No, Republican Voters Are Not ‘Moving on’ From Marriage

/0 Comments/in , /by

A year after the U.S. Supreme Court’s narrow 5-4 ruling redefining marriage, many of the elite in the Republican Party are anxious to declare “the marriage issue” settled. It’s a common refrain from high-ranking Republicans: “The Supreme Court has spoken” and the party should move on to other issues.

The trouble for the echo chamber of corporate lobbyists, paid political consultants, wealthy donors and media personalities who constantly push this narrative is that the actual Republican Party — the tens of millions of Americans who vote in elections — do not buy the refrain, and they regularly hold accountable those who do.

Zerr Zapped

Anne Zerr is the latest example. A state house member in Missouri, Zerr was one of three Republicans who refused to support SJR 39, a proposed amendment to the state constitution that would protect supporters of marriage from being punished by government for refusing to be part of same-sex “marriage.” SJR 39 is essentially the Missouri version of the First Amendment Defense Act pending in Congress.

Grassroots activists had pushed the measure through the state senate to protect the bakers, florists, photographers, innkeepers, and others who have been targeted in other states with lawsuits, fines, and financial and reputational ruin from facing a similar fate in Missouri. SJR 39 would have let voters decide the issue. But when LGBT activists and their allies in corporate America expressed their opposition, Zerr caved and helped kill the proposal.

Unfortunately for Anne Zerr, she then faced voters in a Republican primary race for an open state Senate seat. Social conservatives saw an opportunity to send a message to the echo chamber by opposing her. The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) funded mailers and phone calls targeting Zerr for her refusal to allow voters to protect supporters of marriage. And ordinary voters responded.

NOM endorsed her main opponent, conservative businessman and devout Catholic Bill Eigel, who supported SJR 39. On August 2nd, Eigel defeated Zerr in the Republican primary.

Numerous GOP Political Careers Wrecked By Muffing the Marriage Test

Zerr is not the first Republican to pay with her career for following the urgings of the elite to abandon marriage. She is just the latest.

It’s rarely covered by the media, but the political landscape is littered with the wrecked careers of Republicans who abandoned the party’s commitment to marriage as it has always existed, which is a foundational institution of virtually every faith tradition on the planet.

New York enacted same-sex marriage only because four Republicans in the state senate listened to the political elite and wealthy donors and voted against their party platform and the wishes of their constituents. They were promised, and received, big-time fundraising help from Governor Andrew Cuomo, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Wall Street billionaires. But none of that mattered. Conservatives and marriage supporters like NOM focused voters on their betrayal.

An unprecedented coalition of people with diverse beliefs and backgrounds came together to hold these legislators accountable — including African American and Hispanic clergy, the orthodox Jewish community, New York’s Conservative Party and longtime GOP activists. Today, all four Republicans who for voted for gay “marriage” are now former senators. Despite all the Wall Street money, grassroots activists were able to spread the word about the betrayal these four senators committed — and the voters responded.

Not Even Coastal Republicans are Safe

This phenomenon is not limited to state legislative races. In 2014, two prominent gay Republicans were recruited by GOP leaders in Washington to run for congressional seats in California (Carl DeMaio) and Massachusetts (Richard Tisei). Both made support for gay “marriage” a prominent feature in their election campaigns. As a result, social conservatives opposed them both, some going so far as to endorse their Democratic opponents on the theory that the lesser of two evils was to have a bad Democrat serve for two years rather than a bad Republican serve for decades. DeMaio and Tisei each raised millions, but both were defeated.

A similar thing has happened in races for the US Senate. In California, Republican Tom Campbell, a former state legislator and member of Congress, came out in support of redefining marriage. Social conservatives funded TV ads against him, and he lost a competitive GOP US Senate primary as a result.

The same thing happened in New Hampshire, when NOM funded an ad campaign against wealthy businessman Bill Binnie, who thought gay “marriage” was his ticket to the US Senate. Binnie was defeated. This past cycle, Monica Wehby was the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate in Oregon and promptly aired a TV commercial announcing her support for redefining marriage. Conservatives responded by openly opposing her, and Wehby was trounced.

Naturally, GOP Champions of Natural Marriage Tend to Thrive

Principled Courage Trumps Political Cash

Meanwhile, US Senate candidates in competitive races who stood firm in their support for marriage — often against the wishes of corporate interests and the consulting class — were rewarded. Tom Cotton in Arkansas and Thom Tillis in North Carolina both benefited from independent expenditure campaigns from groups like NOM in winning their elections.

