Oregon Shields Birth Record Changes for Transgenders

/0 Comments/in , /by

Gov. Kate Brown has signed a bill that will make it easier for transgender people in Oregon to shield any updates they make to their birth certificates, a process typically conducted through the court system without privacy from public view . . .

The new law eliminates the requirement that changes to someone’s name or gender identity must be posted publicly by the courts. It also allows court cases involving gender identity changes on birth records to be sealed.

HB 2673 passed the Democratic-controlled Oregon Legislature earlier this month with some Republican support at a time when, two years after the U.S. Supreme Court’s legalization of same-sex marriage, the nation remains largely divided as to how to balance LGBTQ rights and religious freedoms. (Read more from “Oregon Shields Birth Record Changes for Transgenders” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Administration Considering Rule That Would Help Little Sisters of the Poor

/0 Comments/in , /by

For employers that don’t want to provide birth control and abortifacient coverage in health insurance plans, relief may be on the way.

President Donald Trump’s administration “is poised to make changes to Obamacare’s birth control coverage mandate by granting broad exemptions to employers that object on religious or moral grounds,” The Hill reported.

The proposed move is being cheered by some conservatives.

“Better late than never,” Mark Rienzi, senior counsel with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a nonprofit legal organization, said in a statement.

“At long last the United States government acknowledges that people can get contraceptives without forcing nuns to provide them,” Rienzi added. “That is sensible, fair, and in keeping with the Supreme Court’s order and the president’s promise to the Little Sisters and other religious groups serving the poor.”

The Becket Fund represents the Little Sisters of the Poor, an order of Catholic nuns who fought the Obamacare contraception and abortifacient mandate all the way to the Supreme Court.

Last year, the Supreme Court “‘vacated,’ meaning erased, all of the lower court cases and required them to reconsider the claims brought by the Little Sisters of the Poor and others that the regulations promulgated pursuant to Obamacare violate their religious exercise in light of the government’s admission that it could indeed provide contraceptive coverage without the Little Sisters’ collaboration,” wrote The Heritage Foundation’s Elizabeth Slattery and Roger Severino, a former Heritage employee, at the time.

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, an organization that promotes pro-life and family values, said the proposed rule change is good progress.

“While this apparent leaked document is a draft, it is a very positive sign to see the federal government work to cease its hostility toward Christians and those who object to the Obama-era health care mandates,” Perkins said in a statement. “This draft regulation shows that [Health and Human Services] Secretary Tom Price and President Trump intend to make good on their pledge to vigorously protect and promote [America’s] First Freedom.”

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., decried the proposed rule change.

Birth control advocates, such as Keep Birth Control Copay Free, an organization that promotes birth control access, are not supportive of the potential rule change.

“President Trump has been clear that religious liberty is important and that religious orders, such as the Little Sisters of the Poor, are deserving of that freedom as well,” a White House spokesperson told The Daily Signal in an email.

The leaked rule “would leave in place the religious ‘accommodation’ created by the Obama administration, making that route available to groups that choose to continue using it,” according to the Becket Fund.

The Becket Fund also noted in its press release that many Americans remain on health insurance plans that do not have to provide abortifacients or birth control:

One hundred million Americans—nearly one in three—don’t have insurance plans that must comply with this mandate. The government was already exempting large corporations like Exxon and Visa, and even its own government-run plans for the disabled and military families.

Eric Rassbach, deputy general counsel at Becket, told The Daily Signal in an email that the proposed rule could be published in the next week or in the next several weeks. (For more from the author of “Trump Administration Considering Rule That Would Help Little Sisters of the Poor” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

This Farmer Won’t Host Same-Sex Weddings at His Orchard. Now a City Has Banned Him From Its Farmers Market.

/0 Comments/in , /by

A farmers market and Facebook posts have opened a new front in courtroom battles over religious freedom.

It started when Steve Tennes, who owns a 120-acre farm in Charlotte, Michigan, expressed his traditional view about marriage on the farm’s Facebook page.

This drew a warning from an official more than 20 miles away in East Lansing, Michigan, that if Tennes tried to sell his fruit at the city’s farmers market, it could incite protests.

No one showed up to protest that August day last summer, though, and Tennes continued selling organic apples, peaches, cherries, and pumpkins at the seasonal market until October, as he had done the six previous years.

Nevertheless, East Lansing moved earlier this year to ban Tennes’ farm, the Country Mill, from participating in the farmers market when it resumes June 4. The city cited its human relations ordinance, an anti-discrimination law that includes sexual orientation.

So Tennes and his wife sued the city for religious discrimination.

As a Marine veteran who is married to an Army veteran, Tennes told The Daily Signal, this was consistent with his philosophy of defending freedom:

My wife Bridget and I volunteered to serve our country in the military to protect freedom, and that is why we feel we have to fight for freedom now, whether it’s Muslims’, Jews’, or Christians’ right to believe and live out those beliefs.

