lifesitenews--2020-10-27--New undercover video shows potentially massive election fraud in Texas

SAN ANTONIO , Texas , October 27 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Undercover journalists have discovered election fraud on a potentially massive scale in Texas , as voters are bribed and coaxed to vote for Democrats — including changing votes on the ballot .
Project Veritas today released a new video , documenting one woman in particular who claimed that she was “ bringing at least at least 7,000 votes to the polls.
” Raquel Rodriguez from San Antonio , who officially works for a homosexual Republican candidate for Congress , Mauro Garza , is secretly a ballot chaser @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their ballot in favor of Democratic candidates .
The video remains unclear at times .
It seems Rodriguez aims to get Democrats into the White House , as well as other positions , while also helping Republican Mauro Garza get elected to Congress .
Rodriguez mentioned she intends to “ flip all these Dems , but I got to flip them only for him , ” meaning Garza .
The video footage shows Rodriguez persuading a woman to change her vote after having selected Sen. John Cornyn ( R-TX ) : “ If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and then you can just put your initials here , so that way you ’ re voting for the straight Dem .
Cause that ’ s what you want to do , correct ?
You want to vote for the entire , all the Democrats ?
” Rodriguez continued by showing the woman how to change her vote in such a manner that would not arouse suspicion : “ And you ’ re going to have to put like a line through it and your initials , so they ’ re going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ She didn ’ t vote for who we wanted her to vote for … That ’ s my job … I guess it is being persuasive … That right there is against the law , ” Rodriguez explained to the undercover reporter .
After having convinced the woman to change her vote , Rodriguez then gave her a shawl as a gift .
She mentioned that Garza had given her $ 2,500 to use for gifts , essentially to bribe people to support him .
“ I do shawls , I do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I do rosaries , ” admitted Rodriguez , listing the bribes she gives .
The video is unclear as to whether these are used to convince people to vote for Democrat Joe Biden instead of Republican President Trump , or for Garza instead of Democrat Rep. Joaquin Castro .
Rodriguez collects ballots , especially from the older generation , and then mails them from different post offices in order not to arouse suspicion .
She said she also fills in ballots in polling booths on behalf of voters .
The undercover journalist quipped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was right when he raised concerns about rigged elections , to which Rodriguez responded , “ It ’ s true ; ’ cause you ’ re not supposed to do that.
” Another ballot chaser with whom Rodriguez works , Joanne Ramon , is described as having previously even registered votes for dead people in a funeral parlor and cemetery where she worked .
In the 2008 elections , Ramon mentioned that she got “ over 100,000 straight tickets ” for the Democrats .
However , it is not just collected ballots that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has “ a black girl at the poll … because we need the black vote , and the gay vote.
” Rodriguez explains how she is convincing a voter , named Helen , to vote for “ Biden … MJ Heger ” but also “ for my guy Mauro.
” Helen is “ a Republican … why is she going to vote for those two ?
Cause I asked her and I told her they ’ re better.
” Rodriguez continued by describing the process of ensuring that Helen voted “ the right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already coached her … I had another voter go in with her .
Why — because the other person is somebody that I trust.
” Project Veritas accused Rodriguez of having broken many state and federal laws .
Jered Ede , the chief legal officer for Project Veritas , explained that she had broken three separate state laws regarding harvesting of non-family member ’ s votes , for being paid to harvest votes , and for paying others to do so .
Ede also said that Rodriguez could “ qualify for a sentence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which increases the penalty for ballot harvesting if three or more people are involved.
” Among other laws , Ede pointed out , she has also violated the Texas Election Code by prompting voters on how to vote which is punishable by up to a year in prison , and by convincing individuals to change their vote .
James O ’ Keefe , founder of Project Veritas , described it as “ voter fraud system positioned to swing Texas in 2020 ” and noted that such actions “ constitute a direct threat to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ”

Voters are bribed and coaxed to vote for Democrats — including changing their votes already on the ballot.
SAN ANTONIO, Texas, October 27, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Undercover journalists have discovered election fraud on a potentially massive scale in Texas, as voters are bribed and coaxed to vote for Democrats — including changing votes on the ballot.
Project Veritas today released a new video, documenting one woman in particular who claimed that she was “bringing at least at least 7,000 votes to the polls.”
Raquel Rodriguez from San Antonio, who officially works for a homosexual Republican candidate for Congress, Mauro Garza, is secretly a ballot chaser, bribing and coercing voters to change their ballot in favor of Democratic candidates.
The video remains unclear at times. It seems Rodriguez aims to get Democrats into the White House, as well as other positions, while also helping Republican Mauro Garza get elected to Congress. Rodriguez mentioned she intends to “flip all these Dems, but I got to flip them only for him,” meaning Garza.
The video footage shows Rodriguez persuading a woman to change her vote after having selected Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX): “If you want to change it you can, and then you can just put your initials here, so that way you’re voting for the straight Dem. Cause that’s what you want to do, correct? You want to vote for the entire, all the Democrats?”
Rodriguez continued by showing the woman how to change her vote in such a manner that would not arouse suspicion: “And you’re going to have to put like a line through it and your initials, so they’re going to know it was a mistake.”
“She didn’t vote for who we wanted her to vote for … That’s my job … I guess it is being persuasive … That right there is against the law,” Rodriguez explained to the undercover reporter.
After having convinced the woman to change her vote, Rodriguez then gave her a shawl as a gift. She mentioned that Garza had given her $2,500 to use for gifts, essentially to bribe people to support him.
“I do shawls, I do diabetic socks, I do wallets, I do rosaries,” admitted Rodriguez, listing the bribes she gives. The video is unclear as to whether these are used to convince people to vote for Democrat Joe Biden instead of Republican President Trump, or for Garza instead of Democrat Rep. Joaquin Castro.
Rodriguez collects ballots, especially from the older generation, and then mails them from different post offices in order not to arouse suspicion. She said she also fills in ballots in polling booths on behalf of voters.
The undercover journalist quipped at one point that President Donald Trump was right when he raised concerns about rigged elections, to which Rodriguez responded, “It’s true; ’cause you’re not supposed to do that.”
Another ballot chaser with whom Rodriguez works, Joanne Ramon, is described as having previously even registered votes for dead people in a funeral parlor and cemetery where she worked. In the 2008 elections, Ramon mentioned that she got “over 100,000 straight tickets” for the Democrats.
However, it is not just collected ballots that are being manipulated. Rodriguez mentioned she has “a black girl at the poll … because we need the black vote, and the gay vote.”
Rodriguez explains how she is convincing a voter, named Helen, to vote for “Biden … MJ Heger” but also “for my guy Mauro.” Helen is “a Republican … why is she going to vote for those two? Cause I asked her and I told her they’re better.”
— Article continues below Petition — PETITION: Urge state legislatures to scrap universal mail-in ballots and help protect the vote Show Petition Text 19132 have signed the petition. Let's get to 20000 ! Thank you for signing this petition! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Country... State... Sign this Petition Voter fraud is real, and threatens November's election outcome. Please SIGN this urgent petition which asks each state legislature to pass emergency legislation to stop or scrap plans for universal mail-in ballots. Universal mail-in ballots are ballots which would be automatically sent to every voter on the register, without voters having to apply for them. So far, 9 state have mandated universal mail-in ballots because of the COVID crisis, but more are considering the policy. Under normal circumstances, voters who intend to be away from home on polling day can request an absentee ballot from their state's election authority. The key difference between absentee ballots and universal mail-in ballots is that with absentee ballots voters undergo a vetting process which requires them to prove who they are and sign an application form. AND, crucially, absentee voters expect to receive their ballot in the mail. But, with universal mail-in voting, the intended recipient may not expect their ballot in the mail. Indeed, some people may be totally unaware of this initiative. And, moreover, no-one need prove their identity and sign an application. Obviously, this practice is ripe for abuse and voter fraud. From the state sending out ballots to people who no longer live in the voting district (especially when the state does not require people to update their voting status if they move out of the state) to ballot theft, there are several major threats to the integrity of the vote. In fact, judges around the country have already started to make known their displeasure with different aspects of mail-in ballots: In New Jersey - A judge just ordered an election redo over massive voter fraud using mail-in ballots.
In Iowa - A judge just voided the application for 50,000 mail-in ballots which had voters' information pre-filled on the forms. The purpose of this petition is to ensure the integrity of the vote. And, the petition appeals to each state legislature to stop or scrap plans for universal mail-in ballots because of the serious potential for voter fraud. Although this policy would require one additional step to complete the process of voting, the democratic process must be safeguarded as much as humanly possible for this election. Please SIGN this petition and SHARE with your like-minded friends, family and colleagues. Thank you! FOR MORE INFORMATION: 'New Jersey judge orders election redo over massive voter fraud using mail-in ballots' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/new-jersey-judge-orders-election-redo-over-massive-voter-fraud-using-mail-in-ballots 'Judge invalidates pre-filled absentee ballots in second Iowa county' - https://www.kcrg.com/2020/08/29/judge-invalidates-pre-filled-absentee-ballots-in-second-iowa-county/ 'Flashback: New York Democrat election official admitted ‘you’re gonna see a lot’ of voter fraud' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/flashback-new-york-democrat-election-official-admitted-youre-gonna-see-a-lot-of-vote-fraud 'Voter fraud is a huge problem in the Democratic Party' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/voter-fraud-is-a-huge-problem-in-the-democratic-party **Photo Credit: Shutterstock.com Hide Petition Text Sign this Petition
Rodriguez continued by describing the process of ensuring that Helen voted “the right way.” She said, “I already coached her … I had another voter go in with her. Why — because the other person is somebody that I trust.”
Project Veritas accused Rodriguez of having broken many state and federal laws.
Jered Ede, the chief legal officer for Project Veritas, explained that she had broken three separate state laws regarding harvesting of non-family member’s votes, for being paid to harvest votes, and for paying others to do so.
Ede also said that Rodriguez could “qualify for a sentence enhancement under Texas Election Code §276.012, which increases the penalty for ballot harvesting if three or more people are involved.”
Among other laws, Ede pointed out, she has also violated the Texas Election Code by prompting voters on how to vote which is punishable by up to a year in prison, and by convincing individuals to change their vote.
James O’Keefe, founder of Project Veritas, described it as “voter fraud system positioned to swing Texas in 2020” and noted that such actions “constitute a direct threat to the integrity of our election-based republic.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-10-27--Catholic priest threatens mother of seven with arrest if she enters church without a mask