Lest you conclude that this is a battle between social conservative money and corporate money, it’s not primarily the money that matters. Social conservatives are always outspent by the corporate interests, and often badly. What matters is the support of the voters. Once they are alerted to where the candidates stand, they respond. A modest degree of spending by social conservatives produces an outsized response because voters deeply care about the issue.

It’s not only partisan candidates who have seen this effect. In Iowa, three sitting members of the state supreme court, including its chief justice, were removed from the bench by voters furious with their ruling imposing gay “marriage” in that state. An aggressive campaign opposing their judicial retention was mounted by social conservatives to alert voters to their judicial misdeeds.

It should be acknowledged that these races often involve more than the marriage issue. There is usually a range of issues at play in any contested race, whether for the state legislature or Congress. But unquestionably, marriage was a critical issue in all of these contests. Marriage was the issue that drove conservatives to oppose and ultimately defeat incumbents like Anne Zerr in Missouri.

A Solid Platform to Run On

Finally, it is also important to note the importance that support for marriage played most recently in the GOP when grassroots Republican activists made their views clear in crafting the national Republican Party platform last month in Cleveland. Despite an organized and well-funded campaign by Wall Street billionaires and corporate lobbyists to “modernize” the party’s official position on marriage, convention delegates utterly rejected the notion.

The 2016 GOP platform is the most pro-traditional marriage platform ever adopted. It specifically calls for reversing the Obergefell ruling redefining marriage. It explicitly condemns as the product of activist judges the rulings on marriage in both Obergefell and the Windsor case that overturned the federal Defense of Marriage Act, and it calls for the appointment of Supreme Court justices who will reject their reasoning. It endorses the First Amendment Defense Act to protect supporters of marriage from governmental persecution. And it calls for a constitutional amendment to return to the states their right to define marriage solely as the union of one man and one woman.

Never fans of social issues to begin with, it’s a safe bet that the consulting class, corporate lobbyists and wealthy donors will ignore the mountain of evidence all around them that rank-and-file Republican activists and voters revere marriage and will act to defend it. But Republican candidates should come to understand that succumbing to the pleadings of the elite echo chamber can come at a very high price: their very political careers. (For more from the author of “No, Republican Voters Are Not ‘Moving on’ From Marriage” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

As Predicted, Gay Activists Attack the Messengers, Ignore the Evidence

/0 Comments/in , /by

After a major new report was released a little over one week ago challenging the standard LGBT talking points, I predicted that rather than interact with the findings of that report (specifically, a 143-page analysis of 200 previous, peer-reviewed studies), most gay activists and their allies would attack the authors of that study.

Before the day was out, the prediction began to come true, and it has been confirmed numerous times since then.

The report, authored by Lawrence S. Mayer and Paul R. McHugh, was titled, “Sexuality and Gender: Findings from the Biological, Psychological, and Social Sciences,” and was published by The New Atlantis: A Journal of Technology and Society.

On Right Wing Watch, the headline to Peter Montgomery’s article stated, “A New Regnerus? Anti-Equality Groups Promote New Study on Sexual Orientation and Gender.”

He was referring, of course, to Prof. Mark Regnerus, whose studies claiming that children of gay parents do not fare as well as children of straight parents came under such attack that he almost lost his job. So much for academic tolerance and diversity.

“So-Called Findings,” Frightening Funding

Worse still, Montgomery writes, the new report is being hailed by notorious conservatives like Brian Brown of the National Organization of Marriage and Ryan Anderson of the Heritage Foundation. Surely the research must be faulty if conservatives are citing it.

Robbie Medwed, writing for TheNewCivilRights.com, dismisses the report as that of a “Right-Wing Think Tank,” referring to The New Atlantis as “a so-called Journal of Technology and Society,” and then making reference to the report’s “findings” (It’s in quotes, as if to say so-called findings. And note this is “a so-called Journal of Technology and Society.” Perhaps it’s actually a phone book or novel masquerading as a journal?).

Medwed continues, “To fully understand where this study came from and what’s really going on, let’s take a look at its authors and who’s funding it,” pointing to the journal’s conservative affiliations, in particular the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC).

How evil is the EPPC? Medwed cites the organization’s own description: It is an “institute dedicated to applying the Judeo-Christian moral tradition to critical issues of public policy” — how utterly wicked!

But there’s more: “EPPC and its scholars have consistently sought to defend and promote our nation’s founding principles — respect for the inherent dignity of the human person, individual freedom and responsibility, justice, the rule of law, and limited government.”

Surely there is no possible way that an organization like this, which helps publish The New Atlantis, could produce an unbiased, academically rigorous piece of research. Obviously not. It believes in the Judeo-Christian moral tradition!

