Woman Sues Abortion Center Over Violation of Informed Consent Regarding Fetal Research

/0 Comments/in , /by

Jessica Duran is suing Southwestern Women’s Options (SWO), an abortion center in New Mexico, for giving her aborted daughter’s body to University of New Mexico for taxpayer-funded fetal research without her knowledge or consent.

Duran, who received an abortion from SWO in 2012, is being supported in her lawsuit by non-profit pro-life group New Mexico Alliance for Life (NMAFL).

At a press conference at the University of New Mexico Monday morning, Duran said “my right to choose was violated” by SWO. “They take advantage of women like me in frantic situations by not giving us all the facts and information we are entitled to,” Duran said.

According to the lawsuit filed at the Second Judicial District Court in Bernalillo County, New Mexico, SWO provided Duran with a consent form indicating that “tissue and parts” of her aborted baby could be used in medical research. However, the center failed to inform Duran of important specifics, such as the nature and extent of how her baby would be used in research, the fact that SWO was the sole supplier of fetal tissue to UNM (several SWO staff physicians are also volunteer faculty members at UNM), who she could contact with questions about the process, or the fact that the donation of her baby’s body to fetal research was voluntary.

“I was never informed of the University of New Mexico’s collaboration with SWO for research,” Duran said in a NMAFL press release Monday morning, “which appears to have influenced SWO employees to encourage me to abort my daughter.”

Duran’s lawsuit accuses SWO of deceptive trade practices and violation of state law, which requires informed consent before providing an abortion.

“We have evidence that suggests UNM and SWO have been violating women’s rights to informed consent since 1995,” said Elisa Martinez, NMAFL Director, in Monday’s press release. Martinez and Duran are asking New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas to criminally investigate SWO and UNM.

NMAFL isn’t the only group investigating the relationship between and fetal harvesting practices of SWO and NMAFL. The Congressional Select Panel on Infant Lives issued a criminal referral to Balderas earlier this year for “prosecution of various acts” by SWO and UNM.

“UNM Health Sciences Center and Southwestern Women’s Options can no longer deny wrongdoing,” Martinez said; “there are victims out there who were deceived and whose rights were violated in the harvesting of aborted babies’ bodies.”

NMAFL has launched a new website where women like Duran who have had abortions at SWO and believe their rights were violated can submit a complaint.

At the press conference, Martinez further detailed the “shocking” practices NMAFL had discovered in their investigation of SWO and UNM, including the dissecting of an unborn 7-month old brain by students at a UNM summer camp. The brain had been ordered “whole and fixed” by UNM from SWO.

Laura Rosecrans of Surrendered Hearts Abortion Recovery Ministries said that many women are re-traumatized when they learn after-the-fact that their aborted babies’ bodies are used for such purposes.

“My baby was not just a clump of cells,” Duran said in NMAFL’s press release Monday morning. “That’s the lie that is being exposed: my baby was fully human, and her body was highly valuable for the sum of her parts, for UNM research projects.”

Watch the recorded press conference from NFMAL here. (For more from the author of “Woman Sues Abortion Center Over Violation of Informed Consent Regarding Fetal Research” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

‘Make Christmas Great Again. Skip Church!’ Says New Atheist Billboard

/0 Comments/in , /by

The group American Atheists is once again campaigning to keep people out of the pews on Christmas.

After featuring an image of Santa on their billboards last year, urging passers-by to “Go ahead and skip church! Just be good for goodness’ sake,” American Atheists is doubling down.

This year, the group has debuted not one, but two signs, which will be up for the entire month of December in cities such as Colorado Springs, Colo., Lynchburg, Va. and Shreveport, La. The group has even been so kind as to provide a map of their billboard’s locations (see below).

The first and more widespread billboard depicts a young girl texting a friend there’s “no way” she’s going to church this Christmas because she doesn’t “believe that stuff anymore.” And her parents? They’ll just have to “get over it.” Charming young lady.

The second billboard takes its play right out of Donald Trump’s signature campaign hat — or, one could say, right off of it. “Make Christmas Great Again,” the sign declares, “Skip Church!”

American Atheists announced the billboards last Thursday in a post on their website.

“In what has become an annual holiday tradition, American Atheists launched two billboards nationwide urging viewers to celebrate an ‘atheist Christmas’ by skipping church,” the release said.

Following the announcement, the group took to social media to share coverage of their billboards as well as to counter their critics.