NORTHBROOK , Illinois , October 27 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – A Catholic parish priest has threatened to call the police on a parishioner if she shows up to church service not wearing a mask .
Fr .
Christopher Gustafson of St. Norbert Parish in Northbrook , Illinois , told Colette O ’ Regan in an Oct. 15 letter that her stubborn refusal to wear a mask during Mass was “ disruptive ” and “ intransigent.
” “ I find it necessary to enforce prevention of your entering and remaining in the church until you comply with the protocols @ @ @ @ @ @ @ request of wearing a mask , ” he told the 48-year-old mother of seven in the letter obtained by LifeSiteNews .
The priest went on to tell O ’ Regan that he would use legal force to keep her out of the church if she refused to wear a mask .
“ As we spoke of recently , your failure to comply has consequences – spiritual , but also sadly , legal .
The church is private property , and unless you comply , your continued disruptive and intransigent behavior will prohibit your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” “ Civil authorities have assured me of their readiness to enforce the law in this regard , ” the priest warned the woman .
Cook County , where the parish is located , has no mandatory masking policy .
The county ’ s public health guidelines issued in July urge , but do not demand , that “ everyone should wear a cloth face cover in public settings and when around people who don ’ t live in your household , especially when other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy for children under two and “ anyone who has trouble breathing.
” The Archdiocese of Chicago , where the parish is located , goes further than the county , telling the faithful in guidelines issued in May that they are “ required to wear masks during any services/ceremonies.
” The Archdiocese makes it clear that it realizes that masks are often ineffective , telling parishioners that they “ should understand that they assume the risk of contracting COVID-19 any time they enter a public space since such precautions do not eliminate the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Archdiocese of Chicago for comment on the priest ’ s action , but did not receive a response .
O ’ Regan , who had attended Mass daily at the parish for over 21 years , had been eager to get back after weeks of staying home and watching televised Mass during the lockdowns that forced the closure of churches .
“ My heart and soul were yearning for the Eucharist , ” she told LifeSiteNews in a telephone interview .
She began attending daily Mass again after her church reopened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ response to COVID-19 .
She wore a mask when she first returned , but had it pulled down below her nose so that she could breathe more easily .
She was emboldened to wear it this way when she saw other older parishioners doing the same .
It was at this time that Fr .
Gustafson and parish staff began to repeatedly request that she wear her mask “ properly ” – that is , over her nose .
The priest ’ s insistence motivated O ’ Regan to investigate for herself the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus .
“ So I went home and started googling about these masks , ” O ’ Regan said .
Online searches about masking to fight COVID reveal that many masks worn by the public are largely ineffective at stopping the transmission of viruses .
There are also clearly documented hazards of wearing masks for long periods of time .
LifeSiteNews co-founder Steve Jalsevac wrote a two-part series on masks in July where he made the case that the explosion in mandatory masking was not driven by science , but by fear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ II here ) .
John Paul Meenan wrote a piece in July where he makes the case that mandatory masking has a moral side because it hides “ our identity as persons made in God ’ s image.
” O ’ Regan said that her investigation led her to conclude that mask mandates were “ control tools ” and “ Marxist.
” “ I said , ‘ I ’ m not playing this game anymore .
God made us unique and unrepeatable .
Our faces are masterpieces made by God , ” said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the words of Catholic author and evangelist Mark Mallett , who has described the reaction to the COVID-19 outbreak as a “ spiritual coup.
” Mallett wrote , “ For the face is the icon of the image of God in whom we are created .
In fact , the Hebrew word for face is often rendered as ‘ presence ’ : our face is essentially the physical representation of our presence .
As such , when Adam and Eve sinned , they ‘ hid themselves from the face ( presence ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ Regan also described the panic over mask-wearing as an expression of a lack of trust in God .
“ My trust , then , doesn ’ t rely on Him , it relies on me and everyone else around me .
We are not in control .
We can do the best we can , but you got in a car today and drove and we all know there are terrible drivers.
” O ’ Regan decided at this point to entirely forgo wearing a mask while attending daily Mass .
Fr @ @ @ @ @ @ @ O ’ Regan on Oct. 3 , castigating her for not wearing a mask .
“ For whatever reason you have chosen to not wear a mask while coming into church , despite our asking everyone to do so .
I can not imagine that you would politicize the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and use it as a forum for protest .
I am assuming , therefore , that wearing a mask in some way offends your sense of proper religious practice , ” he wrote in the letter obtained by LifeSiteNews @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” the priest continued , “ that it is the smallest of inconveniences , easily undertaken , to enable your neighbors , many of whom are vulnerable , to feel safe .
Failing to wear a mask is disturbing to others , and truthfully , is a moral issue .
I ask you to prayerfully consider your actions in light of the Gospel ’ s twofold call to love and for your own spiritual wellbeing.
” O ’ Regan continued to attend church service without a mask .
Less than two weeks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ priest threatened her with calling the police if she dared show up in church one more time without wearing a mask .
Fr .
Gustafson elaborated on the situation to LifeSiteNews .
He pointed out that people at his parish have come to him with concerns that people who do not wear masks put everyone else at risk .
“ I ’ ve had a [ Mass-goer ] who ’ s a doctor , who is herself immuno-suppressed and has a sick child at home and she said , ‘ How can we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t come anymore , ’ ” Fr .
Gustafson related .
“ As in many things , especially in the moral world , there ’ s a question of burden and benefit ; and it seems very minimally burdensome for someone to wear a mask , and a tremendous benefit for others to continue to be able to come , ” he said .
When asked by LifeSiteNews whether he thought refraining from wearing a mask posed an actual physical risk to others , he replied : “ The risk is people being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ themselves of the spiritual goods of the church .
That ’ s what ’ s at risk here .
The mask-wearing is a simple response to the situation of the pandemic .
I ’ m not doing this on science , I ’ m basing it on people who are telling me that they can not participate because of someone ’ s behavior.
” O ’ Regan , by contrast , commented to LifeSiteNews , “ We can not collectively force other people to do things because it makes us feel safe .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that police confirmed to her that while there was no local law mandating the wearing of masks , her pastor could have her arrested or cited for trespassing on private property if she showed up to a service .
O ’ Regan commented , “ I thought you denied people the sacraments because they ’ re in mortal sin .
They don ’ t deny anyone anymore for that reason .
We ’ re so concentrated on our physical health at this church .
We could be completely dead spiritually , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ long as everyone feels like they ’ re physically safe.
” The Catholic mother lamented that the church , on account of the actions of the priest , was no longer `` open to all.
” LifeSiteNews asked Fr .
Gustafson if his actions contravene Canon law regarding the obligation to give sacraments to faithful Catholics who are “ properly disposed and are not prohibited by law from receiving them.
” When asked whether or not he thought he could reconcile his actions with Canon 843 , Fr .
Gustafson said , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ m doing exactly what I need to do because otherwise , by doing nothing and her continuing to come and disrupt the Mass by not wearing a mask - she ’ s never been denied the Eucharist , by the way - but by my failure to do something , I ’ m depriving others , precisely the rest of the flock , when all she needs to do is wear a mask while she ’ s in the church .
So it ’ s her behavior that ’ s denying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far as her next steps are concerned , O ’ Regan said , “ I ’ m letting God lead this.
” Fr .
Christopher Gustafson St. Norbert and Our Lady of the Brook Parish 1809 Walters Avenue Northbrook , IL 60062 Ph : ( 847 ) 513-6710 Email : [ email protected ] Archdiocese of Chicago Cardinal Blase J. Cupich , Archbishop of Chicago PO Box 1979 Chicago , IL 60690-1979 Tel : 312.534.8230 Email : Use online contact form here