The government shouldn’t be treating some people worse than others because they have different thoughts and ideas.

Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal aid organization, is representing the Tenneses.

Neither East Lansing’s public information office nor the city manager’s office responded Wednesday to phone calls about the case from The Daily Signal.

East Lansing Mayor Mark Meadows told the Lansing State Journal that the city’s decision to exclude Country Mill—also known as Country Mill Orchard—from the farmers market had nothing to do with religious beliefs, but with the farm’s “business decision” not to host same-sex weddings.

“This is about them operating a business that discriminates against LGBT individuals, and that’s a whole different issue,” Meadows said.

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan, says of Steve and Bridget Tennes’ perspective, in part:

Plaintiffs support the rights of citizens and other businesses to express their views about marriage. Plaintiffs simply seek to enjoy the same freedom.

Yet, East Lansing’s policy strips plaintiffs of their constitutional freedoms, including free speech and the free exercise of religion, by punishing plaintiffs’ viewpoint on marriage, going so far as to prohibit Country Mill from continuing its long history of participating in the farmers market because plaintiffs publicly stated their sincerely held religious view that marriage is a union between one man and one woman.

The suit also says the farm “has employed people from a wide variety of racial, cultural, and religious backgrounds, including members of the LGBT community.

Country Mill hosts a corn maze, birthday parties, weddings, and other events.

In 2014, two lesbians sought to be married in a wedding ceremony at Country Mill, but Tennes turned them down.

This occurred before the 2015 Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage across the country.

According to his legal complaint, Tennes had a “civil” discussion with the women, and said his venue didn’t host same-sex weddings because of his religious beliefs. But he referred the women to an orchard that held same-sex weddings.

In 2015, the two women were married at another orchard. On Aug. 22, 2016, one of them wrote a Facebook post discouraging consumers from doing business with Country Mill.

In response, Tennes initially said the farm would cease holding any weddings, writing on Facebook:

After this post, the East Lansing official asked Tennes not to sell produce at the market, saying he feared protests.

Tennes did anyway, and no protest occurred, according to the lawsuit.

In December, Tennes announced on Facebook that Country Mill would resume holding weddings:

This past fall our family farm stopped booking future wedding ceremonies at our orchard until we could devote the appropriate time to review our policies and how we respectfully communicate and express our beliefs. The Country Mill engages in expressing its purpose and beliefs through the operation of its business and it intentionally communicates messages that promote its owners’ beliefs and declines to communicate messages that violate those beliefs.

The Country Mill family and its staff have and will continue to participate in hosting the ceremonies held at our orchard. It remains our deeply held religious belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman and Country Mill has the First Amendment right to express and act upon its beliefs. For this reason, Country Mill reserves the right to deny a request for services that would require it to communicate, engage in, or host expression that violates the owners’ sincerely held religious beliefs and conscience.

Furthermore, it remains our religious belief that all people should be treated with respect and dignity regardless of their beliefs or background. We appreciate the tolerance offered to us specifically regarding our participation in hosting wedding ceremonies at our family farm.

East Lansing city officials determined that these public statements violated the city’s 1972 human relations ordinance prohibiting discrimination. That law was the first in the state to recognize sexual orientation as a protected class from discrimination.

But this brought up a jurisdictional issue on top of First Amendment concerns, the farmer’s lawsuit says.

East Lansing, the complaint says, “has no authority to enforce its ordinance based on Tennes’ religious beliefs and their impact on how he operates Country Mill.” The farm, it says, is 22 miles outside the city.

The lawsuit also notes that the city has not taken action against a vendor that promoted same-sex marriage.

In March, East Lansing sent Tennes a letter denying Country Mill’s application to be a vendor at the 2017 farmers market:

It was brought to our attention that the Country Mill’s general business practices do not comply with East Lansing’s civil rights ordinances and public policy against discrimination as set forth in Chapter 22 of the City Code and outlined in the 2017 market vendor guidelines.

“As such,” the letter reads, “Country Mill’s presence as a vendor is prohibited.” (For more from the author of “This Farmer Won’t Host Same-Sex Weddings at His Orchard. Now a City Has Banned Him From Its Farmers Market.” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Should Fearless Girls Worship the Golden Calf of Abortion?

/0 Comments/in , /by

The saga of the Charging Bull and the Fearless Girl is back in the news. It seems New York sculptor Alex Gardega objected to feminists’ appropriating the Wall Street icon. So he added something: a pug, relieving itself on the girl.

I couldn’t put my finger on it. But something about the Fearless Girl statue didn’t sit well with me. Social media fawned over the diminutive addition that bravely stood in front of Charging Bull in New York’s financial district. But the statue seemed like a cheap way to score political points. My cynicism grew the more I considered her underlying message.

