lifesitenews--2020-04-30--Pro-life investigators ordered to pay $1.5 million in Planned Parenthood baby parts case

SAN FRANCISCO , California , April 30 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – A judge in San Francisco has ruled that the pro-life defendants in the Planned Parenthood Federation of America v. Center for Medical Progress case – popularly known as the “ baby body parts case ” – must pay Planned Parenthood over $ 1.5 million , not including attorney fees which will likely add millions more to what they owe the abortion-committing behemoth .
In November , after the six-week courtroom drama presided over by United States District Judge William H. Orrick concluded , a jury took less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Medical Progress ( CMP ) and its undercover investigators guilty of multiple crimes , including violating the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations ( RICO ) Act , wiretapping , and engaging in civil conspiracy .
The roster of those found liable reads like a who ’ s who of pro-life all stars : Troy Newman , longtime pro-life activist and president of Operation Rescue ; David Daleiden , project lead of CMP who became the face of the investigation ; Sandra Merritt ; Albin Rhomberg ; and Gerardo Adrian Lopez .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ severally liable ” for the $ 1,555,084 judgment .
“ It is no longer in dispute that Planned Parenthood sold aborted baby parts for profit and that our video evidence was authentic .
They admitted it during our trial , ” Newman said in a just-released statement .
Newman served as a founding board member of CMP during the undercover investigation .
“ I believe when the full truth is finally told – and it wasn ’ t at our trial – we will all be exonerated , and it will be Planned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their crimes in a court of law , ” said Newman .
“ I look forward to that day.
” In 2015 , CMP released videos exposing Planned Parenthood ’ s apparently illegal trade in aborted baby body parts after a 30-month undercover operation .
The groundbreaking videos showed top-level Planned Parenthood executives haggling over prices of aborted baby body parts and discussing how to change abortion procedures to obtain more intact organs .
The videos sparked public outrage , congressional and senate hearings , and an ongoing Department of Justice criminal investigation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ those who practice , advocate for , and profit from unthinkably cruel and barbaric acts on the tiniest of humans against a few individuals who had the tenacity , courage , resourcefulness , and faith to walk into the heart of darkness to expose trafficking in the brains , hearts , livers , lungs , and limbs of pre-born babies , ” said LifeSiteNews ’ Lianne Laurence , who travelled to San Francisco last fall to cover the civil trial .
In her analysis of the proceedings , Laurence explained : The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ overestimated .
This lawsuit is Planned Parenthood ’ s desperate attempt to permanently discredit the undercover videos the Center for Medical Progress released in 2015 that exposed its part in trafficking baby body parts .
The casual brutality of abortionists discussing crushing unborn babies and haggling over the price of fetal organs shocked the world and Planned Parenthood wants to convey that those who exposed them – not their giant abortion corporation – are in the wrong .
It ’ s also a retaliatory action : Planned Parenthood wants to to crush the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them .
The plaintiffs allege CMP ’ s project lead David Daleiden , undercover journalists Sandra Merritt and Geraldo Adrian Lopez , and founding board members Troy Newman and Albin Rhomberg , committed 15 crimes while carrying out the undercover video project , ranging from breach of contract to racketeering .
They claim CMP is liable for paying for everything Planned Parenthood ’ s personnel bought , such as security upgrades and staff counselling hotlines , after they realized they ’ d been recorded .
The defendants named in the judgment are : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and ran the undercover sting operation and is the high-profile , public face of CMP .
• Troy Newman , 54 , a veteran pro-life activist , is well-known as the president of Operation Rescue .
• Sandra Merritt , 66 , a grandmother who ran a home business and was a part-time teacher , is familiar as co-defendant with Daleiden in an ongoing California state criminal prosecution .
• Gerardo Adrian Lopez , 28 , is employed by the Navy as a hospital corpsman in an intensive care neonatal unit , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Daleiden met him when he worked at Starbucks and hired him to transcribe the videos .
• Albin Rhomberg is a longtime pro-life advocate and investigator who did graduate studies in high-energy particle physics , taught physics at the University of Wisconsin , and worked in the space program at Caltech Jet Propulsion Laboratory and at the Johnson Space Flight Center in Texas : in other words , he ’ s a rocket scientist .
Lawyers from four law firms and four pro-life legal associations represented the five individual defendants , as well @ @ @ @ @ @ @

The five pro-life activists are also liable for attorney fees, which will likely add millions more to what they owe America's largest abortion chain.
SAN FRANCISCO, California, April 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A judge in San Francisco has ruled that the pro-life defendants in the Planned Parenthood Federation of America v. Center for Medical Progress case – popularly known as the “baby body parts case” – must pay Planned Parenthood over $1.5 million, not including attorney fees which will likely add millions more to what they owe the abortion-committing behemoth.
In November, after the six-week courtroom drama presided over by United States District Judge William H. Orrick concluded, a jury took less than two days to find the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) and its undercover investigators guilty of multiple crimes, including violating the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, wiretapping, and engaging in civil conspiracy.
The roster of those found liable reads like a who’s who of pro-life all stars: Troy Newman, longtime pro-life activist and president of Operation Rescue; David Daleiden, project lead of CMP who became the face of the investigation; Sandra Merritt; Albin Rhomberg; and Gerardo Adrian Lopez. Each has been found “joint and severally liable” for the $1,555,084 judgment.
“It is no longer in dispute that Planned Parenthood sold aborted baby parts for profit and that our video evidence was authentic. They admitted it during our trial,” Newman said in a just-released statement. Newman served as a founding board member of CMP during the undercover investigation.
“I believe when the full truth is finally told – and it wasn’t at our trial – we will all be exonerated, and it will be Planned Parenthood that will be held liable for their crimes in a court of law,” said Newman. “I look forward to that day.”
In 2015, CMP released videos exposing Planned Parenthood’s apparently illegal trade in aborted baby body parts after a 30-month undercover operation.
The groundbreaking videos showed top-level Planned Parenthood executives haggling over prices of aborted baby body parts and discussing how to change abortion procedures to obtain more intact organs. The videos sparked public outrage, congressional and senate hearings, and an ongoing Department of Justice criminal investigation into Planned Parenthood.
The lawsuit pitted “those who practice, advocate for, and profit from unthinkably cruel and barbaric acts on the tiniest of humans against a few individuals who had the tenacity, courage, resourcefulness, and faith to walk into the heart of darkness to expose trafficking in the brains, hearts, livers, lungs, and limbs of pre-born babies,” said LifeSiteNews’ Lianne Laurence, who travelled to San Francisco last fall to cover the civil trial.
In her analysis of the proceedings, Laurence explained:
The significance of the case cannot be overestimated. This lawsuit is Planned Parenthood’s desperate attempt to permanently discredit the undercover videos the Center for Medical Progress released in 2015 that exposed its part in trafficking baby body parts. The casual brutality of abortionists discussing crushing unborn babies and haggling over the price of fetal organs shocked the world and Planned Parenthood wants to convey that those who exposed them – not their giant abortion corporation – are in the wrong. It’s also a retaliatory action: Planned Parenthood wants to to crush the pro-life advocates who went undercover and exposed them. The plaintiffs allege CMP’s project lead David Daleiden, undercover journalists Sandra Merritt and Geraldo Adrian Lopez, and founding board members Troy Newman and Albin Rhomberg, committed 15 crimes while carrying out the undercover video project, ranging from breach of contract to racketeering. They claim CMP is liable for paying for everything Planned Parenthood’s personnel bought, such as security upgrades and staff counselling hotlines, after they realized they’d been recorded.
The defendants named in the judgment are:
David Daleiden, 31, developed and ran the undercover sting operation and is the high-profile, public face of CMP.
31, developed and ran the undercover sting operation and is the high-profile, public face of CMP. Troy Newman, 54, a veteran pro-life activist, is well-known as the president of Operation Rescue.
54, a veteran pro-life activist, is well-known as the president of Operation Rescue. Sandra Merritt , 66, a grandmother who ran a home business and was a part-time teacher, is familiar as co-defendant with Daleiden in an ongoing California state criminal prosecution.
, 66, a grandmother who ran a home business and was a part-time teacher, is familiar as co-defendant with Daleiden in an ongoing California state criminal prosecution. Gerardo Adrian Lopez , 28, is employed by the Navy as a hospital corpsman in an intensive care neonatal unit, and got involved in the undercover operation after Daleiden met him when he worked at Starbucks and hired him to transcribe the videos.
, 28, is employed by the Navy as a hospital corpsman in an intensive care neonatal unit, and got involved in the undercover operation after Daleiden met him when he worked at Starbucks and hired him to transcribe the videos. Albin Rhomberg is a longtime pro-life advocate and investigator who did graduate studies in high-energy particle physics, taught physics at the University of Wisconsin, and worked in the space program at Caltech Jet Propulsion Laboratory and at the Johnson Space Flight Center in Texas: in other words, he’s a rocket scientist.
Lawyers from four law firms and four pro-life legal associations represented the five individual defendants, as well as CMP and its alter-ego BioMax.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-02--Cops back off holding non-COVID-compliant citizens ‘accountable’ for religious service

