lifesitenews--2020-09-28--Massive DC prayer march sees Franklin Graham, thousands pray for healing of nation

September 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Tens of thousands of people poured into the nation ’ s capital from all corners of the country on Saturday to join evangelist Franklin Graham and other Christian leaders to pray and repent on behalf of the nation and ask God to heal divisions and strife .
Vice President Mike Pence with his wife , Karen , by his side made a surprise appearance , urging the crowd of 50,000 to pray for those who serve in every branch of the government , especially those in law enforcement and the military : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confidence .
As we stand today on an ancient promise that Americans have claimed throughout our history , that if His people , who are called by His Name , will humble themselves and pray , and turn , He ’ ll do like He ’ s always done —through much more challenging times in the life of this nation— He ’ ll hear from heaven , and heal this land ; This one nation , under God , indivisible , with liberty and justice for all .
“ Today , at this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ great American tradition , ” said the vice president .
“ Since the founding of our nation the American people and our leaders have gone to prayer in challenging times.
” “ George Washington prayed for the leaders and the people of our states , what he called ‘ an earnest prayer , ’ that God would hold them and our states in His holy protection , ” recounted Pence .
“ Abraham Lincoln , before whose monument we stand today , said during his time in the White House , ‘ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go.
’ And President Donald Trump has observed many times that America is a nation of believers , and you prove that again today , ” he added .
Bishop Harry Jackson of The Reconciled Church suggested that the nation is going through a healing process .
“ Prayer can turn things around , ” said Jackson .
“ When you look at the riots , you look at the challenges , believe that God is healing us.
” Franklin Graham , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Samaritan ’ s Purse and host of the Prayer March , sent out a tweet showing the vast size of the crowd , quoting Jesus ’ s words : “ For where two or three are gathered together in My name , I am there in the midst of them ” ( Matthew 18:20 ) .
Graham kept his words to a minimum .
“ Our Father and our God , we come to say thank you .
Father , our country is in trouble .
We need your help , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re at a crucial point in this country .
We ’ re that close to losing our nation.
” As the march began , the crowd stretched as far as the eye could see : packed tightly in the huge plaza in front of the Lincoln Memorial , cascading down the broad steps to the nearly half-mile-long Reflecting Pool , and extending beyond the World War II Memorial toward the Washington Monument .
The event presented a striking contrast to most large Washington , D.C. gatherings , normally bloated with endless political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Prayer March — which began at the Lincoln Memorial and solemnly made its way across the length of the National Mall to the base of Capitol Hill — was prayer according to 2 Chronicles 7:14 : If my people , which are called by my name , shall humble themselves , and pray , and seek my face , and turn from their wicked ways ; then will I hear from heaven , and will forgive their sin , and will heal their land .
The Marchers stopped at several key points along @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up specific intentions : • Lincoln Memorial : Marchers asked God for forgiveness and to heal the nation .
• World War II Memorial : Prayers for security and peace for the nation , and for military , police , and other law enforcement .
• Washington Monument : Salvation of the lost , renewed strength for families , a solution to the coronovirus pandemic , and an end to abortion .
• White House : For the president and vice president and their families .
• Museum of African-American History & Culture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , respect and reconciliation between races , and healing in communities torn by violence and injustice .
• National Archives : Religious freedom , and for churches to have boldness to , to stand firm with the Word of God , and to preach Jesus Christ in a troubled world .
• United States Capitol : For Congress and other leaders of the national , state , and local levels , along with the Supreme Court and judges across the nation .
“ We all need to come in unity in Christ Jesus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Maria , who traveled from Cleveland , Ohio to be at the event , told LifeSiteNews .
“ Our country is in desperate need of God ’ s help , ” said Susan , from Philadelphia , who suggested that God could forgive and save the nation in the same way he had forgiven and saved her after having had abortions .
She said she now fights for the life of every unborn baby .

September 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Tens of thousands of people poured into the nation’s capital from all corners of the country on Saturday to join evangelist Franklin Graham and other Christian leaders to pray and repent on behalf of the nation and ask God to heal divisions and strife.
Vice President Mike Pence with his wife, Karen, by his side made a surprise appearance, urging the crowd of 50,000 to pray for those who serve in every branch of the government, especially those in law enforcement and the military:
And when you pray, pray with confidence. As we stand today on an ancient promise that Americans have claimed throughout our history, that if His people, who are called by His Name, will humble themselves and pray, and turn, He’ll do like He’s always done —through much more challenging times in the life of this nation— He’ll hear from heaven, and heal this land; This one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Vice President @Mike_Pence: “So on the President's behalf, I want to say thank you for your prayers…and so we want to urge you on. Pray for all of those with public responsibilities.”#PrayerMarch2020 pic.twitter.com/5DW5Hbzphp — Team Trump (Text VOTE to 88022) (@TeamTrump) September 26, 2020
“Today, at this Washington Prayer March, you continue a great American tradition,” said the vice president. “Since the founding of our nation the American people and our leaders have gone to prayer in challenging times.”
“George Washington prayed for the leaders and the people of our states, what he called ‘an earnest prayer,’ that God would hold them and our states in His holy protection,” recounted Pence.
“Abraham Lincoln, before whose monument we stand today, said during his time in the White House, ‘I have been driven many times to my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go.’ And President Donald Trump has observed many times that America is a nation of believers, and you prove that again today,” he added.
Bishop Harry Jackson of The Reconciled Church suggested that the nation is going through a healing process.
“Prayer can turn things around,” said Jackson. “When you look at the riots, you look at the challenges, believe that God is healing us.”
Franklin Graham, CEO of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Samaritan’s Purse and host of the Prayer March, sent out a tweet showing the vast size of the crowd, quoting Jesus’s words: “For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them” (Matthew 18:20).
“For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them.” (Matthew 18:20) #PrayerMarch2020 #WashingtonDC pic.twitter.com/PH1npj86pS — Franklin Graham (@Franklin_Graham) September 27, 2020
Graham kept his words to a minimum.
“Our Father and our God, we come to say thank you. Father, our country is in trouble. We need your help,” said Graham. “I think we’re at a crucial point in this country. We’re that close to losing our nation.”
As the march began, the crowd stretched as far as the eye could see: packed tightly in the huge plaza in front of the Lincoln Memorial, cascading down the broad steps to the nearly half-mile-long Reflecting Pool, and extending beyond the World War II Memorial toward the Washington Monument.
The event presented a striking contrast to most large Washington, D.C. gatherings, normally bloated with endless political speeches. The clear focus of the Prayer March — which began at the Lincoln Memorial and solemnly made its way across the length of the National Mall to the base of Capitol Hill — was prayer according to 2 Chronicles 7:14:
If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
The Marchers stopped at several key points along the way to the Capitol to offer up specific intentions:
Lincoln Memorial : Marchers asked God for forgiveness and to heal the nation.
: Marchers asked God for forgiveness and to heal the nation. World War II Memorial : Prayers for security and peace for the nation, and for military, police, and other law enforcement.
: Prayers for security and peace for the nation, and for military, police, and other law enforcement. Washington Monument : Salvation of the lost, renewed strength for families, a solution to the coronovirus pandemic, and an end to abortion.
: Salvation of the lost, renewed strength for families, a solution to the coronovirus pandemic, and an end to abortion. White House : For the president and vice president and their families.
: For the president and vice president and their families. Museum of African-American History & Culture : Compassion and kindness toward one another, respect and reconciliation between races, and healing in communities torn by violence and injustice.
: Compassion and kindness toward one another, respect and reconciliation between races, and healing in communities torn by violence and injustice. National Archives : Religious freedom, and for churches to have boldness to, to stand firm with the Word of God, and to preach Jesus Christ in a troubled world.
: Religious freedom, and for churches to have boldness to, to stand firm with the Word of God, and to preach Jesus Christ in a troubled world. United States Capitol: For Congress and other leaders of the national, state, and local levels, along with the Supreme Court and judges across the nation.
“We all need to come in unity in Christ Jesus to pray for our nation,” Maria, who traveled from Cleveland, Ohio to be at the event, told LifeSiteNews.
“Our country is in desperate need of God’s help,” said Susan, from Philadelphia, who suggested that God could forgive and save the nation in the same way he had forgiven and saved her after having had abortions.
She said she now fights for the life of every unborn baby.
“He forgave me,” declared Susan. “He can forgive any sin.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-28--WATCH: Ilhan Omar crew involved in major ballot-harvesting scheme, Project Veritas says

