Researcher Who Studied Same-Sex Parenting Cleared of Misconduct Charges

A European poster promoting same-sex marriage and parenting.

The University of Texas has dismissed a scientific-misconduct charge that was brought against a researcher whose study showed that children raised by same-sex parents suffered negative results. 

Mark Regnerus had published an extensive study in Social Science Research, refuting previous claims that children of same-sex parents had no special problems. His study prompted angry reactions from homosexual activists, and one critic charged that Regnerus had engaged in scientific misconduct by pursuing his research.

After a preliminary inquiry, a panel of faculty members at the University of Texas concluded that there was “insufficient evidence to warrant an investigation” of Regnerus. The panel observed that while others might disagree with the conclusions of the Regnerus study, such disagreements are a normal part of academic debate, not evidence of scholarly misconduct.

Researcher Who Studied Same-Sex Parenting Cleared of Misconduct Charges

A European poster promoting same-sex marriage and parenting.

The University of Texas has dismissed a scientific-misconduct charge that was brought against a researcher whose study showed that children raised by same-sex parents suffered negative results. 

Mark Regnerus had published an extensive study in Social Science Research, refuting previous claims that children of same-sex parents had no special problems. His study prompted angry reactions from homosexual activists, and one critic charged that Regnerus had engaged in scientific misconduct by pursuing his research.

After a preliminary inquiry, a panel of faculty members at the University of Texas concluded that there was “insufficient evidence to warrant an investigation” of Regnerus. The panel observed that while others might disagree with the conclusions of the Regnerus study, such disagreements are a normal part of academic debate, not evidence of scholarly misconduct.

The Planned Parenthood Cult: 'Abortion, Not Women's Health, Is Their Main Event'

Susan Thayer, former Planned Parenthood clinic director, speaks to the Iowa Right to Life organization.

Susan Thayer, the director of a Planned Parenthood Clinic in Iowa for 17 years, spoke with Carrie Gress of Catholic Weekly Report August 23 on her experience with the giant abortion provider. The bottom line: Profits take precedence over women's health. Some highlights of Thayer's talk with Gress:

Q: Planned Parenthood markets itself as a health resource for women that provides, among other things, mammograms and other forms of cancer testing. Their website boasts of providing 750,000 breast exams annually, while abortion only makes up three percent of their work. The impression is that abortion is really just one of many things they do there. Is that impression accurate? 
Thayer: There has never been a mammogram done by any clinic in any affiliate. The only cancer screening done there are pap tests and there are fewer and fewer of those happening with the decline in clinician availability.  
They do offer a range of services – sexually transmitted infection testing/treatment, pregnancy testing, birth control, etc - but abortion is their "main event". It's what they do.

Q: How central is abortion to Planned Parenthood's mission and bottom line? 
Thayer: When I started at Planned Parenthood in 1991, my small family planning clinic had little to do with abortion, other than an occasional referral. By the time I left in 2008, every clinic in the agency was mandated to provide webcam and/or surgical abortions. 
Every center had a goal for every service provided there, including abortion. As a manager, if your clinic did not meet goal, you better have a reason why. Webcam abortions are billed the same as early surgical abortions, so they are huge money-makers for the abortion giant.
Every affiliate places huge emphasis on abortion. The staff is groomed, brainwashed actually, to fully believe that working in the abortion industry is an honorable task. They have "pastors" who write letters to the staff to make them feel good about their own part in abortion. 
When you are in it, it is very subtle. But like a cult, once you are out, it is much easier to see the deception.

Q: There was a lot of uproar recently with the Susan G. Komen Foundation's effort to stop giving grant money to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screening. How does Planned Parenthood justify receiving these grants when it doesn't do mammograms? What happens to the money? 
Thayer: The money goes into the big black hole that is Planned Parenthood.Cecile Richards actually said that if Planned Parenthood lost the Komen grants, women would not be diagnosed. This is a complete and total lie. The only breast care done at Planned Parenthood is a manual exam done only during a comprehensive visit. Most patients have only a limited exam, or no exam at all and just get birth control.  Planned Parenthood once again played the victim and turned the Komen situation into a very successful fundraiser.

 Q: Why do you think Planned Parenthood gets away with representing itself so falsely?
Thayer: They are big and they have friends in high places. When I started there, the mission statement was posted in every clinic, but over time, their emphasis came off the mission and focused only on the bottom line. Margaret Sanger founded the organization on eugenics, so even at its roots it is evil. 
There is a video called "Hooking Kids on Sex" which really gives a candid view of Planned Parenthood and the type of events they host. They are experts at selling their agenda. 
Their constant message has been that only three percent of their services involve abortion," but the reality is they do not care about women, only their own growth. To Planned Parenthood, abortion truly is only a number, a weekly goal.

The Planned Parenthood Cult: 'Abortion, Not Women's Health, Is Their Main Event'

Susan Thayer, former Planned Parenthood clinic director, speaks to the Iowa Right to Life organization.

