lifesitenews--2020-10-14--Barrett laments ‘cruel’ attacks that ‘are not only hurtful to me, but are hurtful to my children’

WASHINGTON , D.C. , October 13 , 2020 ( ) — Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett defended herself from attacks she was using her two adopted children from Haiti as “ props.
” In the final hour of today ’ s confirmation hearings , Barrett said that “ accusations like that are cruel.
” Sen. John Kennedy ( R-LA ) asked her about the accusations leveled most prominently by “ some butthead professor at Boston University , ” who said that “ because you and your husband have two children of color , that you ’ re a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you ’ re a racist and then you use your two children as props.
” “ It was the risk of people saying things like that , which would be so hurtful to my family , that when I told Senator Graham this morning that my husband and I had to really weigh the costs of this , ” said Barrett .
“ It was saying deeply offensive and hurtful things , things that are not only hurtful to me , but are hurtful to my children , who are my children , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brought home and made part of our family.
” “ And accusations like that are cruel , ” Barrett concluded .
“ Yeah , they are , ” Kennedy agreed .
“ How low can you go ?
” The senator said he “ didn ’ t want to ask that question when your kids were here .
I ’ m sorry I have to go through that.
” While Barrett ’ s children were present at the beginning of the hearings , they left as the day progressed .
Her husband Jesse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ almost 12 hours of hearings today .
Ibram X. Kendi , the director and founder of Boston University ’ s “ Center for Antiracist Research , ” had tweeted on September 26 , the day Barrett was officially nominated by President Donald Trump , “ Some White colonizers ‘ adopted ’ Black children .
They ‘ civilized ’ these ‘ savage ’ children in the ‘ superior ’ ways of White people , while using them as props in their lifelong pictures of denial , while cutting the biological parents of these children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ And whether this is Barrett or not is not the point .
It is a belief too many White people have : if they have or adopt a child of color , then they can ’ t be racist , ” Kendi added .

PETITION UPDATE (9/26/2020):
With President Trump's nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court left by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, we are closer than we have been in decades to seeing Roe vs. Wade overturned.
We now encourage the Senate to confirm Barrett as the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.
Judge Barrett has a fantastic track recond on sanctity of life issues, has seven children, and is a devout believer. She is the perfect remedy for Ruth Bader Ginsburg's radical pro-abortionism.
Please READ the full story here: 'BREAKING: Trump nominates Catholic mom of 7 Judge Amy Coney Barrett to Supreme Court'
And then, please SIGN this petition telling the High Court that it's now time to end the activist Roe vs. Wade judgment. Thank you!
__________________________________________________________________
PETITION UPDATE (6/29/2020):
In a decision which has imperiled more abortion-minded women, sentenced more preborn to death, and upset pro-lifers across the nation,the United States Supreme Court decided 5-4 to strike down a Louisiana law requiring basic medical precautions in the event of abortion complications, with Chief Justice John Roberts reversing his own past decision to uphold a similar Texas law.
Liberal Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the majority opinion, which held that the Louisiana law was unconstitutional for the simple fact that it was “almost word-for-word identical” to the Texas one the court already struck down in 2016.
In his concurring opinion, Chief Justice Roberts acknowledged that he had “joined the dissent in Whole Woman’s Health and continue to believe that the case was wrongly decided. The question today however is not whether Whole Woman’s Health was right or wrong, but whether to adhere to it in deciding the present case.”
We call on the Supreme Court to stop supporting the culture of death and overturn Roe vs Wade, now.
PETITION UPDATE (1/20/2020):
Hundreds of thousands of people will gather in Washington, D.C., this coming Friday, January 24th, for the March for Life. They will be praying for an end to Roe vs Wade, as the Supreme Court will hear a crucial, abortion-related case later this year in March. United our voices can change the course of history. Sign this petition TODAY! (LEARN MORE BELOW)
PETITION UPDATE (1/3/2020):
In advance of the Supreme Court's hearing arguments in an important abortion case later this year in March, 207 U.S. Senators and Representatives have signed amicus briefs supporting a Louisiana law requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at a hospital nearby an abortion center.
Some of these supporting briefs also suggest that now is the time to reconsider Roe vs Wade as sound law.
Please SIGN this petition, calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down Roe vs Wade.
_____________________________________________________________________________
More than 60 million Americans have been slaughtered in their mother's wombs as a result of Roe v. Wade. This activist, unconstitutional ruling in 1973 has left countless women emotionally and psychologically scarred.
It was believed by many that Roe would be overturned in 1992 with Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Despite having eight Republican-appointed judges at the time, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to uphold it.
Since then, major gains have been made in the fight for life, and many lives have been saved.
However, Roe v. Wade remains the law of the land, leaving millions of defenseless pre-born children vulnerable to murder.
According to a 2016 study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 35% of aborted babies are African American, despite black women only making up six percent of the U.S. population. 19% of aborted babies are Hispanic.
We thus again call on the court to do everything they can to end Roe vs Wade.
Now is the time for pro-lifers to join together and ensure that all of God's children have a right to life.
Roe v. Wade must come to an end!
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/supreme-court-strikes-down-louisiana-abortion-regulations
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/over-200-congressmen-as-us-supreme-court-to-reconsider-roe-v-wade
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/congress-members-file-competing-legal-briefs-in-key-scotus-abortion-case


lifesitenews--2020-10-14--Literally zero spectators at joint Biden-Harris campaign appearance in Arizona

October 13 , 2020 ( American Thinker ) — Who are you going to believe — the polls or your @ @ @ @ @ to Groucho Marx , we now have the answer to the question : `` What @ @ @ @ @ rally and nobody showed up ? ''
The answer is a shocked TV street reporter @ @ @ @ @ the street outside , the reporter said , `` Pretty much all the people we @ @ @ @ @ parking lot about 45 minutes ago were with the Biden-Harris campaign or the pool reporters @ @ @ @ @ that because both halves of the ticket were appearing , it was `` technically , @ @ @ @ @ Not big enough to draw a crowd .
Published with permission from the American Thinker @

Who are you going to believe — the polls or your lying eyes?
October 13, 2020 (American Thinker) — Who are you going to believe — the polls or your lying eyes? With apologies to Groucho Marx, we now have the answer to the question: “What if they held a Biden-Harris rally and nobody showed up?” The answer is a shocked TV street reporter:
Twitter video screen grab.
With nobody visible on the street outside, the reporter said, “Pretty much all the people we saw who pulled into the parking lot about 45 minutes ago were with the Biden-Harris campaign or the pool reporters.” And she noted that because both halves of the ticket were appearing, it was “technically, a big event.”
Not big enough to draw a crowd.
Published with permission from the American Thinker.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-10-14--Abby Johnson describes abortion’s brutality in letter to Senate supporting Amy Coney Barrett

ROUND ROCK , Texas , October 13 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — The founder of an organization dedicated to getting abortion facility staffers out of the business has publicly advocated for Amy Coney Barrett ’ s confirmation to the Supreme Court .
“ On behalf of the more than 550 abortion clinic workers we have helped quit the abortion industry , ” Abby Johnson wrote in a letter to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee , “ we urge you to support the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the United States Supreme Court.
” Johnson is the founder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There Were None , “ a registered nonprofit organization that exists to help abortion clinic workers leave the abortion industry , ” according the group ’ s website .
She spent many years working for Planned Parenthood , the United States ’ largest abortion chain , and resigned in 2009 after using an ultrasound machine to assist at the abortion of 13-week-old baby .
Like many Democratic senators , Johnson links Barrett ’ s nomination to the national controversy surrounding abortion and Roe v. Wade , the 1973 Supreme Court decision that imposed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We want Justice Barrett , ” Johnson concludes , “ simply because our country deserves better than abortion .
The letter talks about not only the brutal deaths that babies suffer in abortion , but also “ the complete and utter disregard for women — they are solely a means of increasing revenue.
” Additionally , “ more than 2,300 abortions are done per day in the United States and ... an average abortion is around $ 500.
” According to Planned Parenthood ’ s 2018–2019 annual report , total net assets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while taxpayer funding equaled $ 616.8 million .
Johnson ’ s personal experiences within the abortion industry were brought to light in last year ’ s film Unplanned , which was based on her book by the same name .
The letter goes on to say that because of Johnson ’ s organization , 22 abortion facilities in 42 states and the District of Columbia have closed .
Also mentioned is the Supreme Court case Whole Women ’ s Health vs. Hellerstedt , in which “ the Court ruled in favor of allowing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continue unchecked.
” The letter ends with a plea to senators to consider the facts when appointing Supreme Court justices : Abortion clinics won ’ t just suddenly close with the appointment of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court .
We just know the truth about abortion and believe that our senators ought to know too .
We do not want Justice Barrett because she will end abortion .
We want Justice Barrett simply because our country deserves better than abortion .