PETITION : Urge state legislatures to scrap universal mail-in ballots and help protect the vote !
Sign the petition here .
September 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – The conservative investigative group Project Veritas unveiled a new undercover investigation Sunday , this time detailing an alleged ballot-harvesting scheme orchestrated by allies of Minnesota Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar .
“ Ballot harvesting is real and it has become a big business , ” Project Veritas founder and head James O ’ Keefe said in a press release .
“ Our investigation into this ballot harvesting ring demonstrates clearly how these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ communities—and have turned the sacred ballot box into a commodities trading desk.
” The video contains Snapchat clips of activist Liban Mohamed bragging about and displaying some of the hundreds of absentee ballots in his car , all of which are for his brother , Minneapolis City Councilman Jamal Osman .
“ Money is everything , money is the king in this world , ” Mohamed says .
“ Look at all these , my car is full .
All these are for Jamal Osman ... We got 300 today for Jamal Osman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ among three locations inside Ward 6 , a ballot harvesting triangle , where the scheme operates : the Riverside Plaza apartments , the senior citizen community at Horn Towers and the Minneapolis Elections and Voter Services office at 980 E. Hennepin Ave. , which also functions as a voting location and ballot drop-off site , ” Project Veritas reports .
Veritas was tipped off to the issue by Minneapolis community activist Omar Jamal of the Somali Watchdog Group , who says “ it ’ s an open secret ” that Rep. Omar ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that she can do to get elected and she has hundreds of people on the streets doing that.
” Jamal and a Veritas reporter interviewed a local ballot harvester who says he was paid to vote in August 11 ’ s special election , and that activists working for Rep. Omar request ballots and fill them out themselves .
“ They come to us , ” the harvester said .
“ They came to our homes .
They said : ‘ This year , you will vote for Ilhan , ’ They said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballots .
We will fill out the forms for you and when you get them back , we will again fill it out and send it.
’ ” “ When we sign the voting document and they fill it out is when they give us the money , ” the whistleblower continued .
“ The minute we signed the thing [ ballot ] for the election .
That ’ s when we get paid.
” Later in the video , a Democrat operative identified only as Jamal tells an undercover journalist that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the ballots Mohamad collected being blank , yet did not speak up because he feared the repercussions and felt he could not make a difference .
He further noted that the scheme exploits recent immigrants ’ ignorance of the law .
“ Through no fault of their own the new immigrants are learning about democracy from the ballot harvesters , '' Jamal explained .
“ When they get here , because of that ignorance , not knowing how this , all things work .
Sometimes they even think it 's legal.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deputy district campaign director Ali Isse Gainey as a central figure in the scheme , who allegedly oversees and approves “ all kinds of shenanigans ” from temporary addresses to insufficient identification .
“ They have perfected this system , ” the source said .
“ This is what they do .
They will tell you we are applying for your ballot .
They take a picture of your social security and your driver 's license .
They have a database .
When the ballot comes , they track it , sometimes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ballot .
Then , they come and pick up the ballot—unopened.
” On Monday , President Donald Trump called on Minnesota officials to investigate Project Veritas ’ allegations ( the state ’ s attorney general , Keith Ellison , is a far-left Democrat ) .
“ The amount of truth to this story is equal to the amount Donald Trump paid in taxes of ten out of the last fifteen years : zero , ” Omar spokesman Jeremy Slevin responded in a statement to Newsweek .
“ And amplifying a coordinated right-wing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election this fall undermines our democracy . ''
Even so , the contents of the Veritas exposé were enough for Hennepin County Attorney Jeff Wojciechowski to inform the conservative watchdog group that “ we will be investigating.
” In 2016 , O ’ Keefe went undercover and was able to obtain a Michigan ballot for the rapper Eminem , whose real name is Marshall Bruce Mathers III .

'Ballot harvesting is real and it has become a big business,' said James O'Keefe of Project Veritas.
PETITION: Urge state legislatures to scrap universal mail-in ballots and help protect the vote! Sign the petition here.
September 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The conservative investigative group Project Veritas unveiled a new undercover investigation Sunday, this time detailing an alleged ballot-harvesting scheme orchestrated by allies of Minnesota Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar.
“Ballot harvesting is real and it has become a big business,” Project Veritas founder and head James O’Keefe said in a press release. “Our investigation into this ballot harvesting ring demonstrates clearly how these unscrupulous operators exploit the elderly and immigrant communities—and have turned the sacred ballot box into a commodities trading desk.”
The video contains Snapchat clips of activist Liban Mohamed bragging about and displaying some of the hundreds of absentee ballots in his car, all of which are for his brother, Minneapolis City Councilman Jamal Osman. “Money is everything, money is the king in this world,” Mohamed says. “Look at all these, my car is full. All these are for Jamal Osman… We got 300 today for Jamal Osman only.”
“Our investigation found that among three locations inside Ward 6, a ballot harvesting triangle, where the scheme operates: the Riverside Plaza apartments, the senior citizen community at Horn Towers and the Minneapolis Elections and Voter Services office at 980 E. Hennepin Ave., which also functions as a voting location and ballot drop-off site,” Project Veritas reports.
Veritas was tipped off to the issue by Minneapolis community activist Omar Jamal of the Somali Watchdog Group, who says “it’s an open secret” that Rep. Omar’s political machine “will do anything that she can do to get elected and she has hundreds of people on the streets doing that.”
Jamal and a Veritas reporter interviewed a local ballot harvester who says he was paid to vote in August 11’s special election, and that activists working for Rep. Omar request ballots and fill them out themselves.
“They come to us,” the harvester said. “They came to our homes. They said: ‘This year, you will vote for Ilhan,’ They said: ‘We will make the absentee ballots. We will fill out the forms for you and when you get them back, we will again fill it out and send it.’”
“When we sign the voting document and they fill it out is when they give us the money,” the whistleblower continued. “The minute we signed the thing [ballot] for the election. That’s when we get paid.”
Later in the video, a Democrat operative identified only as Jamal tells an undercover journalist that he has witnessed abuses, such as some of the ballots Mohamad collected being blank, yet did not speak up because he feared the repercussions and felt he could not make a difference. He further noted that the scheme exploits recent immigrants’ ignorance of the law.
“Through no fault of their own the new immigrants are learning about democracy from the ballot harvesters,” Jamal explained. “When they get here, because of that ignorance, not knowing how this, all things work. Sometimes they even think it's legal.”
Another source identified Rep. Omar’s deputy district campaign director Ali Isse Gainey as a central figure in the scheme, who allegedly oversees and approves “all kinds of shenanigans” from temporary addresses to insufficient identification.
“They have perfected this system,” the source said. “This is what they do. They will tell you we are applying for your ballot. They take a picture of your social security and your driver's license. They have a database. When the ballot comes, they track it, sometimes, they make fake emails. They track the ballot. Then, they come and pick up the ballot—unopened.”
On Monday, President Donald Trump called on Minnesota officials to investigate Project Veritas’ allegations (the state’s attorney general, Keith Ellison, is a far-left Democrat).
This is totally illegal. Hope that the U.S. Attorney in Minnesota has this, and other of her many misdeeds, under serious review??? If not, why not??? We will win Minnesota because of her, and law enforcement. Saved Minneapolis & Iron O Range! https://t.co/yete31P680 — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 28, 2020
“The amount of truth to this story is equal to the amount Donald Trump paid in taxes of ten out of the last fifteen years: zero,” Omar spokesman Jeremy Slevin responded in a statement to Newsweek. “And amplifying a coordinated right-wing campaign to delegitimize a free and fair election this fall undermines our democracy.”
Even so, the contents of the Veritas exposé were enough for Hennepin County Attorney Jeff Wojciechowski to inform the conservative watchdog group that “we will be investigating.”
In 2016, O’Keefe went undercover and was able to obtain a Michigan ballot for the rapper Eminem, whose real name is Marshall Bruce Mathers III.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-28--California gov signs bill letting trans inmates request to be placed in opposite-sex prisons

PETITION : Tell Trump Christians can ’ t accept SCOTUS ruling imposing LGBT ideology !
Sign the petition here .
SACRAMENTO , California , September 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – California Gov .
Gavin Newsom signed legislation over the weekend allowing gender-confused convicts to be incarcerated on the basis of their claimed “ gender identity ” rather than their actual biological sex .
Under the new law , officers overseeing the prisoner intake process must ask inmates if they self-identify as transgendered , nonbinary , or intersex , The Hill reported , at which point inmates can request @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prison .
Requests can not be rejected solely on the basis of an inmate ’ s actual sex but on whether the state has “ management or security concerns ” about that inmate .
State officials must further present inmates with a written explanation of any rejections as well as the opportunity to object to them .
Newsom , a liberal Democrat who also recently signed legislation empowering judges to leave those who engage in homosexual sex with certain minors off the state sex offender registry , called the new law an “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” and part of a broader push to “ uphold the dignity of all Californians , regardless of who you are or who you love.
” In fact , there has been growing concern around the world over placing men who claim to be women in female prison populations .
A record number of male inmates in England and Wales claim to be female , a subject that has garnered controversy partly due to cases like that of Stephen Wood , who assaulted four female inmates after being housed in a women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Canada and Scotland have also seen cases of male prisoners claiming “ transgender ” status in order to secure lighter treatment during their incarceration .

