lifesitenews--2020-02-29--Pro-LGBT group calls petition recognizing kids’ right to mom and dad ‘anti-equality&#821

Pro-LGBT group calls petition recognizing kids’ right to mom and dad ‘anti-equality’

February 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Right Wing Watch — a project of People for the American Way that routinely misrepresents family advocates — responded to the Ruth Institute ’ s Feb. 21 presentation of its Make the Family Great Again petition at the State Dept .
Commission on Unalienable Rights .
A Right Wing Watch article claims that both the Ruth Institute petition and the commission itself were created to help advance what it calls an “ anti-equality agenda , ” a term frequently used to smear and dismiss arguments for the right to life and defense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Morse , Ph.D. , founder and president of the Ruth Institute , said , “ We hold these truths to be self-evident : Every person comes into the world as a helpless baby .
Every person has a mother and a father .
Infancy is the one truly universal human experience .
Is respecting this fact what Right Wing Watch regards as ‘ anti-equality ’ ?
” Morse continued : “ Our Petition doesn ’ t mention LGBTQ , homosexuality or ‘ same-sex marriage.
’ We focus on the rights of children and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the commission reiterated the rights enumerated in the petition : • The right of every child to a relationship with his or her natural mother and father , except for an unavoidable tragedy • The right of every person without exception , to know the identity of his or her biological parents • The right to life from conception to natural death • The right of families to educate their own children in their faith tradition and values , without being undermined by the state “ Which of these rights does People for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ?
” Morse asked .
“ Does Right Wing Watch think children have no right to a relationship with , or to know the identity of , their parents ?
Maybe Right Wing Watch and its parent organization , People for the American Way , do not believe parents have the right to raise their children in accordance with their values .
If so , let them tell us : who does have the right to direct the education of children ?
” The Ruth Institute ’ s petition gained more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this project , LifePetitions.com .
Signers included leaders and activists from 15 countries , among them former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee , Alveda King ( niece of Dr. Martin Luther King , Jr. ) , Nigerian bishop Emmanuel Badejo , and Fr .
Boniface Ssenteza ( National Scouting Chaplain of Uganda ) .
People for the American Way and Right Wing Watch also accused the commission , headed by Harvard law professor and former ambassador to the Holy See Mary Ann Glendon of promoting a “ right-wing interpretation of religious liberty.
” Morse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interference with the free exercise of religion .
That is neither right-wing nor left-wing .
The sexual revolutionaries simply want to avoid an honest debate on these important topics.
” Find the Make the Family Great Again petition here , and a complete text of Dr. Morse ’ s testimony to the Commission on Unalienable Rights here .
The Ruth Institute is an international interfaith coalition to defend the family and build a civilization of love .
Find more information here .
Jennifer Roback Morse is the author of The Sexual State : @ @ @ @ @ @ @

The Ruth Institute’s petition focuses on the rights of children and parents. Right Wing Watch objected.
February 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Right Wing Watch — a project of People for the American Way that routinely misrepresents family advocates — responded to the Ruth Institute’s Feb. 21 presentation of its Make the Family Great Again petition at the State Dept. Commission on Unalienable Rights.
A Right Wing Watch article claims that both the Ruth Institute petition and the commission itself were created to help advance what it calls an “anti-equality agenda,” a term frequently used to smear and dismiss arguments for the right to life and defense of the family.
Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D., founder and president of the Ruth Institute, said, “We hold these truths to be self-evident: Every person comes into the world as a helpless baby. Every person has a mother and a father. Infancy is the one truly universal human experience. Is respecting this fact what Right Wing Watch regards as ‘anti-equality’?”
Morse continued: “Our Petition doesn’t mention LGBTQ, homosexuality or ‘same-sex marriage.’ We focus on the rights of children and parents.” Morse’s statement to the commission reiterated the rights enumerated in the petition:
The right of every child to a relationship with his or her natural mother and father, except for an unavoidable tragedy The right of every person without exception, to know the identity of his or her biological parents The right to life from conception to natural death The right of families to educate their own children in their faith tradition and values, without being undermined by the state
“Which of these rights does People for the American Way think are ‘anti-equality’?” Morse asked. “Does Right Wing Watch think children have no right to a relationship with, or to know the identity of, their parents? Maybe Right Wing Watch and its parent organization, People for the American Way, do not believe parents have the right to raise their children in accordance with their values. If so, let them tell us: who does have the right to direct the education of children?”
The Ruth Institute’s petition gained more than 8,000 signatures at its partner site for this project, LifePetitions.com. Signers included leaders and activists from 15 countries, among them former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, Alveda King (niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.), Nigerian bishop Emmanuel Badejo, and Fr. Boniface Ssenteza (National Scouting Chaplain of Uganda).
People for the American Way and Right Wing Watch also accused the commission, headed by Harvard law professor and former ambassador to the Holy See Mary Ann Glendon of promoting a “right-wing interpretation of religious liberty.”
Morse countered: “The Constitution prohibits government interference with the free exercise of religion. That is neither right-wing nor left-wing. The sexual revolutionaries simply want to avoid an honest debate on these important topics.”
Find the Make the Family Great Again petition here, and a complete text of Dr. Morse’s testimony to the Commission on Unalienable Rights here.
The Ruth Institute is an international interfaith coalition to defend the family and build a civilization of love. Find more information here.
Jennifer Roback Morse is the author of The Sexual State: How Elite Ideologies Are Destroying Lives.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-29--‘Dramatic hearing’ expected in court as pro-lifer defends right to show abortion victims

February 28 , 2020 ( Christian Concern ) — Pro-life campaigner , Christian Hacking , is to appeal an anti-social behaviour injunction which was demanded by pro-abortion MP , Stella Creasy , for challenging her extreme policies on abortion .
Christian , 29 , was issued with a Community Protection Notice ( CPN ) on 3 October 2019 by Waltham Forest Council for showing lawfully validated pictures of abortion in the MP ’ s constituency .
In response , Stella Creasy , a member of parliament and public representative , pressured the police and local council to intervene to prevent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exposing her extreme abortion policies .
“ I have done over 61 displays in London , ” says Christian .
“ I have never been closed down by the police or local authorities .
This particular incident marks a turn , because suddenly local councils are using arbitrary powers to shut down political opposition , and even worse , to criminalise them.
” What happened ?
Why were the public not told the truth ?
Will there be justice and will freedom of speech be upheld on the streets of the UK ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Christian is set to appeal the notice in what is expected to be a dramatic hearing on the 26 and 27 February at Stratford Magistrates Court .

'This particular incident marks a turn,' activist Christian Hacking said, 'because suddenly local councils are using arbitrary powers to shut down political opposition.'
February 28, 2020 (Christian Concern) — Pro-life campaigner, Christian Hacking, is to appeal an anti-social behaviour injunction which was demanded by pro-abortion MP, Stella Creasy, for challenging her extreme policies on abortion.
Christian, 29, was issued with a Community Protection Notice (CPN) on 3 October 2019 by Waltham Forest Council for showing lawfully validated pictures of abortion in the MP’s constituency.
In response, Stella Creasy, a member of parliament and public representative, pressured the police and local council to intervene to prevent Mr Hacking and local volunteers from publicly exposing her extreme abortion policies.
“I have done over 61 displays in London,” says Christian. “I have never been closed down by the police or local authorities. This particular incident marks a turn, because suddenly local councils are using arbitrary powers to shut down political opposition, and even worse, to criminalise them.”
What happened? Why were the public not told the truth? Will there be justice and will freedom of speech be upheld on the streets of the UK?
Supported by the Christian Legal Centre, Christian is set to appeal the notice in what is expected to be a dramatic hearing on the 26 and 27 February at Stratford Magistrates Court.
Published with permission from Christian Concern.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-29--George Soros banks $2M to re-elect prosecutor who bailed out Jussie Smollett

