lifesitenews--2020-05-29--German state backtracks after saying it could take kids if parents don’t sign daily COVID-19 health

German state backtracks after saying it could take kids if parents don’t sign daily COVID-19 health form

DRESDEN , Germany , May 29 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – The German state of Saxony told parents that , as a last resort , children without a “ health confirmation ” form updated daily will be physically removed from their classrooms .
While the government later walked back its severe threats , it first warned that if parents refuse to comply , their children could ultimately be taken into government custody .
The health confirmation is a form which parents are supposed to sign every day , indicating that neither their child nor any family member has symptoms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not comply with this , the school is ultimately obliged to involve the public order office – up to and including taking your child into custody , ” the state of Saxony wrote in a letter dated May 16 .
It was addressed to parents of children going to primary school ( grades 1 through 4 ) , as well as special schools for children with disabilities .
According to the letter , before escalating the situation by activating the public order office , parents have an obligation “ to pick up your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the child not have an updated health confirmation .
Only if parents fail to do that , the student would be removed from the classroom .
The letter caused an uproar on social media .
Many citizens felt reminded of the practice of forced adoptions during the dictatorship of former East Germany , of which Saxony was a part .
Parents considered enemies of the state had their children taken into custody by the government and given up for adoption .
The state of Saxony later clarified that “ taking … into custody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
What was meant , the government claimed , was a temporary separation of the child from the rest of the class , for instance in a different room of the building .
A special government website dedicated to frequently asked questions on the subject of the health confirmation , updated on May 20 , no longer mentions potentially taking children into custody .
If a child is showing symptoms of the coronavirus , “ schools are obliged to exclude the child from the lessons and have the child picked up by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up , it must be looked after in a separate room.
” However , if the child is not taking a health confirmation , updated daily and signed by the parents , to school several days in a row , this can , “ under certain circumstances , also be a signal for domestic problems , possibly even neglect , namely the continuous or repeated failure to act in a caring manner .
In such cases child protective services can be called as a last resort.
” The health confirmation itself had caused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to change its requirements .
Now , parents only have to confirm daily “ that no one in the family has corona symptoms such as cough , a runny nose , and fever.
” There is no liability involved with signing that confirmation .
Previously , parents had to confirm that no family member had been in contact with a person infected with the coronavirus in the last two weeks .
Naturally , parents working in health care were unable to confirm that .
While homeschooling is completely banned in all parts of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parents of children going to primary school to temporarily practice home education , at least from mid-May until early June .
A court had ruled that children could not be forced to go to school if so-called social distancing measures are not taken .
The state of Saxony had argued that so-called social distancing was not possible to be maintained at all times among young children in primary school .
Accordingly , mandatory school attendance was suspended for several weeks .
It remains to be seen whether the temporary homeschooling option will be @ @ @ @ @

'If you do not comply with this, the school is ultimately obliged to involve the public order office – up to and including taking your child into custody,' the German state of Saxony announced.
DRESDEN, Germany, May 29, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The German state of Saxony told parents that, as a last resort, children without a “health confirmation” form updated daily will be physically removed from their classrooms. While the government later walked back its severe threats, it first warned that if parents refuse to comply, their children could ultimately be taken into government custody.
The health confirmation is a form which parents are supposed to sign every day, indicating that neither their child nor any family member has symptoms of COVID-19.
“If you do not comply with this, the school is ultimately obliged to involve the public order office – up to and including taking your child into custody,” the state of Saxony wrote in a letter dated May 16. It was addressed to parents of children going to primary school (grades 1 through 4), as well as special schools for children with disabilities.
According to the letter, before escalating the situation by activating the public order office, parents have an obligation “to pick up your child from school immediately,” should the child not have an updated health confirmation. Only if parents fail to do that, the student would be removed from the classroom.
The letter caused an uproar on social media. Many citizens felt reminded of the practice of forced adoptions during the dictatorship of former East Germany, of which Saxony was a part. Parents considered enemies of the state had their children taken into custody by the government and given up for adoption.
The state of Saxony later clarified that “taking … into custody” was an unfortunate choice of words. What was meant, the government claimed, was a temporary separation of the child from the rest of the class, for instance in a different room of the building.
A special government website dedicated to frequently asked questions on the subject of the health confirmation, updated on May 20, no longer mentions potentially taking children into custody.
If a child is showing symptoms of the coronavirus, “schools are obliged to exclude the child from the lessons and have the child picked up by the parents. Until the child is picked up, it must be looked after in a separate room.”
However, if the child is not taking a health confirmation, updated daily and signed by the parents, to school several days in a row, this can, “under certain circumstances, also be a signal for domestic problems, possibly even neglect, namely the continuous or repeated failure to act in a caring manner. In such cases child protective services can be called as a last resort.”
The health confirmation itself had caused some controversy, leading the state government to change its requirements. Now, parents only have to confirm daily “that no one in the family has corona symptoms such as cough, a runny nose, and fever.” There is no liability involved with signing that confirmation.
Previously, parents had to confirm that no family member had been in contact with a person infected with the coronavirus in the last two weeks. Naturally, parents working in health care were unable to confirm that.
While homeschooling is completely banned in all parts of Germany, the state of Saxony allowed parents of children going to primary school to temporarily practice home education, at least from mid-May until early June.
A court had ruled that children could not be forced to go to school if so-called social distancing measures are not taken. The state of Saxony had argued that so-called social distancing was not possible to be maintained at all times among young children in primary school. Accordingly, mandatory school attendance was suspended for several weeks.
It remains to be seen whether the temporary homeschooling option will be extended beyond June 5.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-29--35 states now giving coronavirus patient addresses to police: Live COVID-19 updates

LifeSite ’ s previous ( and future ) live updates on the coronavirus crisis and how it relates to issues our readers care about can be viewed HERE .
“ At least two-thirds of states across the country are sharing the addresses of people who have tested positive for coronavirus with first responders , and at least 10 states are going so far as to share patients ' identities as well , ” FOX News and MSN report .
According to the Associated Press , the number of states giving police addresses of coronavirus patients is “ at least 35.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ were assured that their private medical information would not be disclosed to anyone else , ” the report continues , adding the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services claims “ the process [ of sending their information to police and other first responders ] is within the bounds of medical privacy laws.
” FOX notes that “ activists are concerned that revealing the information would put minority groups at higher risk of being racially profiled , heightening tensions between law enforcement and black and Hispanic communities.
” May 29 , 2020 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ full article on Trump cutting ties with WHO – and thus depriving the pro-abortion United Nations health entity , which has suspicious ties to communist China , of $ 450 million annually – is HERE .
May 29 , 2020 , 3:54 p.m. EST : BREAKING : President Trump has cut U.S. ties with the pro-abortion World Health Organization .
A LifeSiteNews story with more details is forthcoming .
Developing ... May 29 , 2020 , 1:51 p.m. EST : Sen. Bob Casey ( D-PA ) and Sen. Tim Kaine ( D-VA ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , suggesting they both had the coronavirus at some point .
Pro-family leader Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse of the Ruth Institute wrote on her blog this week ( and said in a video also posted there ) that she is “ seeing people coming unglued from lack of human contact.
” “ Humans are social creatures , ” she wrote .
“ We need other people .
We need to look at other people to see how they are reacting to us .
Are we behaving and thinking in a socially appropriate manner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rails ?
That is pretty hard to know if you are all by yourself.
” Look .
We need each other .
And we need more than “ virtual ” contact .
We need the real deal , physical presence , physical touch… I don ’ t care what the infectious disease people say .
I really don ’ t .
The kind of isolation we ’ ve been enduring is not healthy .
Being scared all the time is not healthy .
We can ’ t go on like this .
You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be touched .
And someone you know needs it too .
“ Free contraception as defined by the CDC , abortion and reproductive health care ” and the establishment of “ sex education at pre-k level – 12th ” are recommended in a “ transition ” report about the post-coronavirus future in Boise , Idaho .
May 29 , 2020 , 11:16 a.m. EST : FOX News published a report today noting the discrepancy between World Health Organization ( WHO ) and U.S. Centers for Disease Control ( CDC ) guidances on face @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only wear masks when caring for coronavirus patients , whereas the CDC recommends people wear masks in public .
Some state governors in the U.S. have mandated masks be worn in public .
May 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – After some backlash , Howard County , Maryland appears to have reversed a ban on Holy Communion in its coronavirus reopening order .
The Archdiocese of Baltimore said it has “ serious concerns ” about the ban , but it is unclear if they had intended to pursue a lawsuit .
At @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tennessee , made a similar demand of churches when it allowed them to reopen : “ [ t ] he physical taking of communion/sacrament should not be performed due to the serial breaking of physical distancing across a congregation.
” In April , a California county banned any singing during live-streamed church services in empty church buildings .
“ Wind instruments ” and “ harmonicas ” were also deemed a threat .
Dr. Anthony Fauci , one of President Donald Trump ’ s top coronavirus advisors , said it ’ s not safe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Last month , he said sex with strangers met on dating apps is alright “ if you ’ re willing to take a risk.
” United Kingdom Health Minister Matt Hancock said yesterday that a new “ test and trace ” system which will tell healthy people to quarantine for 14 days if they have been in close contact with someone who tests positive for the coronavirus , could “ quickly ” become “ mandatory.
” A “ Request for Voluntary Quarantine ” document available via the Washington Department of Health website @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that you comply with this request for voluntary quarantine .
Your health and the health of others depend on it .
If you do not comply with this request for voluntary quarantine we may use a detention order , enforced by the police , to assure your compliance ” ( emphasis added ) .
An April New York Times story falsely reported that a 26-year-old medical intern died of the coronavirus , the liberal newspaper admitted .
At The Federalist , Carina Benton analyzed , “ Washington state Catholic leaders would rather stick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defend their right to celebrate Mass .
Following President Donald Trump ’ s direction on Friday for states to allow houses of worship to [ reopen ] and to declare public worship as essential , Gov .
Jay Inslee immediately thumbed his nose , and Washington bishops quickly follow [ ed ] suit.
” “ In a disappointing response , the bishops demonstrated that rather than stand up for their flock and acknowledge the president ’ s commitment to religious freedom , they prefer hand-wringing and waffling while they wait for the governor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at The Federalist , titled “ Mandatory Masks Aren ’ t About Safety , They ’ re About Social Control ” and “ Our Coronavirus Response Is Making Us Lose Our Humanity , ” also provide interesting insight .
The latter is by Abby Johnson , former Planned Parenthood director turned pro-life activist .
In the former article , Molly McCann argues ( emphasis added ) :