Inmates claiming to be transgendered, nonbinary or intersex may request when incarcerated a male or female prison regardless of biological sex.
PETITION: Tell Trump Christians can’t accept SCOTUS ruling imposing LGBT ideology! Sign the petition here.
SACRAMENTO, California, September 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation over the weekend allowing gender-confused convicts to be incarcerated on the basis of their claimed “gender identity” rather than their actual biological sex.
Under the new law, officers overseeing the prisoner intake process must ask inmates if they self-identify as transgendered, nonbinary, or intersex, The Hill reported, at which point inmates can request to go to a male or female prison.
Requests cannot be rejected solely on the basis of an inmate’s actual sex but on whether the state has “management or security concerns” about that inmate. State officials must further present inmates with a written explanation of any rejections as well as the opportunity to object to them.
Newsom, a liberal Democrat who also recently signed legislation empowering judges to leave those who engage in homosexual sex with certain minors off the state sex offender registry, called the new law an “additional step forward” for “equality,” and part of a broader push to “uphold the dignity of all Californians, regardless of who you are or who you love.”
In fact, there has been growing concern around the world over placing men who claim to be women in female prison populations.
A record number of male inmates in England and Wales claim to be female, a subject that has garnered controversy partly due to cases like that of Stephen Wood, who assaulted four female inmates after being housed in a women’s facility as “Karen White.” Canada and Scotland have also seen cases of male prisoners claiming “transgender” status in order to secure lighter treatment during their incarceration.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-28--Trump slams liberal media’s ‘disgraceful’ attacks on Amy Coney Barrett’s faith

URGENT PETITION : Tell the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade !
Sign the petition here .
WASHINGTON , D.C. , September 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Over the weekend , President Donald Trump defended Judge Amy Coney Barrett , his third nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court , against attacks leveled at her by Democrat lawmakers and left-wing activists targeting her Catholic faith .
On Saturday , Trump nominated Barrett , a former University of Notre Dame law professor and Catholic mother of seven who currently sits on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals , to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ginsburg .
Barrett ’ s record of past rulings , writings , and public statements indicates her to be a pro-life originalist .
Since Barrett ’ s nomination was announced , she has been the subject of numerous articles and comments insinuating her Catholicism is somehow unusual or dangerous – complaints largely rooted in the fear that she will upend pro-abortion , pro-LGBT precedent such as Roe v. Wade or Bostock v. Clayton County .
“ We have noticed some comments made in the media about my incredibly qualified nominee Amy , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The New York Times said her religion is not consistent with American values .
She 's Catholic ; it covers a lot of people .
It 's a very disgraceful thing to say .
Some of the comedians , I do n't think they 're comedians because a comedian is supposed to be funny .
They 're not funny like at all ; they 're nasty , they 're mean , and they think they 're funny.
” “ I thought we settled this 60 years ago with the election of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after an aside about his recent campaign events .
“ But seriously they 're going after her Catholicism .
I will stand with her , fight with her , and we will make sure that these attacks stop because they really , it 's unprecedented , they 're basically fighting a major religion in our country .
This is incredible .
Fighting any religion , fighting Catholicism is just incredible that they can be doing it.
” Democrats are currently weighing whether to make an issue of Barrett ’ s faith in her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Seventh Circuit became a liability for Senate Democrats in 2017 when Sen. Dianne Feinstein , D-California , interrogated her about her Catholic faith .
“ When you read your speeches , the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you , ” the pro-abortion Feinstein said at the time .
“ And that ’ s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for for years in this country.
” Feinstein has so far refused to say whether she would repeat that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but some of her colleagues , such as the far-left Democrat Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii , have signaled that they feel no such reluctance .

The President called out The New York Times and others, saying the attacks on Catholicism are 'just incredible.'
URGENT PETITION: Tell the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade! Sign the petition here.
WASHINGTON, D.C., September 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Over the weekend, President Donald Trump defended Judge Amy Coney Barrett, his third nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, against attacks leveled at her by Democrat lawmakers and left-wing activists targeting her Catholic faith.
On Saturday, Trump nominated Barrett, a former University of Notre Dame law professor and Catholic mother of seven who currently sits on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, to replace recently deceased left-wing Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Barrett’s record of past rulings, writings, and public statements indicates her to be a pro-life originalist.
Since Barrett’s nomination was announced, she has been the subject of numerous articles and comments insinuating her Catholicism is somehow unusual or dangerous – complaints largely rooted in the fear that she will upend pro-abortion, pro-LGBT precedent such as Roe v. Wade or Bostock v. Clayton County.
“We have noticed some comments made in the media about my incredibly qualified nominee Amy,” Trump said during a weekend press conference. “The New York Times said her religion is not consistent with American values. She's Catholic; it covers a lot of people. It's a very disgraceful thing to say. Some of the comedians, I don't think they're comedians because a comedian is supposed to be funny. They're not funny like at all; they're nasty, they're mean, and they think they're funny.”
“I thought we settled this 60 years ago with the election of John F. Kennedy,” Trump continued after an aside about his recent campaign events. “But seriously they're going after her Catholicism. I will stand with her, fight with her, and we will make sure that these attacks stop because they really, it's unprecedented, they're basically fighting a major religion in our country. This is incredible. Fighting any religion, fighting Catholicism is just incredible that they can be doing it.”
Democrats are currently weighing whether to make an issue of Barrett’s faith in her upcoming confirmation hearings. Her hearings for the Seventh Circuit became a liability for Senate Democrats in 2017 when Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, interrogated her about her Catholic faith.
“When you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you,” the pro-abortion Feinstein said at the time. “And that’s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for for years in this country.”
Feinstein has so far refused to say whether she would repeat that line of questioning this time around, but some of her colleagues, such as the far-left Democrat Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, have signaled that they feel no such reluctance.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-28--Questions for Archbishop Viganò concerning the Oath Against Modernism and its abrogation

September 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Dear Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò , in an important interview with Marco Tosatti , you recently pointed out the connection between the Second Vatican Council ( 1962-1965 ) and the July 23 , 1967 Land O ’ Lakes statement , in which some presidents of Catholic universities in the U.S. and elsewhere declared their “ true autonomy and academic freedom in the face of authority of whatever kind , lay or clerical , external to the academic community itself.
” That statement was issued only two years after the end of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about your interview , my husband Robert Hickson and I realized that what seems here even more important is that this unfaithful document was issued only a few days after the quiet abrogation of the Oath Against Modernism by Pope Paul VI , on July 17 , 1967 .
It was the New York Times which reported on this fact on July 18 , and that paper must have been well-aware of the significance of this decision of the Pope to no longer ask all the clergymen and teachers at Catholic faculties to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had crept into the Catholic Church .
In light of this close connection between the Land O ’ Lakes statement and the abandonment of the Oath Against Modernism , do you have any knowledge about whether or not Father Theodore M. Hesburgh , C.S.C .
– the organizer of the Land O ’ Lakes statement – might have known that this oath would soon be dropped , since he prepared that statement for several months before the Land O ’ Lakes meeting ?
But , more importantly : were you yourself , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which had been taken by all the clergymen of the Catholic Church since 1910 , when Pope St. Pius X had issued it – was then abandoned ?
What was the original intention of Pope St. Pius X with this oath , and what would you say were the consequences of the abolition of that oath ?
Are you aware that the German professors at Catholic departments of German universities apparently did not need to swear the Oath Against Modernism – and this since 1910 – and thus they were the only ones @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
What would you say were the reasons why Pope St. Pius X gave this permission , and what would you say were the consequences of this exemption ?
We need to note here of course that at that time , most theologians at the universities would have been priests , and thus they had to take that oath as clergymen .
Do you know more about this matter ?
Cardinal Walter Brandmüller once pointed out the grave effects of this exemption for German theology .
Moreover , according to my knowledge , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vatican Council had taken the Oath Against Modernism .
Would you say that those who actively and willfully participated in the changing of the Church 's doctrine and attitude ( toward more ecumenism , toward more collegiality and equality , against an attitude of condemnation of errors , against any “ triumphalism , ” for religious liberty , and so on ) actually perjured themselves , thus breaking an oath they once had solemnly sworn ?
Let us remember here that those priests who refused to swear that oath in 1910 were punished @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work in the pastoral care or by depriving them of the sacraments .
That shows how much importance Pope Pius X attributed to this oath and to the danger of Modernism .
Then we have Pope Paul VI who abandoned the Oath Against Modernism , but then issued a “ Credo of the People of God , ” in June of 1968 , one year later .
How would you explain this to us ?
Is it that the Pope here expresses his wish that the Church less condemns , and more affirms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example of a participant at the Second Vatican Council who had taken the Oath Against Modernism as a clergyman and who later went on to help change the Catholic Church .
In reading Benedict XVI : A Life , the new biography of Pope Benedict XVI by Peter Seewald , it becomes clear that then-Professor Joseph Ratzinger played a very crucial role in overthrowing the prepared schemas for the Council and starting a completely new approach .
He was the counselor at the time of one of the leading reformers at the Council @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote key analyses and speeches for him .
As Seewald quotes him , Ratzinger argued that these earlier schema that had been prepared under the guidance of Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani were too much influenced by the “ anti-modernist ” spirit , were too “ antiquated , ” and he stated that the Council has “ less the task to formulate doctrines.
” In a speech at that time written by Ratzinger , he proposed that the Faith will “ take another form , ” that it will “ become more barren in content @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” In this described transformation of the Church , the theologian then argued that it would be helpful “ that she let go of some old forms that are not anymore apt , ” and he proposed to “ loosen without hesitation the essence of the Faith from its cloth that is related to a certain period of time.
” He told Cardinal Frings , for whom he worked as a consultor and later peritus at the Council , that a certain schema “ better be dropped altogether.
” He bemoaned that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and too much written by “ scholars , ” rather than “ pastors.
” The Council texts , explained Ratzinger at the time , should not give “ the impression of treatises , ” taken “ out of theological handbooks and written in a scholastic style , ” but , instead , they should “ have the language of the Holy Scripture and of the Church Fathers.
” He thought that “ scholastic theology ” was “ not anymore an instrument , with which to introduce the Faith into the conversation of our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not to offend the non-Catholic Christians – and even went so far to propose to avoid any new declaration concerning the Blessed Mother which could “ place new obstacles ” for “ the outsiders ( especially the Orthodox ) .
” Ratzinger wrote at the time : “ I believe one should drop this Marian schema [ ‘ On the Blessed Virgin Mary , the Mother of God and of mankind ’ ] .
… The Council would put in danger its entire influence should it issue such a schema.
” He explicitly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such expressions as mediatrix and so on that have not yet been dogmatized.
” When in 1962 , with the direct involvement of Ratzinger , a group of council fathers – among them Cardinal Frings – was able to topple the election of prepared commissions of the Council , the German theologian Ratzinger stated joyfully : “ The Council was determined to act independently and not to be degraded as the executing body of the preparatory commissions.
” Professor Ratzinger also wrote that one should be more “ ecumenical , ” that is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the others merely as opponents , against whom one defends oneself , ” and he proposed to “ recognize them as brothers with whom one speaks and from whom one has to learn.
” To conclude : In October 1962 , Joseph Ratzinger criticized the original schema “ On the Sources of Revelation ” because it is “ wholly and entirely determined by the anti-Modernist spirit which developed at the turn of the century [ 1900 ] , that is to say by an ‘ anti ’ , by a negation , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shocking.
” How would you , Archbishop Viganò , comment on this attitude as expressed here by Joseph Ratzinger ?
To what extent was it wrong to abandon the attitude of “ negation ” and of condemnation in favor of a more “ positive ” and affirmative approach ?
How could Ratzinger , in his own conscience , combine his having sworn the Oath Against Modernism with his express rejection of that “ anti-Modernist spirit ” ?
And , a final question on this rejection of an attitude of “ negation ” which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evil : what was the effect on the Church in the decades to come , doctrinally ( for example with regard to the lenient treatment of Liberation Theologians by the Vatican , and here also by Ratzinger ) , but also morally , for example with regard to sexual abuse cases ?