Boos for McHugh

As for McHugh, “His work has been debunked time and time again. McHugh has a distinguished track record of anti-LGBT bigotry and harm … Simply, there is no possible way anyone can argue that his ‘scholarship’ is unbiased and objective.”

Medwed apparently fails to realize the circular reasoning of his argument, namely, that because McHugh’s research leads him to differ with LGBT talking points, and because LGBT researchers differ with his findings, “there is no possible way anyone can argue that his ‘scholarship’ is unbiased and objective.”

As for Mayer, he “reinterpreted” the data “to fit the outcomes they desired.”

At The Daily Beast, the headline to Samantha Allen’s article said it all: “The Right’s Favorite Anti-LGBT Doctor Strikes Again. Dr. Paul McHugh has a long history of anti-science, anti-LGBT stances. That doesn’t stop conservative media from lauding his work.”

How dare conservatives cite a bigot like him!

Over at The Advocate, the headline to Dean Hamer’s study read, “New ‘Scientific’ Study on Sexuality, Gender is Neither New nor Scientific.”

Scorning the call by Drs. Mayer and McHugh for “more research,” Dr. Hamer wrote, “Mayer has never published a single article on human sexuality or gender (his name doesn’t even appear in the paper’s bibliography), and McHugh actually has a long history of blocking such efforts, beginning with his closure of the pioneering gender identity clinic at Johns Hopkins in 1979. McHugh claimed that his decision was based in science, but his real motivation became clear through his repeated reference to gender-confirmation surgery as a ‘mutilation’ and his decision to explain his actions not in a scientific journal but in a conservative Catholic publication.”

So, Dr. McHugh only “claimed that his decision was based in science.” It obviously was not, since he ended up opposing sex-change surgery and transgender activism.

To The Advocate’s credit, they did ask a respected gay scientist to pen the article, and Dr. Hamer does interact critically with the report. (Again, I said that most would attack the messengers rather than interact with the substance of the report, not that all would.)

The Messengers’ Vehicle Also Attacked

Still, it is noteworthy that Dr. Hamer can hardly be called unbiased himself, since he is famous for his search for a gay gene. And even as a seasoned professional, he cannot hide his disdain, closing with these words: “But when the data we have struggled so long and hard to collect is twisted and misinterpreted by people who call themselves scientists, and who receive the benefits and protection of a mainstream institution such as John Hopkins Medical School, it disgusts me.”

Shoot the messengers indeed.

Similarly, Zach Ford who is the LGBT editor for ThinkProgress.org and who describes himself as “Gay, Atheist, Pianist, Unapologetic ‘Social Justice Warrior,” interacted at length with the content of the study, but not without launching some broadsides against the authors and publishers of the report.

While citing the critique of the Mayer-McHugh report by Dr. Warren Throckmorton (who, as would be expected, challenged their findings), Ford also wrote that Dr. McHugh is “generally the only scientist whom opponents of transgender equality ever cite and who has his own history of overt anti-LGBT bias.” As for The New Atlantis, he described it as “a journal that is affiliated with the anti-LGBT Ethics and Public Policy Center and prides itself on not being peer-reviewed.”

Pediatricians Smeared for Good Measure

And while Ford seeks to be even-handed in his critique, taking time to delve into the subject matter, he still refers to the American College of Pediatricians, which opposes transgender activism, as “the fake anti-LGBT American College of Pediatricians.”

A previous article by Ford even carried this headline, “Fake Medical Organization Publishes Lie-Ridden Manifesto Attacking Transgender Kids. Do not trust your children with the American College of Pediatricians.”

So, because these pediatricians felt that the need to break away from the left-leaning American Academy of Pediatricians, based on their own research and medical experience and values, they are a “fake medical organization,” despite the fact that membership is limited to “pediatricians and other healthcare professionals who provide care primarily for infants, children, or adolescents.”

If they are not pro-LGBT activism, they cannot be a legitimate medical organization!

And on and on it goes.

I do hope that in the days to come, researchers and scientists from all camps will take the time to interact fairly and honestly with the Mayer-McHugh report, but for the moment, I guess this is where I say, “I hate to say it, but I told you so.” (For more from the author of “As Predicted, Gay Activists Attack the Messengers, Ignore the Evidence” please click HERE)

Watch a recent interview with the author below:

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Complaint-Ridden Kalamazoo Planned Parenthood Botches Abortion, Kills Young Black Mother

/0 Comments/in , /by

A Battle Creek, Michigan woman died after receiving an abortion from the Planned Parenthood office in Kalamazoo on June 30, 2016, LifeNews reported. Cree Erwin, 24, died three days following the abortion and just hours after leaving an emergency room for abortion-related complications.