Live updates on the coronavirus crisis and how it relates to pro-life issues, faith, and freedom.
LifeSite’s previous (and future) live updates on the coronavirus crisis and how it relates to issues our readers care about can be viewed HERE.
“At least two-thirds of states across the country are sharing the addresses of people who have tested positive for coronavirus with first responders, and at least 10 states are going so far as to share patients' identities as well,” FOX News and MSN report. According to the Associated Press, the number of states giving police addresses of coronavirus patients is “at least 35.”
“Patients who took a test were assured that their private medical information would not be disclosed to anyone else,” the report continues, adding the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services claims “the process [of sending their information to police and other first responders] is within the bounds of medical privacy laws.”
FOX notes that “activists are concerned that revealing the information would put minority groups at higher risk of being racially profiled, heightening tensions between law enforcement and black and Hispanic communities.”
May 29, 2020, 4:41 p.m. EST: LifeSite’s full article on Trump cutting ties with WHO – and thus depriving the pro-abortion United Nations health entity, which has suspicious ties to communist China, of $450 million annually – is HERE.
May 29, 2020, 3:54 p.m. EST: BREAKING: President Trump has cut U.S. ties with the pro-abortion World Health Organization. A LifeSiteNews story with more details is forthcoming. Developing…
May 29, 2020, 1:51 p.m. EST: Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) and Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) have both tested positive for coronavirus antibodies, suggesting they both had the coronavirus at some point.
Pro-family leader Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse of the Ruth Institute wrote on her blog this week (and said in a video also posted there) that she is “seeing people coming unglued from lack of human contact.”
“Humans are social creatures,” she wrote. “We need other people. We need to look at other people to see how they are reacting to us. Are we behaving and thinking in a socially appropriate manner? Or are we going off the rails? That is pretty hard to know if you are all by yourself.”
She continued (emphasis added):
Look. We need each other. And we need more than “virtual” contact. We need the real deal, physical presence, physical touch… I don’t care what the infectious disease people say. I really don’t. The kind of isolation we’ve been enduring is not healthy. Being scared all the time is not healthy. We can’t go on like this. You need your hugs. You need to be touched. And someone you know needs it too.
“Free contraception as defined by the CDC, abortion and reproductive health care” and the establishment of “sex education at pre-k level – 12th” are recommended in a “transition” report about the post-coronavirus future in Boise, Idaho.
May 29, 2020, 11:16 a.m. EST: FOX News published a report today noting the discrepancy between World Health Organization (WHO) and U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidances on face masks. The WHO recommends healthy people only wear masks when caring for coronavirus patients, whereas the CDC recommends people wear masks in public. Some state governors in the U.S. have mandated masks be worn in public.
May 28, 2020, 9:08 p.m. EST:
May 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – After some backlash, Howard County, Maryland appears to have reversed a ban on Holy Communion in its coronavirus reopening order. The Archdiocese of Baltimore said it has “serious concerns” about the ban, but it is unclear if they had intended to pursue a lawsuit.
At the beginning of May, Knoxville, Tennessee, made a similar demand of churches when it allowed them to reopen: “[t]he physical taking of communion/sacrament should not be performed due to the serial breaking of physical distancing across a congregation.”
In April, a California county banned any singing during live-streamed church services in empty church buildings. “Wind instruments” and “harmonicas” were also deemed a threat.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, one of President Donald Trump’s top coronavirus advisors, said it’s not safe for Catholic priests to distribute Holy Communion. Last month, he said sex with strangers met on dating apps is alright “if you’re willing to take a risk.”
United Kingdom Health Minister Matt Hancock said yesterday that a new “test and trace” system which will tell healthy people to quarantine for 14 days if they have been in close contact with someone who tests positive for the coronavirus, could “quickly” become “mandatory.”
A “Request for Voluntary Quarantine” document available via the Washington Department of Health website says, “It is very important that you comply with this request for voluntary quarantine. Your health and the health of others depend on it. If you do not comply with this request for voluntary quarantine we may use a detention order, enforced by the police, to assure your compliance” (emphasis added).
An April New York Times story falsely reported that a 26-year-old medical intern died of the coronavirus, the liberal newspaper admitted.
At The Federalist, Carina Benton analyzed, “Washington state Catholic leaders would rather stick it to the president than let him defend their right to celebrate Mass. Following President Donald Trump’s direction on Friday for states to allow houses of worship to [reopen] and to declare public worship as essential, Gov. Jay Inslee immediately thumbed his nose, and Washington bishops quickly follow[ed] suit.”
“In a disappointing response, the bishops demonstrated that rather than stand up for their flock and acknowledge the president’s commitment to religious freedom, they prefer hand-wringing and waffling while they wait for the governor to pass judgement.”
Two other articles at The Federalist, titled “Mandatory Masks Aren’t About Safety, They’re About Social Control” and “Our Coronavirus Response Is Making Us Lose Our Humanity,” also provide interesting insight. The latter is by Abby Johnson, former Planned Parenthood director turned pro-life activist.
In the former article, Molly McCann argues (emphasis added):
Much of our freedom is maintained by the collective resistance of the American mood. When the Minnesota governor excluded churches from his Phase I reopening plan, Catholic and Lutheran leadership announced, through counsel, that their churches would reopen with or without the state’s blessing. The governor’s resulting about-face was probably not due to a legal epiphany. Rather, he understood he’d pushed the envelope too far.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-29--Jared Kushner wants to shrink GOP platform, nix parental freedom over therapy: report

DROP Disney+ : New teen film 'Out ' features openly homosexual main character !
Sign the petition here .
May 29 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner is overseeing a push to drastically overhaul the official Republican Party platform for 2020 , according to a new report , including cutting a reference to protecting parents ’ right to decide what ’ s best for children struggling with gender confusion or same-sex attraction .
Axios reported that Kushner , husband to President Donald Trump ’ s daughter Ivanka , wants to condense the GOP platform from a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` something like the 10 principles we believe in.
” Members of the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee ( RNC ) are currently negotiating the details .
Kushner ’ s broader goal is reportedly to purge the platform of any language that could be construed as “ alienating ” potential newcomers to the GOP .
To that end , the report says , he has balked at the word “ freedom ” in branding school choice policies , as the term supposedly fails to resonate with black voters .
The most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , would be the removal of the following line , which currently stands in the 2016 GOP platform : “ We support the right of parents to determine the proper medical treatment and therapy for their minor children . ''
“ Kushner said that he did n't want to see anything about ‘ gay conversion therapy ’ in the 2020 Republican platform , ” Axios reported , as LGBT Republicans strenuously objected to the line in 2016 .
Kushner hopes the change would appeal to homosexual voters going forward , apparently without concern @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the GOP ’ s traditional social-conservative base .
Reducing the Republician platform from 58 pages to just one would have the result of giving liberal Republican candidates cover to adopt a broad range of unconservative views while claiming to still be in keeping with the party ’ s official values .
Specifically , abandoning parental rights in children ’ s therapy would represent yet another surrender in the culture wars .
Despite common left-wing insistence that so-called “ conversion ” therapy is junk science ( based largely on misrepresenting simple , professional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ electric shock ) , there are studies that indicate , and former homosexuals who attest to , reparative therapy ’ s success in improving their lives .
The latter , such as Angel Colon and Drew Berryessa , say they want others currently struggling with unwanted same-sex attraction to have access to the same help overcoming it .
Similarly , a range of medical literature suggests that indulging rather than correcting children ’ s gender confusion is harmful in the long run , in no small part because fixating on “ gender affirmation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issues that may be at the root of a patient ’ s mental or emotional unrest .
In 2017 , the University of Cambridge ’ s Stonewall report found that 96 percent of trans students in Scotland attempted self-harm through actions such as cutting themselves , and 40 percent attempted suicide .
Forty percent in the United States have attempted suicide , as well , according to a 2016 survey from the National Center for Transgender Equality ( NCTE ) .
According to a 2011 study out of Sweden , trans people remain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than the general population , even after surgery to reconstruct their bodies .
Pro-family advocates say LGBT activists oppose reparative therapy not out of concern for children ’ s mental health but because it undermines their ideological opposition to sex as a biological reality rather than a matter of perception .
While an incumbent president ’ s allies generally exert considerable influence over the formation of a party ’ s platform every four years , Kushner can not implement any of these changes on his own .
The 2020 platform ’ s final @ @ @ @ @ @ @ platform committee at August ’ s Republican National Convention , then put to a vote of all of the delegates .

