Congresswoman Wants Abortionist Held Accountable for Five Babies Left to Die After Surviving Abortions - LifeNews.com

Congresswoman Wants Abortionist Held Accountable for Five Babies Left to Die After Surviving Abortions - LifeNews.com: Republican Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna wants to hold a Washington, D.C. abortionist accountable for potential crimes he may have committed aborting babies in his Foggy Bottom abortion clinic. Luna sat down with The Daily Signal on Friday for a wide-ranging interview on her first few weeks in Congress, what she wants to accomplish in […]

California Democrats Are Coming After Your Kids

By Deacon Mike Manno

(The Wanderer) – The problem of one-party control is being amply demonstrated in the State of California. In case you have not heard, California has now become a sanctuary state for gender confused children who are seeking a refuge from their parents who do not countenance their little ones — some not yet old enough to drive — making medical decisions for themselves that will affect their lives in a largely negative way. So why don’t we just let California be California? After all, just let those people suffer under the radical leftists that they elect.

Here’s why: The new bill, SB 107, sponsored by left-wing political gadfly State Sen. Scott Wiener, and the usual zoo animals that comprise the legislature’s majority party, is looking beyond California into your state to authorize political kidnapping of any kid in the United States to be brought to California for transgender affirming care; that means everything from puberty blockers to surgery.

A little bit of law is necessary to see the harm these animals are doing. There is something called the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act. When issues arise over which state has jurisdiction over a minor, the act determines which state’s courts have jurisdiction. So, as happens in inter-state child custody disputes, the law provides a legal guideline on which state has, and which state has not, jurisdiction over the child.

Naturally, if a divorce case, for example, is started in one state a parent cannot take a child to another and seek redress there. Now obviously there are some exceptions (consult your lawyer), but where there is no pending litigation, such as when an aunt or grandparent in different states take temporary custody over a child recently orphaned, the rule when I practiced juvenile law was to prefer jurisdiction in the state where the child resided for the greater part of the last six months.

But the wrecking crew that is the California legislature has specifically abrogated the uniform act and gives California courts the jurisdiction over any child in the state regardless of how the child got there, including those children who are runaways as well as those taken to the state without the permission of the child’s parents. We — at least those of us in old school legal thought — call that kidnapping. But, of course, there is nothing old school about the creatures who run such things in — do I dare call it? — the Golden State. Now, no matter how a child reaches the state a judge has the legal authority to name a temporary guardian for that child and when his parents find him, the state prohibits the release of any information to them. So nice to see what these God-fearing Democrats are doing.

The practical effect of this is if you live in a state that has some common sense, it is still possible you can lose your child to California, now indoctrinated by the little tike’s school into believing that he or she might have been born into the wrong body. If he can just make it to that bastion of fruit and nuts (its political product not to be confused with its agricultural output), he can free himself from your parental control regardless of his age.

But there may be some relief in sight. Just last week a conservative legal organization, Advocates for Faith and Freedom, filed a federal lawsuit to stop the enforcement of SB 107. The author of that suit, Mariah Gondeiro, was recently on my radio program to explain the litigation. The legislation, she said, is objectionable on at least three commonsense counts: It encourages children to flee to California to get transgender services; it gives California courts temporary jurisdiction regardless where the child hails from, and it bars parents from obtaining any medical or psychological information about their own child.

SB 107 also creates a carve-out from the law that prohibits parties from obtaining jurisdiction in California by engaging in “unjustifiable conduct.” It explicitly states that “taking of a child [from] the person who has legal custody is not unjustifiable conduct if done to pursue gender transition procedures in California.”

When Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the law, he claimed he did so because “states across the country [were] passing laws to demonize the transgender community.” Bless his little heart. In legal terms SB 107 violates several constitutional provisions including:

Violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution by “stripping parents of their fundamental right to direct the upbringing and care of their children, including accessing their child’s medical records” as well as failing to define the terms “gender-affirming care or “gender-affirming health care.” It also allows the children to be removed to California. Violation of the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution by denying states the right to adjudicate juvenile matters in their own state.

“The Full Faith and Credit Clause demands that state court judgments be accorded full effect in the courts of other states and precludes states from adopting any policy of hostility” towards the public acts of another state, says the suit. “California has neither a legitimate nor legal interest in exceeding its jurisdiction by taking deeply personal, intimate, and life-altering medical decisions of out of state children into their own hands,” the suit argues. The lawsuit was just filed so we have some time before a final decision is handed down, but Ms. Gondeiro is asking for a pre-enforcement injunction against the law. In the meantime, expect numerous amicus briefs to be filed by red state attorneys general from around the country, as well as numerous interested parties, both pro SB 107 and anti.

One who, perhaps inexplicably for some, will not be supporting the bill is a group called Gays Against Groomers. We visited on the radio with Jaimee Michell, the president and founder of that group, who is fighting the transgender effort to target children. “There is no such thing as a child born in the wrong body,” she says and blames radical fringe groups for pushing that agenda. “We do not condone this. . . . We are not a monolith, the majority of people in the gay community, and that includes trans people, do not condone this. There is definitely what I like to call the ‘alphabet mafia’ — or ‘LGBT, Inc.’ — it is more of a political movement.”

Unfortunately, she says, those fringe groups are backed by numerous other political groups, including the White House, to push an agenda most gays do not support. She has two main goals for her organization: stop promoting transgenderism on children and to protect her community so that it can regain some of its respectability that it has achieved in recent years, and is now losing due to this controversy.

(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every weekend on Faith On Trial or podcast at https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/ the episode referred to in this article is #354.)

The Fatima message and what it means: This week on Faith On Trial

Podcast #355 posted at: https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/

Pentagon doctors suggest 7-year-olds are capable of choosing transgender hormones

(LifeSiteNews) – Department of Defense (DoD) doctors published a report urging that children in military families who experience gender confusion be subjected to experimental “transition” procedures and suggesting that kids as young as seven years old be allowed to make life-altering decisions regarding cross-sex hormones and puberty blockers. 

The group of military doctors said that they were motivated to author their report because some states have begun to limit or ban such procedures for kids. They said this represents a “crisis” in so-called “gender-affirming care” for minors.   