lifesitenews--2020-10-13--Kamala Harris goes on long-winded rant about abortion at Barrett hearing

October 13 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — At Judge Amy Coney Barrett ’ s Senate confirmation hearing Tuesday evening , pro-abortion Democratic Vice Presidential nominee Sen. Kamala Harris gave a nearly 10-minute long monologue on how the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a champion of “ women ’ s reproductive healthcare ” and how Barrett would be an opponent of “ choice.
” Harris , who was recently named the “ most liberal Senator ” in the entire U.S. Senate by GovTrack.us , also submitted to the congressional record three documents opposing Barrett ’ s nomination .
Two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the Planned Parenthood Federation of America , the notorious abortion giant that has given Harris large amounts of campaign donations ever since she served as Attorney General of California .
During her allotted time , Harris lamented the fact that “ [ Justice ] Ginsburg ’ s seat ” was being filled by a president who has said his judicial nominees would overturn Roe v. Wade .
Appearing annoyed by the possibility that a leader of “ women 's ’ equality ” would be replaced by someone who opposes abortion , Harris @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disagreement with abortion .
Harris suggested it was already a foregone conclusion on how Barrett would rule on future cases .
“ Your record clearly shows you hold a different view [ than Justice Ginsburg ] , ” Harris said .
“ I would suggest we not pretend that we don ’ t know how this nominee views a women ’ s right to choose and make her own healthcare decisions.
” Unlike her Democratic colleagues who earlier in the day had extensive back-and-forth discussions with Barrett on Roe , Harris barely engaged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spent the first 20 minutes of her time repeating campaign themes and echoing claims marshaled by other Senate Democrats about how sick Americans may very well die if Barrett is confirmed .
Many conservatives expected Harris to take a more combative stance with Barrett , especially given her high-profile status as Joe Biden ’ s running mate , but that was largely not the case Tuesday night .
Harris participated in the hearing virtually , and yesterday experienced technical difficulties during her opening statement .

October 13, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — At Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Senate confirmation hearing Tuesday evening, pro-abortion Democratic Vice Presidential nominee Sen. Kamala Harris gave a nearly 10-minute long monologue on how the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a champion of “women’s reproductive healthcare” and how Barrett would be an opponent of “choice.”
Harris, who was recently named the “most liberal Senator” in the entire U.S. Senate by GovTrack.us, also submitted to the congressional record three documents opposing Barrett’s nomination. Two were from the NAACP and one was from the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the notorious abortion giant that has given Harris large amounts of campaign donations ever since she served as Attorney General of California.
During her allotted time, Harris lamented the fact that “[Justice] Ginsburg’s seat” was being filled by a president who has said his judicial nominees would overturn Roe v. Wade. Appearing annoyed by the possibility that a leader of “women's’ equality” would be replaced by someone who opposes abortion, Harris pointed out that Barrett had previously expressed disagreement with Roe. Harris suggested it was already a foregone conclusion on how Barrett would rule on future cases.
“Your record clearly shows you hold a different view [than Justice Ginsburg],” Harris said. “I would suggest we not pretend that we don’t know how this nominee views a women’s right to choose and make her own healthcare decisions.”
Unlike her Democratic colleagues who earlier in the day had extensive back-and-forth discussions with Barrett on Roe, Harris barely engaged her during her platitude-heavy remarks. Harris spent the first 20 minutes of her time repeating campaign themes and echoing claims marshaled by other Senate Democrats about how sick Americans may very well die if Barrett is confirmed.
Many conservatives expected Harris to take a more combative stance with Barrett, especially given her high-profile status as Joe Biden’s running mate, but that was largely not the case Tuesday night. Harris participated in the hearing virtually, and yesterday experienced technical difficulties during her opening statement.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-10-13--Catholic bishop rebukes Biden for supporting ‘the ultimate child abuse’

October 13 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Bishop Richard Stika of the Diocese of Knoxville , Tennessee is the latest of numerous Catholic clergymen to publicly take issue with Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden ’ s stated position on abortion .
Joining Fr .
James Altman , Cardinal Raymond Burke , Fr .
Stephen Imbarrato , and others , Stika raked Biden for “ support [ ing ] the ultimate child abuse.
” A question for Mr. Biden .
At your judgement before God , how will you explain changing your position about abortion ... Will you tell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of the American Constitution ?
I wonder what God must have asked many leaders throughout the centuries ?
Government over human rights and the taking of innocent lives .
Many Catholics will need to answer this the first of many questions about the poor , the starving etc .
Stika ’ s reference to weighing the emergency of abortion against the question of aiding the poor and hungry is a doubling down on the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops ’ insistence on the pre-eminence of ending abortion first .
Another lesser known @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , former Episcopalian and Anglican and pastor of Christ the King Church in Towson , Maryland , has been exhorting his parish .
In a Sunday homily , Meeks stated : It ’ s not always easy to sift through the myriad of topics at play in presidential politics , so it becomes crucial , then , that we properly prioritize those issues because some are clearly more important than others .
We can respectfully disagree … around issues like the economy , taxation , immigration , national defense ... and so on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the spurious seamless garment theory espoused by many in the Church that asserts that issues like immigration and the environment are of equal weight with abortion .
… There is a set of issues upon which Catholics must not disagree .
Pope Benedict XVI specified ... in Sacramentum Caritatis non-negotiable values .
… [ T ] he sanctity of life from conception to natural death , the sanctity of marriage and preservation of religious liberty [ . ]
... [ These are ] moral principles where the Church draws a clear line @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We must , as faithful Catholics , conscientiously vote in such a way that best upholds and protects these non-negotiable values .

