Jan. 23, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) - Actor
Kelsey Grammer, best known as the title character on the long-running
sitcom Frasier, wasn't always pro-life. But at some point in the past
six years, he had a conversion on the issue.
Particularly in the past few months he has become even more visible
in his stance defending the right to life of the unborn. Last October he posted a photo of himself on Instagram sporting a pro-life t-shirt created by the group Abort73.
Kelsey Grammer and his wife Katye at the March for Life in Washington D.C. on Friday. Kelsey and Katye Grammer Instagram"Would it bother you more if they used guns?" reads the t-shirt.
Then, just this week, he and his wife Katye were spotted braving wintry weather to attend the March for Life in Washington D.C.
The
famous couple posted a photo of themselves at the march to their
Instagram account. Another photo taken by a fan has been circulating
around Twitter.
Grammer has publicly campaigned for Republican presidential hopeful
Rudy Giuliani and candidate John McCain, and has made no bones about
being for small government. His messy personal life hasn’t dimmed his
enthusiasm for religion or espousal of neo-conservative values.
Though as late as 2010 he was describing himself as pro-choice, in
July he attended the National Right to Life convention in New Orleans
where he listened to several Republican presidential hopefuls and was
photographed with one of them, Ben Carson.
HOUSTON, January 29, 2016 (LifeSiteNews)
- A pro-life organization has released documents that may show Planned
Parenthood illegally profited from the sale of aborted babies' body
parts, furthering a Texas state investigation and possibly triggering a
new grand jury in Harris County.
The new receipts show that Planned Parethood charges for each body part obtained, as pro-life advocates had maintained all along.
Operation Rescue attorney Briscoe Cain held a press conference in
front of the Planned Parenthood abortion facility in Houston, which is
run by Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast (PPGC). After undercover
investigators filmed PPGC officials discussing how such profit could be
hidden in "line items," it touched off a series of investigations at the
national, state, and local level.
One of those was in Harris County, where the grand jury on Monday took no action against Planned Parenthood but indicted David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt, the CMP investigators who shot the footage. They face up to 20 years in prison for using a fake ID.
New invoices show PPGC partnering with the University of Texas
Medical Branch at Galveston to furnish aborted babies' tissue for
medical research and experimentation.
An e-mail from September 7, 2011, shows a UTMB official telling
Melissa Farrell (who personally signs some of her e-mails "Missy"), "We
are needing to collect tissues as soon as possible."
Farrell, the director of research at PPGC, sent UTMB two invoices:
one for $5,750 covering February-August 2010, and another for $2,374.98
for January-June 2011.
Each has a flat-fee charge - listed alternately as "reimbursement for study supplies" or "annual admin fee."
Both also contain a line charging $150 for each "consent" obtained -
something lawyers say proves that PPGC charged a fee per specimen.
That designation is how Farrell was able to hide its profit in "line items," as she told CMP investigators on film.
"Farrell admitted on camera to undercover investigators that PPGC
'worded' the per-specimen charges for fetal specimens as 'per consent'
in order to 'frame' the project budget in a way that will look legal 'on
paper,'" David Daleiden said. "Whether the 'consent fee' for fetal
tissue is $25" - the amount Farrell mentioned on film - "or $150, it is
completely outside the letter and spirit of Texas Penal Code 48.02."
There is also an aspect of public funding for Planned Parenthood in the UTMB study.
“Because Planned Parenthood was selling to publicly funded
universities, this means that our tax dollars went to buy aborted baby
remains and ended up in the pockets of Planned Parenthood executives,”
said Operation Rescue Senior Vice President Cheryl Sullenger. Yet, she
said, Harris County District Attorney Devon Anderson "turned a blind eye
to this crime while charging the people that reported the crimes. This
injustice must not be allowed to stand.”
“Because of this new evidence, we renew our call for a new grand jury
to investigate Planned Parenthood to be directed by an independent
special prosecutor not related in any way to Devon Anderson, anyone in
the Harris County District Attorney’s office, or Anderson’s friend, Chip
Lewis," the attorney for Houston abortionist Douglas Karpen and a
longtime Anderson ally, she said.
They also hope to bolster the ongoing Texas state investigation into PPGC, which paid $4.3 million to settle allegations of Medicaid fraud in 2013.