The mother of seven said she wasn't going to play the mask 'game' anymore, referring to mask mandates as 'control tools' and 'Marxist'
NORTHBROOK, Illinois, October 27, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A Catholic parish priest has threatened to call the police on a parishioner if she shows up to church service not wearing a mask.
Fr. Christopher Gustafson of St. Norbert Parish in Northbrook, Illinois, told Colette O’Regan in an Oct. 15 letter that her stubborn refusal to wear a mask during Mass was “disruptive” and “intransigent.”
“I find it necessary to enforce prevention of your entering and remaining in the church until you comply with the protocols asked of all, including the simple request of wearing a mask,” he told the 48-year-old mother of seven in the letter obtained by LifeSiteNews.
The priest went on to tell O’Regan that he would use legal force to keep her out of the church if she refused to wear a mask.
“As we spoke of recently, your failure to comply has consequences – spiritual, but also sadly, legal. The church is private property, and unless you comply, your continued disruptive and intransigent behavior will prohibit your entry to and remaining on the premises.”
“Civil authorities have assured me of their readiness to enforce the law in this regard,” the priest warned the woman.
Cook County, where the parish is located, has no mandatory masking policy. The county’s public health guidelines issued in July urge, but do not demand, that “everyone should wear a cloth face cover in public settings and when around people who don’t live in your household, especially when other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain.” The county allows for exceptions to this policy for children under two and “anyone who has trouble breathing.” The Archdiocese of Chicago, where the parish is located, goes further than the county, telling the faithful in guidelines issued in May that they are “required to wear masks during any services/ceremonies.”
The Archdiocese makes it clear that it realizes that masks are often ineffective, telling parishioners that they “should understand that they assume the risk of contracting COVID-19 any time they enter a public space since such precautions do not eliminate the risk of infection.”
LifeSiteNews reached out to the Archdiocese of Chicago for comment on the priest’s action, but did not receive a response.
O’Regan, who had attended Mass daily at the parish for over 21 years, had been eager to get back after weeks of staying home and watching televised Mass during the lockdowns that forced the closure of churches.
“My heart and soul were yearning for the Eucharist,” she told LifeSiteNews in a telephone interview.
She began attending daily Mass again after her church reopened, with new protocols in place in response to COVID-19. She wore a mask when she first returned, but had it pulled down below her nose so that she could breathe more easily. She was emboldened to wear it this way when she saw other older parishioners doing the same. It was at this time that Fr. Gustafson and parish staff began to repeatedly request that she wear her mask “properly” – that is, over her nose.
The priest’s insistence motivated O’Regan to investigate for herself the effectiveness of wearing a mask to fight the virus.
— Article continues below Petition — URGENT PETITION: Tell the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade Show Petition Text 61375 have signed the petition. Let's get to 70000 ! Thank you for signing this petition! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Country... State... Sign this Petition PETITION UPDATE (9/26/2020): With President Trump's nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court left by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, we are closer than we have been in decades to seeing Roe vs. Wade overturned. We now encourage the Senate to confirm Barrett as the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Judge Barrett has a fantastic track recond on sanctity of life issues, has seven children, and is a devout believer. She is the perfect remedy for Ruth Bader Ginsburg's radical pro-abortionism. Please READ the full story here: 'BREAKING: Trump nominates Catholic mom of 7 Judge Amy Coney Barrett to Supreme Court' And then, please SIGN this petition telling the High Court that it's now time to end the activist Roe vs. Wade judgment. Thank you! __________________________________________________________________ PETITION UPDATE (6/29/2020): In a decision which has imperiled more abortion-minded women, sentenced more preborn to death, and upset pro-lifers across the nation,the United States Supreme Court decided 5-4 to strike down a Louisiana law requiring basic medical precautions in the event of abortion complications, with Chief Justice John Roberts reversing his own past decision to uphold a similar Texas law. Liberal Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the majority opinion, which held that the Louisiana law was unconstitutional for the simple fact that it was “almost word-for-word identical” to the Texas one the court already struck down in 2016. In his concurring opinion, Chief Justice Roberts acknowledged that he had “joined the dissent in Whole Woman’s Health and continue to believe that the case was wrongly decided. The question today however is not whether Whole Woman’s Health was right or wrong, but whether to adhere to it in deciding the present case.” We call on the Supreme Court to stop supporting the culture of death and overturn Roe vs Wade, now. PETITION UPDATE (1/20/2020): Hundreds of thousands of people will gather in Washington, D.C., this coming Friday, January 24th, for the March for Life. They will be praying for an end to Roe vs Wade, as the Supreme Court will hear a crucial, abortion-related case later this year in March. United our voices can change the course of history. Sign this petition TODAY! (LEARN MORE BELOW) PETITION UPDATE (1/3/2020): In advance of the Supreme Court's hearing arguments in an important abortion case later this year in March, 207 U.S. Senators and Representatives have signed amicus briefs supporting a Louisiana law requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at a hospital nearby an abortion center. Some of these supporting briefs also suggest that now is the time to reconsider Roe vs Wade as sound law. Please SIGN this petition, calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down Roe vs Wade. _____________________________________________________________________________ More than 60 million Americans have been slaughtered in their mother's wombs as a result of Roe v. Wade. This activist, unconstitutional ruling in 1973 has left countless women emotionally and psychologically scarred. It was believed by many that Roe would be overturned in 1992 with Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Despite having eight Republican-appointed judges at the time, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to uphold it. Since then, major gains have been made in the fight for life, and many lives have been saved. However, Roe v. Wade remains the law of the land, leaving millions of defenseless pre-born children vulnerable to murder. According to a 2016 study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 35% of aborted babies are African American, despite black women only making up six percent of the U.S. population. 19% of aborted babies are Hispanic. We thus again call on the court to do everything they can to end Roe vs Wade. Now is the time for pro-lifers to join together and ensure that all of God's children have a right to life. Roe v. Wade must come to an end! FOR MORE INFORMATION: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/supreme-court-strikes-down-louisiana-abortion-regulations https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/over-200-congressmen-as-us-supreme-court-to-reconsider-roe-v-wade https://www.foxnews.com/politics/congress-members-file-competing-legal-briefs-in-key-scotus-abortion-case Hide Petition Text Sign this Petition
“So I went home and started googling about these masks,” O’Regan said.
Online searches about masking to fight COVID reveal that many masks worn by the public are largely ineffective at stopping the transmission of viruses. There are also clearly documented hazards of wearing masks for long periods of time. LifeSiteNews co-founder Steve Jalsevac wrote a two-part series on masks in July where he made the case that the explosion in mandatory masking was not driven by science, but by fear (read Part I here and Part II here). John Paul Meenan wrote a piece in July where he makes the case that mandatory masking has a moral side because it hides “our identity as persons made in God’s image.”
O’Regan said that her investigation led her to conclude that mask mandates were “control tools” and “Marxist.”
“I said, ‘I’m not playing this game anymore. God made us unique and unrepeatable. Our faces are masterpieces made by God,” said O’Regan.
She then referred to the words of Catholic author and evangelist Mark Mallett, who has described the reaction to the COVID-19 outbreak as a “spiritual coup.”
Mallett wrote, “For the face is the icon of the image of God in whom we are created. In fact, the Hebrew word for face is often rendered as ‘presence’: our face is essentially the physical representation of our presence. As such, when Adam and Eve sinned, they ‘hid themselves from the face (presence) of the Lord God.’”
O’Regan also described the panic over mask-wearing as an expression of a lack of trust in God. “My trust, then, doesn’t rely on Him, it relies on me and everyone else around me. We are not in control. We can do the best we can, but you got in a car today and drove and we all know there are terrible drivers.”
O’Regan decided at this point to entirely forgo wearing a mask while attending daily Mass.
Fr. Gustafson wrote his first letter to O’Regan on Oct. 3, castigating her for not wearing a mask.
“For whatever reason you have chosen to not wear a mask while coming into church, despite our asking everyone to do so. I cannot imagine that you would politicize the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and use it as a forum for protest. I am assuming, therefore, that wearing a mask in some way offends your sense of proper religious practice,” he wrote in the letter obtained by LifeSiteNews.
“All of us can agree,” the priest continued, “that it is the smallest of inconveniences, easily undertaken, to enable your neighbors, many of whom are vulnerable, to feel safe. Failing to wear a mask is disturbing to others, and truthfully, is a moral issue. I ask you to prayerfully consider your actions in light of the Gospel’s twofold call to love and for your own spiritual wellbeing.”
O’Regan continued to attend church service without a mask. Less than two weeks after receiving the first letter, the priest threatened her with calling the police if she dared show up in church one more time without wearing a mask.
Fr. Gustafson elaborated on the situation to LifeSiteNews. He pointed out that people at his parish have come to him with concerns that people who do not wear masks put everyone else at risk.
“I’ve had a [Mass-goer] who’s a doctor, who is herself immuno-suppressed and has a sick child at home and she said, ‘How can we do this, now I can’t come anymore,’” Fr. Gustafson related.
“As in many things, especially in the moral world, there’s a question of burden and benefit; and it seems very minimally burdensome for someone to wear a mask, and a tremendous benefit for others to continue to be able to come,” he said.
When asked by LifeSiteNews whether he thought refraining from wearing a mask posed an actual physical risk to others, he replied: “The risk is people being unable to receive the sacraments and avail themselves of the spiritual goods of the church. That’s what’s at risk here. The mask-wearing is a simple response to the situation of the pandemic. I’m not doing this on science, I’m basing it on people who are telling me that they cannot participate because of someone’s behavior.”
O’Regan, by contrast, commented to LifeSiteNews, “We cannot collectively force other people to do things because it makes us feel safe. That is Marxist.”
O’Regan said that police confirmed to her that while there was no local law mandating the wearing of masks, her pastor could have her arrested or cited for trespassing on private property if she showed up to a service.
O’Regan commented, “I thought you denied people the sacraments because they’re in mortal sin. They don’t deny anyone anymore for that reason. We’re so concentrated on our physical health at this church. We could be completely dead spiritually, but that doesn’t matter, as long as everyone feels like they’re physically safe.”
The Catholic mother lamented that the church, on account of the actions of the priest, was no longer “open to all.”
LifeSiteNews asked Fr. Gustafson if his actions contravene Canon law regarding the obligation to give sacraments to faithful Catholics who are “properly disposed and are not prohibited by law from receiving them.”
When asked whether or not he thought he could reconcile his actions with Canon 843, Fr. Gustafson said, “I read that canon to say that I’m doing exactly what I need to do because otherwise, by doing nothing and her continuing to come and disrupt the Mass by not wearing a mask – she’s never been denied the Eucharist, by the way – but by my failure to do something, I’m depriving others, precisely the rest of the flock, when all she needs to do is wear a mask while she’s in the church. So it’s her behavior that’s denying the Eucharist, not mine.”
As far as her next steps are concerned, O’Regan said, “I’m letting God lead this.”
Contact information for respectful communications:
Fr. Christopher Gustafson
St. Norbert and Our Lady of the Brook Parish
1809 Walters Avenue
Northbrook, IL 60062
Ph: (847) 513-6710
Email: [email protected]
Archdiocese of Chicago
Cardinal Blase J. Cupich, Archbishop of Chicago
PO Box 1979
Chicago, IL 60690-1979
Tel: 312.534.8230
Email: Use online contact form here
Editor’s note: LifeSiteNews’ Pete Baklinski contributed to this report.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-10-27--Poll says less than half of Republicans support ‘gay marriage’