An open letter to Archbishop Viganò about the consequences of the abolition of the Oath Against Modernism – and Pope Benedict XVI's involvement in overthrowing the prepared schemas of Vatican II.
September 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Dear Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, in an important interview with Marco Tosatti, you recently pointed out the connection between the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) and the July 23, 1967 Land O’Lakes statement, in which some presidents of Catholic universities in the U.S. and elsewhere declared their “true autonomy and academic freedom in the face of authority of whatever kind, lay or clerical, external to the academic community itself.” That statement was issued only two years after the end of the Second Vatican Council.
In several discussions about your interview, my husband Robert Hickson and I realized that what seems here even more important is that this unfaithful document was issued only a few days after the quiet abrogation of the Oath Against Modernism by Pope Paul VI, on July 17, 1967.
It was the New York Times which reported on this fact on July 18, and that paper must have been well-aware of the significance of this decision of the Pope to no longer ask all the clergymen and teachers at Catholic faculties to swear an oath against modernist ideas that had crept into the Catholic Church.
In light of this close connection between the Land O’Lakes statement and the abandonment of the Oath Against Modernism, do you have any knowledge about whether or not Father Theodore M. Hesburgh, C.S.C. – the organizer of the Land O’Lakes statement – might have known that this oath would soon be dropped, since he prepared that statement for several months before the Land O’Lakes meeting?
But, more importantly: were you yourself, in 1967, aware that this oath – which had been taken by all the clergymen of the Catholic Church since 1910, when Pope St. Pius X had issued it – was then abandoned?
What was the original intention of Pope St. Pius X with this oath, and what would you say were the consequences of the abolition of that oath?
Are you aware that the German professors at Catholic departments of German universities apparently did not need to swear the Oath Against Modernism – and this since 1910 – and thus they were the only ones in the world exempt from this oath? What would you say were the reasons why Pope St. Pius X gave this permission, and what would you say were the consequences of this exemption? We need to note here of course that at that time, most theologians at the universities would have been priests, and thus they had to take that oath as clergymen. Do you know more about this matter? Cardinal Walter Brandmüller once pointed out the grave effects of this exemption for German theology.
Moreover, according to my knowledge, all bishops who participated at the Second Vatican Council had taken the Oath Against Modernism. Would you say that those who actively and willfully participated in the changing of the Church's doctrine and attitude (toward more ecumenism, toward more collegiality and equality, against an attitude of condemnation of errors, against any “triumphalism,” for religious liberty, and so on) actually perjured themselves, thus breaking an oath they once had solemnly sworn?
Let us remember here that those priests who refused to swear that oath in 1910 were punished, for example by disallowing them to work in the pastoral care or by depriving them of the sacraments. That shows how much importance Pope Pius X attributed to this oath and to the danger of Modernism.
Then we have Pope Paul VI who abandoned the Oath Against Modernism, but then issued a “Credo of the People of God,” in June of 1968, one year later. How would you explain this to us? Is it that the Pope here expresses his wish that the Church less condemns, and more affirms?
Let us discuss now one specific example of a participant at the Second Vatican Council who had taken the Oath Against Modernism as a clergyman and who later went on to help change the Catholic Church.
In reading Benedict XVI: A Life, the new biography of Pope Benedict XVI by Peter Seewald, it becomes clear that then-Professor Joseph Ratzinger played a very crucial role in overthrowing the prepared schemas for the Council and starting a completely new approach. He was the counselor at the time of one of the leading reformers at the Council, Cardinal Josef Frings, and even wrote key analyses and speeches for him.
As Seewald quotes him, Ratzinger argued that these earlier schema that had been prepared under the guidance of Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani were too much influenced by the “anti-modernist” spirit, were too “antiquated,” and he stated that the Council has “less the task to formulate doctrines.” In a speech at that time written by Ratzinger, he proposed that the Faith will “take another form,” that it will “become more barren in content and form, but perhaps also deeper.” In this described transformation of the Church, the theologian then argued that it would be helpful “that she let go of some old forms that are not anymore apt,” and he proposed to “loosen without hesitation the essence of the Faith from its cloth that is related to a certain period of time.”
He told Cardinal Frings, for whom he worked as a consultor and later peritus at the Council, that a certain schema “better be dropped altogether.” He bemoaned that the texts often were “too stiff” and too much written by “scholars,” rather than “pastors.” The Council texts, explained Ratzinger at the time, should not give “the impression of treatises,” taken “out of theological handbooks and written in a scholastic style,” but, instead, they should “have the language of the Holy Scripture and of the Church Fathers.” He thought that “scholastic theology” was “not anymore an instrument, with which to introduce the Faith into the conversation of our time.” He pointed to the importance not to offend the non-Catholic Christians – and even went so far to propose to avoid any new declaration concerning the Blessed Mother which could “place new obstacles” for “the outsiders (especially the Orthodox).” Ratzinger wrote at the time: “I believe one should drop this Marian schema [‘On the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God and of mankind’]. … The Council would put in danger its entire influence should it issue such a schema.” He explicitly said that one “should avoid altogether such expressions as mediatrix and so on that have not yet been dogmatized.”
When in 1962, with the direct involvement of Ratzinger, a group of council fathers – among them Cardinal Frings – was able to topple the election of prepared commissions of the Council, the German theologian Ratzinger stated joyfully: “The Council was determined to act independently and not to be degraded as the executing body of the preparatory commissions.” Professor Ratzinger also wrote that one should be more “ecumenical,” that is, “one should stop to regard the others merely as opponents, against whom one defends oneself,” and he proposed to “recognize them as brothers with whom one speaks and from whom one has to learn.”
To conclude: In October 1962, Joseph Ratzinger criticized the original schema “On the Sources of Revelation” because it is “wholly and entirely determined by the anti-Modernist spirit which developed at the turn of the century [1900], that is to say by an ‘anti’, by a negation, which ….had to appear cold, yes, shocking.”
How would you, Archbishop Viganò, comment on this attitude as expressed here by Joseph Ratzinger?
To what extent was it wrong to abandon the attitude of “negation” and of condemnation in favor of a more “positive” and affirmative approach?
How could Ratzinger, in his own conscience, combine his having sworn the Oath Against Modernism with his express rejection of that “anti-Modernist spirit”?
And, a final question on this rejection of an attitude of “negation” which means the rejection of the condemnation of evil: what was the effect on the Church in the decades to come, doctrinally (for example with regard to the lenient treatment of Liberation Theologians by the Vatican, and here also by Ratzinger), but also morally, for example with regard to sexual abuse cases?
Follow Maike Dr. Maike Hickson was born and raised in Germany. She holds a PhD from the University of Hannover, Germany, after having written in Switzerland her doctoral dissertation on the history of Swiss intellectuals before and during World War II. She now lives in the U.S. and is married to Dr. Robert Hickson, and they have been blessed with two beautiful children. She is a happy housewife who likes to write articles when time permits. Dr. Hickson published in 2014 a Festschrift, a collection of some thirty essays written by thoughtful authors in honor of her husband upon his 70th birthday, which is entitled A Catholic Witness in Our Time. Hickson has closely followed the papacy of Pope Francis and the developments in the Catholic Church in Germany, and she has been writing articles on religion and politics for U.S. and European publications and websites such as LifeSiteNews, OnePeterFive, The Wanderer, Rorate Caeli, Catholicism.org, Catholic Family News, Christian Order, Notizie Pro-Vita, Corrispondenza Romana, Katholisches.info, Der Dreizehnte, Zeit-Fragen, and Westfalen-Blatt.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-28--Ethics textbook in Communist China: Jesus kill woman caught in adultery