“The purpose of releasing these documents is to shed light on
previously unseen evidence of criminal activity by Planned Parenthood
Gulf Coast and to publicly release for the first time financial
documents exposing the practice of purchasing aborted fetal tissue by
Texas medical schools,” Cain said on Thursday, according to Breitbart.
Cain said he expected the documents to be "key evidence used by the
State of Texas as they continue their investigation of Planned
Parenthood’s activities.”
"Governor Abbott and Attorney General Paxton must hold Planned
Parenthood Gulf Coast accountable for their flagrant violation of the
Texas Penal Code and their abuse of Texas taxpayers’ dollars," Daleiden
said.
WASHINGTON, D.C., January 27, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) -- A bill to legally protect unborn children from the moment of conception is back in the U.S. Senate.
A
day before the 43rd March for Life, Sen. Rand Paul, R-KY, introduced
for the third time the "Life at Conception Act." Described by supporters
as a legislative fix to the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion nationwide, Paul has introduced the bill twice before.
The "Life at Conception Act" aims to apply the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause to unborn children.
Backed
by Republican Sens. Mike Crapo of Idaho, Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, and
Jim Risch of Idaho as original cosponsors, Paul attempted to
short-circuit the often lengthy committee approval process by invoking
Rule XIV of the Senate. The rule allows bills to bypass committees, and
generally eases the process for Senate leadership to call bills up for
votes.
In
a press release, Paul said, "It is time for Congress to recognize the
right to life is guaranteed to all Americans in the Declaration of
Independence, and it is the constitutional duty of all members of
Congress to ensure this belief is upheld."
“The
Life at Conception Act legislatively declares what most Americans
believe and what science has long known - that human life begins at the
moment of conception, and therefore, is entitled to legal protection
from that point forward. Only when America chooses, remembers, and
restores her respect for life will we rediscover our moral bearings and
truly find our way."
Paul, a libertarian-leaning senator who is trailing in his effort to become the 2016 GOP presidential nominee, made waves last year when he challenged Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz on her support for late-term abortion.
However, the pro-life candidate and officeholder faced criticism in 2013
when he said he supports “thousands of exceptions” to his general
belief that abortion should be illegal. However, his office insisted to
LifeSiteNews at the time that he is fully pro-life. He also faced
criticism in 2014, when he said he was "not opposed to birth control" and cited the abortifacient Plan B as a contraceptive option he supports being legal.
Seems as though the liberal broadcast media are hiding the truth. Again. They
are blatantly censoring the Hillary Clinton email scandal, where even
the Associated Press confirmed that the State Department found emails
containing top secret material.
The response last night by the media? Crickets. World News Tonight
set aside the least amount of air time. The ABC program devoted a total
of one minute and 28 seconds to the development, as Jonathan Karl
folded his coverage of the story into a segment about the Democratic
presidential race in Iowa!
The issue is extremely serious, for national security
and government accountability reasons, and potentially could destroy
Hillary Clinton’s political career. The liberal media know this, which
is why they are spinning, downplaying, or censoring news about the
investigation – all to protect Clinton. A Timeline of Spinning Stories:
Mid-August: FBI took possession of Clinton’s
server, only to find out all emails from the server had been erased.
Clinton stated she never received or sent classified data through her
private email. Now? Clinton says she never sent classified emails MARKED classified. Hmmm…media! September: the former campaign staffer who installed and maintained the server in Clinton’s house, Bryan Pagliano, pleaded the 5th
Amendment against self-incrimination before a House committee. CBS
completely ignored the news, as well as Univision and Telemundo. ABC and
NBC gave minimal coverage and downplayed the issue. The same week –
NBC’s Chuck Todd reported there was no smoking gun, and that it looked
like Clinton was “out of jeopardy.” Fast forward to the presidential debates in January,
where NewsBusters reports that major broadcast networks offered a total
of five minutes and 15 seconds to the debate, but made no effort to
mention the new details that broke pertaining to the highly classified
nature of some e-mails found on her private server.