“‘Anti-Christian?’ Nah,” the group tweeted in one response to a Fox News video. “Anti-church, anti-being-forced-to-do-things-you-don’t-believe, maybe. We’re happy to discuss.”

This journalist could live under a rock, but I’ve never heard of someone being forced to attend a church service before. On the contrary, I’ve come across many a parent who have regretfully informed me that their son or daughter had decided not to come to church — usually with a prayer request attached. But never “forced.”

No Belief in God? No Consistency of Message Either

Also, a quick scroll down the Twitter page finds this tweet from just last week, in response to Donald Trump tapping Rep. Tom Price, Ga.-R, for Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services.

“Price is a co-sponsor of the disastrous ‘First Amendment Defense Act’ that lets people break civil rights laws they think their god apposes (sic),” along with the follow up tweet, “The re-definition of ‘religious liberty’ by people like Price has eroded the rights of women, LGBT people, and all Americans. We must fight.” That doesn’t sound very “anti-being-forced-to-do-things-you-don’t-believe” to me.

In another response to the same Fox News clip, American Atheists said, “Also: ‘War on Christmas?’ We’re literally saying that it’s fine to celebrate Xmas w/out the religious stuff. Not sure how that’s a ‘war.’” This tweet came after the group’s original billboard announcement on Twitter, which was gleefully accompanied with “#WarOnChristmas”.

The ChristianExaminer, in their report of the billboards, called American Atheists out on their misleading use of a statistic in the billboard announcement.

According to the announcement,

A recent survey from the Public Religion Research Institute shows that a quarter of Americans and almost 40% of young people are atheist or non-religious. This billboard campaign is specifically aimed at that growing population, especially those who no longer believe but still occasionally attend religious services or call themselves religious despite their lack of belief.

“Presumably, they believe a good number of that group is atheist. But they aren’t telling the whole story,” the ChristianExaminer writes.

The “nones” are comprised of those disenchanted with religion, those apathetic to it, and those who are “unattached” to a denomination or church. Among the apathetic and unattached, a significant number still claim to believe in God. The number of true atheists still hovers around 11 percent of the U.S. population.

The American Atheists billboards came right as the Freedom From Religion Foundation released their own December activism plan, dubbed “Heathens’ Greetings — FFRF’s Winter Solstice Survival Guide.” In the release, the FFRF announced the beginning of its “annual “War on State/Church Separation” and called for activists to “create a little controversy” — possibly with the group’s Bill of Rights “Nativity” displays. (For more from the author of “‘Make Christmas Great Again. Skip Church!’ Says New Atheist Billboard” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Early Christmas! No Draft for Women and Philosopher Warfighter Nominated for SecDef

/0 Comments/in , /by

One could almost feel sorry for President Obama. Practically moments after confirmation that there wasn’t enough Senate support on either side of the aisle for drafting women, we see headlines that “White House announces support for adding women to military draft.”

Obama can do nothing to make this so. Only Congress can, and their decision is already made. The statement was little more than a head-pat to his base. America’s daughters will not be drafted for combat with ISIS, Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, or any other woman-stoning, gay-murdering enemies.

No Military Draft for Women

This is a victory for our military’s combat readiness and America’s young, able-bodied women, who should not be forced into being infantry replacements — the stated purpose of the draft during a large-scale war. Drafting them would require signing up equal numbers of women in all jobs — anything else wouldn’t be “equitable.” Only a tiny portion of the female population qualifies for the military as it is, and they, even having made the cut to join up, suffer an average of 2-10 times the injuries of their male counterparts.

It would be a bureaucratic nightmare for nearly no return to sift through millions of young women in order to find one or two who might be able to make men’s infantry unit standards but would still be at a stark disadvantage for survival in combat. Doing the same number of pull-ups also won’t mitigate the higher rates of injury, the fact that women are higher-value targets to our current enemies, or the other disproportionate risks women face.

Having equal rights under the law does not mean that men and women have the same obligations for the nation’s defense. Drafting women would mean more casualties, more coming home in body bags, and more missions lost. It would compromise our country’s security.

Now Congress can get back to hashing out other provisions in the military appropriations bill like the categorization of the sage grouse. In a world where this is in the spending bill for our national defense, it’s a wonder that common sense prevailed.

