lifesitenews--2020-09-18--Pope Francis tells parents who affirm their children as LGBT: ‘God loves your children as they are’

VATICAN CITY , September 18 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Pope Francis has again implicitly affirmed the notion that God purposefully makes people same-sex attracted and gender dysphoric , telling a group of Italian parents who affirm their children as LGBT that “ God loves your children as they are.
” The Pope met with the group of 40 parents , members of Tenda di Gionata , “ Jonathan ’ s Tent , ” following a public audience , according to a report by America Magazine .
Homosexual activists have long co-opted the Biblical story of the relationship of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jonathan to serve their homosexual agenda .
Mara Grassi , vice president of the Tenda di Gionata , told Pope Francis , “ We wish to create a bridge to the church so that the church too can change its way of looking at our children , no longer excluding them but fully welcoming them.
” Pope Francis has repeatedly delivered mixed signals , often seeming to significantly depart from Church teaching regarding the pastoring of individuals afflicted with homosexuality and transgenderism .
Over the course of his pontificate , Pope Francis has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with addressing homosexual activity according to Church teaching as inherently disordered and intrinsically evil .
Quite the contrary : Not long ago he signalled support for legal recognition of same-sex unions .
He has welcomed a former male student and his boyfriend to the Vatican ’ s U.S. Embassy .
And a French priest said in a televised interview that Pope Francis approved of his blessing of homosexual couples .
In 2013 , the premiere LGBT publication , The Advocate , named Pope Francis “ Person of the Year , ” for asking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seeks the Lord with goodwill , who am I to judge ?
” The Advocate editor ’ s explanation of their choice reveals the consequences of Pope Francis ’ words : In 2017 , the LGBT world applauded Pope Francis ’ recruitment of fellow Jesuit , pro-LGBT Fr .
James Martin , as a communications consultant to the Holy See ’ s Secretariat for Communications .
Martin has led the charge to normalize homosexuality and trangenderism within the Catholic Church virtually unhindered .
In a widely publicized event two years later , Fr @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vatican for a private meeting , bolstering the credibility of Martin ’ s pro-LGBT advocacy .
The private audience took place for over 30 minutes in the papal library of the Apostolic Palace , and America magazine interpreted the meeting as a “ highly significant public statement of support and encouragement ” for the American Jesuit .
Martin himself saw it as “ a sign of the Holy Father ’ s care for L.G.B.T .
people.
” In 2016 , Pope Francis referred to a woman who had undergone a sex-change operation as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ referred to her as having “ married ” another woman and admitted to receiving them in the Vatican last year .
Referring to the post-trans surgery woman , the Pope said , “ He got married.
” ‘ He that was ‘ her ’ but is he , ’ explained Pope Francis .
In 2018 , a homosexual man who visited Pope Francis said the Pope told him , “ God made you gay.
” The allegation came from Juan Carlos Cruz , one of the child victims of sexual abuse by Chilean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ giant leap from his already confounding , impenetrable , “ Who am I to judge ?
” suggesting to the world that the Church is treading down a path to justifying LGBT identity and activity as fully normal .
Such a path would be impossible for the Church of Christ .
The Vatican press office 's Cristina Ravenda told LifeSiteNews at the time , “ The Vatican does not comment on private conversations of the Pope.
” Pope Francis could have personally issued a correction to the story , but a correction never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ out ” gay priest , Fr .
James Alison , who rejects the Church ’ s teaching on homosexuality shared his personal reaction to a phone call he claims he received from Pope Francis in which the Pontiff reportedly affirmed him as a homosexual priest .
Last month , after a controversial nun opened a residence in Argentina for ‘ trans women ’ —men who choose to identify as women— Pope Francis praised her work , referring to the men as “ girls.
” “ Dear Monica , God who did not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will repay you abundantly .
I pray for you and your girls , ” said the Pope , according to the nun , Sister Mónica Astorga Cremona .

Pope Francis has repeatedly delivered mixed signals, often seeming to significantly depart from Church teaching regarding the pastoring of individuals afflicted with homosexuality and transgenderism
PETITION: Stand with priest who faces Church penalties for saying “You can't be a Catholic and a Democrat.”! Sign the petition here.
VATICAN CITY, September 18, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Pope Francis has again implicitly affirmed the notion that God purposefully makes people same-sex attracted and gender dysphoric, telling a group of Italian parents who affirm their children as LGBT that “God loves your children as they are.”
The Pope met with the group of 40 parents, members of Tenda di Gionata, “Jonathan’s Tent,” following a public audience, according to a report by America Magazine. Homosexual activists have long co-opted the Biblical story of the relationship of bosom friendship that existed between David and Jonathan to serve their homosexual agenda.
Mara Grassi, vice president of the Tenda di Gionata, told Pope Francis, “We wish to create a bridge to the church so that the church too can change its way of looking at our children, no longer excluding them but fully welcoming them.”
Pope Francis has repeatedly delivered mixed signals, often seeming to significantly depart from Church teaching regarding the pastoring of individuals afflicted with homosexuality and transgenderism.
Over the course of his pontificate, Pope Francis has given indications that he is not concerned with addressing homosexual activity according to Church teaching as inherently disordered and intrinsically evil. Quite the contrary: Not long ago he signalled support for legal recognition of same-sex unions. He has welcomed a former male student and his boyfriend to the Vatican’s U.S. Embassy. And a French priest said in a televised interview that Pope Francis approved of his blessing of homosexual couples.
In 2013, the premiere LGBT publication, The Advocate, named Pope Francis “Person of the Year,” for asking, “If someone is gay and seeks the Lord with goodwill, who am I to judge?”
The Advocate editor’s explanation of their choice reveals the consequences of Pope Francis’ words:
The most influential person of 2013 doesn't come from our ongoing legal conflict but instead from our spiritual one — successes from which are harder to define. There has not been any vote cast or ruling issued, and still a significant and unprecedented shift took place this year in how LGBT people are considered by one of the world's largest faith communities.
In 2017, the LGBT world applauded Pope Francis’ recruitment of fellow Jesuit, pro-LGBT Fr. James Martin, as a communications consultant to the Holy See’s Secretariat for Communications. Martin has led the charge to normalize homosexuality and trangenderism within the Catholic Church virtually unhindered.
In a widely publicized event two years later, Fr. Martin joined Pope Francis at the Vatican for a private meeting, bolstering the credibility of Martin’s pro-LGBT advocacy.
The private audience took place for over 30 minutes in the papal library of the Apostolic Palace, and America magazine interpreted the meeting as a “highly significant public statement of support and encouragement” for the American Jesuit. Martin himself saw it as “a sign of the Holy Father’s care for L.G.B.T. people.”
In 2016, Pope Francis referred to a woman who had undergone a sex-change operation as a “man,” and also referred to her as having “married” another woman and admitted to receiving them in the Vatican last year.
Referring to the post-trans surgery woman, the Pope said, “He got married.”
‘He that was ‘her’ but is he,’ explained Pope Francis.
In 2018, a homosexual man who visited Pope Francis said the Pope told him, “God made you gay.” The allegation came from Juan Carlos Cruz, one of the child victims of sexual abuse by Chilean clergy.
The Jesuit Pontiff made a giant leap from his already confounding, impenetrable, “Who am I to judge?” suggesting to the world that the Church is treading down a path to justifying LGBT identity and activity as fully normal.
Such a path would be impossible for the Church of Christ.
The Vatican press office's Cristina Ravenda told LifeSiteNews at the time, “The Vatican does not comment on private conversations of the Pope.” Pope Francis could have personally issued a correction to the story, but a correction never came.
Earlier this year, an “out” gay priest, Fr. James Alison, who rejects the Church’s teaching on homosexuality shared his personal reaction to a phone call he claims he received from Pope Francis in which the Pontiff reportedly affirmed him as a homosexual priest.
Last month, after a controversial nun opened a residence in Argentina for ‘trans women’ —men who choose to identify as women— Pope Francis praised her work, referring to the men as “girls.”
“Dear Monica, God who did not go to the seminary or study theology will repay you abundantly. I pray for you and your girls,” said the Pope, according to the nun, Sister Mónica Astorga Cremona.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-18--San Fran archbishop to hold massive eucharistic procession to protest mayor’s crackdown on worship