Susan Thayer, the director of a Planned Parenthood Clinic in Iowa for 17 years, spoke with Carrie Gress of Catholic Weekly Report August 23 on her experience with the giant abortion provider. The bottom line: Profits take precedence over women's health. Some highlights of Thayer's talk with Gress:

Q: Planned Parenthood markets itself as a health resource for women that provides, among other things, mammograms and other forms of cancer testing. Their website boasts of providing 750,000 breast exams annually, while abortion only makes up three percent of their work. The impression is that abortion is really just one of many things they do there. Is that impression accurate? 
Thayer: There has never been a mammogram done by any clinic in any affiliate. The only cancer screening done there are pap tests and there are fewer and fewer of those happening with the decline in clinician availability.  
They do offer a range of services – sexually transmitted infection testing/treatment, pregnancy testing, birth control, etc - but abortion is their "main event". It's what they do.

Q: How central is abortion to Planned Parenthood's mission and bottom line? 
Thayer: When I started at Planned Parenthood in 1991, my small family planning clinic had little to do with abortion, other than an occasional referral. By the time I left in 2008, every clinic in the agency was mandated to provide webcam and/or surgical abortions. 
Every center had a goal for every service provided there, including abortion. As a manager, if your clinic did not meet goal, you better have a reason why. Webcam abortions are billed the same as early surgical abortions, so they are huge money-makers for the abortion giant.
Every affiliate places huge emphasis on abortion. The staff is groomed, brainwashed actually, to fully believe that working in the abortion industry is an honorable task. They have "pastors" who write letters to the staff to make them feel good about their own part in abortion. 
When you are in it, it is very subtle. But like a cult, once you are out, it is much easier to see the deception.

Q: There was a lot of uproar recently with the Susan G. Komen Foundation's effort to stop giving grant money to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screening. How does Planned Parenthood justify receiving these grants when it doesn't do mammograms? What happens to the money? 
Thayer: The money goes into the big black hole that is Planned Parenthood.Cecile Richards actually said that if Planned Parenthood lost the Komen grants, women would not be diagnosed. This is a complete and total lie. The only breast care done at Planned Parenthood is a manual exam done only during a comprehensive visit. Most patients have only a limited exam, or no exam at all and just get birth control.  Planned Parenthood once again played the victim and turned the Komen situation into a very successful fundraiser.

 Q: Why do you think Planned Parenthood gets away with representing itself so falsely?
Thayer: They are big and they have friends in high places. When I started there, the mission statement was posted in every clinic, but over time, their emphasis came off the mission and focused only on the bottom line. Margaret Sanger founded the organization on eugenics, so even at its roots it is evil. 
There is a video called "Hooking Kids on Sex" which really gives a candid view of Planned Parenthood and the type of events they host. They are experts at selling their agenda. 
Their constant message has been that only three percent of their services involve abortion," but the reality is they do not care about women, only their own growth. To Planned Parenthood, abortion truly is only a number, a weekly goal.

New Study on Hostility to Religion in America

The Survey of Religious Hostility in America, released August 27 in Tampa, documents more than 600 incidents of hostility to religion in the United States over the past decade.

 

The Family Research Council and Liberty Institute recently released The Survey of Religious Hostility in America, a compilation of more than 600 documented incidents of hostility to religion that have occurred in the United States - most of them over the last 10 years.

The organizations' presidents, Tony Perkins and Kelly Shackelford, respectively, presented the survey and its findings on Monday during platform week of the Republican National Convention at the Marriott Waterside Hotel in Tampa, FL.

Examples of the increasing hostility to religion described in the 140-page report include:

• A federal judge threatened "incarceration" to a high school valedictorian unless she removed references to Jesus from her graduation speech.
• City officials prohibited senior citizens from praying over their meals, listening to religious messages or singing gospel songs at a senior activities center.
• A public school official physically lifted an elementary school student from his seat and reprimanded him in front of his classmates for praying over his lunch.
• A public school official prevented a student from handing out flyers inviting her classmates to an event at her church.
• A public university's law school banned a Christian organization because it required its officers to adhere to a statement of faith with which the university  disagreed.
• The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs banned the mention of God from veterans' funerals, overriding the wishes of the families of the deceased.
• A federal judge held that prayers before a state House of Representatives could be to Allah but not to Jesus.

"America today would be unrecognizable to our Founders," remarked Shackelford ahead of the survey's release. "Our First Liberty is facing a relentless onslaught from well-funded and aggressive groups and individuals who are using the courts, Congress, and the vast federal bureaucracy to suppress and limit religious freedom. This radicalized minority is driven by an anti-religious ideology that is turning the First Amendment upside down."

Adding to that, Perkins noted: "As dark as this survey is, there is much light. The secularists' agenda only advances when those who love liberty are apathetic. Let this be a call to stand for religious liberty in the United States."

According to the two organizations, The Survey of Religious Hostility in America grew out of testimony that Shackelford, along with a number of Liberty Institute's clients, provided to the U.S. Senate in 2004 about the growing religious hostility in America. Because the opposition insisted these select testimonies were simply isolated incidents, Senators Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and John Cornyn (R-TX) asked Liberty Institute to provide additional information, which led to the development of the first hostilities document.

While the survey provides evidence of growing numbers and severity of offenses to religious freedom in U.S. churches, schools and in the public arena, it also shows that those persons and organizations that stand up for religious liberty are winning.