CHINA , September 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) ― A Chinese ethics textbook developed with some oversight from the communist Chinese government depicts Jesus killing the woman caught in adultery .
The Union of Catholic Asian News ( UCA News ) reported last week that a textbook produced for vocational students by the Chinese University of Electronic Science and Technology Press changed the ending of the famous Gospel story .
As in the original , the crowd cites law as their justification for stoning an adulteress to death .
Jesus says “ Let the one who has never sinned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leave , one by one .
But then , according to the textbook , “ When the crowd disappeared , Jesus stoned the sinner to death saying , ‘ I too am a sinner .
But if the law could only be executed by men without blemish , the law would be dead ’ . ''
The correct ending to the Gospel account , which is in John 8:3-11 , shows Jesus refusing to condemn the woman : “ Jesus again straightened up and said , 'Woman , where are they ?
Has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one , sir , ' she replied .
'Neither do I condemn you , ' said Jesus .
'Go away , and from this moment sin no more.
’ ” According to UCA News , the textbook is used to teach “ professional ethics and law.
” Both education and publishing are strictly controlled by the totalitarian communist Chinese government .
According to UCA , a Catholic in China published the textbook on social media , suggesting that this warped version of the Gospel was a communist attack on the Catholic Church .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Chinese Communist Party has always tried to distort the history of the Church , to slander our Church , and to make people hate our Church , '' he wrote .
UCA also quoted a Christian vocational teacher , Matthew Wang , who confirmed that the textbook did contain the story , but said that its “ content varies from place to place within China.
” Massimo Introvigne of Bitter Winter , a magazine about “ religious liberty and human rights in China ” , wrote that the point of the story @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law as handed down by the Chinese Communist Party .
“ As told to Chinese students , the story teaches that the law and the Party are good and pure , and transcend the impure human beings who happen to represent them , ” the Italian sociologist of religions wrote .
“ Even if the officers are corrupted , their decision should be accepted—because , honest or corrupted , they represent the Party , and the Party ’ s law should never be questioned.
” “ This is standard CCP theory , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ teaching in John 8 .
Mobilizing Jesus for the CCP propaganda is blasphemous and offensive to Christians.
” According to UCA , at least one Chinese Catholics has complained that the Church in China does not fight back against this kind of distortion .
Sociologist Introvigne wrote that Christians can expect more of the same from the Chinese government as it continues its policy of making Christianity more “ sinicized ” ( Chinese ) .
Sinicization does not mean incorporating more Chinese cultural aspects into Chinese Christianity , as the destruction of beautiful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ architecture attests .
It effectively means watering down Christianity so that it is not a threat to the values of the Chinese Communist Party .
In 2019 , French daily Le Figaro reported that the Chinese government had demanded that Christians , Buddhists , and Muslims alter their respective sacred texts so as to conform with `` the requirements of the new era . ''
According to this report , Christians ’ Gospel parables should fall `` in line with the Communist Party , failing which they run the risk of being purged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''

According to the textbook, 'When the crowd disappeared, Jesus stoned the sinner to death'
PETITION: Support Cardinal Zen's plea to stop the “murder of the Church in China”! Sign the petition here.
CHINA, September 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) ― A Chinese ethics textbook developed with some oversight from the communist Chinese government depicts Jesus killing the woman caught in adultery.
The Union of Catholic Asian News (UCA News) reported last week that a textbook produced for vocational students by the Chinese University of Electronic Science and Technology Press changed the ending of the famous Gospel story.
As in the original, the crowd cites law as their justification for stoning an adulteress to death. Jesus says “Let the one who has never sinned throw the first stone.” The accusers leave, one by one.
But then, according to the textbook, “When the crowd disappeared, Jesus stoned the sinner to death saying, ‘I too am a sinner. But if the law could only be executed by men without blemish, the law would be dead’.”
The correct ending to the Gospel account, which is in John 8:3-11, shows Jesus refusing to condemn the woman: “Jesus again straightened up and said, 'Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?' 'No one, sir,' she replied. 'Neither do I condemn you,' said Jesus. 'Go away, and from this moment sin no more.’”
According to UCA News, the textbook is used to teach “professional ethics and law.”
Both education and publishing are strictly controlled by the totalitarian communist Chinese government. According to UCA, a Catholic in China published the textbook on social media, suggesting that this warped version of the Gospel was a communist attack on the Catholic Church.
“I want everyone to know that the Chinese Communist Party has always tried to distort the history of the Church, to slander our Church, and to make people hate our Church,” he wrote.
UCA also quoted a Christian vocational teacher, Matthew Wang, who confirmed that the textbook did contain the story, but said that its “content varies from place to place within China.”
Massimo Introvigne of Bitter Winter, a magazine about “religious liberty and human rights in China”, wrote that the point of the story was to underscore the supremacy of the law as handed down by the Chinese Communist Party.
“As told to Chinese students, the story teaches that the law and the Party are good and pure, and transcend the impure human beings who happen to represent them,” the Italian sociologist of religions wrote.
“Even if the officers are corrupted, their decision should be accepted—because, honest or corrupted, they represent the Party, and the Party’s law should never be questioned.”
“This is standard CCP theory, but totally distorts the meaning of Jesus’ teaching in John 8. Mobilizing Jesus for the CCP propaganda is blasphemous and offensive to Christians.”
According to UCA, at least one Chinese Catholics has complained that the Church in China does not fight back against this kind of distortion. Sociologist Introvigne wrote that Christians can expect more of the same from the Chinese government as it continues its policy of making Christianity more “sinicized” (Chinese).
Sinicization does not mean incorporating more Chinese cultural aspects into Chinese Christianity, as the destruction of beautiful Christian churches designed according to traditional Chinese architecture attests. It effectively means watering down Christianity so that it is not a threat to the values of the Chinese Communist Party.
In 2019, French daily Le Figaro reported that the Chinese government had demanded that Christians, Buddhists, and Muslims alter their respective sacred texts so as to conform with “the requirements of the new era.”
According to this report, Christians’ Gospel parables should fall “in line with the Communist Party, failing which they run the risk of being purged from the Bibles available to the faithful.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-28--BLM activist, outed for posing as black, organized rally against law to protect black babies

