Media scrutinized over coverage of Trump’s Cheney remarks

A chorus of observers on Friday called out corporate media sources for attempting to construe as a threat of violence Trump’s criticism of former Rep. Liz Cheney’s, R-WY, interventionist foreign policy stance. Trump had suggested – and repeated later when asked to clarify – that “warhawks” like Cheney should be given a rifle and made to face the same battles into which they send young Americans.  READ

Trump promises tax breaks for homeschooling parents

Former President Donald Trump has promised homeschooling parents tax relief on their education costs, up to $10,000 per year per child. In a video posted on X, Trump stated, “When I am reelected, I will do everything I can to support parents who make the courageous choice of homeschool.”  READ

Martin Scorsese series on Catholic saints coming to TV

The first four episodes of a docudrama series detailing the lives of eight saints will be released in partnership with Fox Nation on November 17, providing a way to celebrate the month that begins with the Feast of All Saints. Titled “Martin Scorsese Presents: The Saints,” the docuseries is hosted, narrated, and produced by the filmmaker himself.  READ

NBC's "Law & Order" Portrays Pro-Life People as Terrorist Bombers

NBC's "Law & Order" Portrays Pro-Life People as Terrorist Bombers

Can Harris Sell Churchgoers on Abortion and Sexual Immorality?

By Joshua Arnold

Presidential candidate Kamala Harris continued her efforts to woo churchgoers on Sunday, with an appearance at the Church of Christian Compassion in Philadelphia. Her last-minute, “souls-to-the-polls” campaign in historically black churches comes as up to 40 million self-identified Christians plan not to vote in the upcoming election, according to a recent George Barna survey. Harris’s church-focused push began three days after she ejected two rallygoers who exclaimed, “Jesus is Lord.”

The Harris campaign has struggled to sell churchgoing voters on their candidate, in large part due to the fact that they lack a product this audience wants. “The sole issue that Kamala Harris has been running on” is abortion, said David Closson, director of Family Research Council’s Center for Biblical Worldview, on “Washington Watch” Friday. “This really is the only issue [on which] she has been consistent and clear and energetic.”

At a characteristic rally in Texas on Friday, Harris took the stage with pop megastar Beyonce “where pretty much … the main issue that they campaigned on is abortion,” Closson described. “In 2016, Hillary Clinton became the first nominee to come out publicly and say she would be in favor of getting rid of the Hyde Amendment,” he added. But “Hillary Clinton’s position on abortion looks tame in comparison to the Harris-Walz ticket. They are the most ardent, energetic [abortion] supporters … to ever run for president and vice president of the United States.”

Harris underscored her commitment to absolute abortion in a recent sit-down interview with NBC’s Hallie Jackson. When Jackson asked what concessions Harris would consider as president to win codified abortion protections from a hypothetical Republican-controlled Congress, Harris first avoided the question so obviously that Jackson asked the question again, “So [it’s] a question of pragmatism then: What concessions would be on the table? Religious exemptions, for example, is that something that you would consider?” Harris finally replied, “I don’t think we should be making concessions when we’re talking about a fundamental freedom to make decisions about your own body.”

The question was designed as an easy lay-up. Harris was given an opportunity to position herself as a pragmatic, bipartisan negotiator, while at the same time planting a flag for hypothetical negotiations next year. On the second pass, Jackson lowered the difficulty further, signaling that this was a “question of pragmatism” and proposing an example of a relatively painless concession that Harris could latch onto. Yet Harris refused to budge even an inch.

“In one sense, she’s been consistent,” responded Closson. “When she was a senator, she voted against the Pain-Capable Act that would have provided protections for babies when they can feel pain. She voted against a piece of legislation that would provide legal protections for babies who survive botched abortions.”

“If Harris is in the Oval Office on January 20th, the abortion lobby will have the most energetic supporter that they have ever had,” he added. “Clearly, according to Kamala Harris, even our first freedom is not as important as the sacrament of abortion. … Abortion has been elevated to this almost quasi-religious position in the modern-day Democratic Party.”