February 28 , 2020 ( American Thinker ) — It 's like a harmonic convergence of progressive villains .
Rachel Hinton of the Chicago Sun-Times reports : A political action committee founded by liberal billionaire philanthropist — and Donald Trump nemesis — George Soros kicked $ 2 million to a committee supporting Cook County State 's Attorney Kim Foxx in her re-election bid against three Democratic primary challengers .
A mega donor to Democrats and liberal causes , the hedge fund operator ’ s Democracy PAC transferred $ 2 million into the Illinois Justice and Public Safety PAC on Wednesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ receives large donations and supports a candidate can not coordinate with that candidate .
So Foxx is not directly receiving the money from Soros , but Soros cash is being dedicated to her re-election as state 's attorney .
A re-election that would ratify the cronyism that allowed Jussie Smollett to escape prosecution when Foxx 's office declined to pursue charges against him for staging a fake hate crime and tying up substantial police resources needed elsewhere in the crime-ridden Windy City .
Foxx claimed to recuse herself for `` familiarity with potential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ special prosecutor , as required when a conflict of interest is present .
Instead , she had a subordinate under her direct control take over the case , and that led to the prosecution being declined .
Following a public firestorm , including denunciation by Chicago 's chief of police , a special prosecutor was appointed to pursue the case and investigate Foxx .
Now Foxx faces a primary election on March 17 and is adopting a penitent pose .
Mark Guarino reports for the WaPo : In the middle of a video @ @ @ @ @ @ @ State 's Attorney Kim Foxx did something few Chicago politicians do : She admitted fault .
Foxx had been criticized by President Trump , the Fraternal Order of Police and many Chicagoans for her office 's decision in March to drop all 16 felony disorderly conduct charges against actor Jussie Smollett , who police say staged a racist and homophobic attack involving two men with a noose .
Then-Mayor Rahm Emanuel ( D ) called Foxx 's decision `` a whitewash of justice . ''
Trump characterized it as `` a real big @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I did n't handle it well .
I own that , '' Foxx ( D ) said in her two-minute video .
She faces three opponents in the Democrat primary , including one , Bill Conway , with a billionaire father .
From the Sun-Times article above : Conway 's campaign coffers have been bolstered by donations from his dad , William E. Conway Jr. , one of the founders of the private equity firm the Carlyle Group .
More than 88 % of the challenger 's total warchest came from his dad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The senior Conway has a net worth of $ 3.5 billion , according to Forbes .
A poll released two days ago has Foxx and Conway tied at 26 % support among Democrats , with the two other challengers getting a total of 10 % and 36 % undecided .
No doubt , the Soros millions will be a big help in a last-minute push by Foxx to grab those undecided votes .
Foxx is the progressives ' choice , favoring all the soft-on-crime initiatives currently all the rage on the Left , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Working Families , Real Justice PAC , the Chicago Federation of Labor , Personal PAC , and the Wheeling Township of Democrats have all endorsed Foxx , the first Black female Cook County State 's Attorney who is seeking a second term in office .
( snip ) United Working Families Executive Director Emma Tai said in a statement , `` As Cook County State 's Attorney , Kim Foxx has fought tirelessly against the root causes of violence and mass incarceration .
She has exonerated 80 wrongful convictions , reduced prosecution of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over 1,000 low-level possession convictions .
These measures are essential to undoing the racist legacy and continued harm to communities of color under the failed War on Drugs . ''
Real Justice PAC said , `` Kim championed alternatives to incarceration and expunged tens of thousands of marijuana convictions .
The number of people sentenced to jail or prison dropped by 20 percent .
Her record speaks for itself .
She is the reformer that Chicago needs . ''
Chicago Federation of Labor President Bob Reiter said in a statement : `` The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ endorse State 's Attorney Kim Foxx in her campaign for re-election .
While there is still much work to be done to help lift up communities that face social inequity , Kim has worked tirelessly towards making sure our criminal justice system works for everyone . ''
`` The only way we can continue our work to protect women 's rights is with progressive-minded elected officials by our side .
Kim Foxx is that elected official that we can count on , '' said Personal PAC President and CEO Terry Cosgrove in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for women and part of the Personal PAC community .
We proudly support her bid for re-election . ''
Wheeling Township Democrats : `` State 's Attorney Kim Foxx has been a leader , and national example , of what real criminal justice reform looks like .
She delivers true justice and equity to Cook County families and we know she will continue to do that work for the next four years .
We 're proud to join her in this re-election campaign and provide our endorsement , '' said Representative Mark Walker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Soros 's late entrance into funding Foxx must indicate worry that Chicago could actually turn sensible in the wake of the Smollett fiasco .
Published with permission from the American Thinker .
Mainstream media gave credibility to Jussie Smollet ’ s hoax .
It ’ s time to pull their plug

Cook County state's attorney Kim Foxx's office declined to pursue charges against Smollett for staging a fake hate crime and tying up police resources in crime-ridden Chicago.
February 28, 2020 (American Thinker) — It's like a harmonic convergence of progressive villains. Rachel Hinton of the Chicago Sun-Times reports:
A political action committee founded by liberal billionaire philanthropist — and Donald Trump nemesis — George Soros kicked $2 million to a committee supporting Cook County State's Attorney Kim Foxx in her re-election bid against three Democratic primary challengers. A mega donor to Democrats and liberal causes, the hedge fund operator’s Democracy PAC transferred $2 million into the Illinois Justice and Public Safety PAC on Wednesday.
Kim Foxx in 2018 (YouTube screen grab).
By law, a PAC that receives large donations and supports a candidate cannot coordinate with that candidate. So Foxx is not directly receiving the money from Soros, but Soros cash is being dedicated to her re-election as state's attorney. A re-election that would ratify the cronyism that allowed Jussie Smollett to escape prosecution when Foxx's office declined to pursue charges against him for staging a fake hate crime and tying up substantial police resources needed elsewhere in the crime-ridden Windy City.
Foxx claimed to recuse herself for “familiarity with potential witnesses” but declined to appoint a special prosecutor, as required when a conflict of interest is present. Instead, she had a subordinate under her direct control take over the case, and that led to the prosecution being declined. Following a public firestorm, including denunciation by Chicago's chief of police, a special prosecutor was appointed to pursue the case and investigate Foxx.
Now Foxx faces a primary election on March 17 and is adopting a penitent pose. Mark Guarino reports for the WaPo:
In the middle of a video announcing her reelection campaign, Cook County State's Attorney Kim Foxx did something few Chicago politicians do: She admitted fault. Foxx had been criticized by President Trump, the Fraternal Order of Police and many Chicagoans for her office's decision in March to drop all 16 felony disorderly conduct charges against actor Jussie Smollett, who police say staged a racist and homophobic attack involving two men with a noose. Then-Mayor Rahm Emanuel (D) called Foxx's decision “a whitewash of justice.” Trump characterized it as “a real big scam.” “Truth is, I didn't handle it well. I own that,” Foxx (D) said in her two-minute video.
She faces three opponents in the Democrat primary, including one, Bill Conway, with a billionaire father. From the Sun-Times article above:
Conway's campaign coffers have been bolstered by donations from his dad, William E. Conway Jr., one of the founders of the private equity firm the Carlyle Group. More than 88% of the challenger's total warchest came from his dad, the Sun-Times found last month. The senior Conway has a net worth of $3.5 billion, according to Forbes.
A poll released two days ago has Foxx and Conway tied at 26% support among Democrats, with the two other challengers getting a total of 10% and 36% undecided. No doubt, the Soros millions will be a big help in a last-minute push by Foxx to grab those undecided votes.
Foxx is the progressives' choice, favoring all the soft-on-crime initiatives currently all the rage on the Left, as the Chicago Crusader reports:
United Working Families, Real Justice PAC, the Chicago Federation of Labor, Personal PAC, and the Wheeling Township of Democrats have all endorsed Foxx, the first Black female Cook County State's Attorney who is seeking a second term in office. (snip) United Working Families Executive Director Emma Tai said in a statement, “As Cook County State's Attorney, Kim Foxx has fought tirelessly against the root causes of violence and mass incarceration. She has exonerated 80 wrongful convictions, reduced prosecution of low-level offenses, and worked to expunge over 1,000 low-level possession convictions. These measures are essential to undoing the racist legacy and continued harm to communities of color under the failed War on Drugs.” Real Justice PAC said, “Kim championed alternatives to incarceration and expunged tens of thousands of marijuana convictions. The number of people sentenced to jail or prison dropped by 20 percent. Her record speaks for itself. She is the reformer that Chicago needs.” Chicago Federation of Labor President Bob Reiter said in a statement: “The Chicago Federation of Labor is proud to endorse State's Attorney Kim Foxx in her campaign for re-election. While there is still much work to be done to help lift up communities that face social inequity, Kim has worked tirelessly towards making sure our criminal justice system works for everyone.” “The only way we can continue our work to protect women's rights is with progressive-minded elected officials by our side. Kim Foxx is that elected official that we can count on,” said Personal PAC President and CEO Terry Cosgrove in a statement. “She is a warrior for women and part of the Personal PAC community. We proudly support her bid for re-election.” Wheeling Township Democrats: “State's Attorney Kim Foxx has been a leader, and national example, of what real criminal justice reform looks like. She delivers true justice and equity to Cook County families and we know she will continue to do that work for the next four years. We're proud to join her in this re-election campaign and provide our endorsement,” said Representative Mark Walker, committeeman for Wheeling Township Democrats.
Soros's late entrance into funding Foxx must indicate worry that Chicago could actually turn sensible in the wake of the Smollett fiasco.
Published with permission from the American Thinker.
Related:
Mainstream media gave credibility to Jussie Smollet’s hoax. It’s time to pull their plug
Openly-gay Jussie Smollett charged with filing false police report for staged MAGA attack
Jussie Smollett was not exonerated
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-29--Euthanasia activists must have ‘dictated’ Germany’s new pro-assisted-suicide ruling: pro-life doctor