Secretary of Defense Mattis

Another early Christmas gift is the news that President-Elect Trump has chosen Marine Gen. James Mattis to serve as Secretary of Defense. Those who know the legendary general couldn’t be happier, and enemies of freedom the world over have every reason to fear. Mattis is a bold and plain-spoken warfighter, but also a well-read and philosophical student of history and warfare.

He is for American engagement around the world, but not endless military engagements with no clear plan for victory. He has a keen understanding of foreign policy and a deep affection for those who serve in America’s defense. He has not hesitated to name the enemy and believes in confronting even the most complicated military and foreign policy problems head on, rather than letting them fester for the next generation to handle.

Though some are concerned over his opposition to women in combat units, and his rejection of the idea that combat deployed troops are victims broken by their service, those who care about our military’s readiness to fight our merciless enemies and the welfare of those who do so know there is no better choice than James Mattis. He takes war extremely seriously and won’t be frivolous in recommending military operations.

He cares deeply for those who, as he puts it, close in on the last 600 yards of foreign policy, and their families that support them and endure their loss, injury and sacrifice. He believes in reason over impulse, in not repeating the mistakes of the past that have been learned in blood, and working with our friends and allies across the globe to ensure that savages like ISIS don’t prevail.

Making America great again includes restoring a credible military able to withstand any test — and we will be tested, probably sooner than later. For reversing the decline of the military and her material, and making her combat ready again, there’s no better man for the job. Indeed, we have much to be grateful for this holiday season. (For more from the author of “Early Christmas! No Draft for Women and Philosopher Warfighter Nominated for SecDef” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Satanic Temple Slams New Texas Fetus Burial Rule Opposed by Pro-Choice Groups

/0 Comments/in , /by

Abortion rights activists may have found an unlikely ally in the Satanic Temple, which has vowed to oppose a new Texas state rule requiring fetal tissue be given a burial or cremation.

In two weeks, a new state rule on medical waste will take effect in Texas, meaning aborted fetal tissue must undergo “interment.”

From December 18, Texas hospitals and abortion clinics will no longer be permitted to place fetal tissue in sanitary landfills and instead will have to organize a burial of sorts. Although not an official law, the rule could be used to guide court procedures.

TEXAS RULE ON FETAL REMAINS THE SATANIC TEMPLE RELIGIOUS DEFENSE OF REPRODUCTIVE
RIGHTS
The Texas Department of Health and Human Services plans to enforce new rules that require that fetal tissue must be buried or cremated and can no longer be disposed of in sanitary landfills as they are in every other state. The Satanic Temple believes burial rites are a well-established component of religious practice. This is undisputed in the entirety of US legal history. In addition, members of The Satanic Temple believe in the inviolability of the body and, as such, these rules contradict our fundamental beliefs. The First Amendment protects our right to practice our beliefs,
and under the Religious Freedom Reform Act (RFRA), the State must present a compelling reason for why they want to enforce rules that inhibit adherence to our religious
practices. Clearly, the State of Texas has no compelling reason because these rules were
not enacted to promote health and safety, but rather to harass and burden women who terminate their pregnancies. For these reasons, members of The Satanic Temple are not required to comply with the Texas rule on fetal remains. Nevertheless, we will require legal support to protect the
rights of our members. Read more at thesatanictemple.com and religiousreproductiverights.com #thesatanictemple #religiousreproductiverights

A photo posted by The Satanic Temple (@thesatanictemple) on

The Satanic Temple, which uses Satan as a symbol to promote secularism, has now denounced the rule for enforcing a “well-established component of religious practice.”

The group has already targeted the inclusion of religious practices in education and local government by setting up an “After School Satan Club” in Oregon and hailing the Dark Lord in a prayer at an Alaskan council meeting. (Read more from “Satanic Temple Slams New Texas Fetus Burial Rule Opposed by Pro-Choice Groups” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Could We Please Quit Pretending It’s About Marriage Equality?

/0 Comments/in , /by

Betsy DeVos, Donald Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Education is opposed to marriage equality. Representative Tom Price, Trump’s nominee for Secretary of HHS, is also opposed to marriage equality. Three other Trump Cabinet selections are against marriage equality, according to the strongly pro-gay Human Rights Campaign. Vice-President-elect Mike Pence has been working against it for years.

Brian Soucek, an acting professor of law at UC Davis, views all this with alarm. He wants to ward off “the threat to marriage equality in California” by repealing Proposition 8 — in case a future U.S. Supreme Court repeals its recent pro-gay marriage ruling.