October 27 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – A poll conducted earlier this year says that a majority of Republicans are opposed to same-sex “ marriage ” and that support for matrimony defined as between one man and one woman is higher amongst those who identify as “ conservative ” within the party .
The “ 2019 American Values Atlas ” survey , published in April by the Washington D.C. based Public Religion Research Institute ( PRRI ) , which was mainly funded by pro-LGBTQ foundations .
In regards to marriage , the survey asked participants : “ do you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strongly oppose , allowing gay and lesbian couples to legally marry ?
” The poll found that overall , only 47 percent of Republicans voiced support for same-sex “ marriage.
” When it came to those who identified as conservative Republicans , only 40 percent said they approve of same-sex “ marriage.
” When it comes to Democrats , the survey found that the majority , 70 percent , reported being in favor of same-sex “ marriage.
” Amongst Independents , a total of 66 percent reported support for same-sex “ marriage.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nonprofit , nonpartisan organization dedicated to conducting independent research at the intersection of religion , culture , and public policy.
” Their survey sampled a total of 53,474 people via “ bilingual telephone interviews ” from all 50 states throughout 2019 .
Listed as funders for the “ 2019 American Values Atlas ” survey are various foundations tied to the LGBTQ community , those being the Gill Foundation , the Arcus Foundation , the E. Rhodes & Leona B. Carpenter Foundation , the Evelyn and Walter Haas , Jr. Fund , and Unitarian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The foundations individual websites show them all to be advocates for LGBTQ rights , which includes support for same-sex “ marriage.
” The survey asked a variety of questions relating to LGBTQ issues , and overall states that 72 percent of Americans “ support LGBT nondiscrimination protections ” and that a majority ( 56 percent ) oppose allowing small business owners “ to refuse services to gay and lesbian people based on their religious beliefs.
” The survey also says that support for business owners who refuse “ gay and lesbian people ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increased .
“ This landmark survey also finds some erosion in opposition to allowing business owners to refuse to serve gay and lesbian people based on their religious beliefs , ” said PRRI CEO and Founder Robert P. Jones in a press release about the poll .
The PRRI survey says that a total of 56 percent of Americans “ oppose allowing a small business owner in their state to refuse to provide products or services to gay or lesbian people , if doing so violates their religious beliefs.
” Of this amount @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent of Democrats , and 57 percent of Independents oppose allowing small business owners “ to refuse service to gay and lesbian people based on their religious beliefs.
” The survey says that amongst Americans who view President Donald Trump “ favorably , ” just under half , 48 percent , support same-sex “ marriage.
” For those that view Trump in a negative light , 74 percent say they support same-sex “ marriage.
” Broken down by faith , the survey states that those who identified as white evangelical Protestants are the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ marriage ” , with only 41 percent in support .
For those who identified as Catholics , support for same-sex “ marriage ” is in the majority .
The survey states that 63 percent of “ white Catholics ” are in favor of same-sex “ marriage , ” rising to 68 approval amongst “ Hispanic Catholics.
” Overall , the survey says that 62 percent of Americans support same-sex “ marriage ” with 33 percent being opposed , which is the same result as 2018 .
In 2017 a Gallop survey found that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that same-sex “ marriage ” should be recognized as valid , while 34 percent said that it should not be .
The PRRI survey says that overall , women ( 65 percent ) are more than likely than men ( 58 percent ) to show support for same-sex “ marriage.
” Geographically speaking , the survey states that overall , the biggest opposition to same-sex “ marriage ” comes from those who live in the south , with only 57 percent approving .
In comparison , a total of 67 percent of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 64 percent living in the Midwest approve of same-sex “ marriage ” The PRRI survey also stated that opposition to same-sex “ marriage ” has increased amongst those who live in the West .
In 2018 , 67 percent of those surveyed approved , compared to 62 percent today .
Compared to a PRRI survey done in 2011 titled “ The Millennials , Religion & Gay and Lesbian Issues Survey , ” the “ 2019 American Values Atlas ” survey suggests that support for same-sex “ marriage ” has risen overall amongst both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ v. Hodges Supreme Court decision forced all U.S. states to legally recognize same-sex “ marriage ” in a 5-4 Supreme Court vote .
At the federal political level , while President Donald Trump has a long list of pro-life accomplishments and is very supportive of religious liberty , he supports same-sex “ marriage.
” In August Trump said that it was his “ great honor ” to be called the “ the most pro-gay president in American history.
” Vice President Mike Pence on the other hand has a track record of being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In 2016 , then U.S. Vice President and current Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden famously performed his first “ wedding ” ceremony between men .
Biden says he is a Catholic , but the Catholic Church does not recognise so-called same-sex “ marriages.
” Rather the Catholic Church teaches that marriage can only be between one man and one woman and that same-sex inclination is “ objectively disordered , ” while instructing “ compassion , and sensitivity ” for those with such tendencies .
Biden has in the past said he was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ publicly flip-flopped on the issue in 2008 , and has been a staunch supporter of it ever since .