September 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Many of you will remember the story of Rachel Dolezal , a college professor and president of her local chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People ( NAACP ) , who was outed as being a white woman .
Despite a general outcry , Dolezal didn ’ t back down once she was caught , insisting that despite having no non-European ancestry , she self-identifies as black .
If a biological man can identify as a woman , after all , why can ’ t a white woman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her skin a few tones darker ?
After the general mockery came the think pieces discussing whether “ transracialism ” was a valid concept .
Many major newspapers covered the idea ( with pushback from black activists . )
Many pointed out that the similarity of transracialism to transgenderism was inescapable .
If a man could identify as a woman simply because he claimed he felt like a woman and experienced life as a woman ( despite the fact that , as a man , he could not possibly know what a woman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , why could the same not apply to people of different races ?
As the race wars heat up and the cultural capital of being non-white rises amongst the woke , Dolezal appears to have been an inspiration to some .
On September 18 , the Indianapolis Star dropped a bombshell : Satchuel Cole , “ a highly visible community leader advocating for racial and social justice in Indiana , ” turns out not to be the black person that she claimed she was .
She is , in fact , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to increase her credibility in the progressive community .
“ I have taken up space as a Black person while knowing I am white , ” she admitted in a weird apology .
Cole , who was also prominent in the LGBTQ community ( and has served as a Grand Marshall at the Pride Parade ) , explained on her Facebook page that she was not who she ’ d claimed to be after an article outing her as white : “ Friends , I need to take accountability for my actions and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ My deception and lies have hurt those I care most about…I have used Blackness when it was not mine to use .
I have asked for support and energy as a Black person .
I have caused harm to the city , friends and the work that I held so dear.
” Cole ’ s long-running blackface may bring political retribution but , like Ralph Northam , her repulsive support for abortion rights may secure her a get-out-of-jail-free card .
Secular Pro-Life noted that in April 2016 , Cole was the organizer of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s prenatal non-discrimination law .
The law was designed to protect pre-born children from discrimination , banning abortion on the basis of race , sex , and disability ( all of which are frequently-cited motives for abortion . )
“ Support for race-based abortions is inherently racist , ” Secular Pro-Life observed , “ a criticism Cole deftly avoided by claiming to be Black.
” That was a morally bankrupt excuse for opposing protections for non-white babies in the womb before we found out that Cole was a liar , of course .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ not who she said she was .
As Secular Pro-Life succinctly put it : “ The 2020 news cycle moves quickly , and there [ are ] a ton of big stories in the abortion sphere right now , so I feel this bears repeating : A white abortion advocate pretended to be Black , while organizing a rally against a law that would protect Black babies.
” That particular aspect of this story won ’ t get much traction in the media ; the hypocrisy is simply too eye-watering .
The Star @ @ @ @ @ @ @ involvement in a “ rally for women ’ s rights ” in the caption of a photo , not even in the article itself .
Indiana ’ s pro-life law , unfortunately , was stuck down in 2019 by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal , and the Supreme Court declined to rule on the anti-discrimination portion of the law .
Clarence Thomas , the Court ’ s only African American justice , warned that eventually , the issue would have to be dealt with : In the meantime , when you read @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , remember this : A white activist posing as a Black Lives Matter activist campaigned against a law protecting pre-born black babies in the womb from a gruesome death .
Margaret Sanger—and the alt-right movement -- would be proud .
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 Dr. Alveda King , niece of Martin Luther King , Jr. Alveda explains that she used to be pro-abortion but embraced the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Christian in 1983 .
“ The African-American community is a very politically loyal community , ” she said .
“ However , many African-Americans today are supporting President Donald John Trump because of his stand for life , because of his economic support.
” You can subscribe here and listen to the episode below :

URGENT PETITION: Tell the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade! Sign the petition here.
September 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Many of you will remember the story of Rachel Dolezal, a college professor and president of her local chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), who was outed as being a white woman. Despite a general outcry, Dolezal didn’t back down once she was caught, insisting that despite having no non-European ancestry, she self-identifies as black. If a biological man can identify as a woman, after all, why can’t a white woman identify as a black woman after shading her skin a few tones darker?
After the general mockery came the think pieces discussing whether “transracialism” was a valid concept. Many major newspapers covered the idea (with pushback from black activists.) Many pointed out that the similarity of transracialism to transgenderism was inescapable. If a man could identify as a woman simply because he claimed he felt like a woman and experienced life as a woman (despite the fact that, as a man, he could not possibly know what a woman feels like or how she experiences life), why could the same not apply to people of different races?
As the race wars heat up and the cultural capital of being non-white rises amongst the woke, Dolezal appears to have been an inspiration to some. On September 18, the Indianapolis Star dropped a bombshell: Satchuel Cole, “a highly visible community leader advocating for racial and social justice in Indiana,” turns out not to be the black person that she claimed she was. She is, in fact, a white person who pretended to be Black to increase her credibility in the progressive community. “I have taken up space as a Black person while knowing I am white,” she admitted in a weird apology.
Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook
Cole, who was also prominent in the LGBTQ community (and has served as a Grand Marshall at the Pride Parade), explained on her Facebook page that she was not who she’d claimed to be after an article outing her as white: “Friends, I need to take accountability for my actions and the harm that I have done. My deception and lies have hurt those I care most about…I have used Blackness when it was not mine to use. I have asked for support and energy as a Black person. I have caused harm to the city, friends and the work that I held so dear.”
Cole’s long-running blackface may bring political retribution but, like Ralph Northam, her repulsive support for abortion rights may secure her a get-out-of-jail-free card. Secular Pro-Life noted that in April 2016, Cole was the organizer of a rally to protest against Indiana’s prenatal non-discrimination law. The law was designed to protect pre-born children from discrimination, banning abortion on the basis of race, sex, and disability (all of which are frequently-cited motives for abortion.) “Support for race-based abortions is inherently racist,” Secular Pro-Life observed, “a criticism Cole deftly avoided by claiming to be Black.”
That was a morally bankrupt excuse for opposing protections for non-white babies in the womb before we found out that Cole was a liar, of course. But now we know that she was not who she said she was. As Secular Pro-Life succinctly put it: “The 2020 news cycle moves quickly, and there [are] a ton of big stories in the abortion sphere right now, so I feel this bears repeating: A white abortion advocate pretended to be Black, while organizing a rally against a law that would protect Black babies.”
That particular aspect of this story won’t get much traction in the media; the hypocrisy is simply too eye-watering. The Star news article only notes Cole’s involvement in a “rally for women’s rights” in the caption of a photo, not even in the article itself. Indiana’s pro-life law, unfortunately, was stuck down in 2019 by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court declined to rule on the anti-discrimination portion of the law. Clarence Thomas, the Court’s only African American justice, warned that eventually, the issue would have to be dealt with:
Enshrining a constitutional right to an abortion based solely on the race, sex, or disability of an unborn child, as Planned Parenthood advocates, would constitutionalize the views of the 20th-century eugenics movement. In other contexts, the Court has been zealous in vindicating the rights of people even potentially subjected to race, sex, and disability discrimination…Given the potential for abortion to become a tool of eugenic manipulation, the court will soon need to confront the constitutionality of laws like Indiana's.
In the meantime, when you read the latest round of race war news, remember this: A white activist posing as a Black Lives Matter activist campaigned against a law protecting pre-born black babies in the womb from a gruesome death. Margaret Sanger—and the alt-right movement–would be proud.
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 Dr. Alveda King, niece of Martin Luther King, Jr. Alveda explains that she used to be pro-abortion but embraced the pro-life message when she became a born-again Christian in 1983. “The African-American community is a very politically loyal community,” she said. “However, many African-Americans today are supporting President Donald John Trump because of his stand for life, because of his economic support.” 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--2020-09-28--Marian theologian explains the meaning of Our Mother’s apparitions

Formerly Heart to Heart with Mother Miriam , Mother Miriam Live brings you inspiration and solutions for life ’ s @ @ @ @ @ Miriam is a Catholic nun on a mission to bring hope to a world that @ @ @ @ @ let her share that hope and joy with you !
To tune into Mother Miriam @ @ @ @ @ Facebook page here every Monday to Friday at 10am .

To help keep this and other programs on the air, please donate here. In this episode, Mother Miriam interviews Dr. Mark Miravalle, professor of theology at Franciscan University in Steubenville, Ohio. You can tune in daily at 10 am EST/7 am PST on our Facebook Page. Subscribe to Mother Miriam Live email updates here.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-28--COVID won’t stop pro-life Canadians attending annual Life Chain events across country Sunday Oct. 4

September 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – COVID will not stop a Canadian-wide outdoor pro-life event from taking place this coming weekend ( Sunday , Oct. 4 ) , where thousands are expected to take to the streets in cities and towns across the country — while following all provincial regulations — to protest the slaughter of some 100,000 babies every year by abortion .
Life Chain 2020 will forge ahead outdoors following strict COVID-19 protocols .
Campaign Life Coalition is urging all participants to abide by their local health and safety measures and say they are “ confident @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Every year , people of all ages come together to peacefully testify as a community to the truth that abortion kills children and harms women , ” said Josie Luetke , Life Chain Canada committee member and Youth Coordinator for Campaign Life Coalition ( CLC ) in a press release about the event .
“ The event will be relatively low-risk—virtually , as safe as it can be during this pandemic .
Participants will be outdoors , physically distanced , and standing in silent prayer , ” Luetke told LifeSiteNews .
Luetke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ continually engage with the culture , even when it seems intent on pushing death over life again and again.
” “ Our public pro-life witness through Life Chain is a visible call for our communities to return to Christ and to cherish each and every human life .
This reminder is especially necessary when you consider how in Canada in 2020 abortions are considered an ‘ essential service ’ and the elderly and disabled are being isolated and neglected , ” said Luetke to LifeSiteNews .
For 2020 , Life Chain will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Canada except for Prince Edward Island and the Territories .
Due to restrictions put in place because of COVID-19 , event organizers have asked each Life Chain group to follow their local COVID-19 guidelines as they pertain to outdoor crowd limits .
“ We 've asked organizers to be prepared to set up ‘ mini ’ Life Chains , separated by a couple of blocks or so , comprised of no more than 25 people each .
In summary , then , as long as you 're feeling healthy and take the necessary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to take part in Life Chain without any concerns , ” Luetke told LifeSiteNews .
Life Chain organizers also remind participants that even “ during a pandemic ” people have the right to protest .
“ Remember that even during a pandemic , you still have a constitutionally-protected right to protest and that other groups ( like Black Lives Matter ) have done so .
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau himself attended such a protest , ” states the Life Chain COVID-19 protocol document .
In most locations , Life Chain will take place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Times and locations will vary , says CLC , so they have recommended viewing the complete list of locations and times before heading out , which includes nearly 40 locations in Toronto alone .
Event organizers are encouraging participants to be prepared to explain to local media as well as law enforcement the steps they are taking to stay in compliance with their local COVID-19 regulations .
They are also encouraging attendees to have their cameras on hand .
“ We do recommend that Life Chain organizers film their Life Chain if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in order to keep the event peaceful and to have evidence of their compliance to COVID-19 protocols , ” Luetke told LifeSiteNews .
Attendees at previous Life Chain events have received opposition for their pro-life witness .
In 2018 , a man was caught on video roundhouse-kicking a young female CLC staff member at a Life Chain event in Toronto .
As the incident was filmed , the identity of the attacker was later verified which resulted in him being charged with assault .
Life Chain events in Canada have been held @ @ @ @ @ @ @ event first taking place in the United States in 1987 , as “ a peaceful and prayerful demonstration in support of the inherent dignity of every human being , from the moment of conception until natural death.
” For more information on Life Chain Canada , please visit https : //www.campaignlifecoalition.com/life-chain .
Life Chain events in the US will be taking place on two official dates due to COVID-19 , on October 4th , and November 1st .