ABC’s World News Tonight spent a portion of
its 2016 report dithering over recently-posted video of a young Ted Cruz
telling the camera that he’s wishing to grow up and to have “world domination.” Today: As shared by NewsBusters, Today’s Morning Joe with senior political analyst Mark Halperin stated that “the body language among some Obama Administration officials is, this is more serious, and something’s going to happen.”
The lack of coverage of the Clinton email scandal has gone on long enough.
We need to demand truth in media and encourage the fair and objective
coverage of this scandal. Without the truth, Clinton's actions could
severely threaten the national security of our great country.
The MRC has documented and exposed this liberal media
agenda through NewsBusters, MRCTV, the News Analysis Division, a
nationally syndicated column by Brent Bozell and Tim Graham, and through
interviews of our expert staff on talk radio and television. It is
contributors like you that allow us to keep on the front lines of this
scandal, exposing the truth that the media just don’t want you to hear.
Here are the facts: the Texas Legislature passed a pro-woman health bill in 2013, and it was signed into law by then Governor Rick Perry. The common-sense law requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges at a local hospital in case of an emergency, and to keep their facilities up to standards for surgical centers.
But the new law exposed the poor treatment of women at over half of Texas abortion facilities. And so these substandard “medical” abortion facilities were forced to close their doors.
...so of course the abortion industry sued.
Now the Supreme Court must decide whether this Texas state law places an “undue burden” on women who are seeking an abortion. The decision will have a ripple effect and could cause a pro-life landslide across the states. It’s likely that this will be a close decision, with Justice Kennedy again likely casting the decisive vote.
If the Supreme Court rules in our favor, it would unravel the constitutional “right” to abortion -- which was invented in Roe v Wade -- and protect states whose legislatures have voted to limit abortion. Even radical pro-abortion organizations admit they’re alarmed by the facts of this case.
WASHINGTON, D.C., January 19, 2016 (LifeSiteNews)
- An overwhelmingly majority - including two-thirds of self-described
"pro-choice" Americans - would support greatly strengthening laws that
protect the unborn, according to a new poll released this morning.
In all, 81 percent of Americans say abortion should be restricted to
the first trimester of pregnancy at the latest, according to a new
Marist Poll.
The poll found that women (82 percent) were more likely to support such a law than the national average.
Surprisingly, 66 percent of voters who call themselves "pro-choice" also support such a legal change. The poll found that 60 percent of Americans would curtail late-term
abortions that occur after 20 weeks. That confirms previous surveys
showing strong support for the fundamental principle behind the Pain
Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which every Republican presidential
candidate has promised to sign if elected this November.
Those findings should reframe the political debate from a reflexive
hostility against anything curtailing abortion-on-demand, according to
the group that commissioned the poll.
“It is time for a new national conversation on abortion – one that
begins with this consensus in favor of restrictions: a consensus that
American women and men have already reached, and that includes a
majority even of those who call themselves pro-choice,” said Knights of
Columbus CEO Carl Anderson.
Three-quarters of respondents (77 percent overall, including 79
percent of women and 71 percent of "pro-choice" respondents) said
pro-life laws protect both the child and the mother.
“Year in and year out since we began polling on this issue, the
American people have understood that the law can protect mother, and
child alike and have expressed a strong consensus in favor of abortion
restriction," Anderson said. That broad support for pro-life reforms across the political spectrum
could spell bad news for the Democratic nominee. The most recent Democratic Party platform calls for taxpayer-funded abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy. Hillary Clinton, who has been endorsed by Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America, has called on Congress to repeal the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits most taxpayer-funding of abortion.
That's "the most dramatic pro-abortion position espoused by a leading political figure to date," Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser told the Washington Free Beacon.
“If Clinton wants to use her campaign platform to go to war against
popular pro-life positions, we welcome the opportunity to engage and
expose her. The American people will reject this level of extremism in
November,” Dannenfelser said.
The groundbreaking poll also found:
Americans say that abortion ultimately does a woman more harm than good (55 to 30 percent);
Sixty percent of Americans say abortion is immoral (including one-third of "pro-choice" respondents);
A strong majority (70 percent) oppose taxpayer funding of abortion
(including 69 percent of women and 51 percent of "pro-choice"
Americans); and
Conscience rights is supported by a majority of Americans, who say
pro-life health care providers should have the right to opt out of
participating in or providing abortions (51 percent, including 50
percent of women and 34 percent of "pro-choice" respondents).