The Survey of Religious Hostility in America can be downloaded in its entirety for free at www.religioushostility.org. (Contributors: NRB.org, Family Research Council, ReligiousHostility.org, Capitol Hill Prayer Partners)

New Study on Hostility to Religion in America

The Survey of Religious Hostility in America, released August 27 in Tampa, documents more than 600 incidents of hostility to religion in the United States over the past decade.

 

The Family Research Council and Liberty Institute recently released The Survey of Religious Hostility in America, a compilation of more than 600 documented incidents of hostility to religion that have occurred in the United States - most of them over the last 10 years.

The organizations' presidents, Tony Perkins and Kelly Shackelford, respectively, presented the survey and its findings on Monday during platform week of the Republican National Convention at the Marriott Waterside Hotel in Tampa, FL.

Examples of the increasing hostility to religion described in the 140-page report include:

• A federal judge threatened "incarceration" to a high school valedictorian unless she removed references to Jesus from her graduation speech.
• City officials prohibited senior citizens from praying over their meals, listening to religious messages or singing gospel songs at a senior activities center.
• A public school official physically lifted an elementary school student from his seat and reprimanded him in front of his classmates for praying over his lunch.
• A public school official prevented a student from handing out flyers inviting her classmates to an event at her church.
• A public university's law school banned a Christian organization because it required its officers to adhere to a statement of faith with which the university  disagreed.
• The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs banned the mention of God from veterans' funerals, overriding the wishes of the families of the deceased.
• A federal judge held that prayers before a state House of Representatives could be to Allah but not to Jesus.

"America today would be unrecognizable to our Founders," remarked Shackelford ahead of the survey's release. "Our First Liberty is facing a relentless onslaught from well-funded and aggressive groups and individuals who are using the courts, Congress, and the vast federal bureaucracy to suppress and limit religious freedom. This radicalized minority is driven by an anti-religious ideology that is turning the First Amendment upside down."

Adding to that, Perkins noted: "As dark as this survey is, there is much light. The secularists' agenda only advances when those who love liberty are apathetic. Let this be a call to stand for religious liberty in the United States."

According to the two organizations, The Survey of Religious Hostility in America grew out of testimony that Shackelford, along with a number of Liberty Institute's clients, provided to the U.S. Senate in 2004 about the growing religious hostility in America. Because the opposition insisted these select testimonies were simply isolated incidents, Senators Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and John Cornyn (R-TX) asked Liberty Institute to provide additional information, which led to the development of the first hostilities document.

While the survey provides evidence of growing numbers and severity of offenses to religious freedom in U.S. churches, schools and in the public arena, it also shows that those persons and organizations that stand up for religious liberty are winning.

The Survey of Religious Hostility in America can be downloaded in its entirety for free at www.religioushostility.org. (Contributors: NRB.org, Family Research Council, ReligiousHostility.org, Capitol Hill Prayer Partners)

Politics in the Pulpit: What the Separation of Church and State Actually Means

How do you respond when a friend or relative tells you that the wall of separation between Church and State in America means that political issues have no place in the nation's churches and that the religious beliefs of our citizens have no place in the public square?

Father Augustine Hoa T. Tran, a theologian and high school teacher writing for this week's Catholic Weekly Report, provides solid historical background and good ideas for refuting this mistaken position.

For one thing, Father Tran writes, the Founding Fathers intended to protect the citizenry's churches from the state, and not the other way around: "There is a legitimate separation, to be sure, but there is also a legitimate union of the two. When Thomas Jefferson wrote his famous “Wall of Separation Letter” in 1802, he was writing it to the Danbury Baptist Association to assure them of their religious freedom, to assure them that the state would not interfere with their God-given right of religious expression, that is, to protect the Church from the state, not to protect the state from the Church. His letter, which led to the “separation” clause in the Bill of Rights, was meant to allow every religion to express its views freely and publicly, in other words, to include the voice of every religion, not to exclude the voice of every religion from the public square."

For another, "Many people like to use [Christ's teaching about God and Caesar] to support a false notion of separation of Church and state, but recall why that coin belonged to Caesar. It was because the coin bore the image of Caesar that it belonged to him. Therein lies the true message, because Caesar bears the image of God. We are all created in the image and likeness of God, including Caesar, which means that Caesar belongs to God. Hence, that teaching does not affirm the false interpretation of separation of Church and state, the interpretation that does not allow one to bring his religious convictions into the public square. On the contrary, it teaches us the importance and necessity of bringing our faith into the public square. For it reminds our present-day Caesars that they belong to God, that they, too, are bound by his laws."

A  full review of Father Tran's essay is a great start on preparing to discuss this important issue with fellow citizens and voters in this presidential campaign season.

.

Politics in the Pulpit: What the Separation of Church and State Actually Means

How do you respond when a friend or relative tells you that the wall of separation between Church and State in America means that political issues have no place in the nation's churches and that the religious beliefs of our citizens have no place in the public square?

Father Augustine Hoa T. Tran, a theologian and high school teacher writing for this week's Catholic Weekly Report, provides solid historical background and good ideas for refuting this mistaken position.

