lifesitenews--2020-11-12--No, there isn’t any sign the Church has learned from the McCarrick case

Big Tech is censoring us .
Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news .
Subscribe now .
November 12 , 2020 ( La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana ) – The McCarrick Report reveals a substantial degree of tolerance towards homosexual conduct by the clergy , which is punished only if minors are the persons abused .
This report also ignores the fact that the McCarrick case is only the tip of the iceberg of a power system controlled by the gay lobby .
Whether it is a “ truth operation ” as announced , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as immediately defined by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò , there is no doubt that the McCarrick Report presented yesterday in the Vatican is destined to raise more questions than the answers it offers .
While awaiting additional and more specific analyses of this case involving the former cardinal archbishop of Washington Theodore McCarrick , there are two questions that are real eye openers , both of them connected with homosexuality : the first is tolerance towards homosexual conduct also on the part of members of the clergy ; the second is the cover-up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that promotes “ the career ” of trendy clergymen .
Regarding the first point , even though the Report depicts McCarrick as a serial predator , the clamorous reaction only became evident in 2017 with the filing of the first accusation of the sexual abuse of a minor .
This fact is clearly highlighted in several parts of the Report , and is also stressed by the director of Vatican communication , Andrea Tornielli , in his editorial presenting the Report , published on the portal Vatican News .
After years of rumors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not circumstantiated by concrete facts ” but referred to “ immoral conduct with adults ” — as Tornielli explains — “ everything changed , as already mentioned , when the first accusation of sexual abuse of a minor emerged .
The response was immediate .
A rapid canonical process concluded with the serious and unprecedented measure of dismissal from the clerical state of a former Cardinal.
” What we are being told in practice is that “ immoral conduct with adults ” certainly isn ’ t something good in its own right , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alarm , along with the ensuing investigation and potentially serious forms of punishment , only goes off , however , when the person abused is a minor .
This is tantamount to saying that the dozens and dozens of future priests who shared the bed with McCarrick , and hence to a great extent were condemned to an unbalanced priestly life to say the least , weren ’ t really of major importance .
As if the moral and faith-related devastation caused by a bishop predator — lost vocations , priests who would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ falsified by morbid bonds — constituted a minor problem .
Certainly , insistent input advised against McCarrick ’ s promotion to a prestigious see , but the steel trap clicked shut only when a minor appeared among his accusers .
This is a most serious approach that also ignores the fact that the second crime — abuse of minors — is the offspring of the first one .
Regarding the second aspect , the reconstruction of the McCarrick affair substantiates the idea that , yes , this is a dark page for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as an episode whose repetition will be difficult to witness in the future , thanks above all to the measures adopted especially by Pope Francis , “ A painful story from which the Church at large has learned much indeed , ” says Tornielli .
There are doubts about this , however , especially because deliberately ignored is the fact that what had permitted McCarrick ’ s irresistible climb upwards is a power system otherwise known as the gay lobby , that fosters the appointment and the career of bishops with specific characteristics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yesterday might give the impression that the McCarrick case is the outcome of an unfortunate combination of a series of factors : the exuberant personality ( to use a euphemism ) of the person in question , the lack of clear rules , the generic nature of the accusations , the error of one Pope acting in good faith , and the ‘ soft ’ approach of another Pope .
Certainly , these too are elements of no little weight , but the real problem is that without a network of relations and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be practically impossible .
Moreover , this network didn ’ t work for McCarrick alone .
In fact , there are some elements that seem to indicate that it has become even stronger .
Let us recall the Chilean case in 2018 , with Pope Francis who had to face the truth of evidence after having discredited the victims who accused bishops and priests of being abusers .
Then there is the mysterious shelter in the Vatican offered to the Argentinean bishop Zanchetta .
Let ’ s not forget the accusations that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rodriguez Maradiaga , who is the coordinator of the working group of cardinals that assists Pope Francis for the reform of the Curia ( “ It ’ s all slander ” , said the Pope last year ) , and whose auxiliary bishop Juan José Pineda had to resign in July 2018 because of episodes of sexual abuse in the seminary .
Nor can we forget the “ rumors ” from his home region of Apulia that accompany the swift ascent of the recently appointed cardinal Marcello Semeraro , who turned his current @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of LGBT Christians .
Coming back to McCarrick , let ’ s recall that various American bishops were appointed thanks to the former cardinal ’ s sponsorship .
We could continue along this same line .
No , there isn ’ t any sign that the Church has learned a lesson from the McCarrick case .
The feeling is that one person has been made to pay so others may just continue along their way , while at the same time the road ahead is being paved for the idea that for a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a problem .

The feeling is that one person has been made to pay so others may just continue along their way.
Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news. Subscribe now.
November 12, 2020 (La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana) – The McCarrick Report reveals a substantial degree of tolerance towards homosexual conduct by the clergy, which is punished only if minors are the persons abused. This report also ignores the fact that the McCarrick case is only the tip of the iceberg of a power system controlled by the gay lobby.
Whether it is a “truth operation” as announced, or a “surreal operation of mystification” as immediately defined by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, there is no doubt that the McCarrick Report presented yesterday in the Vatican is destined to raise more questions than the answers it offers.
While awaiting additional and more specific analyses of this case involving the former cardinal archbishop of Washington Theodore McCarrick, there are two questions that are real eye openers, both of them connected with homosexuality: the first is tolerance towards homosexual conduct also on the part of members of the clergy; the second is the cover-up of a gay lobby and a system that promotes “the career” of trendy clergymen.
Regarding the first point, even though the Report depicts McCarrick as a serial predator, the clamorous reaction only became evident in 2017 with the filing of the first accusation of the sexual abuse of a minor. This fact is clearly highlighted in several parts of the Report, and is also stressed by the director of Vatican communication, Andrea Tornielli, in his editorial presenting the Report, published on the portal Vatican News. After years of rumors, anonymous letters, and accusations “not circumstantiated by concrete facts” but referred to “immoral conduct with adults” — as Tornielli explains — “everything changed, as already mentioned, when the first accusation of sexual abuse of a minor emerged. The response was immediate. A rapid canonical process concluded with the serious and unprecedented measure of dismissal from the clerical state of a former Cardinal.”
What we are being told in practice is that “immoral conduct with adults” certainly isn’t something good in its own right, but is eventually tolerated. The real alarm, along with the ensuing investigation and potentially serious forms of punishment, only goes off, however, when the person abused is a minor. This is tantamount to saying that the dozens and dozens of future priests who shared the bed with McCarrick, and hence to a great extent were condemned to an unbalanced priestly life to say the least, weren’t really of major importance.
As if the moral and faith-related devastation caused by a bishop predator — lost vocations, priests who would later repeat such abuses, episcopal appointments falsified by morbid bonds — constituted a minor problem. Certainly, insistent input advised against McCarrick’s promotion to a prestigious see, but the steel trap clicked shut only when a minor appeared among his accusers. This is a most serious approach that also ignores the fact that the second crime — abuse of minors — is the offspring of the first one.
Regarding the second aspect, the reconstruction of the McCarrick affair substantiates the idea that, yes, this is a dark page for the Church, but it also stands out as an episode whose repetition will be difficult to witness in the future, thanks above all to the measures adopted especially by Pope Francis, “A painful story from which the Church at large has learned much indeed,” says Tornielli.
There are doubts about this, however, especially because deliberately ignored is the fact that what had permitted McCarrick’s irresistible climb upwards is a power system otherwise known as the gay lobby, that fosters the appointment and the career of bishops with specific characteristics. A reading of the Report published yesterday might give the impression that the McCarrick case is the outcome of an unfortunate combination of a series of factors: the exuberant personality (to use a euphemism) of the person in question, the lack of clear rules, the generic nature of the accusations, the error of one Pope acting in good faith, and the ‘soft’ approach of another Pope. Certainly, these too are elements of no little weight, but the real problem is that without a network of relations and complicity at various levels, certain careers would be practically impossible.