The authors noted that some of these states are home to large military bases with large populations of military families with kids. 

“These current legislative efforts, along with efforts to exclude gender identity from legal discrimination protections, restrict sports participation, and regulate bathroom use” harm gender-confused youth, they allege, while ignoring the damaging impact that inflicting gender ideology has had on children forced to compete against and use school restrooms and locker rooms with members of the opposite sex.    

The report, “Caring for Military-Affiliated Transgender and Gender-Diverse Youths: A Call for Protections,” published in the most recent edition of the American Journal of Public Health, falsely claims that “[g]ender-affirming health care, such as puberty suppression and affirming hormones, mitigates” risks of “suicidal ideation or self-harm” for gender-confused minors and “optimizes patient-oriented outcomes.”

Bottom of Form

Written in an authoritative tone, the report is, in reality, a one-sided opinion piece attempting to eliminate legitimate objections to highly dangerous transgender procedures.

The Devil And The Democrats

 By Fr. Denis Wilde, OSA

(The Wanderer) – States such as Minnesota, California, Maryland, and others, in all cases with Democrat-controlled legislatures, are on a fast track to not only allow unborn babies to be murdered on demand as a woman’s “constitutional right” but also to allow infanticide.

Our nation has gotten so used to the moral evil of killing in the womb that the next diabolical step is being taken — allowing newborn babies to be killed. And at the end of life, assisted suicide is making inroads in the U.S.
Where does our acceptance of legal murder stop?

The Democrat Party has become the biggest funnel of evil that history has seen in a Western democratic society. I say “funnel” because it is a conduit drawing anti-God, anti-life, and anti-family views that converge into law.

This party funnels every vice into law under the attractive banner of “rights,” but without the slightest mention of responsibility. Its members are the architects and custodians of the movement to ensure that the slaughter of babies in the womb keeps going. The Devil hardly does a better job.

Hell is real. God is real, and so is Satan, who is more wily and powerful than any gangster cabal. God continually reaches out to save us, while Satan wants nothing more than to tear our souls from God. He wants human damnation.

Tragically, we are in a cesspool of moral bankruptcy that punishes a person more for publicly protesting the evil of child murder than for committing the act itself. Democrat legislatures are at the forefront in that mentality under the rubric of a so-called constitutional right to “choose.” No, again. We read in Deuteronomy: “Choose life that you and your descendants will live.”

That’s us as well today, pre-Roe v. Wade, during Roe’s 50 years, and now in the states’ purview in the aftermath.

We know the only choice is life. No man or woman of God can vote for a party so steeped in and committee to death. Nearly every Democrat in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate voted against life-saving measures for the unborn, while nearly every Republican voted in favor of life-saving measures. Voters cannot look away from this glaring statistic, easily confirmed in the Congressional Record. It is not 60-40, 70-30, but 95 percent to 5 percent. If your House member or Senator is a Democrat, you can be 95 percent sure he/she wants more killing, not less.

God wants us to be saved by following His Commandments. If you do not believe in God, you will indeed meet Him, nonetheless, after your last breath. Jesus speaks of Hell much more than He does of Heaven not because He wants us to be damned but to ensure we understand the importance of following His Plan for each one of us. To “choose” to kill will cause a grave disturbance that will manifest itself and affect your vision of life negatively, even during your life here.

The Catholic Church in its wisdom has for centuries taught that these are the two sins against the virtue of hope: presumption and despair. Abortion leads to both.

The Devil has his tricks to sooth the mind and heart in how “necessary” it was to “choose” the killing, lulling us into the belief that even if we choose abortion, God will forgive us. That is the real sin of presumption. Despair is what can happen to a mother and father after abortion, when self-hatred and despondency fill the void left in the womb, mind, and heart.

Be assured Satan also knows how to manipulate the human conscience. We all have a conscience; think of it as a GPS for getting to eternity. But the tragedy is that we can deaden our consciences, thus ending up in Satan’s grasp for eternity.

When Catholics pray that very simple prayer, the “Hail Mary,” at the end we humbly plead: “Pray for us now and at the hour of our death.” We’re not asking for another minute to enjoy life but instead hoping that our fervent and heartfelt prayer will be the key to open the door, after our last breath, to Heaven rather than Hell.

Lent is a perfect time to really put our eternal destination in focus. We can perish in a storm, or be lulled to sleep with self-centered ease. To discover the Light requires the humility to put our responsibilities before our desires, the things we might choose — like abortion — that turn us away from God.

As our national conversation more frequently than ever revolves around the “right to choose,” it is of paramount importance that we choose what leads to eternal life with God, rather than eternal damnation with Satan.

We must pray, but we also must speak out against what the Democrat Party has chosen to codify in law. Some of us may have our wings clipped for taking a stand, but this is a time of moral crisis and our very souls — and the soul our nation — are in danger.

(Fr. Denis Wilde, OSA, Ph.D., is the associate chaplain for Priests for Life. A concert pianist, he was formerly an associate professor of music at Villanova University.)

Wyoming Says No to Chemical Abortions

CHEYENNE, WY – As the majority of abortions are now chemical abortions in the United States, Wyoming has become the first state to explicitly ban abortion pills and will impose criminal penalties upon those who violate the law. 

Last Friday, Governor Mark Gordon signed SF0109, known as the “Prohibiting Chemical Abortions” bill, which states “it shall be unlawful to prescribe, dispense, distribute, sell or use any drug for the purpose of procuring or performing an abortion on any person.” 

The only exceptions are “to preserve the woman from an imminent peril that substantially endangers her life or health, according to appropriate medical judgment, or the pregnancy is the result of incest or sexual assault.” 

Abortionists who violate the law would be charged with a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than six months, a $9,000 fine, or both. 

According to this law, a woman upon whom a chemical abortion is performed or attempted shall not be criminally prosecuted.

Another law, HB0152, known as the “Life Is a Human Right Act,” became law last Sunday without Governor Gordon’s signature. This law modifies an existing abortion ban in the state to now include prescribing or selling abortion pills. 