SAN FRANCISCO , September 18 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — San Francisco ’ s archbishop has blasted the city ’ s newest coronavirus restrictions as “ uniquely punitive ” to believers and is asking Catholics to join Eucharistic processions this Sunday that will eventually “ process together ” as a “ public witness of faith ” to press civil authorities to “ Free the Mass.
” Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone ’ s call to action was sparked by Mayor London Breed ’ s coronavirus norms that came into effect September 14 .
A spokesperson for the archdiocese told LifeSiteNews that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ engage in civil disobedience and that participants at the Sunday event will follow the requirements of remaining in groups of 50 , and social distancing .
In a September 13 letter to his priests , Cordileone said that under the “ arbitrary ” and “ inconsistent ” new measures , “ believers are being singled out for uniquely punitive treatment , ” and that the time has come to push back .
The mayor ’ s norms still forbid any indoor gatherings in houses of worship — other than 12 people to live-stream @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a maximum of 50 people — up from the 12 previously allowed .
And while Breed permits indoor private prayer , only one person at a time is allowed inside .
By contrast , businesses such as hair salons , nail salons and massage parlors that involve “ extended close one-on-one contact ” have reopened .
Public parks remain open “ without numerical limit.
” Hotels in San Francisco are fully reopened ; indoor gyms can operate at 10 percent capacity , most retail stores are allowed to operate at 50 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to Catholic News Agency .
“ The civil government has no right to dictate to the Church whether or not it may ‘ allow ’ worship or not , ” Cordileone told his priests .
“ This is an overreach of the government into the life of the Church and an infringement of our right to worship as protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution.
” “ I have done my best to make the case that the Mass is safe , and the data show that , but it has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the archbishop .
“ So , I ’ ve made the decision that we can ’ t be silent any longer .
We can not simply standby while our people are treated with this lack of compassion for their needs , and this lack of respect for their rights.
” Cordileone reiterated this in a homily the same day .
“ We have been enduring unjust treatment at the hands of our elected officials for months , who are stifling our natural right to worship and overstepping the bounds of their authority , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are Christians , so we must respond peaceably and always in the spirit of responsible citizenship , not with violence , as do those without faith.
” Cordileone ’ s letter points out that San Francisco “ is the most restrictive county in the entire country when it comes to public worship , ” and the state of California “ not much better.
” On July 13 , Democratic California Gov .
Gavin Newsom issued a new round of lockdown orders , after rolling back ones from March , in which 29 counties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state ’ s population , were ordered to shut down houses of worship as well as restaurants , bars , gyms , and other types of businesses indefinitely .
On August 31 , the most restricted counties were allowed to open some businesses and activities “ with modifications , including all retail , shopping centers at maximum 25 % capacity , and hair salons and barbershops indoors , ” according to a California government website .
“ The numbers are totally arbitrary : Why only 50 people outside ?
Why only 100 indoors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ why is there any limit ?
The City , in fact , has allowed , and even participated in , street protests without any limit on number , ” the archbishop observed in his letter .
Cordileone emphasized that he has “ worked hard ” behind the scenes with local authorities to ensure churches are safe environments and to demonstrate that the archdiocese is determined to “ adhere to sound principles of public health.
” The city has not responded to a plan for the safe operation of churches that the archdiocese submitted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Agency .
His letter cited a review by three infectious disease specialists of the data of the more than one million public Masses that have taken place over the last 14 weeks .
They concluded no outbreaks of COVID-19 have been linked to church attendance .
Cordileone told CNA in early September that many of his priests are celebrating multiple Masses every Sunday , outside , and with social distancing , to adhere to the restrictions .
“ The Body and Blood of Christ is the source and summit of our Faith .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and many priests are responding to the call as best they can , ” he said .
As for the September 20 public witness to faith , Cordileone ’ s letter said the archdiocese has ordered 100 banners in English , 15 in Spanish , and 5 in Chinese with the motto : “ We Are Essential : Free the Mass !
” It would be “ ideal ” if people carried these banners in the three Eucharistic processions that will begin at St. Anthony , St. Patrick , and Star of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ processions will join at United Nations Plaza near San Francisco City Hall and continue to the Cathedral of St. Mary of the Assumption where Cordileone will lead priests in offering multiple outdoor Masses in both English and Spanish , with participants observing social distancing .
He also asked priests at a minimum to hang the banners “ on your church as a sign that the Church is speaking out with a united voice on this , just as we did when legislation was proposed that would have required priests to break the seal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ promote a petition calling on the city of San Francisco to lift restrictions on public worship , as well as the upcoming October 3 Rosary Rally .
“ I fear for our city , I fear for our nation .
But we must not be ruled by fear .
We walk by faith , not by sight , ” Cordileone said in his homily .
“ And so we must unite , pull together in a common witness of our faith and of the primacy of God.
” Cordileone ’ s call to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Californians attended an outdoor worship service at the state capitol that was also an act of defiance against Newsom ’ s restrictions , as LifeSite ’ s Calvin Freiburger reported last week .
Numerous Protestant churches have defied the governor ’ s order , including Grace Community Church of Sun Valley , Cornerstone Church of Fresno , Destiny Christian Church of Rocklin , Harvest Rock Church of Pasadena , Godspeak Calvary Chapel of Thousand Oaks , and North Valley Baptist Church of Santa Clara .
The last two currently face thousands of dollars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for singing during service .
Los Angeles County has gone to court four times so far in efforts to secure a court order to quash indoor religious services at Grace Community .
Meanwhile , Catholics in the Bay Area attending Mass outside have had to endure some of the worst air quality in the world these last weeks because of the wild fires devastating the west coast .
Air quality is expected to worsen this weekend as coastal winds push smoke toward the city , CNA reported .
Read Archbishop Cordileone ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Bishops missing in action as Christian pastors defy California gov ’ s orders to hold worship services

PETITION: Stand with priest who faces Church penalties for saying “You can't be a Catholic and a Democrat.”! Sign the petition here.
SAN FRANCISCO, September 18, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — San Francisco’s archbishop has blasted the city’s newest coronavirus restrictions as “uniquely punitive” to believers and is asking Catholics to join Eucharistic processions this Sunday that will eventually “process together” as a “public witness of faith” to press civil authorities to “Free the Mass.”
Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone’s call to action was sparked by Mayor London Breed’s coronavirus norms that came into effect September 14. A spokesperson for the archdiocese told LifeSiteNews that the archbishop's intent is not to engage in civil disobedience and that participants at the Sunday event will follow the requirements of remaining in groups of 50, and social distancing.
In a September 13 letter to his priests, Cordileone said that under the “arbitrary” and “inconsistent” new measures, “believers are being singled out for uniquely punitive treatment,” and that the time has come to push back.
The mayor’s norms still forbid any indoor gatherings in houses of worship — other than 12 people to live-stream a service — and restrict outdoor gatherings to a maximum of 50 people — up from the 12 previously allowed.
And while Breed permits indoor private prayer, only one person at a time is allowed inside.
By contrast, businesses such as hair salons, nail salons and massage parlors that involve “extended close one-on-one contact” have reopened. Public parks remain open “without numerical limit.”
Hotels in San Francisco are fully reopened; indoor gyms can operate at 10 percent capacity, most retail stores are allowed to operate at 50 percent capacity and malls at 25 percent, according to Catholic News Agency.
“The civil government has no right to dictate to the Church whether or not it may ‘allow’ worship or not,” Cordileone told his priests.
“This is an overreach of the government into the life of the Church and an infringement of our right to worship as protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution.”
“I have done my best to make the case that the Mass is safe, and the data show that, but it has been to no avail,” added the archbishop.
“So, I’ve made the decision that we can’t be silent any longer. We cannot simply standby while our people are treated with this lack of compassion for their needs, and this lack of respect for their rights.”
Cordileone reiterated this in a homily the same day.
“We have been enduring unjust treatment at the hands of our elected officials for months, who are stifling our natural right to worship and overstepping the bounds of their authority,” he said.
“But we are Christians, so we must respond peaceably and always in the spirit of responsible citizenship, not with violence, as do those without faith.”
Cordileone’s letter points out that San Francisco “is the most restrictive county in the entire country when it comes to public worship,” and the state of California “not much better.”
On July 13, Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom issued a new round of lockdown orders, after rolling back ones from March, in which 29 counties, representing about 80 percent of the state’s population, were ordered to shut down houses of worship as well as restaurants, bars, gyms, and other types of businesses indefinitely.
On August 31, the most restricted counties were allowed to open some businesses and activities “with modifications, including all retail, shopping centers at maximum 25% capacity, and hair salons and barbershops indoors,” according to a California government website.
“The numbers are totally arbitrary: Why only 50 people outside? Why only 100 indoors? If social distancing is maintained, why is there any limit? The City, in fact, has allowed, and even participated in, street protests without any limit on number,” the archbishop observed in his letter.
Cordileone emphasized that he has “worked hard” behind the scenes with local authorities to ensure churches are safe environments and to demonstrate that the archdiocese is determined to “adhere to sound principles of public health.”
The city has not responded to a plan for the safe operation of churches that the archdiocese submitted in May, he told Catholic News Agency.
His letter cited a review by three infectious disease specialists of the data of the more than one million public Masses that have taken place over the last 14 weeks. They concluded no outbreaks of COVID-19 have been linked to church attendance.
Cordileone told CNA in early September that many of his priests are celebrating multiple Masses every Sunday, outside, and with social distancing, to adhere to the restrictions.
“The Body and Blood of Christ is the source and summit of our Faith. People are hungry for the Eucharist, and many priests are responding to the call as best they can,” he said.
As for the September 20 public witness to faith, Cordileone’s letter said the archdiocese has ordered 100 banners in English, 15 in Spanish, and 5 in Chinese with the motto: “We Are Essential: Free the Mass!”
It would be “ideal” if people carried these banners in the three Eucharistic processions that will begin at St. Anthony, St. Patrick, and Star of the Sea parishes, he said.
The processions will join at United Nations Plaza near San Francisco City Hall and continue to the Cathedral of St. Mary of the Assumption where Cordileone will lead priests in offering multiple outdoor Masses in both English and Spanish, with participants observing social distancing.
He also asked priests at a minimum to hang the banners “on your church as a sign that the Church is speaking out with a united voice on this, just as we did when legislation was proposed that would have required priests to break the seal of confession.”
He urged them to promote a petition calling on the city of San Francisco to lift restrictions on public worship, as well as the upcoming October 3 Rosary Rally.
“I fear for our city, I fear for our nation. But we must not be ruled by fear. We walk by faith, not by sight,” Cordileone said in his homily.
“And so we must unite, pull together in a common witness of our faith and of the primacy of God.”
Cordileone’s call to action comes a week after some 12,000 Californians attended an outdoor worship service at the state capitol that was also an act of defiance against Newsom’s restrictions, as LifeSite’s Calvin Freiburger reported last week.
Numerous Protestant churches have defied the governor’s order, including Grace Community Church of Sun Valley, Cornerstone Church of Fresno, Destiny Christian Church of Rocklin, Harvest Rock Church of Pasadena, Godspeak Calvary Chapel of Thousand Oaks, and North Valley Baptist Church of Santa Clara.
The last two currently face thousands of dollars in fines for holding in-person services and for singing during service. Los Angeles County has gone to court four times so far in efforts to secure a court order to quash indoor religious services at Grace Community.
Meanwhile, Catholics in the Bay Area attending Mass outside have had to endure some of the worst air quality in the world these last weeks because of the wild fires devastating the west coast. Air quality is expected to worsen this weekend as coastal winds push smoke toward the city, CNA reported.
Read Archbishop Cordileone’s letter here. Sign the petition here.
For respectful communication, contact:
Mayor London Breed
1 Dr Carlton B Goodlett Pl,
San Francisco CA 94102
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 415-554-5977
Related:
WATCH: California church defies gov Newsom’s order to remain closed, backs ‘recall’ effort
Judge rules Los Angeles can ban religious worship
California archbishop performs exorcism on site of St. Junipero Serra statue desecration
Bishops missing in action as Christian pastors defy California gov’s orders to hold worship services
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-18--Revealed: Chinese Communist org bankrolls Black Lives Matter org started by Marxist founder