According to LifeNews, abortionist Laura Denise Castleman prescribed pain medication for Erwin, although it’s not clear if she performed Erwin’s abortion. Michigan law requires medical providers to maintain a valid drug control license if they routinely dispense medication. Castleman’s license expired months before Erwin’s abortion.

Castleman has been linked to at least three other abortion-related injuries in Kalamazoo and Ann Arbor. Operation Rescue, a pro-life group that “monitors abortion practitioners and exposes their illegal and unethical practices,” has filed a complaint against Planned Parenthood’s Kalamazoo location demanding that their operating license be revoked.

Cheryl Sullenger, Senior Vice President of Operation Rescue said the Kalamazoo Planned Parenthood is a danger to women and must be closed for their protection. “If Cree Erwin had not visited the Kalamazoo Planned Parenthood for an abortion, she would be alive today … the Kalamazoo Planned Parenthood is not safe and must be shut down to protect other women from ending up on a slab in the morgue.”

Catherine Davis, Founding Core Member for the National Black Pro-Life Coalition, said her group must sound the alarm about the women and infants killed, as well as women harmed reproductively, by Planned Parenthood. “The number of women leaving a Planned Parenthood in an ambulance amid allegations of harvesting baby body parts reminds us of two things: Planned Parenthood’s population control mission and their unfettered greed,” Davis said. “Both must be stopped in their tracks before one more vibrant young woman loses her life.”

The Kalamazoo Planned Parenthood operated without a valid facility license from September 2012 to January 2016, said Lynn Mills of Pro-Life Detroit. “Planned Parenthood of Kalamazoo, under the leadership of Lori Carpentier, CEO of Planned Parenthood of Michigan, has a history of not functioning within basic medical standards and flying under the radar with the apparent cooperation of the State of Michigan,” she told LifeNews, “I’m calling for Carpentier to first make a public apology to the family of Cree Erwin, and then to step down from her position. Immediately!”

A homicide investigation into Erwin’s death is still underway pending the release of the autopsy report. (For more from the author of “Complaint-Ridden Kalamazoo Planned Parenthood Botches Abortion, Kills Young Black Mother” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why Is the National Media Ignoring Trump’s Heartfelt Angel Moms Moment?

/0 Comments/in , /by

Wednesday was a big day for Donald Trump’s campaign, marking the Republican presidential candidate’s first meeting with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto. The meeting and its aftermath became the biggest national story of the day, but there was one key angle the media seemed to have left out.

Following his meeting with Peña Nieto, Trump held a rally in Phoenix, Arizona, during which he laid out his ten-step plan of hardline immigration reform. Later in the rally, Trump welcomed on to the stage the group known as Angel Moms, a group of mothers whose children were killed by illegal immigrants.

As the Daily Wire reported, the mothers of Ronald da Silva, Joshua Wilkerson, Steve Woods, Eric Zepeda, Shayley Estees, and Brandon Mendoza all took the stage wearing shirts featuring photos of their murdered children and voiced their support for Trump. They were joined by the parents of Matthew Denice, Rebecca Ann Johnston’s cousin, and Grant Ronnebeck’s father.

Trump ended his speech Wednesday evening with a warning that his candidacy might be the country’s last chance to secure the its borders and prevent future losses like the ones these parents have experienced.

The liberal media was not having it. Thursday morning, many newspapers and online media outlets across the country covered Trump’s Arizona speech but ignored the Angel Moms, instead focusing their attention on Trump’s hardline immigration stance.

“Another Brick in the Wall,” read CNN.com’s homepage headline. “Donald Gets Darker,” warned the ever-Trump-bashing Huffington Post.

We’ve pulled the front pages to give you an idea of what was being reported Thursday morning. See if you can detect a pattern:

ABC

CNN

HuffPo

MSNBC

20160901-Newspapers

Headlines from Newseum

Why is it significant to point out that the media failed to mention Angel Moms in their Trump write-ups? After all, isn’t the policy angle more “newsy” than the personal emotional story of these parents?

That argument may have stood had the media not made such a big deal about the “Mothers of the Movement” appearance at last month’s Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. CNN, MSNBC, and others jumped on the story about the mothers who lost their children to inner city gun crime or police shootings. The online news source Media Matters even pointed out that Fox News “completely ignored the appearance.”

Why can’t Fox have a heart as pure and unbiased as the rest of the liberal media? Give me a break. (For more from the author of “Why Is the National Media Ignoring Trump’s Heartfelt Angel Moms Moment?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Child Welfare Agency Investigating Weiner After Latest Photo Episode

/2 Comments/in , /by

Anthony Weiner’s latest photo escapade has resulted in an investigation into his fitness as a parent.