PETITION UPDATE (3/15/21) -
Reports suggest that the U.S. Catholic Bishops' Conference (USCCB) is preparing a vote on what to do about pro-abortion Joe Biden (and, presumably, other abortion-promoting politicians) who continues to present himself (themselves) for Holy Communion.
Public excommunication would be a suitable response for Biden's obstinate, public and grave sin of scandalously promoting abortion.
Please continue to SIGN and SHARE this important petition.
__________________________________________________________________
PETITION UPDATE (2/4/20)
Since Joe Biden was sworn-in on the 20th of January, he has wasted no time in signing Executive Orders to destroy the protections which former President Trump offered to the unborn and to the innocence and modesty of children of the United States.
In one executive order, Biden rescinded the Mexico City Policy prohibiting the federal government from spending taxpayer monies on abortion and the promotion of abortion.
And, in another executive order, Biden seeks to force girls' athletic programs, restrooms, and locker rooms to accept gender-confused males.
Since the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops was shamefully silent throughout the presidential campaign on the pre-eminent issues of abortion and gender ideology, and what Biden vowed he would do as president, it is cold comfort that their pro-life office is now speaking up about this Administration's wilful disregard for human life and for God's design of human nature (i.e., two biological sexes).
Stated plainly, Joe Biden is as bad as he said he would be, and the bishop, acting in unison (as the USCCB) have an obligation to the Lord (first) and to the faithful (second) to refuse Holy Communion to this grave public sinner.
With all due respect to these bishops, they diminish the Holy Eucharist and their high office, as well as cause grave scandal to the faithful, by dialoguing with a man who is promoting mass murder of the unborn against the constant teaching of the Church.
A man who continues to use the church as a backdrop for statements about how "Catholic/religious" he is, but, at the same time, is now doing everything in his power to protect the murder of the innocent, needs to publicly repent before dialogue can begin.
The bishops should not dialogue with or congratulate someone who has publicly betrayed the Church's teaching and who is leading others astray.
It's an embarrassment and a scandal for the bishops to continue to allow him to receive Holy Communion.
Please SIGN and SHARE this petition today!
________________________________________________________________________________________________
PETITION UPDATE (12/10/20)
Prior to the election on November 3, the U.S. bishops did not address Joe Biden’s anti-Catholic position regarding faith and morals as a unified body.
The USCCB, the organization to which every U.S. bishop belongs and which is staffed and led by bishops, remained disgracefully silent in the run-up to the election.
What were the bishops afraid of, losing their charitable tax status with the IRS, or being deprived of fat checks from the HHS (immigration programs) and USAID (foreign aid programs)?
Or, were they just too cowardly to clearly declare Christ's law to be above man's law and risk the ire of a Joe Biden as president?
Either way, the bishops’ lack of clarity in this regard is a terrible scandal in itself and probably greatly contributed to the possible election of a pro-abortion, anti-Catholic Catholic to the presidency.
Given the fact that exit polling shows Catholics split their vote 50-50 for Trump and Biden, even a slight deviation in the heavily-Catholic swing-states of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania could have produced different results.
The bishops could have spoken out against Biden’s pro-abortion stance collectively, but, again, they were overwhelmingly and shamefully silent.
Because of this, they will be at least partly responsible for the policies advanced by a Biden administration, in the event that Biden is sworn into office.
However, the bishops can, even now, mitigate the damage done by their inaction by taking the following steps: 1) Speak with one voice, as the USCCB, and plainly condemn Biden's pro-abortion stance; 2) Publicly advise Biden not to present himself for Holy Communion because of his scandalous position on abortion and homosexual "marriage;" and, 3) Tell Biden to publicly repent of publicly promoting the wilfull murder of the preborn, sins against nature, and diminishing the natural family.
Thankfully, some individual bishops have spoken out forcefully on Biden's scandalous behavior, and his standing in the Church.
On November 9, Archbishop Strickland of Tyler, Texas tweeted: “A dark cloud has descended on this nation when the USCCB and Planned Parenthood speak in unison in support of a Biden-Harris administration that supports the slaughter of innocents by abortion for all 9 months of pregnancy.”
Additionally, Archbishop Samuel Aquila of Denver, Colorado and Archbishop Charles Chaput have both declared publicly that Joe Biden “should not receive Holy Communion."
But, to add insult to injury, Cardinal Wilton Gregory of Washington, D.C. has said that he will give Holy Communion to Biden because “it’s a matter of the responsibility that I have as the archbishop to be engaged and to be in dialogue with him, even in those areas where we obviously have some differences.”
And, Bishop W. Francis Malooly of Wilmington, Delaware and Bishop McElroy of San Diego also congratulated Biden in statements, but they have not indicated whether or not they would administer Holy Communion to him.
With all due respect to these bishops, they diminish the Holy Eucharist and their high office, as well as cause grave scandal to the faithful, by dialoguing with a man who is promoting mass murder of the unborn against the constant teaching of the Church.
A man who uses the church as a backdrop to make sickening political advertisements about how "Catholic/religious" he is, but, at the same time, says that he will do everything in his power to protect the murder of the innocent, needs to publicly repent before dialogue can begin.
The bishops should not dialogue with or congratulate someone who has publicly betrayed the Church's teaching and who is leading others astray.
It's an embarrassment and a scandal for the bishops to continue to allow him to receive Holy Communion.
Please SIGN and SHARE this petition today!
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/us-bishops-concerned-about-pro-abortion-biden-previously-hailed-him-as-second-catholic-president
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/abp-aquila-backs-call-for-pro-abortion-catholic-joe-biden-to-be-denied-holy-communion?utm_source=top_news&utm_campaign=standard
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/former-philly-archbishop-biden-not-in-full-communion-with-the-catholic-church
https://www.thesoutherncross.org/news/bishop-mcelroy-offers-prayers-and-congratulations-to-president-elect-biden/
https://www.ncronline.org/news/politics/us-catholics-weigh-mixed-reaction-biden-win
____________________________________________________________________________
PETITION UPDATE (9/29/20)
Cardinal Raymond Burke has stated that Democratic candidate Joe Biden should not receive Holy Communion because of his support for abortion.
In an interview for Thomas McKenna's Catholic Action for Faith and Family podcast, Cardinal Burke states the following (starting around 5:00):
First of all, I would tell him [Biden] not to approach to receive Holy Communion, out of charity toward him, because that would be a sacrilege and endanger the salvation of his own soul.
But, also, he should not approach to receive Holy Communion because he gives scandal to everyone, because if someone says, 'I'm a devout Catholic," and, at the same time is promoting abortion, it gives the impression to others that it's acceptable for a Catholic to be in favor of abortion.
Of course, it's absolutely not acceptable, and never has been, and never will be.
We give thanks for Cardinal Burke's frankness and clarity. And, we call on every U.S. Catholic bishop to follow Cardinal Burke's lead and call out Joe Biden for his bloody-minded hypocrisy on the issue of abortion.
To reiterate: You cannot be a Catholic and support abortion.
Thank you for continuing to sign this urgent petition.
___________________________________________________________________________
PETITION UPDATE (8/17/20)
The Democratic presidential candidate, Joe Biden, keeps claiming to be Catholic but has said he will do everything in his power to support abortion.
And, with his pick of California Senator Kamala Harris as his running mate, Biden has just cemented abortion into the Democrats' 2020 presidential ticket.
Indeed, Harris is vehemently pro-abortion.
During her time as attorney general of California, Harris played a key role in defending Planned Parenthood over its sale of aborted baby parts (which violated multiple federal laws, according to undercover video of abortion industry personnel).
And, last year, Harris unveiled a plan to essentially force pro-life states to seek permission from the federal government before pro-life laws can take effect.
Additionally, Harris has dangerous views on religious liberty and freedom of speech.
Harris displayed anti-Catholic bigotry in the confirmation hearings of Judge Brian Buescher. Harris cited his membership in the “all-male society” the Knights of Columbus and its stances against abortion and same-sex “marriage” as grounds for rejecting Buescher for a federal district court in Nebraska.
And, David Daleiden, head of the pro-life investigative group Center for Medical Progress, wrote that from his firsthand experience, he considers Harris the “greatest threat to First Amendment civil rights our country has ever seen.”
Joe Biden has seriously erred by taking on Kamala Harris as his running mate, further distancing himself from the truths of the Catholic Faith, especially that every life is sacred from conception till natural death.
Please CLICK HERE to read an article which details one U.S. bishop's warning about the Biden-Harris ticket.
And, please continue to SIGN and SHARE this petition.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Of course, these two things are incompatible: you cannot be Catholic and pro-abortion.
And, a "Catholic" politician's responsibility in this regard is absolute: On pain of serious sin, he or she can never promote abortion because abortion is the wilful murder of innocent preborn human beings, and also because doing so causes grave scandal to the Church and the faithful.
Please SIGN this urgent petition asking the bishops of the United States to refuse to give Holy Communion to Joe Biden until he publicly repents from his scandalous promotion of abortion.
Biden recently promised to “codify Roe v. Wade” as president, adding, "my Justice Department will do everything in its power to stop the rash of state laws that so blatantly violate a woman’s protected, constitutional right to choose."
And, since starting his latest run for the presidency, Biden also flip-flopped against the Hyde Amendment, saying that he would allow federal funds to be spent on abortion - a position he claimed to be against for more than 40 years.
In short, Joe Biden will do everything in his power to enable and defend the wilful murder of innocent preborn human beings.
So, this should not be a hard decision for our U.S. bishops. In fact, in another circumstance, it was already done by an Illinois bishop.
Indeed, Bishop Paprocki, of Springfield, Illinois, invoked Canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law to withdraw Holy Communion from two Illinois state politicians who had worked to enact radical new abortion legislation in 2019.
Canon 915 states: "Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion."
Of course, no-one, least of all the bishops, wants anyone to be deprived of Holy Communion.
A politician who publicly and obstinately advocates for the murder of innocent preborn babies puts himself out-of-communion with the Church and her teaching.
Pro-abortion politicians should not think that they can advocate for the murder of the unborn and receive the Body of Christ at the same time. This would be to defile the Eucharist while giving scandal to the faithful.
Depriving politicians of Holy Communion is not just meant to prevent scandal; it is also designed to bring a grave public sinner to repentance. In this way, such an action is meant to be for the good of their souls, too.
Thank you for SIGNING this urgent petition which calls on the U.S. Catholic bishops to refuse to admit Joe Biden to Holy Communion until he publicly repents from his scandalous promotion of abortion.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Joe Biden: I support abortion ‘under any circumstance’ - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/joe-biden-i-support-abortion-under-any-circumstance
Catholic priest denies Joe Biden Holy Communion for pro-abortion stance - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/catholic-priest-denies-joe-biden-holy-communion-for-pro-abortion-stance
Cardinal McCarrick and the Concealing of Rome’s Position on Denying Communion - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/cardinal-mccarrick-and-the-concealing-of-romes-position-on-denying-communio
**Photo Credit: Joshua Roberts / Getty Images


lifesitenews--2020-10-13--Democrat senators attempt to bait Amy Coney Barrett on IVF