September 18 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – While the mainstream media frames Black Lives Matter ( BLM ) as merely a rational response to discrimination and police brutality , the movement is actually involved in a litany of radical causes … for which it enjoys the backing of equally radical organizations .
The Daily Signal reported that the Black Futures Lab , an activist group started by BLM founder Alicia Garza , identifies itself as a “ fiscally sponsored project of the Chinese Progressive Association ” ( CPA ) on its donation page .
The CPA is a San @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Communist Chinese government since the 1970s .
Clicking the “ Black Futures Lab ” header on the donation page even redirects to the CPA ’ s website , which states its mission as building “ collective power ” between “ the low income and working class immigrant Chinese community in San Francisco ” and “ other oppressed communities , ” instead of BFL ’ s own website .
The CPA and the BLM movement both enjoy the support of the official Chinese state newspaper China Daily , which has praised the former and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protests over killing by police.
” Garza , meanwhile , is a far-left activist described by her allies as a “ trained Marxist , ” who has described her larger goal as “ dismantling the organizing principle of this society , ” meaning capitalism .
The connection highlights the disconnect between how BLM is portrayed in the press and the full extent of its political aims .
The organization declares among its official goals “ disrupt ( ing ) the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one another ; ” and fostering “ a queer‐affirming network … with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking.
” It also officially supports “ reproductive justice , ” a euphemism for abortion .
The New York Post offers additional reason to suspect that Chinese government-aligned organizations ’ professed regard for racial equality is less than sincere .
“ The U.S. State Department issued an advisory in May noting that law enforcement in China had ordered bars and restaurants not to serve people who appear to be of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

September 18, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – While the mainstream media frames Black Lives Matter (BLM) as merely a rational response to discrimination and police brutality, the movement is actually involved in a litany of radical causes … for which it enjoys the backing of equally radical organizations.
The Daily Signal reported that the Black Futures Lab, an activist group started by BLM founder Alicia Garza, identifies itself as a “fiscally sponsored project of the Chinese Progressive Association” (CPA) on its donation page. The CPA is a San Francisco-based group that has propagandized for the Communist Chinese government since the 1970s.
Clicking the “Black Futures Lab” header on the donation page even redirects to the CPA’s website, which states its mission as building “collective power” between “the low income and working class immigrant Chinese community in San Francisco” and “other oppressed communities,” instead of BFL’s own website.
The CPA and the BLM movement both enjoy the support of the official Chinese state newspaper China Daily, which has praised the former and approvingly covered “global support for U.S. protests over killing by police.”
Garza, meanwhile, is a far-left activist described by her allies as a “trained Marxist,” who has described her larger goal as “dismantling the organizing principle of this society,” meaning capitalism.
The connection highlights the disconnect between how BLM is portrayed in the press and the full extent of its political aims. The organization declares among its official goals “disrupt(ing) the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another;” and fostering “a queer‐affirming network … with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking.” It also officially supports “reproductive justice,” a euphemism for abortion.
The New York Post offers additional reason to suspect that Chinese government-aligned organizations’ professed regard for racial equality is less than sincere. “The U.S. State Department issued an advisory in May noting that law enforcement in China had ordered bars and restaurants not to serve people who appear to be of African origin,” the Post reported.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-18--Ontario imposes ‘highest’ fines in country for those who break new COVID gathering limits

TORONTO , Ontario , September 18 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Ontario Premier Doug Ford has imposed “ severe fines ” which will be the “ highest in Canada ” for those who break physical distancing health rules put in place due to the coronavirus .
In his daily media update on Thursday , Ford said that his government “ will throw the book at you if you break the rules ” with fines of “ a minimum ” of $ 10,000 for anyone who organizes “ illegal ” social gatherings and $ 750 for those who are at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social get-togethers of 50 people inside and 100 outside , but as of Friday , these limits will be lowered in Ottawa , Toronto , and the Peel Region to only 10 indoors and 25 outdoors .
The new restrictions apply to “ social gatherings in private residences , backyards , parks and other recreational areas .
This includes : functions , parties , dinners , gatherings , barbecues , wedding receptions.
” “ The new limits do not apply to events or gatherings in staffed businesses and facilities because they must already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to minimize risk and limit the spread of COVID-19 .
They include : bars , restaurants , cinemas , convention centres or banquet halls , gyms , recreational sporting or performing art events , religious services , rites or ceremonies , ” the regulations states .
“ There ’ s going to be some severe fines for people who want to ignore the regulations , ” Ford said to reporters on Wednesday .
“ They ’ re going to be the highest ( fines ) in the country and they ’ re going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ ll make sure that there is follow-through.
” Ford said earlier in the week that he blames the rise in COVID-19 cases because of social gatherings , and not because of restaurants or bars being open .
Ford ’ s comments on Wednesday immediately drew condemnation from many in the province , such as Ontario ’ s Dr. Kulvinder Gill , who is disappointed in Ford ’ s new measures .
“ What happened to following the science ?
Why are @ [ email protected ] knowingly planning to impose further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ PCR ‘ cases ’ data ?
Ample evidence globally—illogical lockdowns lead to immense collateral morbidity/mortality , ” wrote Gill on Twitter .
Gill is the president and co-founder of Concerned Ontario Doctors .
She has been a critical opponent of the lockdown measures and the need for a vaccine and recently said the “ smears against Hydroxychloroquine ” as an effective treatment for COVID-19 need to stop .
Recently , according to federal public health agency data , Canada reported zero deaths attributed to the coronavirus in a 24-hour period for the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ data shows that positive COVID-19 cases have risen in the past few weeks , hospitalization rates , including ICU admissions , as well as deaths , have remained low in Ontario , with the province reporting 53 people in hospital because of COVID-19 and 21 of them in ICU , including 12 on ventilators .
Earlier in the week , Ford , who himself has been a vocal opponent of those fighting against the lockdown measures put in place in Ontario , said “ We will take every step necessary including further shutdowns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of COVID-19 .
Jim Karahalios , who was banned from running as a leadership candidate for the Conservative Party of Canada , took to Twitter to show his anger against Ford ’ s claim that social gatherings are to blame for the apparent rise in cases .
“ Maybe @ fordnation 's next move will be to ban all weddings ?
?
?
Seems to be the trajectory he is on .
# ONpoli # cdnpoli , ” wrote Karahalios on Twitter .
Concerned Ontario Doctors also voiced their disapproval and concern over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and fines , calling them an “ abuse of power.
” '' Today Premier @ fordnation encouraged your neighbours to snitch on you and call the police to have legal authorities come into your home to lay charges for not following his unscientific , illogical policies based on meaningless 'cases'.Let this sink in.THIS IS ABUSE OF POWER , '' wrote the group on Twitter Thursday .
In a video statement today , Independent MPP for Ontario Randy Hillier came out and said that restrictions put in place due to COVID-19 were not made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ No longer must we rely on predictions , models , and misinformation.
” “ The evidence is clear and without a doubt , the probability of becoming sick or dying from COVID presents little risk to 99 % of our population , and of those who may fall ill , 99 % are expected to recover with little side effect , ” said Hillier in his statement .
“ Without debate or vote , we have embraced arbitrary rules , we have thrown away the rule of law , we have accepted unaccountable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have empowered governments to deprive people of their businesses , employment , and livelihoods .
Socialism is neither a cure nor a remedy for COVID.
” Dr. Harvey Risch , an epidemiologist at Yale School of Public Health , told LifeSiteNews earlier in the week that the only “ solution ” to COVID-19 is herd immunity , which is what Dr. Gill has advocated for , and that lockdowns “ postpone the inevitable.
” He also said that Canada “ should not replicate the Israeli experience ” in terms of what Israel did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ original ( Israeli ) lockdown achieved about no new cases for two weeks and yet a massive second wave occurred when the lockdown reopened because there was no understanding of the reservoir of asymptomatic infected people in the population , ” Risch told LifeSiteNews .