The poll found that overall, only 47 percent of Republicans voiced support for same-sex 'marriage.'
October 27, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A poll conducted earlier this year says that a majority of Republicans are opposed to same-sex “marriage” and that support for matrimony defined as between one man and one woman is higher amongst those who identify as “conservative” within the party.
The “2019 American Values Atlas” survey, published in April by the Washington D.C. based Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI), which was mainly funded by pro-LGBTQ foundations.
In regards to marriage, the survey asked participants: “do you strongly favor, favor, oppose or strongly oppose, allowing gay and lesbian couples to legally marry?”
The poll found that overall, only 47 percent of Republicans voiced support for same-sex “marriage.”
When it came to those who identified as conservative Republicans, only 40 percent said they approve of same-sex “marriage.”
When it comes to Democrats, the survey found that the majority, 70 percent, reported being in favor of same-sex “marriage.”
Amongst Independents, a total of 66 percent reported support for same-sex “marriage.”
The PRRI lists itself as a “nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to conducting independent research at the intersection of religion, culture, and public policy.”
Their survey sampled a total of 53,474 people via “bilingual telephone interviews” from all 50 states throughout 2019.
Listed as funders for the “2019 American Values Atlas” survey are various foundations tied to the LGBTQ community, those being the Gill Foundation, the Arcus Foundation, the E. Rhodes & Leona B. Carpenter Foundation, the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund, and Unitarian Universalist Veatch Program at Shelter Rock.
— Article continues below Petition — PETITION: Dump Twitter and Big Tech for threatening our democracy and freedom of speech! Show Petition Text 15628 have signed the petition. Let's get to 17500 ! Thank you for signing this petition! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Country... State... Sign this Petition Twitter just deplatformed President Trump premanently! And, other conservatives, including General Flynn and Sidney Powell, were also deplatformed. Conservatives, Christians and freedom-loving Americans of all political persuasions must now take a decision to preserve their free speech AND their ability to peaceably assemble by dumping Twitter and Big Tech, and by finding other good alternatives to communicate with each other and share their opinions. Please SIGN our petition-pledge to Dump Twitter and Big Tech, and take back your freedom of speech and privacy. [CLICK HERE for our "Goodbye Google" resources page to find good alternatives to Google!] When you use Twitter or Facebook to communicate, or Google to search for something online, these companies can stifle your ability to share your thoughts and opinions and manipulate your search results, threatening your privacy, your freedom of speech, and even our democracy. Evidence suggests that Twitter and Facebook's 'community guidelines' are selectively enforced against conservatives and Christians, while Google rigs their search algorithms to direct traffic away from conservative and Christian websites, effectively choking traffic to those sites. Simply put, Twitter, Facebook and Google (who owns YouTube) appear to be actively suppressing access to pro-freedom, pro-family and pro-life news and opinion. Don't contribute to this assault on democracy: Stop using Twitter, Facebook and Google as your default social media platforms and search engine! [CLICK HERE to find a good alternative to Google.] To repeat: a few liberal and completely unaccountable computer programmers in Silicon Valley are dictating what we do and do not see in our Twitter and Facebook feeds, and in our Google searches. We, here, at LifeSite, also recently had our Twitter account suspended by the company over "misgendering" a man who claims to be a woman. LifeSite has also experienced a fall-off in Google search-related traffic since the company updated its search algorithms at the beginning of May. And, since the November election, Twitter and Big Tech appear to have dramatically INCREASED their censorship of conservatives and Christians as the President Trump disputed the results of the election and when evidence of election fraud began to mount. Now, it seems likely that they are trying to cut-off conservative leaders (like President Trump) from conservatives on the ground, and effectively exclude us from the national conversation. But, this tactic will not work. Because Twitter, Facebook and Google are not the only game in town! There are a good number of excellent alternatives which we list in our 'Goodbye Google' Resources page. The great irony is that, while Twitter, Facebook and Google executives talk a lot about maintaining freedom of speech and diversity, in fact, these hypocrites are ATTACKING free speech point-blank! This kind of manipulation poses a lethal threat to our democracy, but as we see so clearly now, Twitter and Big Tech have shown no hesitation in excluding conservatives and Christians from the public square. So, at this point, the only way to stop Twitter, Facebook and Google is to quit using their platform. Please SIGN and SHARE this petition to pledge to stop using Twitter and Big Tech. Then, please CLICK HERE to find alternative search engines and social media platforms. Thank you! FOR MORE INFORMATION: Ready to say "Goodbye Google"? Find alternatives for search engines, browsers, email, and more: https://lifesite.kartra.com/page/gbgresources 'BREAKING: Twitter permanently bans President Trump from platform' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/breaking-twitter-permanently-bans-president-trump-from-platform WATCH LifeSite's exclusive series - 'Big Tech vs Free Speech' - of interviews with experts on how Big Tech censorship is killing free speech: https://www.lifesitenews.com/bigtech/ From YouTube to social media and beyond, online censorship is rampant. Read the latest articles covering this ongoing struggle: https://lifesite.kartra.com/page/censorship Hide Petition Text Sign this Petition
The foundations individual websites show them all to be advocates for LGBTQ rights, which includes support for same-sex “marriage.”
The survey asked a variety of questions relating to LGBTQ issues, and overall states that 72 percent of Americans “support LGBT nondiscrimination protections” and that a majority (56 percent) oppose allowing small business owners “to refuse services to gay and lesbian people based on their religious beliefs.”
The survey also says that support for business owners who refuse “gay and lesbian people” service because of their faith, has increased.
“This landmark survey also finds some erosion in opposition to allowing business owners to refuse to serve gay and lesbian people based on their religious beliefs,” said PRRI CEO and Founder Robert P. Jones in a press release about the poll.
The PRRI survey says that a total of 56 percent of Americans “oppose allowing a small business owner in their state to refuse to provide products or services to gay or lesbian people, if doing so violates their religious beliefs.”
Of this amount, 39 percent of Republicans, 70 percent of Democrats, and 57 percent of Independents oppose allowing small business owners “to refuse service to gay and lesbian people based on their religious beliefs.”
The survey says that amongst Americans who view President Donald Trump “favorably,” just under half, 48 percent, support same-sex “marriage.”
For those that view Trump in a negative light, 74 percent say they support same-sex “marriage.”
Broken down by faith, the survey states that those who identified as white evangelical Protestants are the biggest religious group who oppose same-sex “marriage”, with only 41 percent in support.
For those who identified as Catholics, support for same-sex “marriage” is in the majority.
The survey states that 63 percent of “white Catholics” are in favor of same-sex “marriage,” rising to 68 approval amongst “Hispanic Catholics.”
Overall, the survey says that 62 percent of Americans support same-sex “marriage” with 33 percent being opposed, which is the same result as 2018.
In 2017 a Gallop survey found that 64 percent of those who were surveyed said that same-sex “marriage” should be recognized as valid, while 34 percent said that it should not be.
The PRRI survey says that overall, women (65 percent) are more than likely than men (58 percent) to show support for same-sex “marriage.”
Geographically speaking, the survey states that overall, the biggest opposition to same-sex “marriage” comes from those who live in the south, with only 57 percent approving.
In comparison, a total of 67 percent of those who live in the Northeast and 64 percent living in the Midwest approve of same-sex “marriage”
The PRRI survey also stated that opposition to same-sex “marriage” has increased amongst those who live in the West. In 2018, 67 percent of those surveyed approved, compared to 62 percent today.
Compared to a PRRI survey done in 2011 titled “The Millennials, Religion & Gay and Lesbian Issues Survey,” the “2019 American Values Atlas” survey suggests that support for same-sex “marriage” has risen overall amongst both Republicans and Democrats.
The 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court decision forced all U.S. states to legally recognize same-sex “marriage” in a 5-4 Supreme Court vote.
At the federal political level, while President Donald Trump has a long list of pro-life accomplishments and is very supportive of religious liberty, he supports same-sex “marriage.” In August Trump said that it was his “great honor” to be called the “the most pro-gay president in American history.”
Vice President Mike Pence on the other hand has a track record of being a strong social conservative on marriage issues.
In 2016, then U.S. Vice President and current Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden famously performed his first “wedding” ceremony between men.
Biden says he is a Catholic, but the Catholic Church does not recognise so-called same-sex “marriages.” Rather the Catholic Church teaches that marriage can only be between one man and one woman and that same-sex inclination is “objectively disordered,” while instructing “compassion, and sensitivity” for those with such tendencies.
Biden has in the past said he was opposed to same-sex “marriage” but publicly flip-flopped on the issue in 2008, and has been a staunch supporter of it ever since.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-10-27--Proof that Pope Francis’ comments approving of gay civil unions were translated accurately

October 27 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – As you ’ re probably aware , there ’ s a lot of controversy surrounding the recently revealed statements from Pope Francis expressing his support for same-sex civil unions .
I wanted to do a quick fact-check on Catholic commentators who are stating that the media has misrepresented the Pope and that the original Spanish meaning was lost in translation .
One Catholic priest in particular , EWTN ’ s Fr .
Agustino Torres , has released a video that has around 170,000 views arguing this very point .
Watch it here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a lawyer , I ’ m afraid that the good friar is mistaken in his arguments .
Yes , the Pope uses the term `` convivencia civil , ” which , if translated literally , would mean , `` civil coexistence.
” The problem with this interpretation is that it ignores the crucial fact that the Pope was referring to statements he made as Cardinal of Buenos Aires , during the debate on same-sex “ marriage ” and homosexual civil unions in Argentina .
In 2002 , after Bergoglio was installed as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ passed a local law legalizing same-sex civil unions .
This was followed by other local jurisdictions around Argentina .
Eventually , in 2008 , same-sex civil unions were adopted nationally by the government .
As always happens , same-sex civil unions opened the door to same-sex “ marriage ” and by 2010 , Argentina had adopted same-sex “ marriage.
” The key thing to understand here is that in Argentina , same-sex civil unions are referred to as `` uniones convivenciales . ''
In daily usage , the pope ’ s words “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ uniones convivenciales . ''
The former is singular , the latter plural .
This is even more clear when you consider that the context the Pope is speaking of is of forming a family unit .
Thus , although he did n't use the word `` uniones , '' it would be nonsensical to interpret it in any other way .
A `` ley de convivencia civil '' is a law for homosexual `` families '' to be recognized by law , which is precisely what a homosexual civil union , or a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
There is no wiggle room here .
Undoubtedly , there are times when the Pope has spoken in an ambiguous way that might have been purposefully misunderstood by the media .
But in this case , there is no doubt what the Pope meant was that he has supported and supports same-sex civil unions .
I am sorry , Fr .
Agustino .
I , like you , want to believe that the Holy Father would not go against the direct and consistent teaching of the Church , but , in this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact .
As a native Spanish speaker and as a lawyer , I assure you that there is simply no wiggle room for us to justify the Pope 's statement as anything other than a contradiction to the teaching and tradition of the Catholic Church when it comes to homosexuality .

