Two and 3-Year-Old Vaxxed Kids With Seizures Is ‘The New Normal’

/in , , , , , , , , /by

ONLY vaxxed kids. The only thing these kids have in common is that they were given the COVID vaccine just days earlier (two to five days earlier).

This is the new normal. Like the new ‘Sudden Adult Death Syndrome.’

Two and 3-year-old kids with seizures is “the new normal”

I’m getting multiple reports from my nurse friends about kids 2 and 3 years old having seizures. It is ONLY happening on vaccinated kids, and symptoms start 2 to 5 days after the COVID vaccine.

By: Steve Kirsch, July 5, 2022:

Doctors are mystified by a rash of seizures, rashes, etc. happening to 2 and 3-year-old kids.

The only thing these kids have in common is that they were given the COVID vaccine just days earlier (two to five days earlier).

The doctors cannot figure out what is causing the seizures (since it couldn’t be the vaccine since those are safe and effective). The medical staff is not permitted to talk about the cases to the press or on social media or they will be fired.

One nurse posted something to the effect of “how is this legal????” I had to paraphrase to protect the poster.

This is why you are hearing these reports from me. They can’t fire me.

There is nothing on the mainstream media about this since the nurses and doctors aren’t allowed to talk about it.

This will all come out some day, but for now, everyone is keeping quiet about it and the doctors are instructed to convince the parents that it isn’t vaccine related and that they are the only ones having the problem.

Because that’s how science works.

Keep reading…..

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Data Proves ‘Sudden Adult Death Syndrome’ Fiction Is Death by Covid Vaccination

Vaxxed Young Adults are 92% More Likely to Die than Unvaccinated

Are We Now in the Era of the ‘COVID Matrix’ with the Mandated Vaxxed Passports?

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Man Charged With Rape In Connection To 10-Year-Old Who Traveled For Abortion

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

A man was arrested Tuesday and charged with the felony rape of a 10-year-old girl who later travelled to Indiana for an abortion, The Columbus Dispatch reported.

Police said 27-year-old Gershon Fuentes confessed to raping the child on at least two occasions, according to the Dispatch. The child reportedly obtained an abortion in Indianapolis June 30.

Franklin County Children Services referred the case to the police June 22, and the suspect is being tested for paternity.

Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an Indianapolis obstetrician-gynecologist, shared the story with the press July 1 and said the child had gone to Indiana for the abortion because it was illegal in her home state of Ohio, a fact that has been contested by the state’s attorney general. She has since been disciplined for a HIPAA violation for publicizing the patient’s details, Fox News reported.

Fuentes is being held on a $2 million bond, which the judge said was especially high in order to protect the child’s safety.

Bernard did not respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

LAUREL DUGGAN

Social issues and culture reporter.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLE: Biden Considers Declaring Public Health Emergency To Help Secure Abortion Access

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The FDA Is Considering a Change That Would Have Huge Implications for Birth Control

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

The downsides of government mandates requiring a prescription are significant.

With the Supreme Court’s recent abortion decision, unplanned pregnancies are top-of-mind for many Americans. So, whatever one believes about abortion, the timing of a new debate on birth control policy within the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) couldn’t be more important.

The FDA just received a request from a contraceptive company seeking authorization to sell its birth control pills over-the-counter—without a prescription, as is required nationwide under current laws. This has prompted renewed calls for the FDA to approve this change. And, according to the New York Times, it’s seriously considering it this time.

Why? Well, the downsides of government mandates requiring a prescription are significant.

For one thing, it makes birth control harder to access for people without health insurance or the time/resources to obtain professional medical care. It also adds significantly to the cost of birth control by introducing middlemen and additional steps.

The current restrictive regime is defended in the name of safety. After all, hormonal birth control pills can have serious side effects and some women shouldn’t take them if they have certain medical factors that conflict with the medication.

Still, while the medication is indeed serious, it should still be made available over the counter. Right now, the government is needlessly standing in the way between the medical community and countless women who could benefit from care but can’t necessarily obtain a prescription.

You don’t have to take my word for it. The American Medical Association (AMA) has firmly endorsed making birth control available over-the-counter and called on the FDA to approve the change.

“Providing patients with [over-the-counter] access to the birth control pill is an easy call from a public health perspective,” AMA Board Member David H. Aizuss, M.D. said. “Access is one of the most cited reasons why patients do not use oral contraceptives, use them inconsistently, or discontinue use. Expanding [over-the-counter] access would make it easier for patients to properly use oral contraceptives, leading to fewer unplanned pregnancies.”

Studies have shown that, in absence of a required doctor consultation, women are able to self-screen and determine if they meet any of the conditions where one shouldn’t take hormonal birth control. (You know, like people do all the time with various medications). They can also always consult the pharmacists, which doesn’t typically require insurance or even an appointment.

Other expert groups like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists also support making the medication available without a prescription.

It would hardly be an unprecedented move.

Dozens of other countries don’t require a prescription for birth control, including Mexico, Portugal, India, Greece, and Brazil. It’s mostly western Europe, the US, Canada, and other advanced nations—with big, bloated bureaucratic governments—that have barriers in place. But in the countries where it is available, it seems to work out just fine.

More fundamentally, it’s a matter of who gets to decide. Can women weigh the risks and benefits of a medication and decide for themselves? Or should that decision be made for them by supposedly benevolent bureaucrats and the nanny state?

For those who believe in individual liberty, the answer is clear.

“Freedom over one’s physical person is the most basic freedom of all, and people in a free society should be sovereign over their own bodies,” former Congressman Ron Paul, himself a medical doctor, once said. “When we give government the power to make medical decisions for us, we in essence accept that the state owns our bodies.”

The FDA shouldn’t own women’s bodies. They should.

As one long-time advocate of making birth control available over-the-counter, (my friend) the Washington Examiner writer Tiana Lowe, put it, “[The FDA] could do something that not only is broadly supported by people of all political stripes but also has a marked ability to prevent unplanned pregnancies from occurring in the first place.”

All it has to do is get out of the way.

AUTHOR

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and Policy Correspondent at the Foundation for Economic Education.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

DEATH CLAIMS UP $6 BILLION: After Covid ‘Vaccines’ Unleashed

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Fifth Largest life insurance company paid 163% for more working-age deaths in 2021.

The massive media cover-up of the death toll and injuries sustained in the largest medical experiment in human history could not remain hidden for too long. The body count and the life insurance costs cannot be ignored.

The lies and deceit are monumentally criminal …… And the medical establishment has destroyed the public trust by going along with this horror.Just this week:

Two-time Olympic artistic swimmer Anita Alvarez was in danger of drowning after fainting while performing at the World Championships in Budapest, Hungary, on Wednesday and was dramatically rescued by her coach, Gateway Pundit reports.

Death claims up $6 BILLION: Fifth-largest life insurance company paid out for 163% more working-age deaths in 2021 after covid “vaccines” were unleashed

(Natural News) Another major life insurance company in the United States is facing turmoil as death claims soar due to Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccines.”
According to reports, Lincoln National, the country’s fifth-largest life insurance carrier, reported a massive 163 percent increase in death benefits paid out under its group life insurance policies in 2021.
Annual statements filed with state insurance departments, which were provided to Crossroads Report in response to public records requests, show that Lincoln National paid out almost three times as much money in 2021 compared to yearly totals in both 2020 and 2019.
Last year, an astounding $1.45 billion left Lincoln National’s coffers – this compared to $548 million in 2020 and just over $500 million in 2019. (Related: Earlier this year, OneAmerica, another major life insurance carrier, reported a 40 percent increase in death claims after covid injections were released.)
“From 2019, the last normal year before the pandemic, to 2020, the year of the Covid-19 virus, there was an increase in group death benefits paid out of only 9 percent. But group death benefits in 2021, the year the vaccine was introduced, increased almost 164 percent over 2020,” Crossroads Report explains.
“Lincoln National is the fifth-largest life insurance company in the United States, according to BankRate, after New York Life, Northwestern Mutual, MetLife and Prudential.”

More than 20,000 people covered by Lincoln National died in 2021 because of Fauci Flu shots

Group life insurance policies typically cover working-age adults, which range in age from 18 to 64. This should be an otherwise healthy demographic, and one that clearly did not have much of a problem with “covid” pre-vaccine.
“How many deaths are represented by the 163% increase? It is not possible to determine by the dollar figures on the statements,” Crossroads Report further explains.
“But the average death benefit for employer-provided group life insurance, according to the Society for Human Resource Management, is one year’s salary.”
Estimating based on an average annual salary in the United States of $70,000, it is safe to assume that more than 20,000 working-age adults covered just by this one insurance company died last year because of the jabs – and keep in mind that this is just one insurance company.
While we do not yet have numbers for New York Life, Northwestern Mutual, MetLife and Prudential, these each are more than likely seeing similar figures, suggesting that hundreds of thousands of working-age adults in America are now dead as a result of becoming “fully vaccinated.”
There are also ordinary death benefits, which are not paid out under group policies. In 2019 pre-plandemic, such policies paid out $3.7 billion, In 2020, that figure increased to $4 billion. In 2021, however, after almost 260 million Americans took at least one jab, the number ballooned to $5.3 billion.
“The statements show that the total amount that Lincoln National paid out for all direct claims and benefits in 2021 was more than $28 billion, $6 billion more than in 2020, when it paid out a total of $22 billion, which was less than the $23 billion it paid out in 2019, the baseline year,” reports explain.
“A $6 billion increase in expenses is something few companies could absorb, but Lincoln National has been working to do just that – by increasing sales of new insurance policies.”
It remains to be seen if the life insurance industry survives what has happened, is still happening, and will happen in the future once the remaining survivors of the injections develop ADE (antibody-dependent enhancement) and VAIDS (vaccine-induced AIDS).
Fauci Flu shots are a deadly affair. To keep up with the latest news about the injuries and deaths being caused by them, check out VaccineDamage.news.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