President Donald Trump's son-in-law apparently said he doesn't want to see anything about ‘gay conversion therapy.’
DROP Disney+: New teen film 'Out' features openly homosexual main character! Sign the petition here.
May 29, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner is overseeing a push to drastically overhaul the official Republican Party platform for 2020, according to a new report, including cutting a reference to protecting parents’ right to decide what’s best for children struggling with gender confusion or same-sex attraction.
Axios reported that Kushner, husband to President Donald Trump’s daughter Ivanka, wants to condense the GOP platform from a 58-page document to a single-page list of “something like the 10 principles we believe in.” Members of the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee (RNC) are currently negotiating the details.
Kushner’s broader goal is reportedly to purge the platform of any language that could be construed as “alienating” potential newcomers to the GOP. To that end, the report says, he has balked at the word “freedom” in branding school choice policies, as the term supposedly fails to resonate with black voters.
The most contentious known change so far, however, would be the removal of the following line, which currently stands in the 2016 GOP platform: “We support the right of parents to determine the proper medical treatment and therapy for their minor children.”
“Kushner said that he didn't want to see anything about ‘gay conversion therapy’ in the 2020 Republican platform,” Axios reported, as LGBT Republicans strenuously objected to the line in 2016. Kushner hopes the change would appeal to homosexual voters going forward, apparently without concern for how how it could alienate voters in the GOP’s traditional social-conservative base.
Reducing the Republician platform from 58 pages to just one would have the result of giving liberal Republican candidates cover to adopt a broad range of unconservative views while claiming to still be in keeping with the party’s official values. Specifically, abandoning parental rights in children’s therapy would represent yet another surrender in the culture wars.
Despite common left-wing insistence that so-called “conversion” therapy is junk science (based largely on misrepresenting simple, professional counseling as involving discredited practices such as electric shock), there are studies that indicate, and former homosexuals who attest to, reparative therapy’s success in improving their lives.
The latter, such as Angel Colon and Drew Berryessa, say they want others currently struggling with unwanted same-sex attraction to have access to the same help overcoming it.
Similarly, a range of medical literature suggests that indulging rather than correcting children’s gender confusion is harmful in the long run, in no small part because fixating on “gender affirmation” tends to distract from exploring other issues that may be at the root of a patient’s mental or emotional unrest.
In 2017, the University of Cambridge’s Stonewall report found that 96 percent of trans students in Scotland attempted self-harm through actions such as cutting themselves, and 40 percent attempted suicide. Forty percent in the United States have attempted suicide, as well, according to a 2016 survey from the National Center for Transgender Equality (NCTE). According to a 2011 study out of Sweden, trans people remain 19 times more likely to commit suicide than the general population, even after surgery to reconstruct their bodies.
Pro-family advocates say LGBT activists oppose reparative therapy not out of concern for children’s mental health but because it undermines their ideological opposition to sex as a biological reality rather than a matter of perception.
While an incumbent president’s allies generally exert considerable influence over the formation of a party’s platform every four years, Kushner cannot implement any of these changes on his own. The 2020 platform’s final language will be decided by the 112-member platform committee at August’s Republican National Convention, then put to a vote of all of the delegates.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-29--BREAKING: Trump cuts ties with World Health Organization, depriving it of $450M annually

May 29 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – President Donald Trump announced today that the US will cut ties with the World Health Organization ( WHO ) which has been under heavy criticism for the way it handled the coronavirus as well as for it being strongly influenced by China .
“ China has total control over the World Health Organization despite only paying $ 40 million per year compared to what the United States has been paying , which is approximately $ 450 million a year , ” Trump said .
Trump also challenged China for the way it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CNBC reported .
“ The world needs answers from China on the virus .
We must have transparency .
Why is it that China shut off infected people from Wuhan to all other parts of China ?
” he asked .
“ It didn ’ t go to Beijing , ” the President added , “ it went nowhere else , but they allowed them to freely travel throughout the world , including Europe and the United States.
” Trump said Friday that the WHO “ failed to make the requested greatly needed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be today terminating our relationship with the World Health Organization and redirecting those funds to other worldwide and deserving urgent global public health needs.
” LifeSite reported on May 19 on a letter by President Trump announcing that he temporarily halted funding for the WHO already on April 14 .
This temporary suspension of the more than $ 400 million which the United States sends the United Nations entity every year was related to a review of its “ role in severely mismanaging and covering up the spread of the coronavirus.
” Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well withdraw altogether membership from the WHO .
He wrote April 14 in a letter to WHO general-director Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus that if the WHO “ does not commit to major substantive improvements within the next 30 days , I will make my temporary freeze of United States funding to the World Health Organization permanent and reconsider our membership in the organization.
” “ The World Health Organization has repeatedly made claims about the coronavirus that were either grossly inaccurate or misleading , ” the President stated .
He accused the WHO @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that would have helped to constrain the spread of the virus early on .
“ Throughout this crisis , ” he added , “ the World Health Organization has been curiously insistent on praising China for its alleged ‘ transparency.
’ ” Many conservative Americans have welcomed Trump ’ s criticism of the WHO .
The organization has a well-know anti-life and anti-family agenda .
It heavily promotes abortion and contraception throughout the world .
During the coronacrisis , the WHO declared abortion to be “ essential.
” Steve Mosher , the head @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China expert , has long pointed to the close connection between the WHO and Communist China which constantly violates human rights and is following a very strict population control .
He recently pointed out that Ghebreyesus and his senior adviser , Dr. Bruce Aylward , have been “ carrying water ” for the Chinese regime , from backing claims that the virus didn ’ t originate in China to praising the regime ’ s handling of the outbreak .

We will be today ‘terminating our relationship with the World Health Organization and redirecting those funds to other worldwide and deserving urgent global public health needs’
PETITION: Thank President Trump for halting U.S. funding to pro-abortion World Health Organization! Sign the petition here.
May 29, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – President Donald Trump announced today that the US will cut ties with the World Health Organization (WHO) which has been under heavy criticism for the way it handled the coronavirus as well as for it being strongly influenced by China.
“China has total control over the World Health Organization despite only paying $40 million per year compared to what the United States has been paying, which is approximately $450 million a year,” Trump said.
Trump also challenged China for the way it handled the problem with the coronavirus, CNBC reported.
“The world needs answers from China on the virus. We must have transparency. Why is it that China shut off infected people from Wuhan to all other parts of China?” he asked. “It didn’t go to Beijing,” the President added, “it went nowhere else, but they allowed them to freely travel throughout the world, including Europe and the United States.”
Trump said Friday that the WHO “failed to make the requested greatly needed reform” and the U.S. “will be today terminating our relationship with the World Health Organization and redirecting those funds to other worldwide and deserving urgent global public health needs.”
LifeSite reported on May 19 on a letter by President Trump announcing that he temporarily halted funding for the WHO already on April 14. This temporary suspension of the more than $400 million which the United States sends the United Nations entity every year was related to a review of its “role in severely mismanaging and covering up the spread of the coronavirus.” Trump then also announced that he might very well withdraw altogether membership from the WHO. He wrote April 14 in a letter to WHO general-director Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus that if the WHO “does not commit to major substantive improvements within the next 30 days, I will make my temporary freeze of United States funding to the World Health Organization permanent and reconsider our membership in the organization.”
“The World Health Organization has repeatedly made claims about the coronavirus that were either grossly inaccurate or misleading,” the President stated. He accused the WHO of not passing on important medical findings that would have helped to constrain the spread of the virus early on. “Throughout this crisis,” he added, “the World Health Organization has been curiously insistent on praising China for its alleged ‘transparency.’”
Many conservative Americans have welcomed Trump’s criticism of the WHO. The organization has a well-know anti-life and anti-family agenda. It heavily promotes abortion and contraception throughout the world. During the coronacrisis, the WHO declared abortion to be “essential.”
Steve Mosher, the head of the Population Research Institute and a China expert, has long pointed to the close connection between the WHO and Communist China which constantly violates human rights and is following a very strict population control. He recently pointed out that Ghebreyesus and his senior adviser, Dr. Bruce Aylward, have been “carrying water” for the Chinese regime, from backing claims that the virus didn’t originate in China to praising the regime’s handling of the outbreak.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-29--Public schools making it harder for parents to withdraw kids and homeschool: Legal group