The poll surveyed 1,686 adults between November 15 and November 22 of last year.
CHICAGO, Ilinois, January 18, 2016 (LifeSiteNews)
-- Over five thousand people braved the bitter cold to gather in the
largest pro-life demonstration in the history of the Midwest Sunday
afternoon.
With
the temperature close to zero, diverse faiths, cultures, and
generations united to proclaim the sanctity of innocent human life as
they rallied at Federal Plaza, then marched past City Hall and the
Illinois State Building.
The route represented getting the pro-life message to three levels of government: federal, state, and municipal.
Friday
is the 43rd anniversary of the infamous Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton
Supreme Court decisions which legalized abortion throughout all nine
months of pregnancy.
Among the featured speakers was the Right Reverend Paul, Orthodox Bishop of the Midwest, who began the Chicago March for Life
by praying that God would "enlighten the minds and hearts of those
blinded to the truth that life begins at conception, and that the unborn
in the womb are already adorned with Your image and likeness."
Bishop
Paul added, "Be merciful, O Lord, to those who, through ignorance or
willfulness, affront Your divine goodness and providence through the
evil act of abortion. May they, and all of us, come to the light of Your
Truth."
Catholic Archbishop Blase Cupich told demonstrators,
"This isn't just about Chicago. This is about our nation and the soul
of our nation.” Archbishop Cupich continued, “What we do here today has a
message beyond the borders of the state, beyond the borders of the city
and speaks to the world about the importance of protecting life."
"The
womb should not be their tomb," Archbishop Cupich said. "Their lives
matter. We should make room at the table for them, each and every
child."
Archbishop Blase Cupich speaks at the 2016 Chicago March for Life. Chicago March for Life
New
Beginnings church pastor Reverend Corey Brooks said he wanted to take
the pro-life fight to his African-American community, calling abortion a
"scourge" and "the leading cause of death for African-Americans."
Brooks explained that even though the black community makes up 12
percent of the population, it makes up 30 percent of abortions in this
country.
"I
have heard it said many times over and over: 'Black lives matter,' and
they do," Rev. Brooks preached. "I've heard it said many times from
many people, 'All lives matter,' and they do. I'm here to say, 'Babies'
lives matter!'"
In
a rare show of bipartisanship, Republican Congressman Randy Hultgren
and Democrat Congressman Dan Lipinski took the stage together to affirm
their support for the sanctity of innocent human life.
Self-described
“Living Testament” Melissa Ohden also spoke. An abortion survivor,
Melissa shared how she was aborted and left to soak in a burning saline
solution for five days, but she didn’t die. She ended her story with
the declaration, “We are pro-life, we are pro-baby, we are pro-woman,
and we are pro-love.”
Bishop
Paul, who was among seven Orthodox Christian clergy attending, told
LifeSiteNews, "Given the cold weather there were not as many people
there as expected, but I would say the enthusiasm of the group was
great, despite the cold weather."
Michael Parziale,a dedicated Roman Catholic pro-life warrior,has gone to his eternal reward.
Mike was a proud and outspoken Catholic.He experienced such joy and happiness from the
practice of his Catholic faith that he wanted everyone he met to experience that same joy and
happiness.He was a real Catholic gentleman. On the TV show that he and his beloved wife Angela
produced("TRUTH and COMMON SENSE" )for fifteen years,his sincerity and his love for his Catholic faith was eloquently projected. He had a dedication to Our Lady Of Guadalupe and had a
portrait of her on the set of his program.(Our Lady of Guadalupe appeared to St. Juan Diego over
470 years ago and left a miraculous image of her appearance on his cactus fiber tilma which can be
viewed to this day in the Basilica near Mexico City.) It was a direct divine intervention into the
affairs of the human race.
Mike was an intrepid pro life warrior. He was one of God's pro life grunts.He fought in the trenches-
on the streets in front of the abortion killing clinics on Broad Street or Pine Street,or testifying before
RI legislative committees against abortion,or on his TV program.He took pride in the number of babies he saved from the abortion slaughters in front of the abortion killing clinics.