WASHINGTON D.C. , October 13 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Supreme Court Nominee Amy Coney Barrett , has come under further attack for her pro-life positions , this time on the issue of in vitro fertilization , or IVF .
Sen. Patrick Leahy ( D-VT ) attempted to draw Barrett on the issue of IVF , by referencing a pro-life ad she signed in 2006 .
That letter was presented to Barrett as she left church and affirmed the “ right to life from conception to natural death.
” However , Leahy continued by recounting that on the back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , sponsored by the St. Joseph County Right to Life , stating that IVF was tantamount to manslaughter .
Leahy linked Barrett to the views of the ad and challenged her : “ Do you agree that IVF is tantamount to manslaughter ?
” Barrett was quick to correct the senator , by pointing out that the letter affirming the right to life “ was consistent with the views of my church .
It took no position on IVF.
” Not content with this , Leahy questioned further , asking if Barrett agreed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ manslaughter .
Once again Barrett corrected Leahy by observing , “ I don ’ t even think that the IVF view that you ’ re expressing was on that page.
” As with previous questions regarding Roe .
v. Wade and abortion , Barrett would not allow herself to be drawn into stipulating her view : “ for the reasons I have already stated , I can not take policy decisions or express my personal view before the committee , because my personal views don ’ t have anything to do with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t want anyone to be unclear about that.
” Later on in the proceedings , Sen. Richard Blumenthal ( D–CT ) also attacked Barrett on the subject of the letter she signed and IVF .
Blumenthal asked Barrett to express an opinion on a recent statement by the St. Joseph County Right to Life which called for the criminalization of “ discarding of frozen embryos or selective reduction through the IVF process.
” Barrett pointed out that as she was not a member of the organization , she was not responsible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also observed that “ it is not up to me to be in the business of expressing views ... now I 'm a judge so I can not publicly express views.
” The grilling continued , with Blumenthal demanding “ a clear answer ” from Barrett .
She replied that nominees for the Supreme Court “ can ’ t answer questions in the abstract ... an off the cuff reaction from that would circumvent the judicial process.
” IVF is the artificial process whereby eggs are fertilized by sperm outside of the womb @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transferred to the womb .
A great number of those smallest of humans die in the process , and many are deliberately killed if they are deemed unwanted or to be predisposed to a disability .
Antonia Tully , of the U.K.-based Society for the Protection of Unborn Children ( SPUC ) , mentioned the staggering number of deaths involved in the IVF process : “ Normally in every IVF cycle , tiny human embryos are discarded , with about one in 25 embryos created through IVF surviving to birth.
” SPUC also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , during the year 2017 : “ In 2017 alone , 174,622 embryos were discarded in the course of treatment , or after they had been taken out of storage.
” Over 1 million embryonic humans are frozen in the United States .

Barrett repeatedly corrected Sen. Leahy and said she would not 'express my personal view before the committee, because my personal views don’t have anything to do with the way I would decide cases and I don’t want anyone to be unclear about that.'
WASHINGTON D.C., October 13, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Supreme Court Nominee Amy Coney Barrett, has come under further attack for her pro-life positions, this time on the issue of in vitro fertilization, or IVF.
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) attempted to draw Barrett on the issue of IVF, by referencing a pro-life ad she signed in 2006. That letter was presented to Barrett as she left church and affirmed the “right to life from conception to natural death.”
However, Leahy continued by recounting that on the back of the signature sheet was an ad, sponsored by the St. Joseph County Right to Life, stating that IVF was tantamount to manslaughter.
Leahy linked Barrett to the views of the ad and challenged her: “Do you agree that IVF is tantamount to manslaughter?”
Barrett was quick to correct the senator, by pointing out that the letter affirming the right to life “was consistent with the views of my church. It took no position on IVF.”
Not content with this, Leahy questioned further, asking if Barrett agreed with the ad that IVF equated to manslaughter.
Once again Barrett corrected Leahy by observing, “I don’t even think that the IVF view that you’re expressing was on that page.”
As with previous questions regarding Roe. v. Wade and abortion, Barrett would not allow herself to be drawn into stipulating her view: “for the reasons I have already stated, I cannot take policy decisions or express my personal view before the committee, because my personal views don’t have anything to do with the way I would decide cases and I don’t want anyone to be unclear about that.”
Later on in the proceedings, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D–CT) also attacked Barrett on the subject of the letter she signed and IVF. Blumenthal asked Barrett to express an opinion on a recent statement by the St. Joseph County Right to Life which called for the criminalization of “discarding of frozen embryos or selective reduction through the IVF process.”
Barrett pointed out that as she was not a member of the organization, she was not responsible for their views. However, she also observed that “it is not up to me to be in the business of expressing views...now I'm a judge so I cannot publicly express views.”
The grilling continued, with Blumenthal demanding “a clear answer” from Barrett. She replied that nominees for the Supreme Court “can’t answer questions in the abstract…an off the cuff reaction from that would circumvent the judicial process.”
IVF is the artificial process whereby eggs are fertilized by sperm outside of the womb and the thence created embryos are afterwards transferred to the womb. A great number of those smallest of humans die in the process, and many are deliberately killed if they are deemed unwanted or to be predisposed to a disability.
Antonia Tully, of the U.K.-based Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), mentioned the staggering number of deaths involved in the IVF process: “Normally in every IVF cycle, tiny human embryos are discarded, with about one in 25 embryos created through IVF surviving to birth.”
SPUC also presented the statistics regarding IVF in Britain, during the year 2017: “In 2017 alone, 174,622 embryos were discarded in the course of treatment, or after they had been taken out of storage.”
Over 1 million embryonic humans are frozen in the United States.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-10-13--‘Pro-life’ voters get sucked into believing skewed data to justify backing Joe Biden

October 13 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) -- Every four years , there are people who declare that they are pro-life but plan to vote for a political party dedicated to preserving the so-called right to kill children in the womb .
It is always jarring to hear it , because it is difficult to understand how someone who believes that abortion kills a human being would also state that they are planning to vote for a party that sees abortion as a fundamental plank in their platform .
This year , for example , the group “ Pro-Life Evangelicals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ … well , both “ pro-life ” and “ for Biden.
” Biden , of course , is “ for abortion.
” To justify this , some pro-lifers voting for pro-abortion candidates will claim that the abortion rate goes down under Democrat presidents .
This argument is thrown out so often it has become something of a trope , and this election year is no different .
I ’ ve seen the argument making the rounds on social media , and I ’ ve seen it used by pro-life people who really badly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Joe Biden can be morally neutralized by this alleged fact .
As you might imagine , it isn ’ t true .
At least , not in the way that those using it intend .
To debunk this assertion , I turned to pro-life researcher Dr. Michael New , a visiting assistant professor of Political Science and Social Research at the Catholic University of America , as well as an associate scholar at the Charlotte Lozier Institute and a fellow with the Witherspoon Institute at Princeton .
He has a Ph.D in political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in statistics from Stanford , and has served as a post-doctoral fellow at the Harvard-MIT data center and as a lecturer at the University of Massachusetts .
He is one of America ’ s foremost experts on abortion rates .
Here ’ s what he had to say .
Where does the claim that the abortion rate goes down under Democrat presidents originate ?
There are several online memes which claim that there have been considerably larger abortion rate declines during Democratic Presidential administrations than during Republican Presidential administrations .
It is interesting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the court of public opinion , some of our opponents have changed their strategy .
They do not like to argue that pro-lifers are wrong , they instead they have changed their approach and instead argue that pro-life policies are ineffective .
Here are some other examples from recent elections .
In 2004 , there was an article written by Glen Harold Stassen which claimed ( using preliminary data ) that abortions were going up in the early years of the George W. Bush administration .
However , more complete data showed abortion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bush 's Presidency .
In 2008 , Catholic in Alliance for the Common Good published a study which purportedly showed that welfare and other social programs were a more effective strategy for reducing the abortion rate than enacting pro-life laws .
However , their study contained methodological errors .
When the errors were corrected , welfare spending had inconsistent impact on the incidence of abortion across time .
In 2012 , Stephen Schneck of the Catholic University of America claimed that Mitt Romney 's proposed cuts to Medicaid would increase the abortion rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ research to support that argument .
In 2016 , Rachel Held Evans wrote a widely circulated column encouraging pro-life voters to support Hillary Clinton .
She claimed that pro-life laws are not effective at reducing the abortion rate -- even though there is plenty of evidence that the incidence of abortion is sensitive to its legal status .
Evans also claimed that more spending on social programs would reduce the abortion rate – but failed to provide any evidence or research to support that argument .
Finally , she also said that efforts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the abortion rate .
However , research shows that few sexually active women forgo contraception because of the high cost or lack of availability .
Finally , many efforts to increase the contraceptive use are either ineffective at best or counterproductive at worst .
Overall , these memes are misleading .
They do not mention the fact that the U.S. abortion rate increased under Democratic President Jimmy Carter .
These memes often do not mention that California quit reporting abortion data to the CDC in 1997 .
This exaggerates the abortion rate decline @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Some memes use the overall number of abortions instead of the abortion rate .
This is misleading because it allows them to report an increase in the number of abortions that took place during the Reagan administration .
However , the abortion rate actually decreased during the Reagan years -- the reported rise in the number of abortions is due to the fact there was an increase in the population of women of childbearing age between 1981 and 1989 .
Is there any truth to this claim ?
It is true in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been a long-term , durable decline the U.S. abortion rate that has persisted through both Republican and Democratic Presidential administrations .
In percentage terms , there have been somewhat larger percentage declines in the abortion rate during Democratic Presidential administrations than during Republican Presidential administrations .
However , it is by no means clear that these declines are due to any policy change enacted or legislated by these Democratic Presidents .
It should also be noted that policy changes at the state level likely have a larger impact on the incidence of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ level .
Furthermore , in both 1994 ( during the Clinton administration ) and in 2010 ( during the Obama administration ) , Republicans made significant gains in many state legislatures .
This led to an increase in the number of state level pro-life laws , many of which were upheld by judges appointed by Republican Presidents .
Do robust social policies ( such as in Hungary and Israel ) have an impact on the abortion rate ?
The research on the impact of social policies on the abortion rate is mixed .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ lauded for their efforts to reduce the incidence of abortion in Hungary .
They have invested money in educational efforts encouraging women to carry pregnancies to term .
They have increased the maternity benefit and the child care allowance .
They have also offered free or reduced cost services for children .
Between 2010 and 2019 the abortion rate in Hungary fell by over 35 percent .
There was also a study in the journal `` Labour Economics '' which showed that increased maternity leave benefits reduced the probability of abortion in Romania @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a substitute for enacting pro-life laws .
Pro-lifers want to see a world where all unborn children are protected in law and welcomed into life .
However , the policies that have been enacted in Hungary and Romania certainly merit attention from pro-lifers .
What , in your view , is actually bringing the abortion rate down ?
An important reason for the decline in the U.S. abortion rate is because a higher percentage of unintended pregnancies are being carried to term .
According to data from the Guttmacher Institute , 54 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In 2011 ( the most recent year for which we have data ) , only 42 percent of unintended pregnancies resulted in an abortion .
I often present this statistic to pro-life audiences because it nicely demonstrates that the efforts of pro-life activists have been effective at reducing the abortion rate .
If more unintended pregnancies are being carried to term that means that 1 ) hearts and minds are being changed , 2 ) there are more resources available to assist pregnant women or 3 ) protective pro-life laws are now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shows that pro-life educational , service , and legislative efforts have all been effective .
Is it true that the most recent data shows a slight uptick in the abortion rate ?
A recent analysis published by the Charlotte Lozier Institute found that abortions in the United States increased by 1.78 percent between 2017 and 2018 .
This is partly due to an increase in chemical abortions .
There is some preliminary data from Florida which may indicate that the incidence of abortion may be increasing this year .
There are also anecdotal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which indicate that the incidence of abortion has increased during the pandemic .
These reported increases in the incidence of abortion certainly do not undo the impressive , long-term progress that pro-lifers have made reducing the abortion rate .
However , as always , pro-lifers should continue to be vigilant .
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 Marjorie Dannenfelser from the Susan B. Anthony List who tells Van @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the pro-life movement .
Dannenfelser warns listeners that if the Democrats win , it will have a generational impact , as the left will fight to take away the core principles of our nation 's founding .
You can subscribe here and listen to the episode below :