Premier Doug Ford’s new regulations limiting various indoor and outdoor gatherings of people in three regions has been called an ‘abuse of power’
PETITION: No to radical mandatory mask mandates! Sign the petition here.
TORONTO, Ontario, September 18, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Ontario Premier Doug Ford has imposed “severe fines” which will be the “highest in Canada” for those who break physical distancing health rules put in place due to the coronavirus.
In his daily media update on Thursday, Ford said that his government “will throw the book at you if you break the rules” with fines of “a minimum” of $10,000 for anyone who organizes “illegal” social gatherings and $750 for those who are at such an event.
Ontario currently limits social get-togethers of 50 people inside and 100 outside, but as of Friday, these limits will be lowered in Ottawa, Toronto, and the Peel Region to only 10 indoors and 25 outdoors.
The new restrictions apply to “social gatherings in private residences, backyards, parks and other recreational areas. This includes: functions, parties, dinners, gatherings, barbecues, wedding receptions.”
“The new limits do not apply to events or gatherings in staffed businesses and facilities because they must already follow specific public health and safety guidelines to minimize risk and limit the spread of COVID-19. They include: bars, restaurants, cinemas, convention centres or banquet halls, gyms, recreational sporting or performing art events, religious services, rites or ceremonies,” the regulations states.
“There’s going to be some severe fines for people who want to ignore the regulations,” Ford said to reporters on Wednesday.
“They’re going to be the highest (fines) in the country and they’re going to be under provincial jurisdiction … so we’ll make sure that there is follow-through.”
Ford said earlier in the week that he blames the rise in COVID-19 cases because of social gatherings, and not because of restaurants or bars being open.
Ford’s comments on Wednesday immediately drew condemnation from many in the province, such as Ontario’s Dr. Kulvinder Gill, who is disappointed in Ford’s new measures.
“What happened to following the science? Why are @[email protected] knowingly planning to impose further catastrophic, unscientific lockdowns based on meaningless PCR ‘cases’ data? Ample evidence globally—illogical lockdowns lead to immense collateral morbidity/mortality,” wrote Gill on Twitter.
Gill is the president and co-founder of Concerned Ontario Doctors. She has been a critical opponent of the lockdown measures and the need for a vaccine and recently said the “smears against Hydroxychloroquine” as an effective treatment for COVID-19 need to stop.
Recently, according to federal public health agency data, Canada reported zero deaths attributed to the coronavirus in a 24-hour period for the first time in six months.
While the data shows that positive COVID-19 cases have risen in the past few weeks, hospitalization rates, including ICU admissions, as well as deaths, have remained low in Ontario, with the province reporting 53 people in hospital because of COVID-19 and 21 of them in ICU, including 12 on ventilators.
Earlier in the week, Ford, who himself has been a vocal opponent of those fighting against the lockdown measures put in place in Ontario, said “We will take every step necessary including further shutdowns,” because of rising case counts of COVID-19.
Jim Karahalios, who was banned from running as a leadership candidate for the Conservative Party of Canada, took to Twitter to show his anger against Ford’s claim that social gatherings are to blame for the apparent rise in cases.
“Maybe @fordnation's next move will be to ban all weddings??? Seems to be the trajectory he is on. #ONpoli #cdnpoli,” wrote Karahalios on Twitter.
Concerned Ontario Doctors also voiced their disapproval and concern over Ford’s threat of new lockdowns and fines, calling them an “abuse of power.”
“Today Premier @fordnation encouraged your neighbours to snitch on you and call the police to have legal authorities come into your home to lay charges for not following his unscientific, illogical policies based on meaningless 'cases'.Let this sink in.THIS IS ABUSE OF POWER,” wrote the group on Twitter Thursday.
In a video statement today, Independent MPP for Ontario Randy Hillier came out and said that restrictions put in place due to COVID-19 were not made based on facts, and that “No longer must we rely on predictions, models, and misinformation.”
“The evidence is clear and without a doubt, the probability of becoming sick or dying from COVID presents little risk to 99% of our population, and of those who may fall ill, 99% are expected to recover with little side effect,” said Hillier in his statement.
“Without debate or vote, we have embraced arbitrary rules, we have thrown away the rule of law, we have accepted unaccountable authority instead of representative government, we have empowered governments to deprive people of their businesses, employment, and livelihoods. Socialism is neither a cure nor a remedy for COVID.”
Dr. Harvey Risch, an epidemiologist at Yale School of Public Health, told LifeSiteNews earlier in the week that the only “solution” to COVID-19 is herd immunity, which is what Dr. Gill has advocated for, and that lockdowns “postpone the inevitable.”
He also said that Canada “should not replicate the Israeli experience” in terms of what Israel did to combat the coronavirus.
“The original (Israeli) lockdown achieved about no new cases for two weeks and yet a massive second wave occurred when the lockdown reopened because there was no understanding of the reservoir of asymptomatic infected people in the population,” Risch told LifeSiteNews.
Contact Information:
Office of Ontario Premier Doug Ford
Room 281
Legislative Building, Queen's Park
Toronto, ON M7A 1A1
Tel.416-325-1941
Fax.416-325-3745
[email protected]
Website contact form: https://correspondence.premier.gov.on.ca/EN/feedback/default.aspx
Ontario MPP Contact information page
https://www.ola.org/en/members/current/contact-information
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-18--US employment regulator files suit supporting women fired for rejecting pro-LGBT uniform

WASHINGTON , D.C. , September 17 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — The U.S .
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC ) is suing retail giant Kroger for firing two employees who refused to wear a pro-homosexual and pro-transgenderism uniform .
The federal agency also sued snack food producer Frito-Lay for religious discrimination .
A Kroger store in Conway , Arkansas had “ implemented a new dress code , which included an apron depicting a rainbow-colored heart emblem on the bib of the apron , ” according to an EEOC press release .
Two women were fired after stating that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transgenderism , arguing that it violated their religious beliefs .
One of the women “ offered to wear the apron with the emblem covered and the other offered to wear a different apron without the emblem , but the company made no attempt to accommodate their requests.
” Following the women ’ s refusal to comply with the store ’ s demands , “ Kroger retaliated against them by disciplining and ultimately discharging them.
” “ Companies have an obligation under Title VII to consider requests for religious accommodations , and it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accommodation for their religious beliefs , ” explained the EEOC ’ s Delner-Franklin Thomas , who is responsible for Arkansas , Tennessee and portions of Mississippi .
“ The EEOC protects the rights of the LGBTQ community , but it also protects the rights of religious people.
” The EEOC also sued Frito-Lay , which is part of PepsiCo and owns brands such as Doritos , Tostitos , and Lay ’ s , for religious discrimination .
According to the lawsuit , “ a West Palm Beach Frito-Lay warehouse employee applied for and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The employee completed approximately five weeks of training without having to train on Saturdays .
However , despite learning he could not work on Saturdays because of his Seventh-day Adventist religious beliefs , Frito-Lay scheduled him to train on Saturdays and terminated him after he failed to report to training on two consecutive Saturdays.
” EEOC regional attorney Robert Weisberg emphasized that any employer , including Frito-Lay , “ is obligated to accommodate an employee ’ s religious beliefs , for example , by providing a schedule change , when it would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ employer to only schedule the worker to work on Saturdays when it knows he can not due to his religious beliefs violates federal law .
”

The two women were fired because they refused to wear uniforms sporting a rainbow heart, which ran contrary to their faith.
WASHINGTON, D.C., September 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is suing retail giant Kroger for firing two employees who refused to wear a pro-homosexual and pro-transgenderism uniform. The federal agency also sued snack food producer Frito-Lay for religious discrimination.
A Kroger store in Conway, Arkansas had “implemented a new dress code, which included an apron depicting a rainbow-colored heart emblem on the bib of the apron,” according to an EEOC press release. Two women were fired after stating that the emblem supported and endorsed homosexuality and transgenderism, arguing that it violated their religious beliefs.
One of the women “offered to wear the apron with the emblem covered and the other offered to wear a different apron without the emblem, but the company made no attempt to accommodate their requests.” Following the women’s refusal to comply with the store’s demands, “Kroger retaliated against them by disciplining and ultimately discharging them.”
“Companies have an obligation under Title VII to consider requests for religious accommodations, and it is illegal to terminate employees for requesting an accommodation for their religious beliefs,” explained the EEOC’s Delner-Franklin Thomas, who is responsible for Arkansas, Tennessee and portions of Mississippi. “The EEOC protects the rights of the LGBTQ community, but it also protects the rights of religious people.”
The EEOC also sued Frito-Lay, which is part of PepsiCo and owns brands such as Doritos, Tostitos, and Lay’s, for religious discrimination.
According to the lawsuit, “a West Palm Beach Frito-Lay warehouse employee applied for and received a promotion to route sales representative. The employee completed approximately five weeks of training without having to train on Saturdays. However, despite learning he could not work on Saturdays because of his Seventh-day Adventist religious beliefs, Frito-Lay scheduled him to train on Saturdays and terminated him after he failed to report to training on two consecutive Saturdays.”
EEOC regional attorney Robert Weisberg emphasized that any employer, including Frito-Lay, “is obligated to accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs, for example, by providing a schedule change, when it would cause no undue hardship. For an employer to only schedule the worker to work on Saturdays when it knows he cannot due to his religious beliefs violates federal law.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-18--Netflix film ‘Cuties’ is morally indefensible: Girls should never be sexually exploited to get a mes