February 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – German pro-life organizations and Catholic leaders have condemned the supreme constitutional court for overturning a ban on assisted suicide for commercial reasons .
“ I have not seen a more open attack on the freedom of conscience of doctors for a long time .
Overall , the press release reads as if one of the euthanasia organizations had dictated it to the court , ” Dr. Paul Cullen , head of an organization of pro-life doctors in Germany , said of the summary of the ruling .
In 2015 , Germany passed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reasons .
In this context , the German term for commercial ( “ geschäftsmäßig ” ) does not refer to making money but to “ a recurring pursuit ” of providing assisted suicide .
On February 26 , the supreme constitutional court of Germany argued that the constitution guarantees “ the right to die in a self-determined manner , ” including the right to commit suicide and to be helped by others in that endeavor .
After the ruling , the law banning assisted suicide lost its validity .
The eight judges derived @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 of the German constitution .
“ Every person shall have the right to free development of his personality insofar as he does not violate the rights of others or offend against the constitutional order or the moral law , ” it states .
They also referred to article one , which speaks of “ human dignity ” being “ inviolable.
” Additionally , the court said that few doctors are willing to assist a person wanting to commit suicide .
The judges went on to suggest changing the code of medical ethics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prohibits doctors from helping with suicide .
“ Ärzte für das Leben ” ( ÄfdL ) , the organization of pro-life doctors , feared the ruling might lead to the end of freedom of conscience for doctors .
“ We must , however , be concerned about the barely concealed threat to doctors to change their code of medical ethics in such a way that they have little legal leeway in the area of the right to life , ” said Cullen .
Cardinal Reinhard Marx , president of the German Bishops ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ represented “ a turning point in our culture , which is aimed at affirming and promoting life.
” In a joint statement with the head of the Evangelical Church in Germany , Heinrich Bedford-Strohm , Marx pointed out that opening the doors to assisted suicide could , in a subtle way , put pressure on people who are old or sick to make use of such programs .
“ The more normal and accessible options for helping people to commit suicide become , the greater the danger that people in an extremely stressful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or external pressure to make use of such an option and end their own lives , ” he explained .
Emphasizing the value and dignity of each human being , Marx said that “ God has created man in his own image ” and “ is responsible for his life before God.
” The archbishop of Munich and Freising has been called out by faithful Catholics for his problematic positions , for instance on admitting divorced and remarried people to Holy Communion or blessing homosexual couples .
However , he has shown more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on suicide .
In 2014 , the cardinal said in an interview that even small exceptions to a ban on assisted suicide would be “ a slippery slope.
” He mentioned talking to a doctor providing both palliative and hospice care .
“ Like many others , he discovered that almost all patients in the dying process give up the desire to be killed by their own hand or that of somebody else as soon as the pain therapy takes effect and they experience the benevolent closeness of other people.
” Bishop Rudolf @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eventually make dying a duty .
That way , the right to die in a self-determined manner would be determined by somebody else .
Echoing the president of the German Bishops ’ Conference , Voderholzer pointed out that many people contemplating assisted suicide for themselves are driven by a fear of pain and loneliness .
The head of the subcommittee on bioethics of the German Bishops ’ Conference , Bishop Gebhard Fürst of Rottenburg-Stuttgart , only said that he regrets the ruling .
People should not die by the hand of another person @ @ @ @ @ @ @ somebody ’ s hand .
None of the bishops pointed out that suicide in itself is a grave evil , as the Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly demonstrates .
“ Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life .
It is gravely contrary to the just love of self .
It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family , nation , and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations .
Suicide is contrary to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Grave psychological disturbances , anguish , or grave fear of hardship , suffering , or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide , ” the catechism cautions .
A major pro-life organization in Germany , “ Aktion Lebensrecht für Alle ” ( ALfA ) , rejected the reasoning of the supreme constitutional court .
“ Just as man can not bring himself into being , a society should not create the conditions for him to take his own life at any time , ” ALfA wrote in a statement .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the court “ wants to see this right to suicide applied to all phases and situations of life .
This means that everyone has the right to suicide , regardless of age and illness.
” Claudia Kaminski , the head of ALfA , pointed out that the role of doctors in procuring the drugs necessary to help a person commit suicide is highly problematic .
“ It is a doctor ’ s job to heal and save a life , not to end it prematurely , even if this is the will of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” she said .
Jürgen Liminski , a journalist and author of pro-family books , pointed out to conservative newspaper “ Junge Freiheit ” that the judges ’ interpretation of the constitution has very little to do with the intentions of those who created it .
The founding fathers of post-war Germany “ did not foresee many sociopolitical developments and developments in the history of ideas .
Just think of the emptying of the terms marriage and family in article 6 of the constitution.
” The constitution was drafted by a parliamentary council @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the council was Konrad Adenauer , a devout Catholic and the first chancellor of the new republic .
“ Their view of the world was still shaped by the basic concepts of dignity and person , which are anchored in a creator and are accountable to him , ” Liminski explained .
“ It is not without reason that the preamble of the constitution begins with these words : ‘ Conscious of their responsibility before God and man … ’ The total individualization of the concept of dignity and person and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the creator in the last four or five decades has also changed the relationship to death and life.
” The supreme constitutional court said it is still up to lawmakers to regulate assisted suicide .
However , they are not allowed to make it as inaccessible as it used to be .
New bills will be introduced soon .