May 29 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Public schools across the United States are making it harder for parents to withdraw their children from those schools amid the coronavirus pandemic , according to the Home School Legal Defense Association ( HSLDA ) .
As HSLDA ’ s Thomas J. Schmidt , a lawyer , told Fox News , many parents are “ shocked ” to find they can not simply take their children out of public schools .
“ The most egregious situations I ’ ve had have been in Florida , ” Schmidt said .
“ But I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ couple of different counties told , ‘ we ’ re not allowed to withdraw students right now ’ … They ’ re trying to hold onto these students.
” “ We see this across the country , ” the lawyer added .
“ I ’ ve had school officials attempt to prevent or dissuade parents from pulling their kids out.
” Schmidt pointed out “ two main reasons ” for public schools making it harder for parents to withdraw their children from school .
On the one hand , “ school officials are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ homeschooling , ” which causes school districts to also lose money .
“ Traditionally , public schools are funded based on their total student enrollment , ” the Washington Post explained .
Factoring in various types of funding , Utah spends about $ 7,000 per student , whereas New York , as the most costly state , spends more than $ 22,000 .
For public schools , a lot of money is involved in losing students .
The second reason given by Schmidt for not processing the paperwork necessary to get out of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issue , just a lacking staffing issue to process these withdrawals.
” He clarified that it is “ not always an issue of trying to stop parents from homeschooling but there is a significant part of that involved.
” Long before starting to work for HSLDA , an organization that for almost four decades has been fighting for the rights of parents to educate their children in the home , Schmidt was homeschooled himself .
He now homeschools his seven children .
The coronavirus lockdown , which eventually caused the closing down of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forced parents across the United States to turn to homeschooling as the only way to educate their kids .
As a consequence , according to a poll released in mid-May by well-respected RealClear Opinion Research , “ 40 % of families are more likely to homeschool or virtual school after lockdowns.
” “ With 55 million students no longer in their normal educational setting , families are clearly considering new options and many are seeing the benefits of homeschooling and virtual schooling , ” explained John Schilling , President of the American Federation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that there is a strong desire to have these and other educational options available to families.
” The National Home Education Research Institute ( NHERI ) estimated that in 2019 , 2.5 million young people in grades K-12 were educated at home .
“ It appears that the homeschool population is continuing to grow ( at an estimated 2 % to 8 % per annum over the past few years ) , ” NHERI pointed out .
Nevertheless , homeschooling is still coming under attack , especially from the political left .
Earlier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ article about Harvard professor Elizabeth Bartholet , who argued that homeschooling “ not only violates children ’ s right to a ‘ meaningful education ’ and their right to be protected from potential child abuse , but may keep them from contributing positively to a democratic society.
” She also said “ one benefit of sending children to school at age four or five is that teachers are ‘ mandated reporters , ’ required to alert authorities to evidence of child abuse or neglect.
” Bartholet questioned the motives of homeschooling families , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mind .
She claimed “ that some of these parents are ‘ extreme religious ideologues ’ who question science and promote female subservience and white supremacy.
” The Harvard professor effectively denied parents ’ rights as primary educators of their children , claiming that “ we have thought of the government as having some right to educate children so that they become active , productive participants in the larger society.
” “ But it ’ s also important that children grow up exposed to community values , social values , democratic values , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people ’ s viewpoints , ” she said , thereby implying that homeschooling families are unable to provide those values .
Requiring children to attend schools outside the home for six or seven hours a day , Bartholet said , would not really limit parents ’ influence on a child ’ s views and ideas .
“ The issue is , do we think that parents should have 24/7 , essentially authoritarian control over their children from ages zero to 18 ?
I think that ’ s dangerous.
” The Harvard Magazine article @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come out strongly in favor of homeschooling .
“ The risk to children is NOT from homeschooling , ” he tweeted .
“ The risk is from radical leftist scholars seeking to impose THEIR values on OUR children.
” Pompeo summarized the article by stating Bartholet ’ s “ mission is simple : to further the destruction of the family unit .
Her plan : substitute state power for parental love .
For her , the corollary benefit is to drive Christian values out of public discourse under the guise of preventing ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ screed attacking parents who choose to dedicate their lives to educating their own children , often at significant financial sacrifice , is a reminder that we must all work together to protect civilization ’ s most successful institution : our families , ” he concluded .

May 29, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Public schools across the United States are making it harder for parents to withdraw their children from those schools amid the coronavirus pandemic, according to the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA).
As HSLDA’s Thomas J. Schmidt, a lawyer, told Fox News, many parents are “shocked” to find they cannot simply take their children out of public schools.
“The most egregious situations I’ve had have been in Florida,” Schmidt said. “But I’ve had numerous parents in a couple of different counties told, ‘we’re not allowed to withdraw students right now’ … They’re trying to hold onto these students.”
“We see this across the country,” the lawyer added. “I’ve had school officials attempt to prevent or dissuade parents from pulling their kids out.”
Schmidt pointed out “two main reasons” for public schools making it harder for parents to withdraw their children from school.
On the one hand, “school officials are fearful of losing too many students to homeschooling,” which causes school districts to also lose money.
“Traditionally, public schools are funded based on their total student enrollment,” the Washington Post explained.
Factoring in various types of funding, Utah spends about $7,000 per student, whereas New York, as the most costly state, spends more than $22,000. For public schools, a lot of money is involved in losing students.
The second reason given by Schmidt for not processing the paperwork necessary to get out of public school “is perhaps a staffing issue, just a lacking staffing issue to process these withdrawals.”
He clarified that it is “not always an issue of trying to stop parents from homeschooling but there is a significant part of that involved.”
Long before starting to work for HSLDA, an organization that for almost four decades has been fighting for the rights of parents to educate their children in the home, Schmidt was homeschooled himself. He now homeschools his seven children.
The coronavirus lockdown, which eventually caused the closing down of all schools in the United States, forced parents across the United States to turn to homeschooling as the only way to educate their kids.
As a consequence, according to a poll released in mid-May by well-respected RealClear Opinion Research, “40% of families are more likely to homeschool or virtual school after lockdowns.”
“With 55 million students no longer in their normal educational setting, families are clearly considering new options and many are seeing the benefits of homeschooling and virtual schooling,” explained John Schilling, President of the American Federation for Children. “Policymakers should note that there is a strong desire to have these and other educational options available to families.”
The National Home Education Research Institute (NHERI) estimated that in 2019, 2.5 million young people in grades K-12 were educated at home. “It appears that the homeschool population is continuing to grow (at an estimated 2% to 8% per annum over the past few years),” NHERI pointed out.
Nevertheless, homeschooling is still coming under attack, especially from the political left.
Earlier this year, Harvard Magazine published an article about Harvard professor Elizabeth Bartholet, who argued that homeschooling “not only violates children’s right to a ‘meaningful education’ and their right to be protected from potential child abuse, but may keep them from contributing positively to a democratic society.”
She also said “one benefit of sending children to school at age four or five is that teachers are ‘mandated reporters,’ required to alert authorities to evidence of child abuse or neglect.”
Bartholet questioned the motives of homeschooling families, especially those having a Christian education in mind. She claimed “that some of these parents are ‘extreme religious ideologues’ who question science and promote female subservience and white supremacy.”
The Harvard professor effectively denied parents’ rights as primary educators of their children, claiming that “we have thought of the government as having some right to educate children so that they become active, productive participants in the larger society.”
“But it’s also important that children grow up exposed to community values, social values, democratic values, ideas about nondiscrimination and tolerance of other people’s viewpoints,” she said, thereby implying that homeschooling families are unable to provide those values.
Requiring children to attend schools outside the home for six or seven hours a day, Bartholet said, would not really limit parents’ influence on a child’s views and ideas. “The issue is, do we think that parents should have 24/7, essentially authoritarian control over their children from ages zero to 18? I think that’s dangerous.”
The Harvard Magazine article caused Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to come out strongly in favor of homeschooling.
“The risk to children is NOT from homeschooling,” he tweeted. “The risk is from radical leftist scholars seeking to impose THEIR values on OUR children.”
Pompeo summarized the article by stating Bartholet’s “mission is simple: to further the destruction of the family unit. Her plan: substitute state power for parental love. For her, the corollary benefit is to drive Christian values out of public discourse under the guise of preventing ‘child abuse.’”
“This ivory-tower screed attacking parents who choose to dedicate their lives to educating their own children, often at significant financial sacrifice, is a reminder that we must all work together to protect civilization’s most successful institution: our families,” he concluded.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-29--GOP lawmaker announces bill pressuring Big Tech to drop ‘fact-checks’ entirely