This law states, “From conception, the unborn baby is a member of the human race,” and “all members of the human race are created equal.” The legislation states that “no person may be deprived of life or liberty without due process of law.” Abortions may take place only to save the life of the mother, if the child is conceived in rape or incest, or if the child has a “lethal fetal anomaly.” 

The law also refers to Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization when it states, “Wyoming's legitimate interests include respect for and preservation of prenatal life at all stages of development; the protection of maternal health and safety; the elimination of particularly gruesome or barbaric medical procedures; the preservation of the integrity of the medical profession; the mitigation of fetal pain; and the prevention of discrimination on the basis of race, sex, or disability.”

Abortionists who kill an unborn child would be guilty of a felony with punishment up to five years in prison, or a $20,000 fine, or both. Abortionists can have their medical licenses revoked. It also creates a right of action for mothers who suffered an abortion, or her parents if she is a minor or deceased, for $10,000 in statutory damages, as well as “actual and punitive damages.” In addition, the woman who underwent the abortion shall not be prosecuted. 

The pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute has released data revealing that chemical abortions accounted for the majority of all abortions for the first time in U.S. history in 2020. Every three years, Guttmacher surveys all known abortion providers in America. In 2020, abortion pills accounted for 54 percent of all U.S. abortions, an increase from 44 percent in 2019. Chemical abortions accounted for 39 percent of all abortions in 2017, an increase from 29 percent in 2014. 

The abortion drugs, sold under the brand name Mifeprex, is a two-drug treatment that is approved to terminate a pregnancy up to 10 weeks gestation or less when the baby has a beating heart and arms and legs. There has been a steady increase in the use of abortion pills since September 2000 when the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved mifepristone/RU-486, which cuts off blood and nutrients to the unborn baby, slowly starving it to death over one to two days. This drug is taken with misoprostol, which induces labor and causes severe cramping, contractions and bleeding to expel the baby from the womb. 

A 2019 study published in the journal Frontiers in Neuroscience provides additional evidence of the harmful biological and behavioral effects of drug-induced abortion. Using rat subjects, the findings “strongly suggest that pregnancy termination at mid-term (first-trimester human equivalent) induces significant negative biological and behavioral changes in the rat.” The study found that drug-induced abortion presented more negative effects than a spontaneous abortion through miscarriage. Finally, the study found there were positive benefits to carrying the baby to term. 

The Franciscan University three-year study, which was conducted by a team of behavioral neuroscientists who do not have ties to the abortion industry, clearly indicates that there are negative consequences such as depression, anxiety, loss of appetite and decreased self-care after terminating a viable pregnancy using mifepristone and misoprostol. 

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “We commend Wyoming legislators for protecting unborn children and mothers by banning this human genocide. Chemical abortions harm women physically and emotionally and end the life of defenseless children. More states need to follow Wyoming’s example.” 

Liberty Counsel provides broadcast quality TV interviews via Hi-Def Skype and LTN at no cost.

Did Silicon Valley Bank Prioritize Social Justice Over Risk Management?

Heritage take: While neglecting critical risk management, SVB's 2023 proxy statement records 40 mentions of the environmental, social, and governance—or ESG—movement currently in vogue at many corporations and financial institutions. In a “key change,” the board expanded the Governance and Corporate Responsibility Committee's oversight role in ESG. The committee’s oversight includes, according to the proxy statement, “environmental sustainability, climate change, the Company's external diversity, equity and inclusion ("DEI") initiatives, Board diversity, as well as our philanthropic strategy and advocacy activities.” Heritage Expert: Diana Furchtgott-Roth

McCarthy Slams Biden’s Veto of Bipartisan Bill Opposing ‘ESG’ Investments

Heritage take: According to the Labor Department, its rule “allows plan fiduciaries to consider climate change and other environmental, social and governance factors when they select retirement investments and exercise shareholder rights, such as proxy voting.” The ESG rule, the agency added, “follows Executive Order 14030, which was signed by President Biden on May 20, 2021.” Last month, Rep. Andy Barr, R-Ky., and Sen. Mike Braun, R-Ind., introduced resolutions of disapproval to block the Labor Department rule; those measures succeeded in both the House and the Senate, on Feb.28 and March 1, respectively. Heritage Expert: Samantha Renke

Loudon's Revenge: Vote on Federal Parents Bill of Rights Act Scheduled This Week

WASHINGTON, D.C. – This week, the U.S. House is scheduled to vote on HR 5, known as the “Parents Bill of Rights Act,”with many new protections for both parents and guardians. Liberty Counsel Action staff is in meetings today on Capitol Hill to educate people about the need for this bill. A vote is expected on Thursday with the final floor vote scheduled for Friday.

Americans watched in shock as parents in Loudon County, Virginia, were falsely labeled “domestic terrorists” because they cared about their children’s education. They watched in horror as parents faced the full weight of the FBI investigating them for daring to advocate for a better path. This bill will help ensure the freedom of speech and rights of parents to advocate for their children at their local school board meetings without fear of punishment from our federal government. It will also discourage any ongoing FBI investigations against these parents.

HR 5 will encourage and involve parents in their children’s future and best interests. The bill “requires schools to notify parents and guardians of their rights regarding the education of their children.” This bill’s summary includes the following rights for parents and guardians:

• Review the curriculum of their child's school.
• Know if the state alters its challenging academic standards.
• Meet with each teacher of their child at least twice each school year.
• Review the budget, including all revenues and expenditures, of their child's school.
• Review a list of the books and other reading materials in the library of their child's school.
• Address the school board of the local educational agencies (LEA).
• Receive information about violent activity in their child's school.
• Receive information about any plans to eliminate gifted and talented programs in the child's school.

An amendment friendly to the bill is expected for schools to stop helping children hide from their parents when a child presents as one gender at home and the opposite gender at school. This important amendment was already introduced in the U.S. House Education and Workforce Committee and is expected again on the House floor this week.

“Parents and guardians know their children best. ‘Experts’ don’t even know a child’s first name, yet they try to push a ‘one size fits all’ on every child in America. However, the reality is that every child has unique needs. That is why it is critical to encourage parental involvement and local leadership for the best possible future for every child,” said Jonathan Alexandre, senior counsel for governmental affairs for Liberty Counsel Action.