January 5, 2016 (LiveActionNews)
-- Images shape dialogue, and dialogue births change. Photographs that
capture the Great Depression, the Holocaust, and the Civil Rights
Movement are not only a testament of an era, but also examples of how
photos are an effective tool for social change. The powerful images that
fill the pages of history have initiated the struggle for justice and
propelled the human spirit.
Perhaps the most effective method to convey the violence of abortion,
the brutality of the abortion industry, and the dignity of human life
is through photography. Below are seven moving images that speak volumes
of the violence of abortion and the humanity of preborn children. Warning: contains some graphic images.
1) Baby Adelaide Caines
In September, 2014, U.K. mother Emily Caines released this gripping image of her premature daughter, Adelaide, who was delivered at 24 weeks. In an interview with The Mirror,
Caines said she shared the photo of her daughter with the public as a
testament to the humanity of the preborn child, and to show the
hypocrisy of an abortion law in the United Kingdom that allows babies to
be slaughtered at up to 24 weeks’ gestation.
“Our picture shows Adelaide was not a feotus, she was a fully formed human being,” Caines told the Mirror. “To think that a baby like her could be legally terminated on grounds of a lifestyle choice is to me is horrifying.”
The U.K. Mirror reported that this powerful image of little
Adelaide is the only photo her parents have of her living outside of the
womb, since Adelaide passed away shortly after birth due to
complications.
2) Baby Nathan Isaiah
Miscarried at 13 weeks and 4 days, baby Nathan Isaiah’s short
life inside the womb affirms the humanity of the preborn at the
earliest stages of life. Nathan’s parents, Allison and Daniel, learned
they lost their son after they requested to hear Nathan’s heartbeat on
the Doppler during the 15th week of pregnancy. When no heartbeat
registered, the family visited the emergency room to obtain an
ultrasound and learned that Nathan had passed away a few weeks prior.
“His little body was so perfect, with ten tiny fingers and ten tiny
toes,” his mother said. “He had a nose, a mouth, two little eyes and
ears.”
While the family grieved Nathan’s loss, they also shared the value of each human life through Nathan’s story.
3) Gosnell’s “House of Horrors”
Gruesome details from Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell’s
“House of Horrors” revealed that the abortionist killed children born
alive as a result of failed abortions, and brutally stabbed the necks of
some with scissors. As images and testimony emerged, the world learned
in shock.
One such child named Baby Boy B
was discovered during a raid of Gosnell’s abortion facility, frozen in a
red biohazard bag among 46 other aborted children. The medical examiner
told the grand jury that at roughly 28 weeks, Baby Boy B’s spinal cord
had been severed, and his neck bore the familiar scissor wound inflicted
by Gosnell. Images depicting Gosnell’s inhumane and barbaric killings
of these children underline the violent nature of late-term abortions.
Photo credit: Grand jury report
4) Hands and feet of a 9-week-old child
Images
of aborted babies are historically powerful tools in affirming the
humanity of preborn children and the atrocity of abortion. This image of
the arms and feet of a nine-week-old baby placed on a quarter displays
perfectly formed fingers and toes.
Since most abortions occur during the first trimester, these images
make it impossible to ignore the humanity of a child, even in the
earliest stages of life. Fetal imagery exposes the graphic nature of
abortion and the violence it inflicts on a preborn child.
5) “Hand of Hope”
Dubbed the “Hand of Hope,” this incredible image of baby Samuel Armas
grasping a surgeon’s finger was captured by photographer Michael
Clancy. Doctors operated on baby Samuel in utero after he was diagnosed
with spina bifida. Clancy noted that before he captured the iconic
image, he was “indifferent” to the issue of abortion. “It’s just a
miracle picture, a miracle moment,” Clancy told Fox News in an interview
years later. “It shows the earliest human interaction ever recorded.”
Armas’s mother, interviewed 10 years after the iconic image was
taken, told Fox News: “Samuel identifies it more in terms of a pro-life
message more than anything.” She said, “This photo happened and God used
it to show people that this baby in mom’s tummy is alive. He’s pleased
that his photo conveyed that message.”
Photo credit: Michael Clancy
6) Forced abortions in China
In 2012, a heartbreaking image of
a baby killed in China shed light on China’s grievous one-child policy.