On Monday, news organizations began publishing a photo of Weiner that he sent to a woman showing the former congressman in bed next to his son.

As reported by Western Journalism, the lewd photo showed “a bulge in his white, Jockey-brand boxer briefs and his son cuddled up to his left, wrapped in a light-green blanket.”

When the pictures hit the papers, calls for an investigation soon followed.

“The photo and story worry me as a senator, a minister, a parent, and a grandfather, because I believe that the disregard for any boundaries of sexual activity with a child present is incredibly inappropriate, and could have a harmful impact on the child,” Democratic New York State Sen. Reuben Diaz said Monday. “I urge the city of New York’s Administration for Children’s Services to investigate this case carefully and thoroughly.”

The child welfare agency has since launched an investigation into how Weiner cares for his son, The New York Post reported, citing “a city government source.”

The Post reported that city staff made a home visit to the apartment building where Weiner lives, in keeping with the agency’s rules and regulations.

Weiner told the Post Wednesday he had not been interviewed by the agency.

However, other sources said an investigation was inevitable.

“From what it looked like, (Weiner) is possibly exposing his child to an imminent risk of harm. This is something ACS looks into for much less situations … ACS is mandated to protect children from cases of suspected abuse and or neglect,” said Mark Feldman, a divorce and custody lawyer in New York City.

“Any time adults draw children into their own sexual activity, they have crossed the line. It is always inappropriate for an adult to connect any child to their sexual activities, however peripheral,” said Tim Hathaway, executive director at Prevent Child Abuse New York.

ACS said it is the agency’s policy not to comment about whether it is conducting an ongoing investigation.

Weiner’s wife, Huma Abedin — who is vice chairwoman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign — announced Monday that she was separating from Weiner after the latest revelation hit the newspapers.

Abedin and Weiner were married in 2010. He resigned from Congress in 2011 amid a scandal over his sexting, the same habit that derailed his 2013 attempt to run for mayor of New York City. (For more from the author of “Child Welfare Agency Investigating Weiner After Latest Photo Episode” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Catholic Hospital System to Provide Contraceptives in Walgreens Partnership

/0 Comments/in , /by

A Catholic hospital system has confirmed that it will provide contraceptives as part of its partnership with Walgreens, in violation of the American Catholic bishops’ directives. SSM Health describes itself as “a Catholic, not-for-profit health system,” and in its mission statement says that through its work, “we reveal the healing presence of God.”

Nevertheless, on August 25, SSM Health announced it would provide clinics in 26 Walgreens locations in the St. Louis, Missouri, area, and maintain their provision of contraceptives. A spokesperson for SSM Health told The Stream that “SSM Health continues to offer the same services that were previously available at Walgreens Healthcare Clinics” — services that have included selling and giving prescriptions for contraceptives. Walgreens’ national website notes that the chain sells condoms and a wide variety of birth control products.

A SSM Health press release likewise claimed thir new clinics would provide all previously offered services, though it did not mention providing contraceptives. The day after the partnership became official, a SSM Health spokesperson told The Associated Press (AP) the Walgreens clinics

will provide 30-day refills for contraceptive pills previously prescribed by a physician — the same policy carried by the clinics previously run in-house by Walgreens. A website for the clinics shows a long list of services, everything from vaccinations and wellness checkups to treatment for illness and injury, but it makes no reference to birth control.

The Catholic Bishops’ directive states that “Catholic health institutions may not promote or condone contraceptive practices but should provide, for married couples and the medical staff who counsel them, instruction both about the Church’s teaching on responsible parenthood and in methods of natural family planning.”

The ACLU Wants Answers

Before the partnership was formally announced, the ACLU had written Walgreens’ Chief Medical Officer. The liberal group — which has long pressured Catholic health institutions to provide contraceptives, abortifacients and abortions against the bishops’ health directives — asked how SSM-run clinics would provide care and treatment for women seeking birth control and how clinic employees would treat LGBT patients and customers. A spokesperson for the ACLU declined The Stream’s request for comment.

Through its spokesperson’s statement to The Stream, SSM Health addressed the ACLU’s concerns about treatment of LGBT customers. “SSM Health is proud to treat every patient with dignity and respect. This commitment to inclusivity, justice and equality defines who we are as a Mission-and values-driven organization. In fact, we have been recognized as a Leader in LGBT Healthcare Equality by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation.”

SSM received the award in 2014. According to a press release the company issued at the time,

Facilities awarded this title meet key criteria, including patient and employee non-discrimination policies that specifically mention sexual orientation and gender identity, a guarantee of equal visitation for same-sex partners and parents, and LGBT health education for key staff members.