One of the best indications of a child’s future success is parental involvement, according to the Public School Review, yet radicals have a history of repeatedly trying to push parents out of some of the most critical, life-changing decisions for children in America. 

People can make their voices heard on this bill by contacting the U.S. House switchboard at 202-224-3121 and asking for their representative by name. Look up your U.S. representative’s name HERE.

Biden is vilifying efforts to protect children

Biden is vilifying efforts to protect children

Dumping On The Confessional

By Deacon Mike Manno

(The Wanderer) – Several years ago, I served as chaplain at a drug and alcohol rehabilitation center. The interesting thing about the center – besides that it was located in the county jail — was that all involved had some problems with the law outside of their addictions. I would usually spend parts of three days a week there, one of them just meeting those newly arrived.

Most of our “clients” were willing to give me the benefit of the doubt and actually listened to what I said. Naturally many were churchless and needed help finding a denomination that suited them and I tried to help them find one. Others already had a background in some congregation and I tried to help them get to its services on Sundays. And, of course, there were a number who were Catholic and I would arrange for them to be picked up for Sunday Mass.

However, there were a few who were baptized Catholics who had fallen away from the faith. Often, they would come to me and ask how they could return to the Church. Go to Confession, I would tell them, but don’t wait in the Confession line on Sunday morning, let me make an appointment with a priest and do it privately, without being rushed, in his office.

My routine was simple: I would make the appointment and go to the jail, pick up the individual, take him or her to the priest’s office and transport them back to the jail afterwards. It may sound routine, but with each trip I noticed a miracle was taking place right before my eyes. The person I took back to the jail was not the same person that I took to the priest: They had been changed, their life had a new meaning, those who had never been confirmed enrolled in our RCIA program to become confirmed, and most, when released from the program continued their spiritual journey within the Catholic Church.

I saw firsthand how that sacrament could change people’s lives and why Jesus gave His apostles the power to forgive sins.

That is why I was saddened this week to read that two states — and possibly others — had bills filed in their legislatures to eliminate the civil protection priests have which protects the confidentiality of the communication that takes place in the confessional. In Canon Law we call that the Seal of the Confessional, in civil law it is called the priest-penitent privilege.

The Democrats in Delaware and Vermont who are supporting this claim it is in reaction to the child abuse crisis. Teachers, they claim, doctors, the clergy, and many others are mandatory reporters, that is, they are required to notify the authorities if they see or suspect a child is being abused. That, of course, is good. All of those listed often are able to make observations that others cannot.

But the bills in Delaware and Vermont go further: They require a priest who hears a sacramental Confession to report what they hear concerning child abuse, thus rendering the seal of the confessional null and void. It is, according to the sponsors, necessary to remove that protection from the clergy to ensure that those so involved can pay the price in court.
Delaware’s legislature gave this synopsis of its bill:

“This Act abrogates the privilege between priest and penitent in a sacramental confession relating to child abuse and neglect. It requires priests to report child abuse and neglect or to give or accept evidence in a judicial proceeding relating to child abuse or neglect.”

Now no one in either legislative body has suggested eliminating the attorney-client privilege. That would be bound to reap a harvest of criminals who said the wrong thing to their attorney. As it stands now, a client could walk into my office, give me a gun and tell me where the body is buried and that information remains with the client and me alone and I could be disbarred if I breach that confidence.

But a penitent who seeks the consolation of the Church to cleanse his soul for eternity would not be accorded the same privilege as a hardened criminal who is only trying to save himself from jail. Think maybe this shows a lack of concern for the spiritual well-being of those they govern? Or, perhaps, an animus against the Catholic Church?

I do know that one of the concerns that those whom I took from the jail to Confession was “would the priest tell anyone?” Of course, the answer is a firm no; the priest would go to jail first. And if he did violate that confidentiality, he would suffer automatic excommunication which could only be reversed by the Pope himself.

But jail is the threat that the Dems in those two states are proposing, for if a priest fails a court order to reveal what was told to him in the confessional he could be held in contempt and jailed. Nice knowing ya, Father, enjoy your bread and water.

The priest-penitent privilege has a long history in the United States. The first case I found was in New York in 1813, People v. Philips, in which a priest, Fr. Anthony Kohlmann, was asked to divulge the contents of a Confession in a case involving a jewelry theft. The priest asked to be excused from testifying, citing the confidentiality of the confessional. Attorneys made the argument that requiring the priest to do so would not only violate common law precedents but the state constitution as well.

The court, holding that “religion is an affair between God and man, not between man and man” ruled that requiring the priest to testify would also violate the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Numerous cases have followed suit and states have added this privilege to its statutory codes and expanded it to include all clergy acting with a religious purpose.

One of the last cases on the issue, which I covered back in 2015 on my radio program, came from Louisiana where a priest from the Diocese of Baton Rouge was subpoenaed, and later sued for refusal to reveal the topic of a Confession of a young girl who allegedly told the priest about abuse from a parishioner. Her parents were suing the estate of the parishioner for the abuse and the priest for failure to report it.

Naturally the priest refused and the case went up and down the judicial chain making a stop at the Supreme Court which sent the case back down for further hearings. The trick in this case was that the girl, now an adult, wanted to waive the privilege so the priest could testify.

Now in civil law, if the guy who gave me the gun and directed me to the burial place waived attorney-client privilege I would have to testify, since that privilege — as most others are — was established to protect the client, not the attorney. Thus, you would think that the girl could waive it and force the priest to testify.

Not so. Under Canon Law the seal cannot be waived by the penitent. In fact, the priest is not even allowed to confirm the identity of the individual; nor can he ask the penitent about it outside of the confessional afterwards. Ultimately in Louisiana the diocese and the priest were dismissed from the case.

Anyway, leave it to politicians who do not appreciate or understand it to try to gum up the works. May God enlighten them: If not, I’m sure a court will.