The image of a baby at nine months’ gestation shows the dead child
submerged in a bucket of water. The photograph was reportedly posted to
the Chinese web services company Baidu before it sparked outrage across
Chinese social media sites. English reports note that the pregnant
mother was forced into labor and the child was left in the bucket of
water to drown after birth. Women’s Rights Without Frontiers Founder
Reggie Littlejohn told LifeSite that children are violently killed in
late-term abortions across China.
“Forced abortion is China’s war against women,” Littlejohn said. “It
is official government rape. Late term babies are injected with poison
in their skulls or drowned in buckets.”
Other images of forced abortions in China have also sparked outrage.
7) Baby Walter Joshua Fretz
In
summer of 2013, Lexi Fretz was 19 weeks pregnant with her son. Nothing
seemed out of the ordinary until Fretz saw that the mild spotting she
noticed a few days prior had turned unusually pink. Concerned, Fretz
checked herself into an emergency room, and later that evening, she
unexpectedly went into labor. Her 19-week-old son, Walter, did not live
long outside of the womb, and died just minutes after birth.
“I held him, cuddled him, while his heart was beating I held him to
my heart,” Fretz recalled. “I counted his toes and kissed his tiny head.
I will always cherish those memories that I have of him. He was fully
formed and everything was there, I could see his heart beating in his
tiny chest.”
These moving images of Walter taken by Fretz’s husband have impacted thousands.
Alabama chief justice Roy Moore issued an order yesterday
prohibiting the state's probate judges from issuing any licenses for
sodomy-based marriages. They "have a ministerial duty," wrote the judge,
"not to issue any marriage license contrary" to the Alabama
constitution, which bans homosexual marriage.
Alabama's amendment upholding natural marriage had overwhelming support
from Alabama's legislators and the people of Alabama themselves. The
proposed constitutional amendment passed the the Alabama State House
85-7, the Alabama State Senate 30-0, and was enacted by the people with
81% of the vote in June of 2006.
Judge Moore perceptively and accurately notes that the Supreme Court's opinion in Obergefell
is directed only at same-sex marriage bans in Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio
and Tennessee. I would argue even more precisely the Supreme Court's
decision affects only the plaintiffs involved in the Obergefell case.
The Eighth Circuit was quite explicit that the jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court's ruling is limited in scope. It stated flatly that "The
[Obergefell] Court invalidated laws in Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio, and
Tennessee – not Nebraska." In two other cases the Eighth Circuit repeated its conclusion: "not Arkansas" and "not South Dakota."
Moore cites an abiding rule of jurisprudence in his order (citations omitted):
"The above cases reflect an elementary principle of federal jurisdiction: a judgment only binds the parties to the case before the court. 'A judgment or decree among parties to a lawsuit resolves issues as among them, but it does not conclude the rights of strangers to those proceedings... [N]o court can make a decree which will bind anyone but a party ... no matter how broadly it words its decree."
In other words, the 16 couples who were the plaintiffs before the
Supreme Court get to have their same-sex marriages, but no one else
entitled to one based on this ruling alone.
This, by the way, is exactly how Abraham Lincoln responded to the infamous Dred Scott
opinion. He declared that he would accept the authority of the Court in
the case of Dred Scott, the plaintiff before the Court, but vigorously
rejected the notion that it had any binding effect anywhere else. "This
decision," said Lincoln, "was wanting in any claim to public confidence,
and it is not 'resistance,' it is not factious, or even disrespectful,
to treat it as not having quite established a settled doctrine for the land."
The State of Wisconsin flatly refused to submit to the Dred Scott ruling at all.
Note that Judge Moore is not defying the Supreme Court's ruling in
Obergefell. He is simply and quite correctly saying it does not apply to
the state of Alabama. Alabama's natural marriage amendment remains in
force because the Court has never ruled on Alabama's constitutional
prohibition.
Let's not forget that the Supreme Court issues "opinions," not
"rulings." And since we live in America, they are certainly entitled to
their own opinions. But it is the Supreme Court, not the Supreme Branch. A Supreme Court ruling cannot possibly be "the law of the land,"
as the Human Rights Campaign pretends. This is because Article I,
Section 1 says quite explicitly that "All legislative powers herein
granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States." "All" means
"all," as in every last little bit.