For one thing, Father Tran writes, the Founding Fathers intended to protect the citizenry's churches from the state, and not the other way around: "There is a legitimate separation, to be sure, but there is also a legitimate union of the two. When Thomas Jefferson wrote his famous “Wall of Separation Letter” in 1802, he was writing it to the Danbury Baptist Association to assure them of their religious freedom, to assure them that the state would not interfere with their God-given right of religious expression, that is, to protect the Church from the state, not to protect the state from the Church. His letter, which led to the “separation” clause in the Bill of Rights, was meant to allow every religion to express its views freely and publicly, in other words, to include the voice of every religion, not to exclude the voice of every religion from the public square."

For another, "Many people like to use [Christ's teaching about God and Caesar] to support a false notion of separation of Church and state, but recall why that coin belonged to Caesar. It was because the coin bore the image of Caesar that it belonged to him. Therein lies the true message, because Caesar bears the image of God. We are all created in the image and likeness of God, including Caesar, which means that Caesar belongs to God. Hence, that teaching does not affirm the false interpretation of separation of Church and state, the interpretation that does not allow one to bring his religious convictions into the public square. On the contrary, it teaches us the importance and necessity of bringing our faith into the public square. For it reminds our present-day Caesars that they belong to God, that they, too, are bound by his laws."

A  full review of Father Tran's essay is a great start on preparing to discuss this important issue with fellow citizens and voters in this presidential campaign season.

.

Democrats Relent: Invite Dolan to Pray at DNC Convention

Cardinal Timothy Dolan, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which launched the Fortnight for Freedom campaign in April of this year.

Commentator Ben Johnson of Life Site News reports this morning from Charlotte, North Carolina that Cardinal Timothy Dolan will pray at the conclusion of both the Republican and Democratic national conventions in 2012.

The Democratic Party ignored the Cardinal's  offer to pray at the DNC convention for several weeks after it was made.

The New York prelate will arrive in Tampa to give the closing benediction to the Republican National Convention this week after it nominates Mitt Romney for president. Then he will attend the Democratic National Convention to offer a closing prayer in Charlotte, as it renominates the Obama-Biden ticket.
Dolan’s spokeman, Joseph Zwilling, said last week that the cardinal had contacted the Democratic Party after he accepted the GOP’s invitation “to make sure that they knew that this was not a partisan act on his part and that he would be just as happy and grateful to accept an invitation from the Democrats.” At that time, Democratic operatives had not responded.

As Dolan prays, he is also bringing the nation’s warring factions an additional petition: conduct a civil campaign.

The cardinal, who is also president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, is asking Romney and Obama to sign the Knights of Columbus “Civility in America” pledge, which calls on “candidates, the media and other advocates and commentators” to focus “on policies rather than on individual personalities.” 

Democrats Relent: Invite Dolan to Pray at DNC Convention

Cardinal Timothy Dolan, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which launched the Fortnight for Freedom campaign in April of this year.

Commentator Ben Johnson of Life Site News reports this morning from Charlotte, North Carolina that Cardinal Timothy Dolan will pray at the conclusion of both the Republican and Democratic national conventions in 2012.

The Democratic Party ignored the Cardinal's  offer to pray at the DNC convention for several weeks after it was made.

The New York prelate will arrive in Tampa to give the closing benediction to the Republican National Convention this week after it nominates Mitt Romney for president. Then he will attend the Democratic National Convention to offer a closing prayer in Charlotte, as it renominates the Obama-Biden ticket.
Dolan’s spokeman, Joseph Zwilling, said last week that the cardinal had contacted the Democratic Party after he accepted the GOP’s invitation “to make sure that they knew that this was not a partisan act on his part and that he would be just as happy and grateful to accept an invitation from the Democrats.” At that time, Democratic operatives had not responded.

As Dolan prays, he is also bringing the nation’s warring factions an additional petition: conduct a civil campaign.

The cardinal, who is also president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, is asking Romney and Obama to sign the Knights of Columbus “Civility in America” pledge, which calls on “candidates, the media and other advocates and commentators” to focus “on policies rather than on individual personalities.” 

Democrats to Sponsor Muslim Radicals at National Convention; Cardinal Dolan Not Invited

The Blaze reports today that those who are well-informed on the dangers of radical Islam are expressing their doubts about the event.

Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a devout Muslim and the Founder and President of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, wrote:

"The leaders of this event – Jibril Hough and Imam Siraj Wahhaj [are not] moderates. They are radicals. These individuals embrace Islamist supremacy and have demonstrated support for radical ideologies."

The Washington Times has reported the DNC lists the Muslim event as an “official function” of the convention.

Democrats to Sponsor Muslim Radicals at National Convention; Cardinal Dolan Not Invited

The Blaze reports today that those who are well-informed on the dangers of radical Islam are expressing their doubts about the event.

Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a devout Muslim and the Founder and President of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, wrote:

"The leaders of this event – Jibril Hough and Imam Siraj Wahhaj [are not] moderates. They are radicals. These individuals embrace Islamist supremacy and have demonstrated support for radical ideologies."

The Washington Times has reported the DNC lists the Muslim event as an “official function” of the convention.

Taliban Beheads Afghani Citizens for Attending a Dance Party

Polish geologist Piotr Stanczak minutes before he was beheaded by the Taliban in 2009. Photo: Reuters

Our friends at Gateway Pundit report that Barack Obama’s peace partners, the Taliban, have beheaded 17 civilians for dancing and singing including two women.
AFP reported:

Insurgents beheaded 17 civilians in a Taliban-controlled area of southern Afghanistan, apparently because they attended a dance party that flouted the extreme brand of Islam embraced by the militants, officials said Monday.

