking. Like many post-abortive mothers, you disguised your hurt with a political speech to seek absolution from the world for your past abortion decision(s). It’s so sad that you credit an act of violence, abortion, for your career success. The second wave of Feminism has clearly failed as millions of women like you have been deceived into believing that you must kill another in order to succeed in your career.”
“Abortion is the opposite of female empowerment,” said Hawkins. “An abortion says you thought you weren’t strong enough to achieve your goals and care for the new human you created. It’s the pro-life movement that seeks the full empowerment of women, showing women they are superheroes and can do both.”
Joy Pullman, writing at The Federalist, explained what Williams got wrong in her speech:
Chiefly, it’s the underlying idea that human lives are a worthy trade-off for career achievement. If someone put a gun to a child’s head on the Golden Globes stage and said to Williams, “You can have your award, but the price is this child’s life,” hopefully she would have said “F— that award, save the child.” But here she is on a global stage, not only admitting that she has already done essentially the same thing to an even smaller human, but also encouraging other girls and women to do likewise — to repeated Hollywood applause. I can think of few stronger expressions of moral corruption than “This child must die so I can live as I please.” Yet this is the tradeoff we are constantly told epitomizes women’s empowerment. Bunk. What does it profit a woman to gain a major industry award if the price is the life of an innocent child? What kind of “success” is it to rise at the cost of other people’s existence? What kind of society encourages people to think and live this way? A sick, self-cannibalizing one.
National Review’s Alexandra DeSanctis took Williams to task for couching her message in terms of “a woman’s right to choose” rather than speaking straightforwardly about abortion.
No one disagrees that women have the right to make their own choices. The abortion debate exists not because a large faction believes women should be deprived of the “right to choose” but rather because of the choice in question: to end the life of a distinct human being. Abortion-rights supporters such as Williams aren’t part of the debate at all because they are intentionally deceptive about the heart of the argument. And who can blame them? It’s far easier to issue euphemistic speeches about women’s empowerment to thunderous applause than it is to defend the taking of an innocent human life.”
A man who wishes to remain anonymous remarked to LifeSiteNews:
I wonder if a day will come when Williams will look at this worthless Golden Globe trophy she's holding and wish she were cradling her missing child instead.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-01-07--Trump admin, pro-life orgs submit more briefs to Supreme Court abortion hearing

January 7 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – The Trump administration , Priests for Life , and Rachel ’ s Vineyard have submitted amicus briefs urging the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold a Louisiana law imposing medical standards on abortion facilities .
In March , the nation ’ s highest court will hear arguments in June Medical Services LLC v. Gee , which concerns Louisiana ’ s requirement that abortion centers make arrangements for admitting women to nearby hospitals in cases of life-threatening complications .
The abortion industry ’ s attorneys argue the law is no different from the Texas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2016 ’ s Whole Woman ’ s Health v. Hellerstedt ; pro-lifers argue that not only was Hellerstedt wrongly decided , but that the Louisiana law is different from the Texas one .
On Friday , the Trump administration filed a brief arguing that the so-called “ burdens ” imposed by the law , namely a “ modest increase in the waiting time ( less than an hour ) to obtain an abortion , ” pale in comparison to the benefits of ensuring abortion facilities are held to rigorous medical standards – especially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concerns presented by atrocities at abortion clinics like those run by Kermit Gosnell.
” Last week , the American Freedom Law Center ( AFLC ) filed a brief on behalf of Priests for Life and Rachel ’ s Vineyard arguing that Louisiana has a “ paramount right to protect the health and safety of its citizens , ” including by “ enacting regulations to raise the standard and quality of care for women seeking abortions.
” The brief also includes “ testimonies of victims of abortion from states across the country , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ profound way by this deadly procedure.
” '' I went to a place in Baton Rouge .
I do n't remember the name .
It was absolutely demonic , ” testified “ Carmen ” about her 1978 abortion , five years after Roe v. Wade supposedly made the practice safe .
“ I remember lying on the table and saying to the nurse , ' I 'm not sure I want to do this .
I 'm killing my baby . '
She just looked at me , cold and silent .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he came into the room , he was laughing .
There was definitely an evil spirit there . ''
“ One who reads carefully the dozens of abortion decisions the Supreme Court has issued since Roe vs. Wade can see that the Court ’ s jurisprudence on this topic is rudderless and arbitrary , ” said Priests for Life national director Fr .
Frank Pavone .
“ Given that this is the first Supreme Court abortion case which both Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh will hear , we can hope that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has overstepped its bounds in many ways on this issue , and will begin to introduce , step by step , more sanity into our public policy on abortion.
” Last week , more than 200 members of Congress signed another amicus brief calling on the Supreme Court to take the Gee case as an opportunity to review its entire body of abortion precedent , all the way back to Roe v. Wade .
The case is likely to at the very least impact the Hellerstedt precedent , which has been used to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regulations as “ undue burdens ” on women .
It remains to be seen whether the court takes the opportunity to make a broader determination on the underlying legitimacy of Roe or Planned Parenthood v. Casey , which force all 50 states to permit most abortions .
Roe is largely defended not on its legal merits ( numerous pro-abortion legal minds , including Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg herself , have acknowledged the ruling ’ s flaws ) , but on its status as precedent , with the contemporary interpretation of the stare decisis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ history staying on the books grants it added weight .
Justice Clarence Thomas has forcefully rejected such arguments ; it remains to be seen how Chief Justice John Roberts or President Trump ’ s two SCOTUS appointees , Neil Gorscuh and Brett Kavanaugh , will weigh Roe ’ s precedent versus its substance .
Either way , a ruling in the case is likely to be handed down during this already-contentious election year , in which abortion and judicial nominations will be major issues for both Trump and the Democrat nominee .