How much "legislative power" does the Supreme Court have? Zero. None.
Nada. Zilch. It is constitutionally impossible for the Supreme Court to
make law. Thus not a single one of its rulings can possibly be "the law
of the land." It doesn't have that kind of authority.
Thus Judge Moore "ordered and directed" that probate judges "have a
ministerial duty not to issue any marriage license contrary to the
Alabama Sanctity of Marriage Amendment or the Alabama Marriage
Protection Act," and correctly added,"Nothing in the United States
Constitution alters or overrides this duty."
Let's review. The Constitution gives the federal government, including
the judiciary, absolutely no authority whatsoever to dictate marriage
policy to the states. You can read the Constitution from front to back,
left to right, right to left, backwards, upside down and in Sanskrit and
you will find nary a mention of the word "marriage" at all. This means,
according to the Tenth Amendment, it's a matter for the states to
decide. And consistent with the Constitution, the people of Alabama have
decided. Overwhelmingly.
The only one in this sorry mess so far who is actually upholding the
Constitution is Justice Roy Moore. He is following the Constitution of
the United States, which does not authorize the central government to
meddle in marriage, and he is upholding the plain meaning of the Alabama
state constitution, which it is his sworn duty to do.
This is not civil disobedience. It is constitutional obedience. Of the highest and most noble order.
It's not Judge Moore who is defying the law of the land. He's upholding
it and defending it. No, the ones defying the law of the land would be
any Alabama probate judges who defy Judge Moore's legally authorized
order. Let's find out who the people are who have a genuine respect for
the rule of law.
Judge Moore is showing the United States the way to reclaim marriage
from an out-of-control and tyrannical federal judiciary. It's simple.
Just uphold the Constitution. Every court in every one of the 31 states with marriage amendments
should do exactly as Judge Moore has done, and reclaim the right of the
people of their state to govern themselves without the self-anointed
elites on the other side of the country ordering them around.
It's time immediately to get every GOP candidate for the presidency on
record: "Do you support Judge Moore's directive – yes or no?" We
particularly need to get responses from those candidates who have argued
against judicial supremacy and for the right of states to settle the
marriage question for themselves.
A new president who would pledge to unequivocally support Judge Moore
and any other governor or state judiciary who would follow his lead
could take an enormous step back toward sanity and normalcy, and uphold
genuine constitutional authority in the process.
Social conservatives need to know who among the presidential candidates
will be a fighter for us on the fundamental issue of natural marriage.
It's time for somebody to step up. Who will it be?
(Unless otherwise noted, the opinions expressed are the author's and
do not necessarily reflect the views of the American Family Association
or American Family Radio.)
(Human embryos are human beings.This is a biological and scientific fact!!!! Their DNA proves this.
Their DNA is human being DNA.To operate on these human embryos is a crime against humanity.
These human beings(human embryos) cannot give their consent for these experiments on themselves.
These experiments are against the Nuremberg Code as is pointed out in this article.This is another
case of Nazism in the modern world. Nazi doctors were hanged for doing exactly this after WWII.
Two quintessential questions shout out:1)Why doesn't the USA subscribe to the Nuremberg Code; and 2)Doesn't this experimentation on human embryos violate the basic bedrock Judaeo-Christian principle that the End does not justify the Means ???? BLL )
January 15, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – Yesterday an embryologist in UK
asked permission to take the life of thirty children by editing their
genes at the embryonic stage. Her goal is to advance knowledge of human
development in order to treat infertility. Last month a landmark
conference in Washington, D.C., the International Summit on Human Gene Editing,
advocated deadly experimental use of children at an embryonic level of
development for purposes largely related to curing certain genetic
anomalies. What is Human Gene Editing and why did so many scientists at
the conference call for an immediate worldwide moratorium?
Formerly referred to as “germline intervention,” Human Gene Editing
(HGE) is the creation of a genetically modified human. HGE changes made
to a human child at an embryonic level will be passed through normal
sexual reproduction to all future offspring. This emerging technology
has profound implications for the future of the human race.