Tell Trudeau Liberals : Do n't discriminate against Christians on COVID-19 relief funding Sign the petition here .
AYLMER , Ontario , May 1 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Police from an Ontario town now say they will not be pressing charges against Christian churchgoers for attending a drive-in Sunday service .
This change comes despite police earlier stating that congregants would be held “ accountable “ because their service allegedly violated provincial coronavirus social distancing laws .
In a statement circulated yesterday , the Aylmer Police Department said that despite having reasonable grounds to lay charges , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Aylmer Church of God who attended a drive-in Sunday service on April 26 .
Instead , Aylmer police say they will “ use the incident ” as an “ educational tool ” for the Church of God members .
Pastor Henry Hildebrandt of The Church of God said in a statement that he was thankful for all the support his church received regarding the situation .
“ We extend our gratitude to Canadians across the country that have prayed , called , emailed , commented , and messaged us this past week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in this country has been overwhelming , ” said Hildebrandt .
“ God is sovereign and His Word will prevail .
This nation was founded on the principles of religious freedom and peaceful assembly and we pray that we will enjoy these privileges for many years to come.
” This past Wednesday , a group of federal members of Parliament sent a letter to Ontario premier Doug Ford .
The letter said police departments holding drive-in church services “ accountable ” constitutes police overreach .
Although not directly calling out Aylmer police , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ontario “ weaken the goodwill that has helped maintain strong social distancing compliance , harm the well-being of religious communities and undermine our nation ’ s constitutional fabric.
” Yesterday , Hildebrandt thanked the M.P.s who signed the letter for “ standing up for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms on behalf of ALL Canadians , regardless of their creed or religion.
” Hildebrandt noted in his statement yesterday that he hopes Ontario premier Doug Ford will “ swiftly ” provide clearer and more concise “ enforcement directives ” concerning the Emergency Management @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are grateful for that and believe it is the right decision .
This allows the Premier and his cabinet the opportunity to swiftly provide clear enforcement directives pertaining to the Emergency Act that uphold public safety while respecting the right of people to express their faith in a safe manner , ” said Hildebrandt .
“ We continue to hope for a political resolution to this situation that does not put our local police in an unenviable position , and we thank the Aylmer Police for their continued service and protection to our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Civil Protection Act says it is against the law for more than five people to get together to conduct a religious service .
Hildebrandt believes that this a direct violation of religious freedom as protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms .
Global News reported that Hildebrandt is looking to hear directly from Premier Ford and his Cabinet before he proceeds with another drive-in church service .
Aylmer police were on site at the Aylmer Church of God , filming the most recent Sunday drive-in service .
Congregants were in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tuning in to a low-wattage radio station broadcasting the service .
Although police did not block the entry or exit of vehicles or issue fines , they soon afterward said “ people will be held accountable for what happened today.
” The church had twice previously held a drive-in-style Sunday service without any issues and with the full approval and permission of the local police , said Hildebrandt .
Hildebrandt said in a statement posted last Saturday that police had warned him that should he proceed with a third service , it would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fines , disruption , and physical roadblocks by order of the Aylmer Chief of Police.
” Hildebrandt noted that he told his congregants that they did not need to show up for the service .
Last week , Aylmer police chief Zvonko Horvat said he had instructed his officers to begin to lay charges under the Ontario Emergency Measures and Civil Protections Act on any “ faith-based organizations that break the order banning gatherings of more than five people.
” The Canada-based Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms ( JCFF ) was retained by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week to help them with their cause .
Lisa D.S .
Bildy , a lawyer for the JCCF , told LifeSiteNews that a letter they sent to Aylmer police last week asked them to rescind their decision to ticket church members .
“ Government authorities like the Aylmer Police Department may only infringe Canadians ’ constitutional rights if such authorities can demonstrate a pressing and substantial justification for doing so .
There is no justification for prohibiting people from parking in the same parking lot for a drive-in religious service when drive-thru restaurant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” said Bildy in the letter .
The incident in Aylmer is only one of a growing number of police initiatives regarding the breaking of social distancing rules in Canada .
Just this past week , a Calgary street preacher from Mission 7 Street Church was issued a $ 1,200 fine while he was feeding the homeless .
Recently , an Ontario pastor was fined $ 880 for violating “ social distancing ” health rules because he had held “ a seder night ” at his residence .
In early April , another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for breaking social distancing health rules after refusing to cancel a street service that included feeding the homeless .
Also , health authorities from Saskatchewan banned a drive-in Easter Sunday service at a small-town Canadian church , saying it would have constituted a “ mass gathering ” in violation of coronavirus health orders .
The JCCF served a legal warning to the Saskatchewan Health Authority , saying it violated the rights and freedoms of worshipers from the Nipawin Apostolic Church .
The government of Saskatchewan later reversed the decision by its health authority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that recognize the right for churches to hold such services as long as safety precautions are heeded .
A few weeks ago , the JCCF warned that Canadians ’ rights are being trampled because of the coronavirus lockdown measures .
Pro-abortion prime minister Justin Trudeau said in late March that “ all options are on the table ” when it comes to combating the coronavirus .
This includes leaving the door open to the possibility of tracking Canadians ’ cell phones either via a dedicated app or through one ’ s cell phone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nationwide lockdown since early March , with all public schools , churches , sporting events , and sit-down restaurants , and most stores deemed non-essential , shut .
As of today , Canada has registered just under 54,000 coronavirus cases with 3,387 deaths .

The Aylmer Police Department said that despite having reasonable grounds to lay charges, they will not issue fines.
Tell Trudeau Liberals: Don't discriminate against Christians on COVID-19 relief funding Sign the petition here.
AYLMER, Ontario, May 1, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Police from an Ontario town now say they will not be pressing charges against Christian churchgoers for attending a drive-in Sunday service. This change comes despite police earlier stating that congregants would be held “accountable“ because their service allegedly violated provincial coronavirus social distancing laws.
In a statement circulated yesterday, the Aylmer Police Department said that despite having reasonable grounds to lay charges, they will not issue fines to parishioners of the Aylmer Church of God who attended a drive-in Sunday service on April 26.
Instead, Aylmer police say they will “use the incident” as an “educational tool” for the Church of God members.
Pastor Henry Hildebrandt of The Church of God said in a statement that he was thankful for all the support his church received regarding the situation.
“We extend our gratitude to Canadians across the country that have prayed, called, emailed, commented, and messaged us this past week. The support and passion for freedom in this country has been overwhelming,” said Hildebrandt.
“God is sovereign and His Word will prevail. This nation was founded on the principles of religious freedom and peaceful assembly and we pray that we will enjoy these privileges for many years to come.”
This past Wednesday, a group of federal members of Parliament sent a letter to Ontario premier Doug Ford. The letter said police departments holding drive-in church services “accountable” constitutes police overreach.
Although not directly calling out Aylmer police, the letter said recent police actions in Ontario “weaken the goodwill that has helped maintain strong social distancing compliance, harm the well-being of religious communities and undermine our nation’s constitutional fabric.”
Yesterday, Hildebrandt thanked the M.P.s who signed the letter for “standing up for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms on behalf of ALL Canadians, regardless of their creed or religion.”
Hildebrandt noted in his statement yesterday that he hopes Ontario premier Doug Ford will “swiftly” provide clearer and more concise “enforcement directives” concerning the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act.
“We are grateful for that and believe it is the right decision. This allows the Premier and his cabinet the opportunity to swiftly provide clear enforcement directives pertaining to the Emergency Act that uphold public safety while respecting the right of people to express their faith in a safe manner,” said Hildebrandt.
“We continue to hope for a political resolution to this situation that does not put our local police in an unenviable position, and we thank the Aylmer Police for their continued service and protection to our community.”
Ontario’s Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act says it is against the law for more than five people to get together to conduct a religious service. Hildebrandt believes that this a direct violation of religious freedom as protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Global News reported that Hildebrandt is looking to hear directly from Premier Ford and his Cabinet before he proceeds with another drive-in church service.
Aylmer police were on site at the Aylmer Church of God, filming the most recent Sunday drive-in service. Congregants were in their cars with their windows closed, tuning in to a low-wattage radio station broadcasting the service.
Although police did not block the entry or exit of vehicles or issue fines, they soon afterward said “people will be held accountable for what happened today.”
The church had twice previously held a drive-in-style Sunday service without any issues and with the full approval and permission of the local police, said Hildebrandt.
Hildebrandt said in a statement posted last Saturday that police had warned him that should he proceed with a third service, it would be “under the threat of hefty fines, disruption, and physical roadblocks by order of the Aylmer Chief of Police.”
Hildebrandt noted that he told his congregants that they did not need to show up for the service.
Last week, Aylmer police chief Zvonko Horvat said he had instructed his officers to begin to lay charges under the Ontario Emergency Measures and Civil Protections Act on any “faith-based organizations that break the order banning gatherings of more than five people.”
The Canada-based Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCFF) was retained by The Church of God in Aylmer last week to help them with their cause.
Lisa D.S. Bildy, a lawyer for the JCCF, told LifeSiteNews that a letter they sent to Aylmer police last week asked them to rescind their decision to ticket church members.
“Government authorities like the Aylmer Police Department may only infringe Canadians’ constitutional rights if such authorities can demonstrate a pressing and substantial justification for doing so. There is no justification for prohibiting people from parking in the same parking lot for a drive-in religious service when drive-thru restaurant windows and grocery stores are open,” said Bildy in the letter.
The incident in Aylmer is only one of a growing number of police initiatives regarding the breaking of social distancing rules in Canada.
Just this past week, a Calgary street preacher from Mission 7 Street Church was issued a $1,200 fine while he was feeding the homeless.
Recently, an Ontario pastor was fined $880 for violating “social distancing” health rules because he had held “a seder night” at his residence.
In early April, another Calgary street preacher was fined $1,200 for breaking social distancing health rules after refusing to cancel a street service that included feeding the homeless.
Also, health authorities from Saskatchewan banned a drive-in Easter Sunday service at a small-town Canadian church, saying it would have constituted a “mass gathering” in violation of coronavirus health orders.
The JCCF served a legal warning to the Saskatchewan Health Authority, saying it violated the rights and freedoms of worshipers from the Nipawin Apostolic Church.
The government of Saskatchewan later reversed the decision by its health authority banning drive-in religious services and issued guidelines that recognize the right for churches to hold such services as long as safety precautions are heeded.
A few weeks ago, the JCCF warned that Canadians’ rights are being trampled because of the coronavirus lockdown measures.
Pro-abortion prime minister Justin Trudeau said in late March that “all options are on the table” when it comes to combating the coronavirus. This includes leaving the door open to the possibility of tracking Canadians’ cell phones either via a dedicated app or through one’s cell phone provider.
Canada has been in a nationwide lockdown since early March, with all public schools, churches, sporting events, and sit-down restaurants, and most stores deemed non-essential, shut. As of today, Canada has registered just under 54,000 coronavirus cases with 3,387 deaths.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-02--Conservative stronghold caves to LGBT agenda, allows ‘non-binary’ on birth certificates