The plaque at Fearless Girl’s feet reads: “Know the power of women in leadership. SHE makes a difference.” “SHE” is both a descriptive pronoun and the NASDAQ ticker symbol for the organization that funded her. Fearless Girl’s message is to promote workplace gender diversity. And to encourage companies to recruit women to their boards. Those pleasant enough politically correct platitudes.

The artist of the Charging Bull has himself complained that Fearless Girl distorted the meaning of his bronze. It transformed the bull from a symbol of strength and prosperity into one of a villain. In response, New York City Mayor de Blasio tweeted, “Men who don’t like women taking up space are exactly why we need the Fearless Girl.”

But there is more to the story than just political posturing and man-shaming. Mayor de Blasio has already made it clear that the statues’ meanings are fluid. So let’s consider what happens when we move these two statues somewhere else in the world. How does changing the context change their meaning?

Move Those Statues to Africa

If Charging Bull and Fearless Girl were on the African continent, people might think they are a Public Service Announcement. “Caution: Wild Bulls.” Locals seeing a little girl in the path of a raging bull might not find it so — well, inspiring. In fact, they would see it as quite the contrary. Any child left alone in such circumstances is a tribal (or village) failure. They know the inevitable outcome.

And what if the bronzes were moved to India or Nepal? There Hinduism is practiced, and all things bovine — including their dung and urine — are revered. Honoring cows is so weighty that U.S. diplomats are warned that if while driving they are faced with the choice of hitting a person or a cow, the better thing to do is hit the person. Perhaps again Fearless Girl might not inspire the same sort of “You go, girl!” spirit. Suddenly, Fearless Girl is no longer a heroine, but merely a bystander while the bull holds center stage.

Of course, worshiping bulls is nothing new. It never leads to anything good. Just ask the ancient Greek queen of Crete, Pasiphae, how worshiping the white bull worked for her. Their coupling created the monstrous Minotaur: the bull-headed man who devoured Athenian. Nor did the Israelites profit from worship of their golden calf. It nearly got them wiped out as a nation.

We have our own sacred cow. The West thinks that equality between men and women can only be reached by erasing their differences. Such “equality” rests squarely on the notion that women must be free from the burden of childbearing and therefore must have abortion on demand — no restrictions.

Worshiping the Golden Calf of Abortion

Abortion was sold as “safe, legal and rare.” But that golden calf has grown up into something fierce and terrifying. Today, worship of the bull of abortion is a rite of passage for any woman who craves power, prestige or fortune. Nearly every public woman in the corridors of influence from New York to Washington to Hollywood has offered her pinch of incense to the abortion behemoth — Planned Parenthood.

So what if we moved Fearless Girl and Charging Bull back to New York, but consider yet another meaning for each? What if we see Charging Bull as the abortion juggernaut, and Fearless Girl as all those who worship him?

This new, fierce and ferocious bull devours the innocent like the Minotaur. Instead of 15 males and 15 females a year, the numbers are closer to 1500 males a day and 1500 females a day in the United States alone.

Like the golden calf worshipers of old, the new bovine worshipers are not left unscathed. Tragically, all these women who worship abortion have been frozen as little girls — as if in bronze — never to grow up and become true women, but to forever remain stuck in a feminist frenzy: a vicious cycle of victimization, foot stomping tantrums, illogic, perpetual aping of men, and vulgar pink hats.

Sadly, unlike Africa, there are no more grown-ups in the village to come and protect them, for these little girls are the grown-ups; they are the cultural elite; they are culture makers. And yet little girls they remain — fearless and foolish — and try as they might, unless or until they find healing, there they will remain stuck in the path of the charging bull of their own making. (For more from the author of “Should Fearless Girls Worship the Golden Calf of Abortion?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

A Sanctuary City … for Abortion?!

/0 Comments/in , /by

Sanctuary city jurisdictions are local governments that seek to trample upon and undermine the federal government’s constitutional role in enforcing immigration law by offering cover to illegal aliens. However, another sort of “sanctuary” legislation in the U.S. seeks to continually and legally trample the human conscience to protect abortion.

Religious groups in Missouri are now suing to overturn a St. Louis “abortion sanctuary” city ordinance that would have disastrous effects on the freedoms of religion, speech, and association. The AP reports:

A group of St. Louis Catholics filed a lawsuit against the city Monday over a local ordinance that prohibits discrimination based on “reproductive health decisions,” saying the law could force employers or landlords to go against their religious beliefs. The law, enacted in February, bars employers from hiring or firing people based on whether they have had an abortion, get pregnant outside of marriage, or use contraceptives or artificial insemination. Landlords also can’t refuse to rent to someone based on those criteria. Opponents say they law makes St. Louis a sanctuary city for abortion. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Roman Catholic grade schools operating under the Archdiocese of St. Louis; Our Lady’s Inn, a home for pregnant homeless women; and a private company whose owner is Catholic. It seeks to stop the city from enforcing the ordinance.