I hate to tell him, but whether or not Proposition 8 is repealed, there’s going to be marriage inequality either way. There’s marriage inequality even now, under Obergefell v. Hodges. The case was always billed as a battle for marriage equality, but that was never what it was about.

It’s time we quit pretending. It isn’t just Donald Trump’s Cabinet that disbelieves in marriage equality. It isn’t just Jimmy Seibert, controversial pastor to HGTV’s Chip and Joanna Gaines. It’s Brian Soucek, too. It’s the Human Rights Campaign, along with virtually every other gay activist. It’s all of us.

No one believes in marriage equality.

No one, that is, except members of the hyper-radical fringe who want to do away with marriage altogether. They’re the only ones who really believe in marriage equality. Otherwise “marriage equality” has never been anything but a slogan.

Rhetoric in Action

It’s a good one, as slogans go; I’ll grant it that. Borrowed straight from America’s most magnificent noble ideals, it’s got the all right stuff to pack a a powerful rhetorical punch. Why shouldn’t marriage equality be self-evidently a human right, just as much as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness! Who could possibly oppose such a positive vision?

But it gets better. The phrase also trades in the guilt we’ve felt over falling short of our country’s founding ideals. No sensitive human being would be caught dead being against it — not after all the ethical and social failures we’ve been guilty of for so long. We’re not making those mistakes again!

There’s a problem, though. For all its rhetorical usefulness, “marriage equality” can’t be a self-evident human right if it’s self-evidently self-contradictory and impossible — which is exactly what it is.

What “Marriage Equality” Would Mean, if Anyone Really Meant It

Consider what would happen if we took equality seriously as a primary principle for deciding what should count as marriage. It would mean calling an end to all of our exclusionary biases, like our prejudice against father-daughter marriages, multiple-partner marriages, sibling marriages, indeed, any relationship that anyone wants to label “marriage.” If you want marriage equality, that’s the only way you’ll really get it.

Of course LGBT activists are always quuick to tell us “No! That’s not what we meant!” They’re not at all interested in setting the stage for polygamy or incestuous marriages, they say; and I believe them. I just have trouble believing the part where they tell me at the same time they’re for marriage equality, because clearly they believe in marriage inequality, too, beyond their chosen line of marriage demarcation.

We All Draw Our Lines of Equality and Inequality

We all have lines of marriage demarcation. Marriage conservatives place our boundary in the space between opposite-sex relationships and same-sex relationships. Couples on one side of that line may be candidates for marriage; couples on the other side cannot. Couples on one side all deserve fully equal access to marriage (certain other reasonable conditions being in place, of course). In other words, we believe in marriage equality, but only up to a certain line; beyond that there is inequality, as we freely admit.

Marriage revisionists draw a line that looks almost exactly like our line, other than including same-sex couples. They, like we, are quick to exclude underage persons, incestuous relationships, polygamy and so on. As one pro-gay commentator wrote on the day the Supreme Court ruled in favor of gay marriage, “Justice Kennedy today wrote the opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, finding state bans on same-sex marriage unconstitutional, and securing full marriage equality for gays and lesbians across America.” Marriage equality extends to gays and lesbians, now, but no further. In other words, LGBT activists believe in marriage equality, but only up to a certain line; beyond that there is inequality, as they freely admit.

Now I’m sure you’ve caught it already, but it bears repeating: we all believe in marriage equality up to a certain line, and inequality beyond that line. We all agree on marriage equality, and we all believe in marriage inequality. Our only disagreement is over the location of the line.

Some Lines are More Principled Than Others

So how do we all decide where to place our lines of marriage exclusion? Marriage conservatives can make a strong, principled case for the location of our line. It has to do with history, with family and community stability, with the social and physical health of individuals (especially women), and much more.

Those who stand for gay marriage can make no such principled case. Virtually all the arguments they make for gay marriage work just as well for any sort of couple, threesome, foursome, etc. that wants to call their relationship “marriage.” So why don’t these others get “marriage equality,” too? LGBT activists have been quick to say, “We don’t intend that for a moment! We’ve only asked to have marriage equality for gays and lesbians.” But why? From here it looks perfectly arbitrary.