Despite the provision of morally problematic products, the ACLU and the groups that signed its letter said they still want to meet with Walgreens and SSM. A Walgreens spokesperson told AP that the ACLU’s letter included attempted to address some “services that are not applicable to a retail health care clinic setting, regardless of the provider.” (For more from the author of “Catholic Hospital System to Provide Contraceptives in Walgreens Partnership” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Pro-Lifers Respond to Planned Parenthood’s Florida Zika Push

/0 Comments/in , /by

For several weeks, public policy experts have sounded a warning as Zika has spread in the state of Florida. Last week, NPR highlighted how Planned Parenthood has answered the call, joining other groups to knock on thousands of doors and warn people of the dangers associated with the virus, all while promoting its anti-life agenda.

Like many other groups that back abortion, Planned Parenthood says a large part of reducing Zika’s harm is the use of contraceptives to stop women from getting pregnant and passing various disorders onto their children, with abortion as a backup plan. “This is a natural extension of the work we do with reproductive health care and sexually-transmitted infections,” Chief Medical Officer for Planned Parenthood of South, East and North Florida Dr. Christopher Estes told NPR. “It just made sense. And this is a time of a public health crisis. When you have something like this going on, it’s, ‘All hands on deck.’”

Pro-life groups, however, told The Stream that Planned Parenthood’s approach to Zika prevention is causing more harm than good.

“The biggest problem is that an accurate estimate of” how Zika will affect unborn children “not available,” said Dr. Donna Harrison, Executive Director of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists. “No one can tell a pregnant mom infected with Zika how likely it is that her child will have any of these things.”

“These things” are a number of disorders associated with a pregnant mother’s Zika virus infection. According to the Centers for Disease Control, “Zika virus infection during pregnancy is a cause of microcephaly and other serious brain anomalies; however, the clinical spectrum of the effects of Zika virus infection during pregnancy is not yet known. A wide range of neurologic abnormalities, in addition to microcephaly, has been observed among infants with presumed or confirmed congenital Zika virus infection.”

Microcephaly, which can cause small heads and varying levels of brain disorders, has received the most amount of attention. Harrison, though, says “The absolute risk of problems to fetuses whose mother is infected during pregnancy is still being evaluated by the CDC.” She pointed out that maternal infections in the first trimester are by far most likely to affect a child, but that “the best studies show that of all woman infected during the first trimester, 98-99 percent of those infants will not have microcephaly.

“We have a lot of fear,” concluded Harrison, “and very little information at the moment. And fear breeds abortion.”

Jor-El Godsey, president of the pro-life pregnancy care center umbrella group Heartbeat International, said that “What we need to focus on in times like these are cures, treatments and preventing the spread of infectious diseases. Abortion promises none of these societal goods, but instead, promises to end the life of a person who is already alive. That is simply the opposite of health care.”

“The vast majority of women who abort their children do so not because they think it’s the best choice, but because they feel it’s their only choice,” continued Godsey in an e-mail to The Stream. “Women deserve to know the whole truth. A pregnant mother needs to know that Zika and microcephaly are not death sentences for themselves or their precious children.”

“Every life has value and is worth living, regardless of circumstance or the challenges we are called to overcome,” he explained.

According to NPR, Planned Parenthood is not relying solely on birth control and abortion, though it describes that “Family planning is a key part of the Planned Parenthood message.”

“The organization is also distributing Zika prevention kits, including condoms and mosquito repellent, to pregnant women at its health centers,” reports NPR.

Despite the message of the abortion industry, one Florida mother is speaking up to describe the joy she has because of her two children with microcephaly. “[I]t’s not the end of the world because you have these kids,” Haneefa De Clercq, told ABC25. “They will teach [mothers] so much. They’ll teach them how to love, they will teach them patience.”

De Clercq’s disabled children are Andrea, 37, and Robbie, 33, with the respective maturation of a three-year-old and a seven-year-old. “I never expected that I could give them an instruction and that they would follow that instruction and do it properly,” she said. “I see the love between them and it gives me tears of joy.” (For more from the author of “Pro-Lifers Respond to Planned Parenthood’s Florida Zika Push” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

University of New Mexico Dept. Head Confirms Aborted Baby Brains Dissected for High School Students

/0 Comments/in , /by

A recent video shows the chancellor of the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Paul Roth, admitting that one of the university’s summer science programs for high school students dissected baby brains for research.

This confirms what the House Select Panel on Infant Lives exposed in its report when it referred the university to the New Mexico attorney general for criminal charges for possibly violating New Mexico’s Jonathan Spradling Revised Uniform Anatomical Gift Act.