CDC Emails Confirm What We’ve Said All Along: “Vaccine” Definition Fraudulently Altered To Force Needless MRNA Shots On Population

NFL Linebacker Jaylon Ferguson Passes Away Mysteriously at 26

NFL legend Tony Siragusa, who helped Ravens win Super Bowl, dies at the age of 55

Caleb Swanigan, former Purdue standout and first-round NBA draft pick, dead at 25

‘X-Factor’ Star’s Bride Dies On Her Wedding Day

Scientists Discover Jab Decimates Sperm Count

COVID Vaccines Increase Menstrual Irregularities Thousandfold, Fetal Abnormalities Hundredfold: Doctors’ VAERS Analysis

‘Significant’ Cases of Neurological Disorder Associated with Covid Vaccine

Data Proves ‘Sudden Adult Death Syndrome’ Fiction Is Death by Covid Vaccination

Uruguay Judge Orders Pfizer And Government to Disclose Covid Vaccine Ingredients Immediately

CDC Caught Using False Data To Recommend Kids’ COVID Vaccine

New UK government data shows the COVID vaccines kill more people than they save

Here’s Why Officials Are Desperate to Get COVID Vaccine on Childhood Schedule Before ‘Emergency’ Ends

CDC Caught Using False Data To Recommend Kids’ COVID Vaccine

Vaccines for 6-Month-Olds ‘Makes Absolutely No Sense’: Dr. Jeffrey Barke

Publix Publicly Announced Its Refusal To Offer Vaccinations For Children Under 5

MIT: COVID Vaccines ‘Significantly Associated’ with Spike in Heart Attacks in Young People

FDA Authorizes Emergency Use COVID Vaccine Boosters for Children Ages 5 -11

3-year-old girl dies of heart attack one day after taking COVID vaccine

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Clinic Funded By Biden Administration Distributes Crack Pipes To Addicts Outside A ‘School’

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

A “harm reduction” clinic that received grant funding from President Joe Biden’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is distributing crack pipes to addicts in New York City, the Daily Caller confirmed Wednesday.

New York Harm Reduction Educators (NYHRE), a part of OnPointNYC, was awarded nearly $400,000 in grant money from the Biden administration in May to further its services for drug addicts, government records show. Biden officials denied reports that the grant money could fund distribution of crack pipes, but a visit to NYHRE’s office revealed that the organization still offers the smoking paraphernalia to addicts.

OnPointNYC operates two drug use sites, one of which NYHRE runs in East Harlem. After spending about 10 minutes on paperwork with basic information Wednesday evening, staff at the facility provided a Daily Caller reporter a smoking kit containing a crack pipe, condoms and lubricant.

A second Caller reporter returned Thursday and yet again, within minutes, staff provided another crack pipe. A staffer directed the reporter to back rooms for addicts to use drugs under supervision, where the reporter witnessed individuals smoking and injecting various substances.

CLICK HERE FOR A PHOTO OF: A condom and crack pipe acquired from New York Harm Reduction Educators. (Daily Caller)

A second Caller reporter returned Thursday and yet again, within minutes, staff provided another crack pipe. A staffer directed the reporter to back rooms for addicts to use drugs under supervision, where the reporter witnessed individuals smoking and injecting various substances.

The reporter, citing claustrophobia, asked if she could step outside to smoke. A staffer denied the request because the facility is located next to a “school.”

The facility is directly across the street from the Association To Benefit Children, a childcare facility for underprivileged kids in the New York area.

Prior to those visits, the Caller reached out to NYHRE and OnPointNYC on multiple occasions to ask if the organization was still distributing crack pipes, receiving no response. A PBS segment aired December 2021 highlighted that the organization was distributing crack pipes at the time, before the latest Biden grant.

NYHRE provides other services aside from harm reduction, including HIV and hepatitis testing, safe sex education and counseling services. It has received various government grants dating back to 2001 for some of these other services, a review of HHS grant documents shows. This year’s grant is the first “harm reduction” grant the group has received as part of a new administration initiative under Biden’s American Rescue Plan to support “harm reduction” efforts. The so called “safe smoking kits” are a key plank in “harm reduction” efforts across the country.

In addition to the drug and sex paraphernalia, a staffer at NYHRE gave the Caller an ID card after registering personal information. According to that staffer, an individual caught with drugs by police in the city could show that card to avoid punishment.

The Biden administration denied in February that it was giving grants to fund distribution of crack pipes, following a Washington Free Beacon report that HHS had closed applications for funding to do so.

“No federal funding will be used directly or through subsequent reimbursement of grantees to put pipes in safe smoking kits,” HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra said in a statement.

“The goal of harm reduction is to save lives. The Administration is focused on a comprehensive strategy to stop the spread of drugs and curb addiction, including prioritizing the use of proven harm reduction strategies like providing naloxone, fentanyl test strips, and clean syringes, as well as taking decisive actions to go after violent criminals who are trafficking illicit drugs like fentanyl across our borders and into our communities.”

An HHS spokesperson told the Daily Caller the funds from this grant are still prohibited from being used for any federally illegal activity or equipment, including drug paraphernalia like crack pipes. NYHRE has not yet tapped into the grant money they were awarded, and once they do so, the organization must provide specific details on how the money will be spent so HHS can approve it.

“No federal funding is used directly or through subsequent reimbursement of grantees to purchase pipes in safer smoking kits. Grants include explicit prohibitions of federal funds to be used to purchase drug paraphernalia,” the spokesman said. “As the United States confronts record overdose numbers, the Biden-Harris Administration is focused on a comprehensive drug control policy focused on stopping the illicit flow of drugs like fentanyl and evidence-based policies that reduce overdoses and save lives.”

The administration has embraced “harm reduction” — which can include supplying drug paraphernalia and in some cases drugs themselves — as a strategy for treating addiction. The effort facilitates drug use in a safer setting for addicts than they might otherwise use, and offers clean equipment for drug use to prevent the spread of disease.

In total, the SAMHSA grant awarded almost $10 million to 25 different organizations. The grant recipients are disproportionately located in New York and California, not areas within the rust belt hardest hit by the overdose epidemic. Six of the 25 grants went to harm reduction groups in New York state. The Daily Caller has not confirmed which of the other 24 organizations have provided, or still provide, safe smoking kits or crack pipes to addicts.

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), which awarded the grants, did not respond to multiple requests for comment from the Daily Caller, including questions about whether the agency knew NYHRE distributed crack pipes when it awarded them the grant or how it is ensuring that taxpayer funds don’t go to the distribution of smoking equipment.

AUTHOR

DYLAN HOUSMAN

Healthcare reporter. Follow Dylan on Twitter

RELATED ARTICLES:

Even Democrats Now Agree That The Government Should Not Fund Crack Pipes

Knives Are Out For Biden As Contenders Crop Up For 2024

WaPo Writer Says Americans Need To ‘Give Biden A Break’

ANALYSIS: These Four Polls Will Strike Fear Into The Hearts Of Democrats

Biden’s Little Noticed Tax Hike On Everything

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Since January 1st, 2022 — 465 Child Rapes by Illegal Aliens in North Carolina Alone

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

“In the first place, we should insist that, if the immigrant, who comes here in good faith, becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet, an American, and nothing but an American…There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.” — President Theodore Roosevelt – 1907

The Department of Homeland Security is responsible by-law to keep the borders secure. Here’s DHS Secretary Mayorkas saying he thinks that they’re doing a “good job.”

Democrats have and are continuing to ignore the social costs of their open borders policies. We know that drugs like fentanyl, human trafficking and crimes by illegal aliens have risen each and every day that our borders remain open. However, there are much more serious crimes being committed against the innocent and most vulnerable—our children

One North Carolina group is monitoring the most heinous of all crimes—the rape of children by illegal aliens.

According to their website:

North Carolinians For Immigration Reform and Enforcement (NCFIRE) reports on a monthly basing crimes committed by illegal aliens.

NCFIRE verifies the illegal alien status of each individual we post in our Monthly Child Rape reports through the arresting agency of each individual.

Pursuant to the state open records law, North Carolina General Statutes; Public Records § 132-1, Criminal investigations, § 132-1.4, and Access to Records, § 132-9, allow for NCFIRE to obtain and post the arrest records of any and all individuals arrested in North Carolina.