PETITION: Stand with priest who faces Church penalties for saying “You can't be a Catholic and a Democrat.”! Sign the petition here. September 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – COVID will not stop a Canadian-wide outdoor pro-life event from taking place this coming weekend (Sunday, Oct. 4), where thousands are expected to take to the streets in cities and towns across the country — while following all provincial regulations — to protest the slaughter of some 100,000 babies every year by abortion. Life Chain 2020 will forge ahead outdoors following strict COVID-19 protocols. Campaign Life Coalition is urging all participants to abide by […]
PETITION: Stand with priest who faces Church penalties for saying “You can't be a Catholic and a Democrat.”! Sign the petition here.
September 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – COVID will not stop a Canadian-wide outdoor pro-life event from taking place this coming weekend (Sunday, Oct. 4), where thousands are expected to take to the streets in cities and towns across the country — while following all provincial regulations — to protest the slaughter of some 100,000 babies every year by abortion.
Life Chain 2020 will forge ahead outdoors following strict COVID-19 protocols. Campaign Life Coalition is urging all participants to abide by their local health and safety measures and say they are “confident that participants will be physically distanced.”
“Every year, people of all ages come together to peacefully testify as a community to the truth that abortion kills children and harms women,” said Josie Luetke, Life Chain Canada committee member and Youth Coordinator for Campaign Life Coalition (CLC) in a press release about the event.
“The event will be relatively low-risk—virtually, as safe as it can be during this pandemic. Participants will be outdoors, physically distanced, and standing in silent prayer,” Luetke told LifeSiteNews.
Luetke informed LifeSiteNews that the pro-life movement must “continually engage with the culture, even when it seems intent on pushing death over life again and again.”
“Our public pro-life witness through Life Chain is a visible call for our communities to return to Christ and to cherish each and every human life. This reminder is especially necessary when you consider how in Canada in 2020 abortions are considered an ‘essential service’ and the elderly and disabled are being isolated and neglected, ” said Luetke to LifeSiteNews.
For 2020, Life Chain will be taking place in every province in Canada except for Prince Edward Island and the Territories.
Due to restrictions put in place because of COVID-19, event organizers have asked each Life Chain group to follow their local COVID-19 guidelines as they pertain to outdoor crowd limits.
“We've asked organizers to be prepared to set up ‘mini’ Life Chains, separated by a couple of blocks or so, comprised of no more than 25 people each. In summary, then, as long as you're feeling healthy and take the necessary health precautions, you should be able to take part in Life Chain without any concerns,” Luetke told LifeSiteNews.
Life Chain organizers also remind participants that even “during a pandemic” people have the right to protest.
“Remember that even during a pandemic, you still have a constitutionally-protected right to protest and that other groups (like Black Lives Matter) have done so. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau himself attended such a protest,” states the Life Chain COVID-19 protocol document.
In most locations, Life Chain will take place from 2:00 to 3:00 p.m. local time. Times and locations will vary, says CLC, so they have recommended viewing the complete list of locations and times before heading out, which includes nearly 40 locations in Toronto alone.
Event organizers are encouraging participants to be prepared to explain to local media as well as law enforcement the steps they are taking to stay in compliance with their local COVID-19 regulations.
They are also encouraging attendees to have their cameras on hand.
“We do recommend that Life Chain organizers film their Life Chain if they have the capability to do so, in order to keep the event peaceful and to have evidence of their compliance to COVID-19 protocols,” Luetke told LifeSiteNews.
Attendees at previous Life Chain events have received opposition for their pro-life witness.
In 2018, a man was caught on video roundhouse-kicking a young female CLC staff member at a Life Chain event in Toronto. As the incident was filmed, the identity of the attacker was later verified which resulted in him being charged with assault.
Life Chain events in Canada have been held every year since 1990, with the event first taking place in the United States in 1987, as “a peaceful and prayerful demonstration in support of the inherent dignity of every human being, from the moment of conception until natural death.”
For more information on Life Chain Canada, please visit https://www.campaignlifecoalition.com/life-chain.
Life Chain events in the US will be taking place on two official dates due to COVID-19, on October 4th, and November 1st.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-28--How Amy Coney Barrett will use science and legal principles to overturn Roe v. Wade

September 28 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Pro-life Americans assume that Ruth Bader Ginsberg was a hammer-and-tongs feminist who was a die-hard supporter of Roe v. Wade .
The truth is somewhat more … complicated .
Roe v. Wade predated Ginsberg ’ s service on the court , of course , and she originally—and correctly -- considered it an example of judicial overreach .
In a 1993 speech to New York University School of Law students , she explained that the court should have stuck to the issue at hand—the constitutionality of the Texas law against abortion that was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ touch each and every state law that touched on abortion .
Not that Ginsberg was opposed to the end sought by Roe v. Wade : legalized abortion throughout the United States .
She wasn ’ t .
But she was honest enough to admit that the court had engaged in a raw act of judicial tyranny to get there , overriding the democrat process at the federal level and fashioning “ a set of rules that displaced virtually every state law then in force.
” Ginsberg believed that this was a bridge too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , one that merely struck down the extreme Texas law and went no further on that day , I believe … , might have served to reduce rather than to fuel controversy.
” She also felt that Roe v. Wade “ halted a political process [ in favor of abortion rights ] that was moving in a reform direction and thereby … prolonged divisiveness and deferred stable settlement of the issue.
” She was wrong , of course .
Abortion advocates were not then , and are not now , interested in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demands have become ever more extreme over time .
They have abandoned the “ trimester formula ” laid out in Roe in favor of abortion-on-demand up to the point of childbirth .
Indeed , we now have leading members of the Democrat party publicly promoting the killing of babies born alive after failed abortions .
Infanticide by any other name is still infanticide .
Ginsberg may have deplored the judicial overreach which led to Roe v. Wade , but she herself joined the court only to augment the ranks of those who practiced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the cadre of “ black-robed tyrants ” —as Robert Bork called them—who were engaged in turning the Supreme Court into a second legislature , superior even to the U.S. Congress .
Amy Coney Barrett , by all reports , is made of sterner stuff .
The mothers of large families usually are .
When confirmed , she will help steer the court back to its proper constitutional role as a judicious watchdog against legislative and executive overreach .
This necessarily means voting to overturn Roe v. Wade , which is arguably the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the entire history of the court .
In a 2013 speech at the University of Notre Dame on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade , she accurately noted that the court ’ s reasoning “ essentially permitted abortion on demand.
” Even leaving aside her personal “ conviction ” that “ life begins at conception ” —which both faith and scientific fact teach us is true -- it is abundantly clear that she believes Roe vs. Wade was wrongly decided .
The only thing that now stands in the way of tossing out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ once the Supreme Court has issued a ruling it must ever after abide by its own precedent .
Barrett has already disposed of this objection in no less than four separate articles .
In them , she argues that stare decisis may conflict with an “ originalist ” reading of the Constitution and , in addition , sometimes violates the due process clause .
Aside from support for pro-life legislation , what else might Christian conservatives expect to come from a Justice Barrett ?
The first thing to note is that her ascension @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a solid majority of five conservative justices for years to come .
There is little doubt Barrett will close ranks with Justices Alito , Gorsuch , Thomas , and Kavanaugh on cases having to do with everything from 2nd Amendment rights and immigration , to executive power and Obamacare .
This means that the notoriously inconstant Chief Justice John Roberts will no longer hold the balance of power on the court .
Even better , the liberal troika of Kagan , Sotomayor , and Breyer will be reduced to writing impotent dissents .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ just turned 82 .
I wish the court ’ s senior justice many years of continued good health , but it is not improbable that President Trump , during his second term , may get to appoint an unprecedented fourth justice to the court . )
The first thing to go may be Obamacare , which will come before the Supreme Court for a third time this November .
We owe the survival of this legislative monstrosity to Chief Justice Roberts .
He joined the liberal wing of the court in 2012 in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the penalty for not having insurance was actually a “ tax.
” Barrett is on record in a 2017 Notre Dame University Law Review article saying that his opinion twisted the statute “ beyond its plausible meaning.
” The new conservative majority will also protect the right of Americans to keep and bear arms .
Last year a case came before the 7th circuit , on which Barrett currently serves , concerning a law that bars those convicted of even a nonviolent felony from ever owning guns .
She dissented from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who would take away someone ’ s 2nd Amendment rights must prove that they are a present threat to society .
Barrett is also likely to be a reliable vote to uphold the President ’ s executive authority in matters of immigration .
She supported ( in a dissent ) Trump ’ s executive order requiring prospective immigrants to prove that they would not become a burden on the public .
Trump ’ s creation of a conservative supermajority on the Supreme Court in a single term is nothing short of miraculous .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the proper balance between the three “ separate but equal ” branches of the federal government , it will have the added effect of reinvigorating the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution and returning power to the states .
For decades conservatives have been alarmed by the court ’ s increasing willingness to overstep its constitutional bounds and become an instrument of progressive oppression .
There is no more costly or poignant example of this kind of judicial tyranny than Roe v. Wade , which has condemned tens of millions of unborn Americans to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Amy Coney Barrett joins the court as Justice Barrett , I am convinced , America ’ s long national abortion nightmare will begin to come to an end .
The Founders will once again be able to sleep peacefully in their graves knowing that the constitutional order they designed over two centuries ago will survive for another generation .
And the precious unborn will once again be able to dream peacefully in the wombs of their mothers , safe from the scourge of abortion in much of America , until they are born @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mosher is the President of the Population Research Institute and the author of Bully of Asia : Why China ’ s Dream is the New Threat to World Order .