The killings, in a district where U.S. Marines have battled the Taliban for years, were a reminder of how much power the insurgent group still wields in the south — particularly as international forces draw down and hand areas over to Afghan forces.

The victims were part of a large group that had gathered late Sunday in Helmand province’s Musa Qala district for a celebration involving music and dancing, said district government chief Neyamatullah Khan. He said the Taliban slaughtered them to show their disapproval of the event.

All of the bodies were decapitated but it was not clear if they had been shot first, said provincial government spokesman Daoud Ahmadi.

Under Taliban laws all music is banned except certain types of religious songs and pro-Taliban ‘chants’.
In May Barack Obama announced that his administration was “pursuing a negotiated peace with the Taliban” (Tollybon) in Afghanistan.

Taliban Beheads Afghani Citizens for Attending a Dance Party

Polish geologist Piotr Stanczak minutes before he was beheaded by the Taliban in 2009. Photo: Reuters

Our friends at Gateway Pundit report that Barack Obama’s peace partners, the Taliban, have beheaded 17 civilians for dancing and singing including two women.
AFP reported:

Insurgents beheaded 17 civilians in a Taliban-controlled area of southern Afghanistan, apparently because they attended a dance party that flouted the extreme brand of Islam embraced by the militants, officials said Monday.

The killings, in a district where U.S. Marines have battled the Taliban for years, were a reminder of how much power the insurgent group still wields in the south — particularly as international forces draw down and hand areas over to Afghan forces.

The victims were part of a large group that had gathered late Sunday in Helmand province’s Musa Qala district for a celebration involving music and dancing, said district government chief Neyamatullah Khan. He said the Taliban slaughtered them to show their disapproval of the event.

All of the bodies were decapitated but it was not clear if they had been shot first, said provincial government spokesman Daoud Ahmadi.

Under Taliban laws all music is banned except certain types of religious songs and pro-Taliban ‘chants’.
In May Barack Obama announced that his administration was “pursuing a negotiated peace with the Taliban” (Tollybon) in Afghanistan.

You Are Invited: Virginia State Senator Black to Speak on Religious Freedom

Who: Knights of Columbus host Virginia State Senator Dick Black

What: Defense of Religious Freedom in America

Where: Meetings Room, St. Francis de Sales Catholic Church, St. Francis Court, Purcellville, Virginia

When: Monday, August 27, 7:30 p.m.

You Are Invited: Virginia State Senator Black to Speak on Religious Freedom

Who: Knights of Columbus host Virginia State Senator Dick Black

What: Defense of Religious Freedom in America

Where: Meetings Room, St. Francis de Sales Catholic Church, St. Francis Court, Purcellville, Virginia

When: Monday, August 27, 7:30 p.m.

Obama 2016: Film Provides Insights into His Antipathy to Western Civilization

Conservative author Dinesh D'Souza released this weekend a film version of his best-selling book The Roots of Obama's Rage.

Don't miss it. 

The film does not deal with Obama's stance on social issues, but gives important insights into his fundamentally anti-western views, and is recommended viewing for serious opponents of his reelection.

Despite a limited release, it brought in $1.2 million over the weekend, putting it on the list of top revenue producing political documentaries.

Obama 2016: Film Provides Insights into His Antipathy to Western Civilization

Conservative author Dinesh D'Souza released this weekend a film version of his best-selling book The Roots of Obama's Rage.

Don't miss it. 

The film does not deal with Obama's stance on social issues, but gives important insights into his fundamentally anti-western views, and is recommended viewing for serious opponents of his reelection.

Despite a limited release, it brought in $1.2 million over the weekend, putting it on the list of top revenue producing political documentaries.

Obama Turns Down Cardinal Dolan's Request to Pray at Democratic Party National Convention

Cardinal Timothy  Dolan holds up a Fortnight for Freedom sign during last summer's two-week celebration of the nation's first freedom.

Barack Obama has turned down the top U.S. bishop’s request to say a prayer at the DNC in Charlotte in September.
Obama doesn’t like his politics.
 Meanwhile, Georgetown University Law School student and "women's reproductive rights" advocate Sandra Fluke, whom the liberal media brought front and center to as an apologist for the ObamaCare abortion mandate last spring, will take the podium to address the convention.

The New York Post reported, via Weasel Zippers:

President Obama turned down a chance to have Timothy Cardinal Dolan deliver a prayer at the Democratic National Convention after Dolan told Democrats he would be “grateful” to deliver a blessing in Charlotte.

Dolan — considered the top Catholic official in the nation, as head of the Archdiocese of New York and president of the Conference of Catholic Bishops — tipped off Democrats a few weeks ago that he had agreed to deliver the prime-time benediction at the Republican convention in Tampa next week, Dolan’s spokesman Joseph Zwilling told The Post.

 Could the administration's impolite, bordering on thuggish, disregard for the nation's Christian leaders be one of the reasons why Obama's support among Catholic voters has plummeted to 27 percent, less than half of the Catholic vote he garnered in 2008?