Here are the 2021 and 2022 NCFIRE reports:

2022 Monthly Child Rapes by Illegal Aliens

  • June 2022              23 illegal aliens arrested for 61 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC       here
  • May 2022               18 illegal aliens arrested for 42 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC       here
  • April 2022               19 illegal aliens arrested for 72 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC       here
  • March 2022            30 illegal aliens arrested for 110 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC     here
  • February 2022        27 illegal aliens arrested for 84 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC       here
  • January 2022         18 illegal aliens arrested for 96 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC        here

2021 Monthly Child Rapes by Illegal Aliens

  • December 2021   18 illegal aliens arrested for 72 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC      here
  • November 2021   20 illegal aliens arrested for 105 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC    here
  • October 2021      18 illegal aliens arrested for 62 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC       here
  • September 2021   27 illegal aliens arrested for 72 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC       here
  • August 2021          31 illegal aliens arrested for 131 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC     here
  • July 2021               22 illegal aliens arrested for 96 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC       here
  • June 2021              32 illegal aliens arrested for 161 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC     here
  • May 2021               28 illegal aliens arrested for 80 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC       here
  • April 2021               21 illegal aliens arrested for 200 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC     here
  • March 2021            17 illegal aliens arrested for 70 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC       here
  • February 2021        33 illegal aliens arrested for 100 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC     here
  • January 2021         17 illegal aliens arrested for 55 child rape/child sexual assault charges in NC        here

The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) reported the following serious crimes committed by illegal aliens in April and May of 2022 against women and children:

  • On April 19, police in Grovetown, Georgia, arrested Jorge Pineda-Barbosa for allegedly sexually assaulting over 20 women in the area. (WJBF.com, May 3, 2022)
  • On April 25, Yesenia Ramirez and Jose Roman Portillo kidnapped three-month-old Brandon Cuellar in San Jose, California, while the infant’s grandmother was unloading groceries in front of her residence in broad daylight. Fortunately, the baby was found safe twenty hours following the kidnapping. An illegal alien from El Salvador, Yesenia Ramirez had been deported three times: once in 2018, and twice in 2019. (New York Post, April 29, 2022; Breitbart News, May 9, 2022)
  • On May 2, Honduran national Delmer Orlando Ortiz Licona attempted to kidnap a 4-year-old boy in Lubbock County, Texas. He was also accused of sexually assaulting a 7-year-old girl – the daughter of his girlfriend at the time – on August 8, 2021. (Breitbart News, May 25, 2022; KCBD.com, May 25, 2022)
  • In May, police arrested Ronaldo Saul Monteroso Gonzalez for allegedly raping his toddler daughter – whom he also infected with Chlamydia – in Davidson County, Tennessee. Although the child was tested for sexual assault in late February, Monteroso Gonzalez was only arrested in May because the authorities were unable to locate him. ICE has placed a detainer on Monteroso Gonzalez. (ScoopNashville.com, May 12, 2022; Breitbart News, May 18, 2022)
  • On May 19, Reymundo Loa Rodriguez was arrested and charged with allegedly drugging and raping a woman in Wichita Falls, Texas. According to Breitbart News, “Wichita County Jail records show Rodriguez was previously arrested in June 2003 for theft and in October 2013 for assault in a domestic dispute. For each of those arrests, Rodriguez was released within 24 hours.” (Texomashomepage.com, May 23, 2022; Breitbart News, May 30, 2022)

ABOUT NCFIRE

Who We Are

We are a statewide grassroots organization that is dedicated to immigration enforcement. Our organization represents the citizens’ interest in stopping the flood of illegal aliens into North Carolina. We simply can’t afford illegal aliens’ tremendous costs any longer. The damage incurred, the crimes, costs and physical and emotional damage these people are causing, are just too great.

We also seek to educate our citizens to the many costly and destructive aspects of illegal immigrant crime. The crimes we document in our monthly crime reports include some of the most heinous crimes imaginable. (The sad thing about it is, every one of them is 100% preventable if our N.C. Legislators would simply enact and enforce, state level illegal immigration laws.)

What We Believe

We support limiting our jobs and resources to the citizens of North Carolina and we believe that it is time for our Legislators to adhere to their oath of office, “to support the Constitution of the United States; and to be faithful and bear true allegiance to the State of North Carolina” by passing the appropriate legislation to curtail the influx of illegal aliens into our state.

Our Position Statement

“We, as Citizens of the State, call upon the Legislators of North Carolina, to honor their oath of office to support and defend the Constitution of North Carolina, by passing the necessary and appropriate legislation to:”

1) Mandate English as the official language of N.C.

2) Require a valid photo I.D. to vote.

3) Require all companies (public and private) doing business in N.C. to become E-Verify compliant.

4) Mandate stricter punishments and stiffer penalties for hiring illegal aliens in N.C.

5) Enact a N.C. version of Arizona’s SB1070 law to document proof of legal entry and the right to be within N.C. borders.

6) Deny enrollment of illegal aliens to N.C. colleges and universities.

7) Eliminate taxpayer funding to N.C. colleges and universities that allow illegal aliens to enroll.

8) Restrict foreign consulate services to consulate property only.

9) Deny taxpayer funding to any N.C. municipality, town, city or county that supports sanctuary policies for illegal aliens.

10) Require proof of citizenship and residency for all N.C. social welfare eligibility.

11) Cut taxpayer funding to all non-profit organizations in N.C. that provide assistance and/or benefits to illegal aliens.

12) End taxpayer funding of all N.C. ethnic councils.

13) Tighten N.C. vehicle laws by impounding cars driven by unlicensed and uninsured drivers.

14) Restrict the registration of motor vehicles in N.C. to legal N.C. residents only.

What We Do

 We periodically send out “Action Alerts.” These are items that need immediate attention. It may be calling, emailing or faxing your Congressman, signing a petition, attending a rally or to notify you of an upcoming Bill to be voted on in the NCGA. The member contact list is divided up into sections according to their N.C. postal zip code. Information can be sent to specific areas of N.C. according to that zip code. This way, important information can be distributed regionally and action can be taken very quickly.

 How To Join

(It costs you nothing to join and we never ask for your money!)

Simply scroll down to the “Subscribe to our mailing list” section below. Enter your e-mail address. You can also enter your first and last names if you choose but it is not required; then click “Subscribe”. You will be sent a confirmation email that you signed up. Simply click on the link in the email to confirm the request. That’s it!You will be joining 40,000 to 50,000 fellow North Carolinians in the effort to enforce immigration laws in our state. With numbers like that, you can indeed make a difference!

©NCFIRE. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Mayor Bowser claims illegal immigrants crowding DC homeless shelters are asylum seekers ‘tricked’ onto buses

Two Illegals from Guatemala Caught Plotting to Mass Murder Americans on July 4

Biden admin sues Arizona over law requiring proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections

Potential Virginia Mass Shooters Were In US Illegally, One Deported Multiple Times, Police Say

The Majesty & Mystery of Marriage

/in , , , , , , /by

Every responsible adult in this country who reads a newspaper, watches a TV news program, or surfs the internet knows that we are experiencing a serious breakdown of the foundation of our culture. That foundation has long been considered the Judeo-Christian values that were so prevalent when our Founding Fathers gathered together to form what is now the United States of America.

In that time, for the most part, there was an accepted moral standard that provided guidance throughout a person’s life. And no, that guidance did not begin at the schoolhouse doors, nor was it completely given through sermons from the local pulpits. It was in the family home, listening to the words, and prayers of a loving father and mother where children received most of this guidance. The Holy Bible was the ‘primer’ used by families to give direction and purpose to their children. This dispensation of guidance was the most basic tenet of family life and it produced some of the most courageous, honest and trustworthy men and women who then guided our nation to become the greatest in world history.

Fast forward to today; what was considered immoral, unethical, illegal, or sinful then is now accepted as the norm in a society that has seemingly lost its moral compass. What could possibly have happened to change our national culture to this extreme in only a few hundred years? It’s easy to simply blame the devil but the truth is much more frightening. We have seen, and are still seeing, a breakdown in the American family that can be blamed on a lack of understanding of, and respect for, marriage.
The divorce statistics in the United States are staggering; in fact, one source indicates that the rate of divorce for first marriages is somewhere between 41% and 50%. Even more disturbing is the divorce rate among couples claiming to be Christian. While slightly lower than the divorce rate for non-Christians, the figures are still very high, and indicate serious problems that should be addressed by the Body of Christ.

The Origin of Marriage

Marriage is much more than a legal means for having a sexual relationship. The sexual part of marriage is very important and is a crucial part of God’s plan, but there is much more to a marriage than the sexual relationship. For Christian couples, there should be a much better understanding of the totality of marriage, how it began and why it exists. What does God have to say about marriage? Since He is the creator of marriage, let’s start with His Word on the subject. In Genesis 1:27 (KJV), we read: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” What clearer explanation for why there are only two genders on this planet: God wanted it that way! But wait, it also says in Genesis 2:18 (KJV): “And the Lord God said, it is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet (or, suitable) for him.” Originally, Adam, the man, was created without the woman. After God created all the animals and brought them to Adam for him to name, God then saw that Adam was still alone, since none of the animals was suitable as a mate. Some people, in error, have stated that if God saw the woman as an afterthought, He must have made a mistake creating Adam alone. But, since God is perfect and cannot make a mistake, they must be wrong who think this way. Before God created Adam, did He know that Adam would be incomplete without a mate? Of course, He did. But He was about to demonstrate His amazing love and awesome wisdom in solving the problem of Adam not having a mate.
For most Cristian couples who were married in a church ceremony by a minister of the gospel, the words “what therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder” should be very familiar. These are very common words used at the end of many, if not most, church weddings. But how many new husbands and wives listen to those words and consider what they mean, and how important they are in a marriage?

Let’s continue the historical account of what happened from Genesis:

“And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof. And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore, shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh (Genesis 2:18-24 KJV)”.

In God’s eyes, when Adam and Eve were married, He saw them as one flesh, or one body. This is the beginning of the mystery of marriage-the joining together of a man and a woman which, in the eyes of God, forms one body from the joining of two. This passage of scripture is the first mention of marriage in the Bible, and it was the act of a loving God, joining together a man and a woman for life. God himself originated, ordained and approved marriage.

God’s Plan for Adam – a Perfect Mate

Though the animals God created were magnificent and perfect, they were not created in God’s image, and they were not what Adam needed to make him complete. However, God knew exactly what He was doing; He always does. His plan was to take a part of Adam, from his flesh and from his bone, and skillfully craft an exquisite being who would augment and complete every part of Adam’s existence, spiritually, physically and mentally.

I once heard a Christian woman say to her congregation that God is spontaneous, and she stated that Christians should also be spontaneous, like God. While that may be partly true, especially in our worship of God, I disagree with most of what she said. The very creation we are a part of, the universe and everything in it, proves that a being with supernatural intelligence and wisdom planned the entire creation down to the most minute detail. He left nothing to chance, or evolution.