Netflix film ‘Cuties’ is morally indefensible: Girls should never be sexually exploited to get a message across

September 18 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Most of you will already have seen ( or read about ) the backlash to the Netflix release Cuties , a film about a dance troupe of pre-pubescent girls filled with sexualized imagery , close-up crotch shots , and other disturbing content .
# CancelNetflix trended on Twitter for days .
Netflix stock began to tumble .
And for once , and some conservative commentators expressed relief : At least we could all agree that this went too far .
Even some liberal voices expressed their disgust .
Nancy Pelosi ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tweeted this : “ Hi @ netflix , from a customer and former ADA in SFDA ’ a Child Abuse-Sexual Assault Unit : ‘ Cuties ’ hypersexualizes girls my daughter ’ s age no doubt to the delight of pedophiles like the ones I prosecuted .
Cancel this , apologize , work with experts to heal your harm.
” Former Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard chimed in , tweeting that : “ @ netflix child porn `` Cuties '' will certainly whet the appetite of pedophiles & help fuel the child sex trafficking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trafficking are children .
It happened to my friend 's 13 year old daughter .
Netflix , you are now complicit.
” I cite those liberal opponents of Cuties because it didn ’ t take long before the progressive media began to defend the film .
Several outlets actually claimed that the outrage was “ right-wing , ” which is pretty phenomenal self-own .
Every right-winger I know ( and I know a lot of them ) would be happy to admit that child porn and the sexualization of children outrages them .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the indefensible did precisely the opposite of what they were intending to do , and complimented conservatives to boot .
Defending child porn to own the cons .
The only reason I ’ m weighing in is because I ’ ve seen many progressives ( and the occasional libertarian , the sort that hates to condemn anything and enjoys appearing hip and cool and “ more reasonable ” than their conservative friends on social media ) attempting to dismiss the outrage over this film as a “ moral panic.
” I ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that conservatives got this film precisely wrong—this is not a film that sexualizes children , they say , but a film that exposes the problems with the sexualization of children .
After all , the film is about a girl from a conservative Muslim family who joins a twerking dance troupe and then , by the end of the film , rejects both the hyper-conservatism of her family and the hyper-sexualization of post-modern culture .
I ’ d like to briefly respond to that argument , because this is a common method of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defenders are claiming is that you can perpetrate an injustice in order to expose an injustice .
If you show a film about a murder in order to expose what happened , for example , the re-enactment does not feature an actual murder .
When you sexualize little girls to point out that sexualizing little girls is wrong , you are actually perpetrating the thing you claim to be condemning .
It is the same thing with pornography and pornographic scenes in films or TV shows : The actors aren ’ t pretending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sex acts—they are actually doing so .
In fact , the child actors were exploited not only in the sexualized behavior they were paid to perform onscreen , but also in the lines they were told to memorize .
Over at The American Conservative , Rod Dreher notes that in one scene , the girls are watching porn ( or pretending to ) on a cell phone in a bathroom .
As they watch , they describe to one another what they are watching—and the sex acts they discuss are vile .
As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ memorize this dialogue and perform it on camera .
They also had to learn how to stroke their crotches , twerk , put their fingers in their mouths suggestively , and move like strippers mimicking vigorous intercourse .
The actors are children .
Simply to play their roles , they had to have their innocence taken from them by the filmmaker — no doubt with the consent of their parent or parents .
It is hard to imagine fathers and mothers allowing their little girls to be exploited in this way , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ My point is that the intention of the director , even if noble , does not obviate the fact that for these children to play these roles , they had to say filthy things ( and to imagine visually the things the script had them saying ) , and do filthy things with their bodies for the camera .
Our culture is now so morally dysfunctional that some people can not see what is happening before their very eyes .
Drag Queen Storytime , “ Drag Kids , ” children twerking at Pride @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dances—all of these things are happening , and when conservatives condemn them , progressives double down to defend these latest manifestations of the metastasizing Sexual Revolution .
They pretend that those who see these things are too stupid , or too square , or too religious , or too uncultured to understand the value in sexualizing kids .
They try to tell us that we are not seeing what we know we are seeing : Who are you going to believe ?
Us or your lying eyes ?
The ugly reality is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe that the Sexual Revolution will stop now .
Every sexual standard civilization held to for 2,000 years has been trashed in a matter of decades .
Do we actually think there are brakes on this train ?
Jonathon ’ s new podcast , The Van Maren Show , is dedicated to telling the stories of the pro-life and pro-family movement .
In his latest episode , he interviews Women for Trump board member Danielle D ’ Souza Gill .
She ’ s also a graduate of Dartmouth College and the author of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Choice : The Abortion Divide in America.
” You can subscribe here and listen to the episode below :

PETITION: Call for an additional Presidential Debate on Family Issues! Sign the petition here.
September 18, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Most of you will already have seen (or read about) the backlash to the Netflix release Cuties, a film about a dance troupe of pre-pubescent girls filled with sexualized imagery, close-up crotch shots, and other disturbing content. #CancelNetflix trended on Twitter for days. Netflix stock began to tumble. And for once, and some conservative commentators expressed relief: At least we could all agree that this went too far.
Even some liberal voices expressed their disgust. Nancy Pelosi’s daughter Christine Pelosi, for example, tweeted this: “Hi @netflix, from a customer and former ADA in SFDA’a Child Abuse-Sexual Assault Unit: ‘Cuties’ hypersexualizes girls my daughter’s age no doubt to the delight of pedophiles like the ones I prosecuted. Cancel this, apologize, work with experts to heal your harm.”
Former Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard chimed in, tweeting that: “@netflix child porn “Cuties” will certainly whet the appetite of pedophiles & help fuel the child sex trafficking trade. 1 in 4 victims of trafficking are children. It happened to my friend's 13 year old daughter. Netflix, you are now complicit.”
I cite those liberal opponents of Cuties because it didn’t take long before the progressive media began to defend the film. Several outlets actually claimed that the outrage was “right-wing,” which is pretty phenomenal self-own. Every right-winger I know (and I know a lot of them) would be happy to admit that child porn and the sexualization of children outrages them. These long think pieces attempting to defend the indefensible did precisely the opposite of what they were intending to do, and complimented conservatives to boot. Defending child porn to own the cons.
The only reason I’m weighing in is because I’ve seen many progressives (and the occasional libertarian, the sort that hates to condemn anything and enjoys appearing hip and cool and “more reasonable” than their conservative friends on social media) attempting to dismiss the outrage over this film as a “moral panic.” I’ve seen several on social media actually claim that conservatives got this film precisely wrong—this is not a film that sexualizes children, they say, but a film that exposes the problems with the sexualization of children. After all, the film is about a girl from a conservative Muslim family who joins a twerking dance troupe and then, by the end of the film, rejects both the hyper-conservatism of her family and the hyper-sexualization of post-modern culture.
Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook
I’d like to briefly respond to that argument, because this is a common method of excusing inexcusable material. What these Cuties defenders are claiming is that you can perpetrate an injustice in order to expose an injustice. If you show a film about a murder in order to expose what happened, for example, the re-enactment does not feature an actual murder. When you sexualize little girls to point out that sexualizing little girls is wrong, you are actually perpetrating the thing you claim to be condemning. It is the same thing with pornography and pornographic scenes in films or TV shows: The actors aren’t pretending to get naked and pretending to simulate sex acts—they are actually doing so.
In fact, the child actors were exploited not only in the sexualized behavior they were paid to perform onscreen, but also in the lines they were told to memorize. Over at The American Conservative, Rod Dreher notes that in one scene, the girls are watching porn (or pretending to) on a cell phone in a bathroom. As they watch, they describe to one another what they are watching—and the sex acts they discuss are vile. As Dreher noted:
These children had to memorize this dialogue and perform it on camera. They also had to learn how to stroke their crotches, twerk, put their fingers in their mouths suggestively, and move like strippers mimicking vigorous intercourse. The actors are children. Simply to play their roles, they had to have their innocence taken from them by the filmmaker — no doubt with the consent of their parent or parents. It is hard to imagine fathers and mothers allowing their little girls to be exploited in this way, but people will do anything for fame. My point is that the intention of the director, even if noble, does not obviate the fact that for these children to play these roles, they had to say filthy things (and to imagine visually the things the script had them saying), and do filthy things with their bodies for the camera.
Our culture is now so morally dysfunctional that some people cannot see what is happening before their very eyes. Drag Queen Storytime, “Drag Kids,” children twerking at Pride celebrations, films featuring children performing sexual dances—all of these things are happening, and when conservatives condemn them, progressives double down to defend these latest manifestations of the metastasizing Sexual Revolution. They pretend that those who see these things are too stupid, or too square, or too religious, or too uncultured to understand the value in sexualizing kids. They try to tell us that we are not seeing what we know we are seeing: Who are you going to believe? Us or your lying eyes?
The ugly reality is that there is really no good reason to believe that the Sexual Revolution will stop now. Every sexual standard civilization held to for 2,000 years has been trashed in a matter of decades. Do we actually think there are brakes on this train?
Jonathon’s new podcast, The Van Maren Show, is dedicated to telling the stories of the pro-life and pro-family movement. In his latest episode, he interviews Women for Trump board member Danielle D’Souza Gill. She’s also a graduate of Dartmouth College and the author of the brand new book titled “The Choice: The Abortion Divide in America.”
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--2020-09-18--Join our daily worldwide rosary HERE