PETITION : Stop 'sex change ' operations during coronavirus crisis Sign the petition here .
May 1 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — On Monday , I reported on the British government ’ s plan to ban “ sex-change ” surgeries for underage children , and I noted that I was somewhat surprised that Boris Johnson ’ s Tories were actually acting on socially conservative policy .
Right across the West , conservative political parties have caved to the Sexual Revolution , and their resistance to social change generally involves them trailing behind the leftist progressive parties , shouting , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Canadian conservative parties are particularly nauseating in this regard , with the early days of the current federal Conservative leadership race involving a social media campaign from former Harper Cabinet minister Peter MacKay assuring conservative voters that he will most definitely be showing up at the Pride Parade in June .
Presumably , he will do some sort of online tribute to the LGBTQ2S+ transformation of our society since the COVID-19 pandemic has denied him the chance to scamper about with the drag queens and leather dudes to display his progressive bona @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But the Progressive Conservative Party in Manitoba is ensuring that a pandemic doesn ’ t get in the way of “ progress.
” According to Global News , “ Manitobans will soon have a non-binary gender option on birth certificates , ” as the province will be “ allowing a third option in addition to ‘ male ’ or ‘ female ’ on official birth documents.
” The Progressive Conservatives have also assured the public that once this law is passed , they will also have the option of not selecting a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In an age of gender identity confusion , even government identification is losing the capacity to identify people .
According to finance minister Scott Fielding ( of , I must point out again , Manitoba ’ s conservative party ) : “ In response to a ruling from the Manitoba Human Rights Commission , the Vital Statistics Agency is implementing policy changes to be more inclusive to Manitobans.
” The case Fielding is referring to is from last November , when the Manitoba Human Rights Commission awarded a trans person $ 50,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right to change the sex designation on the person ’ s birth certificate to an “ X ” back in 2014 .
The commission ’ s adjudicator , Dan Manning , ordered the province to cease discriminating and gave it six months to start offering at least a third option ( in addition to male and female ) , with Manitoba following Ontario , Nova Scotia , Alberta , and Newfoundland and Labrador in providing a gender-neutral option .
It makes no difference that “ non-binary ” is an unscientific and inexplicable phenomenon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evidence , to be neither male nor female .
( Commentator Douglas Murray wryly noted that he does not understand the difference between saying , “ I ’ m non-binary ” and “ Look at me !
Look at me !
” ) One of the particularly pathetic aspects of our late-stage culture wars is the sight of supposedly conservative , middle-aged politicians obediently parroting lines on “ non-binary ” people and inclusiveness and the panoply of sexual practices and identities that now demand formal genuflection from all who seek public office .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of them , as most are simply trying to keep up with the lightning-fast pace of change ( there is always a new form of bigotry one might be guilty of — even if one was unaware of its existence until being convicted ) .
Most of these politicians don ’ t believe in dozens of genders , and behind closed doors , most of them will say the idea is nonsense .
That is part of the game .
The LGBT activists also know that many of these politicians do not , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recently constructed world of gender fluidity and all the rest of it .
Thus , it gives them a particular sense of power and pleasure to force these politicians to bend the knee or face the media furnace , and to see those who ran for office on conservative platforms obediently pay tribute to their cause .
As long as the politicians believe they must play along , this pathetic game will continue .
In this week ’ s episode of The Van Maren Show , Anne Schlafly Cori , daughter of legendary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to set the record straight in the wake of a new Hulu TV show spitting on her mother ’ s memory .
Anne shares the wonderful , selfless things Phyllis accomplished in her life , including helping get Ronald Reagan elected .
You can subscribe here and listen to the episode below :

PETITION: Stop 'sex change' operations during coronavirus crisis Sign the petition here.
May 1, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — On Monday, I reported on the British government’s plan to ban “sex-change” surgeries for underage children, and I noted that I was somewhat surprised that Boris Johnson’s Tories were actually acting on socially conservative policy. Right across the West, conservative political parties have caved to the Sexual Revolution, and their resistance to social change generally involves them trailing behind the leftist progressive parties, shouting, “We agree! We agree!”
Canadian conservative parties are particularly nauseating in this regard, with the early days of the current federal Conservative leadership race involving a social media campaign from former Harper Cabinet minister Peter MacKay assuring conservative voters that he will most definitely be showing up at the Pride Parade in June. Presumably, he will do some sort of online tribute to the LGBTQ2S+ transformation of our society since the COVID-19 pandemic has denied him the chance to scamper about with the drag queens and leather dudes to display his progressive bona fides (and hopefully nothing else).
Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook
But the Progressive Conservative Party in Manitoba is ensuring that a pandemic doesn’t get in the way of “progress.” According to Global News, “Manitobans will soon have a non-binary gender option on birth certificates,” as the province will be “allowing a third option in addition to ‘male’ or ‘female’ on official birth documents.” The Progressive Conservatives have also assured the public that once this law is passed, they will also have the option of not selecting a sex on birth and death certificates altogether. In an age of gender identity confusion, even government identification is losing the capacity to identify people.
According to finance minister Scott Fielding (of, I must point out again, Manitoba’s conservative party): “In response to a ruling from the Manitoba Human Rights Commission, the Vital Statistics Agency is implementing policy changes to be more inclusive to Manitobans.”
The case Fielding is referring to is from last November, when the Manitoba Human Rights Commission awarded a trans person $50,000 from the province for denying the apparent right to change the sex designation on the person’s birth certificate to an “X” back in 2014.
The commission’s adjudicator, Dan Manning, ordered the province to cease discriminating and gave it six months to start offering at least a third option (in addition to male and female), with Manitoba following Ontario, Nova Scotia, Alberta, and Newfoundland and Labrador in providing a gender-neutral option. It makes no difference that “non-binary” is an unscientific and inexplicable phenomenon where an individual claims, against all evidence, to be neither male nor female. (Commentator Douglas Murray wryly noted that he does not understand the difference between saying, “I’m non-binary” and “Look at me! Look at me!”)
One of the particularly pathetic aspects of our late-stage culture wars is the sight of supposedly conservative, middle-aged politicians obediently parroting lines on “non-binary” people and inclusiveness and the panoply of sexual practices and identities that now demand formal genuflection from all who seek public office. It must be genuinely humiliating for many of them, as most are simply trying to keep up with the lightning-fast pace of change (there is always a new form of bigotry one might be guilty of — even if one was unaware of its existence until being convicted). Most of these politicians don’t believe in dozens of genders, and behind closed doors, most of them will say the idea is nonsense.
That is part of the game. The LGBT activists also know that many of these politicians do not, deep down, actually believe in this recently constructed world of gender fluidity and all the rest of it. Thus, it gives them a particular sense of power and pleasure to force these politicians to bend the knee or face the media furnace, and to see those who ran for office on conservative platforms obediently pay tribute to their cause. As long as the politicians believe they must play along, this pathetic game will continue.
In this week’s episode of The Van Maren Show, Anne Schlafly Cori, daughter of legendary conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly, joins Jonathon to set the record straight in the wake of a new Hulu TV show spitting on her mother’s memory. Anne shares the wonderful, selfless things Phyllis accomplished in her life, including helping get Ronald Reagan elected.
You can subscribe here and listen to the episode below:
Follow Jonathon Jonathon Van Maren is a public speaker, writer, and pro-life activist. His commentary has been translated into more than eight languages and published widely online as well as print newspapers such as the Jewish Independent, the National Post, the Hamilton Spectator and others. He has received an award for combating anti-Semitism in print from the Jewish organization B’nai Brith. His commentary has been featured on CTV Primetime, Global News, EWTN, and the CBC as well as dozens of radio stations and news outlets in Canada and the United States. He speaks on a wide variety of cultural topics across North America at universities, high schools, churches, and other functions. Some of these topics include abortion, pornography, the Sexual Revolution, and euthanasia. Jonathon holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree in history from Simon Fraser University, and is the communications director for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform. Jonathon’s first book, The Culture War, was released in 2016.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-02--Iowa bishops insist on continuing Mass ban as governor lifts religious restrictions