October 13, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Every four years, there are people who declare that they are pro-life but plan to vote for a political party dedicated to preserving the so-called right to kill children in the womb. It is always jarring to hear it, because it is difficult to understand how someone who believes that abortion kills a human being would also state that they are planning to vote for a party that sees abortion as a fundamental plank in their platform. This year, for example, the group “Pro-Life Evangelicals for Biden” is claiming to be … well, both “pro-life” and “for Biden.” Biden, of course, is “for abortion.”
To justify this, some pro-lifers voting for pro-abortion candidates will claim that the abortion rate goes down under Democrat presidents. This argument is thrown out so often it has become something of a trope, and this election year is no different. I’ve seen the argument making the rounds on social media, and I’ve seen it used by pro-life people who really badly want to believe that a vote for Joe Biden can be morally neutralized by this alleged fact. As you might imagine, it isn’t true. At least, not in the way that those using it intend.
Listen to this full interview here:
To debunk this assertion, I turned to pro-life researcher Dr. Michael New, a visiting assistant professor of Political Science and Social Research at the Catholic University of America, as well as an associate scholar at the Charlotte Lozier Institute and a fellow with the Witherspoon Institute at Princeton. He has a Ph.D in political science and a Master’s degree in statistics from Stanford, and has served as a post-doctoral fellow at the Harvard-MIT data center and as a lecturer at the University of Massachusetts. He is one of America’s foremost experts on abortion rates. Here’s what he had to say.
Where does the claim that the abortion rate goes down under Democrat presidents originate?
There are several online memes which claim that there have been considerably larger abortion rate declines during Democratic Presidential administrations than during Republican Presidential administrations. It is interesting, as pro-lifers have made gains in the court of public opinion, some of our opponents have changed their strategy. They do not like to argue that pro-lifers are wrong, they instead they have changed their approach and instead argue that pro-life policies are ineffective. Here are some other examples from recent elections.
Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook
In 2004, there was an article written by Glen Harold Stassen which claimed (using preliminary data) that abortions were going up in the early years of the George W. Bush administration. However, more complete data showed abortion rates continued to decline during George W. Bush's Presidency.
In 2008, Catholic in Alliance for the Common Good published a study which purportedly showed that welfare and other social programs were a more effective strategy for reducing the abortion rate than enacting pro-life laws. However, their study contained methodological errors. When the errors were corrected, welfare spending had inconsistent impact on the incidence of abortion across time.
In 2012, Stephen Schneck of the Catholic University of America claimed that Mitt Romney's proposed cuts to Medicaid would increase the abortion rate, but provided no actual data or research to support that argument.
In 2016, Rachel Held Evans wrote a widely circulated column encouraging pro-life voters to support Hillary Clinton. She claimed that pro-life laws are not effective at reducing the abortion rate — even though there is plenty of evidence that the incidence of abortion is sensitive to its legal status. Evans also claimed that more spending on social programs would reduce the abortion rate – but failed to provide any evidence or research to support that argument.
Finally, she also said that efforts to make contraception more available would reduce the abortion rate. However, research shows that few sexually active women forgo contraception because of the high cost or lack of availability. Finally, many efforts to increase the contraceptive use are either ineffective at best or counterproductive at worst.
Overall, these memes are misleading. They do not mention the fact that the U.S. abortion rate increased under Democratic President Jimmy Carter. These memes often do not mention that California quit reporting abortion data to the CDC in 1997. This exaggerates the abortion rate decline that took place during the Clinton administration. Some memes use the overall number of abortions instead of the abortion rate. This is misleading because it allows them to report an increase in the number of abortions that took place during the Reagan administration. However, the abortion rate actually decreased during the Reagan years — the reported rise in the number of abortions is due to the fact there was an increase in the population of women of childbearing age between 1981 and 1989.
Is there any truth to this claim?
It is true in the sense that since 1980, there has been a long-term, durable decline the U.S. abortion rate that has persisted through both Republican and Democratic Presidential administrations.
In percentage terms, there have been somewhat larger percentage declines in the abortion rate during Democratic Presidential administrations than during Republican Presidential administrations. However, it is by no means clear that these declines are due to any policy change enacted or legislated by these Democratic Presidents. It should also be noted that policy changes at the state level likely have a larger impact on the incidence of abortion than policy changes at the federal level. Furthermore, in both 1994 (during the Clinton administration) and in 2010 (during the Obama administration), Republicans made significant gains in many state legislatures. This led to an increase in the number of state level pro-life laws, many of which were upheld by judges appointed by Republican Presidents.
Do robust social policies (such as in Hungary and Israel) have an impact on the abortion rate?
The research on the impact of social policies on the abortion rate is mixed. However, the Hungarian government should be lauded for their efforts to reduce the incidence of abortion in Hungary. They have invested money in educational efforts encouraging women to carry pregnancies to term. They have increased the maternity benefit and the child care allowance. They have also offered free or reduced cost services for children. Between 2010 and 2019 the abortion rate in Hungary fell by over 35 percent. There was also a study in the journal “Labour Economics” which showed that increased maternity leave benefits reduced the probability of abortion in Romania.
These sorts of policies are not a substitute for enacting pro-life laws. Pro-lifers want to see a world where all unborn children are protected in law and welcomed into life. However, the policies that have been enacted in Hungary and Romania certainly merit attention from pro-lifers.
What, in your view, is actually bringing the abortion rate down?
An important reason for the decline in the U.S. abortion rate is because a higher percentage of unintended pregnancies are being carried to term. According to data from the Guttmacher Institute, 54 percent of unintended pregnancies were aborted in 1981. In 2011 (the most recent year for which we have data), only 42 percent of unintended pregnancies resulted in an abortion.
I often present this statistic to pro-life audiences because it nicely demonstrates that the efforts of pro-life activists have been effective at reducing the abortion rate. If more unintended pregnancies are being carried to term that means that 1) hearts and minds are being changed, 2) there are more resources available to assist pregnant women or 3) protective pro-life laws are now in place.
All of this nicely shows that pro-life educational, service, and legislative efforts have all been effective.
Is it true that the most recent data shows a slight uptick in the abortion rate?
— Article continues below Petition — PETITION: Stand with the priest who rebuked the Democratic Party and admonished the bishops Show Petition Text 96863 have signed the petition. Let's get to 100000 ! Thank you for signing this petition! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Country... State... Sign this Petition PETITION UPDATE (7/9/2021) - Father James Altman was informed late last week that he has been removed as pastor of St. James the Less parish, and that his priestly faculties have been suspended indefinitely. Please Click Here to WATCH LifeSite's exclusive interview with Fr. Altman, and Click Here to READ more about this turn of events. As Bishop William J. Callahan’s decree explains, this means he is forbidden from celebrating “The Holy Eucharist” with any members of the faithful present, except for his elderly parents. He is also “no longer allowed to preach,” administer baptism, or assist at marriages. Altman said that he wasn’t issued restrictions from hearing Confessions or Anointing of the Sick. The decree also states that he is to continue to live within the Diocese of LaCrosse, where he has been instructed to meet with the Vicar for Clergy at least once a month, and has been “invited to begin” a month-long “spiritual retreat” to help him to “spiritually heal” and “address the issues that caused the issuance of this decree.” The order states it is in effect as long as “cause” is present, but it does not specify what the cause is. Callahan said he asked Altman to resign on May 23 for being “divisive and ineffective.” Altman first triggered backlash from his bishop when his video “You cannot be a Catholic and a Democrat. Period” went viral last year. Altman shared that in response to this, his office “got the most vile, despicable phone calls, letters” and “some terrible, really foul messages.” Callahan criticized Altman at the time for his “manner and tone,” to which Altman countered, “what about the manner and tone of the 10,000 babies that are chopped up last Saturday?” “What I would hope would always come through no matter what people think about my manner and tone, is that they would recognize that what’s coming through there is God’s love,” Altman told LifeSiteNews. “A love that I recognize because He’s loved me, and I didn’t deserve that.” “If I seem angry at times, it has nothing to do with me, it has to do with the people. And I asked the question recently, how can they love? If you love, how can you not feed your children?” In late April, Altman chided the U.S. bishops for needlessly shutting churches and denying the faithful sacraments during the COVID-19 pandemic, saying the hierarchy showed “an abundance of cowardice.” In his interview with LifeSite, Altman alluded to the fact that some don’t like seeing him “upset.” “I’m thinking well, if you’re denying my child food, the Bread of Life – [Bishop Fulton J. Sheen] said, if you can’t get angry about stuff like that then you can’t love either. Because greater love has greater anger towards those things that are contrary to the salvation of eternal souls, which is the only thing that matters in the end,” said Altman. "I don’t care what they do to me, honestly, in the end… what troubles me is the interference with the feeding of God’s children, which is through word and through the sacrament. Both of which were denied to people over the past 15 months." Please continue to SIGN and SHARE this petition, and to continue to contact the Diocese of LaCrosse's Chancery Office, to politely voice your opposition to the removal of Fr. Altman from his parish. The Chancery's phone number is: 608-788-7700. _______________________________________________________________________ PETITION UPDATE (5/24/2021) - Father James Altman, the Wisconsin priest whose video message last fall "You can’t be a Catholic and a Democrat" went viral and who has fearlessly admonished the U.S. bishops for shutting churches and denying the faithful Sacraments during the COVID-19 crisis, announced on Pentecost Sunday that his bishop has asked him to resign for being "divisive and ineffective." Please CLICK HERE to READ LifeSiteNews' latest article related to Fr. Altman's ongoing persecution, just to continue shepherding his flock. Bishop William P. Callahan began threatening the outspoken priest with "canonical penalties" in September, even as public support for the priest surged among rank-and-file Catholics around the country and the world. And now, a group called 'Faithful America' is proudly boasting responsibility for taking down Fr. Altman, but Faithful America are not even a Catholic organization! Thankfully, Fr. Altman says he is working with a canon lawyer to resolve this matter. WATCH Fr. Altman's Sunday sermon in which he announces the bishop's decision to ask for his resignation. "In response my canon lawyer asked for clarification – asked for the justification and a chance to review what was in my file that suggested I was so divisive and ineffective,” explained Altman. “And I say all this only because, I'm no expert on canon law, but understand only that while we are contesting bishop's request — and we are — he could in theory appoint a parish administrator whilst I remain a pastor without duties until the appeal goes through Rome, which could take up to a year or more." Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas, offered his support for Altman via Twitter. Please continue to SIGN and SHARE this petition with your like-minded family and friends. And, after signing and sharing, please take a minute to contact the LaCrosse Diocese to politely voice your support for Fr. Altman, and against leftist pressure groups like 'Faithful America.' Please ask Bishop Callahan to prayerfully reconsider his decision and allow Fr. Altman to remain as pastor of St. James the Less parish. The phone number for the diocese office is: 608.788.7700 Thank you! PETITION UPDATE (9/15/2020) - Just this past weekend a prayer vigil was held outside the Cathedral in LaCrosse, Wisconsin, on behalf of Fr. James Altman, the priest facing Church penalties for saying that you cannot be a Catholic and a Democrat in 2020. Hundreds of faithful Catholics turn out to pray for Fr. Altman. Though Fr. Altman did use strong language to warn his flock against spiritual perils, what he said about the Democratic Party's platform is true! Motivated by a deep sense of justice, supporters gathered at the Cathedral to pray for the priest, and for Bishop Callahan to stand by his priest rather than punish him. "Fr. Altman is a rare breed. He’s a modern-day St. John the Baptist," declared one woman who attended the prayer vigil. "He’s really changed my life and so many others he’s had that impact on. We need more priests who are true shepherds." Fr. Richard Heilman, who is the founder of the U.S. Grace Force and who was also present to help lead people in prayer during the vigil, had this to say about Fr. Altman: "Bottom line: he loves, loves, loves his flock. And so, like a good shepherd, if he sees the wolves invading, he sounds the warning alarm." Please consider SIGNING this petition if you have not already signed. And, please SHARE this petition and video with your family, friends and colleagues. Thank you! If after signing and sharing you wish to make an even greater impact, we encourage you to contact the Diocese of LaCrosse's Chancery Offices to politely let them know that you support Fr. Altman and want to see him continue in his essential ministry. Diocese of LaCrosse's Chancery Office phone number: 608-788-7700. ___________________________________________________________________________________ ORIGINAL PETITION TEXT: Father James Altman, pastor of St. James the Less parish in the Wisconsin Diocese of LaCrosse, has been threatened with canonical punishment by his Bishop, Most Rev. William Patrick Callahan. Fr. Altman's alleged "offense"? Stating what every faithful Catholic knows to be true in 2020: "You cannot be a Catholic and a Democrat." Please SIGN this petition which will go to Bishop Callahan and ask him to stop any canonical proceedings against Fr. Altman. In a strongly-worded YouTube video, designed to shepherd the faithful out of harm's way (supporting the Democratic Party's evil platform), Fr. Altman states the following: "Here's a memo to clueless, baptized Catholics out there: You cannot be Catholic and be a Democrat. Period. Their party platform absolutely is against everything the Catholic Church teaches. So, just quit pretending that you're Catholic and vote Democrat. Repent of your support of that party and its platform, or face the fires of Hell..." Strong stuff to be sure, but Fr. Altman was taking his cue from Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI (whom he quotes) – the Church has a "duty and obligation" to speak up when politicians act in an immoral way. In other words, a pastor must give strong warnings, at times, to guide souls away from grave danger, even when the dangers come from politicians or a political party. When your house is burning down...or, more appropriately, when someone is attempting to burn your house down, it's time to dispense with the niceties of politically correct language. And, as Fr. Altman suggests, the Democratic Party's evil platform which promotes the desecration of God's plan for humanity is, in effect, trying to burn down our house (i.e., the Church). Not only do the Democrats openly advocate for abortion (i.e., killing innocent human beings), but they also promote the destruction of the natural family and the desecration of human nature in support of the homosexual and transgender agendas. Remember the following: The Obama-Biden Administration attempted to force the Little Sisters of the Poor to participate in the provision of abortion-inducing drugs and contraception and threatened schools with the loss of federal funding if they wouldn’t let boys in girls’ bathrooms and vice versa.
Democratic Senators Kamala Harris and Mazie Hirono grilled a judge, who is a Knight of Columbus, on his membership in the Knights, absurdly suggesting that membership in the Catholic mens' fraternal organization should disqualify someone from sitting on the bench.
And, in 2017, the DNC Chairman said that pro-lifers were not welcome in the party. No faithful Catholic should even think about voting for such a platform. And, the bishops should be on the frontlines, speaking this truth to power. Thankfully, the Bishop of Tyler, Texas, Most Rev. Joseph Strickland, has come out in support of Fr. Altman's statement, tweeting: "As the Bishop of Tyler I endorse Fr. Altman’s statement in this video. My shame is that it has taken me so long. Thank you Fr Altman for your COURAGE. If you love Jesus & His Church & this nation...please HEED THIS MESSAGE.” With this petition, we now ask that Fr. Altman's own bishop, Most. Rev. Callahan, likewise support his priest and stop any canonical proceedings against him. Devoid of united leadership from the Hierarchy, individual priests must do their best to inform the laity of the mortal dangers on full view in the Democrats' platform. And, threatening to silence priests for strongly speaking the truth only plays into the hand of those who actually hate what the Church stands for...and who will, if elected, most likely seek to injure, or even eradicate, the Church. The bishops should know that the legacy of the Democratic Party being the party of the small man and of the Catholic immigrant is now over. The Democratic Party of today is the party of radical individualism, not the common good. And, rabid support for abortion and the homosexual agenda are practically obligatory. As such, the Democratic Party is not a friend of the Church and any priest or bishop who thinks otherwise is being deceived, or allowing himself to be deceived or bullied. This is not just an abstraction! This is a serious threat to Christianity and their party's platform needs to be met with strong opposition. Thank you for SIGNING this petition to the bishop of LaCrosse, Wisconsin, Bishop Callahan, asking him to support Fr. Altman rather than bringing any canonical proceedings against him. FOR MORE INFORMATION: 'Bishop threatens ‘canonical penalties’ for priest whose viral video warned Catholics can’t be Democrats': https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/bishop-threatens-canonical-penalties-for-fr-altman YouTube Video - 'Fr. James Altman: You cannot be Catholic & a Democrat. Period.': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-7eoTN2vNM Statement regarding Fr. James Altman from Bishop Callahan: https://diolc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Statement-Father-James-Altman-090920.pdf 'Bishop Strickland echoes priest: ‘You cannot be Catholic and be a Democrat’': https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/bishop-strickland-echoes-priest-you-cannot-be-catholic-and-be-a-democrat **Photo Credit: Screen capture from Fr. James Altman's YouTube video on Alpha News MN Hide Petition Text Sign this Petition
A recent analysis published by the Charlotte Lozier Institute found that abortions in the United States increased by 1.78 percent between 2017 and 2018. This is partly due to an increase in chemical abortions. There is some preliminary data from Florida which may indicate that the incidence of abortion may be increasing this year.
There are also anecdotal reports from abortion facilities and abortion funds which indicate that the incidence of abortion has increased during the pandemic.
These reported increases in the incidence of abortion certainly do not undo the impressive, long-term progress that pro-lifers have made reducing the abortion rate. However, as always, pro-lifers should continue to be vigilant.
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 Marjorie Dannenfelser from the Susan B. Anthony List who tells Van Maren that this election is crucial for the pro-life movement. Dannenfelser warns listeners that if the Democrats win, it will have a generational impact, as the left will fight to take away the core principles of our nation's founding.
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--2020-10-13--Barrett defends pro-life ad she signed in 2006: ‘An affirmation of life’