— Article continues below Petition — PETITION: Ask Pope Francis to clarify and rectify scandalous remarks on homosexual civil unions Show Petition Text 22787 have signed the petition. Let's get to 25000 ! Thank you for signing this petition! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Country... State... Sign this Petition Remarks attributed to Pope Francis (and, not denied by the Vatican) in support of homosexual civil unions have caused grave scandal to the faithful. Please SIGN this urgent petition which asks Pope Francis to clarify and rectify these heterodox and scandalous remarks on homosexual civil unions, and which will be delivered both to the Vatican and to the Papal Nuncio of the United States (the Pope's official representative in the U.S.). As the last guarantor of the Faith, the Pope should clarify and rectify these remarks, which go against the perennial teaching of the Church, even including the teaching of his living predecessor, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. "What we have to create is a law of civil coexistence [meaning civil union law, for homosexuals]...," Pope Francis is reported to have remarked, in what is arguably his clearest statement of public support for a practice morally prohibited by official Catholic Church teaching. In fact, the Church has been crystal clear in Her opposition to homosexual unions. Just in 2003, Pope Saint John Paul II approved a document from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, titled 'Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons' and written by Cardinal Ratzinger (now, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI), which concludes with the following: "The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions. The common good requires that laws recognize, promote and protect marriage as the basis of the family, the primary unit of society. Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean not only the approval of deviant behaviour, with the consequence of making it a model in present-day society, but would also obscure basic values which belong to the common inheritance of humanity. The Church cannot fail to defend these values, for the good of men and women and for the good of society itself." It could not be more clear: the Church is calling people to repentance, not to be left to indulge in grave sin. Since becoming public, several senior prelates as well as other notable Catholic figures have voiced their opposition to these remarks attributed to the Pontiff. Cardinal Raymond Burke stated: "It is a source of deepest sadness and pressing pastoral concern that the private opinions reported with so much emphasis by the press and attributed to Pope Francis do not correspond to the constant teaching of the Church, as it is expressed in Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition." Cardinal Gerhard Müller commented: "Where there is tension between the plain and obvious Word of God and the infallible interpretation on the one hand, and private expressions of opinion even by the highest church authorities on the other, the principle always applies: in dubio pro DEO [When in doubt, be in favor of God]." And, Catholic theologian and apologist Scott Hahn, without directly quoting Pope Francis, shared on Facebook the 'Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons,' published by the CDF in 1986, with the statement: "Holy Father, respectfully and humbly, I beg to differ... if that is indeed what you said. In any case, please clarify and rectify your statement, especially in view of the official teaching of our Lord through the magisterium of His Church." But, the silence from the Vatican has been deafening, with no clarification forthcoming. We must, therefore, ask the Pope for clarification in this serious matter. Please SIGN and SHARE this petition which asks Pope Francis to clarify and rectify remarks attributed to him in support of homosexual civil unions. FOR MORE INFORMATION: 'Cdl. Burke: Pope’s homosexual civil union remarks ‘contrary’ to Scripture, Tradition' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/cardinal-burke-on-popes-homosexual-civil-union-remarks-contrary-to-the-teaching-of-sacred-scripture-and-sacred-tradition 'Cardinal says Catholics ‘can and should’ disagree with Pope’s ‘opinion’ on gay civil unions' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/cdl.mueller-popes-words-on-gay-civil-unions-purely-private-expression-of-opinion-which-every-catholic-can-and-should-freely-contradict 'Archbishop Vigano, Bishops Tobin and Strickland respond to Pope’s approval of homosexual civil unions' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/archbishop-vigano-and-bishops-tobin-strickland-respond-to-popes-approval-of-homosexual-civil-unions 'Pope’s comments on gay civil unions cause shockwaves around the world' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/deepest-sadness-cardinal-burke-condemns-pope-franciss-remarks-supporting-civil-unions Hide Petition Text Sign this Petition
Moreover, this network didn’t work for McCarrick alone. In fact, there are some elements that seem to indicate that it has become even stronger. Let us recall the Chilean case in 2018, with Pope Francis who had to face the truth of evidence after having discredited the victims who accused bishops and priests of being abusers. Then there is the mysterious shelter in the Vatican offered to the Argentinean bishop Zanchetta. Let’s not forget the accusations that pursue the cardinal from Honduras, Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga, who is the coordinator of the working group of cardinals that assists Pope Francis for the reform of the Curia (“It’s all slander”, said the Pope last year), and whose auxiliary bishop Juan José Pineda had to resign in July 2018 because of episodes of sexual abuse in the seminary. Nor can we forget the “rumors” from his home region of Apulia that accompany the swift ascent of the recently appointed cardinal Marcello Semeraro, who turned his current diocese of Albano into the Italian capital of LGBT Christians. Coming back to McCarrick, let’s recall that various American bishops were appointed thanks to the former cardinal’s sponsorship.
We could continue along this same line. No, there isn’t any sign that the Church has learned a lesson from the McCarrick case. The feeling is that one person has been made to pay so others may just continue along their way, while at the same time the road ahead is being paved for the idea that for a priest to have homosexual inclinations is not a problem.
Published with permission from La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-11-12--Ticketmaster plans mandatory COVID vaccine verification policy for concert-goers

November 12 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Ticketmaster is reportedly working on a plan to verify that concert goers have either tested negative for coronavirus or have been vaccinated against the virus before attending Ticketmaster concerts .
Ticketmaster sells tickets for a wide variety of events , including major league sports games , concerts , and Broadway shows .
Though Ticketmaster is still developing its plan , the company intends to partner with “ third party health information companies like , CLEAR Health Pass or IBM ’ s Digital Health Pass and testing and vaccine distribution centers like Labcorp @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reports Billboard .
Billboard further explains that , after purchasing tickets , fans will be required to verify that they have been vaccinated against COVID-19 or tested negative for the virus 24-72 hours before the concert .
After they have been tested for coronavirus , Ticketmaster fans will have their results sent to a health pass company which will in turn notify Ticketmaster of the results and confirm the attendee ’ s status .
`` We ’ re already seeing many third-party health care providers prepare to handle the vetting -- whether that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ test , or other methods of review and approval - which could then be linked via a digital ticket so everyone entering the event is verified , '' Mark Yovich , president of Ticketmaster told Billboard .
Dr. Simone Gold of America ’ s Front Line Doctors tweeted that Ticketmaster should be boycotted over its plans to monitor the health of concert-goers .
Ticketmaster ’ s plan comes shortly after the announcement of “ CovidPass , ” which currently enables users to digitally prove that they recently tested negative for COVID-19 and intends @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when it becomes available .
The Ticketmaster plan and the “ CovidPass ” app both suggest that digital proof of a negative COVID-19 test or vaccination against COVID-19 will be required to travel and enter events .

PETITION UPDATE (1/15/2021) -
The events of the past month, and especially the past 10 days, have shaken the faith Americans have in their elected and appoint officials.
We continue to call for investigations to be made into allegations of election fraud. Texas is in the process of prosecuting one political operative for illegal ballot harvesting, and multiple state legislatures have called for investigations, too.
However, the judiciary has severely let down the American electorate.
As we have said all along, the integrity of the election is much bigger than President Trump. Election integrity is at the heart of republican democracy, and if we don't have it, we no longer have a functioning republic.
Therefore, we continue to seek the truth for the election outcome. Perhaps that will only be known in the future when state or federal commissions are established to investigate the instances of election fraud which were witnessed and sworn to, by thousands of Americans of all political persuasions.
In the meantime, you may still sign this petition. Thank you!
___________________________________________________________________
PETITION UPDATE (12/10/20) -
On Wednesday, President Trump tweeted: "We will be INTERVENING in the Texas (plus many other states) case. This is the big one. Our Country needs a victory!"
He is referring to the lawsuit which the state of Texas has filed against Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Georgia in the Supreme Court over changes those states made to their election rules, claiming they violated the U.S. Constitution in the process.
Here is the central part of the argument: if Texas were to allow possible voter fraud to go unchecked in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Georgia, it would be akin to committing fraud upon the people of Texas, who cast their ballots within the framework of the law.
Indeed, this would apply equally to all citizens who voted within the framework of the law across the United States!