‘I have not seen a more open attack on the freedom of conscience of doctors for a long time.’
February 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – German pro-life organizations and Catholic leaders have condemned the supreme constitutional court for overturning a ban on assisted suicide for commercial reasons.
“I have not seen a more open attack on the freedom of conscience of doctors for a long time. Overall, the press release reads as if one of the euthanasia organizations had dictated it to the court,” Dr. Paul Cullen, head of an organization of pro-life doctors in Germany, said of the summary of the ruling.
In 2015, Germany passed a law prohibiting assisted suicide for commercial reasons. In this context, the German term for commercial (“geschäftsmäßig”) does not refer to making money but to “a recurring pursuit” of providing assisted suicide.
On February 26, the supreme constitutional court of Germany argued that the constitution guarantees “the right to die in a self-determined manner,” including the right to commit suicide and to be helped by others in that endeavor. After the ruling, the law banning assisted suicide lost its validity.
The eight judges derived a right to assisted suicide from article 2 of the German constitution. “Every person shall have the right to free development of his personality insofar as he does not violate the rights of others or offend against the constitutional order or the moral law,” it states.
They also referred to article one, which speaks of “human dignity” being “inviolable.”
Additionally, the court said that few doctors are willing to assist a person wanting to commit suicide. The judges went on to suggest changing the code of medical ethics, which in many parts of Germany prohibits doctors from helping with suicide.
“Ärzte für das Leben” (ÄfdL), the organization of pro-life doctors, feared the ruling might lead to the end of freedom of conscience for doctors.
“We must, however, be concerned about the barely concealed threat to doctors to change their code of medical ethics in such a way that they have little legal leeway in the area of the right to life,” said Cullen.
Cardinal Reinhard Marx, president of the German Bishops’ Conference, said Wednesday’s ruling represented “a turning point in our culture, which is aimed at affirming and promoting life.”
In a joint statement with the head of the Evangelical Church in Germany, Heinrich Bedford-Strohm, Marx pointed out that opening the doors to assisted suicide could, in a subtle way, put pressure on people who are old or sick to make use of such programs.
“The more normal and accessible options for helping people to commit suicide become, the greater the danger that people in an extremely stressful life situation will find themselves under internal or external pressure to make use of such an option and end their own lives,” he explained.
Emphasizing the value and dignity of each human being, Marx said that “God has created man in his own image” and “is responsible for his life before God.”
The archbishop of Munich and Freising has been called out by faithful Catholics for his problematic positions, for instance on admitting divorced and remarried people to Holy Communion or blessing homosexual couples. However, he has shown more respect for the Church’s stand on suicide.
In 2014, the cardinal said in an interview that even small exceptions to a ban on assisted suicide would be “a slippery slope.”
He mentioned talking to a doctor providing both palliative and hospice care. “Like many others, he discovered that almost all patients in the dying process give up the desire to be killed by their own hand or that of somebody else as soon as the pain therapy takes effect and they experience the benevolent closeness of other people.”
Bishop Rudolf Voderholzer of Regensburg said permitting euthanasia would eventually make dying a duty. That way, the right to die in a self-determined manner would be determined by somebody else.
Echoing the president of the German Bishops’ Conference, Voderholzer pointed out that many people contemplating assisted suicide for themselves are driven by a fear of pain and loneliness.
The head of the subcommittee on bioethics of the German Bishops’ Conference, Bishop Gebhard Fürst of Rottenburg-Stuttgart, only said that he regrets the ruling. People should not die by the hand of another person, he added, but while holding somebody’s hand.
None of the bishops pointed out that suicide in itself is a grave evil, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly demonstrates.
“Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life. It is gravely contrary to the just love of self. It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations. Suicide is contrary to love for the living God.”
“Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide,” the catechism cautions.
A major pro-life organization in Germany, “Aktion Lebensrecht für Alle” (ALfA), rejected the reasoning of the supreme constitutional court.
“Just as man cannot bring himself into being, a society should not create the conditions for him to take his own life at any time,” ALfA wrote in a statement. It is “particularly frightening” that the court “wants to see this right to suicide applied to all phases and situations of life. This means that everyone has the right to suicide, regardless of age and illness.”
Claudia Kaminski, the head of ALfA, pointed out that the role of doctors in procuring the drugs necessary to help a person commit suicide is highly problematic. “It is a doctor’s job to heal and save a life, not to end it prematurely, even if this is the will of the patient in the individual case,” she said.
Jürgen Liminski, a journalist and author of pro-family books, pointed out to conservative newspaper “Junge Freiheit” that the judges’ interpretation of the constitution has very little to do with the intentions of those who created it.
The founding fathers of post-war Germany “did not foresee many sociopolitical developments and developments in the history of ideas. Just think of the emptying of the terms marriage and family in article 6 of the constitution.”
The constitution was drafted by a parliamentary council in 1948 and 1949. The chairman of the council was Konrad Adenauer, a devout Catholic and the first chancellor of the new republic.
“Their view of the world was still shaped by the basic concepts of dignity and person, which are anchored in a creator and are accountable to him,” Liminski explained.
“It is not without reason that the preamble of the constitution begins with these words: ‘Conscious of their responsibility before God and man …’ The total individualization of the concept of dignity and person and the decoupling of this duo from its roots in the creator in the last four or five decades has also changed the relationship to death and life.”
The supreme constitutional court said it is still up to lawmakers to regulate assisted suicide. However, they are not allowed to make it as inaccessible as it used to be.
New bills will be introduced soon.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-29--Respected humanitarian doctor group publishes abortion how-to guide

WASHINGTON , D.C. , February 28 , 2020 ( C-Fam ) — The humanitarian group Doctors Without Borders launched online medical abortion guidelines that its partner group acknowledges will be used for do-it-yourself abortions .
Doctors Without Borders , also known as Médecins Sans Frontières ( MSF ) , says it “ has teamed up with ” HowToUseAbortionPill.org to create an online video guide on how to use pills to abort an unborn child up to 22 weeks .
In a cartoon-based guide , MSF shows how to “ push out the pregnancy , ” in “ a process that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its “ goal is to ensure that everyone ” can get the information “ no matter who you are , where you are.
” “ The fact that Doctors Without Borders is a recognizable , reputable group also might make people more comfortable with the procedure , ” an unidentified representative of HowToUseAbortionPill.org said in an interview with Vice .
“ We do not see this piece as an instructional guide for self-managed abortion , ” she said of the video .
“ However , we know that much of our online content…is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ users to the fact that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has made it illegal to sell the abortion drug mifepristone online or in pharmacies , that five U.S. states have made self-induced abortions illegal , and 18 states prohibit telemedicine abortions .
The website calls itself “ an online community run by dedicated individuals who believe that all women , regardless of where they live , should have access to a safe abortion option.
” There is no information giving the names of its staff , an address , or who funds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that , “ because the how-to videos are available to the general public in multiple languages , ” the MSF guide , ostensibly meant for health professionals in humanitarian settings , “ can double as a complete guide to doing your own abortion , outside of medical supervision.
” Doctors Without Borders/MSF is a critic of the U.S. Mexico City Policy that bans taxpayer funds for promoting or performing overseas abortion .
The group says it does not take U.S. funds , and that it is not affected by the policy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ advanced technology or specialized medical interventions in order to provide medication abortion safely , ” the MSF website says .
“ All you need ” are information , medications , and “ mutual respect and trust , ” and for that reason , abortions have increased “ for millions of women and girls around the world — and especially in low-resource and humanitarian settings.
” Children born prematurely at 22 weeks have survived outside the womb .
Doctors Without Borders/MSF warns humanitarians in the video guide that if the child makes noise or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be upsetting for the woman who has aborted the child .
It says that the woman may want to hold the aborted “ pregnancy , ” take it home , and even give it a burial .
MSF does not list abortion among its humanitarian services on its website , but says it is part of its maternal health program , arguing that “ unsafe abortion ” is the fifth leading case of maternal mortality after postpartum hemorrhage , sepsis , complications from delivery , and hypertensive disorders .
“ Of all these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that is completely avoidable , ” the MSF website says .
It does not list avoiding abortion as a way to avoid maternal deaths .

Claiming to be against 'unsafe abortion,' Doctors Without Borders is now providing a guide so mothers can commit abortions at home.
WASHINGTON, D.C., February 28, 2020 (C-Fam) — The humanitarian group Doctors Without Borders launched online medical abortion guidelines that its partner group acknowledges will be used for do-it-yourself abortions.
Doctors Without Borders, also known as Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), says it “has teamed up with” HowToUseAbortionPill.org to create an online video guide on how to use pills to abort an unborn child up to 22 weeks. In a cartoon-based guide, MSF shows how to “push out the pregnancy,” in “a process that is similar to miscarriage.” MSF says its “goal is to ensure that everyone” can get the information “no matter who you are, where you are.”
“The fact that Doctors Without Borders is a recognizable, reputable group also might make people more comfortable with the procedure,” an unidentified representative of HowToUseAbortionPill.org said in an interview with Vice. “We do not see this piece as an instructional guide for self-managed abortion,” she said of the video. “However, we know that much of our online content…is used for self-managed abortion.”
HowToUseAbortionPill.org alerts users to the fact that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has made it illegal to sell the abortion drug mifepristone online or in pharmacies, that five U.S. states have made self-induced abortions illegal, and 18 states prohibit telemedicine abortions. The website calls itself “an online community run by dedicated individuals who believe that all women, regardless of where they live, should have access to a safe abortion option.” There is no information giving the names of its staff, an address, or who funds the website.
The HowToUseAbortionPill.org program manager said that, “because the how-to videos are available to the general public in multiple languages,” the MSF guide, ostensibly meant for health professionals in humanitarian settings, “can double as a complete guide to doing your own abortion, outside of medical supervision.”
Doctors Without Borders/MSF is a critic of the U.S. Mexico City Policy that bans taxpayer funds for promoting or performing overseas abortion. The group says it does not take U.S. funds, and that it is not affected by the policy.
“You don’t need any advanced technology or specialized medical interventions in order to provide medication abortion safely,” the MSF website says. “All you need” are information, medications, and “mutual respect and trust,” and for that reason, abortions have increased “for millions of women and girls around the world — and especially in low-resource and humanitarian settings.”
Children born prematurely at 22 weeks have survived outside the womb. Doctors Without Borders/MSF warns humanitarians in the video guide that if the child makes noise or moves after the abortion, it could be upsetting for the woman who has aborted the child. It says that the woman may want to hold the aborted “pregnancy,” take it home, and even give it a burial.
MSF does not list abortion among its humanitarian services on its website, but says it is part of its maternal health program, arguing that “unsafe abortion” is the fifth leading case of maternal mortality after postpartum hemorrhage, sepsis, complications from delivery, and hypertensive disorders. “Of all these, unsafe abortion is the only one that is completely avoidable,” the MSF website says. It does not list avoiding abortion as a way to avoid maternal deaths.
Published with permission from C-Fam.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-29--Abortion activists force Colombia into constitutional crisis over legalization