Abortion is the lead role in a cast encompassing the entire Sexual Revolution. Closson noted how Harris and other progressives in Congress support the poorly named Equality Act, a bill “that would prioritize these contested claims of sexual orientation and gender identity” so that they would take precedence “whenever they come into conflict with a religious liberty claim.” When Harris first ran for president in 2019, she wrote on a candidate questionnaire that gender “transition treatment” was “a medical necessity,” which taxpayers should fund for prisoners and illegal immigrants in federal custody.

This issue is less popular than abortion, so it isn’t one Harris likes to talk about. Yet Jackson gave Harris an opportunity to stake out a more moderate position in this election, asking, “Do you believe that transgender Americans should have access to gender-affirming care in this country?” Harris responded, “I believe we should follow the law.” Again, Jackson gently pressed and Harris again deflected, “I’m not going to put myself in the position of a doctor.”

The sexual libertinism of the Harris campaign’s closing pitch is underscored by a pro-pornography advertisement that Democrat-aligned super-PACs intend to run in the seven key swing states in the final week before Election Day. In a desperate attempt to scoop up disinclined male voters, the ad suggests that Republican politicians will ban pornography. (This is untrue; some GOP-controlled state legislators have merely required age verification to prevent minors — that is, non-voters — from accessing pornographic sites.)

Can you imagine if Harris brought this pitch to the pulpit? “Vote a blue ticket. We’ll keep porn legal.” The parents training their 10-year-olds to pay attention during “Big Church” would be outraged. Miss Tamara, the semi-retired potluck hostess in the stylish hat, might faint right there in the pews. But the recently divorced young women — perhaps some with children — whose ex-husbands refused to kill their sinful addiction might be the most grieved of all. These are, admittedly, stereotypes; in reality, a shift in trends means that young men are more likely to be in church than young women.

“It’s really frightening how many of these issues directly oppose biblical teaching,” responded Family Research Council Action President Jody Hice. “And they’re entrenched and embracing those things.”

“We just need to be really clear as Christians,” declared Closson. “There are issues of clear biblical morality on the ballot: abortion, sexuality, marriage, a host of other issues.” The Bible addresses these fundamental moral issues in multiple places, but Paul’s letter to the church in Corinth may be the most succinct: “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).

“Why do we care about politics? Why do we need to be out there voting?” Closson continued. “One, a love of neighbor. … Can you say that you comprehensively love your neighbor if you’re not engaging in the process that affects our basic rights and liberties and our freedoms?” A second reason, he added, is stewardship. “God calls us to be faithful stewards of everything he’s entrusted us with. And I think for those of us … who live in the United States … we need to be good stewards of our vote.”

It’s clear that Vice President Harris is making a pitch for churchgoing voters. It’s less clear whether it will succeed. It may come down to whether churchgoers want to buy the vision of America that Harris is selling. After Harris’s second deflection on the question of abortion concessions, NBC interviewer Jackson gave a response that may prove ominously fitting, “I will move on. But I don’t know that I heard a clear answer from you on the issue.”

Joshua Arnold is a senior writer at The Washington Stand.

Missouri Amendment 3: So-Called “Fact Checkers” are Wrong

(Jefferson City, Missouri) Thomas More Society attorneys are pushing back against the so-called “fact checkers” trying to cast doubt on the predictions of Missouri Senator Josh Hawley and Governor Mike Parson that proposed Amendment 3 would reverse the Show-Me State’s prohibition on gender transition surgeries for children, and other controversial procedures. The Thomas More Society has released a “decoder” document to highlight the legal principles that Missouri judges would be bound to apply when interpreting the proposal’s troubling open-ended language. Senior Counsel Mary Catherine Martin authored the piece to help voters read the amendment for themselves and understand its grave consequences. Martin argued before the Missouri Supreme Court in the lawsuit seeking to remove Amendment 3 from the ballot and she has been giving interviews across Missouri to educate voters on the amendment.