Roth, who is also the dean of the medical school, is shown in a video released by the New Mexico Alliance for Life (NMAFL), admitting that some baby brains were used in research:

The person questioning repeatedly tells him she is videotaping the conversation and asks Roth to repeat what he said earlier about using human remains with high school students. Roth replies on camera:

Yes, we had a faculty member who obtained some tissue, and during one of these summer workshops, uh, dissected I think one or two fetal brains.

(Read more from “University of New Mexico Dept. Head Confirms Aborted Baby Brains Dissected for High School Students” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Movie About Obamas’ First Date Flops at Box Office in Opening Weekend

/0 Comments/in , /by

A romantic comedy about Barack Obama’s first date with his future wife opened over the weekend to unimpressive numbers.

Southside With You depicts young lawyer Obama’s outing with Michelle Robinson, a summer associate at his Chicago law firm, in 1989.

The film finished at No. 13 in the weekend box office, grossing a mere $3 million.

The low ranking came despite the promotional efforts of Southside With You‘s stars, Parker Sawyers and Tiki Sumpter, as well as executive producer John Legend.

After its premiere at the Sundance Film Festival, writer and director Richard Tanne said the Obamas were “excited” about the movie, but also “a little baffled by its existence.”

The movie, which had a limited release of 813 theaters, fared relatively well in some cities.

Southside With You had its post profitable showing at the Magic Johnson theater in Harlem, N.Y.

It also drew larger audiences in Atlanta, Chicago, Memphis, Los Angeles and Washington.

Howard Cohen, co-president of Roadside Attractions, said, “We’re very happy with the opening. … We had sellouts in many markets and the movie is playing to both an African-American audience and to arthouse audiences.”

Southside With You also received mostly positive reviews.

The film has a “freshness” rating of 92 percent on Rotten Tomatoes, and the site’s Critical Consensus states, “Southside With You looks back on a fateful real-life date with strong performances and engaging dialogue, adding up to a romance that makes for a pretty good date movie in its own right.”

Odie Henderson with RogerEbert.com said, “This down-to-earth approach works surprisingly well because Southside With You never loses sight of the primary tenet of a great romantic comedy: All you need is two people whom the audience wants to see get together — then you put them together.”

Peter Travers of Rolling Stone remarked, “Both Sawyers and Sumpter are terrific, world-class charmers who suggest the powerhouses they’re playing without undue mimickry.”

But The New York Times’ Manohla Dargis said Tanne “mistakes faithfulness for truthfulness. He’s obviously interested in the Obamas, but he’s so cautious and worshipful that there’s nothing here to discover, only characters to admire.”

“Mr. Obama hasn’t even left office, but the cinematic hagiography has begun,” Dargis concluded.

Despite its weak weekend at the box office, Southside With You still managed to outperform Hands of Stone, a Weinstein Co. film about professional boxer Roberto Duran, portrayed by Edgar Ramirez, and his trainer Ray Arcel, played by Robert DeNiro.

That movie opened in 810 venues and grossed $1.7 million.

The top-grossing movie of the weekend was the horror film Don’t Breathe, which opened in 3,051 theaters and grossed $26 million. (For more from the author of “Movie About Obamas’ First Date Flops at Box Office in Opening Weekend” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Gun Ownership, Concealed-Carry Permits up Among Women and Minorities

/0 Comments/in , /by

Antonia Okafor, a Dallas resident, says she believes a gun can be the great equalizer for women to defend themselves—one reason she is now the southwest regional director for a group called Students for Concealed Carry.

State laws allowing residents to carry concealed weapons have been enacted in all 50 states, with varying degrees of regulation—most recently on college campuses.

“We see ourselves as doing this as a means of empowerment,” Okafor, 26, told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “Real feminism is about empowerment and taking our safety into our own hands.”

Okafor, who is black, said more female role models, such as Olympic gold medalist Kim Rhode, have inspired more gun ownership among women.

But Okafor—a graduate of the University of Texas at Dallas, where she became involved in the movement—said her mother is opposed to guns.

In an April poll by ABC News of issues millennial women are most concerned about, gun rights scored even with equal pay and abortion, each getting 11 percent.

A study by the Crime Prevention Research Center earlier this month found concealed-carry permits have boomed nationally, but particularly among women and minorities. “In eight states where we have data by gender, since 2012 the number of permits has increased by 161 percent for women and by 85 percent for men,” the report says.

From 2007 through 2015, concealed-carry permits issued by state and local governments increased about 75 percent faster among nonwhites than whites, according to the report.

Okafor noted that those living in the inner city “are the most likely to benefit” from self-defense.