NEW YORK , February 28 , 2020 ( C-Fam ) — Activists for abortion-on-demand in Colombia pushed the Latin American nation into a constitutional crisis with the help of UN agencies and experts , as the country ’ s Constitutional Court is expected to rule on a new abortion case .
Colombia ’ s legislature has repeatedly shot down bills to make abortion legal , despite instructions from the Constitutional Court of the predominantly Catholic country to change the penal code to make abortion legal .
Now Colombia ’ s Constitutional Court may go a step further and declare a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sixteen weeks of pregnancy .
The prospect of a Constitutional crisis led Colombian President Ivan Duque to intervene as the Court began to debate the case on February 19 .
A ruling is expected in March .
“ I don ’ t want to undermine the independence of any institution , but I think going beyond the three exceptions , which are clear , is a very big change for Colombian society , ” weighed Duque last week while taking questions from the press .
“ I express my opinion freely and repeat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I believe in life from the moment of conception , but I also believe that the three exceptions have been recognized by the country .
I think moving away from that would clash very hard with our society , ” Duque added .
Abortion remains a crime in Colombia even though its laws are not enforced .
The ministry of health recognizes a fundamental right to abortion following a Constitutional Court ruling in 2006 .
The Court ordered the Colombian legislature to change its criminal code to allow abortion in cases of rape @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the mother , based on non-binding recommendations from UN treaty bodies that abortion is a human right .
But unlike the U.S. Supreme Court , Colombia ’ s highest court can not strike down legislation .
Colombia ’ s criminal code , adopted in the year 2000 , still prohibits abortion in all circumstances .
Recent Colombian Presidents have not enforced the criminal laws and have followed the Constitutional Court ’ s rulings instead .
Since 2006 , the Court has issued 16 rulings confirming the 2006 decision and has urged the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more accessible , going as far as prohibiting hospitals from objecting to providing abortions .
All the while Colombia ’ s democratically elected legislature has shot down legislation to make abortion legal 33 times since 1976 .
In an amicus curiae submission to the Court a group of legislators lambasted the court for “ usurping legislative prerogatives.
” Former Colombian President and now Senator Alvaro Uribe was among those who opposed the possibility of abortion-on-demand .
“ We need to prepare for a referendum against permissiveness on abortion , ” he said in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Alianza Verde responded to Uribe ’ s suggestion during an interview with Semana en Vivo , saying , “ What is unconstitutional is a referendum that lets citizens decide on a fundamental human right.
” José Jaime Uscátegui , a center-right politician of Uribe ’ s party raised the issue of term limits in the same interview commenting on the possibility of a referendum .
“ That we would be willing to discard a baby after 7-months of gestation , it seems cruel to me , ” he said .
Colombia ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ response to the case before the Court last week .
The video calls abortion “ murder ” and warns of the negative consequences of abortion on women ’ s physical and mental health .

Abortion remains a crime in Colombia, even though its laws are not enforced. That may change.
NEW YORK, February 28, 2020 (C-Fam) — Activists for abortion-on-demand in Colombia pushed the Latin American nation into a constitutional crisis with the help of UN agencies and experts, as the country’s Constitutional Court is expected to rule on a new abortion case.
Colombia’s legislature has repeatedly shot down bills to make abortion legal, despite instructions from the Constitutional Court of the predominantly Catholic country to change the penal code to make abortion legal. Now Colombia’s Constitutional Court may go a step further and declare a human right to abortion-on-demand in the first sixteen weeks of pregnancy.
The prospect of a Constitutional crisis led Colombian President Ivan Duque to intervene as the Court began to debate the case on February 19. A ruling is expected in March.
“I don’t want to undermine the independence of any institution, but I think going beyond the three exceptions, which are clear, is a very big change for Colombian society,” weighed Duque last week while taking questions from the press.
Duque insisted on his pro-life credentials.
“I express my opinion freely and repeat once again: I am pro-life, I believe in life from the moment of conception, but I also believe that the three exceptions have been recognized by the country. I think moving away from that would clash very hard with our society,” Duque added.
Abortion remains a crime in Colombia even though its laws are not enforced. The ministry of health recognizes a fundamental right to abortion following a Constitutional Court ruling in 2006. The Court ordered the Colombian legislature to change its criminal code to allow abortion in cases of rape, disability, or any health risk to the mother, based on non-binding recommendations from UN treaty bodies that abortion is a human right.
But unlike the U.S. Supreme Court, Colombia’s highest court cannot strike down legislation. Colombia’s criminal code, adopted in the year 2000, still prohibits abortion in all circumstances. Recent Colombian Presidents have not enforced the criminal laws and have followed the Constitutional Court’s rulings instead.
Since 2006, the Court has issued 16 rulings confirming the 2006 decision and has urged the government and legislature to make abortion even more accessible, going as far as prohibiting hospitals from objecting to providing abortions. All the while Colombia’s democratically elected legislature has shot down legislation to make abortion legal 33 times since 1976.
In an amicus curiae submission to the Court a group of legislators lambasted the court for “usurping legislative prerogatives.”
Former Colombian President and now Senator Alvaro Uribe was among those who opposed the possibility of abortion-on-demand.
“We need to prepare for a referendum against permissiveness on abortion,” he said in a Tweet.
Pro-abortion legislator Juanita Goebertus of Alianza Verde responded to Uribe’s suggestion during an interview with Semana en Vivo, saying, “What is unconstitutional is a referendum that lets citizens decide on a fundamental human right.”
José Jaime Uscátegui, a center-right politician of Uribe’s party raised the issue of term limits in the same interview commenting on the possibility of a referendum.
“That we would be willing to discard a baby after 7-months of gestation, it seems cruel to me,” he said.
Colombia’s Catholic bishops released a video in response to the case before the Court last week. The video calls abortion “murder” and warns of the negative consequences of abortion on women’s physical and mental health.
Published with permission from C-Fam.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-29--Pastor offers free legal help to pro-life ‘sanctuary cities’ threatened by leftist lawsu

Pastor offers free legal help to pro-life ‘sanctuary cities’ threatened by leftist lawsuit

LONGVIEW , Texas , February 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — An American pastor is promising free legal services to seven Texas cities facing lawsuits from a leftist civil liberties group , because they recently enacted laws banning abortion while proclaiming themselves “ sanctuary cities ” for the unborn .
In a Facebook post on Tuesday , Pastor Mark Lee Dickson , director of Right to Life of East Texas , said the lawsuit was a “ meritless lawsuit brought to deter and intimidate cities from enacting these ordinances.
” Dickson then offered free legal help : “ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these ordinances at no charge to the cities , ” said Dickson .
“ We are prepared to defend all other cities that enact these laws at no charge to the taxpayers .
We are eager to defend these ordinances in court.
” The left-leaning American Civil Liberties Union ( ACLU ) filed a lawsuit at the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against the Texas “ sanctuary cities ” for the unborn last Tuesday .
In a news release about the lawsuit , the ACLU says the cities ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ representing , Lilith Fund and Texas Equal Access Fund ( TEA Fund ) , as criminal organizations for their pro-abortion stance .
They also question whether the laws are constitutional .
The cities facing the ACLU lawsuit — Waskom , Naples , Joaquin , Tenaha , Rusk , Gary , and Wells — all recently enacted ordinances outlawing abortion becoming “ sanctuary cities ” for the unborn .
An ordinance is a type of local regulation or law and carries a lot more legal weight than when a municipality simply enacts a resolution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is one of the main supporters behind efforts to have Texas municipalities enact pro-life ordinances .
The first Texas municipality to enact pro-life laws was the town of Waskom , whose City Council in a 5-0 vote banned medical and surgical abortions in June of 2019 .
In speaking about the ACLU lawsuit , the mayor of Waskom said he was not surprised about it and that the city will fight it .
“ The ACLU thinks this is something we did to get attention to the city , ” said Mayor Jesse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do not have a clue as to how wrong they are .
We passed the ordinance because it was the right thing to do , and we will fight this lawsuit to the very end and then some.
” In recent months , many Democrat-controlled states have passed extreme laws to expand abortion , and the entire field of 2020 Democratic presidential candidates all support taxpayer-funded abortions , including up to birth .
The ACLU has a history of advocating for left-leaning ideas and laws .
In December of 2019 , the organization @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s washrooms to stop prejudice against “ every person who menstruates.
” In November of the same year , on “ International Men ’ s Day , ” the ACLU declared on its Twitter page , “ Men who get pregnant and give birth are men.
” Other cities and towns outside Texas , such as Roswell , New Mexico , have passed resolutions recognizing sanctuary status for the unborn .
Texas Right to Life has said the lawsuit is “ baseless , selectively targeting smaller cities that have passed the ordinance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that cover for the real culprit : abortion businesses , which are evidently unwilling to join the lawsuit themselves.
” Dickson in a Facebook post yesterday mirrored the messaging from Texas Right to Life .
He also used his post to promote an online petition from the website Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn , which promises help to cities to become sanctuary cities for the unborn .