January 7, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The Trump administration, Priests for Life, and Rachel’s Vineyard have submitted amicus briefs urging the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold a Louisiana law imposing medical standards on abortion facilities.
In March, the nation’s highest court will hear arguments in June Medical Services LLC v. Gee, which concerns Louisiana’s requirement that abortion centers make arrangements for admitting women to nearby hospitals in cases of life-threatening complications. The abortion industry’s attorneys argue the law is no different from the Texas law the Supreme Court struck down in 2016’s Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt; pro-lifers argue that not only was Hellerstedt wrongly decided, but that the Louisiana law is different from the Texas one.
On Friday, the Trump administration filed a brief arguing that the so-called “burdens” imposed by the law, namely a “modest increase in the waiting time (less than an hour) to obtain an abortion,” pale in comparison to the benefits of ensuring abortion facilities are held to rigorous medical standards – especially in light of the “profound ethical concerns presented by atrocities at abortion clinics like those run by Kermit Gosnell.”
Last week, the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) filed a brief on behalf of Priests for Life and Rachel’s Vineyard arguing that Louisiana has a “paramount right to protect the health and safety of its citizens,” including by “enacting regulations to raise the standard and quality of care for women seeking abortions.” The brief also includes “testimonies of victims of abortion from states across the country,” who “have been harmed in a profound way by this deadly procedure.”
“I went to a place in Baton Rouge. I don't remember the name. It was absolutely demonic,” testified “Carmen” about her 1978 abortion, five years after Roe v. Wade supposedly made the practice safe. “I remember lying on the table and saying to the nurse, 'I'm not sure I want to do this. I'm killing my baby.' She just looked at me, cold and silent. I remember the doctor's face. When he came into the room, he was laughing. There was definitely an evil spirit there.”
“One who reads carefully the dozens of abortion decisions the Supreme Court has issued since Roe vs. Wade can see that the Court’s jurisprudence on this topic is rudderless and arbitrary,” said Priests for Life national director Fr. Frank Pavone. “Given that this is the first Supreme Court abortion case which both Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh will hear, we can hope that the Court will begin to acknowledge that it has overstepped its bounds in many ways on this issue, and will begin to introduce, step by step, more sanity into our public policy on abortion.”
Last week, more than 200 members of Congress signed another amicus brief calling on the Supreme Court to take the Gee case as an opportunity to review its entire body of abortion precedent, all the way back to Roe v. Wade.
The case is likely to at the very least impact the Hellerstedt precedent, which has been used to invalidate a broad range of modest abortion regulations as “undue burdens” on women. It remains to be seen whether the court takes the opportunity to make a broader determination on the underlying legitimacy of Roe or Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which force all 50 states to permit most abortions.
Roe is largely defended not on its legal merits (numerous pro-abortion legal minds, including Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg herself, have acknowledged the ruling’s flaws), but on its status as precedent, with the contemporary interpretation of the stare decisis doctrine holding that Roe’s lengthy history staying on the books grants it added weight. Justice Clarence Thomas has forcefully rejected such arguments; it remains to be seen how Chief Justice John Roberts or President Trump’s two SCOTUS appointees, Neil Gorscuh and Brett Kavanaugh, will weigh Roe’s precedent versus its substance.
Either way, a ruling in the case is likely to be handed down during this already-contentious election year, in which abortion and judicial nominations will be major issues for both Trump and the Democrat nominee.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-01-07--Massachusetts bill would allow abortion for all 9 months, end parental consent

BOSTON , January 7 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Despite being one of the most liberal states in the country , Massachusetts ’ abortion laws have long been too moderate for the abortion lobby ’ s liking .
Democrat lawmakers hope to change that with the so-called ROE Act currently pending before the legislature .
The Remove Obstacles and Expand Abortion Access ( ROE ) Act declares that abortions may be committed past the state ’ s current cutoff point of 24 weeks if a physician deems abortion “ necessary to protect the patient ’ s life or physical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of lethal fetal anomalies , or where the fetus is incompatible with sustained life outside the uterus.
” It defines “ physical or mental health ” as encompassing “ all factors — physical , emotional , psychological , familial , and the person ’ s age — relevant to the well-being of the patient , ” the same language used in the U.S. Supreme Court ’ s 1973 Doe v. Bolton ruling , which when paired with Roe v. Wade defines “ health ” so broadly as to permit effectively unlimited abortions .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s current requirement that minors can not abort without the consent of a parent , as well as language requiring that abortionists “ take all reasonable steps ( … ) to preserve the life and health of the aborted child.
” '' I think if people realize what a post-Roe world would be , that would make it even more reasonable to do this bill , '' the bill ’ s sponsor , Democrat state Sen. Harriette Chandler , told U.S. News & World Report .
Massachusetts Citizens for Life board chairman David @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that abortion is often used by adult predators to hide and continue their rape of teenage girls , by destroying the evidence , and argued that laws “ need to do as much as we can — especially given the kind of epidemic abuse that we 're facing — to interrupt that cycle.
” The ROE Act is part of a broader trend of states on both sides preparing for an assumed reversal of Roe v. Wade in the not-too-distant future .
It would also bring Massachusetts more closely aligned with its left-wing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , California raised eyebrows last fall when it put Massachusetts on a list of 22 states it was blacklisting for “ severe anti-choice policies.
” The ROE Act is expected to pass the state legislature , but whether it would become law remains to be seen .
Liberal Republican Gov .
Charlie Baker is an abortion supporter who previously signed a repeal of Massachusetts ’ pre-Roe abortion ban , but has said he has “ concerns about eliminating the parental notification requirement .
”

Under the Remove Obstacles and Expand Abortion Access (ROE) Act, abortionists would no longer be required 'to preserve the life and health of the aborted child.'
BOSTON, January 7, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Despite being one of the most liberal states in the country, Massachusetts’ abortion laws have long been too moderate for the abortion lobby’s liking. Democrat lawmakers hope to change that with the so-called ROE Act currently pending before the legislature.
The Remove Obstacles and Expand Abortion Access (ROE) Act declares that abortions may be committed past the state’s current cutoff point of 24 weeks if a physician deems abortion “necessary to protect the patient’s life or physical or mental health, or in cases of lethal fetal anomalies, or where the fetus is incompatible with sustained life outside the uterus.”
It defines “physical or mental health” as encompassing “all factors — physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the person’s age — relevant to the well-being of the patient,” the same language used in the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 Doe v. Bolton ruling, which when paired with Roe v. Wade defines “health” so broadly as to permit effectively unlimited abortions.
The bill also eliminates the state’s current requirement that minors cannot abort without the consent of a parent, as well as language requiring that abortionists “take all reasonable steps (…) to preserve the life and health of the aborted child.”
“I think if people realize what a post-Roe world would be, that would make it even more reasonable to do this bill,” the bill’s sponsor, Democrat state Sen. Harriette Chandler, told U.S. News & World Report.
Massachusetts Citizens for Life board chairman David Franks responded to the bill by noting that abortion is often used by adult predators to hide and continue their rape of teenage girls, by destroying the evidence, and argued that laws “need to do as much as we can — especially given the kind of epidemic abuse that we're facing — to interrupt that cycle.”
The ROE Act is part of a broader trend of states on both sides preparing for an assumed reversal of Roe v. Wade in the not-too-distant future. It would also bring Massachusetts more closely aligned with its left-wing reputation; the City of San Francisco, California raised eyebrows last fall when it put Massachusetts on a list of 22 states it was blacklisting for “severe anti-choice policies.”
The ROE Act is expected to pass the state legislature, but whether it would become law remains to be seen. Liberal Republican Gov. Charlie Baker is an abortion supporter who previously signed a repeal of Massachusetts’ pre-Roe abortion ban, but has said he has “concerns about eliminating the parental notification requirement.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-01-07--Public school sex-ed is bad enough that you should pull your kids out of school

Formerly Heart to Heart with Mother Miriam , Mother Miriam Live brings you inspiration and solutions for life ’ s @ @ @ @ @ Miriam is a Catholic nun on a mission to bring hope to a world that @ @ @ @ @ let her share that hope and joy with you !
To tune into Mother Miriam @ @ @ @ @ Facebook page here every Monday to Friday at 10am .