Join our daily worldwide rosary HERE

September 18 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – In response to the crisis unfolding in our world and in the Church , LifeSite is offering Catholics throughout the world a chance to be united daily in prayer , in the Our Lady of Fatima Rosary Crusade .
Catholics from all over the world—from Israel , Uganda , Italy , France , Germany , Ireland , Pakistan , Singapore , the Philippines , India , Indonesia , Australia , New Zealand , Thailand , the United Kingdom , the U.S. , Canada , Brazil , and other countries—are gathering daily to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Anthony Pillari , J.C.L.
, an American priest currently studying in Italy .
Our goal is , by means of this daily rosary and by embracing and living out the message given by the Virgin Mary at Fatima , the triumph of Our Lady ’ s Immaculate Heart .
To help obtain that goal , Bishop Athanasius Schneider graciously composed the following prayer for this worldwide rosary crusade : O Immaculate Heart of Mary , you are the holy Mother of God and our tender Mother .
Look upon the distress in which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are living because of the spread of materialism and the persecution of the Church .
In Fatima you warned against these errors , as you spoke about the errors of Russia .
You are the Mediatrix of all graces .
Implore your Divine Son to grant this special grace for the Pope : that he might consecrate Russia to your Immaculate Heart , so that Russia will be converted , a period of peace will be granted to the world , and your Immaculate Heart will triumph , through an authentic renewal of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ purity of the Catholic Faith , of the sacredness of Divine worship and of the holiness of the Christian life .
O Queen of the holy Rosary and our sweet Mother , turn your merciful eyes to us and graciously hear this our trusting prayer .
Amen .
+ Athanasius Schneider , Auxiliary Bishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana To learn more about the urgency of responding to Our Lady ’ s message at Fatima , and about what you can do , please read Cardinal Burke ’ s 2017 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ https : //voiceofthefamily.com/full-text-cardinal-burkes-historic-call-for-consecration-of-russia/ ) .
As St. Padre Pio once said , “ The rosary is the weapon for these times.
” Through prayer , God can shape history , change the world , and bring about a great time of renewal and peace for the Church and for the world , through the triumph of Our Lady ’ s Immaculate Heart .
Join us today !
If you would like to follow along with the prayers said during this rosary , you can access them via this PDF .
This document also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the daily rosary on LifeSite led by Fr .
Pillari .

(LifeSiteNews) — In response to the crisis unfolding in our world and in the Church, LifeSite is happy to promote Regina Angelorum Press’s Daily Rosary, which is offering Catholics throughout the world the chance to be united daily in prayer, in the Our Lady of Fatima Rosary Crusade.
Catholics from all over the world — from Israel, Uganda, Italy, France, Germany, Ireland, Pakistan, Singapore, the Philippines, India, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, the United Kingdom, the U.S., Canada, Brazil, and other countries — are gathering daily to pray the Rosary, led by Father Pillari, JCL, MCL, STL, an American priest currently studying in Italy.
The Daily Rosary is being offered each day at 12noon EST through Regina Angelorum Press’ YouTube Channel to which you can subscribe HERE.
The goal is, by means of this Daily Rosary and by embracing and living out the message given by the Virgin Mary at Fatima, the triumph of Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart.
To help obtain that goal, Bishop Athanasius Schneider graciously composed the following prayer for this worldwide Rosary crusade:
O Immaculate Heart of Mary, you are the holy Mother of God and our tender Mother. Look upon the distress in which the Church and the whole of humanity are living because of the spread of materialism and the persecution of the Church. In Fatima you warned against these errors, as you spoke about the errors of Russia. You are the Mediatrix of all graces. Implore your Divine Son to grant this special grace for the Pope: that he might consecrate Russia to your Immaculate Heart, so that Russia will be converted, a period of peace will be granted to the world, and your Immaculate Heart will triumph, through an authentic renewal of the Church in the splendor of the purity of the Catholic Faith, of the sacredness of Divine worship and of the holiness of the Christian life. O Queen of the holy Rosary and our sweet Mother, turn your merciful eyes to us and graciously hear this our trusting prayer. Amen. + Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
To learn more about the urgency of responding to Our Lady’s message at Fatima, and about what you can do, please read Cardinal Burke’s 2017 address at the Rome Life Forum.
As St. Padre Pio once said, “The Rosary is the weapon for these times.” Through prayer, God can shape history, change the world, and bring about a great time of renewal and peace for the Church and for the world, through the triumph of Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart. Join us today!
If you would like to follow along with the prayers said during this Rosary, you can access them HERE. The document also includes a brief F.A.Q. pertaining to the daily Rosary.
You can send your prayer requests to https://reginangelorumpress.com/prayer-intentions/
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-17--Undercover pro-life journalist Daleiden fights Planned Parenthood with federal defamation lawsuit

NEW YORK CITY , September 17 , 2020 ( Thomas More Society ) – Undercover journalist David Daleiden is turning the tables on abortion giant Planned Parenthood Federation of America ( PPFA ) with a defamation lawsuit filed in New York federal district court on September 17 , 2020 .
Represented by the Thomas More Society , Daleiden is taking the abortion giant to task for telling the media that he and The Center for Medical Progress “ manufacture [ d ] ” and “ created ” a “ false smear campaign ” by releasing videos showing clear evidence of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ PPFA network ’ s participation in illegal harvesting and selling of aborted fetal body parts .
PPFA ’ s statements are provably false and betray their own admissions about the veracity of the videos .
Daleiden has been a target of Planned Parenthood since the 2015 release of his investigative videos exposed the abortion company ’ s apparent involvement in illegal aborted baby body parts trafficking .
Daleiden ’ s undercover research into abortion industry fetal tissue sales spurred Congressional investigations into Planned Parenthood and its business partners and instigated a national public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Congressional probes and multi-pronged legal action resulted in the severing of services to Planned Parenthood by their one-time biowaste disposal company , Stericycle .
Court testimony in lawsuits and hearings related to Daleiden ’ s investigation revealed shocking details about the lengths to which abortion providers are willing to go to make a profit off of the babies they abort .
In the wake of the negative publicity , Planned Parenthood has filed lawsuits and levied public accusations at Daleiden , including a steady stream of misleading claims and disingenuous narrative .
Yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ veracity of Daleiden ’ s videos on trial in a court of law , where it has even stipulated that the words used by Planned Parenthood officials in the videos indeed “ were spoken by those persons.
” But in the court of public opinion , Planned Parenthood has taken a different approach , calling the videos “ manufactured ” and “ false.
” These statements are clearly false and actionable in court .
According to Tom Brejcha , president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Society , “ Planned Parenthood is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by killing off America ’ s next generation and endangering pregnant women .
Additionally , they feel that they must obliterate the reputation of anyone who dares to challenge them and suggest that what they are doing is not the great philanthropic work that they pretend it is .
Planned Parenthood ’ s very existence is an anathema to America ’ s pursuit of the most basic of human rights and they know it .
We have not been surprised over their campaign to smear the reputation of Mr. Daleiden , but they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reputation for exposing the truth.
” “ Instead of coming clean about its ruthless pursuit of profit from selling the remains of aborted children , Planned Parenthood tried to smear David Daleiden , the man who blew the whistle on its dirty secret , '' said Peter Breen , Vice President and Senior Counsel for the Thomas More Society .
`` In its earlier lawsuit against David and the Center for Medical Progress , Planned Parenthood fought to avoid scrutiny of its illegal fetal tissue trafficking .
This new lawsuit puts Planned Parenthood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ center , to prove the truth of the conclusions of David ’ s investigation , which were also confirmed and echoed by the United States Congress and other government officials.
” Daleiden ’ s lawsuit zeroes in on a false statement issued by Planned Parenthood Federation of America Senior Vice President of Communication and Culture Melanie Newman on September 18 , 2019 , in which she told Rewire News that Daleiden and The Center for Medical Progress “ manufacture [ d ] a fake smear campaign against Planned Parenthood.
” The filing also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tweet posted by Planned Parenthood Federation of America on their official Twitter feed that said Daleiden and others associated with The Center for Medical Progress “ created a false smear campaign against Planned Parenthood.
” The lawsuit assures that the Daleiden undercover videos , as shown in court and admitted by Planned Parenthood itself , have truly and accurately recorded Planned Parenthood officials ’ own shocking words spoken in real life .
Read the Verified Complaint and Jury Demand filed by the Thomas More Society on behalf of David Daleiden and The Center @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Center for Medical Progress and David Daleiden v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America at The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on September 17 , 2020 , here Background on the Thomas More Society ’ s defense of David Daleiden for his exposé of Planned Parenthood ’ s alleged participation in trafficking baby body parts can be found here .
The Thomas More Society is a national not-for-profit law firm dedicated to restoring respect in law for life , family , and religious liberty .
Headquartered in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NJ , the Thomas More Society fosters support for these causes by providing high quality pro bono legal services from local trial courts all the way up to the United States Supreme Court .
For more information , visit thomasmoresociety.org .