“The passage of this bill is not a milestone of our city’s success,” said St. Louis Archbishop Robert J. Carlson at a public press conference after filing the lawsuit on Monday. “It is rather a marker of our city’s embrace of the culture of death.”

Alderwoman Megan Green, 15th ward, who originally sponsored the legislation, called the lawsuit “frivolous.”

“We know that discrimination does exist. (The ordinance) was done to make sure we are protecting women in making their own medical choices,” Green said Monday, per the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

This is pure pro-abortion politician-ese.

Brushing past Alderwoman Green’s too-commonly-held assumption that abortion is simply just another “medical choice” — rather than a willful taking of human life (dressed up in a lab coat) — the ordinance does nothing to affect any St. Louisan’s ability to procure an abortion or means of contraception (aside from forcing employers to pay for the latter).

Rather, it seeks to elevate actions that just happen to be in concert with their worldview to a protected class (over the First Amendment rights of all else in the city who disagree with them), draping it all in the language of “anti-discrimination.”

And the measure goes far beyond just freedom of religion, but also freedom of speech as well. The law prohibits any housing or job listing “which expresses directly or indirectly any preference, limitation, specification, or discrimination because of reproductive health decisions.”

At the same press conference on Monday in St. Louis, Thomas More Society special counsel Sarah Pitlyk said: “It’s like a page right out of George Orwell’s ‘1984,’ in which people could be prosecuted for ‘thought crimes.’

One has to wonder: Was there really an epidemic of landlords asking women for their medical history in the city? Are these sorts of questions commonplace, across the board, in St. Louis job interviews? If not, what other ends would this serve (aside from creating a means to punish those who disagree with the abortion lobby’s established orthodoxy)?

This is several steps past the contraception mandate that brought the owners of Hobby Lobby and the Little Sisters of the Poor to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Instead of making nonprofits violate their deeply held beliefs in order to merely remain operational, such abortion-sanctuary measures would actively undermine conservative groups’ own goals by forcing them to hire people whose worldviews fundamentally contradict the mission of pro-life organizations.

What this law implicitly teaches is that the killing of preborn children – and one’s support of the procedure – are in effect more important to the St. Louis government than the fundamental rights of conscience of anyone who dares disagree. It is not enough to be able to do so legally, but nobody may dissent to that action in any meaningful way, even with their own property.

The fundamental right of conscience are a sanctuary for the human soul. Now the federal courts will consider whether that ancient, inalienable refuge should even still exist in the city of St. Louis. (For more from the author of “A Sanctuary City … for Abortion?!” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

These Numbers From New Planned Parenthood Report Show Need to Defund Abortion Giant

/0 Comments/in , /by

Each year, Planned Parenthood Federation of America issues an annual report outlining the abortion giant’s medical service data, revenue and expenses, and advocacy and educational activity.

This week, the 2015-2016 report went public. These reports are typically published in December or January, but this year’s highly anticipated report was inexplicably released several months later than expected.

As previously explained at The Daily Signal, these annual reports provide Americans on both sides of the abortion debate with important information about abortion incidence and other services provided by Planned Parenthood, which receives over half a billion dollars from taxpayers each year.

The report opens with the revelation that Planned Parenthood served 100,000 fewer women in 2015-2016 compared to 2014-2015, and that in the same period the number of Planned Parenthood health centers and affiliates declined.

Planned Parenthood performed more abortions last year (328,348) compared to the previous year (323,999). In the same period, contraception and cancer screening and prevention services declined.

Specifically, Planned Parenthood served fewer female reversible contraception clients, performed fewer vasectomies and female sterilization procedures, and provided fewer emergency contraception kits in 2015-2016 compared to the previous year.

Planned Parenthood also performed fewer breast examinations, fewer HPV vaccinations, and fewer colposcopy and cryotherapy procedures in 2015-2016. Despite often repeated claims to the contrary, Planned Parenthood provides zero mammograms.

The report reveals a dramatic decline in prenatal services. Planned Parenthood provided 9,419 in 2015-2016 compared to 17,419 in the previous year—meaning 8,000 fewer women and their unborn children received prenatal care in just one year.

This sharp decline reinforces the findings of a pro-life organization’s investigative report. Earlier this year, Live Action—a nonprofit dedicated to ending abortion and protecting the right to life—contacted 97 Planned Parenthood clinics searching for prenatal care and was turned away by 92 of the centers.

Despite the declining number of Planned Parenthood clinics, clients, and many services, the abortion giant continues to receive half a billion dollars from taxpayers each year.

For the year ended June 30, 2015, Planned Parenthood reported $553,700,000 in “government health services grants & reimbursements.” For the year ended June 30, 2016, Planned Parenthood reported a slight increase to $554,600,000.