The act of God’s creativity in removing a piece of Adam’s own body and transforming it into the very element that was originally missing from Adam is, to me, a proof that God plans everything well in advance. It is also possibly the greatest act of Love, other than the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus, ever recorded in the Bible. How much more perfect could Eve have been than to have come directly from the body of her husband? Please understand, in the same way that the animals were created, from the dirt, Adam was also made from the dust of the earth, from actual dirt. God took that dirt and changed it into the marvelous creation known as man, the human body, then he breathed into it His own life.

But, unlike Adam, the first human being created, Eve was made using flesh and bone that had already undergone the miraculous transformation God exhibited in creating Adam when He changed dirt into a flesh and blood body. Eve was made using material from Adam’s physical body that had already been transformed and perfected by God’s touch! But, as perfect and unique as she was, Eve, just like Adam, was incomplete on her own. It was only when God joined them back together that they completed each other. And what is just as wonderful and amazing is this: every living human being after this came from the body of the woman whom God made using the flesh and bone of Adam. Wow! God is the ultimate planner!

In God’s eyes, when Adam and Eve were joined in marriage, the two fleshes that came from one were perfectly joined back into one flesh again; only this time they perfectly complemented and completed each other! God’s plan was for Adam and Eve to remain in a perfect married state, perfectly joined together forever, since they were created not to die, but to live eternally. Had sin not entered the world, every man born of this perfect union should also have sought out and found the perfect woman, the one who would complete his life before God.

The Corruption of Sin

Up to this time, Adam and Eve had neither needed nor worn clothes because they were unaware of their nakedness: “And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed “ (Genesis 2:25 KJV). But we all know that sin did enter and that changed everything. Instantly sin opened their eyes and they saw themselves as God did; for the first time, Adam and Eve saw each other’s naked physical bodies and were ashamed: “And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons” (Genesis 3:7 KJV). Up until that time, only God knew they were naked. The shame of seeing their naked bodies caused them to hide themselves from God, as sin and shame always do.

I have often wondered why Adam and Eve didn’t know they were naked until they sinned. I personally believe that they were both covered, or crowned, with God’s own glory when He created them and they were totally unaware of their physical bodies until their eyes were opened after they sinned, and God’s glory departed from them. When sin entered through the disobedience of Adam and Eve, and their eyes were opened to know good and evil, God’s perfect plan for marriage became corrupted.

Eventually, having seen that women were beautiful to behold and physically desirable, many men began to look more for the physical beauty of a woman for completion. However, this only provided the physical completion, rather than the total completion God had planned as a result of Eve’s creation. Anytime man’s actions contradict God’s perfect plan, man loses some of what God originally intended for him. God desired, and expected, to have Adam and Eve multiply and replenish the earth with beings just like themselves. God wanted the original perfect union between one man and one woman to create a worldwide family that He could fellowship and commune with on a daily basis.

The Deception of Physical Beauty

Because of the corrupting influence of sin, men began to place a higher priority on the physical attributes of women and many eventually chose their mates based on those attributes that were pleasing to the eye. Sin caused men to relate to women more on a physical level based on their appearance, rather than their spiritual and/or intellectual makeup. However, this was a very short-sighted means of choosing a mate since another result of sin was the aging process, which is essentially the death process whereby all human beings begin to gradually lose that which keeps them young and physically attractive. Physical beauty, which soon fades, is a poor means of determining the suitability of a mate, but it now seems to be the highest priority used by both men and women in the ‘mate selection process’.

Physical beauty, without a corresponding spiritual beauty or purity, is a means of deception Satan uses to deceive men and women into making poor choices for marriage. When the aging process, or any other circumstance, such as accident or illness, causes the loss of physical beauty, the basic reason for the marriage based on appearance alone vanishes and divorce is considered a viable alternative to staying with a person who is no longer physically attractive. Based on the divorce rate statistics, this option is used nearly as often by Christian couples as those who are non-Christian. Just because it is considered to be a legitimate way of dissolving a marriage does not make it acceptable in God’s sight.

Enter Divorce

It didn’t take long for men to realize that the selection of a mate based on a woman’s physical beauty was no guarantee of a successful, or happy, marriage. The first mention of divorce is found in the Book of Leviticus, indicating that divorce had already become an issue in the time of Moses. Much later, during Jesus ministry, the question of divorce was one of the weapons the Pharisees used to try to catch Jesus in His words. In the Gospel of Matthew, we read, “The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? And he answered and said unto them, have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. They say unto him, why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto you, whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.” (Matthew 19: 3-9 KJV)

Jesus states clearly that Moses granted divorce as an option to the Israelites due to the hardness of their hearts, not because it was acceptable to God. Those men who sought to separate from, or ‘to put away’, their wives had obviously chosen their wives using their eyes, not their hearts, and had easily fallen prey to the deceiver, Satan. As I stated earlier, God’s plan was for a man and woman to fully complement and augment each other, physically, spiritually and mentally.

But, when mate selection was based only on a physical attraction, something was missing in the marriage that hastened a divorce. What? Most people would likely answer this question that one, or both simply stopped loving the other. Only when we examine the type of love that forms the basis of a good marriage can we truly answer this question.

The True Basis for Marriage

Even though there are other words in the Greek language that are defined as ‘love’, two are mainly used in the New Testament, translated into the English word, love. The first is phileo (5368 in Strong’s Concordance), a Greek word meaning to be a friend to, or to have affection for (denoting personal attachment, as a matter of sentiment or feeling). This word usually connotes a brotherly love, or the feeling one might have for a friend. The second word is the Greek agapaó (25 in the Strong’s Concordance), which means to love in a social or moral sense, to prefer, i.e. embracing God’s will. One Word study, defines it as a “discriminating affection which involves choice and selection”.

This word has a much wider and deeper meaning than phileo, since agapaó embraces judgment and the deliberate assent of the will as a matter of duty, principle and propriety. This is the God kind of love, whereby He chooses to love when it would seem to us impossible to do so. This is the love described in John 3:16 and fully explains why God gave His only Begotten Son to be the sacrifice for our sins. God loves because He chooses to love.

Agapaó is the love God used when he took a part of Adam and skillfully crafted a mate that would provide everything, physical, spiritual and mental, that Adam was missing in his aloneness. Adam was neither physically, nor spiritually, complete until Eve was presented to him. God understood then, and understands now, exactly what every person needs to be complete.

Agapaó is the kind of love that God determined to be the basis for a man to leave his mother and father and cleave (or cling, adhere) to his wife. Agapaó love says to another person: “you are valuable and precious to me and I choose to love you and hold on to you”. But agapaó love is much more than that; agapaó is love that goes far beyond the physical and dwells on a much higher level, that of the spiritual. Unless this is the type of love that forms the foundation for a marriage, the chances for divorce are extremely high.

Since men and women are triune beings, made up of spirit, soul and body, there is a third Greek word that is very important for a healthy marriage is the word ‘eros’, from which the word ‘erotic’ is derived and it specifically refers to the physical, intimate love that is connected to the sexual act between a husband and wife. God designed the marriage of a man and woman to be a ‘complete union, one in which the two totally become one with the physical union meant to provide a satisfying physical relationship while also providing the means for the union to produce offspring. God, who is perfect, leaves nothing undone and the sexual part of marriage is no exception.

Requirements for a Successful Marriage

In the Book of Ephesians, the apostle Paul plainly tells the men in the Church at Ephesus what is required for them to be followers of God: “Husbands, love (agapaó) your wives, even as Christ also loved (agapaó) the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless, let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband” (Ephesians 5:25-33 KJV).

In this passage, Paul is comparing the relationship between a man and his wife with the relationship Christ has with the Church. The Church is the ‘body of Christ’, and Jesus loves His body. He was willing to lay down His own life for a body of sinful people so that they could form the Church that was, as yet, non-existent. The holy Spirit signified through the writing of Paul that a man should love his own wife in the same way. Even as Christ loves His body, the Church, and was willing to lay down His life for it, a man must love his wife in the same way, and certainly no less than he loves his own flesh; by the same token, the wife is instructed to reverence, or respect, her husband no less than the Church reveres Christ.

Conclusion – The Missing Ingredient in Many Marriages – Real Godly Commitment

It is indeed a great mystery that God used the union of a man and his wife to describe the union between Christ and the Church. Jesus was committed to God’s plan of salvation, knowing in himself that He would have to die for the church, His body of believers, to become pure and clean and worthy of Him. He knew the terrible price He would have to pay for that union to come into existence, but He possessed the critical attribute that allowed Him to face His death and not waiver—commitment. By an act of His will, he chose to follow God’s plan, no matter what the cost to Him. A husband should have the same commitment concerning his wife, and by an act of his will, he should choose to love her, at all costs.

In the same way, once a man determines what is required of him to love his wife with agapao love, he must then decide, by an act of his will, to commit to, and remain committed to, the union with his wife that has been ordained and blessed by God. When this commitment is present, the means to cherish and nourish his wife will come much easier, as will her respect and reverence for her husband

I am reminded of the words of Ruth Graham, wife of evangelist Billy Graham, who, during an interview, was asked about her long marriage to her world-famous husband. When asked if she ever thought about divorce, she answered emphatically, “No, I’ve never thought of divorce in all these 35 years of marriage, but I did think of murder a few times”. She was obviously joking about the murder comment, but her words indicate that even the most godly and strongest believers are, at times, driven to think negative thoughts about their marriages. However, with Godly love and commitment, the divorce option can, and should, be taken off the table when marital problems occur, as they invariably will. Situations will occur in every marriage to cause anger, frustration and hurt, but none of these should ever be considered a reason to dissolve a marriage that was ordained and blessed before God.