Advocates hope to bring generational cures to genetic diseases such
as Sickle Cell Anemia and Tay-Sachs Disease which can be specifically
targeted for HGE at an early embryonic level. Critics are arguing that
the technology is too new and the inherent risks to all of human-kind
are too great. Due to the uncharted concerns and very present unintended
consequences regarding HGE, many scientists in the summit are calling
for a moratorium on all human gene editing. Philip Campbell of the
science journal Nature explains why they have called for a moratorium and have rejected papers on the subject:
So we've had human germline editing papers sent to us. These are
confidential so I won't say more about them but several papers have been
received by several journals and all have been rejected by us either
because of technical inadequacies or because of noncompliance with local
regulation . . . OR BOTH [emphasis mine].
Poor science and breaking the law are just a couple of the reasons
why we should be concerned when discussing proliferation and scientific
acceptance of this emerging technology. Here are a few facts to
consider: Human Gene Editing has been condemned by the United Nations and outlawed in over 29 countries
(China, North Korea and the United States are not among them). Due to
its eugenic history, Germany has enacted some of the strictest criminal
penalties for human embryo experimentation. The Nuremberg medical trials
of last century ruled that the deadly human experiments performed by
the Nazis during the Holocaust on concentration camp inmates constituted
“human experimentation without informed consent” and were considered
war crimes. Seven Nazi doctors were found guilty and hung. To prevent
the medical research community from repeating these crimes the Nuremburg
Code was adopted by most western nations (United States excluded) and
became the founding tenant of modern bioethics. If the embryo is a
person then HGE would be a violation of informed consent.
Undeterred by international condemnation, China, in April 2015, described their use of a newly developed CRISPR–Cas9 technology to edit the genomes of human embryos.
Led by Junjiu Huang at Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou, this team
of scientists published the first and only paper to date of this
controversial form of human experimentation. This new genetic
modification technology is called CRISPR, short for “clustered regularly
interspaced short palindromic repeats.” CRISPR is incredibly fast,
relatively simple and very cheap. A recent biotech startup named Amino
has brought desktop bioengineering to everyone for a little under
$700.00. For less than the cost of a leading smartphone you can
bioengineer your own glow in the dark bacteria by splicing genes in your
garage. Their marketing material boasts that “Amino is a small and
simple-to-use hardware system that enables anyone to grow and take care
of living cells. We are the world’s first publicly available
bioengineering platform that can be used at home, in labs or in
schools.” They go on to describe the following product line: “These
hand-assembled polished rich Mahogany Amino Ones are shipped with the
Amino Glow App, a DNA program and the set of chemicals needed to
transform the regular bacteria into a glowing organism and keep it
growing and glowing! A living Nightlight!”
Or Nightmare, depending on whose hand holds the test tube. These
do-it-yourself (DIY) bioengineering kits have been criticized as opening
the door to “bio-hackers” who may use the technology for malevolent
intent. From DIY DNA kits to community laboratories where CRISPR is
available to untrained amateurs, the possibility for domestic bio-terrorism becomes a probability. “One of the biggest fears surrounding CRISPR is that it could be used to create a genetic modification designed to spread through a population of organisms at an unnaturally fast rate,” says Heidi Ledford writing for the science journal Nature.
The FBI routinely builds relationships within the bio-hacker community
so that any realtime threat can be assessed and hopefully neutralized.
As the price of this “cut and paste” gene sequencing has reached hobbyist levels
the temptation to alter children at an embryonic level has
proliferated. Testing material is easily acquired. An excess of over
500,000 human embryos have been created through the IVF process. Clients
routinely abandon their cryogenically preserved offspring rather than
continue to pay for the upkeep of their frozen embryos. It is
increasingly common that they altruistically donate their left-overs to
science. With the easy availability of human test subjects whom the National Institutes of Health have declared non-persons,
it is just a matter of time until a rogue scientist using CRISPR
technology repeats what was done in China last April and produces a GMO
child.
Once the genie is out of the bottle there will be no putting it back.
Perhaps we should heed science fiction writer Bruce Sterling, “"Maybe
we're about to radically change the operating system of the human
condition. If so, then this would be a really good time to make backups
of our civilization." Daniel Becker is president of Personhood Alliance, lecturer, and author of the book Personhood: A Pragmatic Guide to Prolife Victory in the 21st Century.