Remarks attributed to Pope Francis (and, not denied by the Vatican) in support of homosexual civil unions have caused grave scandal to the faithful.
Please SIGN this urgent petition which asks Pope Francis to clarify and rectify these heterodox and scandalous remarks on homosexual civil unions, and which will be delivered both to the Vatican and to the Papal Nuncio of the United States (the Pope's official representative in the U.S.).
As the last guarantor of the Faith, the Pope should clarify and rectify these remarks, which go against the perennial teaching of the Church, even including the teaching of his living predecessor, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.
"What we have to create is a law of civil coexistence [meaning civil union law, for homosexuals]...," Pope Francis is reported to have remarked, in what is arguably his clearest statement of public support for a practice morally prohibited by official Catholic Church teaching.
In fact, the Church has been crystal clear in Her opposition to homosexual unions.
Just in 2003, Pope Saint John Paul II approved a document from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, titled 'Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons' and written by Cardinal Ratzinger (now, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI), which concludes with the following:
"The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions. The common good requires that laws recognize, promote and protect marriage as the basis of the family, the primary unit of society. Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean not only the approval of deviant behaviour, with the consequence of making it a model in present-day society, but would also obscure basic values which belong to the common inheritance of humanity. The Church cannot fail to defend these values, for the good of men and women and for the good of society itself."
It could not be more clear: the Church is calling people to repentance, not to be left to indulge in grave sin.
Since becoming public, several senior prelates as well as other notable Catholic figures have voiced their opposition to these remarks attributed to the Pontiff.
Cardinal Raymond Burke stated: "It is a source of deepest sadness and pressing pastoral concern that the private opinions reported with so much emphasis by the press and attributed to Pope Francis do not correspond to the constant teaching of the Church, as it is expressed in Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition."
Cardinal Gerhard Müller commented: "Where there is tension between the plain and obvious Word of God and the infallible interpretation on the one hand, and private expressions of opinion even by the highest church authorities on the other, the principle always applies: in dubio pro DEO [When in doubt, be in favor of God]."
And, Catholic theologian and apologist Scott Hahn, without directly quoting Pope Francis, shared on Facebook the 'Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons,' published by the CDF in 1986, with the statement: "Holy Father, respectfully and humbly, I beg to differ... if that is indeed what you said. In any case, please clarify and rectify your statement, especially in view of the official teaching of our Lord through the magisterium of His Church."
But, the silence from the Vatican has been deafening, with no clarification forthcoming.
We must, therefore, ask the Pope for clarification in this serious matter.
Please SIGN and SHARE this petition which asks Pope Francis to clarify and rectify remarks attributed to him in support of homosexual civil unions.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
'Cdl. Burke: Pope’s homosexual civil union remarks ‘contrary’ to Scripture, Tradition' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/cardinal-burke-on-popes-homosexual-civil-union-remarks-contrary-to-the-teaching-of-sacred-scripture-and-sacred-tradition
'Cardinal says Catholics ‘can and should’ disagree with Pope’s ‘opinion’ on gay civil unions' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/cdl.mueller-popes-words-on-gay-civil-unions-purely-private-expression-of-opinion-which-every-catholic-can-and-should-freely-contradict
'Archbishop Vigano, Bishops Tobin and Strickland respond to Pope’s approval of homosexual civil unions' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/archbishop-vigano-and-bishops-tobin-strickland-respond-to-popes-approval-of-homosexual-civil-unions
'Pope’s comments on gay civil unions cause shockwaves around the world' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/deepest-sadness-cardinal-burke-condemns-pope-franciss-remarks-supporting-civil-unions


lifesitenews--2020-10-27--BREAKING: Audio of Hunter Biden confirms relationship with ‘spy chief of China’

October 26 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – New audio of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden ’ s son Hunter Biden has emerged , in which the younger Biden appears to confirm some degree of relationship between himself and a disgraced Chinese businessman he describes as the “ spy chief of China.
” The audio , released by The National Pulse , consists of Hunter apparently venting about unwanted scrutiny coming his way from numerous sources , among them a New York Times reporter “ calling about my representation of Patrick Ho — the f***ing spy chief of China who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who is worth $ 323 billion , founded and is now missing .
The richest man in the world is missing who was my partner .
He was missing since I last saw him in his $ 58 million apartment inside a $ 4 billion deal to build the f***ing largest f***ing LNG port in the world.
” Ho is the former Hong Kong Secretary for Home Affairs who went on to become a lobbyist and eventually vice-chairman of CEFC China Energy Co. , and was later arrested and convicted of bribery and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
CEFC is the firm which , according to recently-unearthed emails , agreed to pay Hunter $ 30 million over three years to arrange meetings with the former Vice President of the United States .
The missing business partner Hunter references is Ye Jianming , who disappeared in 2018 after being charged with bribing foreign government officials .
The audio further corroborates the authenticity of the laptop and its contents , first revealed earlier this month , which appear to detail how the Biden family made millions of dollars via Biden ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lieutenant and former Hunter business partner Tony Bobulinski publicly announced that the email exchanges he was a part of are authentic , and that the elder Biden was aware of his son ’ s activities .
With Joe Biden days away from either winning or losing his bid to unseat President Donald Trump , both traditional and social media have worked hard to suppress the story .

Joe Biden’s son appears to confirm some degree of relationship between himself and a disgraced Chinese businessman he describes as the ‘spy chief of China.’
October 26, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – New audio of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden has emerged, in which the younger Biden appears to confirm some degree of relationship between himself and a disgraced Chinese businessman he describes as the “spy chief of China.”
The audio, released by The National Pulse, consists of Hunter apparently venting about unwanted scrutiny coming his way from numerous sources, among them a New York Times reporter “calling about my representation of Patrick Ho — the f***ing spy chief of China who started the company that my partner, who is worth $323 billion, founded and is now missing. The richest man in the world is missing who was my partner. He was missing since I last saw him in his $58 million apartment inside a $4 billion deal to build the f***ing largest f***ing LNG port in the world.”
��EXCLUSIVE #HUNTERBIDEN AUDIO�� “I have a NYT reporter calling about my representation of Patrick Ho – the f***ing spy chief of #China who started the company that my partner, who is worth $323B, founded…”@RaheemKassam #SteveBannon #WarRoomPandemic pic.twitter.com/dYflqud5nV — Steve Bannon’s War Room (@WarRoomPandemic) October 27, 2020
Ho is the former Hong Kong Secretary for Home Affairs who went on to become a lobbyist and eventually vice-chairman of CEFC China Energy Co., and was later arrested and convicted of bribery and money laundering charges in the United States.
CEFC is the firm which, according to recently-unearthed emails, agreed to pay Hunter $30 million over three years to arrange meetings with the former Vice President of the United States. The missing business partner Hunter references is Ye Jianming, who disappeared in 2018 after being charged with bribing foreign government officials.
The audio further corroborates the authenticity of the laptop and its contents, first revealed earlier this month, which appear to detail how the Biden family made millions of dollars via Biden’s office.
— Article continues below Petition — Attorney General Barr: Investigate the Biden Family affair now! Show Petition Text 38585 have signed the petition. Let's get to 40000 ! Thank you for signing this petition! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Country... State... Sign this Petition Please SIGN and SHARE this petition which calls on the U.S. Attorney General, William Barr, to investigate the allegations of corruption and influence-peddling against former Vice President Joe Biden. In an interview on Fox News, just this morning, the President stated: "This is major corruption and this has to be known about before the election." If proven true, these outrageous allegations against Biden could have massive implications for national security! Americans do not want a president who will sell out his country to the highest bidder in order to enrich his family or save them from prosecution. This scandal began last week when the New York Post dropped a bombshell story alleging that then Vice President Biden pressured Ukrainian authorities to fire a prosecutor who was investigating a company with ties to the Biden Family. And, in another expose by the NY Post, also last week, the Biden Family is alleged to have improperly profited from deals made with one of the largest Chinese energy companies because of Vice President Biden's position in government. Please SIGN our petition to support President Trump calling on the Attorney General to launch an investigation with all due haste. The American public deserves to know the truth about Joe Biden and his involvement, if any, in this apparent influence-peddling scandal. Serious questions need to be answered with all urgency! Please SIGN and SHARE this petition which urges William Barr, the U.S. Attorney General, to immediately initiate an inquiry into the alleged corruption scandal involving the Biden Family. FOR MORE INFORMATION: 'China has bought and paid for Joe Biden and his entire family' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/china-has-bought-and-paid-for-joe-biden-and-his-entire-family 'Smoking-gun email reveals how Hunter Biden introduced Ukrainian businessman to VP dad' - https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden-introduced-ukrainian-biz-man-to-dad 'Emails reveal how Hunter Biden tried to cash in big on behalf of family with Chinese firm' - https://nypost.com/2020/10/15/emails-reveal-how-hunter-biden-tried-to-cash-in-big-with-chinese-firm **Photo Credit: Joe Raedle / Getty Images News Hide Petition Text Sign this Petition
Last week, retired Navy lieutenant and former Hunter business partner Tony Bobulinski publicly announced that the email exchanges he was a part of are authentic, and that the elder Biden was aware of his son’s activities. With Joe Biden days away from either winning or losing his bid to unseat President Donald Trump, both traditional and social media have worked hard to suppress the story.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-10-27--When 100 percent of the Democrats vote against Amy Coney Barrett