Urgent appeal to the bishops of the world : Feed your flock Sign the petition here .
DES MOINES , Iowa , May 1 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — The bishops of the four dioceses of Iowa will keep public Masses banned , even as the state government starts easing restrictions on religious gatherings imposed due to the coronavirus pandemic .
In a joint statement , the bishops said it might take until “ an effective vaccine ” has been found for them to loosen the self-imposed restrictions on access to the sacraments .
According to the archbishop of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Sioux City , Davenport , and Des Moines , “ the spread of the COVID-19 disease remains a real and present danger.
” “ In particular , the health and survival of the elderly and other vulnerable populations is still a grave concern , ” as many of the faithful , but also of the priests , are part of those groups .
“ In light of the expectation that positive cases of COVID-19 will peak in Iowa in the next few weeks , we have decided it would be most prudent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ liturgical restrictions we have in place , including the suspension of public Masses , ” the statement explained .
Iowa is reporting , at the time of this writing , a total of 162 deaths related to the coronavirus , as well as over 7,000 cases .
More than 42,000 people had been tested .
There are more than three million people currently living in the Hawkeye State .
In any case , a return of public Masses might be months away .
“ Without an effective vaccine or widespread testing and contact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we simply are not at a place where we can resume our previous prayer practices , ” the bishops argued .
Bill Gates , whose foundation is heavily involved in funding the research to create a coronavirus vaccine , said a vaccine would be ready next year , at the earliest .
“ Like America ’ s top public health officials , I say that it is likely to be 18 months , even though it could be as short as nine months or closer to two years , ” he wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ continue to closely monitor the statewide and respective regional situations through the weeks of May and beyond.
” “ When the time comes that we can gather in greater numbers while observing social distance , safe hygienic practices and other precautions without placing one another at serious risk , public Masses and other sacramental celebrations will be allowed to resume , ” they added .
Bishop William M. Joensen of Des Moines , in a video , vaguely spoke of a time frame for the start of public Masses , mentioning “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before the feast of Corpus Christi in June.
” “ What a source of thanksgiving and celebration that will be , ” he added , before cautioning , “ But again , I can ’ t promise something that I ’ m not able , at this time , to deliver on.
” Iowa governor Kim Reynolds allowed Iowans on April 27 to “ gather for spiritual or religious purposes , so long as churches , synagogues , or other hosts of a spiritual or religious gathering take reasonable measures to ensure social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other participants , increased hygiene practices , and other public health measures to reduce the risk of further spread of COVID-19 , ” beginning May 1 .
While still recommending to “ conduct activities ” online , the Iowa government suggested “ outdoor services , or drive-in vehicle events ” as alternatives to traditional worship services inside a building .
In many of Iowa ’ s counties , even restaurants are again allowed to open , although social distancing requirements need to be maintained .
Apart from the Catholic bishops , several other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to stay at home , as reported by The Des Moines Register .
The Pew Research Center pointed out that only ten states within the United States had imposed an outright ban on religious gatherings , including California , New York , and Illinois .
The other states had put only certain restrictions in place , usually relating to size and social distancing .
Nevertheless , public Masses have essentially disappeared in America , given that bishops across the country issued decrees prohibiting priests from celebrating Mass with significant numbers of faithful present @

The bishops call for an 'effective vaccine or widespread testing and contact data' before they will consider no longer forbidding their priests to offer the Mass to the faithful.
Urgent appeal to the bishops of the world: Feed your flock Sign the petition here.
DES MOINES, Iowa, May 1, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The bishops of the four dioceses of Iowa will keep public Masses banned, even as the state government starts easing restrictions on religious gatherings imposed due to the coronavirus pandemic.
In a joint statement, the bishops said it might take until “an effective vaccine” has been found for them to loosen the self-imposed restrictions on access to the sacraments.
According to the archbishop of Dubuque, as well as the bishops of Sioux City, Davenport, and Des Moines, “the spread of the COVID-19 disease remains a real and present danger.”
“In particular, the health and survival of the elderly and other vulnerable populations is still a grave concern,” as many of the faithful, but also of the priests, are part of those groups.
“In light of the expectation that positive cases of COVID-19 will peak in Iowa in the next few weeks, we have decided it would be most prudent for now to continue to follow the liturgical restrictions we have in place, including the suspension of public Masses,” the statement explained.
Iowa is reporting, at the time of this writing, a total of 162 deaths related to the coronavirus, as well as over 7,000 cases. More than 42,000 people had been tested. There are more than three million people currently living in the Hawkeye State.
In any case, a return of public Masses might be months away. “Without an effective vaccine or widespread testing and contact data that justifies a change in course, we simply are not at a place where we can resume our previous prayer practices,” the bishops argued.
Bill Gates, whose foundation is heavily involved in funding the research to create a coronavirus vaccine, said a vaccine would be ready next year, at the earliest. “Like America’s top public health officials, I say that it is likely to be 18 months, even though it could be as short as nine months or closer to two years,” he wrote.
The Iowa bishops announced they would “continue to closely monitor the statewide and respective regional situations through the weeks of May and beyond.”
“When the time comes that we can gather in greater numbers while observing social distance, safe hygienic practices and other precautions without placing one another at serious risk, public Masses and other sacramental celebrations will be allowed to resume,” they added.
Bishop William M. Joensen of Des Moines, in a video, vaguely spoke of a time frame for the start of public Masses, mentioning “the vigil of Pentecost, or certainly before the feast of Corpus Christi in June.”
“What a source of thanksgiving and celebration that will be,” he added, before cautioning, “But again, I can’t promise something that I’m not able, at this time, to deliver on.”
Iowa governor Kim Reynolds allowed Iowans on April 27 to “gather for spiritual or religious purposes, so long as churches, synagogues, or other hosts of a spiritual or religious gathering take reasonable measures to ensure social distancing of employees, volunteers, and other participants, increased hygiene practices, and other public health measures to reduce the risk of further spread of COVID-19,” beginning May 1.
While still recommending to “conduct activities” online, the Iowa government suggested “outdoor services, or drive-in vehicle events” as alternatives to traditional worship services inside a building.
In many of Iowa’s counties, even restaurants are again allowed to open, although social distancing requirements need to be maintained.
Apart from the Catholic bishops, several other religious communities have called on their faithful to stay at home, as reported by The Des Moines Register.
The Pew Research Center pointed out that only ten states within the United States had imposed an outright ban on religious gatherings, including California, New York, and Illinois. The other states had put only certain restrictions in place, usually relating to size and social distancing.
Nevertheless, public Masses have essentially disappeared in America, given that bishops across the country issued decrees prohibiting priests from celebrating Mass with significant numbers of faithful present.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-02--Ontario hospitals continue abortions while canceling breast cancer, cardiac surgeries

TORONTO , May 1 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Ontario ’ s hospitals continue to commit abortions as an “ essential service ” even as they cancel or delay cancer and heart surgeries under COVID-19 pandemic protocols , and amid warnings that dozens of people may have died as a direct result of such delays .
Indeed , Ontario health minister Christine Elliott acknowledged earlier this week that a data analysis released by the Toronto University Health Network estimated that 35 people may have died because they didn ’ t get cardiac surgery in time , the Canadian Press @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Financial Accountability Office ( FAO ) released a report the same day that also warned that continuing delays will bring “ worse health outcomes.
” As of April 22 , “ up to 52,700 hospital procedures have been cancelled or avoided , ” and “ every week that the COVID-19 outbreak continues , up to 12,200 more procedures are delayed , ” the FAO reported .
While this frees up resources for COVID-19 patients , “ it also will lead to significant demand pressure for hospitals in the longer-term , ” stated the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the delayed procedures are medically required , the longer procedures are postponed , the worse health outcomes Ontarians could have and the harder it will be for hospitals to eventually clear the backlog of delayed procedures.
” But by all reports , none of this affects abortion , which continues as usual in hospitals with minimal delays .
This was confirmed by hospitals in Ottawa , Toronto , and London contacted by LifeSiteNews .
“ For abortion , we are booking appointments as we were doing earlier ; this Covid-19 thing doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” a medical officer at the Bay Center for Birth Control at Toronto ’ s Women ’ s College Hospital told LifeSiteNews .
As for the coronavirus risk , “ all the patients have to go through the screening process , ” she said .
If a mother tests negative for COVID-19 , “ they will do the procedure , ” and if she tests positive , “ as far as I know , they have to book a treatment , or , whatever they have to do , they will do it.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ them , ” a representative from the Family Planning Clinic at Ottawa Hospital ’ s Riverside Campus told LifeSiteNews , adding : “ We ’ re considered an essential service , so we ’ re still running.
” “ We ’ re still doing them , yes , ” stated a staff member at the Pregnancy Options Program at the Women ’ s Health Care Center at London ’ s Health Science Center .
According to Pregnancy Options ’ recorded message , it “ offers medical abortion services up to 10 weeks gestation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks.
” There may be a two-week waiting period between the initial contact and an assessment with a nurse , the recording says .
Another source told LifeSiteNews on the condition of anonymity that one Ontario hospital is doing multiple abortions every other week while significantly reducing the number of breast , colon , liver , and skin cancer surgeries .
While a woman will wait at most two weeks for an abortion , cancer patients are facing indeterminate delays for surgery , which is often the first step in their treatment , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Dr. Stewart Kennedy , head of the COVID-19 response team at the Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre , who told local media that cancer surgeries have decreased 34 percent since the pandemic protocols have been put in place .
He also warned of the dire consequences of delaying so many surgeries — a policy the Ford government shows no sign of changing anytime soon .
“ I ’ ve said multiple times we ’ re going to have more deaths , not from COVID-19 , but from the backlog of services @ @ @ @ @ @ @ urgent needs , ” Kennedy told Thunder Bay NewsWatch .
Other jurisdictions , such as Japan , have reported that a “ delay in particular types of surgery ” has led to “ a 17 per cent increase in morbidity , ” which is the rate of disease in a specific population , or “ disease burden , ” Kennedy said .
Similar concerns were expressed by Ontarian Janet Smith , who wrote to Premier Doug Ford thanking him for his efforts to contain the pandemic but questioning why abortion facilities remain open @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unnecessary medical tests and surgeries be cancelled or postponed.
” “ I suffer from a undiagnosed condition and have now been told that I must wait for the tests until July at the very earliest ; my husband could go blind if he does not regularly see his physician , ” wrote Smith in the letter , which was obtained by LifeSiteNews .
“ [ B ] ut these appointments have also been postponed in order to free up medical equipment and healthcare personnel , ” she said .
“ What about all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ requires ?
Why are they not being added to the fight against this coronavirus ?
” “ Allowing elective abortions is a slap in the face to all those who have made and are still making sacrifices for the better good of our province.
” LifeSiteNews contacted Elliott and the ministry of health for comment but did not receive a response .
Campaign Life Coalition , Canada ’ s national pro-life , pro-family political lobbying group , has blasted the premiers for not canceling abortions during the pandemic as non-essential .
“ Pro-life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ medically unnecessary , elective abortions , committed purely for reasons of lifestyle convenience , are being prioritized ahead of genuine medical treatments , like breast cancer surgery , and other operations and treatments that are actually necessary to keep people alive and healthy , ” said Jack Fonseca , Campaign Life director of political operations .
“ Are Canada ’ s provincial health ministers and premiers insane ?
Does Christine Elliott in Ontario , and all her provincial counterparts around the country , really want to tell women with breast cancer that their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ someone who wants to kill her unborn baby ?
” he pointed out in an email to LifeSiteNews .
“ We have to raise our voices to tell our Premiers and Health Ministers that abortion is never medically necessary , and therefore , all elective abortions must be halted immediately and throughout this Wuhan virus pandemic.
” Campaign Life is urging Canadians to sign its petition to the premiers , which includes a postcard feature , here .
Campaign Life is also asking Canadians to call their premiers and has provided a suggested @ @ @