(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every weekend on Faith On Trial or podcast at https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/)

This week on FOT: Both gays and straight are fighting transgenderism of children

Listen now: Podcast #354 posted at: https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/

First-Year Med Students Told to Call Women ‘People With Cervices’; Professor Slams ‘Anti-Biological’

A professor at Indiana University School of Medicine condemned a lesson inculcating gender ideology among first-year medical students as “anti-scientific” and “anti-biological,” warning that it would have “very detrimental effects to the health care profession” and stating that he had not heard of any internal discussions about the lesson before professors implemented it. “I did not hear about it until it came out in the news,” the professor, who spoke with The Daily Signal on condition of anonymity, said in a phone interview Wednesday. He said the transgender lesson did not surprise him, however, because “the entire biomedical profession has been conquered by this aggressive ideology that inculcates a certain worldview.” Heritage Expert: Tyler O’Neil

The Pope, Hollywood and Transgenderism

By Catholic League president Bill Donohue

If there were any doubt that the religious vision of sexuality, as represented by the pope, and the secular vision, as represented by Hollywood, were dissimilar, they were wiped away over the weekend.

On March 10, an Argentine daily newspaper, La Nación, published an interview that Pope Francis gave on the subject of transgenderism. "Gender ideology, today, is one of the most dangerous ideological colonizations. Why is it dangerous? Because it blurs the difference and the value of men and women." 

The pope also said that "some people are a bit naïve and believe that it [gender ideoogy] is the way to progress." Such persons, he said, do not recognize "an anthropology of gender, which is extremely dangerous because it eliminates differences [between men and women]." 

Two days later, at the Academy Awards, Daniel Scheinert, the co-director of the Oscar-winning movie, Everything Everywhere All at Once, took the occasion to defend drag queens and drag children. He said they were "a threat to nobody!" The crowd loved it. 

The pope understands that human nature is fixed: there are only two sexes. Hollywood thinks human nature is fluid: there are many sexes, or what they inaccurately call "genders." 

Is the Hollywood crowd naïve, as the pope says, or are they something more sinister? To conclude they are naïve is to say they can be educated as to their follies. But if they are not naïve, and they know exactly what they are doing, then they are willfully promoting what the pope calls "one of the most dangerous ideological colonizations." 

In a burst of honesty, drag queen Kitty Demur warned parents two years ago about taking their kids to drag events. 

"I have no idea why you want drag queens to read books to your children... What in the hell has a drag queen ever done to make you have so much respect for them and admire them so much? Other than put on makeup and jump on the floor and writhe around and do sexual things on stage? I have absolutely no idea why you would want that to influence your child. Would you want a stripper or a porn star to influence your child?" 

The drag queen asks all the right questions. Too bad Hollywood isn't listening.

Déjà Vu All Over Again

By Deacon Mike Manno

(The Wanderer) – It was only a few weeks ago in this column that I wrote about my radio interview with Kyle Seraphin, the FBI whistleblower who released the bureau’s field report which impugned “radical traditional Catholics” as some sort of hate cult.

He noted that the report, apparently written by a left-wing activist, was based, in part, upon accusations by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which he described as a non-reliable source for an FBI investigation. The SPLC, as discussed in the interview, was once a well-respected civil rights organization that has warped into a left-wing institution that characterizes many on the right as facilitating hate.

Thus, I was surprised when, in the aftermath of a riot over the location — and apparent existence — of a new police training facility outside Atlanta, Ga., one of those arrested and charged with domestic terrorism was an SPLC staff attorney by the name of Thomas Jurgens. He was one of twenty-three so charged after “demonstrators” threw rocks at police and started fires at the site of the proposed training facility.

In response to Jurgens’ arrest, the SPLC issued a statement confirming his employment and told the news media that Jurgens was at the riot as a “legal observer” for the National Lawyers Guild (NLG). The guild issued its own statement claiming Jurgens was present “supporting movement organizers and activists.” It added that Jurgens and other NLG legal observers are “trained witnesses of police conduct.”

Okay, let me understand this: The NLG, which could easily be classified as a left-leaning entity, has trained and is using an SPLC attorney to attend violent events carried out by “movement” supporters to watch for a potential overreaction by police, apparently for use in subsequent legal proceedings.

That would imply, seemingly, a recognition that the “demonstration” was not only planned ahead of time, but that the mob of protesters might be inclined to do something that would require a police response. That leads me to question the integrity of the individual attorney, and the two organizations to which he belongs; the whole thing sounds like a set-up to me: Provoke the police by pelting them with rocks and set the surrounding area on fire. Of course, it was probably only a peaceful fire as we’ve seen before.

Now this takes me back to the SPLC whose investigations the Biden administration’s Department of Justice relies upon to get the skinny on those nefarious folks who support such hate organizations as the Latin Mass.

The SPLC, as mentioned before, was once a legitimate civil rights organization that gave legal representation to those who had, for whatever reason, little or no access to legal assistance. In that, it had done well. But now it stands as an entity that is looking for hate under every rock in sight. Now in doing so it has pointed its finger at many groups that could legitimately be called “hate groups.” Many would be readily recognizable, but many more are small groups that have only limited ability to cause much mischief.

On the other hand, the SPLC seems to find that any person or groups who oppose same-sex marriage, the use of schools to condition children in the great delusion of transgenderism, oppose abortion, and embrace traditional values such as family, are, in fact, hate groups.

Let me give you a rundown of some of the prominent haters, according to the SPLC:

First and foremost is the Family Research Council and its president, Tony Perkins, who is listed personally in a hate profile. Why? According to the SPLC’s web page: “FRC helped launch the religious right as an overt political movement in the 1980s and remains one of the largest anti-LGBTQ organizations in the U.S.” Hmmm, and we thought they were the good guys.

Also included is the Alliance Defending Freedom which we know as a very significant legal player defending religious liberty (which apparently now is bad) not only against government interference, but in the workplace, the military, and even in the schools. They do a lot more, but what seems to be held against them is the claim that “men who self-identify as women are still biological men.”

And we find listed the Pacific Justice Institute and its president Brad Dacus. Another religious liberty supporter; I guess they didn’t get the message that this was all wrong now. PJI was cited for supporting California’s Proposition 8 which would have banned same-sex marriage and for such other sins as opposing reparative therapy which is being used to “affirm” your child’s belief that he might really be a she.