Watch Mother Miriam's Live show from 1.7.2020. In today's encore presentation, Mother discusses the terrible sex-ed classes being taught in California schools and urges parents to take their kids out of public schools.
You can tune in daily at 10 am EST/7 am PST on our Facebook Page.
Subscribe to Mother Miriam Live here.


lifesitenews--2020-01-08--Chick-fil-A pres muddies waters on LGBT donation controversy, now calls Salvation Army ‘outsta

Chick-fil-A pres muddies waters on LGBT donation controversy, now calls Salvation Army ‘outstanding’

January 8 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy has written an open letter admitting that the fast-food giant “ inadvertently discredited several outstanding organizations ” when it announced last November that it was reprioritizing its corporate giving strategy .
When Chick-fil-A revealed that it would stop donating to The Salvation Army and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes – groups that LGBT activists have for years deemed to be “ anti-gay ” for their Christian stances on certain issues – the move was interpreted by many observers and faithful patrons as knuckling under to pressure from LGBT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earned hero status among Christians because of its courage in standing up to the homosexual juggernaut was suddenly seen as having betrayed millions of its loyal customers .
Chick-fil-A ’ s announcement was followed by the revelation it had donated in 2017 to the far-left , anti-Christian Southern Poverty Law Center ( SPLC ) .
It was a “ hate map ” produced by the SPLC that inspired domestic terrorist Floyd Lee Corkins II to attempt a mass shooting at the pro-life Family Research Council ( FRC ) in 2012 .
He was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Corkins had with him a backpack of Chick-fil-A sandwiches .
He said he ’ d planned to smear them on the corpses of FRC employees .
American Family Association ( AFA ) President Tim Wildmon reached out to Cathy with a personal letter , asking : • Will Chick-fil-A publicly state that it does not believe the Salvation Army and FCA are hate groups because of the ministries ’ beliefs about sexuality , marriage , and family ?
• Will you publicly state that Chick-fil-A will not hesitate to fund these two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the future ?
“ As you have seen , recently we announced changes to our giving strategy at the Chick-fil-A Foundation , ” wrote Cathy in his December 5 , 2019 response .
“ These changes were made to better focus on hunger , homelessness and education .
We understand how some thought we were abandoning our long-standing support of faith-based organizations.
” “ We inadvertently discredited several outstanding organizations that have effectively served communities for years , ” continued Cathy .
“ Some also questioned if our commitment to our Corporate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unequivocally : It is not , ” he added .
“ It appears that Mr. Cathy understands how many evangelicals perceived the company 's decision , as he stated that these Christian groups were ‘ inadvertently discredited , ’ ” said Wildmon .
“ The fact that Dan Cathy called these two Christian groups ‘ outstanding organizations ’ will mean a lot to evangelicals.
” However , I also mentioned in my initial letter that Chick-fil-A stated that the company would support Covenant House , a ministry to homeless youth , including homosexual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to help hurting youth in desperate circumstances –– including those who are LGBTQ –– Covenant House also openly promotes homosexuality as normal , natural , and healthy .
This was evident in Covenant House 's participation in the NYC gay pride parade and a number of other efforts that make it clear the ministry does not hold to a biblical view of human sexuality .
“ As a result , AFA will continue to monitor Chick-fil-A 's corporate giving , at least for the foreseeable future , ” continued Wildmon .
“ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do so.
” Covenant House , which is ostensibly Catholic , has supported one of the most controversial recent developments in LGBT activism : Drag Queen Story Hour .
The movement ’ s New York City page lists Covenant House New York as having provided “ community space ” to host events in which adult crossdressers read to children about “ intersectionality ” and “ learn [ ing ] to see beyond the pink and blue gender binary , ” according to the organization ’ s own website .
More than 116,000 concerned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ November , joining with Wildmon in asking Chick-fil-A to clarify the organization ’ s attitude toward The Salvation Army and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes .
Elsewhere in his letter to Wildmon , Cathy promised , “ Chick-fil-A will give to faith-based and other organizations that we believe to be highly effective in a particular area.
” “ Grant recipients will likely rotate , as we assess from year to year partners who help us meet our stated goals , ” continued Cathy .
“ Also , our Operators in your community will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are meaningful at their discretion .
Additionally , our family will continue to fund and operate our family foundations and give to other charities of our choice .
We have been entrusted with much to share and the needs are great.
” “ We understand Chick-fil-A can support whatever groups it wants but we wanted to protect the reputation of FCA and the Salvation Army , ” Ed Vitagliano , an AFA executive vice president , told OneNewsNow .
Over 43,000 people have signed a LifeSiteNews petition asking Chick-fil-A to reverse course .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and continue to support pro-marriage and pro-family Christian organizations , ” it says .

There are still many unanswered questions about Chick-fil-A's financial support of leftist organizations.
January 8, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy has written an open letter admitting that the fast-food giant “inadvertently discredited several outstanding organizations” when it announced last November that it was reprioritizing its corporate giving strategy.
When Chick-fil-A revealed that it would stop donating to The Salvation Army and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes – groups that LGBT activists have for years deemed to be “anti-gay” for their Christian stances on certain issues – the move was interpreted by many observers and faithful patrons as knuckling under to pressure from LGBT political forces.
The restaurant that had earned hero status among Christians because of its courage in standing up to the homosexual juggernaut was suddenly seen as having betrayed millions of its loyal customers.
Chick-fil-A’s announcement was followed by the revelation it had donated in 2017 to the far-left, anti-Christian Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). It was a “hate map” produced by the SPLC that inspired domestic terrorist Floyd Lee Corkins II to attempt a mass shooting at the pro-life Family Research Council (FRC) in 2012. He was stopped by the security guard he shot.
Corkins had with him a backpack of Chick-fil-A sandwiches. He said he’d planned to smear them on the corpses of FRC employees.
American Family Association (AFA) President Tim Wildmon reached out to Cathy with a personal letter, asking:
Will Chick-fil-A publicly state that it does not believe the Salvation Army and FCA are hate groups because of the ministries’ beliefs about sexuality, marriage, and family? Will you publicly state that Chick-fil-A will not hesitate to fund these two ministries again, should the opportunity arise in the future?
“As you have seen, recently we announced changes to our giving strategy at the Chick-fil-A Foundation,” wrote Cathy in his December 5, 2019 response. “These changes were made to better focus on hunger, homelessness and education. We understand how some thought we were abandoning our long-standing support of faith-based organizations.”
“We inadvertently discredited several outstanding organizations that have effectively served communities for years,” continued Cathy.
“Some also questioned if our commitment to our Corporate Purpose was waning. Let me state unequivocally: It is not,” he added.
Wildmon said that Cathy’s response “was a welcomed clarification.”
“It appears that Mr. Cathy understands how many evangelicals perceived the company's decision, as he stated that these Christian groups were ‘inadvertently discredited,’” said Wildmon. “The fact that Dan Cathy called these two Christian groups ‘outstanding organizations’ will mean a lot to evangelicals.”
Wildmon also expressed caution:
However, I also mentioned in my initial letter that Chick-fil-A stated that the company would support Covenant House, a ministry to homeless youth, including homosexual young people. While it is admirable to help hurting youth in desperate circumstances –– including those who are LGBTQ –– Covenant House also openly promotes homosexuality as normal, natural, and healthy. This was evident in Covenant House's participation in the NYC gay pride parade and a number of other efforts that make it clear the ministry does not hold to a biblical view of human sexuality.
“As a result, AFA will continue to monitor Chick-fil-A's corporate giving, at least for the foreseeable future,” continued Wildmon. “We believe our supporters rely on us to do so.”
Covenant House, which is ostensibly Catholic, has supported one of the most controversial recent developments in LGBT activism: Drag Queen Story Hour. The movement’s New York City page lists Covenant House New York as having provided “community space” to host events in which adult crossdressers read to children about “intersectionality” and “learn[ing] to see beyond the pink and blue gender binary,” according to the organization’s own website.
More than 116,000 concerned individuals had signed an AFA petition in November, joining with Wildmon in asking Chick-fil-A to clarify the organization’s attitude toward The Salvation Army and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes.
Elsewhere in his letter to Wildmon, Cathy promised, “Chick-fil-A will give to faith-based and other organizations that we believe to be highly effective in a particular area.”
“Grant recipients will likely rotate, as we assess from year to year partners who help us meet our stated goals,” continued Cathy. “Also, our Operators in your community will continue to invest in local causes that are meaningful at their discretion. Additionally, our family will continue to fund and operate our family foundations and give to other charities of our choice. We have been entrusted with much to share and the needs are great.”
“We understand Chick-fil-A can support whatever groups it wants but we wanted to protect the reputation of FCA and the Salvation Army,” Ed Vitagliano, an AFA executive vice president, told OneNewsNow.
Over 43,000 people have signed a LifeSiteNews petition asking Chick-fil-A to reverse course.
“Please stop pandering to homosexual activists and continue to support pro-marriage and pro-family Christian organizations,” it says.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-01-08--Legalization of doctors killing sick Canadians creates organ donation ‘boon,’ media org raves