 

The document takes on the “fact checkers” by explaining that Hawley and Parsons are right, because Amendment 3’s new right to “all matters relating to reproductive health care” necessarily encompasses transgender interventions, including those for minor children. The Thomas More Society notes that statements from other sources, including the United States Office of Civil Rights, Boston Children’s Hospital, and Planned Parenthood, also support the Hawley/Parsons interpretation. The “decoder” further lays out how this understanding is supported by the plain text of the amendment and by Missouri Supreme Court precedent interpreting the words used in Amendment 3.

 

According to the “decoder,” Amendment 3’s removal of restrictions on “all matters relating to reproductive health care” would not just require Missouri courts to invalidate the state’s current prohibition on transgender surgeries for minors but similarly sanction all other reproductive technologies, including those yet to be discovered. It also highlights how the text of Amendment 3 makes the “right to reproductive freedom” a “super-right,” above every other right, even superseding the rights of parents to guide their children’s health care. And the “decoder” shows that the Missouri proposal is the most radical in the country, going far beyond merely removing regulations on abortion.

 

The “decoder” walks voters through the language in Amendment 3, which would disrupt Missouri’s laws requiring parental consent for minors receiving “reproductive health care,” prohibiting taxpayer funding for abortion, and allowing single-sex bathrooms and sports teams. The Thomas More Society encourages Missouri voters to interpret the actual text of the Amendment 3 proposal for themselves, to cut through political rhetoric and vote their ballot with informed confidence.

 

Download Decoding Missouri Amendment 3: A Guide to Understanding the Language of Missouri's Amendment 3 Ballot Initiative here.

 

Thomas More Society Senior Counsel Mary Catherine Martin is available for interviews about Amendment 3 and the Thomas More Society’s efforts to inform the public about this dangerous measure.

 

Harris celebrates with anti-Catholic hate group

A new ad from CatholicVote released Monday shows Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris posing with a longtime member of the anti-Catholic “drag” troupe the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence (SPI) at the San Francisco Pride parade in 2019. Numerous Catholic leaders have denounced the SPI, including Bishop Robert Barron, who describes the troupe as an “anti-Catholic hate group.” READ

22-year-old black DNC delegate switches parties, backs Trump

Audrey McNeal, 22, announced in a video posted to X Friday that after serving as a delegate to the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in 2020 and 2024, she is joining the Republican Party and voting for Trump. McNeal, a black woman, said she realized the Democratic Party “was no longer the party of free speech and civil liberties” and blasted her former party for “installing” Harris as its nominee.  READ

Woman Going in for Lifesaving Mastectomy is Offered Euthanasia Instead

Woman Going in for Lifesaving Mastectomy is Offered Euthanasia Instead

RFK Jr. Message to Catholic Voters

Why You Should Vote Anyway

AFL Sues School Board for Silencing Parents Who Voiced Concerns

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, America First Legal (AFL) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, on behalf of a group of parents, against the Loudoun County School Board for silencing concerned parents and depriving them of exercising their First Amendment right to free speech after speaking out against allowing an allegedly illegal alien student with MS-13 ties to return to school after he was arrested for carrying a gun and threatening to shoot another student. For years, the Loudoun County School Board has actively suppressed criticism and silenced dissenting voices at school board meetings under the guise of protecting student privacy. This led to a special grand jury report blasting the school district for hiding behind suspect privacy justifications at the expense of student safety. On October 8, 2024, a group of concerned parents and community members attended the school board’s public meeting to voice their concerns over reports that the school had decided to reinstate a reported illegal alien student with ties to the transnational MS-13 gang who had previously been arrested for carrying a stolen firearm and threatening to kill a classmate.  Parents were rightfully concerned that the school board would allow this allegedly illegal, gang-affiliated student to return to the school, given an incident that occurred at Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS) in 2021 when the school board reassigned a student who sexually assaulted another student to another school in the LCPS system. During the public comment portion of the meeting, when parents attempted to discuss the safety of students, the school board — led by Chairwoman Melinda Mansfield — cut off the speakers, accused them of violating “decorum” rules and privacy laws, and abruptly ended the public comment period, depriving several speakers the chance to speak at all, including a parent whose child was sexually assaulted by a “transgender” student at LCPS.   The school board’s action to prevent concerned parents from expressing their concerns is brazen and intentional viewpoint discrimination and a flagrant violation of the First Amendment right to free speech.  Shockingly, the School Board has defended its actions to discriminate based on viewpoints by claiming that it shut down public comment to “comba[t]…misinformation.”  This is not the first time LCPS has engaged in blatantly unlawful conduct. In January 2023, AFL sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) requesting an investigation into LCPS’ mishandling of sexual assault incidents that resulted from a “non-binary” male student entering the girls’ bathroom and assaulting a female student. Later that month, in response to AFL’s complaint, the DOE’s office opened an investigation into LCPS allegations of sexual assault and harassment.  AFL’s lawsuit demands that the Court declare LCPS’s actions unconstitutional and enjoin the district from continuing to unconstitutionally silence parents from speaking on the safety of students at LCPS and the district’s actions related to the transfer to another school of a student arrested for carrying a gun, threatening to shoot another student, and allegedly in this country illegally and affiliated with MS-13. Read the lawsuit here.