Seven Texas cities face lawsuits from the leftist ACLU because they recently enacted laws banning abortion while proclaiming themselves 'sanctuary cities' for the unborn.
LONGVIEW, Texas, February 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — An American pastor is promising free legal services to seven Texas cities facing lawsuits from a leftist civil liberties group, because they recently enacted laws banning abortion while proclaiming themselves “sanctuary cities” for the unborn.
In a Facebook post on Tuesday, Pastor Mark Lee Dickson, director of Right to Life of East Texas, said the lawsuit was a “meritless lawsuit brought to deter and intimidate cities from enacting these ordinances.”
Dickson then offered free legal help: “We have a legal team ready to defend these ordinances at no charge to the cities,” said Dickson. “We are prepared to defend all other cities that enact these laws at no charge to the taxpayers. We are eager to defend these ordinances in court.”
The left-leaning American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit at the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against the Texas “sanctuary cities” for the unborn last Tuesday.
In a news release about the lawsuit, the ACLU says the cities’ pro-life laws label the organizations they are representing, Lilith Fund and Texas Equal Access Fund (TEA Fund), as criminal organizations for their pro-abortion stance. They also question whether the laws are constitutional.
The cities facing the ACLU lawsuit — Waskom, Naples, Joaquin, Tenaha, Rusk, Gary, and Wells — all recently enacted ordinances outlawing abortion becoming “sanctuary cities” for the unborn.
An ordinance is a type of local regulation or law and carries a lot more legal weight than when a municipality simply enacts a resolution.
Right to Life of East Texas is one of the main supporters behind efforts to have Texas municipalities enact pro-life ordinances.
The first Texas municipality to enact pro-life laws was the town of Waskom, whose City Council in a 5-0 vote banned medical and surgical abortions in June of 2019. In speaking about the ACLU lawsuit, the mayor of Waskom said he was not surprised about it and that the city will fight it.
“The ACLU thinks this is something we did to get attention to the city,” said Mayor Jesse Moore, adding, “But they do not have a clue as to how wrong they are. We passed the ordinance because it was the right thing to do, and we will fight this lawsuit to the very end and then some.”
In recent months, many Democrat-controlled states have passed extreme laws to expand abortion, and the entire field of 2020 Democratic presidential candidates all support taxpayer-funded abortions, including up to birth.
The ACLU has a history of advocating for left-leaning ideas and laws. In December of 2019, the organization demanded that tampons be provided in men’s washrooms to stop prejudice against “every person who menstruates.”
In November of the same year, on “International Men’s Day,” the ACLU declared on its Twitter page, “Men who get pregnant and give birth are men.”
Other cities and towns outside Texas, such as Roswell, New Mexico, have passed resolutions recognizing sanctuary status for the unborn.
Texas Right to Life has said the lawsuit is “baseless, selectively targeting smaller cities that have passed the ordinance, and filed by abortion advocacy organizations that cover for the real culprit: abortion businesses, which are evidently unwilling to join the lawsuit themselves.”
Dickson in a Facebook post yesterday mirrored the messaging from Texas Right to Life. He also used his post to promote an online petition from the website Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn, which promises help to cities to become sanctuary cities for the unborn.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-29--Buttigieg promises to crush religious groups, commodify kids for gays’ feelings

February 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) –– Democrat presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg has doubled down on his campaign ’ s assault on religious liberty while elevating the rights of gays and lesbians to obtain children over and above the natural right of all children to be reared by a mother and father .
During a recent CNN town hall meeting ( video here ) , a woman who identifies as an “ LGBTQ American ” and who believes that faith-based foster and adoption organizations unfairly diminish the rights of self-identified homosexual and transgender individuals to have access to children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ granted a waiver for faith-based foster and adoption programs that accept federal funding , allowing these programs to reject prospective parents if their sexual orientation or gender identity doesn ’ t align with the group ’ s religious values .
This , ultimately , harms the children in their care and discriminates against the LGBTQ community .
If elected , how do you intend to protect and uphold the separation of church and state and work for these children ?
The candidate agreed with the premise of the woman ’ s question , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ simple .
I believe that federal funding should never be used to discriminate .
It is a basic principle.
” Buttigieg often pays empty homage to religious freedom in his campaign appearances , promising to “ fiercely defend religious liberty ” while in actuality discounting its bedrock , foundational importance to the American way of life .
In his answer to the unidentified woman , he revealed that when matters of conscience for Christians and best practices for serving orphaned children are pitted against the demands of homosexuals and transgenders to acquire children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should trump the rights of all others .
And , here ’ 's how I think about religious freedom more broadly .
And I feel this way , both as a citizen and as a person of faith .
Of course , it is so important to the fabric of the country that people of every religion and no religion can practice their faith to the best of their conscience .
But , like any other freedom , that freedom ends where you begin to invoke it to harm other people .
Just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any other freedom , is constrained by that .
We all treasure our freedom of speech , but nobody here has the freedom to yell ‘ Fire ’ in this crowded space .
It is the same way with religious liberty .
We respect , and I will fiercely defend , religious liberty — but not past the point where it is being invoked as an excuse to harm other people through this kind of discrimination .
Buttigieg is saying a child ’ s need for both a mom and dad is an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those children must sacrifice what is best for them in order to help homosexuals maximize their personal fulfillment .
In Pete Buttigieg ’ s strange worldview , an orphaned child ’ s right to both Mom and Dad “ harms ” gays , and the deep-seated hunger that every child has for both parents of both sexes discriminates against gays .
In essence , Buttigieg sees all kids as born prejudiced .
He deems active homosexuals as bigger “ victims ” than orphaned children .
While Buttigieg never fails to paint himself as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ instincts that surface during political events are those of a man whose same-sex attraction define his personhood and distort his view of reality .
At a campaign rally last week , the openly gay presidential candidate invited onto the stage a nine-year-old boy in order to publicly offer him advice on “ coming out ” as gay .
Both recent instances should categorically disqualify Buttigieg as a serious White House contender .

Democrat presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg has doubled down on his campaign’s assault on religious liberty while elevating the rights of gays and lesbians to obtain children.
February 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) –– Democrat presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg has doubled down on his campaign’s assault on religious liberty while elevating the rights of gays and lesbians to obtain children over and above the natural right of all children to be reared by a mother and father.
During a recent CNN town hall meeting (video here), a woman who identifies as an “LGBTQ American” and who believes that faith-based foster and adoption organizations unfairly diminish the rights of self-identified homosexual and transgender individuals to have access to children, said:
Our governor was recently granted a waiver for faith-based foster and adoption programs that accept federal funding, allowing these programs to reject prospective parents if their sexual orientation or gender identity doesn’t align with the group’s religious values. This, ultimately, harms the children in their care and discriminates against the LGBTQ community. If elected, how do you intend to protect and uphold the separation of church and state and work for these children?
The candidate agreed with the premise of the woman’s question, saying, “It’s very simple. I believe that federal funding should never be used to discriminate. It is a basic principle.”
Buttigieg often pays empty homage to religious freedom in his campaign appearances, promising to “fiercely defend religious liberty” while in actuality discounting its bedrock, foundational importance to the American way of life.
In his answer to the unidentified woman, he revealed that when matters of conscience for Christians and best practices for serving orphaned children are pitted against the demands of homosexuals and transgenders to acquire children to mitigate their loneliness, LGBT demands should trump the rights of all others.
Buttigieg continued:
And, here’'s how I think about religious freedom more broadly. And I feel this way, both as a citizen and as a person of faith. Of course, it is so important to the fabric of the country that people of every religion and no religion can practice their faith to the best of their conscience. But, like any other freedom, that freedom ends where you begin to invoke it to harm other people. Just as the freedom of speech, or any other freedom, is constrained by that. We all treasure our freedom of speech, but nobody here has the freedom to yell ‘Fire’ in this crowded space. It is the same way with religious liberty. We respect, and I will fiercely defend, religious liberty — but not past the point where it is being invoked as an excuse to harm other people through this kind of discrimination.
Buttigieg is saying a child’s need for both a mom and dad is an insult to gays and lesbians, therefore those children must sacrifice what is best for them in order to help homosexuals maximize their personal fulfillment.
Kids: Born that way
In Pete Buttigieg’s strange worldview, an orphaned child’s right to both Mom and Dad “harms” gays, and the deep-seated hunger that every child has for both parents of both sexes discriminates against gays.
In essence, Buttigieg sees all kids as born prejudiced. He deems active homosexuals as bigger “victims” than orphaned children.
While Buttigieg never fails to paint himself as a “moderate,” his natural instincts that surface during political events are those of a man whose same-sex attraction define his personhood and distort his view of reality.
At a campaign rally last week, the openly gay presidential candidate invited onto the stage a nine-year-old boy in order to publicly offer him advice on “coming out” as gay.
Both recent instances should categorically disqualify Buttigieg as a serious White House contender.
Follow Doug Doug Mainwaring is a journalist for LifeSiteNews, an author, and a marriage, family and children's rights activist. He has testified before the United States Congress and state legislative bodies, originated and co-authored amicus briefs for the United States Supreme Court, and has been a guest on numerous TV and radio programs. Doug and his family live in the Washington, DC suburbs.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-29--Gays, lesbians vastly overrepresented on TV in UK: diversity monitoring group