Over fifty thousand hospital procedures have been 'canceled or avoided' to date, but abortions continue apace.
TORONTO, May 1, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Ontario’s hospitals continue to commit abortions as an “essential service” even as they cancel or delay cancer and heart surgeries under COVID-19 pandemic protocols, and amid warnings that dozens of people may have died as a direct result of such delays.
Indeed, Ontario health minister Christine Elliott acknowledged earlier this week that a data analysis released by the Toronto University Health Network estimated that 35 people may have died because they didn’t get cardiac surgery in time, the Canadian Press reported.
Moreover, Ontario’s Financial Accountability Office (FAO) released a report the same day that also warned that continuing delays will bring “worse health outcomes.”
As of April 22, “up to 52,700 hospital procedures have been cancelled or avoided,” and “every week that the COVID-19 outbreak continues, up to 12,200 more procedures are delayed,” the FAO reported.
While this frees up resources for COVID-19 patients, “it also will lead to significant demand pressure for hospitals in the longer-term,” stated the FAO report.
“Since most of the delayed procedures are medically required, the longer procedures are postponed, the worse health outcomes Ontarians could have and the harder it will be for hospitals to eventually clear the backlog of delayed procedures.”
But by all reports, none of this affects abortion, which continues as usual in hospitals with minimal delays.
This was confirmed by hospitals in Ottawa, Toronto, and London contacted by LifeSiteNews.
“For abortion, we are booking appointments as we were doing earlier; this Covid-19 thing doesn’t affect booking appointments for abortion,” a medical officer at the Bay Center for Birth Control at Toronto’s Women’s College Hospital told LifeSiteNews.
As for the coronavirus risk, “all the patients have to go through the screening process,” she said. If a mother tests negative for COVID-19, “they will do the procedure,” and if she tests positive, “as far as I know, they have to book a treatment, or, whatever they have to do, they will do it.”
“We’re still doing them,” a representative from the Family Planning Clinic at Ottawa Hospital’s Riverside Campus told LifeSiteNews, adding: “We’re considered an essential service, so we’re still running.”
“We’re still doing them, yes,” stated a staff member at the Pregnancy Options Program at the Women’s Health Care Center at London’s Health Science Center.
According to Pregnancy Options’ recorded message, it “offers medical abortion services up to 10 weeks gestation and surgical abortion services up to 24 weeks.” There may be a two-week waiting period between the initial contact and an assessment with a nurse, the recording says.
Another source told LifeSiteNews on the condition of anonymity that one Ontario hospital is doing multiple abortions every other week while significantly reducing the number of breast, colon, liver, and skin cancer surgeries.
While a woman will wait at most two weeks for an abortion, cancer patients are facing indeterminate delays for surgery, which is often the first step in their treatment, the source said.
This was confirmed by Dr. Stewart Kennedy, head of the COVID-19 response team at the Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, who told local media that cancer surgeries have decreased 34 percent since the pandemic protocols have been put in place.
He also warned of the dire consequences of delaying so many surgeries — a policy the Ford government shows no sign of changing anytime soon.
“I’ve said multiple times we’re going to have more deaths, not from COVID-19, but from the backlog of services and people not wanting to address their urgent needs,” Kennedy told Thunder Bay NewsWatch.
Other jurisdictions, such as Japan, have reported that a “delay in particular types of surgery” has led to “a 17 per cent increase in morbidity,” which is the rate of disease in a specific population, or “disease burden,” Kennedy said.
“Morbidity can lead to mortality.”
Similar concerns were expressed by Ontarian Janet Smith, who wrote to Premier Doug Ford thanking him for his efforts to contain the pandemic but questioning why abortion facilities remain open “when your government insists that all unnecessary medical tests and surgeries be cancelled or postponed.”
“I suffer from a undiagnosed condition and have now been told that I must wait for the tests until July at the very earliest; my husband could go blind if he does not regularly see his physician,” wrote Smith in the letter, which was obtained by LifeSiteNews.
“[B]ut these appointments have also been postponed in order to free up medical equipment and healthcare personnel,” she said. “What about all the medical equipment and medications that abortion requires? Why are they not being added to the fight against this coronavirus?”
“Allowing elective abortions is a slap in the face to all those who have made and are still making sacrifices for the better good of our province.”
LifeSiteNews contacted Elliott and the ministry of health for comment but did not receive a response.
Campaign Life Coalition, Canada’s national pro-life, pro-family political lobbying group, has blasted the premiers for not canceling abortions during the pandemic as non-essential.
“Pro-life Canadians are disgusted by the fact that medically unnecessary, elective abortions, committed purely for reasons of lifestyle convenience, are being prioritized ahead of genuine medical treatments, like breast cancer surgery, and other operations and treatments that are actually necessary to keep people alive and healthy,” said Jack Fonseca, Campaign Life director of political operations.
“Are Canada’s provincial health ministers and premiers insane? Does Christine Elliott in Ontario, and all her provincial counterparts around the country, really want to tell women with breast cancer that their surgeries are less ‘essential’ than someone who wants to kill her unborn baby?” he pointed out in an email to LifeSiteNews.
“We have to raise our voices to tell our Premiers and Health Ministers that abortion is never medically necessary, and therefore, all elective abortions must be halted immediately and throughout this Wuhan virus pandemic.”
Campaign Life is urging Canadians to sign its petition to the premiers, which includes a postcard feature, here. Campaign Life is also asking Canadians to call their premiers and has provided a suggested script here.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-02--In homeschooling debate, opposing sides are gathering their forces for battle