Obama Turns Down Cardinal Dolan's Request to Pray at Democratic Party National Convention

Cardinal Timothy  Dolan holds up a Fortnight for Freedom sign during last summer's two-week celebration of the nation's first freedom.

Barack Obama has turned down the top U.S. bishop’s request to say a prayer at the DNC in Charlotte in September.
Obama doesn’t like his politics.
 Meanwhile, Georgetown University Law School student and "women's reproductive rights" advocate Sandra Fluke, whom the liberal media brought front and center to as an apologist for the ObamaCare abortion mandate last spring, will take the podium to address the convention.

The New York Post reported, via Weasel Zippers:

President Obama turned down a chance to have Timothy Cardinal Dolan deliver a prayer at the Democratic National Convention after Dolan told Democrats he would be “grateful” to deliver a blessing in Charlotte.

Dolan — considered the top Catholic official in the nation, as head of the Archdiocese of New York and president of the Conference of Catholic Bishops — tipped off Democrats a few weeks ago that he had agreed to deliver the prime-time benediction at the Republican convention in Tampa next week, Dolan’s spokesman Joseph Zwilling told The Post.

 Could the administration's impolite, bordering on thuggish, disregard for the nation's Christian leaders be one of the reasons why Obama's support among Catholic voters has plummeted to 27 percent, less than half of the Catholic vote he garnered in 2008?

Parents Beware: ObamaCare Begins Teen Sterilization Without Parental Consent

LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic Online) - Forget the milestones of obtaining a driver's license at 16 and being able to legally drink at 21 - getting sterilized at 15 is now the first step in the social maturity process of an American youth.

The "Required Health Plan Coverage Guidelines" set forth by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services states: "Non-grandfathered plans and issuers are required to provide coverage without cost-sharing consistent with these guidelines in the first plan year.that begins on or after August 1, 2012.All [FDA] approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity."

Under Oregon State Law, the state's revised statutes (ORS) defines "informed consent" for 15-year-olds independently pursuing reproductive sterilization as being "(a) Based upon a full understanding of the nature and consequences of sterilization pursuant to information requirements set forth in ORS 436.225(1); (b) Given by an individual competent to make such a decision; and (c) Wholly voluntary and free from coercion, express or implied."

So you need parental consent to contract a state-sanctioned marriage under the age of 18 in the U.S., but you, all by yourself, can give full consent to the irreversibility of sterilization at 15? Chances are, you do not even know your future spouse, yet you're already determining his or her fate as well?

Oregon's consent form, specific for the sterilizations of 15 to 20-year-olds, reads, "I understand that the sterilization must be considered permanent and not reversible. I have decided that I do not want to become pregnant, bear children or father children." In the case that the patient does not speak or read English, an interpreter is permitted to assist the patient "to the best of [his] knowledge and belief" in the signing away of the patient's reproductive capacity.

Could there be any easier way to push the next generation towards mass sterilization?
What's even more frightening is that this story has largely flown under the radar of major news sources, save a few sparse reports. Apparently, teenage sterilization does not seem to be a major concern, in spite of the fact that birthrates in the western hemisphere are all but sustainable.

Parents Beware: ObamaCare Begins Teen Sterilization Without Parental Consent

LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic Online) - Forget the milestones of obtaining a driver's license at 16 and being able to legally drink at 21 - getting sterilized at 15 is now the first step in the social maturity process of an American youth.

The "Required Health Plan Coverage Guidelines" set forth by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services states: "Non-grandfathered plans and issuers are required to provide coverage without cost-sharing consistent with these guidelines in the first plan year.that begins on or after August 1, 2012.All [FDA] approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity."

Under Oregon State Law, the state's revised statutes (ORS) defines "informed consent" for 15-year-olds independently pursuing reproductive sterilization as being "(a) Based upon a full understanding of the nature and consequences of sterilization pursuant to information requirements set forth in ORS 436.225(1); (b) Given by an individual competent to make such a decision; and (c) Wholly voluntary and free from coercion, express or implied."

So you need parental consent to contract a state-sanctioned marriage under the age of 18 in the U.S., but you, all by yourself, can give full consent to the irreversibility of sterilization at 15? Chances are, you do not even know your future spouse, yet you're already determining his or her fate as well?

Oregon's consent form, specific for the sterilizations of 15 to 20-year-olds, reads, "I understand that the sterilization must be considered permanent and not reversible. I have decided that I do not want to become pregnant, bear children or father children." In the case that the patient does not speak or read English, an interpreter is permitted to assist the patient "to the best of [his] knowledge and belief" in the signing away of the patient's reproductive capacity.

Could there be any easier way to push the next generation towards mass sterilization?
What's even more frightening is that this story has largely flown under the radar of major news sources, save a few sparse reports. Apparently, teenage sterilization does not seem to be a major concern, in spite of the fact that birthrates in the western hemisphere are all but sustainable.

Unearthed Video Shows Obama Supporting Late-Term Abortions

Weekly Standard reporter John McCormack has unearthed an old video from 2003, when President Barack Obama was running for the U.S. Senate from Illinois, in which he defends his position favoring late-term abortions.
Life News reported:

 
Of course, this political position in itself, makes Barack Obama the most radical president in US history. But, don’t expect the media to report on this.