Or maybe it’s not so arbitrary. Their line is in exactly the right place to gain the social approval they’ve needed for their cause. Activist leaders have long cautioned LGBT people against asking for too much too soon, knowing that they would surely suffer a backlash if they pushed too hard. This marriage-equality line of theirs looks suspiciously as if it’s landed where it is because it suits gay activists’ political purposes.

Enough Pretending Already

At any rate it should be clear enough: we all agree on marriage equality up to a certain line, and inequality beyond it. Our only disagreement is over the placement of the line. So let’s call this “marriage equality” slogan what it is: it’s a sham. Marriage equality isn’t real. The slogan exists only to arouse patriotism and guilt, and to make the conservative view on marriage appear morally inferior. Given that we all believe in marriage equality up to a certain boundary, however, it is no moral fault to prefer a principled boundary over an arbitrary one.

But LGBT activists will undoubtedly continue the sham. They don’t dare quit it. They can’t afford to give it up; it’s too much of a rhetorical powerhouse for them. They have to keep on pretending it’s about marriage equality. But we don’t have to keep letting them get away with the pretense. (For more from the author of “Could We Please Quit Pretending It’s About Marriage Equality?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Unexpected Friendship: 4-Year-Old Gives Hugs and Purpose to Elderly Widower

/0 Comments/in , /by

When Dan Peterson went to the grocery store only months after his wife’s death, he didn’t want to be there. For Dan, everything was a chore. Most days he spent staring out the window at squirrels. As he admitted tearfully in a recent CBS interview, he was just waiting to die — he had no purpose, no reason to live.

But this day brought something different, for as Dan rounded the corner of the canned vegetable aisle, a little girl reached out to him. “Hi old person!” she said happily, “It’s my birthday!” Surprised, Dan smiled. “Well hello, little lady! How old are you today?” he asked.

Norah’s mom, Tara Wood, said the two chatted for a few minutes then they went their separate ways. But after a few minutes, Norah decided she wanted to get a picture with Dan. “And so they posed together, and then they hugged each other like they were long lost friends,” said Tara. When Norah asked for a hug, Dan was taken aback. “A hug? he said, ‘Absolutely!’”

Tara said Norah “zeroed in on him like a missile,” not asking for anything, just wanting Dan to feel loved and to give him that hug. “It was just sweet,” she said.

Dan laughed at the memory, then teared up again. “I said ‘You don’t know, this is the first time for quite a while that I’ve been this happy.’”

Tara thought that was the end of story. She returned home and posted the photos on Facebook.

The post went viral, but something more miraculous happened. A friend of Dan’s told Tara that Dan’s wife had recently passed away — and it had been a long time since she’d seen him so happy. It was through this friend that she was able to get Dan’s contact information.

When she called Dan, he knew exactly who she was. “[Tara] said, ‘Is this the Dan that talked to the little girl at the grocery store?’ I said, ‘Are you talking about Norah?’” Tara and Norah decided to visit Dan and brought a framed picture of the two at the grocery store, pictures she colored and a bag of candy. Dan promptly placed the pictures on his refrigerator. Mom and daughter have been visiting Dan once a week ever since. They even celebrated Dan’s birthday recently — Norah brought balloons and a giant cupcake.

Norah remains concerned about Dan. “Norah has been worried about Mr. Dan being alone. She wanted to know if we could buy him a dog because dogs make everything better,” said Tara. Dan said that Tara convinced Norah that a real dog might not be a good idea, but one day she brought by a present. “And she had this bag and Norah took out a stuffed puppy for me.”

According to Tara, Norah has helped put Dan’s mind at ease. “He said that he hadn’t had an uninterrupted night of sleep for the past several months. Sadness and anxiety had made his mind wander at night, but since meeting Norah, he has slept soundly every single night. He said she healed him.”

Dan believes the meeting was by divine intervention and said he feels that God had a hand in putting the two friends together. Tara said the friendship was just meant to be. “Mostly, she just cares about his well-being and his heart. She wants him to be happy … I guess that’s what friends are supposed to do, huh?”

For Dan, the friendship has given him new meaning and a sense of purpose: “Norah. Watching her grow up. If I didn’t have anything else to do the rest of my life, I have her to love.”

(For more from the author of “Unexpected Friendship: 4-Year-Old Gives Hugs and Purpose to Elderly Widower” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Diversity Police Went Too Far in Attacking HGTV’s Fixer Uppers

/0 Comments/in , , /by

For years I have said that gay activists and their allies would overplay their hand and that their bullying would backfire. It is happening today in front of our eyes as a Christian couple, Chip and Joanna Gaines, who recently graced the cover of People magazine, is now being attacked simply for attending a Christian church. Oh, the thought of it!