May 2 , 2020 ( CatholicCulture.org ) — This spring , due to the school closures mandated by the CO19 lockdown , hundreds of thousands of American parents are having their first experience with home schooling .
Coincidentally , for the many Americans who have already made home schooling a way of life , there have arisen two other critically important news developments : one a serious threat to home schooling , the other a huge potential opportunity .
Consider the threat first .
The May-June issue of Harvard Magazine contains a remarkably candid article entitled “ The Risks of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Harvard Law School professor , Elizabeth Bartholet , makes her argument for a “ presumptive ban ” on the practice of home schooling .
Bartholet sees the practice as “ dangerous , ” because of the likelihood that parents will take an “ authoritarian ” attitude toward their own children .
Digging further into Bartholet ’ s views on the subject , the New Boston Post discovered an article in the Arizona Law Review in which she had explained her perspective more fully : Many home-schooling parents might concede that point , actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ task of educating their children precisely because they don ’ t want to give those children an education comparable to what the public schools provide .
In far too many public schools , students are more likely to learn about climate change and transgender rights than about the multiplication tables and ABCs .
But I digress .
Bartholet is not alone , unfortunately , in viewing parents as a threat to their own children .
At William and Mary , another law professor , James Dwyer , also wants to break down the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decisions about the education of their offspring .
Dwyer argues unapologetically that the government , not the parents , should have the last say .
In fact he claims that “ the reason parent-child relationships exist is because the State confers legal parenthood.
” Dwyer ’ s argument might come as a special surprise to mothers , who thought their relationships with their children began in their wombs , long before the State knew anything about them .
And as a matter of constitutional law , Dwyer ’ s argument runs directly counter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Supreme Court , in the case of Pierce v. Society of Sisters ( 1925 ) : “ The child is not the mere creature of the State ; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right , coupled with the high duty , to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.
” The idea that parental authority is subject to State control is repugnant to the common sense , to Christian teaching , and to American law .
Yet regrettably , we can not dismiss their arguments as the rantings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are respected legal scholars , teaching at prestigious institutions , with considerable resources at their disposal .
And they have plans .
In June , Harvard Law School has scheduled a “ summit ” on home schooling , with Bartholet and Dwyer playing key roles in organizing the event .
The invitation-only summit will bring together legal minds that share the organizers ’ views , and clearly they hope to plan a campaign that could overturn existing precedents , ban or restrict home schooling , and undermine parental rights .
This spring the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case of Espinoza v. Montana .
The case involves Kendra Espinoza , who took advantage of a scholarship program to send her daughters to Stillwater Christian School .
The scholarship program in turn was funded by a tax-credit system , established by the Montana legislature .
But the state ’ s supreme court struck down the tax-credit system , citing the “ Blaine Amendment , ” which bars any form of government funding for religious schools .
So the scholarship program disappeared , and with it Kendra Espinoza ’ s hopes for her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advantages for school-choice advocates , who eagerly took up the legal argument : • The Montana scholarship program does not support religious schools .
It supports parents , who can spend the money as they see fit .
• The state tax-credit program serves a clear public purpose ; the funds can be used only at schools that meet certain criteria set by the state .
• The Blaine Amendment in Montana , like similar measures in many other states , is the product of a wave of anti-Catholic bigotry that swept the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many leading jurists ( including Supreme Court justices ) believe that these amendments themselves are discriminatory and should be overturned .
Espinoza ’ s attorneys came away from their Supreme Court hearing optimistic about the prospects for a favorable decision .
The Court is expected to issue its ruling before the end of June .
A decision in Espinoza ’ s favor , and against the Blaine Amendment , would immediately trigger legal challenges against the Blaine Amendments in other states , and clear the way for a political offensive by advocates of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offered dozens of new measures to support private schools , religious schools , and home schools .
My friend Michael Gilleran , an attorney who prepared an amicus brief for the Supreme Court in the Espinoza case , spoke about the background , the legal issues , and the likely outcome of the case in an April talk sponsored by the Center for the Restoration of Christian Culture at Thomas More College .
I strongly recommend that informative talk to interested readers .
And speaking of that Center ( for which I serve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 13 we shall hold our own “ summit ” on home schooling , as a pre-emptive response to the event at Harvard Law School : Who Owns Our Children : Home Education in an Authoritarian Age .
With our own impressive lineup of speakers , we ’ ll take up the challenge , and join in what could be a pivotal political battle for 2020 and beyond .

May 2, 2020 (CatholicCulture.org) — This spring, due to the school closures mandated by the CO19 lockdown, hundreds of thousands of American parents are having their first experience with home schooling. Coincidentally, for the many Americans who have already made home schooling a way of life, there have arisen two other critically important news developments: one a serious threat to home schooling, the other a huge potential opportunity.
Consider the threat first. The May-June issue of Harvard Magazine contains a remarkably candid article entitled “The Risks of Homeschooling”, in which a distinguished Harvard Law School professor, Elizabeth Bartholet, makes her argument for a “presumptive ban” on the practice of home schooling. Bartholet sees the practice as “dangerous,” because of the likelihood that parents will take an “authoritarian” attitude toward their own children.
Digging further into Bartholet’s views on the subject, the New Boston Post discovered an article in the Arizona Law Review in which she had explained her perspective more fully:
Parents who are ideologically committed to raising children in isolation from the larger society, with views and values counter to much of the education provided in public schools, are not going to be willing or able to provide an education comparable to what schools provide.
Many home-schooling parents might concede that point, actually. They have taken upon themselves the task of educating their children precisely because they don’t want to give those children an education comparable to what the public schools provide. In far too many public schools, students are more likely to learn about climate change and transgender rights than about the multiplication tables and ABCs. But I digress.
Bartholet is not alone, unfortunately, in viewing parents as a threat to their own children. At William and Mary, another law professor, James Dwyer, also wants to break down the presumption that parents should make their own decisions about the education of their offspring. Dwyer argues unapologetically that the government, not the parents, should have the last say. In fact he claims that “the reason parent-child relationships exist is because the State confers legal parenthood.”
Dwyer’s argument might come as a special surprise to mothers, who thought their relationships with their children began in their wombs, long before the State knew anything about them. And as a matter of constitutional law, Dwyer’s argument runs directly counter to the clear ruling of the US Supreme Court, in the case of Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925): “The child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.”
The idea that parental authority is subject to State control is repugnant to the common sense, to Christian teaching, and to American law. Yet regrettably, we cannot dismiss their arguments as the rantings of a few isolated extremists. These are respected legal scholars, teaching at prestigious institutions, with considerable resources at their disposal. And they have plans.
In June, Harvard Law School has scheduled a “summit” on home schooling, with Bartholet and Dwyer playing key roles in organizing the event. The invitation-only summit will bring together legal minds that share the organizers’ views, and clearly they hope to plan a campaign that could overturn existing precedents, ban or restrict home schooling, and undermine parental rights.
Now the good news.
This spring the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of Espinoza v. Montana. The case involves Kendra Espinoza, who took advantage of a scholarship program to send her daughters to Stillwater Christian School. The scholarship program in turn was funded by a tax-credit system, established by the Montana legislature. But the state’s supreme court struck down the tax-credit system, citing the “Blaine Amendment,” which bars any form of government funding for religious schools. So the scholarship program disappeared, and with it Kendra Espinoza’s hopes for her daughters.
The Espinoza case offers several advantages for school-choice advocates, who eagerly took up the legal argument:
The Montana scholarship program does not support religious schools. It supports parents, who can spend the money as they see fit.
The state tax-credit program serves a clear public purpose; the funds can be used only at schools that meet certain criteria set by the state.
The Blaine Amendment in Montana, like similar measures in many other states, is the product of a wave of anti-Catholic bigotry that swept the US in the late 19th-century, and many leading jurists (including Supreme Court justices) believe that these amendments themselves are discriminatory and should be overturned.
Espinoza’s attorneys came away from their Supreme Court hearing optimistic about the prospects for a favorable decision. The Court is expected to issue its ruling before the end of June. A decision in Espinoza’s favor, and against the Blaine Amendment, would immediately trigger legal challenges against the Blaine Amendments in other states, and clear the way for a political offensive by advocates of school choice. State legislatures could be offered dozens of new measures to support private schools, religious schools, and home schools.
My friend Michael Gilleran, an attorney who prepared an amicus brief for the Supreme Court in the Espinoza case, spoke about the background, the legal issues, and the likely outcome of the case in an April talk sponsored by the Center for the Restoration of Christian Culture at Thomas More College. I strongly recommend that informative talk to interested readers.
And speaking of that Center (for which I serve as Program Director), on May 13 we shall hold our own “summit” on home schooling, as a pre-emptive response to the event at Harvard Law School: Who Owns Our Children: Home Education in an Authoritarian Age. With our own impressive lineup of speakers, we’ll take up the challenge, and join in what could be a pivotal political battle for 2020 and beyond.
Published with permission from CatholicCulture.org.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-02--UN secretary general demands abortion access worldwide during coronavirus panic

NEW YORK , May 2 , 2020 ( C-Fam ) — Two competing draft resolutions emerged at the UN this week on the impact of COVID-19 on women .
One of the main disputes in negotiations is over national prerogatives on abortion .
Both resolutions are based on a policy brief from UN Secretary General , Antonio Guterres , published just before Easter on “ The impact of COVID-19 on Women.
” The brief seeks to designate a list of priority policies to protect women from the pandemic , among them “ sexual and reproductive health services.
” One resolution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Egypt , Saudi Arabia , and Zambia , recognizes national prerogatives when it comes to “ sexual and reproductive health.
” The other , sponsored by Europeans , minimizes national prerogatives and gives the UN bureaucracy a broad sweeping mandate , even endorsing the UN Secretary General ’ s brief and a more explicitly pro-abortion guidance note from a UN human rights committee that declared abortion essential to the COVID-19 response .
The brief and both of the initial drafts of the resolutions specifically identify “ sexual and reproductive health ” as essential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be disrupted by COVID-19 health policy decisions .
It is unclear if this same level of priority will be retained after the resolutions are discussed remotely by UN member states .
The COVID-19 pandemic has upended normal UN negotiating dynamics , making the negotiating process less transparent .
The normal procedures of the UN system came to a halt as a result of the global panic over the novel coronavirus .
Since mid-March , the day-to-day operations of the international organization have been reduced to bare essentials .
Human rights panels have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diplomatic pow-wows put on indefinite hold .
The daily deluge of dozens of UN documents is down to a trickle , and operations at UN headquarters are all but shut down .
UN member states are having to rubberstamp resolutions remotely , through a silent procedure .
There are no informal negotiations of resolutions .
Delegations are given time-frames within which to object to resolutions .
If no objection is made , it is declared adopted .
This may be why there are two seemingly competing resolutions on COVID-19 and women .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is widely used to cluster abortion alongside more widely accepted maternal health and family planning health policies .
The Trump administration has spearheaded efforts to remove the term in UN policy and use less ambiguous terminology .
While recognizing the significantly higher impact of COVID-19 on men , the UN Secretary General ’ s policy brief argues that “ the health of women generally is adversely impacted through the reallocation of resources and priorities , including sexual and reproductive health services ” calling them “ central to health , rights and well-being of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was declared a pandemic , UN agencies promoted abortion as an essential service that should not be disrupted in COVID-19 health responses .
Even more attention and resources were dedicated to “ sexual and reproductive health ” in the UN Secretary General ’ s appeal to the UN system for the pandemic , which also made abortion part of the UN ’ s response by incorporating a UN agency manual that refers to abortion as a human right .
The CEDAW Committee , a UN human rights panel that tracks the efforts of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ women ’ s rights , also came out with its own guidance note on COVID-19 telling countries they “ must ” provide “ confidential access to sexual and reproductive health information and services such as modern forms of contraception , safe abortion and post-abortion services ” during the pandemic .