January 8 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Even for Canada ’ s media , which was universally and enthusiastically in favor of the legalization of assisted suicide in the leadup to legalization , the Ottawa Citizen ’ s recent spin on a tragic and awful trend is jaw-dropping .
Increasingly , those opting for assisted suicide are also volunteering to have their organs recycled ( 18 organ and 95 tissue donors in 2919 ) , and the Citizen ’ s headline noted this fact approvingly : “ Medically assisted deaths prove a growing boon to organ donation in Ontario.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ new source of organs and tissues , ” which they noted is significant in that “ Ontario ’ s waiting list for organs typically hovers around 1,600.
” That “ source of organs and tissues , ” it should be noted , is patients who have been killed by medical professionals at their request , after which their corpses can be pillaged for spare parts .
This , apparently , is a “ boon.
” From the Citizen : Since assisted suicide ( referred to in the media by the handy euphemism “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ process sound less alarming and less like suicide ) became legal in Canada in 2016 , the Trillium Gift of Life Network “ immediately moved to the forefront of organ and tissue donation through MAiD ” as a result of “ proactively ” reaching out to those seeking assisted suicide to see if they might be willing to donate their organs after they ’ d been killed .
The only downside , the Citizen noted , is that the preference of assisted suicide recipients for “ home deaths ” prevents many donations from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legal when the donor dies in a hospital .
One particularly disturbing scenario cited by Dr. Moira McQueen of the Canadian Catholic Bioethics Institute involves a compromise solution to prospective donors who still wish to die at home .
In some instances , patients could begin the process of dying at home—in short , getting the first injections , which would sedate them .
At that point , having lost consciousness at home as they wished , the donor could then be shuttled to the hospital where the final lethal injection would kill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Further to all of that , the Citizen noted enthusiastically , we may see these donations increase : MAiD donations also typically provide more time for testing donor organs and better matching with recipients .
MAiD , and its subsequent related organ donation , recently received a potential boost in the courts , when Quebec ’ s Superior Court ruled last September that parts of the laws governing assisted death were unconstitutional .
The decision followed a lawsuit by Montrealers Jean Truchon and Nicole Gladu , who have incurable degenerative illnesses and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they challenged the Criminal Code restriction that natural death be “ reasonable foreseeable ” before being eligible for assisted death and the portion of Quebec ’ s Bill 52 that said people must “ be at the end of life.
” The court decision gave both governments , neither of which appealed the decision , six months to amend their laws .
To summarize that : Expanding the eligibility criteria for assisted suicide is a positive thing because more dead people means more available organs .
Further to that , allowing people who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have themselves killed means that the likelihood of getting organs in better condition ( i.e .
not damaged by disease ) grows significantly .
This is also apparently a good thing .
At no point , it must be noted , does the Ottawa Citizens ’ glowing coverage quote anyone with any ethical concerns about approaching suicidal people with requests for their organs .
Jonathon ’ s new podcast , The Van Maren Show , is dedicated to telling the stories of the pro-life and pro-family movement .
In his latest episode , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ known abortion survivor and pro-life advocate .
Ms. Jessen has been mentioned in speeches by President George W. Bush .
The Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of Westminster have said that her story could impact the abortion debate .
She says : “ I am alive .
Just by the miraculous power of Christ.
” You can subscribe here and listen to the episode below :

January 8, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Even for Canada’s media, which was universally and enthusiastically in favor of the legalization of assisted suicide in the leadup to legalization, the Ottawa Citizen’s recent spin on a tragic and awful trend is jaw-dropping. Increasingly, those opting for assisted suicide are also volunteering to have their organs recycled (18 organ and 95 tissue donors in 2919), and the Citizen’s headline noted this fact approvingly: “Medically assisted deaths prove a growing boon to organ donation in Ontario.”
The Citizen lauded this “relatively new source of organs and tissues,” which they noted is significant in that “Ontario’s waiting list for organs typically hovers around 1,600.” That “source of organs and tissues,” it should be noted, is patients who have been killed by medical professionals at their request, after which their corpses can be pillaged for spare parts. This, apparently, is a “boon.” From the Citizen:
According to Trillium Gift of Life Network, which oversees organ and tissue donation in Ontario, the 113 MAiD-related donations in 2019 accounted for five per cent of overall donations in Ontario, a share that has also been increasing. In 2018, MAiD-related donations made up 3.6 per cent of the province’s total donations, and in 2017 just 2.1 per cent.
Since assisted suicide (referred to in the media by the handy euphemism “MAiD” in order to make the process sound less alarming and less like suicide) became legal in Canada in 2016, the Trillium Gift of Life Network “immediately moved to the forefront of organ and tissue donation through MAiD” as a result of “proactively” reaching out to those seeking assisted suicide to see if they might be willing to donate their organs after they’d been killed. The only downside, the Citizen noted, is that the preference of assisted suicide recipients for “home deaths” prevents many donations from taking place as organ donation is only legal when the donor dies in a hospital.
Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook
One particularly disturbing scenario cited by Dr. Moira McQueen of the Canadian Catholic Bioethics Institute involves a compromise solution to prospective donors who still wish to die at home. In some instances, patients could begin the process of dying at home—in short, getting the first injections, which would sedate them. At that point, having lost consciousness at home as they wished, the donor could then be shuttled to the hospital where the final lethal injection would kill him and his organs would be harvested.
Further to all of that, the Citizen noted enthusiastically, we may see these donations increase:
MAiD donations also typically provide more time for testing donor organs and better matching with recipients. MAiD, and its subsequent related organ donation, recently received a potential boost in the courts, when Quebec’s Superior Court ruled last September that parts of the laws governing assisted death were unconstitutional. The decision followed a lawsuit by Montrealers Jean Truchon and Nicole Gladu, who have incurable degenerative illnesses and were refused MAiD. In particular, they challenged the Criminal Code restriction that natural death be “reasonable foreseeable” before being eligible for assisted death and the portion of Quebec’s Bill 52 that said people must “be at the end of life.” The court decision gave both governments, neither of which appealed the decision, six months to amend their laws.
To summarize that: Expanding the eligibility criteria for assisted suicide is a positive thing because more dead people means more available organs. Further to that, allowing people who are not dying in the short-term to have themselves killed means that the likelihood of getting organs in better condition (i.e. not damaged by disease) grows significantly. This is also apparently a good thing. At no point, it must be noted, does the Ottawa Citizens’ glowing coverage quote anyone with any ethical concerns about approaching suicidal people with requests for their organs.
Apparently, we’ve moved past all that.
Jonathon’s new podcast, The Van Maren Show, is dedicated to telling the stories of the pro-life and pro-family movement. In his latest episode, he interviews Gianna Jessen, a well known abortion survivor and pro-life advocate. Ms. Jessen has been mentioned in speeches by President George W. Bush. The Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of Westminster have said that her story could impact the abortion debate. She says: “I am alive. Just by the miraculous power of Christ.” You can subscribe here and listen to the episode below:
Follow Jonathon Jonathon Van Maren is a public speaker, writer, and pro-life activist. His commentary has been translated into more than eight languages and published widely online as well as print newspapers such as the Jewish Independent, the National Post, the Hamilton Spectator and others. He has received an award for combating anti-Semitism in print from the Jewish organization B’nai Brith. His commentary has been featured on CTV Primetime, Global News, EWTN, and the CBC as well as dozens of radio stations and news outlets in Canada and the United States. He speaks on a wide variety of cultural topics across North America at universities, high schools, churches, and other functions. Some of these topics include abortion, pornography, the Sexual Revolution, and euthanasia. Jonathon holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree in history from Simon Fraser University, and is the communications director for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform. Jonathon’s first book, The Culture War, was released in 2016.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-01-08--WATCH: How a literature professor is using books to end abortion