President Trump also tweeted that this case is, "very strong...ALL CRITERIA MET."
Please continue to SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition, now.
____________________________________________________________________
PETITION UPDATE (12/7/20) - Since this petition was launched, President Trump's legal team, as well as other concerned citizens, have discovered what appears to be irrefutable evidence of voter fraud in several of the key battleground states, and have initiated legal challenges in six states.
While the situation continues to evolve, this remains a hugely important petition which we encourage you to SIGN and SHARE.
Below, please WATCH and READ about the mounting evidence of voter fraud and how the mainstream media seem determined to ignore even the most egregious instances of vote tampering. Then, please SIGN and SHARE this petition.
'Trump: ‘Our election system is now under assault and siege’ and as president I must defend it'
'Tens of thousands 2020 election votes illegally scanned in Detroit, says Dominion IT contractor'
'Trump campaign files lawsuit demanding ‘a new statewide election for president’ in Georgia'
'Experts flag over 500k ballots in PA with new evidence of major 2020 election voter fraud'
''Smoking gun'? Pennsylvania vote fraud hearing gets gasps from audience'
'FBI and Justice Department have dragged their feet investigating 2020 vote fraud'
''CNN top brass in leaked tape: We won't give Trump 'too much of a platform on his not conceding'
'Twitter censored Trump 63 times over Thanksgiving holiday, Biden untouched'
LifeSite supports President Trump with this petition because we believe he is trying to defend the Constitution, ensuring that electoral fraud does not taint the result of the 2020 general election.
But, since starting this petition, we have launched a separate petition related to the disputed election outcome, calling on the Department of Justice to 'do their job' and engage in meaningful investigations of the mounting evidence of voter fraud.
We believe that conducting forensic audits of ballots and voting machines, as well as issuing subpoenas to collect more evidence, would be a good start.
Thankfully, some of the state started to demand investigations independent of federal agencies. But we still believe that the DoJ needs to use its enormous fact-finding resources to help resolve allegations of election fraud.
Thank you for continuing to SIGN and SHARE all our election-related petitions.
_____________________________________________________________________
Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition which calls on all Americans to Stand With President Trump as he uses every legitimate means to find out if voter fraud played any role in the election outcome.
Amid allegations of voter fraud, and at a time when the situation with COVID has been used by many of the states to facilitate the use of mail-in ballots on a massive scale, we need to be very careful in dismissing the possibility of voter fraud.
The fact is, the possibility of wide-spread fraud with mail-in ballots is significant.
But, this is not about Donald Trump or Joe Biden! This about whether or not the sanctity of the ballot box has been tampered with!
Please Stand With President Trump as he attempts to defend the integrity of this election, as well as well as the right to vote itself!
Indeed, this is so important, not so much because one election hangs in the balance, but because our democracy, itself, hangs in the balance.
Americans not only have a right to know, but should demand that every legitimate means be used to discover the truth about these elections!
Please SIGN this petition and Stand With President Trump to ensure that these elections were conducted freely and fairly!
While most all Americans believe in playing by the rules, we also know that some very devious, politically-motivated operatives have been trying to harm the Trump administration from before he even took the oath of office.
This fact should lead us to question how some allegations of voter fraud can be so easily dismissed by state election authorities.
We demand to know the truth, and, for the sake of our democracy, we demand that President Trump keep fighting to learn the truth.
Thank you for SIGNING and SHARING this petition today!
**Photo Credit: Shealah Craighead / White House / Flickr


lifesitenews--2020-11-12--Canadian police encourage citizens to snitch on each other to fight ‘rising’ COVID cases

WINNIPEG , Manitoba , November 12 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Police in a central Canadian city are actively encouraging their citizens to make use of COVID-19 “ snitch lines ” to call out large private gatherings , and promise they will “ intervene ” as needed to fine those found violating the law .
“ In response to increasing cases of COVID-19 , the Winnipeg Metro Region was moved to Critical Level ( red ) .
The Winnipeg Police Service has begun triaging calls from the public regarding gathering sizes in private residences and will dispatch resources to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Winnipeg Police statement issued on November 4 .
The Winnipeg police say that they are asking citizens to call out large gatherings to “ ensure the safety and wellbeing of the public , and we will continue to remind people of the measures they can take to ensure their own safety.
” “ The Winnipeg Police Service is one of a number of enforcement bodies who can intervene in breaches .
Those who continue to gather in contravention of public health orders may be subject to enforcement action , ” the statement concludes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they would not be actively enforcing provincially imposed COVID-19 gathering restrictions .
That changed when the city of Winnipeg went into a provincial mandated “ red ” critical lockdown last week .
Most businesses were shut down and severe gathering restrictions were imposed , limiting both private and public gatherings to no more than a household plus five additional people .
Fines for those found breaking the new gathering restrictions now stand at $ 1,296 , up from $ 486 , and police will be taking down the names of those in any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ local health officials .
Allison Pejovic , alawyer for the Alberta based Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms ( JCCF ) told LifeSiteNews that the Winnipeg Police snitching policy is a “ dangerous road ” which could lead to a society where “ regular people are treated like criminals.
” “ It is a concern when the message to society is that individuals should take on a role that is normally reserved for law enforcement , and assist police in reporting their neighbors ’ behaviors , ” Pejovic told LifeSiteNews .
“ When neighbors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Charter protected rights to assemble , associate , travel , and worship , it creates a society where regular people are treated like criminals.
” Pejovic also mentioned to LifeSiteNews that the environment created through the encouragement of “ snitch lines ” is more akin to a “ Communist society.
” “ This is a dangerous road as trust between friends is eroded and people are divided .
This environment is more akin to a Communist society , ” Pejovic said .
“ Historically , snitching on your neighbors has been encouraged and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has always resulted in the destruction of the social ties which bind neighbor to neighbor.
” LifeSiteNews contacted the Winnipeg Police to ask them if they have measures in place to ensure that calls they obtain from “ snitch lines ” are dealt with fairly , and also asked how many people have been fined since their November 4 statement .
Constable Jay Murray , a Public Information Officer with the Winnipeg Police responded by referring to the text of their November 4 statement , but added that he does not “ have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” However , a Global News report said that in October , before the public was actively encouraged to report alleged COVID-19 private gathering violations , there were “ hundreds ” of calls to police that resulted in three fines and five warnings .
In a report from last week , Const .
Rob Carver was quoted as saying that police may “ still do education ” but added that “ the numbers dictate a different response and we ’ re acting accordingly.
” In a November 3 report released by the Policing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extreme last resort : Monetary Penalties and the Policing of COVID-19 in Canada , ” the authors state that “ granting police and bylaw officers with new , broad discretionary power to fine and potentially jail people perceived to be breaking public health orders is only likely to exacerbate the current crisis.
” “ Fines , as simple and conceptually appealing as they might be , are much more likely to exacerbate the current crisis than they are to resolve it .
The evidence suggests as much , ” authors Alex Luscombe and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pandemic Mapping Project have published an interactive map noting the launch of “ snitch Lines ” and other non-compliance reporting related to COVID-19.
” The JCCF has been outspoken against the COVID-19 lockdown measures imposed by provincial governments across Canada , demanding that they explain themselves in showing “ proof ” that their measures have any effect .
Recently , the organisation was successful in forcing the Alberta government to scrap the controversial Bill 10 originally put forth to combat COVID-19 .
The JCCF called the bill a “ betrayal of the electorate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Earlier this week the Manitoba government , under Progressive Conservative Premier Brian Pallister , announced that effective November 12 , the entire province of Manitoba will move into the red “ critical ” phase .
All social gatherings “ will not be permitted , ” and only businesses listed as “ critical services ” are allowed to be open , and only at 25 percent capacity .
This means that gyms , movie theaters , recreation centers and museums are being ordered to close .
Restaurants are allowed take-out only , but schools @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has also ruled that all churches “ must close ” and only “ provide services virtually.
” Before today , the regulations allowed churches in Winnipeg to operate at 15 percent capacity , with those in the rest of the province being allowed to be 20 percent full .