Planned Parenthood also reports increased excess revenue and net assets.

In fiscal year 2015, its excess revenue was nearly $59 million and net assets totaled more than $1.4 billion. For fiscal year 2016, Planned Parenthood’s excess revenue increased to $77.5 million and net assets now total over $1.5 billion.

The information in the latest report is particularly relevant as Congress considers a budget reconciliation bill to repeal Obamacare. The bill includes a provision that would disqualify Planned Parenthood affiliates from receiving Medicaid reimbursements for one year after enactment of the bill.

Planned Parenthood’s latest annual report underscores why taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize the abortion giant. As the number of abortions increases, fewer women are turning to the group for care like cancer treatment and prevention services, contraception, and prenatal services.

Government funds currently flowing to Planned Parenthood could instead be directed to the thousands of centers that provide health care for women without entanglement in on-demand abortion.

It’s time for Congress to end taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood, its affiliates, and other abortion providers once and for all by sending the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act to President Donald Trump’s desk for signature. (For more from the author of “These Numbers From New Planned Parenthood Report Show Need to Defund Abortion Giant” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Fallen Marine’s Mom Teaches Powerful Memorial Day Lesson

/0 Comments/in , /by

Lt. Col. Christopher Raible died three days after the 2012 Benghazi attack in the little-remembered Taliban siege on Camp Bastion in Afghanistan.

Raible’s mom, Kim, along with the family of fellow fallen Marine Sgt. Bradley Atwell, waged a vigilant battle to keep their heroes’ memories alive and to hold their government accountable for its malfeasance and cover-up.

This past month, Kim Raible has had to wage another fight on behalf of her son. A few weeks ago, she recounted on Facebook how her request for a local Memorial Day banner in the Pittsburgh suburb of Norwin honoring her son was rejected:

As we enter the month of May, the month that has so much meaning to me, our military, and their families, I was astounded today at the cruel blow the Norwin Rotary handed to me this morning. A few years ago, that Rotary started a banner program making these beautiful military banners that were hung in our town to anyone that wanted their military loved one on a banner. I was approached by a member of the Norwin Rotary to use our son Christopher Raible (KIA September 14, 2012) on the flyer that would be put into businesses for families to pick up and fill out to order a banner for their military loved one and in that same year for using our son on their flyers—a banner was hung in his honor.

Last year, there was not a banner in his honor and I did not understand why. This year, I dropped a check at the office of Dr. Aiello to hope to pay for a banner to be hung (they were members of the rotary and the people that initiated the banner program) so to be sure he was not forgotten. I received a call from Mrs. Aiello asking me what the check was for, as the banners were free, and I had told her to keep the check as a donation anyway and order the banner for my son. She then told me that my son’s banner could not be hung as the Norwin Rotary was not allowing KIA soldiers to be included on the streets of Irwin for this program, only active military. She stated that they would not have enough money to pay for KIA soldiers, too…. wow, not enough money to pay for a soldier that paid with his life.

I was willing to pay for my son’s banner but was still told they were not allowing KIA solders in their program. I was beyond blown away as I asked her why, and was told it was only for active military and not KIA soldiers. Apparently, no one at this Rotary must know the true meaning of Memorial Day or the reason for its observance.

Mrs. Raible told me that after she voiced her frustration with the policy, other families of KIA soldiers came forward to protest. She also found out that other local organizations had adopted similar policies, including “the VFW of North Huntingdon/Irwin as well as the American Legion.”

A military mom never forgets.

Here’s the good news.

Last week, in response to Mrs. Raible’s pleas, the Irwin City Council approved the flying of banners displaying the photos of three local servicemen who were killed in action at the entrance to a local park. “In addition,” the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported, “the borough plans to allow the posting of banners for other military personnel not included in an existing banner program that honors service members from Irwin, North Huntingdon and North Irwin.” Jim Halfhill, the region’s director of public works and a former Marine, volunteered to put the banners up himself.

A military mom never forgets. And must never rest. Mrs. Raible’s fight for her son’s memory is a fight for all of our fallen. It’s a fight about never taking our freedom for granted—and never, ever forgetting those in uniform who paid the ultimate price for it. (For more from the author of “Fallen Marine’s Mom Teaches Powerful Memorial Day Lesson” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Anti-War Marchers Dump Pro-Life Allies

/0 Comments/in , /by

An anti-war march will be held in Pittsburgh on the first of July. Local advocacy groups are sponsoring it. But the organizers just booted one sponsor: Rehumanize International.

As Marlo Safi reported in The Pitt Maverick: “Rehumanize International said the march organizers had retracted the sponsorship after discovering they were anti-abortion.”