October 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — What should we think when every single Democrat voted against the Supreme Court nomination of Amy Coney Barrett ?
What does this say about their convictions and ideology ?
There were actually three Democrats who voted to confirm Neil Gorsuch in 2017 ( Donnelly , Heitkamp , and Manchin ) .
Even Brett Kavanaugh received one Democratic vote in 2018 ( again , Manchin ) .
But when it came to Barrett , not one Democrat voted for her .
Not one .
This happened despite her receiving a “ ‘ Well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Association ( ABA ) whose representatives relayed descriptions of her as ‘ brilliant ’ and an ‘ intellectual giant.
’ ” And this happened despite there being no allegations of sexual impropriety to dog her , as with the attacks on Kavanaugh .
No , this was a simple rejection of Barrett as a conservative jurist who might one day vote to overturn Roe .
v. Wade .
For some , this was a simple rejection of a God-fearing , devout Catholic serving on the highest court in the land .
Danger !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president and Senate are of the same party , they have consistently voted to appoint new Supreme Court justices during election years .
So , this was hardly an unprecedented move .
And , while some senators might honestly believe that Barrett would vote to deprive millions of Americans of healthcare , I would dare say that , for others , this was simply a political talking point .
No , the stark reality is that , on this historic day , when a highly-qualified woman was appointed to take the place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not a single Democrat could be found to vote for her .
Let the record be remembered for posterity .
Gone are the days when someone like Justice Ginsburg could be confirmed by a vote of 96-3 .
Or Justice Antonin Scalia by a vote of 98-0 .
Obviously , there was much more bipartisanship on both sides in the past .
But , reviewing the voting of the last 40 years , it ’ s clear that it is the Democrats who have dug in their heels against conservative justices rather than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( I ’ m talking about actual votes , not refusing to nominate a new judge during a divided election year . )
During the Reagan years , Sandra Day O ’ Connor was confirmed 99-0 , William H. Rehnquist was confirmed 65-33 , and Anthony M. Kennedy 97-0 .
As for Robert Bork , he was infamously rejected ( “ borked , ” to be precise ) , by a vote of 42-58 .
( As Frank Turek recently pointed out , had Bork , not Kennedy , been appointed to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been overturned in 1992 . )
Under George H. W. Bush , David H. Souter was confirmed 90-9 , while Clarence H. Thomas , after a tumultuous hearing , barely made it by a vote of 52-48 .
The pattern is crystal clear .
Both of Bill Clinton ’ s nominees were confirmed with ease .
Ginsburg , as mentioned , by a vote of 96-3 ( despite being famously progressive ) and Stephen G. Breyer by a vote of 87-9 .
Under George W. Bush , John G. Roberts was confirmed 78-22 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a much tougher battle , getting in by a vote of 58-42 .
Under Barack Obama , and in a time of deep political divide , his two nominees were still confirmed with relative ease , Sonia Sotomayor by a vote of 68-31 and Elena Kagan by a vote of 63-37 .
And did anyone really wonder how these new justices would rule ?
It is true that the Republicans stifled Obama ’ s attempts to appoint Merrick B. Garland to the court .
But , as mentioned , that has happened before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the Senate were controlled by different parties .
But , when it comes to overall voting patterns , despite the known liberal proclivities of the Democratic nominees , the Republicans have focused more on the legal suitability of the nominee rather than the ideology of the nominee .
Thus , there is no Republican parallel to the voting tallies for the three justices nominated by President Donald Trump : Gorsuch , 54-45 ; Kavanaugh , 50-48 ; Barrett , 52-48 .
Neither is there a parallel to the borking of the great @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vicious attacks and then narrow confirmation of Clarence Thomas .
I ’ m quite aware that both political parties are flawed and that the political system itself is marred by greed , lust for power , backroom deals , and corruption .
I ’ m also sure that different constituents can point to different strengths and weaknesses within each party .
Surely , the Republicans are not all good and the Democrats all evil .
Not a chance .
But when it comes to some of the greatest issues of our day , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ freedoms , on the definition of marriage , and on the sanctity of life , the Democrats have been making their positions clear .
Now , they have spoken with one voice in their unanimous opposition to Justice Amy Coney Barrett .
As summed up in the words of “ nay ” voting Democrat Mazie Hirono , “ hell no.
” Let the record , and these words , be remembered for posterity .
And let the record , and these words , be remembered on November 3 .