WASHINGTON , D.C. , October 13 , 2020 ( ) — Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett during today ’ s confirmation hearings defended signing a pro-life statement published in a local newspaper 14 years ago .
“ It ’ s really no more than the expression of a pro-life view , ” she said .
The ad had stated , “ We faculty and staff at the University of Notre Dame reaffirm our full support for our University ’ s commitment to the right to life , we renew our call for the unborn to be protected in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we voice our love and support for the mothers who bear them.
” Asked by Sen. Richard Blumenthal ( D-CT ) about what it means for the unborn to be protected by law , Barrett explained , “ I think that statement is an affirmation of life .
It points out that we express our love and support for the mothers who bear them .
Again , it was a statement validating the position of the Catholic university at which I worked , in support for life , and to support women in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Blumenthal had led up to his question by trying to elicit emotion and telling the story of a woman who was raped .
“ Samantha went out with a few friends and coworkers , ” the senator said .
“ She woke up the next morning and a coworker ’ s home , confused , scared , covered in blood .
She ’ d been raped .
After she was raped , Samantha was , in her words , a zombie .
She couldn ’ t change clothes , couldn ’ t shower @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think .
She wanted this event to be erased from her memory.
” “ Samantha ’ s attacker , ” he continued , “ also began stalking her , and she was struggling with depression and PTSD .
In March [ 2017 ] , Samantha took a pregnancy test , and then another , and another .
It kept coming back with the same result : pregnant .
After the horrible violence she faced , she simply couldn ’ t process that she was now pregnant .
When Samantha shared her story with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ knew if I couldn ’ t end this pregnancy , it would end me.
’ So she decided to get an abortion.
” “ Now , as you know , Judge , the landmark Roe v. Wade decision gave her that option .
It gave women the right to decide for themselves whether and when to have a child .
Roe didn ’ t compel Samantha to get an abortion , he didn ’ t tell her what she had to do .
But it gave her that choice.
” Instead of giving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responded by summarizing the two main abortion cases that have come before the Supreme Court .
“ Roe v. Wade clearly held that the Constitution protected a woman ’ s right to terminate a pregnancy , ” she said .
“ Casey upheld that central holding and spelled out in greater detail the tests that the court uses to consider the legality of abortion regulations.
” The newspaper ad , she continued , “ didn ’ t say anything about rape or incest or any of those things .
It simply validated the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of life from conception to natural death.
” Rebecca Kiessling , whose mother was raped and subsequently placed her for adoption , told LifeSiteNews , “ I ’ m curious as to whether Sen. Blumenthal would support a law which would authorized rape victims to pay someone to kill their rapist ?
Or just her innocent child ?
I did not deserve the death penalty for the crime of my biological father .
He should focus on punishing rapists not babies.
” “ As a child who was conceived from rape and abandoned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 1972 the law protected my birth mom from making one of the biggest mistakes of her life , ” said Monica Kelsey , who was also conceived in rape .
“ Today , I am the founder and CEO of Safe Haven Baby Boxes , a nonprofit that fights for babies who are at risk of abandonment and I help give their mothers hope.
” “ This is something I would recommend for Senator Blumenthal , give women hope in their moment of crisis , not additional pain !
Genesis 50:20 says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ harm me but God intended it for good , to accomplish what is now being done the saving of many lives !
’ ” Jennifer Christie was raped herself , and decided to keep her child .
“ Where is the empowerment in telling a woman she can ’ t ?
” Christie commented .
“ She can ’ t love her child from assault .
She can ’ t move forward without abortion .
Where is the outrage that the strength of survivors is so radically underestimated ?
Rape is evil .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Blumenthal purports abortion is necessary after rape , ” she explained .
“ I have a joyful 6-year-old who fills my home with laughter and my heart with joy .
He would disagree.
” “ We are strong enough to not return violence for violence , ” Christie is convinced .
“ We are strong enough to unearth love from the debris of hate .
Life is not ‘ a ’ choice .
It is the only choice.
” Several times today , Barrett explained that she was not going to comment on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before the Supreme Court .
Early on , she referred to pro-abortion Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg , who said “ with her characteristic pithiness ” that a Supreme Court nominee during confirmation hearings should give “ no hints , no previews , no forecasts ” regarding potential future rulings .