Unearthed Video Shows Obama Supporting Late-Term Abortions

Weekly Standard reporter John McCormack has unearthed an old video from 2003, when President Barack Obama was running for the U.S. Senate from Illinois, in which he defends his position favoring late-term abortions.
Life News reported:

 
Of course, this political position in itself, makes Barack Obama the most radical president in US history. But, don’t expect the media to report on this.

Ask Your Bishop: "How Shall We Dissent?"

Thousands demonstrate in Phoenix against the HHS abortion mandate.

It's time to ask our bishops and other clergy to formulate a national strategy of opposition to the Obama administration's abortion mandate and other attacks on the nation's religious freedom, Father Marcel Guarnizo told the June 30 Fortnight for Freedom conference on the First Amendment held at Patrick Henry College in northern Virginia. Here are excerpts from Father Guarnizo's keynote address, urging letters to our religious leaders asking for guidance in this fight.

What Is to Be Done?

What is to be done? Our bishops have been calling for dissent.  I’ve heard and read many statements from, “This is the time of Henry VIII” to “We must do something.”  The times of Henry VIII were very difficult.  As you know, John Fisher was the one, lone bishop that survived that sort of persecution (survive morally, to stick by the truth).  But I don’t think we need to use too much hyperbole.  No one is talking about getting beheaded, no one is talking about any of these things right now.  I mean, to invoke Henry VIII in such things is not to take the question seriously.  They’ve talked about dissent and here we are talking about religious freedom. 

I think we need an educational campaign because a democracy cannot remain both free and ignorant.  There are far too many Americans who do not know what’s going on.  I think we should write letters to our bishops.  Dissent is not a strategy.  I was in the pro-life movement in the 90’s when we actually had civil disobedience and we had real dissent.  Dissent is not a strategy.  “We would like to know,” you should write your bishops, “what does dissent mean concretely?  What are we talking about when we say, ‘dissent’?  What are we going to do?  Are we going to have a tax protest?  Are we going to tell Catholics not to buy insurance?”

We need a real strategy because Obama could win the election and if he wins the election I don’t see how we will overturn this.  So, we need to clarify what we mean by dissent a.s.a.p.  It’s good that we’re speaking against the administration; it’s good that we’re speaking against this ObamaCare, but at this point we really need to figure out how we’re going to do this, in my opinion.  One good way to dissent, I would say, which would save us the trouble, is for bishops to put pressure on the governors to say, “We will not implement ObamaCare.”  So, Bobby Jindal in Louisiana has already said he is not going to prepare the exchanges, shorthand for he will not implement ObamaCare.  He didn’t say until when.  He didn’t say it was just up until November and then after November he would have to.  But in any case,  we should write bishops and tell them to write the governors to say we are not going to implement it because if they don’t implement it we won’t have to dissent.  They will do the dissent and we will support them.  They just say, “It doesn’t happen in Virginia.”  End of story.  They should go talk to their governors.  Bobby Jindal has said as much.  Bachmann and others are advocating and calling people.  Cantor is calling governors saying, “Do not implement it before November.” 

Exemption Is Not the Answer

The problem is what happens in November if Obama wins, of course.  Then you really have to make decisions if we’re really going to be paying for all of this.  I would say there will be some theologians who will try to argue that this is material cooperation but not formal cooperation and therefore it’s licit to cooperate.  I would argue that that is a complete ruse and remember that before this happened they were saying that was unacceptable.  If you later hear that it’s acceptable, morally acceptable, just go look at the articles when they said it was not acceptable.  What is also not acceptable is an exemption for the Catholic Church.  Morally speaking you can only ask for an exemption (and I told this to one cardinal who will remain unnamed, I think he didn’t like it very much) exemptions are not possible as a moral claim if the law is intrinsically evil or unjust.  So, I cannot ask as a Catholic Church to be exempt from slavery.  So you can enslave everybody else as long as we’re exempt.  You cannot ask if the Jewish people are made to wear the Star of David that we don’t say anything against that law as long as we’re exempt.  You can only ask for an exemption from a law that is just but that you have moral objections to, like war.  War could be just but it is true, the Quakers and others may have some moral objection and so they have a conscientious objection.  But war itself is not intrinsically evil.  You cannot ask for an exemption for something that is intrinsically evil if that is what we teach, and that is what we teach.  We have to fight something that is intrinsically evil.  Not only will we not accept an exemption, we will fight it.  And then we have to figure out how.  An exemption is morally incorrect for Catholic bishops. (In the beginning they were looking for an exemption and now they are not.  I am glad to see they are not.  I hope they hold their ground.) It is incorrect, because a parish could get an exemption; the pastor could get an exemption on his three employees in the rectory.  What happens to the Catholic businessman who runs a corporation, an office―he’s a dentist, he’s a doctor?  They’re as much a part of the Church as we are.  But they cannot ask for an exemption and they have to participate in intrinsically evil practices.  We’re always talking about the lay people and how important the lay people are.  No!  We stand with our people!  There’s no exemption for them, there’s no exemption from an intrinsically evil law, so there should be no exemption for us.  It’s a non-starter as a moral argument.  Furthermore, there are people who are not Catholic because the things that we’re objecting to can be perceived by any person of good will to be contrary to right reason, that they are evil.  They must be exempted.  And that means that everybody would have an exemption and therefore there would be no law.  So there’s no other choice than to fight the law in its totality, as being unjust and intrinsically evil. 