A November 10 memo from Archbishop Richard Gagnon simply stated the government ruling and directed Catholics to “ make use of Our Archdiocesan website…and social media platforms .
”

Winnipeg police say that they are asking citizens to call out large gatherings to 'ensure the safety and wellbeing of the public, and we will continue to remind people of the measures they can take to ensure their own safety.'
WINNIPEG, Manitoba, November 12, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Police in a central Canadian city are actively encouraging their citizens to make use of COVID-19 “snitch lines” to call out large private gatherings, and promise they will “intervene” as needed to fine those found violating the law.
“In response to increasing cases of COVID-19, the Winnipeg Metro Region was moved to Critical Level (red). The Winnipeg Police Service has begun triaging calls from the public regarding gathering sizes in private residences and will dispatch resources to intervene as required,” reads the Winnipeg Police statement issued on November 4.
The Winnipeg police say that they are asking citizens to call out large gatherings to “ensure the safety and wellbeing of the public, and we will continue to remind people of the measures they can take to ensure their own safety.”
“The Winnipeg Police Service is one of a number of enforcement bodies who can intervene in breaches. Those who continue to gather in contravention of public health orders may be subject to enforcement action,” the statement concludes.
Initially, Winnipeg Police said that they would not be actively enforcing provincially imposed COVID-19 gathering restrictions.
That changed when the city of Winnipeg went into a provincial mandated “red” critical lockdown last week. Most businesses were shut down and severe gathering restrictions were imposed, limiting both private and public gatherings to no more than a household plus five additional people.
Fines for those found breaking the new gathering restrictions now stand at $1,296, up from $486, and police will be taking down the names of those in any gatherings to “pass on” to local health officials.
Allison Pejovic, a Winnipeg-based lawyer and a member of the Manitoba bar for the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), told LifeSiteNews that the Winnipeg Police snitching policy is a “dangerous road” which could lead to a society where “regular people are treated like criminals.”
“It is a concern when the message to society is that individuals should take on a role that is normally reserved for law enforcement, and assist police in reporting their neighbors’ behaviors,” Pejovic told LifeSiteNews.
“When neighbors start reporting each other for exercising their Charter protected rights to assemble, associate, travel, and worship, it creates a society where regular people are treated like criminals.”
— Article continues below Petition — Canada: Sign the Geneva Consensus Declaration! Show Petition Text 6733 have signed the petition. Let's get to 7500 ! Thank you for signing this petition! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Country... State... Sign this Petition On October 22nd, thirty-two nations signed the historic Geneva Consensus Declaration, including the co-sponsoring nations, the United States, Brazil, Hungary, Indonesia, and Uganda. However, Canada was not among the signatories. Please SIGN this joint petition, from LifeSite and Campaign Life Coalition, urging Canada to ratify the Geneva Consensus Declaration, which will put Canada at the forefront in the fight to protect genuine human rights. The Geneva Consensus Declaration takes a firm stance against invented human rights by saying, "there is no international right to abortion, nor any international obligation on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion." The Geneva Consensus Declaration further reaffirms: That "protecting the right to life" is an "essential priority."
The "inherent 'dignity and worth of the human person'" and that "'every human has the inherent right to life.'"
That "'the family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and state,'" as the Declaration on the Rights of the Child stated. Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition to Canadian MPs, asking them to restore Canada's reputation as a world leader in human rights, and sign the Geneva Consensus Declaration. In the past, Canada had a reputation for supporting conventions and declarations that promote fundamental and universal principles, including the right to life and the centrality of the natural family in society. To that end, Canada signed declarations and conventions supporting the child and the natural family, like the Declaration on the Rights of the Child, in 1959, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, in 1990. However, in recent years, Canada has deviated from its commitments and its historic role in advancing genuine human rights. Instead, Canada has pushed a marginal agenda focused on newly-invented “rights” that are neither based in natural law nor in any international treaty. Among these are a false right to abortion, a false right to choose one’s gender, and a false right to sexual pleasure for children. Indeed, Canada has become a bully on the world stage, imposing its agenda on traditional peoples in developing nations, promoting abortion, gender theory, and radical sex education. It is time for Canada to stand up for genuine human rights like it once did, especially the right to life, and proclaim that the nuclear family is the basis of society. By ratifying the Geneva Consensus Declaration, Canada would join other nations in upholding these very things, and would recommit itself to safeguarding the rights and principles that it formerly promoted and defended. Please SIGN this petition calling on the Members of Parliament to sign the Geneva Consensus Declaration. FOR MORE INFORMATION: Information about the Geneva Consensus Declaration - https://www.hhs.gov/about/agencies/oga/global-health-diplomacy/protecting-life-global-health-policy/geneva-declaration.html The text of the Geneva Consensus Declaration - https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/geneva-consensus-declaration-english.pdf CLC article, 'Canada Must Join the Geneva Consensus Declaration' - https://www.campaignlifecoalition.com/clc-blog/id/118/title/canada-must-join-the-geneva-consensus LifeSite article, '32 nations, including US, declare ‘no international right to abortion’ at UN' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/32-nations-including-us-declare-no-international-right-to-abortion-at-un Hide Petition Text Sign this Petition
Pejovic also mentioned to LifeSiteNews that the environment created through the encouragement of “snitch lines” is more akin to a “Communist society.”
“This is a dangerous road as trust between friends is eroded and people are divided. This environment is more akin to a Communist society,” Pejovic said.
“Historically, snitching on your neighbors has been encouraged and rewarded by many repressive regimes, and has always resulted in the destruction of the social ties which bind neighbor to neighbor.”
LifeSiteNews contacted the Winnipeg Police to ask them if they have measures in place to ensure that calls they obtain from “snitch lines” are dealt with fairly, and also asked how many people have been fined since their November 4 statement.
Constable Jay Murray, a Public Information Officer with the Winnipeg Police responded by referring to the text of their November 4 statement, but added that he does not “have any statistics to provide at this time.”
However, a Global News report said that in October, before the public was actively encouraged to report alleged COVID-19 private gathering violations, there were “hundreds” of calls to police that resulted in three fines and five warnings.
In a report from last week, Const. Rob Carver was quoted as saying that police may “still do education” but added that “the numbers dictate a different response and we’re acting accordingly.”
In a November 3 report released by the Policing the Pandemic Project titled, “An extreme last resort: Monetary Penalties and the Policing of COVID-19 in Canada,” the authors state that “granting police and bylaw officers with new, broad discretionary power to fine and potentially jail people perceived to be breaking public health orders is only likely to exacerbate the current crisis.”
“Fines, as simple and conceptually appealing as they might be, are much more likely to exacerbate the current crisis than they are to resolve it. The evidence suggests as much,” authors Alex Luscombe and Alexander McClelland stated.
The Policing the Pandemic Mapping Project has published an interactive map noting the launch of “snitch Lines” and other non-compliance reporting related to COVID-19.”
The JCCF has been outspoken against the COVID-19 lockdown measures imposed by provincial governments across Canada, demanding that they explain themselves in showing “proof” that their measures have any effect.
Recently, the organization was successful in pressuring the Alberta government to announce that it would scrap the controversial Bill 10 originally put forth to combat COVID-19. The JCCF called the bill a “betrayal of the electorate and of the rule of law.”
Earlier this week the Manitoba government, under Progressive Conservative Premier Brian Pallister, announced that effective November 12, the entire province of Manitoba will move into the red “critical” phase.
All social gatherings “will not be permitted,” and only businesses listed as “critical services” are allowed to be open, and only at 25 percent capacity. This means that gyms, movie theaters, recreation centers and museums are being ordered to close. Restaurants are allowed take-out only, but schools will remain open.
The local government has also ruled that all churches “must close” and only “provide services virtually.” Before today, the regulations allowed churches in Winnipeg to operate at 15 percent capacity, with those in the rest of the province being allowed to be 20 percent full.