WASHINGTON , D.C. , May 29 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – With President Donald Trump having signed an executive order meant to tackle discrimination against conservatives on social media , a Republican congressman announced he is also working on a legislative solution to the problem .
Rep. Matt Gaetz , R-Florida , says he is currently working on legislation that would require platforms such as Facebook and Twitter to abstain from “ fact-checking ” users ’ content if they want to remain immune from potential liability for the content they host , one of the privileges they currently enjoy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Decency Act .
“ I am currently working with my Republican colleagues on the Judiciary Committee to craft legislation to say that if you ’ re going to opine as to the truth or falsity of that which is put on your platform , for the sake of its viewers , you don ’ t get the protection of Section 230 .
You are not a platform , ” Gaetz said this week , Breitbart reported .
“ You are doing something else , you are editorializing.
” The move follows Twitter placing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by President Donald Trump pertaining to the fraud potential of mail-in voting .
On Thursday , Trump signed an executive order aimed at tweaking how federal agencies interpret and enforce Section 230 .
The order essentially directs the Federal Communications Commission ( FCC ) to propose an administrative rule that would “ spell out what it means for the tech giants to carry out their takedown policies ‘ in good faith , ’ ” national security attorney Stewart Baker explained .
“ This is not a Fairness Doctrine for the internet ; it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ balance in their moderation policies .
It is closer to a Due Process Clause for the platforms .
They may not announce a neutral rule and then apply it pretextually.
” The order also tasks the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) to “ determine whether entities relying on section 230 ‘ restrict speech in ways that do not align with those entities ' public representations about those practices , ’ ” Baker continued , quoting the order .
Still , the president ’ s power to affect change in this area within @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where Gaetz ’ s bill comes in , by adding a clear , objective condition to the law itself .
“ You see Twitter disadvantaging the president , they enjoy liability protections that are not enjoyed by your local newspaper or your local TV station , or Fox News , or CNN , or MSNBC , ” Gaetz said .
“ They have special benefits under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act as digital platforms because they ’ re not creating content for which they should be liable .
They ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re simply saying come one , come all with your content .
And as a consequence of that , they ’ re getting a bunch of protections.
” For years , several conservatives have urged reforming Section 230 as a way to curb internet platforms ’ discriminiation against conservatives without running foul of the First Amendment .
“ These statutory provisions ( of Section 230 ) have likely had a helpful role in the growth of the internet .
But they are also clearly not constitutionally required – they are special favors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Eugene Kontorovich testified last year .
“ In enacting the immunity provisions , Congress assumed that protected internet services provide ‘ a forum for a true diversity of political discourse.
’ To the extent that assumption is weakened by online companies filtering out viewpoints that they deem ideologically impermissible , the assumptions behind Section 230 may need to be revisited.
” The bill is not expected to make it out of the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives .
Regulating social media is also a contentious issue within the Republican Party , raising questions as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if Republicans keep and expand their control of government in the November elections .

PETITION: No to mandatory contact tracing and government surveillance for the coronavirus! Sign the petition here.
WASHINGTON, D.C., May 29, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – With President Donald Trump having signed an executive order meant to tackle discrimination against conservatives on social media, a Republican congressman announced he is also working on a legislative solution to the problem.
Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Florida, says he is currently working on legislation that would require platforms such as Facebook and Twitter to abstain from “fact-checking” users’ content if they want to remain immune from potential liability for the content they host, one of the privileges they currently enjoy under Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act.
“I am currently working with my Republican colleagues on the Judiciary Committee to craft legislation to say that if you’re going to opine as to the truth or falsity of that which is put on your platform, for the sake of its viewers, you don’t get the protection of Section 230. You are not a platform,” Gaetz said this week, Breitbart reported. “You are doing something else, you are editorializing.”
The move follows Twitter placing a “fact-check” on a tweet by President Donald Trump pertaining to the fraud potential of mail-in voting. On Thursday, Trump signed an executive order aimed at tweaking how federal agencies interpret and enforce Section 230.
The order essentially directs the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to propose an administrative rule that would “spell out what it means for the tech giants to carry out their takedown policies ‘in good faith,’” national security attorney Stewart Baker explained. “This is not a Fairness Doctrine for the internet; it doesn't mandate that social media show balance in their moderation policies. It is closer to a Due Process Clause for the platforms. They may not announce a neutral rule and then apply it pretextually.”
The order also tasks the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to “determine whether entities relying on section 230 ‘restrict speech in ways that do not align with those entities' public representations about those practices,’” Baker continued, quoting the order.
Still, the president’s power to affect change in this area within existing law is limited, which is where Gaetz’s bill comes in, by adding a clear, objective condition to the law itself.
“You see Twitter disadvantaging the president, they enjoy liability protections that are not enjoyed by your local newspaper or your local TV station, or Fox News, or CNN, or MSNBC,” Gaetz said. “They have special benefits under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act as digital platforms because they’re not creating content for which they should be liable. They’re not making decisions about content, they’re simply saying come one, come all with your content. And as a consequence of that, they’re getting a bunch of protections.”
For years, several conservatives have urged reforming Section 230 as a way to curb internet platforms’ discriminiation against conservatives without running foul of the First Amendment.
“These statutory provisions (of Section 230) have likely had a helpful role in the growth of the internet. But they are also clearly not constitutionally required – they are special favors,” George Mason University law professor Eugene Kontorovich testified last year. “In enacting the immunity provisions, Congress assumed that protected internet services provide ‘a forum for a true diversity of political discourse.’ To the extent that assumption is weakened by online companies filtering out viewpoints that they deem ideologically impermissible, the assumptions behind Section 230 may need to be revisited.”
The bill is not expected to make it out of the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives. Regulating social media is also a contentious issue within the Republican Party, raising questions as to the bill’s prospects even if Republicans keep and expand their control of government in the November elections.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-29--United Nations ‘experts’ bash America for COVID-19 abortion suspensions

May 29 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – American governors who have subjected the abortion industry to the same emergency restrictions imposed on actual medical fields have been “ manipulating ” the coronavirus crisis to undermine women ’ s “ rights , ” claims a group of so-called “ experts ” from the United Nations .
Advice from medical authorities led governors across the United States to order the temporary suspension of all or most “ non-urgent ” health appointments and elective medical procedures , both to limit the spread of COVID-19 and to free up time and resources to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ included surgical abortions , to the abortion industry ’ s chagrin .
Those states “ appear to be manipulating the crisis to severely restrict women ’ s reproductive rights , ” claims Elizabeth Broderick , Vice Chair of the UN Working Group on Discrimination against Women and Girls .
“ We fear that , without clear political will to reverse such restrictive and regressive trends , states will continue pursuing this pattern.
” “ Abortion care [ sic ] constitutes essential health care and must remain available during the COVID-19 crisis , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to comprehensive reproductive health information and services , including abortion as well as contraception , constitute human rights violations and can cause irreversible harm , in particular to low-income women and those belonging to racial minorities and immigrant communities.
” Broderick also responded to the Trump administration ’ s recent declaration that “ there is no international right to abortion , nor is there any duty on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion.
” Therefore , the Trump administration insisted , “ we do not accept references to ‘ sexual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ language that suggests or explicitly states that access to abortion is included in the provision of population and individual level health services.
” “ Removing references to sexual and reproductive health from the HRP will have devastating consequences for women worldwide , ” Broderick claimed .
“ It will seriously undermine the international community ’ s joint effort to respond to women ’ s health needs in this time of crisis.
” Pro-lifers argue the opposite is the case .
“ Elective abortion , both surgical and drug induced , also generates more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emergency rooms , ” the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists ( AAPLOG ) says .
“ Most abortion providers instruct women to go to an emergency room if they have any concerning symptoms after the abortion .
Approximately five percent of women who undergo medication abortions will require evaluation in an emergency room , most commonly for hemorrhage .
Surgical abortions can also result in hemorrhage .
Emergency room personnel – who are already struggling to meet the demands of the COVID-19 pandemic – will be further strained to provide care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government strongly disagrees with the characterisations and conclusions expressed in this statement and rejects any attempt to use the COVID-19 pandemic as a way to assert that there is an international right to abortion , '' the US mission to the UN in Geneva responded Thursday .
`` At a time when there are many documented cases of human rights abuses of women and girls during the pandemic , it would behoove the working group 's representatives to focus on these real human rights abuses.
” Planned Parenthood is currently preparing a $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states with advertising against state efforts to suspend elective abortions as part of coronavirus emergency measures .