January 8 , 2019 ( LifeSiteNews ) – In today ’ s episode of The Van Maren Show , Jonathon Van Maren speaks with acclaimed author and professor Karen Swallow Prior .
Dr .
Swallow Prior is well-known for her work as a teacher of literature and her books : Fierce Convictions , On Reading Well , and Booked .
What many people might not realize is she has a deep history as a pro-life activist .
Swallow Prior was arrested many times for blocking the doors of abortion facilities in order to speak to women before they entered .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ how something one might not expect will play a key role in the abortion debate : literature !
After seeing The Silent Scream at her church , Swallow Prior began volunteering at her local crisis pregnancy center .
When Operation Rescue came to her city , she and her husband went to a local abortion center with about a dozen or so people to pray and sing hymns .
She was arrested that day – the first arrest of many .
Van Maren and Swallow Prior look at the similarities between Operation Rescue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been more than 70,000 arrests during the history of Operation Rescue , more than during the civil rights movement .
Swallow Prior admits she was a bit naïve when she first joined the movement , thinking , “ people disagree , you know ?
I 'm an activist and we can disagree with one another , but activism is cool.
” It was as she continued in the movement that she realized how many political and ideological movements are so closely tied to or dependent upon abortion .
She talks about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at a state university as she became more involved in Operation Rescue and eventually became a high-profile activist .
One professor commented that Swallow Prior ’ s grade most likely dropped due to the demands of her illegal anti-abortion activities .
There were also professors who refused to serve on her dissertation committee .
In the mid 1980s , the pro-life movement was excited , thinking Roe v. Wade would be overturned by the Reagan-stacked court .
Instead , in the early 1990s , the movement faced some very harsh blows .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law , the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act , was passed , which greatly increased the jail time and fines levied for Operation Rescue-type missions .
It was also in the early 1990s that there was a rash of violence against abortionists by pro-lifers .
Swallow Prior recounts the time she was awoken in the middle of the night to the news that abortionist Barnett Slepian had been assassinated in his home by a pro-life activist .
This news caused Swallow Prior to really reflect on the language and rhetoric being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Swallow Prior argues that language is a significant part of what makes us human .
She discusses the important role that language plays in the pro-life movement .
She states that even using the terms “ pro-life ” and “ pro-choice ” shifts the focus of the debate and actually helps the pro-abortion side .
The terms used before Roe v. Wade , “ anti-abortion rights ” and “ pro-abortion rights , ” are far more accurate , according to Swallow Prior .
Literature can also be used to understand what inspires pro-abortion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ children , which pro-life activists can then address .
Swallow Prior and Van Maren discuss some of the pro-abortion literature and poems that have had a powerful impact on the movement and what pro-lifers can learn from them .
There are many authors , including Pulitzer Prize winners , who have focused on or addressed abortion in their writing , including Ernest Hemmingway and F. Scott Fitzgerald , but the prevelance of it in literature isn ’ t well-known to most people .
Sharon Olds , a pro-abortion feminist and Pulitzer Prize winner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She writes of her unborn children reaching out to her : “ I can feel just one of them standing on the edge of a cliff by the sea in the dark , stretching its arms out desperately to me.
” Van Maren also points out the personal ties many authors had to abortion .
Many now-famous authors , especially from the beatnik generation , forced their wives to have abortions so they could focus on their careers .
Van Maren highlights the almost universal acceptance of this among male authors such as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Steinbeck , and Ernest Hemingway .
Swallow Prior doesn ’ t advocate boycotting books written by these authors , but instead encourages people to read them understanding the author ’ s background .
She tells listeners that these are great examples of how we can all compartmentalize and be inconsistent in our beliefs and expression of those beliefs .
Both Swallow Prior and Van Maren encourage people to read more literature to help form one ’ s moral compass , strengthen pro-life arguments , and to allow us to return to a central @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re losing today : language .
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 Pippa webpage here .
To receive weekly emails when a new episode is uploaded , click here .
Listen to the entire episode here :