This week on Faith On Trial

 Faith On Trial podcast: https://faith-on-trial.simplecast.com/

Judge orders Virginia to keep non-citizens on voting rolls

Judge Giles

U.S. District Judge Patricia Giles on Friday ordered Virginia to restore more than 1,600 voter registrations that she said were illegally purged in the last two months in an effort to stop noncitizens from voting.

Judge Giles, a 2021 Biden appointee to the federal bench granted an injunction request brought against Virginia election officials by the Biden Justice Department, which claimed the voter registrations were wrongly canceled during a 90-day quiet period ahead of the November election that restricts states from making large-scale changes to their voter rolls.

Those whose registration was reinstated had previously self-identified as non-citizens. Under current Virginia law they were given notice and an opportunity to appeal the decision to remove them, or to vote by using a challenged ballot. The law had been passed and signed into law by former Governor and now Senator Tim Kaine, a Democrat.

 

Local Resident Suddenly Forced to Obtain Town Permit for Holding Religious Sign on Public Sidewalk

Chapin, SC — First Liberty Institute sent a letter to the Town of Chapin, South Carolina on behalf of local resident Ernest Giardino after he was told a permit was required to hold a sign and share his faith on a public sidewalk.

 

You can read the letter here.

 

“No one needs the government’s permission to express their faith in public,” said First Liberty Senior Counsel Nate Kellum. “The First Amendment is his permit. Like any citizen in any city in America, Mr. Giardino is free to peacefully share his religious beliefs on a public sidewalk. Chapin’s ordinance is overbroad, unconstitutional, and must be repealed or enjoined.”

 

Ernest Giardino was on a public sidewalk at the intersection of Old Lexington Road and Chapin Road on June 20, 2024, holding a 20x24 inch sign attached to a short handle, which read “Trust Christ He paid the price” on one side and “He Saved Others—Jesus—He’ll Save You” on the other side. He had held similar signs on Chapin sidewalks for the previous 8 months without incident. However, on this day as Mr. Giardino was leaving, a Chapin police officer approached Mr. Giardino and informed him that he needed Chapin’s permission to share his message with a sign.

 

The next day, Mr. Giardino spoke with the Code Enforcement Officer and the Chief of Police in person about this surprising development.  Though cordial, both confirmed the need for a permit for his speech, handing Mr. Giardino a permit application.  The permits limited Mr. Giardino to holding his sign for only 30 minutes.  Additionally, he was advised that he would need to change sidewalk corners every 15 minutes while holding a sign.

 

First Liberty’s letter says, “Permit schemes, like the one found in Chapin, have the effect of freezing speech before it is uttered.  Permit schemes are thus viewed skeptically, being ‘the most serious and least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights.’ A prior restraint like Chapin’s ordinance can survive challenge only if it does not delegate overly broad licensing discretion to government officials.   Chapin’s permit scheme falls short of this standard, in multiple ways.”

 

###

About First Liberty Institute

First Liberty Institute is a non-profit public interest law firm and the largest legal organization in the nation dedicated exclusively to defending religious freedom for all Americans.