Liberty Counsel is another pro-bono legal group coming to the assistance of Christians who are being denied their religious freedoms by intrusive action by government, schools, workplaces, and the military. Its sin is that it is classified as “anti-gay,” apparently because it doesn’t support transgender classrooms, among other evils.

Also caught up in this dragnet is the Thomas More Law Center in Ann Arbor, Mich. Many of these and similar legal organizations have appeared on my radio program, Faith on Trial, to discuss cases that they are taking, and winning at all levels of the judicial system. They all have one thing in common: They support traditional Christian and family values.

Other organizations receiving SPLC condemnation include: the Illinois Family Institute and the Fatima Crusader and Rosary Crusade, the latter two for radical traditional Catholicism. Apparently publishing opinions which the SPLC finds hateful will put you on the hate list as well, such as The Catholic Family News and The Remnant, all radical traditional Catholics.

Also on the list are many individuals, including retired Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, apparently for his work with the Family Research Council; former Trump aide Stephen Miller who now is chief counsel for America First Legal, a conservative legal defense group defending conservative political principles; and Brian Fisher of the American Family Association, which, according to the illuminaries at SPLC, is anti-gay.

Okay, so now we know who these people are. They obviously disagree with many Christian, Catholic, and traditional values held by the American people. And, needless to say, they have a right to make their views known. And in their efforts, we must concede that they have noted several groups who are well-known for hate, although many they finger are only remnants of what they used to be in the times of KKK and Jim Crow.

But this all begs the question: Why is the Justice Department — under a man who was once promoted as a nominee for the Supreme Court, Merrick Garland — relying on these people for advice on whom to investigate? I’m sorry, but in my mind both Garland and FBI chief Christopher Wray need to be given the heave-ho. The last thing we need in this country is to be governed by the instincts of a bunch of wing nuts from the political left who have no compunction in making accusations against people with whom they disagree.

If you think I’m wrong, just ask any parent who is now afraid of speaking up at a school board meeting.

(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every weekend on Faith On Trial or podcast at https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/)

Abortion drugs and pills, this week on Faith On Trial

This episode (#353) will be posted as a podcast Saturday noon at: https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/

Seal Of Confession Under Fire

By Catholic League president Bill Donohue 

The Catholic League is used to doing battle with lawmakers who want to violate the seal of confession. Their intentions vary, but in each case the proximate cause of such legislation is the sexual abuse of minors. 

In the last few years we succeeded in beating back attempts to vitiate the priest-penitent privilege in Utah and North Dakota. Now Vermont is considering such a law. 

The sponsor of the Vermont legislation is State Sen. Dick Sears Jr. Unlike many other lawmakers, he comes to this matter with good credentials: he has a record of combating child abuse. Unfortunately, his dedication to this cause has allowed him to think that progress could be made if we lifted the priest-penitent privilege. 

In a letter I sent today, I commended Sears for his work. I also mentioned that I am a Catholic leader and author, and that my interest in this subject led me to write a book about it, The Truth about Clergy Sexual Abuse: Clarifying the Facts and the Causes. 

“I am writing to you in the hope that you might reconsider one aspect of your bill on this issue,” I said, “namely the part that touches on the priest-penitent relationship. If the seal of the confession is broken, it would vitiate its raison d’être. It is also unenforceable: no priest I know would ever violate his obligation to maintain confidentiality.” 

Whenever we have dealt with this matter, I always ask those sponsoring a bill like the one proposed by Sen. Sears the same question. “Where is the evidence that the priest-penitent privilege plays a role in the unfolding of the clergy sexual abuse scandal?” I am aware of none. 

It must be said that the scandal that rocked the Catholic Church took place mostly between 1965 and 1985. Moreover, the reforms enacted over the past two decades have been a stunning success: the average number of credible accusations made against approximately 50,000 members of the clergy is in the single digits. The fact is that most of the molesters are either dead or have been kicked out of the priesthood. 

Journalists will go to prison before giving up their sources. Psychologists would never divulge what they learn from their patients. Lawyers learn of things from their clients that must remain secret. Ditto for priests in the confessional. 

There are some important steps that can be taken to curtail the abuse of children. They should be implemented. But not among them is busting the seal of the confessional. 

We copied the other members of the Vermont Senate Judiciary Committee, as well as Burlington Bishop Christopher Coyne. We are not asking that the bill be withdrawn: our only interest is having all parties to it to reconsider the decision to bust the seal of confession. It won’t protect one minor, but it will trample on the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

Indoctrinate Or Cancel: The Left’s America

By Deacon Mike Manno

(The Wanderer) – Over the past few years not a few people have asked themselves, “Is this the America in which I grew up?” Unfortunately, the answer for most of us is a definite “no.”

Of course, we can cite numerous reasons why one might feel that way. As Catholics, and as people of faith, we are tired of watching our cherished beliefs not only ridiculed and defamed, but so many of our institutions — including government — reaching out to limit and cancel the voices of our churches collectively, and our own voices individually.

Social media refer to this as cancel culture. But it is more than that: Coupled with it is a plan to eliminate all of those Americans who won’t go along with the current Progressives’ dog and pony show they are using not only to drag from us the “unalienable rights” bestowed by our Creator, but to lead us into more than just “temptation.”

So where do we begin this analysis? I’m neither an academic sociologist nor a professional historian so I cannot pick a point in time when this all began. But I do watch these things. I’m exposed to a lot writing a column each week and hosting a weekly program on Catholic radio where we find those who are experts in these fields, or those who stand up to fight for those values that we see are being tread underfoot by those claiming a moral superiority. Thus, I’ve been given a practical education of such things.

I think it is easy for me to pick the point when it all became clear to me. One morning on radio we had an expert from the Heritage Foundation, Sarah Parshall Perry, who was scheduled to discuss an unrelated legal matter. She took us by surprise, however, with breaking news about a series of rules the (devout Catholic) Biden administration was proposing.
At the time the vaccine mandate was imposed on all federal employees, and there were many who opposed taking the vaccine due to its tie to abortions. Those who did so were predominately conservative Christians and Catholics, and they were requesting religious exemptions to the mandate.