The U.N. secretary general’s policy brief calls 'sexual and reproductive health services' 'central to health, rights and well-being of women and girls.'
PETITION: Urge state governors to stop abortions during coronavirus crisis Sign the petition here.
NEW YORK, May 2, 2020 (C-Fam) — Two competing draft resolutions emerged at the UN this week on the impact of COVID-19 on women. One of the main disputes in negotiations is over national prerogatives on abortion.
Both resolutions are based on a policy brief from UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, published just before Easter on “The impact of COVID-19 on Women.” The brief seeks to designate a list of priority policies to protect women from the pandemic, among them “sexual and reproductive health services.”
One resolution, sponsored by Algeria, China, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Zambia, recognizes national prerogatives when it comes to “sexual and reproductive health.” The other, sponsored by Europeans, minimizes national prerogatives and gives the UN bureaucracy a broad sweeping mandate, even endorsing the UN Secretary General’s brief and a more explicitly pro-abortion guidance note from a UN human rights committee that declared abortion essential to the COVID-19 response.
The brief and both of the initial drafts of the resolutions specifically identify “sexual and reproductive health” as essential “health services” that should not be disrupted by COVID-19 health policy decisions. It is unclear if this same level of priority will be retained after the resolutions are discussed remotely by UN member states.
The COVID-19 pandemic has upended normal UN negotiating dynamics, making the negotiating process less transparent.
The normal procedures of the UN system came to a halt as a result of the global panic over the novel coronavirus. Since mid-March, the day-to-day operations of the international organization have been reduced to bare essentials. Human rights panels have been canceled, UN commissions postponed, and diplomatic pow-wows put on indefinite hold. The daily deluge of dozens of UN documents is down to a trickle, and operations at UN headquarters are all but shut down.
UN member states are having to rubberstamp resolutions remotely, through a silent procedure. There are no informal negotiations of resolutions. Delegations are given time-frames within which to object to resolutions. If no objection is made, it is declared adopted. This may be why there are two seemingly competing resolutions on COVID-19 and women.
The term “sexual and reproductive health” is widely used to cluster abortion alongside more widely accepted maternal health and family planning health policies. The Trump administration has spearheaded efforts to remove the term in UN policy and use less ambiguous terminology.
While recognizing the significantly higher impact of COVID-19 on men, the UN Secretary General’s policy brief argues that “the health of women generally is adversely impacted through the reallocation of resources and priorities, including sexual and reproductive health services” calling them “central to health, rights and well-being of women and girls.”
Since before COVID-19 was declared a pandemic, UN agencies promoted abortion as an essential service that should not be disrupted in COVID-19 health responses. Even more attention and resources were dedicated to “sexual and reproductive health” in the UN Secretary General’s appeal to the UN system for the pandemic, which also made abortion part of the UN’s response by incorporating a UN agency manual that refers to abortion as a human right.
The CEDAW Committee, a UN human rights panel that tracks the efforts of countries to implement the UN treaty on women’s rights, also came out with its own guidance note on COVID-19 telling countries they “must” provide “confidential access to sexual and reproductive health information and services such as modern forms of contraception, safe abortion and post-abortion services” during the pandemic.
Published with permission from C-Fam.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-02--State Dept sends taxpayer funds to abortion-promoting, lawbreaking WHO underling

WASHINGTON , D.C. , May 2 , 2020 ( C-Fam ) — Last week , the U.S. State Department decided to continue funding the Pan American Health Organization ( PAHO ) , while defunding its parent organization , the World Health Organization ( WHO ) .
PAHO ’ s promotion of abortion is at odds with Trump administration foreign policy , and it also violates the Siljander Amendment to U.S. foreign aid law which forbids U.S. funding being used to lobby for or against abortion .
In March of 2019 , Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced a funding cut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American States ( OAS ) , citing promotion of abortion by the OAS subsidiary bodies on human rights and women ’ s issues .
These continue to promote abortion in response to the COVID-19 epidemic .
The State Department did not defund PAHO at that time .
PAHO escaped funding cuts again last week because State Department lawyers argued it was not part of WHO , a source told the Friday Fax .
In fact , PAHO is both the specialized health agency of the Inter-American System and the Regional Office for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ notably backed UNICEF when it advocated to keep abortion legal in Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic .
In “ Reproductive Health and Healthy Motherhood : Aligning National Legislation with International Human Rights Law , ” PAHO identified “ challenges with respect to reproductive rights and healthy motherhood , ” including “ legal provisions that restrict human rights , such as the dissemination of confidential information on reproductive health ; restricted access to emergency oral contraceptives ( EOC ) and family planning methods ; and a lack of protocols for therapeutic abortion.
” PAHO @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the human rights of adolescents , including “ [ i ] nsufficient safe , confidential , institutional services for sexual and reproductive health that offer information , counseling , and the interruption of pregnancy , ” and “ lack of protocols for the therapeutic interruption of pregnancy ” for minors .
PAHO cites the Universal Declaration of Human Rights , the Convention on Economic , Social , and Cultural Rights , the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women , and the Convention on the Rights of the Child @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obligate nations to legalize it or provide it .
It also cites the International Conference on Population and Development , a 1994 conference whose participants expressly rejected a human right to abortion .
The report ’ s authors work for both PAHO and WHO , according to the report .
Among their co-authors is the pro-abortion public interest law firm Center for Reproductive Rights .
PAHO endorses WHO protocols that advance abortion as maternal health care .
In “ Packages of Interventions for Family Planning , Safe Abortion Care , Maternal , Newborn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guiding principles ” including “ ensuring universal access to family planning , safe abortion , maternal , newborn and child health care.
” The guidance includes “ policy broadening legal grounds for safe abortion , universal access to safe services , universal knowledge about the law and services and importance of safe abortion care.
” In an April 2010 meeting co-organized with Planned Parenthood of America , PAHO developed “ strategies and initiatives that advance women ’ s reproductive rights in PAHO Member States , ” to “ review mandates , strategies and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ family planning , oral emergency contraception , and prevention of unplanned pregnancies.
” At another event , PAHO endorsed the expansion of abortion in Panama .
The amendment to U.S. law , named after Rep. Mark Siljander , applies to all foreign assistance funds available through annual appropriations , including health , development , economic support , transition initiatives , complex crises funds , and others .

The U.S. State Department decided to continue funding the Pan American Health Organization even as State defunded the WHO, its parent.
PETITION: Thank President Trump for halting U.S. funding to pro-abortion World Health Organization Sign the petition here.
WASHINGTON, D.C., May 2, 2020 (C-Fam) — Last week, the U.S. State Department decided to continue funding the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), while defunding its parent organization, the World Health Organization (WHO). PAHO’s promotion of abortion is at odds with Trump administration foreign policy, and it also violates the Siljander Amendment to U.S. foreign aid law which forbids U.S. funding being used to lobby for or against abortion.
In March of 2019, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced a funding cut of $210,000 to the Organization of American States (OAS), citing promotion of abortion by the OAS subsidiary bodies on human rights and women’s issues. These continue to promote abortion in response to the COVID-19 epidemic. The State Department did not defund PAHO at that time. PAHO escaped funding cuts again last week because State Department lawyers argued it was not part of WHO, a source told the Friday Fax.
In fact, PAHO is both the specialized health agency of the Inter-American System and the Regional Office for the Americas of the WHO. The organization notably backed UNICEF when it advocated to keep abortion legal in Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic.
In “Reproductive Health and Healthy Motherhood: Aligning National Legislation with International Human Rights Law,” PAHO identified “challenges with respect to reproductive rights and healthy motherhood,” including “legal provisions that restrict human rights, such as the dissemination of confidential information on reproductive health; restricted access to emergency oral contraceptives (EOC) and family planning methods; and a lack of protocols for therapeutic abortion.”
PAHO further identified legal “obstacles” to the human rights of adolescents, including “[i]nsufficient safe, confidential, institutional services for sexual and reproductive health that offer information, counseling, and the interruption of pregnancy,” and “lack of protocols for the therapeutic interruption of pregnancy” for minors.
PAHO cites the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, none of which mention abortion or obligate nations to legalize it or provide it. It also cites the International Conference on Population and Development, a 1994 conference whose participants expressly rejected a human right to abortion. The report’s authors work for both PAHO and WHO, according to the report. Among their co-authors is the pro-abortion public interest law firm Center for Reproductive Rights.
PAHO endorses WHO protocols that advance abortion as maternal health care. In “Packages of Interventions for Family Planning, Safe Abortion Care, Maternal, Newborn and Child Health” it backs “guiding principles” including “ensuring universal access to family planning, safe abortion, maternal, newborn and child health care.” The guidance includes “policy broadening legal grounds for safe abortion, universal access to safe services, universal knowledge about the law and services and importance of safe abortion care.”
In an April 2010 meeting co-organized with Planned Parenthood of America, PAHO developed “strategies and initiatives that advance women’s reproductive rights in PAHO Member States,” to “review mandates, strategies and best practices” with emphasis on “family planning, oral emergency contraception, and prevention of unplanned pregnancies.” At another event, PAHO endorsed the expansion of abortion in Panama.
The amendment to U.S. law, named after Rep. Mark Siljander, applies to all foreign assistance funds available through annual appropriations, including health, development, economic support, transition initiatives, complex crises funds, and others.
Published with permission from C-Fam.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-05--Polish president supports bill to ban ‘eugenic’ abortions against disabled babies