Yes, if you are a public figure and you attend a church that preaches that marriage is the union of one man and one woman and you actually believe that homosexuals can be changed by the power of the gospel, you should be shamed, ridiculed and perhaps even fired.

That is the obvious offshoot of BuzzFeed’s recent article which carried the headline, “Chip And Joanna Gaines’ Church Is Firmly Against Same-Sex Marriage.” How terrible!

Chip and Joanna attend a church that actually believes what the Bible says? They’re part of a congregation that preaches what the church has taught for 2,000 years? Worse still, “Their pastor considers homosexuality to be a ‘sin’ caused by abuse,” although, “whether the Fixer Upper couple agrees is unclear.” Horror of all horrors. What kind of monsters are these two?

And note that the Gaines’ crime was not making a public statement against homosexuality, as Duck Dynasty’s Phil Robertson did, after which he was promptly (albeit briefly) suspended by A & E.

Their crime was not making ministry-related statements against abortion and homosexual practice, as the Benham Brothers did, because of which they were promptly fired by HGTV (after that network was bullied by radical left activists).

Their crime was not preaching in their own church that homosexuality was a sin, as Dr. Eric Walsh did, because of which he was fired by the state of Georgia as Public Health Director.

Their crime was not writing a book that made passing, negative reference to homosexual practice as did Kelvin Cochran, because of which he was fired by the city of Atlanta as fire chief.

Their crime was not penning an op-ed piece in a local newspaper, taking respectful issue with the notion that gay is the new black, as Crystal Dixon did, because of which she was fired as Associate Vice President of Human Resources at the University of Toledo.

Their crime was not even signing a petition after a church service which called for a popular vote on same-sex “marriage” in the state of Maryland (rather than letting legislators decide this), as Dr. Angela McCaskill did, because of which she was placed on leave by Gallaudet University in Washington, D.C. where she served as Associate Provost of Diversity and Inclusion (a position, by the way, which made no reference to sexual issues in its description).

No, the crime of Chip and Joanna Gaines was simply that they attend a gospel-preaching church. How much farther will these witch hunts go?

The Gaines and their representatives have not even issued a statement as to their own beliefs (if they do, I sure hope they affirm what their church teaches), nor has there ever been the slightest hint that anything they said on or off the show has been offensive, mean-spirited or hateful. Still, the very fact that they are popular, conservative Christians has put a target on their backs.

I repeat: This kind of shaming and bullying will backfire, and it will backfire sooner rather than later.

That’s why the left-leaning Washington Post already published an article by Brandon Abrosino, himself open and proudly gay, taking issue with the BuzzFeed article and noting that almost 40 percent of Americans are “not on board” with same-sex “marriage.” In response to this Abrosino asks, “Is the suggestion here [meaning, on BuzzFeed] that 40 percent of Americans are unemployable because of their religious convictions on marriage? That the companies that employ them deserve to be boycotted until they yield to the other side of the debate — a side, we should note, that is only slightly larger than the one being shouted down?”

Under no circumstances can gay activists and their allies wave the flag of Equality, Diversity and Tolerance when it comes to the BuzzFeed article. No, this is an overt and explicit attack on equality, diversity and tolerance and is, itself, an example of bigotry and intolerance of the highest order.

So, here’s a word of wisdom for BuzzFeed and those applauding their attack on Chip and Joanna Gaines: The Bible will be here long after you are gone, and the words of Moses, Jesus and Paul will be quoted for generations to come, while articles like the current hit piece on Chip and Joanna will be here today and gone tomorrow.

Put another way, as Bible-believing followers of Jesus, we’re not backing down or cowering in a corner or going underground. We’re here to stay, we are not ashamed, and the more you attack us, the stronger we become.

(For more from the author of “The Diversity Police Went Too Far in Attacking HGTV’s Fixer Uppers” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

House Panel Recommends Criminal Investigation of Planned Parenthood Affiliate

/0 Comments/in , /by

The House of Representatives’ Select Panel on Infant Lives has recommended the Texas Attorney General prosecute a Planned Parenthood affiliate that allegedly, and illegally, sold fetal parts to the University of Texas. The House also approved continued funding for its investigative panel, by a party-line vote of 235 to 176, with just two Democrats voting with the majority.