In January, Rehumanize International was also excluded from the Women’s March on Washington. They were known as Life Matters Journal at the time.

Executive Director Aimee Murphy says her team will attend the march anyway. I spoke with her on the phone Thursday evening.

“We as an organization embrace the consistent life ethic,” she said. This philosophy isn’t limited to the abortion issue. “We need to respect every human being’s life from conception to natural death.” That means opposing “all forms of aggression and violence,” including unjust war.

Aimee Murphy’s Consistency is Too Much for Some

Aimee Murphy is a progressive. But her “consistent life ethic” is a stumbling block to many on the Left.

“I’ve been interested in getting involved in peace organizations for a long time,” she said. But she “didn’t hear about a single anti-war march” in Pittsburgh until Donald Trump was elected. The anti-war movement “was largely silent during the Obama administration.”

When Pittsburgh activists started planning a march this year, “we volunteered to help,” Murphy said. Her team was excited to get involved in Pittsburgh, where Rehumanize International is based.

Then organizers found out they were pro-life. Rehumanize International was ousted.

Some accuse Murphy of supporting a “war on women” by opposing abortion. “This stems from either a misunderstanding or a willful ignorance about the humanity of the preborn child. Because if abortion doesn’t kill a human being, then it’s just a bunch of crazy people trying to control women’s bodies,” she said.

Murphy said she sympathizes with her opponents. “I’m a feminist. If I did not understand the scientific reality of the humanity of the preborn child, I’m sure I would be on their side.”

But she won’t back down on the science. She says she can “pull out 10 different embryology textbooks” that show human life begins at fertilization. “If you understand that, then our position is the one that’s fully consistent.”

Murphy: Being Pro-Life Isn’t ‘Conservative’

Some say Rehumanize International is a liberal front group for conservative values. Murphy denies it. “We’re not a rightwing group. Most of the people in leadership in our organization are very liberal and very progressive.”

Murphy said pro-abortion progressives “don’t want to come to terms with the fact that standing against abortion is a very progressive cause. Extending the respect for human rights to more humans is not a regressive cause. It’s a progressive cause.”

Ultimately, Murphy doesn’t care about political tribes. She remembers an interviewer joking that he couldn’t figure out her political leanings. “I guess you care more about human rights than you do about politics,” he said.

“You are one thousand percent correct,” she told him.

I emailed the Pittsburgh March Against War organizers for a comment. As of this writing they have not responded. (For more from the author of “Anti-War Marchers Dump Pro-Life Allies” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

These Practical Pro-Life Programs Help Moms Finish School

/0 Comments/in , /by

The story of a high school senior whose pregnancy has barred her from walking at her graduation and removed her from her student leadership positions has sparked a debate within the pro-life community.

A story at the New York Times spells out how a spokesman for 18-year-old Maddi Runkles’ Christian high school – Heritage Academy in Hagerstown, Md. – stood by the decision, calling it an internal matter. The original story concedes that the internal debate is a difficult one between policies that affirm life and policies that affirm traditional moral teachings on premarital sex.

Over the past few days, two camps have arisen in pro-life circles about the incident. One sides with Students for Life of America (SFLA) – who supported Runkles in the NYT story – saying that the school shouldn’t have penalized her for choosing to keep her baby. The other includes The Blaze’s Matt Walsh, who took to Facebook to defend Heritage Academy’s decisions.

Regardless of where you are in the debate, one inescapable fact is that Runkles – a young woman of an age to start college – is a member of a demographic extremely vulnerable to the temptation of abortion.

Statistics from the Guttmacher institute – a research arm of Planned Parenthood – show that young women of high school and college age account for over 45 percent of all abortions performed. Furthermore, a 2009 study also found that girls at private religious schools were more likely to have abortions than their counterparts at public schools, statistically speaking.

Ergo, for every Maddi Runkles, there are scores of other girls whose children will never see the light of day in large part because of the multitude of pressures these young women face.

How could the school have responded? And what are other institutions doing to affirm the lifesaving choices that girls like Maddi have made in the face of this kind of pressure and uncertainty?

Debbie Capen was once in Runkles’ shoes and made the choice to abort – a choice she deeply regrets. Now she helps other young women in the same tough situation make the choice for life in her role as the executive director of Mira Via, a maternity home in the Charlotte, N.C., area geared toward helping young single moms choose life and college at the same time.

Historically affiliated with Catholic Belmont Abbey College (BAC) in the area, Mira Via – Latin for “miraculous way” — is a program that offers pregnant women and young moms in college the resources, instructions, shelter, and childcare they need for up to two years in order to finish a degree.

For Debbie Capen, programs like this are simply part of being consistently pro-life in an institution’s beliefs as well as its policies, especially when the choice for life is as counter-cultural as it is today.