The new rules were designed to frustrate those seeking an exemption in that they required everyone applying would need to provide certain information to the government about their physical description, any other names they had used in the past, such as maiden and formerly married names, as well as how often and in which religious services they partook, among other obviously intrusive information.

Ultimately the vaccine mandate was overruled and federal employment was allowed, at least for a short time, to get back to normal — except for the military, but we’ll have to do that some other time.

Then, as reported last week, one of Sarah’s colleagues at Heritage, Hans von Spakovsky, brought to our attention the new rules the Biden administration was proposing to govern federal hiring, which he termed the “conservatives need not apply” rule because the language was so broad and vague that demonstrating against abortion, or objecting to trans activists teaching your children could be enough to disqualify an applicant from federal employment.

Isn’t it interesting how far this administration will go to make sure that anyone who disagrees with it in any fashion should be shunned?

But that’s not all. Just last week, without fanfare or notice, His Holiness Joseph the Elder issued a new executive order to promote Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) in each and every federal office. So, if you’ve somehow passed through all the cultural roadblocks Mr. Biden has already thrown in your way, here’s another: You will be inundated with, what is truly fascism, DEI, CRT, and employee measurement — not by meritocracy — but by group equitable outcomes as evaluated by cooperative federal bureaucrats.
Think of this as the adult version of your children being indoctrinated by the gender police, woke administrators, and the teachers’ union in their public schools. As one reporter suggested, “the order essentially creates an ‘army of equity bureaucrats’ in the federal government to enforce the principles of critical race theory and gender identity in society.”

The order reads: “Achieving racial equity and support for underserved communities is not a one-time project. It must be a multi-generational commitment, and it must remain the responsibility of agencies across the Federal Government.” It requires each cabinet secretary to create “agency equity teams” made up of political appointees and career officials, who are covered by civil service protection, making them hard for a future administration to remove.

Each of these equity teams is to develop equity training and equity leadership. They are to ensure that Mr. Biden’s goals for creating a diverse workforce that “doles out taxpayer dollars based on race and other factors — excellence be damned,” as another critic put it.

Russell Vought, former director of the Office of Management and Budget, warned: “‘Equity’ policies are routinely used to justify making decisions based on race, gender, and other identity characteristics. This administration has turned government-funded racism into an art. This is dangerous and exactly the type of woke and weaponized government we are trying to defund.”

Christopher Rufo, of the Manhattan Institute, says the order “manipulates language and statistics in order to nationalize the DEI movement, suppress dissent from the new racial orthodoxy, and subvert the Constitution’s promise of equal treatment under the law.” He also argues that the order “mirrors the Soviet Union’s push for political officers charged with maintaining ideological conformity in every sphere of society.”

According to Rufo, the order’s priorities are a form of “anti-racist discrimination” which will require people to be categorized by race or sexual orientation which will allow discrimination against those in groups that have an unacceptable mix of people so that it is considered not diverse enough.

“This move by President Biden to permeate society with government-enforced, radical ideologies delivers a type of socialist dream rather than any semblance of creating equality,” said CatholicVote Communications Director Joshua Mercer. “Rather than encouraging Americans to treat each other with respect and fairness, this administration is constantly sending the message that you don’t matter if you don’t conform.”

Now consider the road this administration has already traveled: investigations of parents who speak up at school board meetings, investigations and arrests of pro-life activists in retaliation for the overruling of Roe v. Wade, crackdowns on pro-life adoption agencies, numerous rules and regulations requiring Christians to support and perform immoral acts, FBI investigations of the Latin Mass attendees, pressure on news and social media outlets to censor certain stories unfavorable to the administration, and a host of other actions that demonstrate from which side of the “devout” line Mr. Biden originates.

Of course, why worry? After all we’re just a basket of deplorables, apparently not entitled to anything more than a bare existence, that is, only if the woke intelligentsia permits. God help us.

(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every weekend on Faith On Trial or podcast at https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/)

SPLC Lawyer Arrested in Atlanta Molotov Cocktail Riot, Faces Terrorism Charges

A staff attorney at the Southern Poverty Law Center, a left-leaning civil rights group notorious for branding mainstream conservative and Christians nonprofits “hate groups” and putting them on a map with Ku Klux Klan chapters, was arrested Sunday on terrorism charges for allegedly taking part in a violent riot where agitators threw rocks, Molotov cocktails, and fireworks at police. According to DeKalb County Jail records, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation arrested Thomas Webb Jurgens, a 6-foot male with brown hair and brown eyes, on Sunday, March 5. He faces one charge of “domestic terrorism.” Heritage Expert: Tyler O’Neil

Drug Legalization Fails Miserably

By Catholic League president Bill Donohue 

We have been told repeatedly that the “war on drugs” has been an utter failure. That’s because nothing can stop people from using illicit drugs. Worse, our failure to legalize them makes a black market inevitable. Therefore, it makes more sense to regulate drugs and get rid of the black market. 

If by failure it means that the law has not prevented people from taking drugs, then this is true. Much the same could be said about wife beating. Should we legalize it? 

Many parts of the country have legalized certain drugs, marijuana in particular, yet in virtually every case the black market has increased, not decreased.  

In the mid-1990s, William F. Buckley Jr. ran a lengthy piece in National Review titled, “The War on Drugs Is Lost.” He and several others argued it was time to legalize all drugs, including cocaine and heroin. That idea was dumb then and it is even dumber now. 

In 2019, lawmakers in Colorado made the possession of a small amount of heroin and cocaine a misdemeanor, not a felony. The Democrat-controlled legislature included fentanyl, the most dangerous drug of them all. Colorado prosecutors pleaded with lawmakers to exempt fentanyl—four grams is the equivalent of 13,000 deadly doses—but they refused. What happened? Opioid overdose deaths increased by 54 percent in 2020. 