‘I think that statement is an affirmation of life. It points out that we express our love and support for the mothers who bear them.’
WASHINGTON, D.C., October 13, 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett during today’s confirmation hearings defended signing a pro-life statement published in a local newspaper 14 years ago. “It’s really no more than the expression of a pro-life view,” she said.
The ad had stated, “We faculty and staff at the University of Notre Dame reaffirm our full support for our University’s commitment to the right to life, we renew our call for the unborn to be protected in law and welcomed in life, and we voice our love and support for the mothers who bear them.”
Asked by Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) about what it means for the unborn to be protected by law, Barrett explained, “I think that statement is an affirmation of life. It points out that we express our love and support for the mothers who bear them. Again, it was a statement validating the position of the Catholic university at which I worked, in support for life, and to support women in crisis pregnancies, to support babies.”
Blumenthal had led up to his question by trying to elicit emotion and telling the story of a woman who was raped. “Samantha went out with a few friends and coworkers,” the senator said. “She woke up the next morning and a coworker’s home, confused, scared, covered in blood. She’d been raped. After she was raped, Samantha was, in her words, a zombie. She couldn’t change clothes, couldn’t shower, she couldn’t drink or think. She wanted this event to be erased from her memory.”
“Samantha’s attacker,” he continued, “also began stalking her, and she was struggling with depression and PTSD. In March [2017], Samantha took a pregnancy test, and then another, and another. It kept coming back with the same result: pregnant. After the horrible violence she faced, she simply couldn’t process that she was now pregnant. When Samantha shared her story with me, she said, ‘I knew if I couldn’t end this pregnancy, it would end me.’ So she decided to get an abortion.”
“Now, as you know, Judge, the landmark Roe v. Wade decision gave her that option. It gave women the right to decide for themselves whether and when to have a child. Roe didn’t compel Samantha to get an abortion, he didn’t tell her what she had to do. But it gave her that choice.”
Instead of giving her opinion on the issue, Barrett responded by summarizing the two main abortion cases that have come before the Supreme Court.
“Roe v. Wade clearly held that the Constitution protected a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy,” she said. “Casey upheld that central holding and spelled out in greater detail the tests that the court uses to consider the legality of abortion regulations.”
The newspaper ad, she continued, “didn’t say anything about rape or incest or any of those things. It simply validated the teaching of my Church on the sacredness of life from conception to natural death.”
— Article continues below Petition — URGENT PETITION: Tell the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade Show Petition Text 61375 have signed the petition. Let's get to 70000 ! Thank you for signing this petition! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Country... State... Sign this Petition PETITION UPDATE (9/26/2020): With President Trump's nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court left by the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, we are closer than we have been in decades to seeing Roe vs. Wade overturned. We now encourage the Senate to confirm Barrett as the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Judge Barrett has a fantastic track recond on sanctity of life issues, has seven children, and is a devout believer. She is the perfect remedy for Ruth Bader Ginsburg's radical pro-abortionism. Please READ the full story here: 'BREAKING: Trump nominates Catholic mom of 7 Judge Amy Coney Barrett to Supreme Court' And then, please SIGN this petition telling the High Court that it's now time to end the activist Roe vs. Wade judgment. Thank you! __________________________________________________________________ PETITION UPDATE (6/29/2020): In a decision which has imperiled more abortion-minded women, sentenced more preborn to death, and upset pro-lifers across the nation,the United States Supreme Court decided 5-4 to strike down a Louisiana law requiring basic medical precautions in the event of abortion complications, with Chief Justice John Roberts reversing his own past decision to uphold a similar Texas law. Liberal Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the majority opinion, which held that the Louisiana law was unconstitutional for the simple fact that it was “almost word-for-word identical” to the Texas one the court already struck down in 2016. In his concurring opinion, Chief Justice Roberts acknowledged that he had “joined the dissent in Whole Woman’s Health and continue to believe that the case was wrongly decided. The question today however is not whether Whole Woman’s Health was right or wrong, but whether to adhere to it in deciding the present case.” We call on the Supreme Court to stop supporting the culture of death and overturn Roe vs Wade, now. PETITION UPDATE (1/20/2020): Hundreds of thousands of people will gather in Washington, D.C., this coming Friday, January 24th, for the March for Life. They will be praying for an end to Roe vs Wade, as the Supreme Court will hear a crucial, abortion-related case later this year in March. United our voices can change the course of history. Sign this petition TODAY! (LEARN MORE BELOW) PETITION UPDATE (1/3/2020): In advance of the Supreme Court's hearing arguments in an important abortion case later this year in March, 207 U.S. Senators and Representatives have signed amicus briefs supporting a Louisiana law requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at a hospital nearby an abortion center. Some of these supporting briefs also suggest that now is the time to reconsider Roe vs Wade as sound law. Please SIGN this petition, calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down Roe vs Wade. _____________________________________________________________________________ More than 60 million Americans have been slaughtered in their mother's wombs as a result of Roe v. Wade. This activist, unconstitutional ruling in 1973 has left countless women emotionally and psychologically scarred. It was believed by many that Roe would be overturned in 1992 with Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Despite having eight Republican-appointed judges at the time, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to uphold it. Since then, major gains have been made in the fight for life, and many lives have been saved. However, Roe v. Wade remains the law of the land, leaving millions of defenseless pre-born children vulnerable to murder. According to a 2016 study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 35% of aborted babies are African American, despite black women only making up six percent of the U.S. population. 19% of aborted babies are Hispanic. We thus again call on the court to do everything they can to end Roe vs Wade. Now is the time for pro-lifers to join together and ensure that all of God's children have a right to life. Roe v. Wade must come to an end! FOR MORE INFORMATION: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/supreme-court-strikes-down-louisiana-abortion-regulations https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/over-200-congressmen-as-us-supreme-court-to-reconsider-roe-v-wade https://www.foxnews.com/politics/congress-members-file-competing-legal-briefs-in-key-scotus-abortion-case Hide Petition Text Sign this Petition
Rebecca Kiessling, whose mother was raped and subsequently placed her for adoption, told LifeSiteNews, “I’m curious as to whether Sen. Blumenthal would support a law which would authorized rape victims to pay someone to kill their rapist? Or just her innocent child? I did not deserve the death penalty for the crime of my biological father. He should focus on punishing rapists not babies.”
“As a child who was conceived from rape and abandoned at birth I am thankful that back in 1972 the law protected my birth mom from making one of the biggest mistakes of her life,” said Monica Kelsey, who was also conceived in rape. “Today, I am the founder and CEO of Safe Haven Baby Boxes, a nonprofit that fights for babies who are at risk of abandonment and I help give their mothers hope.”
“This is something I would recommend for Senator Blumenthal, give women hope in their moment of crisis, not additional pain! Genesis 50:20 says it best: ‘You intended to harm me but God intended it for good, to accomplish what is now being done the saving of many lives!’”
Jennifer Christie was raped herself, and decided to keep her child. “Where is the empowerment in telling a woman she can’t?” Christie commented. “She can’t love her child from assault. She can’t move forward without abortion. Where is the outrage that the strength of survivors is so radically underestimated? Rape is evil. A child is not.”
“Senator Blumenthal purports abortion is necessary after rape,” she explained. “I have a joyful 6-year-old who fills my home with laughter and my heart with joy. He would disagree.”
“We are strong enough to not return violence for violence,” Christie is convinced. “We are strong enough to unearth love from the debris of hate. Life is not ‘a’ choice. It is the only choice.”
Several times today, Barrett explained that she was not going to comment on specifics of hypothetical cases that might come before the Supreme Court. Early on, she referred to pro-abortion Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who said “with her characteristic pithiness” that a Supreme Court nominee during confirmation hearings should give “no hints, no previews, no forecasts” regarding potential future rulings.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-10-13--Mazie Hirono loses it over Amy Coney Barrett’s use of the ‘offensive’ term ‘sexual preference’