February 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – British television employs people who identify as LGBT on and off-screen in numbers that vastly overrepresent their actual presence in the general population , according to a just-released major industry survey .
In its Diamond : The Third Cut report , the Creative Diversity Network ( CDN ) surveyed “ over 30,000 diversity forms relating to over 600,000 TV production contributions.
” Although gays and lesbians comprise 6.4 percent of the UK ’ s workforce and national population , the percentage of on-screen contributions by gays and lesbians was universally high at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ homosexual on-screen contributions amounted to 10.7 percent ; at ITV , 10.5 percent ; and at Channel 4 , 13.1 percent .
At 18.1 percent , Channel 5 was found to have the highest percentage of on-screen contributions by homosexuals -- nearly three times their 6.4 percent presence in the general population .
Sky was found to have the lowest percentage , but at 7.6 percent it is still significantly above the actual population of homosexuals in the UK .
The on and off-screen contributions of self-identified homosexuals to children ’ s programming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , respectively .
“ People who identify as LGB are represented well across all genres , without exception , both on and off-screen , ” the report stated .
The report also further broke down the percentages of homosexuals serving in various production positions .
Homosexuals occupy 14.9 percent of all senior production staff , with 20.6 percent acting as producers and a whopping 26.3 percent serving as series producers , more than four times the actual proportion of the homosexual population within the UK .
Information about the on- and off-screen contributions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , with much of it redacted due to low sample sizes .
Surveys taken of the television industry in the United States have reported similar findings .
In its annual report on the state of LGBT representation in television released late last year , the pro-LGBT pressure group GLAAD said , “ Of the 879 series regular characters expected to appear on broadcast prime-time scripted programming in the coming year , 90 ( 10.2 percent ) were counted as LGBTQ.
” Prime-time “ representation ” in the United States is more than double @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent of the U.S. population identifies as LGBT .
Interestingly , the overrepresentation of homosexuals in on- and off-screen positions , and as characters in shows remains lower than what most people falsely believe to be the percentage of homosexuals in the population .
In what is a testament to the marketing acumen of LGBT lobbyists and promoters , U.S. adults , on average , continue to believe that about 25 percent of the population is gay or lesbian , more than five times the actual number .
Overall , a full 90 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with 54 percent of Americans estimating that gays and lesbians constitute more than 20 percent of the population , according to a June 17 , 2019 Gallup poll .
Only 8 percent of those polled come close to accurately estimating the LGBT population in the United States at around 4.5 percent .
“ Overestimations of the nation ’ s gay population may in part be due to the group ’ s outsized visibility , ” suggested Gallup at the time , citing a GLAAD report that had found 8.8 percent of prime-time TV @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

The number of on-screen homosexual contributors at some networks is more than three times the general population.
February 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – British television employs people who identify as LGBT on and off-screen in numbers that vastly overrepresent their actual presence in the general population, according to a just-released major industry survey.
In its Diamond: The Third Cut report, the Creative Diversity Network (CDN) surveyed “over 30,000 diversity forms relating to over 600,000 TV production contributions.”
Although gays and lesbians comprise 6.4 percent of the UK’s workforce and national population, the percentage of on-screen contributions by gays and lesbians was universally high at British TV networks.
At BBC, homosexual on-screen contributions amounted to 10.7 percent; at ITV, 10.5 percent; and at Channel 4, 13.1 percent.
At 18.1 percent, Channel 5 was found to have the highest percentage of on-screen contributions by homosexuals — nearly three times their 6.4 percent presence in the general population.
Sky was found to have the lowest percentage, but at 7.6 percent it is still significantly above the actual population of homosexuals in the UK.
The on and off-screen contributions of self-identified homosexuals to children’s programming amounts to 12.8 percent and 14.3 percent, respectively.
“People who identify as LGB are represented well across all genres, without exception, both on and off-screen,” the report stated.
The report also further broke down the percentages of homosexuals serving in various production positions. Homosexuals occupy 14.9 percent of all senior production staff, with 20.6 percent acting as producers and a whopping 26.3 percent serving as series producers, more than four times the actual proportion of the homosexual population within the UK.
Information about the on- and off-screen contributions by transgenders is sketchy in the report, with much of it redacted due to low sample sizes.
Surveys taken of the television industry in the United States have reported similar findings.
In its annual report on the state of LGBT representation in television released late last year, the pro-LGBT pressure group GLAAD said, “Of the 879 series regular characters expected to appear on broadcast prime-time scripted programming in the coming year, 90 (10.2 percent) were counted as LGBTQ.”
Prime-time “representation” in the United States is more than double Gallup’s 2017 estimate that 4.5 percent of the U.S. population identifies as LGBT.
Interestingly, the overrepresentation of homosexuals in on- and off-screen positions, and as characters in shows remains lower than what most people falsely believe to be the percentage of homosexuals in the population.
In what is a testament to the marketing acumen of LGBT lobbyists and promoters, U.S. adults, on average, continue to believe that about 25 percent of the population is gay or lesbian, more than five times the actual number.
Overall, a full 90 percent believe in an inflated number, with 54 percent of Americans estimating that gays and lesbians constitute more than 20 percent of the population, according to a June 17, 2019 Gallup poll. Only 8 percent of those polled come close to accurately estimating the LGBT population in the United States at around 4.5 percent.
“Overestimations of the nation’s gay population may in part be due to the group’s outsized visibility,” suggested Gallup at the time, citing a GLAAD report that had found 8.8 percent of prime-time TV characters are LGBT during the previous year.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-29--Walkouts at screening of new movie featuring 10-year-old girl playing sex robot

BERLIN , February 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — A sci-fi movie portraying a sexual relationship between a man and a robot that replicates his lost 10-year-old daughter has prompted walkouts and outrage at its screenings at the Berlin film festival .
The film , titled The Trouble with Being Born and directed by Austrian Sandra Wollner , stirred controversy at its February 25 world premiere at Berlinale 2020 , reported the U.K .
Independent .
It depicts a child-like android , played by 10-year-old Lena Watson ( a pseudonym ) , who calls her owner “ Daddy.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ leaves little doubt that the man , played by Dominik Warta , has a sexual relationship with the child robot , ” the Independent reports .
According to a review in Slant , the film plot reveals that the android , Elli , “ was built to replicate the father ’ s daughter , who disappeared 10 years before.
” The film evoked disgust on Twitter , with one person calling it “ paedophile propaganda , ” the Independent reported .
That was echoed by FilmGoblin in a review entitled “ Pedophilia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Being Born.
” “ Who are these people actually kidding ?
” notes the review .
“ Let ’ s not pretend that this isn ’ t about mainstreaming the last sexual perversion — other than bestiality — that isn ’ t socially acceptable , ” it adds .
“ And there ’ s no argument to be made in defense of the existence of this film by using the ‘ Lolita ’ defense , or even the ‘ well it ’ s just a robot ’ defense.
” Wollner told the Hollywood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ hidden gem , ” that the role was originally intended for a 20-year-old .
However , she decided to cast a child after removing some more explicit elements in the script .
“ What I found interesting about it is that we have an android whose only desires are the ones you program it to have , ” she said .
“ I found it fascinating to show the perspective of the world through this machine that does not judge and does not care , and doesn ’ t need the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that she was initially “ scared ” about choosing a child for the part and said that when she was casting for the role , she looked for a minor who came from a “ healthy environment.
” It was also necessary that the child come from “ the sort of open-minded family who would understand the story they wanted to tell and also allow them to do it , ” noted The Hollywood Reporter .
In the end , Wollner found Watson because her parents were known by a friend of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ silicone mask and a wig , which hides her identity and reinforces that “ it ’ s a role she ’ s playing , ” Wollner told Variety .
“ Of course , her parents were there during the shoot .
She was never naked , she was never running around naked , she never saw anybody naked on set .
We just did that in the edit , ” she added .
“ We had really honest talks with the family , who were there during the shoot .
It was very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ course we talked to [ Watson ] about the film in a very child-appropriate way , ” she told The Hollywood Reporter .
Noted FilmGoblin : “ Of course , if you live like an atheist and have a worldview that this world is all there is and that human beings aren ’ t any more than a conglomeration of cells accidentally swirled together , to both begin and end without meaning in the world , then why wouldn ’ t you build a kiddie sex robot , thus softening your resistance to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hello , pagan morality.
” As well as portraying a pedophilic incestuous android-human relationship , the movie also seems to have a transgender subplot .
When Elli runs away , she is picked up by a motorist who then gives her to his mother as a replacement for the brother she lost 60 years ago , according to Slant .