She was arrested many times for defending life and she now uses an unlikely weapon to fight abortion: books.
January 8, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – In today’s episode of The Van Maren Show, Jonathon Van Maren speaks with acclaimed author and professor Karen Swallow Prior. Dr. Swallow Prior is well-known for her work as a teacher of literature and her books: Fierce Convictions, On Reading Well, and Booked. What many people might not realize is she has a deep history as a pro-life activist. Swallow Prior was arrested many times for blocking the doors of abortion facilities in order to speak to women before they entered.
Van Maren and Swallow Prior speak about how something one might not expect will play a key role in the abortion debate: literature!
After seeing The Silent Scream at her church, Swallow Prior began volunteering at her local crisis pregnancy center. When Operation Rescue came to her city, she and her husband went to a local abortion center with about a dozen or so people to pray and sing hymns. She was arrested that day – the first arrest of many.
Van Maren and Swallow Prior look at the similarities between Operation Rescue and the civil rights movement. There have been more than 70,000 arrests during the history of Operation Rescue, more than during the civil rights movement.
Swallow Prior admits she was a bit naïve when she first joined the movement, thinking, “people disagree, you know? I'm an activist and we can disagree with one another, but activism is cool.” It was as she continued in the movement that she realized how many political and ideological movements are so closely tied to or dependent upon abortion.
She talks about the difficulties she faced as a PhD student at a state university as she became more involved in Operation Rescue and eventually became a high-profile activist. One professor commented that Swallow Prior’s grade most likely dropped due to the demands of her illegal anti-abortion activities. There were also professors who refused to serve on her dissertation committee.
Watch the full episode here:
In the mid 1980s, the pro-life movement was excited, thinking Roe v. Wade would be overturned by the Reagan-stacked court. Instead, in the early 1990s, the movement faced some very harsh blows. It was during this time that the FACE law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, was passed, which greatly increased the jail time and fines levied for Operation Rescue-type missions.
It was also in the early 1990s that there was a rash of violence against abortionists by pro-lifers. Swallow Prior recounts the time she was awoken in the middle of the night to the news that abortionist Barnett Slepian had been assassinated in his home by a pro-life activist. This news caused Swallow Prior to really reflect on the language and rhetoric being used by some in the movement.
Swallow Prior argues that language is a significant part of what makes us human. She discusses the important role that language plays in the pro-life movement. She states that even using the terms “pro-life” and “pro-choice” shifts the focus of the debate and actually helps the pro-abortion side. The terms used before Roe v. Wade, “anti-abortion rights” and “pro-abortion rights,” are far more accurate, according to Swallow Prior.
Literature can also be used to understand what inspires pro-abortion activists to support the murder of innocent children, which pro-life activists can then address. Swallow Prior and Van Maren discuss some of the pro-abortion literature and poems that have had a powerful impact on the movement and what pro-lifers can learn from them.
There are many authors, including Pulitzer Prize winners, who have focused on or addressed abortion in their writing, including Ernest Hemmingway and F. Scott Fitzgerald, but the prevelance of it in literature isn’t well-known to most people.
Sharon Olds, a pro-abortion feminist and Pulitzer Prize winner, compares abortion to car accidents. She writes of her unborn children reaching out to her: “I can feel just one of them standing on the edge of a cliff by the sea in the dark, stretching its arms out desperately to me.”
Van Maren also points out the personal ties many authors had to abortion. Many now-famous authors, especially from the beatnik generation, forced their wives to have abortions so they could focus on their careers. Van Maren highlights the almost universal acceptance of this among male authors such as Allen Ginsberg, Jack Kerouac, John Steinbeck, and Ernest Hemingway.
Swallow Prior doesn’t advocate boycotting books written by these authors, but instead encourages people to read them understanding the author’s background. She tells listeners that these are great examples of how we can all compartmentalize and be inconsistent in our beliefs and expression of those beliefs.
Both Swallow Prior and Van Maren encourage people to read more literature to help form one’s moral compass, strengthen pro-life arguments, and to allow us to return to a central part of being human that we’re losing today: language.
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 Pippa webpage here.
To receive weekly emails when a new episode is uploaded, click here.
Listen to the entire episode here:
Share


lifesitenews--2020-01-08--Trump administration declares pro-abortion ‘Equal Rights Amendment’ dead on arrival

January 8 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Left-wing hopes of reviving the long-dormant Equal Rights Amendment ( ERA ) were dashed this week as the Trump administration declared that the proposed constitutional amendment ’ s supporters would have to restart the amendment process from scratch if they want to enact it so long after its original deadline .
Originally proposed and defeated decades ago , the ERA simply states that “ Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
” But conservatives argue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be interpreted as codifying into law non-rights such as abortion and have broad ramifications on everything from the military draft and sex-segregated prisons to women-only restrooms and male-only clergy .
Lawmakers in South Carolina , Utah , and Virginia have been working on reviving the ERA , while the U.S. House Judiciary Committee voted in November to retroactively lift its deadline for ratification .
But that won ’ t suffice to let ERA supporters simply pick up where they left off , according to a 38-page opinion from the Department of Justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We conclude that the ERA Resolution has expired and is no longer pending before the States , ” it reads .
“ Even if one or more state legislatures were to ratify the 1972 proposal , that action would not complete the ratification of the amendment , and the ERA ’ s adoption could not be certified under 1 U.S.C .
§ 106b .
In addition , we conclude that when Congress uses a proposing clause to impose a deadline on the States ’ ratification of a proposed constitutional amendment , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ revive the proposal after the deadline ’ s expiration.
” In order to legitimately ratify the ERA , supporters would instead have to either pursue a new “ convention sought by two-thirds of the state legislatures , ” or Congress would have to “ propose that amendment once more ” and approve it with “ two-thirds of both Houses ” ( as outlined in Article V of the U.S. Constitution ) , at which point states would have to take all-new ratification votes .
National Review ’ s Ed Whelan noted that no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has conceded as much , having written that she looks forward to its supporters one day “ starting over again collecting the necessary states to ratify it.
” A coalition of pro-life leaders wrote in January against voting to revive the ERA , declaring it would be more accurately named the “ Everything Related to Abortion Act.
” “ Let us be clear , laws protecting women ’ s interests will be undercut by the radical language of the ERA that strips away from women their unique place in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Not only will real protections be overwritten by this heavy-handed measure , the most profound change will be creating a constitutional foothold for abortion and introduction of vague language on ‘ sex ’ that may harm women ’ s unique interests .
”

The Department of Justice determined that the resolution has expired and its supporters would have to start over.
January 8, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Left-wing hopes of reviving the long-dormant Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) were dashed this week as the Trump administration declared that the proposed constitutional amendment’s supporters would have to restart the amendment process from scratch if they want to enact it so long after its original deadline.
Originally proposed and defeated decades ago, the ERA simply states that “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.” But conservatives argue that if implemented, this redundant language would be interpreted as codifying into law non-rights such as abortion and have broad ramifications on everything from the military draft and sex-segregated prisons to women-only restrooms and male-only clergy.
Lawmakers in South Carolina, Utah, and Virginia have been working on reviving the ERA, while the U.S. House Judiciary Committee voted in November to retroactively lift its deadline for ratification. But that won’t suffice to let ERA supporters simply pick up where they left off, according to a 38-page opinion from the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel.
“We conclude that the ERA Resolution has expired and is no longer pending before the States,” it reads. “Even if one or more state legislatures were to ratify the 1972 proposal, that action would not complete the ratification of the amendment, and the ERA’s adoption could not be certified under 1 U.S.C. § 106b. In addition, we conclude that when Congress uses a proposing clause to impose a deadline on the States’ ratification of a proposed constitutional amendment, that deadline is binding and Congress may not revive the proposal after the deadline’s expiration.”
In order to legitimately ratify the ERA, supporters would instead have to either pursue a new “convention sought by two-thirds of the state legislatures,” or Congress would have to “propose that amendment once more” and approve it with “two-thirds of both Houses” (as outlined in Article V of the U.S. Constitution), at which point states would have to take all-new ratification votes.
National Review’s Ed Whelan noted that no less a feminist authority than Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has conceded as much, having written that she looks forward to its supporters one day “starting over again collecting the necessary states to ratify it.”
A coalition of pro-life leaders wrote in January against voting to revive the ERA, declaring it would be more accurately named the “Everything Related to Abortion Act.”
“Let us be clear, laws protecting women’s interests will be undercut by the radical language of the ERA that strips away from women their unique place in the law,” the letter says. “Not only will real protections be overwritten by this heavy-handed measure, the most profound change will be creating a constitutional foothold for abortion and introduction of vague language on ‘sex’ that may harm women’s unique interests.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-01-08--Ricky Gervais hits back at critics: ‘Just because you’re offended, doesn’t mean you&#821

Ricky Gervais hits back at critics: ‘Just because you’re offended, doesn’t mean you’re right’