May 29, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – American governors who have subjected the abortion industry to the same emergency restrictions imposed on actual medical fields have been “manipulating” the coronavirus crisis to undermine women’s “rights,” claims a group of so-called “experts” from the United Nations.
Advice from medical authorities led governors across the United States to order the temporary suspension of all or most “non-urgent” health appointments and elective medical procedures, both to limit the spread of COVID-19 and to free up time and resources to focus on infected patients. Some expressly included surgical abortions, to the abortion industry’s chagrin.
Those states “appear to be manipulating the crisis to severely restrict women’s reproductive rights,” claims Elizabeth Broderick, Vice Chair of the UN Working Group on Discrimination against Women and Girls. “We fear that, without clear political will to reverse such restrictive and regressive trends, states will continue pursuing this pattern.”
“Abortion care [sic] constitutes essential health care and must remain available during the COVID-19 crisis,” she continued. “Restrictions on access to comprehensive reproductive health information and services, including abortion as well as contraception, constitute human rights violations and can cause irreversible harm, in particular to low-income women and those belonging to racial minorities and immigrant communities.”
Broderick also responded to the Trump administration’s recent declaration that “there is no international right to abortion, nor is there any duty on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion.” Therefore, the Trump administration insisted, “we do not accept references to ‘sexual and reproductive health,’ or other language that suggests or explicitly states that access to abortion is included in the provision of population and individual level health services.”
“Removing references to sexual and reproductive health from the HRP will have devastating consequences for women worldwide,” Broderick claimed. “It will seriously undermine the international community’s joint effort to respond to women’s health needs in this time of crisis.”
Pro-lifers argue the opposite is the case.
“Elective abortion, both surgical and drug induced, also generates more patients to be seen in already overburdened emergency rooms,” the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG) says. “Most abortion providers instruct women to go to an emergency room if they have any concerning symptoms after the abortion. Approximately five percent of women who undergo medication abortions will require evaluation in an emergency room, most commonly for hemorrhage. Surgical abortions can also result in hemorrhage. Emergency room personnel – who are already struggling to meet the demands of the COVID-19 pandemic – will be further strained to provide care to these women.”
“The US government strongly disagrees with the characterisations and conclusions expressed in this statement and rejects any attempt to use the COVID-19 pandemic as a way to assert that there is an international right to abortion,” the US mission to the UN in Geneva responded Thursday. “At a time when there are many documented cases of human rights abuses of women and girls during the pandemic, it would behoove the working group's representatives to focus on these real human rights abuses.”
Planned Parenthood is currently preparing a $5 million campaign to bombard election battleground states with advertising against state efforts to suspend elective abortions as part of coronavirus emergency measures.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-29--Stories from my time as a prison chaplain: Catholic Nun

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 .

To help keep this and other programs on the air, please donate here.
Watch Mother Miriam's Live show from 5.29.2020. In today's show, she shares stories from her time as a women's prison chaplain.
You can tune in daily at 10 am EST/7 am PST on our Facebook Page.
Subscribe to Mother Miriam Live here.


lifesitenews--2020-05-29--As lockdown eases, some Australian states give churches fewer freedoms than pubs

AUSTRALIA , May 29 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — As coronavirus lockdown restrictions are eased in Australia , states around the country are granting equal or less freedom for people to attend church as they are to pub and restaurant goers .
In New South Wales , Victoria , and Queensland ( Australia ’ s most populated states ) restrictions on churches are generally being lifted at the same rate as those on pubs and restaurants .
From the start of June , 50 people will be allowed to attend church services at a time in NSW , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ restaurants in the state .
Initially , churches in NSW were not included in the list of venues that would benefit from the relaxed restrictions but now have been .
Sydney Archbishop Anthony Fisher has said he is grateful to the state government for the change of policy .
“ It is with great joy that we learnt today that the New South Wales Government has agreed to relax the restrictions on churches and worship , to bring them into line with like venues and activities , ” he said in a statement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just and common-sense outcome but it took some negotiating , and I thank all those who joined our campaign for it .
Other parts of Australia have not yet achieved parity between churches and other venues , and so you might still like to sign up to our revised petition at openourchurches.com.au.
” Across the border in Victoria , just 20 people are being allowed to attend church services – the same number as hospitality venues .
In Queensland there are also similar restrictions on both hospitality venues and churches , with maximum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but rising to 20 later in June and 100 in July .
In South Australia , however , from the start of June restaurants and cafes will be permitted up to 80 diners , while no more than 20 will be allowed to attend church services .
In an open letter published earlier this month Catholic clergy led by former papal nuncio Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò and Cardinals Gerhard Ludwig Mueller , Joseph Zen , and Janis Pujats reminded politicians around the world that “ [ t ] he State has no right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in the sovereignty of the Church.
” “ This autonomy and freedom are an innate right that Our Lord Jesus Christ has given her for the pursuit of her proper ends .
For this reason , as Pastors we firmly assert the right to decide autonomously on the celebration of Mass and the Sacraments , just as we claim absolute autonomy in matters falling within our immediate jurisdiction , such as liturgical norms and ways of administering Communion and the Sacraments , ” the signatories stated .
Numbers in this article are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ May 29 ) .

In South Australia, from the start of June restaurants and cafes will be permitted up to 80 diners, while no more than 20 will be allowed to attend church services.
AUSTRALIA, May 29, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — As coronavirus lockdown restrictions are eased in Australia, states around the country are granting equal or less freedom for people to attend church as they are to pub and restaurant goers.
In New South Wales, Victoria, and Queensland (Australia’s most populated states) restrictions on churches are generally being lifted at the same rate as those on pubs and restaurants.
From the start of June, 50 people will be allowed to attend church services at a time in NSW, with the same number allowed in pubs and restaurants in the state.
Initially, churches in NSW were not included in the list of venues that would benefit from the relaxed restrictions but now have been. Sydney Archbishop Anthony Fisher has said he is grateful to the state government for the change of policy.
“It is with great joy that we learnt today that the New South Wales Government has agreed to relax the restrictions on churches and worship, to bring them into line with like venues and activities,” he said in a statement released today.
“This is a just and common-sense outcome but it took some negotiating, and I thank all those who joined our campaign for it. Other parts of Australia have not yet achieved parity between churches and other venues, and so you might still like to sign up to our revised petition at openourchurches.com.au.”
Across the border in Victoria, just 20 people are being allowed to attend church services – the same number as hospitality venues. In Queensland there are also similar restrictions on both hospitality venues and churches, with maximum numbers currently capped at 10 people, but rising to 20 later in June and 100 in July.
In South Australia, however, from the start of June restaurants and cafes will be permitted up to 80 diners, while no more than 20 will be allowed to attend church services.
In an open letter published earlier this month Catholic clergy led by former papal nuncio Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò and Cardinals Gerhard Ludwig Mueller, Joseph Zen, and Janis Pujats reminded politicians around the world that “[t]he State has no right to interfere, for any reason whatsoever, in the sovereignty of the Church.”
“This autonomy and freedom are an innate right that Our Lord Jesus Christ has given her for the pursuit of her proper ends. For this reason, as Pastors we firmly assert the right to decide autonomously on the celebration of Mass and the Sacraments, just as we claim absolute autonomy in matters falling within our immediate jurisdiction, such as liturgical norms and ways of administering Communion and the Sacraments,” the signatories stated.
Numbers in this article are based on report in The Guardian (May 29).
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-29--Left melts down as Alberta moves to recognize Christian parents’ right to choose education for kids