Daleiden is taking the abortion giant to task for telling the media that the undercover journalist manufactured a 'false smear campaign' by releasing videos showing evidence of Planned Parenthood's involvment in illegal harvesting and selling of aborted fetal body parts
NEW YORK CITY, September 17, 2020 (Thomas More Society) – Undercover journalist David Daleiden is turning the tables on abortion giant Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) with a defamation lawsuit filed in New York federal district court on September 17, 2020.
Represented by the Thomas More Society, Daleiden is taking the abortion giant to task for telling the media that he and The Center for Medical Progress “manufacture[d]” and “created” a “false smear campaign” by releasing videos showing clear evidence of high-level Planned Parenthood officials candidly discussing the PPFA network’s participation in illegal harvesting and selling of aborted fetal body parts. PPFA’s statements are provably false and betray their own admissions about the veracity of the videos.
Daleiden has been a target of Planned Parenthood since the 2015 release of his investigative videos exposed the abortion company’s apparent involvement in illegal aborted baby body parts trafficking. Daleiden’s undercover research into abortion industry fetal tissue sales spurred Congressional investigations into Planned Parenthood and its business partners and instigated a national public outcry to “Defund Planned Parenthood.” Congressional probes and multi-pronged legal action resulted in the severing of services to Planned Parenthood by their one-time biowaste disposal company, Stericycle. Court testimony in lawsuits and hearings related to Daleiden’s investigation revealed shocking details about the lengths to which abortion providers are willing to go to make a profit off of the babies they abort.
In the wake of the negative publicity, Planned Parenthood has filed lawsuits and levied public accusations at Daleiden, including a steady stream of misleading claims and disingenuous narrative. Yet Planned Parenthood has scrupulously avoided putting the veracity of Daleiden’s videos on trial in a court of law, where it has even stipulated that the words used by Planned Parenthood officials in the videos indeed “were spoken by those persons.” But in the court of public opinion, Planned Parenthood has taken a different approach, calling the videos “manufactured” and “false.” These statements are clearly false and actionable in court.
According to Tom Brejcha, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Society, “Planned Parenthood is not content to make obscene financial profit by killing off America’s next generation and endangering pregnant women. Additionally, they feel that they must obliterate the reputation of anyone who dares to challenge them and suggest that what they are doing is not the great philanthropic work that they pretend it is. Planned Parenthood’s very existence is an anathema to America’s pursuit of the most basic of human rights and they know it. We have not been surprised over their campaign to smear the reputation of Mr. Daleiden, but they are not allowed to falsely besmirch his reputation for exposing the truth.”
“Instead of coming clean about its ruthless pursuit of profit from selling the remains of aborted children, Planned Parenthood tried to smear David Daleiden, the man who blew the whistle on its dirty secret,” said Peter Breen, Vice President and Senior Counsel for the Thomas More Society. “In its earlier lawsuit against David and the Center for Medical Progress, Planned Parenthood fought to avoid scrutiny of its illegal fetal tissue trafficking. This new lawsuit puts Planned Parenthood’s grisly business practices front and center, to prove the truth of the conclusions of David’s investigation, which were also confirmed and echoed by the United States Congress and other government officials.”
Daleiden’s lawsuit zeroes in on a false statement issued by Planned Parenthood Federation of America Senior Vice President of Communication and Culture Melanie Newman on September 18, 2019, in which she told Rewire News that Daleiden and The Center for Medical Progress “manufacture[d] a fake smear campaign against Planned Parenthood.”
The filing also names a November 15, 2019, tweet posted by Planned Parenthood Federation of America on their official Twitter feed that said Daleiden and others associated with The Center for Medical Progress “created a false smear campaign against Planned Parenthood.”
The lawsuit assures that the Daleiden undercover videos, as shown in court and admitted by Planned Parenthood itself, have truly and accurately recorded Planned Parenthood officials’ own shocking words spoken in real life.
Read the Verified Complaint and Jury Demand filed by the Thomas More Society on behalf of David Daleiden and The Center for Medical Progress in the lawsuit, The Center for Medical Progress and David Daleiden v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America at The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on September 17, 2020, here .
Background on the Thomas More Society’s defense of David Daleiden for his exposé of Planned Parenthood’s alleged participation in trafficking baby body parts can be found here.
The Thomas More Society is a national not-for-profit law firm dedicated to restoring respect in law for life, family, and religious liberty. Headquartered in Chicago, Omaha, and Fairfield, NJ, the Thomas More Society fosters support for these causes by providing high quality pro bono legal services from local trial courts all the way up to the United States Supreme Court. For more information, visit thomasmoresociety.org.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-19--US votes against international COVID-19 resolution, citing abortion concerns

NEW YORK , September 18 , 2020 ( C-Fam ) — Citing concerns about abortion , the Trump administration voted against a UN resolution on the COVID-19 pandemic .
Amid a chorus of reservations and acrimonious voting two Fridays ago , the U.N. General Assembly adopted a long-awaited resolution on the coronavirus .
The U.S. cited a long list of concerns , including the insertion of the controversial term “ sexual and reproductive health.
” “ We do not accept references to sexual and reproductive health , ” said U.S. diplomat Jason Mack , pointing to the use of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health service.
” “ There is no international right to abortion , nor is there any duty on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion , ” he explained .
It took seven months of negotiations for the resolution to be voted on .
Even so , Member States could not smooth out all their differences , however , only the U.S. and Israel ended up voting against the resolution .
Other delegations expressed reservations rather than vote against it .
Among the reasons cited for voting against the resolution , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ongoing dispute of the U.S. government with the World Health Organization .
The resolution speaks highly of the global health body , whereas the U.S. has been critical of its response to the pandemic and has initiated a withdrawal from the international organization .
The U.S. put the paragraph on “ reproductive health ” to a vote .
The vote failed by a wide margin .
Only three countries aligned with the U.S. government .
One hundred and twenty-two aligned with the European Union , against the U.S. pro-life positions .
Over fifty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote .
Germany , speaking on behalf of the European Union , criticized the U.S. attempt to delete “ sexual and reproductive health.
” The delegate said it sent a “ terrible signal.
” Citing the World Health Organization ’ s guidelines during the pandemic , their statement said reproductive health was an “ essential health service.
” Australia , speaking on behalf of 42 countries mainly from Europe and Latin America , also complained about the U.S. request to delete “ sexual and reproductive health.
” The United Kingdom called sexual and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ UN COVID-19 response .
From the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic , the World Health Organization has maintained that sexual and reproductive health , and abortion specifically , should be an essential part of government responses to the health crisis .
The UN Secretary General has followed their lead , and continues to promote abortion during the global health emergency .
The U.S. government may not have received many votes in support , but several delegations expressed solidarity with U.S. pro-life concerns .
Iraq said the resolution on COVID-19 was not a “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issues .
Libya said , “ sexual and reproductive health ” was “ controversial terminology.
” Their diplomat said the UN should not use this language “ against our country ” and asserted its right to draw up legislation in line with national priorities and according to its cultural heritage .
Guatemala also made a reservation on the language on sexual and reproductive health , saying it “ could be erroneously interpreted ” as including a right to abortion .
Russia distanced itself from UN “ review conferences ” that are known for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ autonomy for children .
The Holy See expressed concern with pro-life issues in the COVID-19 pandemic more broadly .
The Apostolic Nuncio , Archbishop Gabriele Caccia — the personal representative of Pope Francis to the United Nations — brought up concerns about abortion , surrogacy , sterilization , ethical concerns with the development of new vaccines , and the right to life of older persons .

A huge number of countries aligned with the European Union steamrolled the U.S. and three allies in adopting pro-abortion language.
NEW YORK, September 18, 2020 (C-Fam) — Citing concerns about abortion, the Trump administration voted against a UN resolution on the COVID-19 pandemic.
Amid a chorus of reservations and acrimonious voting two Fridays ago, the U.N. General Assembly adopted a long-awaited resolution on the coronavirus. The U.S. cited a long list of concerns, including the insertion of the controversial term “sexual and reproductive health.”
“We do not accept references to sexual and reproductive health,” said U.S. diplomat Jason Mack, pointing to the use of the phrase to legitimize abortion as a “health service.”
“There is no international right to abortion, nor is there any duty on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion,” he explained.
It took seven months of negotiations for the resolution to be voted on. Even so, Member States could not smooth out all their differences, however, only the U.S. and Israel ended up voting against the resolution. Other delegations expressed reservations rather than vote against it.
Among the reasons cited for voting against the resolution, Mack also cited anti-Israel bias and the ongoing dispute of the U.S. government with the World Health Organization. The resolution speaks highly of the global health body, whereas the U.S. has been critical of its response to the pandemic and has initiated a withdrawal from the international organization.
The U.S. put the paragraph on “reproductive health” to a vote. The vote failed by a wide margin. Only three countries aligned with the U.S. government. One hundred and twenty-two aligned with the European Union, against the U.S. pro-life positions. Over fifty countries abstained or did not cast a vote.
Germany, speaking on behalf of the European Union, criticized the U.S. attempt to delete “sexual and reproductive health.” The delegate said it sent a “terrible signal.” Citing the World Health Organization’s guidelines during the pandemic, their statement said reproductive health was an “essential health service.”
Australia, speaking on behalf of 42 countries mainly from Europe and Latin America, also complained about the U.S. request to delete “sexual and reproductive health.” The United Kingdom called sexual and reproductive health “vital” to the UN COVID-19 response.
From the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the World Health Organization has maintained that sexual and reproductive health, and abortion specifically, should be an essential part of government responses to the health crisis. The UN Secretary General has followed their lead, and continues to promote abortion during the global health emergency.
The U.S. government may not have received many votes in support, but several delegations expressed solidarity with U.S. pro-life concerns.
Iraq said the resolution on COVID-19 was not a “suitable” place to address sensitive social issues.
Libya said, “sexual and reproductive health” was “controversial terminology.” Their diplomat said the UN should not use this language “against our country” and asserted its right to draw up legislation in line with national priorities and according to its cultural heritage.
Guatemala also made a reservation on the language on sexual and reproductive health, saying it “could be erroneously interpreted” as including a right to abortion.
Russia distanced itself from UN “review conferences” that are known for promoting abortion, LGBT, and sexual autonomy for children.
The Holy See expressed concern with pro-life issues in the COVID-19 pandemic more broadly.
The Apostolic Nuncio, Archbishop Gabriele Caccia — the personal representative of Pope Francis to the United Nations — brought up concerns about abortion, surrogacy, sterilization, ethical concerns with the development of new vaccines, and the right to life of older persons.
Published with permission from C-Fam.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-19--Join our daily worldwide rosary HERE