Imagine the hurt that Jesus feels when we, His body, mess up and sin against Him. Yet, He is always there, waiting for us to come to Him, repent and ask forgiveness and restore the fellowship that was broken as a result of our sin. In the same way, when problems arise that break the marital fellowship, husbands and wives should first consider what is needed for restoration, and then repent, ask for forgiveness of, and forgive, each other. This act of fellowship restoration will often save the marital relationship.

It is somewhat understandable that non-Christian couples will not comprehend the majesty and mystery of marriage, but all who have a good Christian foundation on which their lives together were built must realize that they will be held accountable for what happens in their marriages. When Jesus said the words: “what God has joined together, let not man put asunder” (Matthew 19:6 KJV), He established and confirmed God’s law on marriage. I know that many will say they made a mistake and should not have married the person they did. But does that make divorce among Christians OK? To answer that properly, we must consider that marriage vows are just that: they are vows or oaths made before Almighty God. In Psalm 15, the psalmist asked these questions of God: “Who shall dwell in thy tabernacle? And who shall dwell in thy holy hill?” He provides a partial answer in verse 4b: “He that sweareth to his own hurt and changeth not”. Christian couples must understand the sacred duty and obligation they accepted when they both spoke the vows that were to bind them together in holy matrimony for life. The basis for their marriage must not be a purely physical attraction and love, but it must be the agapaó love described previously.

This agapaó love, and the ensuing commitment to a marriage, will not keep problems from occurring, but they will provide the Christian couple with the Godly means to work on, and solve, every problem that does arise and will allow them to remain in a committed and loving relationship. The agapaó love and commitment should always find the answer to any problem before divorce is ever considered. If all Christian couples would work more diligently on their level of commitment, embracing love as a choice, rather than a physical attraction, a long and successful marriage is possible. The best result would be that Christian divorce rates would drop dramatically and God will be pleased.

Blessings!

©Bud Hancock. All rights reserved.

Poll Finds 26-Point Increase in 2022 Midterm Voter Interest Among Young Women Due to Roe v Wade Decision

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

NEW YORK, NY/PRNewswire/ — More than 80% of women aged 18-29 say the recent Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade has made them more interested in voting in the 2022 midterm elections, a 26-point increase since September 2021, according to a new poll by the nonpartisan women’s political leadership group All In Together and administered by Emerson College.

The increase in voting interest because of the SCOTUS decision crosses all demographics, most notably among Democratic women (14-point increase), Black women (21-point increase), Hispanic women (21-point increase) and college-educated women (12-point increase). Among all voters who say the decision makes them much more interested in the 2022 elections, 68% support a generic Democratic congressional candidate on the ballot. Among Independents, women are also much more interested in voting because of the Supreme Court decision (39%), compared to September 2021 (23%).

“The SCOTUS decision overturning Roe v. Wade may very well be the game changer in the 2022 mid-terms and beyond, especially among female and young voters,” said Lauren Leader, AIT co-founder and CEO.  “Moreover, the Democrats have been searching for an issue to galvanize their base and stem what had been a rising Republican advantage.  Our data suggests that this is that issue.”

September 2021: If Roe v. Wade were done away with, would that make you more or less interested in voting in the 2022 elections, or does it not make a difference to you?

June 2022: Does the overturning of Roe v. Wade make you more or less interested in voting in the 2022 Elections or does it not make a difference to you?

September 2021

June 2022

Shifts

All
Voters

All
Women

Women
18-29

All
Voters

All
Women

Women
18-29

All
Voters

All
Women

Women
18-29

Much more interested

30 %

32 %

30 %

38 %

42 %

50 %

+8

+10

+20

Somewhat more interested

25 %

22 %

27 %

18 %

18 %

33 %

-7

-4

+6

Somewhat less interested

9 %

8 %

15 %

6 %

4 %

3 %

-3

-4

-12

Much less interested

3 %

4 %

7 %

2 %

1 %

0 %

-1

-3

-7

No difference

27 %

27 %

14 %

33 %

29 %

6 %

+6

+2

-8

Unsure

6 %

8 %

8 %

5 %

6 %

8 %

-1

-2

0

The survey was administered by Emerson College Polling. The national poll was conducted June 28-29, 2022. The sample consisted of registered voters, n=1,271, with a Credibility Interval (CI) similar to a poll’s margin of error (MOE) of +/- 2.7 percentage points. The data sets were weighted by gender, region, age, education, and race/ethnicity, based on 2022 turnout modeling. It is important to remember that subsets based on gender, age, education, and race/ethnicity carry with them higher margins of error, as the sample size is reduced. Data was collected using an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) system of landlines and an online panel provided by CloudResearch.

More information is available at https://aitogether.org/ Crosstabs and additional data can be made available on request.  Interviews with AIT CEO Lauren Leader can also be arranged upon request.

About All In Together (AIT) is a non-partisan, non-profit women’s civic education and mobilization organization.

Secularism: The Forgotten Factor in Falling Fertility

/in , , , , , , , , /by

The decline in faith has precipitated a drop in procreation.

James McHenry is a lesser-known American Founding Father. A Scots-Irish Presbyterian born in County Antrim, Ireland, he came to the colonies in 1771, just five years before independence.

McHenry eventually became a military surgeon, signer of the Constitution and Secretary of War for Presidents Washington and Adams. Fort McHenry, of Star-Spangled Banner fame, bears his name. James McHenry was of the early American elite. He wrote:

“The holy Scriptures… can alone secure to society, order and peace, and to our courts of justice and constitutions of government, purity, stability, and usefulness.”

Holy Scriptures? How unwoke can you get?

Are we to assume that McHenry was racist, “homophobic,” nativist or a bigot? Can you imagine a member of the Biden cabinet referencing holy Scripture? Why, that would be a violation of “separation of church and state,” the Jeffersonian doctrine intended to prevent government from meddling in matters of faith. Today that doctrine has been wholly transmuted, weaponised to eradicate religious expression from the public square.

A different century

McHenry wasn’t the only American Founder whose words would get him cancelled today. How about the “father of our country” George Washington? Here is what Washington told a gathering of Delaware Indian leaders:

You do well to wish to learn our arts and our ways of life and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are. Congress will do everything they can to assist you in this wise intention.

A compilation of religious sentiments by early American leaders would consume more terabytes than MercatorNet can handle. Needless to say, the Founders were people of faith. Back then, the West was commonly referred to as Christendom. As far as I know, no one found that offensive.

What does any of this have to do with demography?

Well, according to the World Atlas, “American women reaching child-bearing age in 1800 had on average of seven to eight live births in the course of their reproductive life.” In 1800, America was mostly rural and practising Christian.

In the early 1800s, two overarching factors influenced family life. The first was faith. The Biblical injunction “And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein.” (Genesis 9:7, KJV) was taken quite seriously.

Also, having children was sound economics. Children meant more hands on deck at the farm and family business. That was early American family planning.

From 1800, however, US fertility steadily declined, bottoming out in the 1940s. Then the postwar “baby boom” brought a 60% bump. The decline has since resumed, attributed to better public health (lower infant mortality), urbanisation, industrialisation, higher incomes and women in the workforce.

However, one tremendously significant reason for fewer children is usually omitted from demographic analyses: secularism.

What is secularism?

The term was coined c.1850 to denote a system which sought to order and interpret life on principles taken solely from this world, without recourse to belief in God and a future life. It is now used in a more general sense of the tendency to ignore, if not to deny, the principles of supernatural religion.
— The Concise Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church

According to Merriam-Webster, secularism is “indifference to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations.”

The US is today’s secularist imperium. Secularism is a major contributing factor, usually overlooked, for persistent below-replacement fertility worldwide.

It is no secret that, on average, religious folks have more children than the non-religious. Why? Quite often, people of faith seriously follow the Biblical injunction to go forth and multiply. They believe in salvation and are usually somewhat less egocentric and materialistic than the average modern Joe.

But today we are in the age of Economic Man, defined by Merriam-Webster as

… an imaginary individual created in classical economics and conceived of as behaving rationally, regularly, and predictably in his economic activities with motives that are egoistic, acquisitive, and short-term in outlook.

By adopting the model of Economic Man, Western societies abandoned believing that humanity’s intellectual, spiritual and moral essence were in the image of God, a view that had sustained them for at least 18 centuries. This stone-cold secularism would eventually lead to Communism and the many other atheistic ideologies we suffer from today.

Major General JFC Fuller, in volume 3 of his Military History of the Western World, posited that “the myth of Economic Man [was] the fundamental factor in Capitalism, Socialism, and Communism.”

We are also addicted to the Idea of Progress, defined by the web’s Conservapedia as

… a worldview mainly promoted by globalists and liberals that argues “that the human condition has improved over the course of history and will continue to improve.”[1]

It is closely associated with the concept that man is perfectible and at some point in the future will, in fact, be perfect. While popular in contemporary culture, this idea has several serious flaws.

Flawed indeed. Shallow belief in the inevitability of human progress and unlimited temporal advancement disregards the transcendent, giving rise to the “prosperity gospel” and rank materialism.

Many prosper, but post-World War II affluence is proving to be ephemeral. Something is lacking. That is why China popularises Confucius, Russia subsidises Orthodoxy and Hungary promotes Catholicism in hopes of boosting birthrates. The US mandates wokeism and relies on immigration.

Today politicians rarely invoke religious faith except in throwaway lines for public consumption. People made of sterner stuff like James McHenry and George Washington are vilified and cancelled, their names expunged and statues removed. What will tomorrow’s children know of their heritage?