Unlike Trump nominees Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, and in spite of her qualifications, Barrett didn’t get a single Democratic vote in the Senate.
October 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — What should we think when every single Democrat voted against the Supreme Court nomination of Amy Coney Barrett? What does this say about their convictions and ideology?
There were actually three Democrats who voted to confirm Neil Gorsuch in 2017 (Donnelly, Heitkamp, and Manchin). Even Brett Kavanaugh received one Democratic vote in 2018 (again, Manchin).
But when it came to Barrett, not one Democrat voted for her. Not one.
This happened despite her receiving a “‘Well Qualified’ rating from the American Bar Association (ABA) whose representatives relayed descriptions of her as ‘brilliant’ and an ‘intellectual giant.’”
And this happened despite there being no allegations of sexual impropriety to dog her, as with the attacks on Kavanaugh.
No, this was a simple rejection of Barrett as a conservative jurist who might one day vote to overturn Roe. v. Wade. For some, this was a simple rejection of a God-fearing, devout Catholic serving on the highest court in the land. Danger!
The senators should know that, when the president and Senate are of the same party, they have consistently voted to appoint new Supreme Court justices during election years. So, this was hardly an unprecedented move.
And, while some senators might honestly believe that Barrett would vote to deprive millions of Americans of healthcare, I would dare say that, for others, this was simply a political talking point.
No, the stark reality is that, on this historic day, when a highly-qualified woman was appointed to take the place of the iconic Ruth Bader Ginsburg, not a single Democrat could be found to vote for her.
Let the record be remembered for posterity.
— Article continues below Petition — URGENT PETITION: Tell the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade Show Petition Text 61375 have signed the petition. Let's get to 70000 ! Thank you for signing this petition! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Country... State... Sign this Petition PETITION UPDATE (9/26/2020): With President Trump's nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court left by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, we are closer than we have been in decades to seeing Roe vs. Wade overturned. We now encourage the Senate to confirm Barrett as the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Judge Barrett has a fantastic track recond on sanctity of life issues, has seven children, and is a devout believer. She is the perfect remedy for Ruth Bader Ginsburg's radical pro-abortionism. Please READ the full story here: 'BREAKING: Trump nominates Catholic mom of 7 Judge Amy Coney Barrett to Supreme Court' And then, please SIGN this petition telling the High Court that it's now time to end the activist Roe vs. Wade judgment. Thank you! __________________________________________________________________ PETITION UPDATE (6/29/2020): In a decision which has imperiled more abortion-minded women, sentenced more preborn to death, and upset pro-lifers across the nation,the United States Supreme Court decided 5-4 to strike down a Louisiana law requiring basic medical precautions in the event of abortion complications, with Chief Justice John Roberts reversing his own past decision to uphold a similar Texas law. Liberal Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the majority opinion, which held that the Louisiana law was unconstitutional for the simple fact that it was “almost word-for-word identical” to the Texas one the court already struck down in 2016. In his concurring opinion, Chief Justice Roberts acknowledged that he had “joined the dissent in Whole Woman’s Health and continue to believe that the case was wrongly decided. The question today however is not whether Whole Woman’s Health was right or wrong, but whether to adhere to it in deciding the present case.” We call on the Supreme Court to stop supporting the culture of death and overturn Roe vs Wade, now. PETITION UPDATE (1/20/2020): Hundreds of thousands of people will gather in Washington, D.C., this coming Friday, January 24th, for the March for Life. They will be praying for an end to Roe vs Wade, as the Supreme Court will hear a crucial, abortion-related case later this year in March. United our voices can change the course of history. Sign this petition TODAY! (LEARN MORE BELOW) PETITION UPDATE (1/3/2020): In advance of the Supreme Court's hearing arguments in an important abortion case later this year in March, 207 U.S. Senators and Representatives have signed amicus briefs supporting a Louisiana law requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at a hospital nearby an abortion center. Some of these supporting briefs also suggest that now is the time to reconsider Roe vs Wade as sound law. Please SIGN this petition, calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down Roe vs Wade. _____________________________________________________________________________ More than 60 million Americans have been slaughtered in their mother's wombs as a result of Roe v. Wade. This activist, unconstitutional ruling in 1973 has left countless women emotionally and psychologically scarred. It was believed by many that Roe would be overturned in 1992 with Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Despite having eight Republican-appointed judges at the time, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to uphold it. Since then, major gains have been made in the fight for life, and many lives have been saved. However, Roe v. Wade remains the law of the land, leaving millions of defenseless pre-born children vulnerable to murder. According to a 2016 study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 35% of aborted babies are African American, despite black women only making up six percent of the U.S. population. 19% of aborted babies are Hispanic. We thus again call on the court to do everything they can to end Roe vs Wade. Now is the time for pro-lifers to join together and ensure that all of God's children have a right to life. Roe v. Wade must come to an end! FOR MORE INFORMATION: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/supreme-court-strikes-down-louisiana-abortion-regulations https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/over-200-congressmen-as-us-supreme-court-to-reconsider-roe-v-wade https://www.foxnews.com/politics/congress-members-file-competing-legal-briefs-in-key-scotus-abortion-case Hide Petition Text Sign this Petition
Gone are the days when someone like Justice Ginsburg could be confirmed by a vote of 96-3. Or Justice Antonin Scalia by a vote of 98-0. Obviously, there was much more bipartisanship on both sides in the past.
But, reviewing the voting of the last 40 years, it’s clear that it is the Democrats who have dug in their heels against conservative justices rather than Republicans doing the same with liberals. (I’m talking about actual votes, not refusing to nominate a new judge during a divided election year.)
During the Reagan years, Sandra Day O’Connor was confirmed 99-0, William H. Rehnquist was confirmed 65-33, and Anthony M. Kennedy 97-0.
As for Robert Bork, he was infamously rejected (“borked,” to be precise), by a vote of 42-58. (As Frank Turek recently pointed out, had Bork, not Kennedy, been appointed to the court, Roe v. Wade might have been overturned in 1992.)
Under George H. W. Bush, David H. Souter was confirmed 90-9, while Clarence H. Thomas, after a tumultuous hearing, barely made it by a vote of 52-48. The pattern is crystal clear.
Both of Bill Clinton’s nominees were confirmed with ease. Ginsburg, as mentioned, by a vote of 96-3 (despite being famously progressive) and Stephen G. Breyer by a vote of 87-9.
Under George W. Bush, John G. Roberts was confirmed 78-22 while the more conservative Samuel Alito had a much tougher battle, getting in by a vote of 58-42.
Under Barack Obama, and in a time of deep political divide, his two nominees were still confirmed with relative ease, Sonia Sotomayor by a vote of 68-31 and Elena Kagan by a vote of 63-37. And did anyone really wonder how these new justices would rule?
It is true that the Republicans stifled Obama’s attempts to appoint Merrick B. Garland to the court. But, as mentioned, that has happened before during election years when the White House and the Senate were controlled by different parties.
But, when it comes to overall voting patterns, despite the known liberal proclivities of the Democratic nominees, the Republicans have focused more on the legal suitability of the nominee rather than the ideology of the nominee.
Thus, there is no Republican parallel to the voting tallies for the three justices nominated by President Donald Trump: Gorsuch, 54-45; Kavanaugh, 50-48; Barrett, 52-48.
Neither is there a parallel to the borking of the great legal scholar Robert Bork nor to the vicious attacks and then narrow confirmation of Clarence Thomas.
I’m quite aware that both political parties are flawed and that the political system itself is marred by greed, lust for power, backroom deals, and corruption.
I’m also sure that different constituents can point to different strengths and weaknesses within each party.
Surely, the Republicans are not all good and the Democrats all evil. Not a chance.
But when it comes to some of the greatest issues of our day, issues that touch on our most fundamental freedoms, on the definition of marriage, and on the sanctity of life, the Democrats have been making their positions clear.
Now, they have spoken with one voice in their unanimous opposition to Justice Amy Coney Barrett. As summed up in the words of “nay” voting Democrat Mazie Hirono, “hell no.”
Let the record, and these words, be remembered for posterity.
And let the record, and these words, be remembered on November 3.
The Democrats have spoken.
Follow Michael Dr. Brown is the author of more than 35 books, including Our Hands Are Stained with Blood: The Tragic Story of the “Church” and the Jewish People, which has been translated into more than twelve languages, the highly acclaimed five-volume series, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, a commentary on Jeremiah (part of the revised edition of the Expositor’s Bible Commentary), and several books on revival and the Jesus revolution. His most recent book is Evangelicals at the Crossroads: Will We Pass the Trump Test?
Share


lifesitenews--2020-10-27--WATCH: Trump officials discuss importance of religious freedom

October 27 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — In 1998 , the U.S. Congress passed the International Religious Freedom Act , thereby establishing America ’ s commitment to religious liberty at home and abroad .
Today marks the 22rd anniversary of International Religious Freedom Day .
To celebrate that occasion , several officials in the Trump administration are holding a virtual discussion on the critical importance of ensuring religious liberty is upheld for all Americans .
At 1 pm ET , Roger Severino , Claire Murray , Sam Brownback , Andrew Bremberg , and Kristina Arriaga will host an online @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Age of COVID-19 and Beyond.
” You can watch it below or visit the website of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ( HHS ) by clicking here .
Severino is the Director of the Office for Civil Rights at HHS .
Murray is the acting Associate Attorney General in the Department of Justice .
Brownback is the U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom .
Bremberg is an international diplomat .
And Arriaga is a member of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom .
Religious liberty has been under assault @ @ @ @ @ @ @ established the infamous “ contraception mandate ” that forced groups like the Little Sisters of the Poor to provide abortion-inducing drugs to their employees .
Liberals have since argued that religious liberty doesn ’ t mean having the right to “ discriminate ” against others , and that while Americans may have a “ right to worship ” they can ’ t use that right to “ impose ” their beliefs on others .
The issue has taken on a heightened importance during the 2020 election season .
Joe Biden and his running @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Supreme Court ’ s ruling in favor of the Little Sisters of the Poor a step backwards for women .
Both have also pledged to support the pro-LGBT “ Equality Act , ” a bill that would threaten the freedom of Christians who teach the Biblical view of human sexuality .
Additionally , many Democratic governors have forced churches and other religious organizations to shut down during the pandemic or else face harsh fines and penalties .
President Trump , on the other hand , has defended the Little Sisters of the Poor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 , and has repeatedly spoken of the importance of imploring the help of God , even inviting pastors into the Oval Office to pray on multiple occasions .

At 1 pm ET, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is hosting an online conference titled, ‘Religious Freedom in the Age of COVID-19 and Beyond.’
October 27, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — In 1998, the U.S. Congress passed the International Religious Freedom Act, thereby establishing America’s commitment to religious liberty at home and abroad.
Today marks the 22rd anniversary of International Religious Freedom Day. To celebrate that occasion, several officials in the Trump administration are holding a virtual discussion on the critical importance of ensuring religious liberty is upheld for all Americans.
At 1 pm ET, Roger Severino, Claire Murray, Sam Brownback, Andrew Bremberg, and Kristina Arriaga will host an online conference titled “Religious Freedom in the Age of COVID-19 and Beyond.” You can watch it below or visit the website of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) by clicking here.
Severino is the Director of the Office for Civil Rights at HHS. Murray is the acting Associate Attorney General in the Department of Justice. Brownback is the U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom. Bremberg is an international diplomat. And Arriaga is a member of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.
Religious liberty has been under assault ever since President Obama’s HHS established the infamous “contraception mandate” that forced groups like the Little Sisters of the Poor to provide abortion-inducing drugs to their employees.
Liberals have since argued that religious liberty doesn’t mean having the right to “discriminate” against others, and that while Americans may have a “right to worship” they can’t use that right to “impose” their beliefs on others.
The issue has taken on a heightened importance during the 2020 election season. Joe Biden and his running mate Kamala Harris have both called the Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of the Little Sisters of the Poor a step backwards for women. Both have also pledged to support the pro-LGBT “Equality Act,” a bill that would threaten the freedom of Christians who teach the Biblical view of human sexuality. Additionally, many Democratic governors have forced churches and other religious organizations to shut down during the pandemic or else face harsh fines and penalties.
President Trump, on the other hand, has defended the Little Sisters of the Poor, deemed churches “essential” during COVID-19, and has repeatedly spoken of the importance of imploring the help of God, even inviting pastors into the Oval Office to pray on multiple occasions.
Share