The Referral

The referral, made earlier today, was formally announced by Rep. Mia Love (R-UT) on the House floor (starting at 3:24 of the video). According to Love, “the Panel learned that Planned Parenthood of Gulf Coast violated both Texas and U.S. law when it sold baby parts to the University of Texas.”

A panel spokesperson confirmed the referral to The Stream. It is the ninth from the Select Panel, which has determined that fetal harvesting company StemExpress, the University of New Mexico and other for-profit and non-profit organizations violated various state and/or federal laws in Ohio, California, New Mexico, Florida and other states.

In California, Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas filed lawsuits against two companies after the panel’s referral. Two other abortion centers have been referred for prosecution in addition to Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast.

The referral is not the first federal controversy for the Planned Parenthood affiliate. In 2013, it settled with the U.S. Department of Justice over allegations that it overcharged Texas and the federal government for various products and services. The $4.3 settlement did not require Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast to admit guilt in the case, which was brought by a former employee-turned-whistleblower.

The Funding

Approximately an hour after Love spoke, the House voted to fund the Panel with up to $800,000 above and beyond the $790,000 already slated for investigations of the fetal harvesting industry. The money comes from taxpayer-funded House reserve funds that have already been appropriated for use by the House, and will fund the Panel until its statutorily-limited existence ends with the start of the 115th Congress.

Democrats have condemned the Panel, calling the money spent on its investigations a waste of taxpayer resources and the investigations themselves “a witch hunt.” The Panel’s Ranking Member, Illinois Democrat Jan Schakowsky, responded after Love’s speech that “bogus referrals do not a conviction make.”

Panel Chair Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), however, said that the investigation has “reveals that the unethical and potentially unlawful practices of some bad actors may be putting important research at risk. Considering all that our Panel has identified, despite having barely a year to conduct this investigation, it is now up to us to build on this work, to hold our government accountable, and to stop these affronts to human dignity.”

Pro-Life Groups React

The Center for Medical Progress, which provided undercover videos in 2015 that led to the Panel’s creation, said in a statement that the Panel’s findings and Texas referral “confirm the criminal activity at Planned Parenthood that CMP’s videos documented and show that the wrongdoing goes even deeper than anyone first suspected.”

“Law enforcement and elected representatives at all levels must now act quickly to bring Planned Parenthood to justice under the law and prevent any more taxpayer subsidies from flowing to Planned Parenthood’s barbaric criminal enterprise,” concluded the pro-life group.

In a press release, Texas Right to Life praised the prosecution referral. “The diligent work of the federal House Select Panel under the leadership of Pro-Life stalwart Representative Marsha Blackburn has renewed hopes in Texas that the shocking evidence revealed by the Center for Medical Progress will be thoroughly investigated and those at fault held accountable to the full extent of the law,” said the group.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said that the Texas referral “is the appropriate next step in bringing justice to bear on a group that clearly sees itself as above the law.” He urged Congress to “once again use the reconciliation process to redirect taxpayer dollars away from Planned Parenthood,” as the legislative body did less than a year ago. (For more from the author of “House Panel Recommends Criminal Investigation of Planned Parenthood Affiliate” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Pro-Life Progress: License of Ohio Abortion Clinic Revoked, Maryland Late-Term Abortionist Quits

/0 Comments/in , /by

An abortion facility in Ohio run by one of the nation’s most notorious abortion doctors has had its operating license revoked by Rick Hodges, director of the state’s Department of Health, CBS News reported.

The license was revoked after abortionist Martin Haskell’s Women’s Med Center of Dayton failed to obtain a transfer agreement with area hospitals, a requirement for abortion facilities in Ohio, CBS News reported. The clinic also failed to name the required number of physicians to standby as backup for emergencies — the only way abortion facilities can be exempt from the transfer agreement.

The clinic plans to appeal the order and has 15 days to do so, according to Dayton Daily News.

As reported earlier by The Stream, Haskell is credited with being the first to scientifically describe partial-birth abortions, after having carried out 700 of the horrific procedures himself.

The closing of Women’s Med Center of Dayton is being credited in part to the pro-life non-profit Created Equal through its Killers Among Us project, which discouraged area physicians from supporting the abortion clinic. The campaign is “aimed at calling out doctors involved in abortions, which included posters, mailers and vehicles circulating through the doctors’ neighborhoods publicizing their names,” Dayton Daily News reported.