January 8 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – British comedian Ricky Gervais has hit back at critics of his performance as host of this past weekend ’ s Golden Globe awards , in which he scathingly called out the hypocrisy of Hollywood ’ s “ woke ” elites .
Despite beginning his speech by saying that his comments were “ just jokes , ” Gervais appeared to be serious when he told the Hollywood celebrities gathered for the awards ceremony on Sunday evening that they were “ in no position to lecture the public about anything.
” Some sections of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speech , which included a number of controversial and extremely vulgar jokes , “ cheapened the ceremony ” and “ overshadowed vital political statements ” made during the course of the evening .
Gervais responded to his critics on Twitter by mocking the idea that “ teasing huge corporations , and the richest , most privileged people in the world ” makes him “ right wing.
” In a tweet published earlier today , he told “ woke ” critics that “ simply pointing out whether someone is left or right wing is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ just because you 're offended , does n't mean you 're right.
” Gervais also retweeted a post by conservative talk-show host Dana Loesch , who said that the negative reactions to Gervais ’ speech “ prove his point.
” Loesch tweeted in response to an article in UK newspaper the Indepedent , which argued that “ powerful speeches ... given by actors including Jennifer Aniston on climate change , Joaquin Phoenix on veganism , Michelle Williams on abortion rights [ sic ] and Patricia Arquette on the conflict between Iran/US ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ called the article “ garbage ” and said “ [ t ] hey can lecture from the stage but he can ’ t mock their inconsistencies ?
You prove his point.
” During his speech at the ceremony , Gervais at one point tore stripes off of Apple for claiming to be “ woke ” while being a “ company who runs sweatshops in China.
” He told the gathered celebrities , “ You say you 're ‘ woke , ’ but the companies you work for are unbelievable .
Apple , Amazon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ streaming service you 'd call your agent , would n't you ?
” “ So if you do win an award tonight do n't use it as a platform to make a political speech .
You 're in no position to lecture the public about anything.
” At one point in his speech , Gervais referred to the audience generally as “ all you perverts.
” He joked about the connection of celebrities to convicted sex-offender Jeffrey Epstein , telling the audience , “ I know he ’ s your friend.
” At @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the one thing that all TV and film executives had in common was being “ terrified of Ronan Farrow , ” the journalist known for helping to uncover sexual abuse allegations against former Hollywood film producer Harvey Weinstein .
It is by no means clear where Gervais stands on a number of the controversial issues touched on in his speech .
In one interview prior to the event , he said , “ it ’ s about the gag – whatever it looks like .
I think some people think that a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his real soul .
Well it ’ s not .
Sometimes they ’ re word play , sometimes you say things you don ’ t mean for comic-effect.
” However , he does appear to be intent on attacking what many consider to be the hypocrisy of celebrities using such award ceremonies to make moral and political speeches .
Prior to the event , Gervais told the Spectator magazine of his intention to challenge the celebrity audience , saying “ it 's a room full of the biggest virtue-signalers and hypocrites in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go after that .
”

Gervais told Hollywood celebrities gathered for the awards ceremony on Sunday evening that they were 'in no position to lecture the public about anything.'
January 8, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – British comedian Ricky Gervais has hit back at critics of his performance as host of this past weekend’s Golden Globe awards, in which he scathingly called out the hypocrisy of Hollywood’s “woke” elites.
Despite beginning his speech by saying that his comments were “just jokes,” Gervais appeared to be serious when he told the Hollywood celebrities gathered for the awards ceremony on Sunday evening that they were “in no position to lecture the public about anything.”
Some sections of the media have said that Gervais’ speech, which included a number of controversial and extremely vulgar jokes, “cheapened the ceremony” and “overshadowed vital political statements” made during the course of the evening.
Gervais responded to his critics on Twitter by mocking the idea that “teasing huge corporations, and the richest, most privileged people in the world” makes him “right wing.” In a tweet published earlier today, he told “woke” critics that “simply pointing out whether someone is left or right wing isn't winning the argument” and that “just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.”
1. Simply pointing out whether someone is left or right wing isn't winning the argument.
2. If a joke is good enough, it can be enjoyed by anyone.
3. It's not all about you.
4. Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. — Ricky Gervais (@rickygervais) January 8, 2020
Gervais also retweeted a post by conservative talk-show host Dana Loesch, who said that the negative reactions to Gervais’ speech “prove his point.”
Loesch tweeted in response to an article in UK newspaper the Indepedent, which argued that “powerful speeches…given by actors including Jennifer Aniston on climate change, Joaquin Phoenix on veganism, Michelle Williams on abortion rights [sic] and Patricia Arquette on the conflict between Iran/US” had been undermined by Gervais. Loesch called the article “garbage” and said “[t]hey can lecture from the stage but he can’t mock their inconsistencies? You prove his point.”
Oh garbage. @rickygervais demonstrated that good comedians go after everyone. No one should be safe, but the prevailing thought these past 10+ years is that one group IS exempt. They can lecture from the stage but he can’t mock their inconsistencies? You prove his point. https://t.co/Dr9PKnbUSg — Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) January 7, 2020
During his speech at the ceremony, Gervais at one point tore stripes off of Apple for claiming to be “woke” while being a “company who runs sweatshops in China.”
He told the gathered celebrities, “You say you're ‘woke,’ but the companies you work for are unbelievable. Apple, Amazon, Disney – If ISIS started a streaming service you'd call your agent, wouldn't you?”
“So if you do win an award tonight don't use it as a platform to make a political speech. You're in no position to lecture the public about anything.”
At one point in his speech, Gervais referred to the audience generally as “all you perverts.” He joked about the connection of celebrities to convicted sex-offender Jeffrey Epstein, telling the audience, “I know he’s your friend.” At another point in his speech he said that the one thing that all TV and film executives had in common was being “terrified of Ronan Farrow,” the journalist known for helping to uncover sexual abuse allegations against former Hollywood film producer Harvey Weinstein.
It is by no means clear where Gervais stands on a number of the controversial issues touched on in his speech. In one interview prior to the event, he said, “it’s about the gag – whatever it looks like. I think some people think that a comedian’s joke is looking into his real soul. Well it’s not. Sometimes they’re word play, sometimes you say things you don’t mean for comic-effect.”
However, he does appear to be intent on attacking what many consider to be the hypocrisy of celebrities using such award ceremonies to make moral and political speeches. Prior to the event, Gervais told the Spectator magazine of his intention to challenge the celebrity audience, saying “it's a room full of the biggest virtue-signalers and hypocrites in the world, so I've got to go after that.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-01-08--Brazilian bishop suspends priest for blessing homosexual partnership