Yes, we’re oh-so-modern, high tech, sophisticated and secular. Having children is uncool. Modernity is slowly but surely killing us. The idea of progress that venerates Mammon, radical environmentalism, egocentrism and wokeism has Homo sapiens on the path to extinction. But as the old saying goes, “Fish are the last to notice the water.”

AUTHOR

Louis T. March

Louis T. March has a background in government, business and philanthropy. A former talk show host, author and public speaker, he is a dedicated student of history and genealogy. Louis lives with his family… More by Louis T. March

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Permanent Male Sterilization’: Vasectomies Soar After SCOTUS Overturns Roe

Biden Admin To Families Suffering High Gas Costs: ‘This Is About The Future Of The Liberal World Order’

RELATED VIDEO: Groomed – How Schools Sexualise Your Children.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Why Do The Woke Hate Clarence Thomas So Much?

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Justice Clarence Thomas, being African American, is seen as a traitor to the woke cause.

After the overturning of Roe v Wade, Justice Clarence Thomas has been a particular target of venomous attack from the woke mob. Why do they hate him so much? One might be forgiven for thinking that it is due to his staunch anti-abortion views. But that explanation does not work.

Pope Francis has long expressed that opposing abortion is “closely linked to the defense of each and every other human right”, and yet, the Left is not obsessed with him (in fact, many even take a liking). At some point, even Joe Biden supported letting States overturn Roe v Wade, and again, the Left did not go ballistic on him.

Not behaving as expected

So, why the animus against Thomas? There can only be one explanation: race. In 1991, as he was accused of sexually harassing Anita Hill, Thomas countered that he was the victim of “a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you.”

This was loose talk, as it trivialised the suffering of real lynching victims in America’s troubled history of race relations. But Thomas did have a point in arguing that in the United States, any black person who dares to deviate from the official narrative of how blacks are supposed to act, will face severe harassment.

In 1991, he anticipated a trend that would become mainstream in our times: if you are born with a particular skin colour, you are supposed to behave in a certain way, and uphold a specific ideology. If not, you are a race traitor. As Biden so neatly phrased it:

“[I]f you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”

Any competent scholar of the history of racism would immediately recognise this as race essentialism. As Angelo Corlett explains in his book Race, Racism and Reparations,
“proponents of race essentialism define human races by a set of genetic or cultural traits shared by all members of a ‘racial’ group.”

Who are the neo-Nazis now?

In the first half of the 20th Century, this view was popular amongst proponents of so-called “racial science”. They believed that racial biological traits determine how people behave. Hitler believed that no matter how much a person with Jewish ancestry tried to assimilate to German society (even converting to another religion), he or she would still be a dangerous Jew, because it was in his or her essence.

Race essentialism is abhorrent, and one might think that after 1945, the world learned a lesson. And yet, race essentialism is alive and kicking, but this time, under the guise of woke progressivism. As per today’s woke rules, if you are black, you must embrace the whole woke mindset.

White people (such as Pope Francis) may occasionally be forgiven for having anti-abortion views, but if you are black and you deviate from the woke line (such as Clarence Thomas), you are a race traitor, an Uncle Tom. Unsurprisingly, Thomas has been called “Uncle Clarence” multiple times.

If you are black, not only do you have to act a certain way, but you must also have a special sexual preference. The woke pay lip service to interracial relationships, but amongst them there is a sense of unease when they contemplate a successful black man marrying a white woman.

For example, when Thomas was nominated to the Supreme Court of the United States, USA Today columnist Barbara Reynolds wrote: “Here’s a man who’s going to decide crucial issues for the country and he has already said no to blacks; he has already said if he can’t paint himself white he’ll think white and marry a white woman.” Russell Adams, chairman of African American studies at Howard University, said that Thomas “marrying a white woman is a sign of his rejection of the black community.”

Truly racist

Frantz Fanon is a figure beloved by the Left. In 1952, he published Black Skin, White Masks, a canonical text of wokeness. In that book, he also scorns black men who fall in love with white women. Fanon castigates himself for, at some point, having had these thoughts: “Out of the blackest part of my soul, across the zebra striping of my mind, surges this desire to be suddenly white. I wish to be acknowledged not as black but as white… I marry white culture, white beauty, white whiteness.” The implication of this passage is that loving a white woman is an act of racial treason.

Fanon felt disdain for black people who embraced Western values. He claimed they were wearing white masks, as if somehow, they were deviating from their real essence, and were therefore living an inauthentic life. Therefore — so Fanon believed — Western civilisation must be rejected entirely. As he explained in The Wretched of the Earth, “When the colonized hear a speech on Western culture, they draw their machetes or at least check to see they are close to hand.” He who admires Western values is a sellout.

Ever since Fanon, racial essentialism in the name of progress has only grown worse. People of color are now encouraged not to honour punctuality, because being on time is part of whiteness. Black kids who are academically talented run the risk of being told they are “acting white”. Analysing things objectively is an act of white supremacy. And so on.

Consequently, Clarence Thomas is not allowed to have anti-abortion views. Nobody cares about his anti-abortion arguments, because he is not supposed to make them in the first place. Other jurists, philosophers or theologians will be allowed to oppose abortion, but only if they are white. Thomas is hated not because of his views, but because of his skin colour. He upsets the arbitrary racial classifications that the woke are so eager to embrace.

As per woke taxonomy, black people cannot be conservative, and if they are, they are only wearing a “white mask”. To paraphrase the late Christopher Hitchens, “identity politics poisons everything”. We can no longer have a meaningful discussion about anything as vital as the ontological status of a fetus, because the race of the discussants will determine who is allowed to uphold a particular view. It’s time to push back against this madness.

AUTHOR

Gabriel Andrade

Gabriel Andrade is a university professor originally from Venezuela. He writes about politics, philosophy, history, religion and psychology. More by Gabriel Andrade

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Turnaway Study: A Lesson in Politically Incentivised and Twisted Science

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Pro-choice ideology has been allowed to infect research on mental health outcomes for women who have had abortions.

Given decades of legal and quasi-legal abortions in developed countries involving millions of women, there should be many studies with various findings on the impact of what was, until “shout your abortion” politics came along, generally regarded as a complex decision for a woman. And yet the Anglo-American lay reader is likely to find only one.

It’s called the Turnaway Study, conducted at the University of San Francisco California in 2008-2010. Mainstream media outlets have been broadcasting its results for nearly a decade, and research articles generated from the same core sample of women have been published in droves.

The study has been touted by academics, professional organisations, and journalists alike as the abortion study to end all studies, offering definitive answers to hotly debated questions on how abortion benefits contemporary women psychologically, relationally, physically and in terms of life satisfaction — among a host of other quality of life indicators.

Not quite, according to Priscilla Coleman, retired Professor of Human Development and Family Studies at Bowling Green State University in Ohio. Coleman has been studying the psychology of abortion decision-making and mental health outcomes associated with abortion for nearly 30 years. Last month she published “The Turnaway Study: A Case of Self-Correction in Science Upended by Political Motivation and Unvetted Findings” in the top-ranked psychology journal, Frontiers in Psychology.

Focusing on Turnaway’s mental health findings, Coleman pulls back the curtain, revealing the details of this large-scale effort to use science to manufacture a false narrative about abortion being preferable to delivering an unintended pregnancy, and as essential for preserving the well-being of women.

The publication of her article is timely given the overturn of Roe v Wade and likely use of Turnaway findings in the raging battles at state level.

More than 50 peer-reviewed spinoffs can’t be wrong?

In the Frontiers in Psychology article, Coleman quotes a January 2022 Kaiser Health News interview with the study’s principal investigator, Diana Greene Foster.

“Data from the Turnaway Study has resulted in the publication of more than 50 peer-reviewed studies, and the answer to nearly all the questions asked, said Foster, is that the women who got abortions fared better in respect to economics and health, including their mental health, compared with those who did not have abortions.”

Better mental health? According to Coleman, these results dramatically contradict a wealth of data from large, methodologically sophisticated studies demonstrating that abortion is associated with a statistically significant increased risk for mental health problems including depression, anxiety, substance abuse, and suicide. She wanted to understand why.

Motivation and funding

Coleman began by examining the investigators’ incentive for embarking on the study. She soon discovered that the funding came from Warren Buffett, who provided a minimum of $88,000,000 to the University of California San Francisco (UCSF), funds directly supporting researchers who had expressed abortion-rights political views.

A research unit called Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH) within UCSF’s Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health housed Turnaway. Research conducted within the centre was aimed at debunking common justifications for abortion restrictions, including increased risks for serious, long-lasting mental health challenges.

Critical analysis of the study’s Operating Procedures Manual and publications led Coleman to identify numerous methodological shortcomings. For a start, the study investigators never describe the plan for sampling women, the precise size of the population, or the manner for selecting sites within the various cities.

The Turnaway women

Participants from three different groups were recruited for Turnaway: (1) women whose pregnancies were past clinic gestational limits for performing abortions and were not permitted a wanted abortion (“Turnaway Group”); (2) women whose pregnancies were close to the clinic gestational limit and had an abortion; and finally, (3) women who had an abortion in the first trimester.

The women were recruited over three years in 21 states at 29 abortion clinics with different gestational age limits. The clinics performed over 2000 abortions a year on average. Coleman calculates that the potential pool of women could have been as high as 162,000. However, only 7,486 women were screened for the study, and of those only 3,045 were approached to participate in it. Ultimately the number of those participating was 1,199. Why only 41% of those screened were asked to participate was not explained by the study authors, says Coleman.

“This is potentially very problematic, because those not screened in or not approached could have been systematically different from those who were screened in or approached relative to background characteristics, situational factors and/or how they presented before, during, or immediately after the abortion experience.”