May 4 , 2020 ( Live Action News ) — Under current law , abortions are illegal in Poland except in cases of incest or rape , when there is risk to the mother ’ s life or health ( although , in truth , deliberately killing a preborn child through abortion is never medically necessary ) , or when the preborn child is diagnosed with a life-limiting condition .
Abortions in cases of disability or abnormality in the preborn baby comprise 98 % of legal abortions in Poland .
But Earlier in April , Polish lawmakers debated a bill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Kaja Godek , a pro-life legislator and head of the Life and Family Foundation , rightly described the bill as protection for disabled children .
Godek introduced similar legislation in 2018 that did not ultimately pass .
Polish President Andrzej Duda has indicated that he would endorse the latest pro-life law , saying in an interview , “ I am a strong opponent of eugenic abortion and I believe that killing children with disabilities is frankly murder .
If the plan finds itself on my desk , I will in all certainty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to committee for further debate .
A date for the committee vote has not yet been set .
Pro-abortion groups have portrayed the coincidence of the COVID-19 pandemic and the debate of this pro-life bill as an attempt to silence pro-abortion protesters .
International news coverage has focused on the pro-abortion protests that occurred despite strict social distancing measures in force .
However , the life-saving bill is the result of a Citizen ’ s Initiative which received the support of more than 830,000 Polish residents .
As pro-life groups have previously noted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parliament which formed following the October 2019 election , has a legal duty to consider any Citizens ’ Initiative bills which receive over 100,000 signatures within 6 months of its formation — in this case by May 2020.
” In pushing for legislators to reject the pro-life proposal , abortion supporters unwittingly undermined the “ self-managed ” abortion rhetoric increasingly popular among abortion activists .
One pro-abortion organizer explained that the current pro-life laws in Poland have led to an increase in at-home abortions , funded by international abortion groups , and noted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ women .
Another abortion supporter , Amnesty International Poland Director Draginja Nadazdin , claimed the pro-life bill would “ fuel fear and ignorance ” — which is ironic , because parents are often pressured into aborting a child with disabilities based on fear and ignorance .
Babies with unknown prognoses or life-limiting conditions do not deserve to be violently killed in abortion .
Parents deserve to know that they have other options .

'If the plan finds itself on my desk, I will in all certainty sign it,' said President Andrzej Duda.
PETITION: Urge state governors to stop abortions during coronavirus crisis Sign the petition here.
Editor’s Note: Click HERE to read LifeSite’s story on this situation last month, which explains some nuances of Polish politics.
May 4, 2020 (Live Action News) — Under current law, abortions are illegal in Poland except in cases of incest or rape, when there is risk to the mother’s life or health (although, in truth, deliberately killing a preborn child through abortion is never medically necessary), or when the preborn child is diagnosed with a life-limiting condition. Abortions in cases of disability or abnormality in the preborn baby comprise 98% of legal abortions in Poland. But Earlier in April, Polish lawmakers debated a bill to ban abortions on babies with disabilities.
Kaja Godek, a pro-life legislator and head of the Life and Family Foundation, rightly described the bill as protection for disabled children. Godek introduced similar legislation in 2018 that did not ultimately pass. Polish President Andrzej Duda has indicated that he would endorse the latest pro-life law, saying in an interview, “I am a strong opponent of eugenic abortion and I believe that killing children with disabilities is frankly murder. If the plan finds itself on my desk, I will in all certainty sign it.”
The bill has moved to committee for further debate. A date for the committee vote has not yet been set.
Pro-abortion groups have portrayed the coincidence of the COVID-19 pandemic and the debate of this pro-life bill as an attempt to silence pro-abortion protesters. International news coverage has focused on the pro-abortion protests that occurred despite strict social distancing measures in force. However, the life-saving bill is the result of a Citizen’s Initiative which received the support of more than 830,000 Polish residents.
As pro-life groups have previously noted, “Under Polish law, the parliament which formed following the October 2019 election, has a legal duty to consider any Citizens’ Initiative bills which receive over 100,000 signatures within 6 months of its formation — in this case by May 2020.”
In pushing for legislators to reject the pro-life proposal, abortion supporters unwittingly undermined the “self-managed” abortion rhetoric increasingly popular among abortion activists. One pro-abortion organizer explained that the current pro-life laws in Poland have led to an increase in at-home abortions, funded by international abortion groups, and noted that this increase is a risk to women.
Another abortion supporter, Amnesty International Poland Director Draginja Nadazdin, claimed the pro-life bill would “fuel fear and ignorance” — which is ironic, because parents are often pressured into aborting a child with disabilities based on fear and ignorance.
Babies with unknown prognoses or life-limiting conditions do not deserve to be violently killed in abortion. Parents deserve to know that they have other options.
Published with permission from Live Action News.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-04--Trump admin clarifies Planned Parenthood ineligible for coronavirus relief money

May 4 , 2020 ( The Daily Signal ) — The Trump administration has acted to ensure that no funds from the new Paycheck Protection Program , set up to assist small businesses battered by COVID-19 , will go to Planned Parenthood .
“ President Trump is committed to ensuring Paycheck Protection Program money is used for saving jobs at small businesses , not getting the government into the business of funding abortion , ” a senior administration official told The Daily Signal .
“ While not all Americans share President Trump ’ s pro-life beliefs , there is broad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taxpayers should not have to fund abortion , ” the official said Wednesday night .
The Paycheck Protection Program , designed to shore up small businesses that had to close or otherwise were affected by the coronavirus pandemic , allows businesses with fewer than 500 employees to be forgiven for the principal of a government loan if they don ’ t lay off their employees .
The employers still have to pay the interest on the loans , overseen by the Small Business Administration .
The program ’ s initial $ 350 billion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 30 by the House , was depleted April 16 .
The program received $ 320 billion in new funding in a bill passed Thursday by the House and signed into law Friday by Trump .
The senior administration official told The Daily Signal that the Small Business Administration ’ s mission already excludes big enterprises such as Planned Parenthood , the nation ’ s largest abortion provider .
“ The SB in SBA is for ‘ small business , ’ so SBA has regulations called ‘ affiliation rules ’ to define when small @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a parent organization that they should be considered one large employer , ” the official said , adding : While each Planned Parenthood affiliate has fewer than 500 employees , nationwide it has over 16,000 employees .
So when applying PPP ’ s affiliation rules neutrally , it ’ s clear that Planned Parenthood is one large employer and not eligible for PPP money .
The interim final rule made crystal clear that an organization with Planned Parenthood ’ s corporate structure doesn ’ t qualify .
So far , over 1.6 million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Paycheck Protection Program , with Trump saying that the SBA processed more loans in 14 days than it had in the previous 14 years .
A quote was added to this report shortly after initial publication .
Published with permission from The Daily Signal .

The Trump administration has acted to ensure that no funds from the new Paycheck Protection Program will go to Planned Parenthood.
PETITION: Urge state governors to stop abortions during coronavirus crisis Sign the petition here.
May 4, 2020 (The Daily Signal) — The Trump administration has acted to ensure that no funds from the new Paycheck Protection Program, set up to assist small businesses battered by COVID-19, will go to Planned Parenthood.
“President Trump is committed to ensuring Paycheck Protection Program money is used for saving jobs at small businesses, not getting the government into the business of funding abortion,” a senior administration official told The Daily Signal.
“While not all Americans share President Trump’s pro-life beliefs, there is broad bipartisan support for the idea that American taxpayers should not have to fund abortion,” the official said Wednesday night.
The Paycheck Protection Program, designed to shore up small businesses that had to close or otherwise were affected by the coronavirus pandemic, allows businesses with fewer than 500 employees to be forgiven for the principal of a government loan if they don’t lay off their employees. The employers still have to pay the interest on the loans, overseen by the Small Business Administration.
The program’s initial $350 billion fund, established in legislation passed March 30 by the House, was depleted April 16. The program received $320 billion in new funding in a bill passed Thursday by the House and signed into law Friday by Trump.
The senior administration official told The Daily Signal that the Small Business Administration’s mission already excludes big enterprises such as Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider.
“The SB in SBA is for ‘small business,’ so SBA has regulations called ‘affiliation rules’ to define when small employers might be so closely affiliated with a parent organization that they should be considered one large employer,” the official said, adding:
While each Planned Parenthood affiliate has fewer than 500 employees, nationwide it has over 16,000 employees. So when applying PPP’s affiliation rules neutrally, it’s clear that Planned Parenthood is one large employer and not eligible for PPP money. The interim final rule made crystal clear that an organization with Planned Parenthood’s corporate structure doesn’t qualify.
So far, over 1.6 million businesses have received forgivable loans from the Paycheck Protection Program, with Trump saying that the SBA processed more loans in 14 days than it had in the previous 14 years.
A quote was added to this report shortly after initial publication.
Published with permission from The Daily Signal.
Share