SAO PAULO , January 8 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – A Brazilian bishop has temporarily suspended a Catholic priest for blessing a homosexual partnership between two men .
A video of the Dec. 7 ceremony showed Father Vicente Paula Gomes ( 56 ) humorously stating that he was “ trembling a little , ” given that he was giving such a blessing to homosexuals for the first time .
Gomes was not wearing liturgical vestments during the ceremony , but was dressed entirely in white as where the rest of the wedding party .
There were no liturgical objects @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two men to kiss after exchanging promises , the priest playfully turned his back and covered his eyes .
“ We think that [ at ] home a man and a woman are enough .
Family is not only that .
To become a family means to create conditions for a dignified life .
That ’ s why I ’ m happy to be here , ” the priest said during the ceremony .
Referring to his bishop , the priest said : `` I am already thinking about what Dom Argemiro [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Monday , but , as I said initially , the blessing does not diminish me , nor will it diminish the Church , nor you . ''
He told the two men that they should declare their homosexual love for each other “ before God ” and to have the “ courage to make it known to your friends and the Holy Church.
” Gomes admitted that the Catholic Church does not recognize same-sex “ marriage.
” He said , “ Of course I can not give this sacrament , but I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you have the duties of companions until the end of your lives .
And do not forget that God blesses your love now and forever . ''
A document from Bishop Argemiro de Azevedo referred to what it called “ grave accusations ” against Father Gomes , who last month “ celebrated a homo-affective union ” of two men , Luis Carlos dos Santos and Claudinei Batista de Almeida , in Assis , a city near metropolitan São Paulo in Brazil .
The letter cited the canon law of the Catholic Church , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the faithful .
The bishop suspended Gomes ’ from his duties as pastor at a parish .
He was due to become parochial vicar of a church in the diocese on Monday .
However , it was not clear what the disposition of that appointment was as a result of the sanction .
The Catholic Church teaches that homosexual acts are “ intrinsically disordered ” since they are “ contrary to the natural law ” and they “ close the sexual act to the gift of life.
” The Church also teaches that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” since God created sexual attraction to be between a male and female for the sake of procreation .
In this way , there is no such reality as a “ homosexual person , ” but only a person who struggles with the “ disorder ” of being attracted to the same sex .
The Church teaches that everybody , including those with disordered sexuality — often expressing itself in lust , masturbation , fornication , pornography , homosexuality — are called to chastity .
That is , to the moral virtue of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person .
The Christian faith holds that the homosexual act , along with murdering the innocent , depriving a laborer of his wages , and oppressing the poor , is one of the four sins that cries to heaven for justice .
AssisCity , a local news outlet , reported that one of the two men in the union blessed by the priest said that homosexual unions are loving , not sinful .
Claudinei Batista de Almeida said , `` We are living in turbulent times , we often realize a widespread hatred @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way of being or their thinking .
We were among friends , dear people and it was cool , cool , we had so much fun !
That this is a way to break prejudice and so that new doors can be opened , so that people can see in a different way that the union between homosexual couples is not a sin , but love.
” In the letter signed by Bishop Azevedo and diocesan chancellor Father David José Martins , Father Gomes was informed that a precautionary measure has been laid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Considering the serious allegations against Father Vicente Paula Gomes , who has celebrated a homosexual union [ … ] , an act performed at a party hall in the city of Assis , [ … ] I decree the suspension of order ad cautelam ( temporarily ) .
” The letter cited canon law of the Catholic Church .
For example , it referred to Can .
1399 , which says : “ In addition to the cases established here or in other laws , the external violation of a divine or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just penalty only when the special gravity of the violation demands punishment and there is an urgent need to prevent or repair scandals.
” The decree of the Diocese of Assisi also declared that once an investigation and canonical proceedings in the matter have concluded , the precautionary measure could be lifted .
The measure was promulgated on December 12 .
Gomes has a popular radio show and is well known in his diocese .
Pope Francis named Bishop Azevedo to his current see in 2016 .
German Cardinal Reinhard Marx , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the Church to grant liturgical blessings to homosexual unions .
In a 2017 radio interview in Germany , Marx said that “ closer pastoral care ” must be given to homosexuals , while priests and pastoral workers should be called on to “ give people in concrete situations [ of homosexual unions ] encouragement .
I do not really see any problems there .
”

SAO PAULO, January 8, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A Brazilian bishop has temporarily suspended a Catholic priest for blessing a homosexual partnership between two men.
A video of the Dec. 7 ceremony showed Father Vicente Paula Gomes (56) humorously stating that he was “trembling a little,” given that he was giving such a blessing to homosexuals for the first time. Gomes was not wearing liturgical vestments during the ceremony, but was dressed entirely in white as where the rest of the wedding party. There were no liturgical objects apparent in the video.
Allowing the two men to kiss after exchanging promises, the priest playfully turned his back and covered his eyes.
“We think that [at] home a man and a woman are enough. Family is not only that. To become a family means to create conditions for a dignified life. That’s why I’m happy to be here,” the priest said during the ceremony.
Referring to his bishop, the priest said: “I am already thinking about what Dom Argemiro [de Azevedo] is going to say on Monday, but, as I said initially, the blessing does not diminish me, nor will it diminish the Church, nor you.” He told the two men that they should declare their homosexual love for each other “before God” and to have the “courage to make it known to your friends and the Holy Church.”
Gomes admitted that the Catholic Church does not recognize same-sex “marriage.” He said, “Of course I cannot give this sacrament, but I pour the blessing on you so that you have the duties of companions until the end of your lives. And do not forget that God blesses your love now and forever.”
A document from Bishop Argemiro de Azevedo referred to what it called “grave accusations” against Father Gomes, who last month “celebrated a homo-affective union” of two men, Luis Carlos dos Santos and Claudinei Batista de Almeida, in Assis, a city near metropolitan São Paulo in Brazil.
The letter cited the canon law of the Catholic Church, which sanctions clerics who give scandal to the faithful. The bishop suspended Gomes’ from his duties as pastor at a parish. He was due to become parochial vicar of a church in the diocese on Monday. However, it was not clear what the disposition of that appointment was as a result of the sanction.
The Catholic Church teaches that homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered” since they are “contrary to the natural law” and they “close the sexual act to the gift of life.” The Church also teaches that same-sex attraction is itself “objectively disordered” since God created sexual attraction to be between a male and female for the sake of procreation. In this way, there is no such reality as a “homosexual person,” but only a person who struggles with the “disorder” of being attracted to the same sex.
The Church teaches that everybody, including those with disordered sexuality — often expressing itself in lust, masturbation, fornication, pornography, homosexuality — are called to chastity. That is, to the moral virtue of a rightly ordered sexuality integrated within the person. The Christian faith holds that the homosexual act, along with murdering the innocent, depriving a laborer of his wages, and oppressing the poor, is one of the four sins that cries to heaven for justice.
AssisCity, a local news outlet, reported that one of the two men in the union blessed by the priest said that homosexual unions are loving, not sinful.
Claudinei Batista de Almeida said, “We are living in turbulent times, we often realize a widespread hatred of people who want to impose their way of being or their thinking. We were among friends, dear people and it was cool, cool, we had so much fun! That this is a way to break prejudice and so that new doors can be opened, so that people can see in a different way that the union between homosexual couples is not a sin, but love.”
In the letter signed by Bishop Azevedo and diocesan chancellor Father David José Martins, Father Gomes was informed that a precautionary measure has been laid against him. The document read, “Considering the serious allegations against Father Vicente Paula Gomes, who has celebrated a homosexual union […], an act performed at a party hall in the city of Assis, […] I decree the suspension of order ad cautelam (temporarily).”
The letter cited canon law of the Catholic Church. For example, it referred to Can. 1399, which says: “In addition to the cases established here or in other laws, the external violation of a divine or canonical law can be punished by a just penalty only when the special gravity of the violation demands punishment and there is an urgent need to prevent or repair scandals.”
The decree of the Diocese of Assisi also declared that once an investigation and canonical proceedings in the matter have concluded, the precautionary measure could be lifted. The measure was promulgated on December 12. Gomes has a popular radio show and is well known in his diocese.
Pope Francis named Bishop Azevedo to his current see in 2016.
German Cardinal Reinhard Marx, a close advisor of Pope Francis, called for the Church to grant liturgical blessings to homosexual unions. In a 2017 radio interview in Germany, Marx said that “closer pastoral care” must be given to homosexuals, while priests and pastoral workers should be called on to “give people in concrete situations [of homosexual unions] encouragement. I do not really see any problems there.”
Share