“Society has taught that being burdened with a child is some sort of a punishment,” Capen tells me over the phone, with the baby in her lap audibly cooing in the background. “We live in a culture where everything is supposed to be as easy as possible and as pain-free as possible. So when young women come to us, it’s like they have a cloud over their head with all these worries and concerns and that it is the end of their lives and they don’t know where to go.”

However, the staff at Mira Via work to lift this cloud through education, assistance, and time to sort out those issues. Once those worries are dispelled, Capen says, the moms typically experience a sense of not only relief, but joy. This allows them “not to see the child as a punishment, but as a gift,” she adds. And she loves seeing that change take place.

“It’s one of the most amazing transformations,” Capen says. “To witness that moment where they realize that they don’t have to feel this pressure, that it’s up to them to choose the fate of this child, then they can welcome the child with joy. By the time they leave our program, they all can’t believe that they were so afraid of this.”

When asked about situations like the one described by the New York Times, Capen says that adding consequences to a situation that already has enough of them is unfair, unnecessary, and unhelpful.

“[The mother] cannot escape the visible consequence [of her actions], whereas the father of the child does not have a visible consequence that everyone can see,” she explains. “Consequences are natural. The child is the natural consequence to her situation that does not need to be added to with the component of shame.”

“This young woman may have fallen down in her own personal walk,” Capen concludes, “but now she has gotten up and chosen to take the next good step, and she should not be punished for taking the next good step.”

And while women staying at Mira Via can go to any school they wish, BAC also offers them assistance in the form of two years of free tuition to help them finish their degrees.

“For us as a college, we were put in a position to figure out how we could help,” explains BAC spokesman Rolando Rivas. “So, it was important for us to step up and do equally to what the monastery had done and try to find a way to help support these young ladies at this critical time.”

Mira Via was the first program of its kind in the U.S., but it is no longer alone. One of several other such programs is located at the College of St. Mary in Omaha (CSM). CSM’s Mother’s Living and Learning program is currently ranked number one in the nation for student residential maternity homes, according to the Cardinal Newman Society.

Lacy Dodd Miske got pregnant during her senior year at the University of Notre Dame in 1999. She was able to keep her child and her future career thanks to the support of pregnancy resource centers in the local community and her hometown, as well as a delayed active duty start date in the U.S. Army.

After a five-year stint in the military, she moved to Charlotte with her daughter, where she started her civilian career. She felt called to give back and worked at Mira Via. She served on the board of directors for six years, until a military assignment for her husband – whom she met and married after the birth of her daughter, now 17 – moved her away.

She too says that piling on to a young woman’s situation when she has chosen life is unnecessary.

“If a student becomes pregnant, a Christian school and community should show support for the young woman’s decision to have the baby and not create a stigma around it, whether at the high school or college level,” says Lacy. “It is a lack of resources which is a huge cause of abortion. Schools need to show more openness and support for the choice for life.”

Capen also shares some personal experience with the girls she helps. She herself had an abortion as a young woman because “she had no other choice.” Now she works with several young moms who have found themselves in the same place.

Capen recalls one instance at a pro-life rally where she was confronted by the director of an abortion clinic. Capen was holding a sign: “I regret my abortion.” She recalls how the director of the clinic came out and “stuck a finger in my face,” informing her that pro-lifers were, in her own view, “shaming women through the front door.”

“As someone who was post-abortive, I understood because I got it,” she says. “I did not want to disappoint anybody. I did not want to hurt anyone in my family.”

“By providing organizations like Mira Via,” she explains, “it alleviates all of those fears and shame factors” that drive women through the doors in the first place. (For more from the author of “These Practical Pro-Life Programs Help Moms Finish School” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Are Gays and Lesbians Throwing One of Their Own Under the Bus?

/0 Comments/in , /by

Gay and lesbian websites have jumped all over recent research supposedly showing that Dan Savage’s immensely popular “It Gets Better” anti-gay bullying campaign — strongly endorsed by everyone from Hollywood celebrities to then-President Obama and Vice President Biden — does more harm than good.

Two things stand out about this. First, gays, lesbians, and their allies have a history of battling science that doesn’t support their agenda. Their usual claim is that the research is “flawed.” (George Yancey wrote on this recently for The Stream.) For some reason they didn’t do that this time. Instead they’re practically throwing Savage under the bus.

Second, this research — unlike many other studies that gay activists have objected to — really is hopelessly flawed. Or at least there’s nothing in it to support the conclusion that “It Gets Better” is bad for young gays and lesbians.

Now, I’m no fan of Dan Savage. You’ll see why in a moment. But I find it odd that these gays and lesbians seem so willing to steamroll him. I can’t help wondering whether it’s because they know he’s wrong, and he’s embarrassing them besides.

The story has many twists. I’ll start with Dan Savage himself.