Join our daily worldwide rosary HERE

September 19 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – In response to the crisis unfolding in our world and in the Church , LifeSite is offering Catholics throughout the world a chance to be united daily in prayer , in the Our Lady of Fatima Rosary Crusade .
Catholics from all over the world—from Israel , Uganda , Italy , France , Germany , Ireland , Pakistan , Singapore , the Philippines , India , Indonesia , Australia , New Zealand , Thailand , the United Kingdom , the U.S. , Canada , Brazil , and other countries—are gathering daily to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Anthony Pillari , J.C.L.
, an American priest currently studying in Italy .
Our goal is , by means of this daily rosary and by embracing and living out the message given by the Virgin Mary at Fatima , the triumph of Our Lady ’ s Immaculate Heart .
To help obtain that goal , Bishop Athanasius Schneider graciously composed the following prayer for this worldwide rosary crusade : O Immaculate Heart of Mary , you are the holy Mother of God and our tender Mother .
Look upon the distress in which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are living because of the spread of materialism and the persecution of the Church .
In Fatima you warned against these errors , as you spoke about the errors of Russia .
You are the Mediatrix of all graces .
Implore your Divine Son to grant this special grace for the Pope : that he might consecrate Russia to your Immaculate Heart , so that Russia will be converted , a period of peace will be granted to the world , and your Immaculate Heart will triumph , through an authentic renewal of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ purity of the Catholic Faith , of the sacredness of Divine worship and of the holiness of the Christian life .
O Queen of the holy Rosary and our sweet Mother , turn your merciful eyes to us and graciously hear this our trusting prayer .
Amen .
+ Athanasius Schneider , Auxiliary Bishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana To learn more about the urgency of responding to Our Lady ’ s message at Fatima , and about what you can do , please read Cardinal Burke ’ s 2017 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ https : //voiceofthefamily.com/full-text-cardinal-burkes-historic-call-for-consecration-of-russia/ ) .
As St. Padre Pio once said , “ The rosary is the weapon for these times.
” Through prayer , God can shape history , change the world , and bring about a great time of renewal and peace for the Church and for the world , through the triumph of Our Lady ’ s Immaculate Heart .
Join us today !
If you would like to follow along with the prayers said during this rosary , you can access them via this PDF .
This document also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the daily rosary on LifeSite led by Fr .
Pillari .


lifesitenews--2020-09-22--Ruth Bader Ginsburg zealously defended partial-birth abortion multiple times

September 21 , 2020 ( CNS News ) — Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg , who defended what she argued was a constitutional “ right ” to partial-birth abortion , passed away on Friday night .
She was 87 years old .
In the 2000 case of Stenberg vs. Carhart and the 2007 case of Gonzales vs. Carhart , Ginsburg made clear her view that the U.S. Constitution protected a “ right ” to abortion ( as the court had ruled in the 1973 case of Roe vs. Wade and the 1992 case of Planned Parenthood vs. Casey ) and that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ partial-birth abortion .
The 2000 case of Stenberg vs. Carhart focused on a Nebraska state law that outlawed partial-birth abortions .
At the time , there were also 29 other states that banned partial-birth abortions .
The court ruled 5-4 in Stenberg that Nebraska ’ s partial birth abortion law was unconstitutional .
The five-justice majority included Justices Stephen Breyer , John Paul Stevens , Sandra Day O ’ Connor , David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg .
Chief Justice William Rehnquist dissented as did Justices Antonin Scalia , Anthony Kennedy and Clarence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stenberg , Justice Thomas described the partial-birth abortion procedure which the court ’ s majority declared a constitutional right .
Although there are variations , it is generally performed as follows : After dilating the cervix , the physician will grab the fetus by its feet and pull the fetal body out of the uterus into the vaginal cavity .
At this stage of development , the head is the largest part of the body .
Assuming the physician has performed the dilation procedure correctly , the head will be held inside the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
While the fetus is stuck in this position , dangling partly out of the woman ’ s body , and just a few inches from a completed birth , the physician uses an instrument such as a pair of scissors to tear or perforate the skull .
The physician will then either crush the skull or will use a vacuum to remove the brain and other intracranial contents from the fetal skull , collapse the fetus ’ head , and pull the fetus from the uterus .
In her own opinion , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to throw out the Nebraska law banning partial-birth abortion , Justice Ginsburg cited Parenthood vs. Casey and said that the partial-birth abortion ban “ violates the Constitution.
” “ A state regulation that ‘ has the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus ’ violates the Constitution , ” Ginsburg wrote in her Stenberg opinion .
Seven years later , in the case of Gonzales vs. Carhart , the court reviewed a federal ban on partial-birth abortion .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the partial-birth abortion ban .
Justice Ginsburg wrote the dissent in which Justices Stevens , Souter and Breyer joined .
In this dissent , Ginsburg argued that it was “ irrational ” to ban partial-birth abortion .
“ In sum , ” wrote Ginsburg , “ the notion that the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act furthers any legitimate governmental interest is , quite simply , irrational.
” She then argued that the court ’ s opinion upholding the partial-birth abortion ban was part of an “ effort to chip away ” at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Court ’ s defense of the statute provides no saving explanation , ” wrote Ginsburg .
“ In candor , the Act , and the Court ’ s defense of it , can not be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this court — and with increasing comprehension of its centrality to women ’ s lives .
”

Two Supreme Court decisions in particular show how dedicated Ginsburg was to preserving the practice.
September 21, 2020 (CNS News) — Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who defended what she argued was a constitutional “right” to partial-birth abortion, passed away on Friday night. She was 87 years old.
In the 2000 case of Stenberg vs. Carhart and the 2007 case of Gonzales vs. Carhart, Ginsburg made clear her view that the U.S. Constitution protected a “right” to abortion (as the court had ruled in the 1973 case of Roe vs. Wade and the 1992 case of Planned Parenthood vs. Casey) and that this right extended to the practice of partial-birth abortion.
The 2000 case of Stenberg vs. Carhart focused on a Nebraska state law that outlawed partial-birth abortions. At the time, there were also 29 other states that banned partial-birth abortions.
The court ruled 5-4 in Stenberg that Nebraska’s partial birth abortion law was unconstitutional. The five-justice majority included Justices Stephen Breyer, John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O’Connor, David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Chief Justice William Rehnquist dissented as did Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas.
In his dissenting opinion in Stenberg, Justice Thomas described the partial-birth abortion procedure which the court’s majority declared a constitutional right.
Justice Thomas wrote:
Although there are variations, it is generally performed as follows: After dilating the cervix, the physician will grab the fetus by its feet and pull the fetal body out of the uterus into the vaginal cavity. At this stage of development, the head is the largest part of the body. Assuming the physician has performed the dilation procedure correctly, the head will be held inside the uterus by the women’s cervix. While the fetus is stuck in this position, dangling partly out of the woman’s body, and just a few inches from a completed birth, the physician uses an instrument such as a pair of scissors to tear or perforate the skull. The physician will then either crush the skull or will use a vacuum to remove the brain and other intracranial contents from the fetal skull, collapse the fetus’ head, and pull the fetus from the uterus.
In her own opinion, concurring in the court’s decision to throw out the Nebraska law banning partial-birth abortion, Justice Ginsburg cited Parenthood vs. Casey and said that the partial-birth abortion ban “violates the Constitution.”
“A state regulation that ‘has the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus’ violates the Constitution,” Ginsburg wrote in her Stenberg opinion.
Seven years later, in the case of Gonzales vs. Carhart, the court reviewed a federal ban on partial-birth abortion. This time the court ruled 5-4 in favor of the partial-birth abortion ban. Justice Ginsburg wrote the dissent in which Justices Stevens, Souter and Breyer joined.
In this dissent, Ginsburg argued that it was “irrational” to ban partial-birth abortion.
“In sum,” wrote Ginsburg, “the notion that the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act furthers any legitimate governmental interest is, quite simply, irrational.”
She then argued that the court’s opinion upholding the partial-birth abortion ban was part of an “effort to chip away” at the “right” to abortion.
“The Court’s defense of the statute provides no saving explanation,” wrote Ginsburg. “In candor, the Act, and the Court’s defense of it, cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this court — and with increasing comprehension of its centrality to women’s lives.”
Published with permission from CNS News.
Share