May 29 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Yesterday afternoon , Alberta ’ s education minister Adriana LaGrange introduced Bill 15 , the Choice in Education Act .
The legislation appears to be , in part , a response to attempts by former premier Rachel Notley and her education minister David Eggen to shut down religious schools that refused to conform to progressive values and set up Gay-Straight Alliance clubs under the guise of “ anti-bullying.
” Premier Jason Kenney stated that the legislation “ enshrines the belief of Albertans in freedom , diversity , pluralism and choice as well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe that parents know better than politicians or bureaucrats about what ’ s in the best interests of their kids , ” Kenney added .
According to LaGrange , this legislation makes good on an election promise to give greater latitude to homeschooling families and protect religious charter schools .
Religious schools , she noted , “ felt they were not valued or threatened under the previous government.
” Indeed , over twenty schools would have been shut down by NDP Education Minister David Eggen if Jason Kenney had not defeated Rachel Notley @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Christian communities had politically mobilized in an unprecedented fashion to fend off the threat to their right to educate their children according to the tenets of their faith .
I attended several political meetings in Alberta during the run-up to the election , and many of the attendees had never been involved in provincial politics until the NDP came after their communities .
According to the CBC , the proposed changes make no changes to private school funding and would allow those seeking to set up a school to “ go directly to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Department of Education would ensure the proper consultation : In addition to these changes , there are also a number of smaller changes , including two additions to the preamble — the introductory part of the statute .
The first would add a new whereas statement to the act : `` whereas parents have the a priori right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children '' — which is also the language used in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights .
The second addition recognizes all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as `` valued and as integral '' in providing choice in education to students and parents .
Included on this list are public schools , separate schools , Francophone schools , private schools , charter schools , early childhood services programs and home education programs .
This development is very positive news , especially the explicit recognition of parental rights in education .
It is easy to forget just how brazen the NDP was in attacking the values of religious schools , at one point going so far as to object to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ school ’ s “ Safe and Caring ” policy : “ We believe men and women were created in the image of God , after His likeness , and therefore have transcendent , intrinsic worth.
” This statement , claimed the NDP , violated the School Act because it was allegedly “ unwelcoming , uncaring and/or disrespectful.
” The NDP is anti-Christian , and the moment they gained power , they stopped pretending that they were not .
The reaction to the United Conservative Party ’ s move to protect parental rights and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ once again highly revealing .
Gil McGowan , the President of the Alberta Federation of Labour , promptly melted down on Twitter and did what is referred to in political circles as “ saying the quiet part out loud.
” The bill , he claimed without irony , “ paves the way for nutbar religious charter schools & homeschooling that doesn ’ t follow the curriculum .
They ’ re trying to create an army of brainwashed right-wing warriors .
And they accused the NDP of being too political with education !
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ course , he means the sort of curriculum he approves of . )
In case you didn ’ t catch his opinion on religious schools with that first tweet , McGowan followed up : “ To add insult to injury , this will pave the way for a money grab so that the government can use YOUR tax dollars to help fund these crazy right-wing , religious schools .
No other province gives more public money to fund private schools than Alberta.
” I ’ m glad McGowan went off the way he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what he and his fellow ideologues think : That Christian , Sikh , Muslim , and Jewish parents do not have the right to educate their children in their own beliefs because they are “ religious nutbars.
” McGowan , like most progressives , sees homeschooling and religious schools as a threat to his ability to control and shape the minds of your children .
His children , if he has any , can go to whichever school he chooses .
But that isn ’ t enough for dangerous , spiteful little men @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that your children are being taught what he believes .
And why is that ?
Because you ’ re a crazy religious nutbar , that ’ s why .
How could we ever trust these ideologues to make decisions about the education of our children ?
They hate us .
They have contempt for us .
And we must fight them tooth and nail every step of the way to deny them the power they desperately crave—and seek to use .

Premier Jason Kenney said the bill was introduced because 'we believe that parents know better than politicians or bureaucrats about what’s in the best interests of their kids'
May 29, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Yesterday afternoon, Alberta’s education minister Adriana LaGrange introduced Bill 15, the Choice in Education Act. The legislation appears to be, in part, a response to attempts by former premier Rachel Notley and her education minister David Eggen to shut down religious schools that refused to conform to progressive values and set up Gay-Straight Alliance clubs under the guise of “anti-bullying.”
Premier Jason Kenney stated that the legislation “enshrines the belief of Albertans in freedom, diversity, pluralism and choice as well as parental responsibility.”
“Because we believe that parents know better than politicians or bureaucrats about what’s in the best interests of their kids,” Kenney added.
According to LaGrange, this legislation makes good on an election promise to give greater latitude to homeschooling families and protect religious charter schools. Religious schools, she noted, “felt they were not valued or threatened under the previous government.”
Indeed, over twenty schools would have been shut down by NDP Education Minister David Eggen if Jason Kenney had not defeated Rachel Notley for the premier’s office. Christian communities had politically mobilized in an unprecedented fashion to fend off the threat to their right to educate their children according to the tenets of their faith. I attended several political meetings in Alberta during the run-up to the election, and many of the attendees had never been involved in provincial politics until the NDP came after their communities.
Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook
According to the CBC, the proposed changes make no changes to private school funding and would allow those seeking to set up a school to “go directly to the minister,” at which point the Department of Education would ensure the proper consultation:
In addition to these changes, there are also a number of smaller changes, including two additions to the preamble — the introductory part of the statute. The first would add a new whereas statement to the act: “whereas parents have the a priori right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children” — which is also the language used in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The second addition recognizes all of Alberta's current choices in education as “valued and as integral” in providing choice in education to students and parents. Included on this list are public schools, separate schools, Francophone schools, private schools, charter schools, early childhood services programs and home education programs.
This development is very positive news, especially the explicit recognition of parental rights in education. It is easy to forget just how brazen the NDP was in attacking the values of religious schools, at one point going so far as to object to the inclusion of the following statement in one school’s “Safe and Caring” policy: “We believe men and women were created in the image of God, after His likeness, and therefore have transcendent, intrinsic worth.” This statement, claimed the NDP, violated the School Act because it was allegedly “unwelcoming, uncaring and/or disrespectful.” The NDP is anti-Christian, and the moment they gained power, they stopped pretending that they were not.
The reaction to the United Conservative Party’s move to protect parental rights and diversity in education was both predictable but once again highly revealing. Gil McGowan, the President of the Alberta Federation of Labour, promptly melted down on Twitter and did what is referred to in political circles as “saying the quiet part out loud.” The bill, he claimed without irony, “paves the way for nutbar religious charter schools & homeschooling that doesn’t follow the curriculum. They’re trying to create an army of brainwashed right-wing warriors. And they accused the NDP of being too political with education!” (By “curriculum,” of course, he means the sort of curriculum he approves of.)
In case you didn’t catch his opinion on religious schools with that first tweet, McGowan followed up: “To add insult to injury, this will pave the way for a money grab so that the government can use YOUR tax dollars to help fund these crazy right-wing, religious schools. No other province gives more public money to fund private schools than Alberta.”
I’m glad McGowan went off the way he did, because he is saying precisely what he and his fellow ideologues think: That Christian, Sikh, Muslim, and Jewish parents do not have the right to educate their children in their own beliefs because they are “religious nutbars.” McGowan, like most progressives, sees homeschooling and religious schools as a threat to his ability to control and shape the minds of your children. His children, if he has any, can go to whichever school he chooses. But that isn’t enough for dangerous, spiteful little men like him. He needs to know that your children are being taught what he believes. And why is that? Because you’re a crazy religious nutbar, that’s why.
How could we ever trust these ideologues to make decisions about the education of our children? They hate us. They have contempt for us. And we must fight them tooth and nail every step of the way to deny them the power they desperately crave—and seek to use.
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 Scott Klusendorf about the fundamental flaw Klusendorf sees in the idea of locking down the country under the guise of preventing people from getting coronavirus. 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--2020-05-29--Twitter censors Trump hours after he signs executive order combatting social media censorship

UNITED STATES , May 29 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Twitter has censored a new post by President Donald Trump within 24 hours of him signing an executive order to combat social media censorship .
The social media giant covered a tweet published by Trump earlier today with the words : “ This Tweet violated the Twitter Rules about glorifying violence .
However , Twitter has determined that it may be in the public ’ s interest for the Tweet to remain accessible.
” Trump ’ s censored post was responding to the ongoing riots in Minneapolis , warning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the city if local authorities can not address the situation .
Trump has responded by calling on the U.S. Congress to revoke Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act , which protects platforms like Twitter and Facebook from being sued for what their users post on the sites .
“ Twitter is doing nothing about all of the lies & propaganda being put out by China or the Radical Left Democrat Party .
They have targeted Republicans , Conservatives & the President of the United States .
Section 230 should be revoked by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be regulated !
” Trump posted earlier today .
Florida congressman Matt Gaetz told Fox News host Tucker Carlson yesterday that he will be filing a complaint with Federal Election Commission about social media ’ s censorship of Trump .
“ If we just wait around , big tech will steal this election from Donald Trump and the American people , ” Gaetz said .
“ I will be filing a complaint with the Federal Election Commission tomorrow because of what they ’ ve done to President Trump .
As a voter I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And President Trump should call for a decision on the Federal Election Commission questions that are before them so that these tech companies get flushed out of the bushes , ” Gaetz continued .
Gaetz announced on his regular podcast earlier this week that he is working on legislation that would remove Section 230 ’ s legal immunity that social media companies currently enjoy , “ I am currently working with my Republican colleagues on the Judiciary Committee to craft legislation to say that if you ’ re going to opine as to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is put on your platform , for the sake of its viewers , you don ’ t get the protection of Section 230 .
You are not a platform .
You are doing something else , you are editorializing , ” Gaetz told his listeners .