Dan Savage, The Anti-Bullying Bully Who Wants to Say “It Gets Better”

Savage is a gay sex columnist and (in his own words) “potty-mouthed political pundit” who founded “It Gets Better” to reduce anti-gay bullying. He’s a bully himself (potty mouth warning ), so it’s clear he’s okay with that sort of behavior, just as long as it isn’t directed against his people. The hypocrisy is absolutely staggering.

He launched “It Gets Better” in 2010 with one video he co-produced along with his “partner” Terry Miller. It grew into a website featuring thousands of like-minded videos. President Obama, Michelle Obama and Vice President Biden all contributed videos to the project, along with many celebrities.

Savage summarized “It Gets Better” in a 2011 interview with NPR: “A bullied gay teenager who ends his life is saying that he can’t picture a future with enough joy in it to compensate for the pain he’s in now.” That’s true enough, and well worth working on. There’s no need to say “gay” in there, though. It’s the same for any bullied teen.

He added,

Things didn’t just get better for me. All of the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender adults I knew were leading rich and rewarding lives. … People pursue happiness in different ways — but we all had so much to be thankful for, and so much to look forward to. Our lives weren’t perfect; there was pain, heartbreak and struggle. But our lives were better. Our lives were joyful.

That’s doubtful. It might even be dreaming on his part. I don’t know all the people Dan Savage knows, but I do know that solid research reported last fall in The New Atlantis shows that LGBT people are, on average, more emotionally troubled than the rest of the population. Their distress can’t be explained just by their being an “embattled minority” or any such thing. There’s something inherently distressing about homosexuality. From a biblical and natural law perspective, that something is easy to identify: homosexuality runs contrary to the way God designed us.

Gay Media and the University of Arizona Research

So young LGBT people have a lot to cope with. Of course that includes bullying. Their coping mechanisms were the subject of the research in question here. Gay media jumped all over its purported finding on “It Gets Better.”

Queerty said, “But new research finds the project [“It Gets Better”] might actually be doing more harm than good.” (Link not included because of objectionable content on the page.) The Washington Blade’s headline read, “‘It Gets Better’ may be harmful: study.” NewNowNext came right out and called it “bad advice.”

What the Study Really Shows

But that’s not what the study says. It didn’t examine “It Gets Better” at all. It did look into the effects of “imagining a better future,” which is only distantly related to the whole “It Gets Better” idea. “Imagining a better future” was just one item on a questionnaire, lumped together with three others: “Spending more time by yourself to figure things out,” “Just trying to put it all out of your mind” and “Avoiding other people.”

Because it was combined with these other items, all of which have something to do with pulling away, withdrawing or escaping, “Imagining a better future” in this case had very little to do with the active hope promoted by the “It Gets Better” project. Most survey respondents probably thought of it in terms of daydreaming: imagining that they would somehow magically turn straight, for example, or imagining the U.S. had a gay president.

That sort of impossible imagining doesn’t help people who are hurting — which is no news, by the way: social scientists have known it for decades. It’s not, however, what “It Gets Better” promotes.

Granted, the study’s lead researcher, Russell Toomey of the University of Arizona, told NewNowNext, “Our findings question the ’It Gets Better’ narrative that’s been given to LGB youth.” Scientists speak that way all the time, and what they generally mean by it is that here’s something unknown there, a question that calls for further study. Nothing more: there are no conclusions to be drawn, just a question. The study was a small one, by the way, and limited to the San Francisco Bay area. The report’s authors noted that it wasn’t strong enough to draw sweeping new conclusions.

It’s a long leap from “questioning the narrative” to the conclusion, “it’s bad advice,” but that’s where these gay websites took it.

Do They Know It Doesn’t Get That Much Better?

Thus we have one of gay activism’s most heavily promoted projects coming under some slight question; it doesn’t even amount to criticism. Gay websites haven’t denounced it as they usually do. They’re promoting it instead. Why?

Two possible explanations come to mind. I can’t prove either one is true, so I have to frame them as questions.

First, have they decided Dan Savage has been wrong all along? Have they realized it really doesn’t get that much better? Bullying may decrease as gays and lesbians get older, with the world celebrating homosexuality more and more these days. But bullying isn’t their only problem. Homosexuality really is strongly associated with depression and other emotional stresses, not all of which can be blamed on other people’s anti-gay attitudes. So I wonder whether they’re losing hope, as they find they’re still not experiencing the “rich” and “joyful” life Savage promised them.

Maybe They’re Embarrassed

And then there’s Dan Savage’s potty mouth and his non-stop bullying. Have they perhaps noticed his extreme profanity and his blatant hypocrisy, along with his failed promises of life getting better? Are they embarrassed by Dan Savage? They certainly should be.

Throw him under the bus? I don’t know, but this might be the excuse some of them have been waiting for. (For more from the author of “Are Gays and Lesbians Throwing One of Their Own Under the Bus?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.