“A lot of minority homes didn’t have father figures growing up,” Okafor told The Daily Signal. “The right to bear arms is a way to protect our community. Every weekend people are dying in cities riddled with gun control.”

Okafor said increasing gun ownership could mark a political shift among both women and minorities away from pro-gun control Democrats to pro-gun rights Republicans in the longer term.

However, JaQuan Taylor, a senior at Georgia Tech, is a Democrat and president of the college group that advocates allowing students and faculty to carry concealed firearms while on campus. Taylor, who is black, said he doesn’t plan on switching parties, but he is more open now.

“It’s more challenging for me to pick a politician that wants to take away guns or prohibit them in anyway,” Taylor, 22, told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “I vote for the person more than the party, but I usually vote Democrat because they are pro-education. Since I’ve gotten a gun, I’ve begun to look at Republicans.”

Taylor said he joined a marksmanship club at Georgia Tech and then “became comfortable with getting a gun to protect myself.”

He said he believes as more African-Americans learn about gun laws, more are buying for self-defense.

He doesn’t see the gun issue as a left-right matter, but more of an issue of freedom, Taylor said.

“It seems like with the push for gay marriage, there is a push for freedom in all directions. That’s a good thing,” he said.

The data on women and minorities should come as no surprise, said Crime Prevention Research Center President John Lott, a noted economist and author of the recent book, “The War on Guns.”

“Women benefit more from having a gun than a man because of the large strength differential between a male-to-woman attacker compared to [a] male-to-male attacker,” Lott, the author of the August study, told The Daily Signal.

Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun control group founded by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, questions the research but said any increase in recent ownership is driven by fear.

“The rate of American gun ownership has been in serious decline over the last 40 years, so it’s not surprising that gun manufacturers are desperately seeking to tap into new markets and that they’re using the politics of fear to drive new sales,” Everytown for Gun Safety spokesman Andrei Berman told The Daily Signal in an email.

Lynne Roberts, the Massachusetts state coordinator for the pro-gun Second Amendment Sisters, said classes at a Braintree, Massachusetts, shooting range went from about five women per month a decade ago to 35 in the past year.

“We have to tell them to call before so we’ll have enough instructors,” Roberts told The Daily Signal. “Now we have to limit it to 26, and it always fills.”

She added that in recent years, an increasingly diverse group of women has sought to learn about guns for the first time. They include single mothers and married women, from 22 to 82, in occupations such as nurses, small-business owners, social workers, accountants, and lawyers. They travel from Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Maine, as well as other parts of Massachusetts.

Roberts also sees a potential political shift.

“Women are voting typically on the Democratic side because over the last two or three generations self-defense and firearms were demonized,” she said. “Women were told they can’t take care of themselves. That’s changing.”

Responsible gun ownership does not represent a political shift, said Brendan Kelly, spokesman for the Brady Campaign and Center to Prevent Gun Violence, a gun control group.

“Owning a gun and supporting sensible laws that keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people are not mutually exclusive,” Kelly told The Daily Signal in an email, adding:

In fact, what we know is that 90 percent of the American public, including more than 70 percent of NRA members, support expanded Brady background checks. Expanded Brady background checks are more popular with the general public now than they ever have been.

The so-called Brady bill of 1993 required gun dealers to run all purchasers through a national system for instant criminal background checks. In 2013, President Barack Obama pushed for legislation to require sales at gun shows to go through the same checks, but the measure died in the Senate even while it was controlled by Democrats.

Restricting guns isn’t the answer, said National Rifle Association spokesman Catherine Mortensen. Violent crime in cities such as Chicago is one reason why traditional Democratic constituencies are buying guns for self-defense.

“Americans have seen the government can’t always protect them—from the terrorist attack in San Bernardino to the shooting in Orlando,” Mortensen told The Daily Signal.

Mortensen added the NRA is the “oldest civil rights group” in the United States.

“We are proud to defend the right to self-defense of everyone regardless of race, religion, or sexual orientation,” Mortensen said.

Larry Pratt, president of Gun Owners of America, said he believes the increase in gun ownership and concealed carry could represent a political realignment.

Pratt recalled a friend, a college professor who was a liberal Democrat and an atheist in favor of gun control. Then, after two of the professor’s friends were robbed and murdered, he got a gun. The professor gradually became more conservative on other issues and became a Christian, Pratt said.

“Owning a gun marked the break with the tenets of liberal orthodoxy—that government can take care of me,” Pratt told The Daily Signal. “That opened the door to a broader realignment.” (For more from the author of “Gun Ownership, Concealed-Carry Permits up Among Women and Minorities” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.