Further, although “1000” is the number of participants usually cited by the authors, the actual number of women who completed the initial interview (“baseline measures”) was 877. And the total percentage of women who completed the 5-year study was 516 — a mere 16.9% of those approached.

If Coleman’s figure of 162,000 women for the potential population for the study is used, the 516 who actually completed it would amount to a miniscule 0.32% of them. Even at 10% of her population estimate, the final sample of 516 participants would be 3.18% of the total abortions performed at the 29 clinics over three years. As Coleman observes:

“The Turnaway Study researchers attempted to make generalized claims about women seeking abortion when the study itself likely did not even consider over 95% of women receiving abortions at the facilities included in the study. Given the extremely small percentage of women from the population represented in the sample, generalizations are precluded.”

Among the other methodological problems of Turnaway highlighted in Coleman’s article are the following:

  1. Those who underwent abortions near gestational limits included patients whose pregnancies ranged from 10 to 27 weeks gestation, even though women’s reasons for aborting and their psychological responses vary greatly at different times across pregnancy. For this reason, they should not have been grouped together.
  2. Many of the complex outcomes are measured far too simplistically, with anxiety and depression scales containing only six items and self-esteem and life satisfaction only 2 items. Capturing all the components of complex internal states is impossible with so few items and goes against established protocol for reliable and valid assessments.
  3. In many of the analyses, the authors failed to control for abortions that took place before or after the target abortion. This is problematic because previous studies have shown more than one abortion increases a woman’s risk for mental health problems beyond that incurred from a single abortion.

The studies you never hear about — except to dismiss them

Yet, there are well-designed studies coming to different conclusions from those of the Turnaway authors, and Coleman provides the reader with an up-to-date synopsis of some of the strongest of them. She notes:

“The science linking abortion to elevated risk for mental health challenges is published in prominent journals, with dozens of large, prospective studies incorporating comparison groups and additional sophisticated control techniques, enhancing confidence in the published findings. This extensive literature has shown that abortion increases risk for mental health problems including substance abuse, anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, and suicide.”

She summarises the results of systematic reviews of literature, including her own, demonstrating this effect and provides overviews of some of the most sophisticated empirical studies published in recent years. There is a table (reproduced at the end of this article) in the Frontiers article highlighting key findings from several large-scale studies, all of which revealed increased risks of psychological problems associated with abortion, in contrast to Turnaway.

And yet professional groups such as the American Psychological Association (in 2008), the Royal College of Psychiatrists (in 2011) and the American Academies of Sciences (in 2018) have published reviews of the literature on abortion and mental health that dismiss findings like Coleman’s and support the “no negative effect” line.

In the last part of her article, Coleman examines these reviews and details a litany of methodological problems with them that include, among others: missing or elusive selection criteria that resulted in selective reporting of studies, shifting standards of evaluation based on study results, failure to conduct a quantitative synthesis or meta-analysis, sweeping conclusions based on very few or a single study, and factual errors. She comes out fighting:

“Journals opening their doors to allow virtually uncontested publication of some of the poorest work in the field, media outlets seizing the information that they believe the public desires, and abortion providers and their advocates using the data in attempts to remove and prevent installation of abortion restrictions: this is the status of mainstream science on the psychology of abortion in our world in 2022.”

Coleman concludes:

“[W]ith widespread dissemination of misinformation generated from studies like the Turnaway Study, hundreds of thousands of women considering an abortion are likely unaware of the expansive literature demonstrating abortion is a significant risk factor for post-abortion psychological distress and mental health detriments.

The science revealing the potential for serious, debilitating mental health consequences underscores the necessity of providing women with up-to-date information on the risks from the most rigorous scientific studies.”

Study Results
Gong, X., Hao, J., Tao, F., Zhang, J., Wang, H., & Xu, R. (2013). Pregnancy loss and anxiety and depression during subsequent pregnancies: Data from the C-ABC study. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, 166(1), 30–36. Large Chinese study (over 20,000 women), 7683 of whom had an abortion. Abortion was related to increased risk of depression (OR: 1.381) and anxiety (OR: 1.211) in the first trimester of a later pregnancy after controlling for age, education, pre-pregnancy MBI, income, and residence. The comparison group was women experiencing a first pregnancy.
Gissler, M., Karalis, E., & Ulander, V.M. (2015). Decreased suicide rate after induced abortion, after the Current Care Guidelines in Finland 1987-2012. Scand J Public Health, 43(1), 99-101. Examined suicide post-abortion between 1987 and 2012 in Finland. A 2-fold increased risk of suicide was observed even after new guidelines required post-abortion follow-up sessions at 2-3 weeks to monitor women’s mental health.
Jacob, L., Gerhard, C., Kostev, K., & Kalder, M. (2019). Association between induced abortion, spontaneous abortion, and infertility respectively and the risk of psychiatric disorders in 57,770 women followed in gynecological practices in Germany. Journal of Affective Disorders, 251, 107–113. Case-control study from the Disease Analyzer Database (IQVIA). Induced abortion was positively associated with the elevated risk of psychiatric disorders (ORs ranging from 1.75 to 2.01).
Jacob, L., Kostev, K., Gerhard, C., & Kalder, M. (2019). Relationship between induced abortion and the incidence of depression, anxiety disorder, adjustment disorder, and somatoform disorder in Germany. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 114, 75–79. Examined women with a first abortion in 281 gynecological practices in Germany. Included 17581 women with an abortion experience and 17581 matched controls who had a live birth. Induced abortion predicted depression (HR=1.34), adjustment disorder (HR=1.45), and somatoform disorder (HR=1.56) across the 10-year study period.
Lega, I., Maraschini, A., D’Aloja, P., Andreozzi, S., Spettoli, D., Giangreco, M., Vichi, M., Loghi, M., Donati, S., & Regional Maternal Mortality Working Group (2020). Maternal suicide in Italy. Archives of Women’s Mental Health, 23(2), 199–206. Data were gathered from 10 regions in Italy. The suicide rate was 1.18 per 100,000 among women who gave birth (n = 2,876,193) and 2.77 among women who aborted (n = 650,549), a statistically significant difference.
Luo, M., Jiang, X., Wang, Y., Wang, Z., Shen, Q., Li, R., & Cai, Y. (2018). Association between induced abortion and suicidal ideation among unmarried female migrant workers in three metropolitan cities in China: A cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health, 18(1), 625. Examined 5115 unmarried females from Shanghai, Beijing, and Guangzhou. Abortion was associated with nearly double the odds of suicidal ideation (OR = 1.89) after adjustment for numerous controls (age, education, years in the working place, tobacco use, alcohol consumption, daily internet use, attitude towards premarital pregnancy, multiple induced abortion, self-esteem, loneliness, depression, and anxiety disorders.) The association was stronger in those aged > 25 (OR = 3.37), among women with > 5 years in the work force (OR = 2.98), in the non-anxiety group (OR = 2.28, and in the non-depression group (OR = 2.94).
McCarthy, F. P., Moss-Morris, R., Khashan, A. S., North, R. A., Baker, P. N., Dekker, G., Poston, L., McCowan, L., Walker, J. J., Kenny, L. C., & O’Donoghue, K. (2015). Previous pregnancy loss has an adverse impact on distress and behaviour in subsequent pregnancy. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 122(13), 1757–1764. Women with one prior abortion had elevated stress (adjusted mean difference=0.65) and depression (aOR= 1.25) at 15 weeks of gestation. Women with two prior abortions had increased perceived stress (adjusted mean difference=1.43) and depression (aOR=1.67).
Sullins D. P. (2016). Abortion, substance abuse and mental health in early adulthood: Thirteen-year longitudinal evidence from the United States. SAGE Open Medicine, 4, In a US sample, after extensive control for other pregnancy outcomes and sociodemographic variables, abortion was associated with increased overall risk of mental health disorders (OR:1.45). A Population Attributable Risk analysis showed 8.7% of the prevalence of mental disorders was attributable to abortion.
Wie, J. H., Nam, S. K., Ko, H. S., Shin, J. C., Park, I. Y., & Lee, Y. (2019). The association between abortion experience and postmenopausal suicidal ideation and mental health: Results from the 5th Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES V). Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 58(1), 153–158. After adjusting for several demographic controls, women who had three abortions experienced elevated risk for suicidal ideation (OR: 1.510). This level of risk was significant even after controlling for depression (OR: 1.391). Risk of depressive mood in daily life was likewise elevated with more abortions even after controlling for depression (OR: 1.657).

AUTHOR

Carolyn Moynihan

Carolyn Moynihan is the former deputy editor of MercatorNet More by Carolyn Moynihan.

RELATED ARTICLE: Dobbs, seen from an outpost of America’s informal empire

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

EXCLUSIVE: Sen. Blackburn To Introduce Legislation Backing National Guard Members Set To Be Fired Over COVID Vaccine Refusal

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Republican Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn will introduce legislation Thursday that would ban federal funds from being used to implement any requirement that a National Guard member must receive a COVID-19 vaccine.

The legislation, first obtained by the Daily Caller, comes as up to 40,000 U.S. Army National Guard members are set to be fired Thursday for refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine. Blackburn said she is introducing the legislation to protect the 40,000 guardsmen and said firing them would be a threat to U.S. national security.

“Our servicemembers are the bedrock of America,” Blackburn told the Daily Caller before introducing the legislation. “Firing 40,000 Guardsmen for refusing the COVID vaccine would be both a complete disgrace and a threat to our national security. I am honored to stand beside our National Guardsmen and women by introducing this legislation to protect them from President Biden’s forever pandemic.”