A November 10 memo from Archbishop Richard Gagnon simply stated the government ruling and directed Catholics to “make use of Our Archdiocesan website…and social media platforms.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-11-12--Accomplished medical doctor lays out hazards of COVID-19 face masks

Editor ’ s note : The following is an excerpt from “ COVID-19 and Public Health Totalitarianism ” by Peter R. Breggin , M.D .
The full report can be read at this link .
November 12 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — The wearing of face masks has become a political litmus test used to challenge the President and to cow the people .
The internet is filled with photos of strong advocates of face masks dropping them to their chin to speak clearly and to relieve discomfort .
Meanwhile , beyond all reason , we see intimidated people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and walking alone in parks with their faces covered .
Although face masks may protect other people who are near enough to be coughed or sneezed on , or to catch a moist exhalation of air , in most situations face masks are probably more harmful than helpful .
At the very start of the push for wearing face masks , there was a scientific pushback that was largely ignored .
On April 20 , 2020 , a Rapid Response was published in the BMJ by Antonio Lazzarino , a physician and epidemiologist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Epidemiology and Health Care , and two others .
Their summary follows : The two potential side effects that have already been acknowledged are : ( 1 ) Wearing a face mask may give a false sense of security and make people adopt a reduction in compliance with other infection control measures , including social distancing and hands washing .
( 2 ) Inappropriate use of face mask : people must not touch their masks , must change their single-use masks frequently or wash them regularly , dispose them correctly and adopt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and those of others may increase .
Other potential side effects that we must consider are : ( 3 ) The quality and the volume of speech between two people wearing masks is considerably compromised and they may unconsciously come closer .
While one may be trained to counteract side effect , this side effect may be more difficult to tackle .
( 4 ) Wearing a face mask makes the exhaled air go into the eyes .
This generates an uncomfortable feeling and an impulse to touch your eyes .
If your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yourself .
( 5 ) Face masks make breathing more difficult .
For people with COPD , face masks are in fact intolerable to wear as they worsen their breathlessness .
Moreover , a fraction of carbon dioxide previously exhaled is inhaled at each respiratory cycle .
Those two phenomena increase breathing frequency and deepness , and hence they increase the amount of inhaled and exhaled air .
This may worsen the burden of covid-19 if infected people wearing masks spread more contaminated air .
This may also worsen the clinical condition of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the viral load down into their lungs .
[ These breathing problems can also lead to lightheadedness , anxiety , and panic .
PRB ] ( 6 ) While impeding person-to-person transmission is key to limiting the outbreak , so far little importance has been given to the events taking place after a transmission has happened , when innate immunity plays a crucial role .
The main purpose of the innate immune response is to immediately prevent the spread and movement of foreign pathogens throughout the body .
The innate immunity ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ load .
If face masks determine a humid habitat where the SARS-CoV-2 can remain active due to the water vapour continuously provided by breathing and captured by the mask fabric , they determine an increase in viral load and therefore they can cause a defeat of the innate immunity and an increase in infections .
This phenomenon may also interact with and enhance previous points .
In conclusion , … It is necessary to quantify the complex interactions that may well be operating between positive and negative effects of wearing surgical masks at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to act without evidence .
( citations omitted ) Wearing face masks has not be left to individual discretion .
People have not been educated to face mask hazards and many mistakenly believe that wearing them will protect themselves as well as others from COVID-19 .
They fear that the failure to use them will be taken as irrational defiance of authority or lack of concern for others .
Some people view the wearing of masks as a sign of their virtue ; but others feel they it is a sign of conformity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ face masks cuts people off from each other ’ s other facial expressions and cues .
It reduces verbal communications .
Today , when people go outdoors or into buildings wearing a mask , they often make no attempt to make a friendly gesture and indeed they commonly avert eyes .
More than anything , masks create discomfort and alienation between people , which is a hallmark of the totalitarian society .
Decades ago , In Crowds and Power , Nobel Prize Winner in Literature , Elias Canetti , wrote some astonishing passages @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in general : People 's attitude to this play of the features varies .
In some civilizations the freedom of the face is largely restricted ; it is thought improper to show pain and pleasure openly ; a man shuts them away inside himself and his face remains calm .
The real reason for this attitude is the desire for personal autonomy : no intrusion on oneself is permitted , nor does one intrude on anyone else .
A man is supposed to have the strength to stand alone and also the strength @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go hand in hand , for it is the influence of one man upon another which stimulates the unending succession of transformations .
They are expressed in gestures and the movements of the face and , where these are suppressed , all transformation becomes difficult and , in the end , impossible .
A little experience of the inflexibility of such unnatural `` stoics '' soon leads one to understand the general significance of the mask : it is a conclusion ; into it flows all the ferment of the as yet unclear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ face so miraculously expresses , and there it ends .
Once the mask is in position there can be no more beginnings , no groping towards something new .
The mask is clear-cut ; it expresses something which is quite definite , and neither more nor less than this .
It is fixed ; the thing it expresses can not change .
P. 374… In our culture in ordinary times , the wearing of a mask or kerchief in public presents several threats , most notably , the person is sick and infectious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about to threaten us .
In a time of great turmoil , with riots occurring nightly in cities around the country , and acts of vandalism in the name of political retribution or righteousness , the perpetrators happily wear masks , giving them anonymity during their perpetrations .
Do masks have any use outside of an infection disease treatment setting or when in close proximity to vulnerable and elderly people ?
Probably not much and they do have hazards .
Government enforced public health policies concerning the wearing of masks may do much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their own standards and letting the people under most circumstances rely upon voluntary social distancing when necessary .

PETITION UPDATE (12/11/2020)
Right before Thanksgiving, YouTube deleted a LifeSite video of a distinguished Canadian physician protesting the "unfounded public hysteria" over COVID-19 and accused us of spreading "medical misinformation."
Our account was suspended, and we were prohibited from posting videos on our YouTube channel for one week. And, while that may not seem like a big deal, it's a huge deal for a news organization like LifeSite.
Then, earlier this week, YouTube again suspended our account – this time for two weeks – over an episode of The Bishop Strickland Show wherein Bishop Strickland said he would not take an unethical COVID-19 vaccine.
We were able to appeal the suspension, and our request was granted.
This means that in YouTube's three-strikes-and-you're-out content-policing, idea-cleansing scheme, we are back down to one strike. But, we still face the threat of losing our account permanently.
And, we're not the only ones.
In a recent turn of events, YouTube just announced that it will remove videos alleging widespread voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election.
But, what is YouTube afraid of? The truth???
Thankfully, however, there is a one, big bright spot on the horizon: 48 states filed suit against Facebook just this week.
And, although this seems like a step in the right direction, the draconian measures which YouTube just rolled out, which are already wielded by Twitter, are an assault against free speech.
So, the fight for freedom of speech against Big Tech goes on. And, we must do everything we can to protect it!
Please SIGN and SHARE this petition today!
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/breaking-youtube-reverses-ban-on-lifesitenews?
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/youtube-bans-lifesite-over-video-of-bp-strickland-refusing-to-take-corona-vaccine
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/lifesites-channel-was-suspended-by-youtube-heres-how-you-can-still-watch-our-videos
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/youtube-starts-removing-videos-that-contain-allegations-of-mass-voter-fraud
https://tennesseestar.com/2020/12/10/facebook-sued-by-48-states-federal-trade-commission-over-allegations-of-monopolistic-practices/
________________________________________________________________________
PETITION UPDATE (11/18/2020)
Everyone thought the censorship by Big Tech corporations would decrease after the 2020 election, but the truth is that censorship is being felt just as much as it was before the election.
And, given the election outcome, perhaps Big Tech censorship now is even more consequential than it was before the election!
The two biggest social media platforms, Facebook and Twitter, and other Big Tech companies, are still censoring and suppressing stories and posts favorable to conservatives, and especially anything that has to do with election fraud.
Here are a few recent examples:
Women for America First organized the March for Trump on November 14, which was shut down by Facebook, MailChimp and Eventbrite. Despite Big Tech’s best efforts to cancel the event, the march went on and gathered a huge crowd.
Twitter has been suppressing a large number of President Trump’s Tweets. Most of his Tweets have been flagged arbitrarily with a warning stating: “This claim about election fraud is disputed."