Ask Your Bishop: "How Shall We Dissent?"

Thousands demonstrate in Phoenix against the HHS abortion mandate.

It's time to ask our bishops and other clergy to formulate a national strategy of opposition to the Obama administration's abortion mandate and other attacks on the nation's religious freedom, Father Marcel Guarnizo told the June 30 Fortnight for Freedom conference on the First Amendment held at Patrick Henry College in northern Virginia. Here are excerpts from Father Guarnizo's keynote address, urging letters to our religious leaders asking for guidance in this fight.

What Is to Be Done?

What is to be done? Our bishops have been calling for dissent.  I’ve heard and read many statements from, “This is the time of Henry VIII” to “We must do something.”  The times of Henry VIII were very difficult.  As you know, John Fisher was the one, lone bishop that survived that sort of persecution (survive morally, to stick by the truth).  But I don’t think we need to use too much hyperbole.  No one is talking about getting beheaded, no one is talking about any of these things right now.  I mean, to invoke Henry VIII in such things is not to take the question seriously.  They’ve talked about dissent and here we are talking about religious freedom. 

I think we need an educational campaign because a democracy cannot remain both free and ignorant.  There are far too many Americans who do not know what’s going on.  I think we should write letters to our bishops.  Dissent is not a strategy.  I was in the pro-life movement in the 90’s when we actually had civil disobedience and we had real dissent.  Dissent is not a strategy.  “We would like to know,” you should write your bishops, “what does dissent mean concretely?  What are we talking about when we say, ‘dissent’?  What are we going to do?  Are we going to have a tax protest?  Are we going to tell Catholics not to buy insurance?”

We need a real strategy because Obama could win the election and if he wins the election I don’t see how we will overturn this.  So, we need to clarify what we mean by dissent a.s.a.p.  It’s good that we’re speaking against the administration; it’s good that we’re speaking against this ObamaCare, but at this point we really need to figure out how we’re going to do this, in my opinion.  One good way to dissent, I would say, which would save us the trouble, is for bishops to put pressure on the governors to say, “We will not implement ObamaCare.”  So, Bobby Jindal in Louisiana has already said he is not going to prepare the exchanges, shorthand for he will not implement ObamaCare.  He didn’t say until when.  He didn’t say it was just up until November and then after November he would have to.  But in any case,  we should write bishops and tell them to write the governors to say we are not going to implement it because if they don’t implement it we won’t have to dissent.  They will do the dissent and we will support them.  They just say, “It doesn’t happen in Virginia.”  End of story.  They should go talk to their governors.  Bobby Jindal has said as much.  Bachmann and others are advocating and calling people.  Cantor is calling governors saying, “Do not implement it before November.” 

Exemption Is Not the Answer

The problem is what happens in November if Obama wins, of course.  Then you really have to make decisions if we’re really going to be paying for all of this.  I would say there will be some theologians who will try to argue that this is material cooperation but not formal cooperation and therefore it’s licit to cooperate.  I would argue that that is a complete ruse and remember that before this happened they were saying that was unacceptable.  If you later hear that it’s acceptable, morally acceptable, just go look at the articles when they said it was not acceptable.  What is also not acceptable is an exemption for the Catholic Church.  Morally speaking you can only ask for an exemption (and I told this to one cardinal who will remain unnamed, I think he didn’t like it very much) exemptions are not possible as a moral claim if the law is intrinsically evil or unjust.  So, I cannot ask as a Catholic Church to be exempt from slavery.  So you can enslave everybody else as long as we’re exempt.  You cannot ask if the Jewish people are made to wear the Star of David that we don’t say anything against that law as long as we’re exempt.  You can only ask for an exemption from a law that is just but that you have moral objections to, like war.  War could be just but it is true, the Quakers and others may have some moral objection and so they have a conscientious objection.  But war itself is not intrinsically evil.  You cannot ask for an exemption for something that is intrinsically evil if that is what we teach, and that is what we teach.  We have to fight something that is intrinsically evil.  Not only will we not accept an exemption, we will fight it.  And then we have to figure out how.  An exemption is morally incorrect for Catholic bishops. (In the beginning they were looking for an exemption and now they are not.  I am glad to see they are not.  I hope they hold their ground.) It is incorrect, because a parish could get an exemption; the pastor could get an exemption on his three employees in the rectory.  What happens to the Catholic businessman who runs a corporation, an office―he’s a dentist, he’s a doctor?  They’re as much a part of the Church as we are.  But they cannot ask for an exemption and they have to participate in intrinsically evil practices.  We’re always talking about the lay people and how important the lay people are.  No!  We stand with our people!  There’s no exemption for them, there’s no exemption from an intrinsically evil law, so there should be no exemption for us.  It’s a non-starter as a moral argument.  Furthermore, there are people who are not Catholic because the things that we’re objecting to can be perceived by any person of good will to be contrary to right reason, that they are evil.  They must be exempted.  And that means that everybody would have an exemption and therefore there would be no law.  So there’s no other choice than to fight the law in its totality, as being unjust and intrinsically evil.