'Not long after Amy Coney Barrett joins the court as Justice Barrett, I am convinced, America’s long national abortion nightmare will begin to come to an end'
URGENT PETITION: Tell the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade! Sign the petition here.
September 28, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Pro-life Americans assume that Ruth Bader Ginsberg was a hammer-and-tongs feminist who was a die-hard supporter of Roe v. Wade. The truth is somewhat more … complicated.
Roe v. Wade predated Ginsberg’s service on the court, of course, and she originally—and correctly–considered it an example of judicial overreach. In a 1993 speech to New York University School of Law students, she explained that the court should have stuck to the issue at hand—the constitutionality of the Texas law against abortion that was being challenged—instead of seizing the opportunity to touch each and every state law that touched on abortion.
Not that Ginsberg was opposed to the end sought by Roe v. Wade: legalized abortion throughout the United States. She wasn’t. But she was honest enough to admit that the court had engaged in a raw act of judicial tyranny to get there, overriding the democrat process at the federal level and fashioning “a set of rules that displaced virtually every state law then in force.”
Ginsberg believed that this was a bridge too far: “A less encompassing Roe, one that merely struck down the extreme Texas law and went no further on that day, I believe …, might have served to reduce rather than to fuel controversy.”
She also felt that Roe v. Wade “halted a political process [in favor of abortion rights] that was moving in a reform direction and thereby … prolonged divisiveness and deferred stable settlement of the issue.”
She was wrong, of course. Abortion advocates were not then, and are not now, interested in a “stable settlement.” Instead, their demands have become ever more extreme over time. They have abandoned the “trimester formula” laid out in Roe in favor of abortion-on-demand up to the point of childbirth. Indeed, we now have leading members of the Democrat party publicly promoting the killing of babies born alive after failed abortions. Infanticide by any other name is still infanticide.
Ginsberg may have deplored the judicial overreach which led to Roe v. Wade, but she herself joined the court only to augment the ranks of those who practiced it. She became a leading member of the cadre of “black-robed tyrants”—as Robert Bork called them—who were engaged in turning the Supreme Court into a second legislature, superior even to the U.S. Congress.
Amy Coney Barrett, by all reports, is made of sterner stuff. The mothers of large families usually are. When confirmed, she will help steer the court back to its proper constitutional role as a judicious watchdog against legislative and executive overreach.
This necessarily means voting to overturn Roe v. Wade, which is arguably the most notorious example of judicial overreach in the entire history of the court. In a 2013 speech at the University of Notre Dame on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, she accurately noted that the court’s reasoning “essentially permitted abortion on demand.”
Even leaving aside her personal “conviction” that “life begins at conception”—which both faith and scientific fact teach us is true–it is abundantly clear that she believes Roe vs. Wade was wrongly decided.
The only thing that now stands in the way of tossing out Roe is the notion of stare decisis—that once the Supreme Court has issued a ruling it must ever after abide by its own precedent. Barrett has already disposed of this objection in no less than four separate articles. In them, she argues that stare decisis may conflict with an “originalist” reading of the Constitution and, in addition, sometimes violates the due process clause.
(Expect Democrat senators to aggressively question Barrett on her views on stare decisis at next week’s hearing. They will portray themselves as fierce defenders of what they will embrace as a sacred judicial principle rooted in longstanding tradition.)
Aside from support for pro-life legislation, what else might Christian conservatives expect to come from a Justice Barrett?
The first thing to note is that her ascension to the court will cement in place a solid majority of five conservative justices for years to come. There is little doubt Barrett will close ranks with Justices Alito, Gorsuch, Thomas, and Kavanaugh on cases having to do with everything from 2nd Amendment rights and immigration, to executive power and Obamacare.
This means that the notoriously inconstant Chief Justice John Roberts will no longer hold the balance of power on the court. Even better, the liberal troika of Kagan, Sotomayor, and Breyer will be reduced to writing impotent dissents. (Breyer, by the way, just turned 82. I wish the court’s senior justice many years of continued good health, but it is not improbable that President Trump, during his second term, may get to appoint an unprecedented fourth justice to the court.)
The first thing to go may be Obamacare, which will come before the Supreme Court for a third time this November. We owe the survival of this legislative monstrosity to Chief Justice Roberts. He joined the liberal wing of the court in 2012 in upholding Obamacare, offering the novel argument that the penalty for not having insurance was actually a “tax.” Barrett is on record in a 2017 Notre Dame University Law Review article saying that his opinion twisted the statute “beyond its plausible meaning.”
The new conservative majority will also protect the right of Americans to keep and bear arms. Last year a case came before the 7th circuit, on which Barrett currently serves, concerning a law that bars those convicted of even a nonviolent felony from ever owning guns. She dissented from the liberal majority on the grounds that those who would take away someone’s 2nd Amendment rights must prove that they are a present threat to society.
Barrett is also likely to be a reliable vote to uphold the President’s executive authority in matters of immigration. She supported (in a dissent) Trump’s executive order requiring prospective immigrants to prove that they would not become a burden on the public.
Trump’s creation of a conservative supermajority on the Supreme Court in a single term is nothing short of miraculous. Not only will it help to restore the proper balance between the three “separate but equal” branches of the federal government, it will have the added effect of reinvigorating the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution and returning power to the states.
For decades conservatives have been alarmed by the court’s increasing willingness to overstep its constitutional bounds and become an instrument of progressive oppression.
There is no more costly or poignant example of this kind of judicial tyranny than Roe v. Wade, which has condemned tens of millions of unborn Americans to an untimely death.
Not long after Amy Coney Barrett joins the court as Justice Barrett, I am convinced, America’s long national abortion nightmare will begin to come to an end.
The Founders will once again be able to sleep peacefully in their graves knowing that the constitutional order they designed over two centuries ago will survive for another generation.
And the precious unborn will once again be able to dream peacefully in the wombs of their mothers, safe from the scourge of abortion in much of America, until they are born into this blessed land.
Steven W. Mosher is the President of the Population Research Institute and the author of Bully of Asia: Why China’s Dream is the New Threat to World Order.
Follow Steven Steven Mosher is an internationally recognised authority on China and population issues as well as an acclaimed author and speaker and founder and head of the Population Research Institute. He was the first American social scientist to visit mainland China in 1979 where he witnessed women being forced to have abortion under the new “one-child-policy” which he then exposed to the world. Mr. Mosher was a pro-choice atheist at the time, but witnessing these traumatic abortions led him to reconsider his convictions and to eventually become a practicing, pro-life Roman Catholic. Mosher has appeared numerous times before the US Congress as an expert in world population, China and human Rights abuses. He has also made TV appearances on Good Morning America, 60 Minutes, The Today Show, 20/20, FOX and CNN news, as well as being a regular guest on talk radio shows across the nation. He is the author of the best-selling A Mother’s Ordeal: One woman’s Fight Against China’s One-Child-Policy. His latest book is Bully of Asia, exposing the threat of China to the entire world at this time. Articles by Steve have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, Reader’s Digest, The New Republic, The Washington Post, National Review, Reason, The Asian Wall Street Journal, Freedom Review, Linacre Quarterly, Catholic World Report, Human Life Review, First Things, and numerous other publications. Steven Mosher lives in Virginia with his wife, Vera, and their nine children.
Share