“Other ob/gyn’s in the community saw what was going on and didn’t want to be a part of it,” said Jennifer Branch, attorney for the clinic.

Created Equal celebrated in a news release Thursday, with National Director Mark Harrington saying “Our efforts combined with local activists have had an impact.”

Katie Franklin, spokeswoman for Ohio Right to Life, said the organization is “very grateful to see that action is being taken on this facility, and we are hoping thousands of lives in Dayton are saved in the long run.”

Maryland Late-Term Abortionist Walks Out of Clinic

News of the clinic’s revoked license follows the end of another abortionist’s practice — specifically, his practice of providing late-term abortions.

Operation Rescue, a pro-life activist organization, reported last week that Leroy Carhart of Maryland has officially stopped providing late-term abortions at Germantown Reproductive Health Services (GRHS). According to Operation Rescue, GRHS previously provided abortions through all nine months of pregnancy.

But many abortions performed by Carhart were far from safe. Possibly as many as 12 women were transported from his clinic to emergency rooms after botched abortion attempts, Operation Rescue reported in March. One of his patients died after complications following her abortion procedure at 33-weeks.

Operation Rescue President Troy Newman said Carhart’s retirement from late-term abortions is “something to be grateful for.”

“Carhart’s brand of very late-term abortions are morally reprehensible and very dangerous, having taken the lives of countless viable babies and two of his patients,” Newman continued. “We have worked for years to end this atrocity, and today, Maryland is free from the dangers posed by Carhart.”

Carhart still performs abortions up to 20 weeks at a facility near his hometown in Nebraska, according to Operation Rescue. (For more from the author of “Pro-Life Progress: License of Ohio Abortion Clinic Revoked, Maryland Late-Term Abortionist Quits” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

3 Ways Ivanka’s Inner Liberal Is About to Go WILD in Trump’s White House

/0 Comments/in , /by

Now that her father, Donald Trump, will soon be President Trump, Ivanka Trump walks the line between her father’s stated conservative positions and the liberal elite society she is a member of.

A new Politico report confirms as much, with regard to the Ivanka-liberal elite connection. Ivanka also has the ears of her father, as we all know.

So what leftist causes will Ivanka champion in the Trump administration? Here are three biggest possibilities:

1. Climate change

“Ivanka wants to make climate change—which her father has called a hoax perpetuated by the Chinese—one of her signature issues, a source close to her told Politico. The source said Ivanka is in the early stages of exploring how to use her spotlight to speak out on the issue,” Politico’s Annie Karni writes.

Is Ivanka’s influence on climate change apparent already? While campaigning for president, Donald Trump stated he would “cancel” the Paris Agreement, a brainchild of the United Nations. Since getting elected, however, Trump has signaled that he’s open to keeping an executive commitment to the Paris climate accord to limit greenhouse gases. He now says that he is “looking at it very closely” and that he has an “open mind” about it.

2. So called “equal pay”

During her speech at the Republican National Convention in July, Ivanka promised that, as president, her father “will change labor laws” to ensure equal pay for women: “He will fight for equal pay for equal work, and I will fight for this too, right along side of him.”

Ivanka hasn’t been quiet about pushing the liberal myth about women being paid less for equal work — thus the need for equal pay laws. And now that her father is to assume the Oval Office, she’ll exert a lot of influence in advancing the cause.

But Congress is the only entity that can constitutionally change labor laws, and the last equal pay bill Congress considered went down in flames in the GOP Senate two years ago. Earth to Ivanka: A GOP Congress isn’t going to pass an equal pay bill in 2017 either.

3. Paid parental leave

In addition, Ivanka promised that her father “will focus on making quality childcare affordable and accessible for all” during her showcase RNC speech. Sure enough, Trump floated a government welfare plan shortly thereafter that would, among other things, establish a six-week national maternity leave policy, paid for by unemployment insurance.

Now that Trump has been elected president, he has a huge and powerful platform from which to advance any cause he likes. He clearly has taken advice from Ivanka before, and it’s likely he’ll continue to be a vector for his daughter’s leftist agenda.

But it would be far better for Donald Trump to shape policy based off a little something called conservatism and more importantly the U.S. Constitution. (For more from the author of “3 Ways Ivanka’s Inner Liberal Is About to Go WILD in Trump’s White House” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.