Please READ this recent article about Big Tech's attempt to choke information conerning the recent Million MAGA March in Washington, DC: '5 things mainstream media won’t tell you about massive DC ‘Stop the Steal’ rally'
Then, please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition, which calls on the Congress, the president, and governors to defend freedom of speech as Big Tech continues their rampant censorship.
PETITION UPDATE (10/15/2020)
In a remarkable development, Republican Senators Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham have announced that the Senate Judiciary Committee will be issuing subpoenas to Twitter's Jack Dorsey and Facebook's Mark Zuckerburg for their company's suppression of two critical expose news stories about how Hunter Biden and the Biden Family allegedly profited from business deals made because of Joe Biden's position as Vice President.
Please WATCH LifeSite's exclusive video of the announcement by Senator Ted Cruz below.
According to the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Lindsey Graham, the subpoenas will be issued next Tuesday, for hearings to be held on Friday of next week.
This is a MASSIVE development, and should be welcomed by those who champion freedom of speech.
Again, this is all happening because Twitter and Facebook refuse to allow their members to share stories which would be favorable to conservatives.
Here's the timeline:
Yesterday, Twitter and Facebook suppressed a NY Post story about how Hunter Biden allegedly profited from introducing a Ukrainian businessman to his then-Vice President father, Joe Biden. The story also alleges that Vice President Biden then subsequently pressured Ukrainian authorities to fire a prosecutor who was investigating the businessman's company.
And, just this morning, Twitter suppressed another expose by the NY Post alleging that the Biden Family improperly profitted from deals made with one of the largest Chinese energy companies because of Vice President Biden's position in government.
But, right after the story broke, Senator Cruz tried to share the latest story on Twitter and was blocked. Twitter says that they are blocking the stories because they claim that the information was obtained illegally. However, Twitter showed no problem allowing illegally obtained information about President Trump's tax returns to be shared.
Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition, which calls on the Congress, the president, and governors to defend freedom of speech as Big Tech continues their rampant censorship.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
'GOP senators decry Big Tech censorship of NY Post story exposing Biden corruption' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/gop-senators-decry-big-tech-censorship-of-ny-post-story-exposing-biden-corruption
___________________________________________________________________________
PETITION UPDATE (9/17/2020)
Big Tech is out to kill free speech. LifeSite is out to protect it!
LifeSite has been digging deep into the many claims of liberal bias and selective censorship of pro-life, pro-family, and conservative voices on social media.
And, we are now launching our new series 'Uncensored: Big Tech vs. Free Speech', which will unpack how the actions of Big Tech censors actually affect conservative and Christian organization and individuals.
Please WATCH the first video in our series featuring Brigitte Gabriel, the Founder of ACT For America, one of the nation's premier national security grassroots organizations.
Ms. Gabriel's organization, ACT For America, has been targeted by Big Tech especially in the manipulation of search results.
Big Tech “think[s] they are God and they are exercising their godly power over everybody else,” Gabriel explained. "Because in today's world, anytime you want to find out any information about somebody, what do you do? Google. You go to the internet to find out some information about them. When you research anything about somebody, the first thing that comes up [in the search results] is the Southern Poverty Law Center’s labeling of ‘hate groups.’”
“And who are the ‘hate groups’? Family Research Council is a hate group because they are pro-family. American Family Radio is a hate group…LifeSiteNews is a hate group. My organization is a hate group because we sound the alarm about terrorism and protecting our constitutional freedom. And so they try to character assassinate you. And they control the language.”
LifeSite's research shows that Facebook, Google, YouTube, Twitter, and others have become far too dangerous for democracy.
They can and do sway elections and public opinion in whatever direction they want, primarily by manipulating search results, tracking our online behavior, and by blocking truthful content from their platforms.
Today, LifeSite is starting to fight back, with facts and with stories of conservatives and Christians who are being negatively impacted by Big Tech's liberal bias.
Please continue to follow our 'Big Tech vs. Free Speech' series which aims to launch a new video each week for the next eight weeks.
And, please sign our petition demanding that Big Tech monopolies are broken up. Thank you!
__________________________________________________________________________
ORIGINAL PETITION BACKGROUND TEXT:
The outrageous erasing of the White Coat Summit from the internet is only the latest in a long series of brazen acts of censorship against conservatives and all those who support legitimate free speech.
You may agree or disagree with the efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine against the coronavirus, but everyone should agree on this point:
No Big Tech company should have the power to erase from the internet the medical opinions of licensed practicing doctors simply because they do not like what they have to say about the coronavirus or their experience treating it. Americans and other free peoples do not need leftist computer programmers deciding what the best course of medical treatment is for them.
Google/Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, Apple and their Big Tech friends want to control what you see, what you read, what you think, and ultimately, how you vote. Not only do they spend hundreds of millions of dollars on lobbying congress and buttering up big Washington DC think tanks, but now they brazenly and directly censor any content they don't want you to see.
Big Tech, like other interest groups, aggressively lobby to help their businesses thrive, but increasingly, Big Tech is using blatant internet censorship to impose its radical world view over those they consider to be "deplorables."
This must stop, but it won't unless we demand it as forcefully as legally possible. We believe that we have reached the point were Big Tech must be broken up if legitimate free speech is going to survive and continue to thrive on the internet.
Please sign our petition to demand real consequences for Big Tech's suppression of legitimate free speech.
In 2016, emails revealed by Fox News' Tucker Carlson proved that Google tried to influence the election by affecting voter turnout. Thankfully they failed. But they didn't give up. Instead, they have been preparing and testing how to manipulate information to continue to abuse their monopolistic power.
In 2018, Google/Youtube et. al. succeeded in manipulating the Irish abortion referendum by blacklisting pro-life videos, manipulating pro-life search terms and results and intentionally withholding pro-life information. Again, this is not an opinion or a conspiracy theory, Project Veritas obtained first hand information proving the intentional censorship by Big Tech.
And the Coronavirus has just made things worse. You see, scared people are more easily manipulated into giving up their freedom of speech. Children are being kept from going to school, tens of millions of Americans are out of work, and rioting has broken out in most major American cities.
Now, more than ever, freedom of speech is necessary to secure all of our freedoms. Freedom of speech is crucial to truly exercise the freedom to vote for the person that best represents one's own views, or the freedom to decide what course of medical treatment to accept - especially the decision to control what vaccines are administered to our children.
Some experts, like Dr. Robert Epstein, a behavioral psychologist who has testified before congress against Big Tech believes that we may already be too late to control Big Tech's tyrannical control over information.
President Trump took a step in the right direction with his Executive Order calling for increased regulation of Big Tech. But much more can be done and needs to be done right now.
In an era where almost everything is polarized, there is an overwhelming support for breaking up the Big Tech monopolies. A recent Pew poll found that 75% of Americans believe that Big Tech companies have too much influence.
It is time to bring serious accountability to Big Tech for their attempts to use their monopolies to kill free speech.
It is time to break up Big Tech.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Google, Facebook, Twitter shut down ‘frontline’ US doctors who promote ‘cure for COVID’ - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/google-facebook-twitter-shut-down-frontline-us-doctors-who-promote-cure-for-covid?utm_source=featured&utm_campaign=standard
Americans overwhelmingly agree Big Tech has too much power: Pew poll - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/americans-overwhelmingly-agree-big-tech-has-too-much-power-pew-poll
Leaked Google employee's email reveals effort to boost Latino vote, surprise that some voted for Trump - https://www.foxnews.com/tech/leaked-google-employees-email-reveals-effort-to-boost-latino-vote-surprise-that-some-voted-for-trump
Undercover video proves Google interfered in Irish abortion referendum - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/americans-overwhelmingly-agree-big-tech-has-too-much-power-pew-poll


lifesitenews--2020-11-12--Where modesty comes from, and why it’s still essential today

Editor ’ s note : This is part one of a two-part essay .
The second installment will be published tomorrow .