WASHINGTON , D.C. , October 13 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Hawaii ’ s Democratic Sen. Mazie Hirono raised eyebrows during Tuesday ’ s confirmation hearing for Judge Amy Coney Barrett ’ s nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court , with a particular line of attack focusing on Barrett ’ s earlier use of the term “ sexual preference ” to reference homosexuality .
“ Even though you did not give a direct answer ” on the Supreme Court ’ s Obergefell ruling ( which made same-sex “ marriage ” the law of the land ) , Hirono said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speak volumes.
” “ Not once but twice you used the term ‘ sexual preference ’ to describe those in the LGBTQ community , ” she went on .
“ And let me make clear : ‘ sexual preference ’ is an offensive and outdated term .
It is used by anti-LGBTQ activists to suggest that sexual orientation is a choice .
It is not .
Sexual orientation is a key part of a person ’ s identity .
That sexual orientation is both a normal expression of human sexuality and immutable was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s opinion in Obergefell , which , by the way , Scalia did not agree with.
” “ So if it is your view that sexual orientation is merely a preference , as you noted , then the LGBTQ community should be rightly concerned whether you would uphold their constitutional right to marry.
” Hirono ’ s time expired before Barrett could respond , but the next questioner , Republican Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa , gave her a chance to do so .
`` I certainly didn ’ t mean to use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the LGBT community , ” Barrett said .
The senator also asked Barrett whether , as an adult , she has made any unwanted requests “ for sexual favors , or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature ?
” She then asked , “ Have you ever faced discipline or entered into a settlement related to this kind of conduct ?
” To both questions , the Supreme Court nominee responded , “ No.
” One of the Senate ’ s most radical Democrats , Hirono @ @ @ @ @ @ @ judicial confirmation hearings .
In 2019 she declared that the Catholic Knights of Columbus held an “ alt-right ” position on abortion and LGBT issues .
The year before , she claimed that then-judicial nominee Brett Kavanaugh ’ s denial of sexual assault claims ( for which no evidence was ever produced ) lacked “ credibility ” on the basis of his assumed position “ against women ’ s reproductive choice , ” i.e.
, abortion .