In 2018, Oregon’s King County, which encompasses Seattle, and neighboring Snohomish County, stopped charging people for small amounts of hard drugs. Meth overdoses skyrocketed, going from 18 deaths in 2008 to 197 in 2019. Heroin overdose deaths jumped from 45 to 147 and fentanyl-related deaths climbed from 9 to 196, during the same period. Seattle-radio show host Jason Rantz says decriminalization made “the problems worse.” In fact, he brands it “an unmitigated disaster.” 

The notion that drug legalization would put an end to the black market is completely unfounded. A recent editorial in the Wall Street Journal on how drug legalization has failed in California explains what has happened, yet the editorial board seems not to fully understand why. The subtitle of the article says, “The black market in pot proliferates despite legalization.” Despite? It would be more accurate to say because of legalization. 

Whenever and wherever drugs are legalized, there is a spike in illicit drugs. Why? For one, legalization sends a moral message to the public, and that is, despite slogans to the contrary, people will interpret the decision as a green light. That means the market will balloon. 

With drug legalization comes state taxes and regulations, both of which are a boon to drug lords; they are wholly unaffected. Moreover, government drug stores will never allow the public to buy an unlimited amount of drugs, nor will they allow for the purchase of every conceivable drug. Thus have they created another loophole for the drug lords to exploit. Nothing can stop this from happening. 

Not too long ago, New York Governor Kathy Hochul and New York City Mayor Eric Adams were singing the praises of marijuana legalization. No more. 

In 2019, New York lawmakers not only voted to legalize marijuana, they voted to stop those from selling illegal weed from being punished; they were given criminal court summons and a small fine. To show how merciful they were, the legislature gave those previously busted for drugs first dibs in getting a license to sell marijuana. Guess what happened? 

“Truth to tell,” wrote Bob McManus in the New York Post, “New York’s plan to legalize weed, turn its distribution over to ex-cons and then scoop up sales taxes while making no serious effort to combat illegal competition always seemed weird.” As he noted, “Used syringes litter city streets; there are pop-up shooting galleries in public spaces—and fentanyl overdoes are pacing an increasingly deadly opioid epidemic.” 

Mayor Adams is despondent. “Children are getting high on their way to school. Children are taking these gummy bears. I must be old-fashioned. People don’t realize what’s happening in our country and in our city.” 

He’s right. The illegal pot shops are everywhere. Indeed, one is directly across from City Hall. 

Hochul is totally confused. She pushed hard to legalize smoking marijuana but now wants a big tax hike on smoking cigarettes. To top things off, she wants to ban smoking menthol cigarettes and other flavored tobacco, but she is not seeking a ban on flavored vaping products or on fruity-scented marijuana! 

There are certain vices that we will never stop. The best we can do is curtail them. But removing from the criminal justice system those vices that have traditionally been prosecuted is the worst possible way to deal with them.    

FBI ALLEGEDLY SPIED ON PRO-LIFE MEETING

Texas Republicans Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. Chip Roy sent a letter Wednesday to Attorney General Merrick Garland demanding answers about Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising's (PAAU) allegation that an undercover FBI agent secretly recorded one of their meetings. "Allegations that the FBI is spying on pro-life gatherings in tandem with the rise in high-profile FBI investigations into pro-life Americans raise well-founded concerns for millions of Americans," the letter states.  READ

Garland’s Stunning Ignorance Of Jane’s Revenge

By Catholic League president Bill Donohue 

It was not a good day for U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland. He got his clocked cleaned by several members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. His failure to stem the tide of violence against pro-life Americans, many of whom are Catholic, is not debatable. 

As Sen. Mike Lee pointed out yesterday, there have been 81 violent attacks on pro-life crisis pregnancy centers, and 130 attacks on Catholic churches, but only two persons have been charged. Yet the Department of Justice (DOJ) has brought charges against 34 non-violent pro-life protesters. This is purely a function of politics. There is no other rational explanation for such a glowing disparity. 

No domestic terrorist group has been more vocal and active in violently attacking pro-life individuals and institutions than Jane’s Revenge. They have claimed responsibility for at least 18 violent attacks on pro-life centers since the leak of the Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade. 

It is bad enough that Garland’s DOJ has been missing in action in prosecuting Jane’s Revenge, it is mind-blowing to learn that Garland claims not to have known who they are until yesterday! 

Here is what Sen. Marsha Blackburn said to him yesterday. “You told me earlier that you didn’t know who Jane’s Revenge is. They are all over Twitter.” Garland did not contest what she attributed to him. 

Assuming he is not lying, why is it that no one on his staff ever bothered to appraise him of Jane’s Revenge? It’s not as though he hasn’t been contacted about their violence. 

On June 10, 2022, Sen. Marco Rubio wrote to Garland about “radical pro-abortion groups, like Jane’s Revenge, that have relentlessly targeted pro-life centers, groups, and churches with arson, vandalism, and violence due to their pro-life views.” 

On June 15, Rubio again wrote to Garland about Jane’s Revenge, saying they have now “doubled-down on its commitment to violence, threats and intimidation, writing that the ‘leash is off’ and it is now ‘open season’ on any pro-life group that refuses to close its doors.” 

On June 16, 2022, Sen. Tom Cotton said Garland should resign over the DOJ’s failure to deal with Jane’s Revenge violence. “Houses of worship and pro-life pregnancy centers are under attack.” 

On June 17, 2022, I wrote to Garland. “We have witnessed a rash of vandalism against Catholic churches, firebombings of crisis pregnancy centers (many of which are run by Catholics), Masses being interrupted, illegal protests outside the homes of Catholic Supreme Court Justices, and at attempted murder of one of the Catholic Justices. While there are several groups involved in these attacks, none is more dangerous than Jane’s Revenge. 

“Jane’s Revenge is a domestic terrorist group, par excellence. Recently formed, it brags about blowing up crisis pregnancy centers. Worse, it is calling for a ‘Night of Rage’ on the day the Supreme Court is expected to overturn Roe v. Wade.” 

I ended by asking him to take “aggressive action” against Jane’s Revenge. 

Even though Rubio, Cotton and I independently alerted Garland to Jane’s Revenge, he appears positively clueless as to who they are. His ignorance is stunning.

Sen. Cotton is right—Garland should resign. If he doesn’t, he should be impeached.