November 12 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Nowadays , in Latin and Byzantine Rite Catholic Churches , as well as in the other Churches of the Catholic Church , many ancient traditions and customs have been called into question , and many of the faithful have been led to believe that most of the “ old ways ” of doing things are “ old hat ” and no longer apply in our day and age .
One @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing things that is widely regarded as “ old hat ” is the “ old way ” of dressing — both the old standards for dress in general and , in particular , the standards of dress for divine worship .
In this article we will consider whether the traditional Catholic standards of “ modesty ” are “ old hat ” or still valid — subject to change according to fashion , or divinely ordained and timeless .
Before addressing the subject of modesty , it will be important to distinguish between customs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing things , that were wrong according to the Gospel — and which therefore needed to be changed — and “ old ways ” of doing things that were required by the Gospel and which must be maintained .
One “ old way ” of doing things that was not according to the Gospel was the longstanding practice of segregation in Catholic churches in many parts of the United States .
Two generations ago , in many states of the Union , Catholic churches were completely segregated according to color .
It would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Testament or of the Church Fathers to know that this practice contradicts the teaching of Our Lord Jesus Christ as it was understood in the Church from the beginning .
In the letter of St. James , the apostle strongly condemns any kind of discrimination in the Church based on wealth or social status , which certainly included racial discrimination .
Thus , the abandonment of segregation should be celebrated by all Catholic Christians as a victory for the Gospel .
The old custom of segregation according to race is ( rightly ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Byzantine Catholics and members of other churches within the Catholic Church are tempted , unfortunately , to regard other customs that were practiced at the same time as equally dispensable .
But this is illogical —and extremely dangerous .
It is illogical because the mere fact that two customs prevailed in the same Catholic community at the same time ( and that one of them was evil ) does not prove that the second custom was also evil or dispensable .
It is also dangerous because if the second custom accorded with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been handed down from the apostles , the rejection of that custom will do great harm to the souls of the faithful .
In short , one must learn to ask the vital question : “ Is this or that custom in accord with the Gospel as it has been understood in the Church from the beginning ?
” If the answer is “ yes , ” that custom must be defended .
If the answer is “ no , ” it can be changed for good reason — as long as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Gospel as it has been handed down from the apostles .
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church : Adam and Eve were created in a state of perfect integrity in which their passions and appetites were completely subordinated to reason and their reason to the will of God .
In their original state of integrity , Adam and Eve possessed perfect chastity .
With the Original Sin , however , our first parents lost the gift of integrity .
Their passions and appetites no longer remained subject to reason , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the will of God .
Under these conditions , chastity could not be preserved without the extra safeguard of modesty , which the Catechism defines as “ refusing to unveil what should remain hidden , ” adding that modesty is A survey of the Holy Scriptures on the subject of modesty confirms this teaching .
The first mention of clothing in the entire Bible occurs in the book of Genesis after the Fall of Adam .
Before the Fall , Adam and Eve were clothed in the glory of God .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Feast of the Transfiguration liken the glory of Jesus on Mt .
Tabor to the original glory of Adam : According to St. John Chrysostom , when Adam and Eve sinned against God in Paradise , they lost the grace of God that had illuminated them with glory and became aware of their nakedness .
Having lost the glory of God in which they had been created , Adam and Eve sought to clothe their naked bodies with fig leaves .
But God was not satisfied with these “ aprons , ” and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ garments made of animal skins , skins that required the sacrificial death of animals — a foreshadowing of the future sacrificial death of Our Lord Jesus Christ , who merited for Adam and Eve and for all of their children a share in His perfect chastity .
Thus , right at the beginning of human history , God clothed the first man and woman in a way that safeguarded their chastity .
This is reflected in the iconography of the Byzantine tradition , which always portrays Adam and Eve after the exile from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cover them from their shoulders to their knees .
The importance of modesty in dress for our first parents receives even greater emphasis in the icons of the Resurrection , which show the Risen Lord rescuing Adam and Eve from Hades , fully clothed from head to toe .
In man ’ s original state , clothed in the light of glory , Adam ’ s and Eve ’ s bodies and souls had existed in perfect harmony with the Divine Will .
But after the Fall , their bodies and souls grew @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meant to serve the soul became rebellious .
Even though Adam and Eve continued to be “ one flesh ” with the blessing of God after the Fall , their desire for each other was no longer perfectly ordered as it would have been in the original state of integrity .
As their children and grandchildren began to populate the Earth , the need for modesty grew even more urgent .
Thus , God had to teach man to discipline his mind and his body , to maintain right order within himself , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s friendship .
The Ten Commandments required God ’ s people to maintain a high standard of chastity , and the Mosaic Law mandated strict punishments for those who violated the sanctity of marriage through fornication , adultery , or sexual perversion .
Under the Old Covenant , women had rights that they did not enjoy in most other societies .
For Hebrew women , the modest clothing of a woman ’ s body was not only a safeguard against lust and unchastity , but also a sign of her dignity .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he personified her as a woman and predicted that she would fall from her position of power and prestige into abject slavery .
In the ancient world , only slaves and prostitutes bared their legs or uncovered their thighs .
Knowing this , one can appreciate the horror of Isaiah ’ s warning to Babylon : No woman of Israel would deliberately expose her legs or her thighs to public view .
Immodesty of that sort was only forced upon slaves and prostitutes .
Thus , modest dress gave witness to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and distinguished them from Gentile women , who were often treated like chattel .

Modest dress once gave witness to the unique dignity of women. Does it still, or is modesty just an outdated custom?
Editor’s note: This is part one of a two-part essay. Part two can be read here.
November 12, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Nowadays, in Latin and Byzantine Rite Catholic Churches, as well as in the other Churches of the Catholic Church, many ancient traditions and customs have been called into question, and many of the faithful have been led to believe that most of the “old ways” of doing things are “old hat” and no longer apply in our day and age. One of the “old ways” of doing things that is widely regarded as “old hat” is the “old way” of dressing — both the old standards for dress in general and, in particular, the standards of dress for divine worship. In this article we will consider whether the traditional Catholic standards of “modesty” are “old hat” or still valid — subject to change according to fashion, or divinely ordained and timeless.
Before addressing the subject of modesty, it will be important to distinguish between customs, or “old ways” of doing things, that were wrong according to the Gospel — and which therefore needed to be changed — and “old ways” of doing things that were required by the Gospel and which must be maintained. One “old way” of doing things that was not according to the Gospel was the longstanding practice of segregation in Catholic churches in many parts of the United States. Two generations ago, in many states of the Union, Catholic churches were completely segregated according to color. It would not take much reading of the New Testament or of the Church Fathers to know that this practice contradicts the teaching of Our Lord Jesus Christ as it was understood in the Church from the beginning. In the letter of St. James, the apostle strongly condemns any kind of discrimination in the Church based on wealth or social status, which certainly included racial discrimination. Thus, the abandonment of segregation should be celebrated by all Catholic Christians as a victory for the Gospel.