While much is implied, the movie 'leaves little doubt that the man ... has a sexual relationship with the child robot,' the Independent reports.
BERLIN, February 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — A sci-fi movie portraying a sexual relationship between a man and a robot that replicates his lost 10-year-old daughter has prompted walkouts and outrage at its screenings at the Berlin film festival.
The film, titled The Trouble with Being Born and directed by Austrian Sandra Wollner, stirred controversy at its February 25 world premiere at Berlinale 2020, reported the U.K. Independent.
It depicts a child-like android, played by 10-year-old Lena Watson (a pseudonym), who calls her owner “Daddy.”
While much is implied, the movie “leaves little doubt that the man, played by Dominik Warta, has a sexual relationship with the child robot,” the Independent reports.
The movie also includes multiple CGI nude scenes.
According to a review in Slant, the film plot reveals that the android, Elli, “was built to replicate the father’s daughter, who disappeared 10 years before.”
The film evoked disgust on Twitter, with one person calling it “paedophile propaganda,” the Independent reported.
That was echoed by FilmGoblin in a review entitled “Pedophilia gets mainstream nod in The Trouble with Being Born.”
“Who are these people actually kidding?” notes the review.
“Let’s not pretend that this isn’t about mainstreaming the last sexual perversion — other than bestiality — that isn’t socially acceptable,” it adds. “And there’s no argument to be made in defense of the existence of this film by using the ‘Lolita’ defense, or even the ‘well it’s just a robot’ defense.”
Wollner told the Hollywood Reporter, which described the film as a “hidden gem,” that the role was originally intended for a 20-year-old.
However, she decided to cast a child after removing some more explicit elements in the script.
“What I found interesting about it is that we have an android whose only desires are the ones you program it to have,” she said. “I found it fascinating to show the perspective of the world through this machine that does not judge and does not care, and doesn’t need the meanings that we do.”
Wollner added that she was initially “scared” about choosing a child for the part and said that when she was casting for the role, she looked for a minor who came from a “healthy environment.”
It was also necessary that the child come from “the sort of open-minded family who would understand the story they wanted to tell and also allow them to do it,” noted The Hollywood Reporter.
In the end, Wollner found Watson because her parents were known by a friend of a friend.
The child actress used a silicone mask and a wig, which hides her identity and reinforces that “it’s a role she’s playing,” Wollner told Variety.
“Of course, her parents were there during the shoot. She was never naked, she was never running around naked, she never saw anybody naked on set. We just did that in the edit,” she added.
“We had really honest talks with the family, who were there during the shoot. It was very open, very transparent. And of course we talked to [Watson] about the film in a very child-appropriate way,” she told The Hollywood Reporter.
Noted FilmGoblin: “Of course, if you live like an atheist and have a worldview that this world is all there is and that human beings aren’t any more than a conglomeration of cells accidentally swirled together, to both begin and end without meaning in the world, then why wouldn’t you build a kiddie sex robot, thus softening your resistance to going and getting a real kid? Hello, pagan morality.”
As well as portraying a pedophilic incestuous android-human relationship, the movie also seems to have a transgender subplot. When Elli runs away, she is picked up by a motorist who then gives her to his mother as a replacement for the brother she lost 60 years ago, according to Slant.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-29--Justice Dept intervenes to defend Christian wedding photographer’s religious freedom

February 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — The Trump administration ’ s Department of Justice ( DOJ ) is stepping in on behalf of a Christian wedding photographer who is suing the city of Louisville , Kentucky over an ordinance that forces her to lend her services to same-sex “ wedding ” ceremonies .
Alliance Defending Freedom ( ADF ) is representing Chelsey Nelson , who owns a photography studio in Louisville , in her lawsuit against the city ’ s Fairness Ordinance , which states that businesses can not deny a customer “ full and equal ” enjoyment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advantages , or public accommodations on the basis of various attributes , including sexual orientation .
It also forbids businesses from publishing communications suggesting such “ discrimination.
” According to ADF , this means that Nelson not only must photograph same-sex “ weddings , ” but can not publicly explain why she wants to photograph only monogamous male-female unions .
On Thursday , the DOJ ’ s Civil Rights Division filed a Statement of Interest in the case siding with Nelson , contending that she is likely to prevail on the merits because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ religious realm and profoundly symbolic ceremonies in the secular one , ” thereby qualifying as “ expressive activities ” for the purposes of free speech claims .
“ The First Amendment forbids the government from forcing someone to speak in a manner that violates individual conscience , ” Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband explained in a press release .
“ The U.S. Department of Justice will continue to protect the right of all persons to exercise their constitutional right to speech and expression.
” Nelson and ADF ’ s suit further argues that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help gay customers find willing photographers , as an online directory lists lists 91 other photographers in Louisville and 314 photographers statewide who advertise their willingness to do so .
Nelson ’ s challenge is a pre-emptive measure against an ordinance the city has not yet attempted to enforce , filed before it harms religious businesses as similar mandates have across the United States .
“ I ’ m careful to photograph and blog about each of these solemn ceremonies in a way that reflects my views of marriage , ” which “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ best person to photograph every wedding , ” Nelson has previously explained , noting that she also declines to work at heterosexual weddings with trivial themes such as Halloween .
“ My highest aim in life is to honor God , and that informs everything I do , business included .
”

The Trump DOJ’s Civil Rights Division filed a Statement of Interest in the case siding with the photographer, contending that she is likely to prevail on the merits.
February 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The Trump administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) is stepping in on behalf of a Christian wedding photographer who is suing the city of Louisville, Kentucky over an ordinance that forces her to lend her services to same-sex “wedding” ceremonies.
Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) is representing Chelsey Nelson, who owns a photography studio in Louisville, in her lawsuit against the city’s Fairness Ordinance, which states that businesses cannot deny a customer “full and equal” enjoyment of goods, services, privileges, advantages, or public accommodations on the basis of various attributes, including sexual orientation. It also forbids businesses from publishing communications suggesting such “discrimination.”
According to ADF, this means that Nelson not only must photograph same-sex “weddings,” but cannot publicly explain why she wants to photograph only monogamous male-female unions.
On Thursday, the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division filed a Statement of Interest in the case siding with Nelson, contending that she is likely to prevail on the merits because “weddings are sacred rites in the religious realm and profoundly symbolic ceremonies in the secular one,” thereby qualifying as “expressive activities” for the purposes of free speech claims.
“The First Amendment forbids the government from forcing someone to speak in a manner that violates individual conscience,” Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband explained in a press release. “The U.S. Department of Justice will continue to protect the right of all persons to exercise their constitutional right to speech and expression.”
Nelson and ADF’s suit further argues that the Fairness Ordinance is hardly necessary to help gay customers find willing photographers, as an online directory lists lists 91 other photographers in Louisville and 314 photographers statewide who advertise their willingness to do so.
Nelson’s challenge is a pre-emptive measure against an ordinance the city has not yet attempted to enforce, filed before it harms religious businesses as similar mandates have across the United States.
“I’m careful to photograph and blog about each of these solemn ceremonies in a way that reflects my views of marriage,” which “means I wouldn’t be the best person to photograph every wedding,” Nelson has previously explained, noting that she also declines to work at heterosexual weddings with trivial themes such as Halloween. “My highest aim in life is to honor God, and that informs everything I do, business included.”
Share