READ THE LEGISLATION HERE: 

(DAILY CALLER OBTAINED) — … by Henry Rodgers

“We’re going to give every soldier every opportunity to get vaccinated and continue their military career. Every soldier that is pending an exemption, we will continue to support them through their process,” Lt. Gen. Jon Jensen, director of the Army National Guard, said in an Associated Press interview regarding the vaccine mandate. “We’re not giving up on anybody until the separation paperwork is signed and completed. There’s still time.” A number of House Republicans have introduced legislation to put an end to vaccine and mask mandates. In late September, a group of House Republicans introduced a bill that would prohibit federal agencies from implementing vaccine mandates.

The Daily Caller contacted the Department of Defense (DOD) and the White House about this legislation and about the jobs of the 40,000 National Guardsmen who remain unvaccinated. White House Press Sec. Karine Jean-Pierre would not answer the questions and referred the Caller to the Army. The DOD did not immediately respond.

AUTHOR

HENRY RODGERS

Senior Congressional correspondent. Follow Henry Rodgers On Twitter

RELATED ARTICLES:

Up to 40,000 Unvaccinated Army Guard Troops at Risk of Dismissal as Deadline for Vaccine Mandate Looms

EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Clyde, House Republicans Introduce Legislation To Block Future OSHA Vaccine Mandates

EXCLUSIVE: House Republicans Introduce Bill That Would Prohibit Agencies That Received COVID Funds From Issuing Vaccine Mandates

Youngkin Urges Pentagon To Ease Up On Vax Mandate As Tens Of Thousands Of Troops Face Discharge

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

POLL: Inflation, Economy And Crime Still More Important Than Abortion To Voters Post-Dobbs

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Voters still rank economic concerns and rising crime higher in importance than abortion even after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, a Cygnal study released Wednesday found.

The most important issues to voters polled were the high cost of living/inflation, the economy in general and crime/violence. A full 62% of voters ranked these issues as the most important to them.

Only eight percent said abortion was the most important issue to them.

The study had a margin of error of 2.19%. Cygnal interviewed registered voters via online panel, and the poll was conducted through June 25 and 26 and surveyed over 2,000 voters. Cygnal has a B+ rating according to FiveThirtyEight and has predicted 95% of races correctly.

Among independents, high cost of living/inflation, economy in general and jobs were top concerns, with 60% of independent voters ranking them as the most important issues to them. Comparatively, 20% of independent voters ranked abortion as the most important issue to them.

According to the poll, voters seem to have a slight preference for Republicans candidates over Democrat candidates heading into the midterms. Of those surveyed, 48% said they would prefer a Republican candidate and 44% said they would prefer a Democratic candidate.

The polling also showed Republicans leading as the party most trusted to handle economic issues. Republicans are trusted to handle the high cost of living and inflation, for instance, at a rate of 51%, compared to 49% who trusted them in a January poll. The percentage of voters who trusted Democrats to handle those issues remained steady from January, at 39%.

“Friday’s decision did nothing to change the headwinds state Democrats will face this year as a result of a dismal national political environment,” the Republican State Leadership Committee said of the polling numbers.

AUTHOR

SARAH WEAVER

Staff writer.

RELATED ARTICLES:

HART: Dems’ Dearth Of Ideas Spawns Weaponization Of Government Against Opponents

The Internet Drags Biden For Claim About The ‘Ultra-MAGA’ Agenda

AMERICAN PRIDE ON THE SLIDE: Record-Low 38% ‘Extremely Proud’ to Be American

Poll Shows How Much The Trimester Affects Support For Abortion

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Here’s Why The Government Can’t Set Up Abortion Clinics On Federal Land

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

Despite demands from several prominent Democrats, the federal government is prohibited from using taxpayer dollars to fund abortions.

The Hyde Amendment, first included in federal appropriations bills in 1976, prohibits the federal government from funding abortions unless “the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term or where the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.” Activists estimate that the Hyde Amendment prevents at least 60,000 abortions every year.

The amendment is named for Republican Illinois Rep. Henry Hyde, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee who championed it.

Although support for the amendment was initially bipartisan, Democrats in recent years have attempted to pass federal budgets that do not include the provision. President Joe Biden flip-flopped on support for the amendment during his 2020 presidential campaign, and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi attempted to jettison the provision for an early COVID-19 relief package. Democratic West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin’s demand that the Hyde Amendment be included in a social spending package was a key factor in the breakdown in Build Back Better negotiations.

Following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, several Republican-controlled states instituted trigger laws limiting abortion. In response, prominent left-wing Democrats urged the Biden administration to take actions to protect abortion access in those states.

New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren both called on the federal government to make abortions available on federal lands like national parks, where state governments could not regulate the procedure.

Warren and Minnesota Sen. Tina Smith claimed in a New York Times op-ed that Biden could provide “federal resources for individuals seeking abortion care in other states” and use “federal property and resources to protect people seeking abortion services locally.” Warren also claimed that the administration could designate “federal lands as a place where abortions can occur.”

Ocasio-Cortez added that providing abortion services on federal lands is the “the babiest of the babiest of the baby steps” that the federal government can take.

Neither Warren nor Ocasio-Cortez responded to the Daily Caller’s request for comment on whether or not they believe that such actions would violate the Hyde Amendment.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre rejected the congressional Democrats’ suggestion Monday, but two cabinet members did suggest that they would use their agencies to promote abortion access.

“Nothing is more important to me or to this Department than the health and well-being of our Service members, the civilian workforce and DOD families,” Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said in a Friday statement shortly after the ruling. “I am committed to taking care of our people and ensuring the readiness and resilience of our Force.”

“The Department is examining this decision closely and evaluating our policies to ensure we continue to provide seamless access to reproductive health care as permitted by federal law,” he added.

When contacted for comment, a Department of Defense (DOD) spokesperson cited a memorandum released Tuesday by Undersecretary of Defense Gilbert Cisneros. The memorandum stressed that the DOD will comply with the conditions laid out by the Hyde Amendment, and “will continue to follow existing departmental policy.”

Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Xavier Becerra promised to “increase access” to abortifacients, claiming that his agency has been planning for “every action necessary to protect women’s access to reproductive healthcare.”

A spokesperson for HHS did not respond to the Daily Caller’s request for comment on compliance with the Hyde Amendment.

AUTHOR

MICHAEL GINSBERG

Congressional reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

EXCLUSIVE: 48 Senate Republicans Tell Schumer They Will Block Any Bill Undermining Hyde Amendment

‘Simply Ignore’: Military Expert Sounds Alarm On Pentagon’s Abortion Stance

New York Attorney General Demands Google Scrub Crisis Pregnancy Centers From Search Results

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden Administration Invests $6 Mil to Advance Racial Equity in Food Stamp Program

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

The Biden administration is spending millions of taxpayer dollars to advance racial equity in the government’s bloated, multi-billion-dollar food-stamp program that already serves a large minority population. A record 45 million people receive the welfare benefit, according to the latest figures published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), at a cost of about $80 billion. This month the administration announced it is investing $6 million to fund data projects centered on identifying inequities in the food stamp program, which was rebranded Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by the Obama administration to eliminate the welfare stigma.

The costly project is known as SNAP E&T Data and Technical Assistance (DATA) and its mission is to help states make data-driven decisions to advance equity in the food stamp program. “Throughout the United States, systemic barriers for historically underserved communities have, historically and to this day, led to significant barriers to education, training, and full participation in the labor market,” the Biden administration writes in the grant announcement. “SNAP E&T programs are primed to be leaders in promoting equitable (i.e. race, gender, geographic, sexual orientation, religion, etc.) access to good jobs and sustained family-supporting wages in high-demand career fields for those from historically underserved groups; as measured by educational attainment, households that participate in the SNAP program are the least well-off in the labor market.”

For those unfamiliar with term equity, the document identifies it in a long-winded footnote as the “consistent and systematic fair, just, and impartial treatment of all individuals, including individuals who belong to underserved communities that have been denied such treatment, such as Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American persons, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and other persons of color; members of religious minorities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with disabilities; persons who live in rural areas; and persons otherwise adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality.” The USDA’s Food and Nutrition Services (FNS) plans to support and invest in projects to help states make data-driven decision to advance equity in SNAP programs, the announcement says.

The data complied under the project will help look inwardly at state policy and operational decisions to identify if they have impacts on equitable program participation, according to the grant document. It will look outwardly to build an understanding of the environment in which food stamp recipients and programs operate that may lead to inequitable outcomes for participants of various identities, backgrounds, and geographic locations. Advancing the ability of states to use data to improve and maintain equitable access and outcomes for all participants is the ultimate goal. Once the data has been gathered, it will be analyzed to understand opportunities or disparities for historically underserved communities, the grant document states. It will also incorporate individual, community, political and historical contexts of race, gender, sexual identity, disability status and geographic location to inform recommendations. Appropriate measures will then be developed that allow states to make accurate and timely decisions related to program policies and operations to advance equity as well as equitable participation and outcomes for food stamp recipients.

Last year the USDA launched a Racial Justice and Equity Working Group to address the agency’s “history of systemic discrimination via policies and programs designed to benefit those with access, education, assets, privilege rather than for those without.” A few weeks later the USDA dedicated $1 billion to bring healthy food to underserved minority communities. The allocation is part of a multi-trillion-dollar Biden administration initiative called Build Back Better to supposedly “rescue” and “rebuild” the country by, among other things, tackling racial injustice and inequity. “Black and Latino Americans, Native Americans, immigrants, and women have never been welcomed as full participants in the economy,” according to a White House document outlining the plan. The initiative is broad and features a three-part agenda that includes promoting food stamps. “There is extra money available for food,” Build Back Better assures, encouraging the public to apply for SNAP.

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.