— Article continues below Petition — PETITION: Ask Pope Francis to clarify and rectify scandalous remarks on homosexual civil unions Show Petition Text 22787 have signed the petition. Let's get to 25000 ! Thank you for signing this petition! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Country... State... Sign this Petition Remarks attributed to Pope Francis (and, not denied by the Vatican) in support of homosexual civil unions have caused grave scandal to the faithful. Please SIGN this urgent petition which asks Pope Francis to clarify and rectify these heterodox and scandalous remarks on homosexual civil unions, and which will be delivered both to the Vatican and to the Papal Nuncio of the United States (the Pope's official representative in the U.S.). As the last guarantor of the Faith, the Pope should clarify and rectify these remarks, which go against the perennial teaching of the Church, even including the teaching of his living predecessor, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. "What we have to create is a law of civil coexistence [meaning civil union law, for homosexuals]...," Pope Francis is reported to have remarked, in what is arguably his clearest statement of public support for a practice morally prohibited by official Catholic Church teaching. In fact, the Church has been crystal clear in Her opposition to homosexual unions. Just in 2003, Pope Saint John Paul II approved a document from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, titled 'Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons' and written by Cardinal Ratzinger (now, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI), which concludes with the following: "The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions. The common good requires that laws recognize, promote and protect marriage as the basis of the family, the primary unit of society. Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean not only the approval of deviant behaviour, with the consequence of making it a model in present-day society, but would also obscure basic values which belong to the common inheritance of humanity. The Church cannot fail to defend these values, for the good of men and women and for the good of society itself." It could not be more clear: the Church is calling people to repentance, not to be left to indulge in grave sin. Since becoming public, several senior prelates as well as other notable Catholic figures have voiced their opposition to these remarks attributed to the Pontiff. Cardinal Raymond Burke stated: "It is a source of deepest sadness and pressing pastoral concern that the private opinions reported with so much emphasis by the press and attributed to Pope Francis do not correspond to the constant teaching of the Church, as it is expressed in Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition." Cardinal Gerhard Müller commented: "Where there is tension between the plain and obvious Word of God and the infallible interpretation on the one hand, and private expressions of opinion even by the highest church authorities on the other, the principle always applies: in dubio pro DEO [When in doubt, be in favor of God]." And, Catholic theologian and apologist Scott Hahn, without directly quoting Pope Francis, shared on Facebook the 'Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons,' published by the CDF in 1986, with the statement: "Holy Father, respectfully and humbly, I beg to differ... if that is indeed what you said. In any case, please clarify and rectify your statement, especially in view of the official teaching of our Lord through the magisterium of His Church." But, the silence from the Vatican has been deafening, with no clarification forthcoming. We must, therefore, ask the Pope for clarification in this serious matter. Please SIGN and SHARE this petition which asks Pope Francis to clarify and rectify remarks attributed to him in support of homosexual civil unions. FOR MORE INFORMATION: 'Cdl. Burke: Pope’s homosexual civil union remarks ‘contrary’ to Scripture, Tradition' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/cardinal-burke-on-popes-homosexual-civil-union-remarks-contrary-to-the-teaching-of-sacred-scripture-and-sacred-tradition 'Cardinal says Catholics ‘can and should’ disagree with Pope’s ‘opinion’ on gay civil unions' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/cdl.mueller-popes-words-on-gay-civil-unions-purely-private-expression-of-opinion-which-every-catholic-can-and-should-freely-contradict 'Archbishop Vigano, Bishops Tobin and Strickland respond to Pope’s approval of homosexual civil unions' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/archbishop-vigano-and-bishops-tobin-strickland-respond-to-popes-approval-of-homosexual-civil-unions 'Pope’s comments on gay civil unions cause shockwaves around the world' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/deepest-sadness-cardinal-burke-condemns-pope-franciss-remarks-supporting-civil-unions Hide Petition Text Sign this Petition
The old custom of segregation according to race is (rightly) so repulsive to people today that many Byzantine Catholics and members of other churches within the Catholic Church are tempted, unfortunately, to regard other customs that were practiced at the same time as equally dispensable. But this is illogical —and extremely dangerous. It is illogical because the mere fact that two customs prevailed in the same Catholic community at the same time (and that one of them was evil) does not prove that the second custom was also evil or dispensable. It is also dangerous because if the second custom accorded with the teaching of the Gospel as it has been handed down from the apostles, the rejection of that custom will do great harm to the souls of the faithful. In short, one must learn to ask the vital question: “Is this or that custom in accord with the Gospel as it has been understood in the Church from the beginning?” If the answer is “yes,” that custom must be defended. If the answer is “no,” it can be changed for good reason — as long as the new practice is also in accord with the Gospel as it has been handed down from the apostles.
Modesty safeguards chastity
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
Chastity means the successful integration of sexuality within the person and thus the inner unity of man in his bodily and spiritual being. Sexuality, in which man's belonging to the bodily and biological world is expressed, becomes personal and truly human when it is integrated into the relationship of one person to another, in the complete and lifelong mutual gift of a man and a woman. The virtue of chastity therefore involves the integrity of the person and the integrality of the gift (CCC, 2337).
Adam and Eve were created in a state of perfect integrity in which their passions and appetites were completely subordinated to reason and their reason to the will of God. In their original state of integrity, Adam and Eve possessed perfect chastity. With the Original Sin, however, our first parents lost the gift of integrity. Their passions and appetites no longer remained subject to reason, nor did their reason easily submit to the will of God. Under these conditions, chastity could not be preserved without the extra safeguard of modesty, which the Catechism defines as “refusing to unveil what should remain hidden,” adding that modesty is
ordered to chastity to whose sensitivity it bears witness. It guides how one looks at others and behaves toward them in conformity with the dignity of persons and their solidarity . . . It inspires one’s choice of clothing. It keeps silence or reserve where there is evident risk of unhealthy curiosity. (Catechism of Catholic Church, 2521-2522)
A survey of the Holy Scriptures on the subject of modesty confirms this teaching. The first mention of clothing in the entire Bible occurs in the book of Genesis after the Fall of Adam. Before the Fall, Adam and Eve were clothed in the glory of God. This is why the Byzantine Vespers verses for the Feast of the Transfiguration liken the glory of Jesus on Mt. Tabor to the original glory of Adam:
Through your transfiguration, You returned Adam’s nature to its original splendor, restoring its very elements to the glory and brilliance of your divinity. Wherefore we cry out to you, the Creator of All, “Glory be to you.”
According to St. John Chrysostom, when Adam and Eve sinned against God in Paradise, they lost the grace of God that had illuminated them with glory and became aware of their nakedness.
And the eyes of them both were opened: and when they perceived themselves to be naked, they sewed together fig leaves, and made themselves aprons. (Gen. 3:7)
Having lost the glory of God in which they had been created, Adam and Eve sought to clothe their naked bodies with fig leaves. But God was not satisfied with these “aprons,” and He provided Adam and Eve with full-length garments made of animal skins, skins that required the sacrificial death of animals — a foreshadowing of the future sacrificial death of Our Lord Jesus Christ, who merited for Adam and Eve and for all of their children a share in His perfect chastity.
Thus, right at the beginning of human history, God clothed the first man and woman in a way that safeguarded their chastity. This is reflected in the iconography of the Byzantine tradition, which always portrays Adam and Eve after the exile from Paradise clothed in rough animal skins that cover them from their shoulders to their knees. The importance of modesty in dress for our first parents receives even greater emphasis in the icons of the Resurrection, which show the Risen Lord rescuing Adam and Eve from Hades, fully clothed from head to toe.
In man’s original state, clothed in the light of glory, Adam’s and Eve’s bodies and souls had existed in perfect harmony with the Divine Will. But after the Fall, their bodies and souls grew disordered, and the passions that were meant to serve the soul became rebellious. Even though Adam and Eve continued to be “one flesh” with the blessing of God after the Fall, their desire for each other was no longer perfectly ordered as it would have been in the original state of integrity. As their children and grandchildren began to populate the Earth, the need for modesty grew even more urgent. Thus, God had to teach man to discipline his mind and his body, to maintain right order within himself, so that he could live in God’s friendship. The Ten Commandments required God’s people to maintain a high standard of chastity, and the Mosaic Law mandated strict punishments for those who violated the sanctity of marriage through fornication, adultery, or sexual perversion.
Under the Old Covenant, women had rights that they did not enjoy in most other societies. For Hebrew women, the modest clothing of a woman’s body was not only a safeguard against lust and unchastity, but also a sign of her dignity. When the prophet Isaiah prophesied against Babylon, he personified her as a woman and predicted that she would fall from her position of power and prestige into abject slavery. In the ancient world, only slaves and prostitutes bared their legs or uncovered their thighs. Knowing this, one can appreciate the horror of Isaiah’s warning to Babylon:
O daughter of the Chaldeans … thou shalt no more be called tender and delicate. Take the millstones, and grind meal: uncover thy locks, make bare the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers. Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen. (Is. 47:1–3)
No woman of Israel would deliberately expose her legs or her thighs to public view. Immodesty of that sort was only forced upon slaves and prostitutes. Thus, modest dress gave witness to the unique dignity of women in Hebrew society and distinguished them from Gentile women, who were often treated like chattel.
Share