Trump’s censored post seemed to indicate the military would open fire on rioters in Minneapolis. He has since said that's not what he meant.
May 29, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Twitter has censored a new post by President Donald Trump within 24 hours of him signing an executive order to combat social media censorship.
The social media giant covered a tweet published by Trump earlier today with the words: “This Tweet violated the Twitter Rules about glorifying violence. However, Twitter has determined that it may be in the public’s interest for the Tweet to remain accessible.”
Trump’s censored post was responding to the ongoing riots in Minneapolis, warning that the military will assume control of the city if local authorities cannot address the situation.
….These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 29, 2020
The president faced wide criticism after the tweet because it seemed to indicate the military would open fire on rioters. In a follow up tweet, he claimed that is not what he meant:
….It was spoken as a fact, not as a statement. It’s very simple, nobody should have any problem with this other than the haters, and those looking to cause trouble on social media. Honor the memory of George Floyd! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 29, 2020
Trump has responded to the Twitter censorship by calling on the U.S. Congress to revoke Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects platforms like Twitter and Facebook from being sued for what their users post on the sites.
“Twitter is doing nothing about all of the lies & propaganda being put out by China or the Radical Left Democrat Party. They have targeted Republicans, Conservatives & the President of the United States. Section 230 should be revoked by Congress. Until then, it will be regulated!” Trump posted earlier today.
Florida congressman Matt Gaetz told Fox News host Tucker Carlson yesterday that he will be filing a complaint with Federal Election Commission about social media’s censorship of Trump.
“If we just wait around, big tech will steal this election from Donald Trump and the American people,” Gaetz said.
“I will be filing a complaint with the Federal Election Commission tomorrow because of what they’ve done to President Trump. As a voter I have the standing to do it. And President Trump should call for a decision on the Federal Election Commission questions that are before them so that these tech companies get flushed out of the bushes,” Gaetz continued.
Gaetz announced on his regular podcast earlier this week that he is working on legislation that would remove Section 230’s legal immunity that social media companies currently enjoy,
“I am currently working with my Republican colleagues on the Judiciary Committee to craft legislation to say that if you’re going to opine as to the truth or falsity of that which is put on your platform, for the sake of its viewers, you don’t get the protection of Section 230. You are not a platform. You are doing something else, you are editorializing,” Gaetz told his listeners.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-29--Orthodox Jews will challenge Doug Ford’s COVID-19 restrictions on religious liberty

TORONTO , May 29 , 2020 ( Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms ) — The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms ( jccf.ca ) yesterday announced that it will file a Charter challenge against the Ontario government on behalf of various members of the Orthodox Jewish community in Toronto , for the government ’ s infringement of their freedoms of peaceful assembly and religion .
Ontario may well be the only jurisdiction in the world that continues to ban Orthodox Jews from praying in their traditional manner .
Under their strict religious laws , practiced for thousands of years , Orthodox @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in groups of a minimum of 10 adult males , called a minyan .
The Province ’ s Order under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act prohibits gatherings of more than five people , including for the purposes of conducting religious services , rites or ceremonies .
For the entire Orthodox Jewish community , these prohibitions have profoundly disrupted their freedom of religion , which is protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms .
When violating any Charter freedom , even the freedom of only one individual , a government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ justified in a free and democratic society .
This requires showing that the violations are a minimal impairment of those freedoms , and that the harm of violating the Charter freedom is clearly outweighed by the benefits that the government seeks to obtain .
Despite the fact that many stores , businesses and even parks are now open , Ontario ’ s highly-restrictive Order specifically targets religious individuals , who have been prevented from holding in-person services in their houses of worship for over two months , and who face draconian fines of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jail term for meeting in contravention of this Order .
These discriminatory restrictions do not appear to be based on scientific or public health standards , and are continuing now into a third month , with no clear end in sight .
Although drive-in religious services have finally been permitted in Ontario , in part due to the efforts of the Justice Centre on behalf of the Church of God of Aylmer , this accommodation does not assist Orthodox Jews , who are prevented by Jewish law from using any mechanized devices on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as Yom Kippur .
This includes a car , or even a bicycle .
Last week , a group of Orthodox Jews made a request to government officials , which was supported by over 400 Christian churches , to permit members of the Jewish community to gather in a safe manner , following guidelines similar to those now officially approved for all faith groups in other provinces .
This is important for celebrating the Sabbath and regular daily prayer sessions , and also the Jewish holiday of Shavuos , which begins at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prayer service and celebration of receiving of the Torah 3300 years ago , and is an important and fixed date on the Jewish calendar .
It is also one of only four occasions each year where congregants pray the Yizkor service together , a special memorial prayer for the souls of the departed .
Government representatives initially agreed to accommodations for outdoor services , but then changed their minds when they learned that some in the Jewish community preferred a more deferential approach toward government leaders .
The Ford government appears to have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now declines any accommodation whatsoever .
“ For many religious communities , coming together to worship is of fundamental importance to their faith , and is no less essential than any commercial activity , ” notes Justice Centre lawyer Lisa Bildy .
“ With the province increasingly opening up , it is important that faith groups be a part of that process .
If stores can have many dozens of people inside and maintain safety , so too can houses of worship , ” adds Bildy .
“ Other jurisdictions in Canada are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but Ontario won ’ t even allow people to meet outside in groups larger than five , despite mounting and compelling evidence that there is virtually no risk of disease transmission outdoors.
” Across the country , restrictions are being lessened as we learn that this virus was not nearly as devastating as initially feared , and as the number of serious cases continues to decline .
The Justice Centre has prepared a report outlining its position that lockdowns and restrictions at the end of May are no longer a demonstrably justified infringement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ It ’ s time to recognize that faith groups can reopen their houses of worship just as safely as any store , with similar social distancing measures .
There is no legal or public health basis for treating religious groups differently , and indeed it is contrary to the Charter to discriminate in this arbitrary manner , ” concludes Bildy .
Published with permission from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms .

Ontario may well be the only jurisdiction in the world that continues to ban Orthodox Jews from praying in their traditional manner.
TORONTO, May 29, 2020 (Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms) — The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (jccf.ca) yesterday announced that it will file a Charter challenge against the Ontario government on behalf of various members of the Orthodox Jewish community in Toronto, for the government’s infringement of their freedoms of peaceful assembly and religion. Ontario may well be the only jurisdiction in the world that continues to ban Orthodox Jews from praying in their traditional manner.
Under their strict religious laws, practiced for thousands of years, Orthodox Jews must pray three times daily, in groups of a minimum of 10 adult males, called a minyan. The Province’s Order under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act prohibits gatherings of more than five people, including for the purposes of conducting religious services, rites or ceremonies. For the entire Orthodox Jewish community, these prohibitions have profoundly disrupted their freedom of religion, which is protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. When violating any Charter freedom, even the freedom of only one individual, a government must prove that such violations are demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. This requires showing that the violations are a minimal impairment of those freedoms, and that the harm of violating the Charter freedom is clearly outweighed by the benefits that the government seeks to obtain.
Despite the fact that many stores, businesses and even parks are now open, Ontario’s highly-restrictive Order specifically targets religious individuals, who have been prevented from holding in-person services in their houses of worship for over two months, and who face draconian fines of up to $100,000 and a one-year jail term for meeting in contravention of this Order. These discriminatory restrictions do not appear to be based on scientific or public health standards, and are continuing now into a third month, with no clear end in sight.
Although drive-in religious services have finally been permitted in Ontario, in part due to the efforts of the Justice Centre on behalf of the Church of God of Aylmer, this accommodation does not assist Orthodox Jews, who are prevented by Jewish law from using any mechanized devices on the Sabbath and on many religious holidays such as Yom Kippur. This includes a car, or even a bicycle.
Last week, a group of Orthodox Jews made a request to government officials, which was supported by over 400 Christian churches, to permit members of the Jewish community to gather in a safe manner, following guidelines similar to those now officially approved for all faith groups in other provinces. This is important for celebrating the Sabbath and regular daily prayer sessions, and also the Jewish holiday of Shavuos, which begins at sundown tonight. Shavuos is an annual prayer service and celebration of receiving of the Torah 3300 years ago, and is an important and fixed date on the Jewish calendar. It is also one of only four occasions each year where congregants pray the Yizkor service together, a special memorial prayer for the souls of the departed.
Government representatives initially agreed to accommodations for outdoor services, but then changed their minds when they learned that some in the Jewish community preferred a more deferential approach toward government leaders. The Ford government appears to have taken advantage of that division, and now declines any accommodation whatsoever.
“For many religious communities, coming together to worship is of fundamental importance to their faith, and is no less essential than any commercial activity,” notes Justice Centre lawyer Lisa Bildy.
“With the province increasingly opening up, it is important that faith groups be a part of that process. If stores can have many dozens of people inside and maintain safety, so too can houses of worship,” adds Bildy. “Other jurisdictions in Canada are permitting indoor services with 50 congregants, but Ontario won’t even allow people to meet outside in groups larger than five, despite mounting and compelling evidence that there is virtually no risk of disease transmission outdoors.”
Across the country, restrictions are being lessened as we learn that this virus was not nearly as devastating as initially feared, and as the number of serious cases continues to decline. The Justice Centre has prepared a report outlining its position that lockdowns and restrictions at the end of May are no longer a demonstrably justified infringement on the civil liberties of Canadians.
“It’s time to recognize that faith groups can reopen their houses of worship just as safely as any store, with similar social distancing measures. There is no legal or public health basis for treating religious groups differently, and indeed it is contrary to the Charter to discriminate in this arbitrary manner,” concludes Bildy.
The Justice Centre is presently preparing court documents.
Published with permission from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms.
Share