VIDEO: World-Leading Infectious Disease Expert Explains Why Government Lockdowns Should End

In 2010, The Atlantic said that Dr. John Ioannidis “may be one of the most influential scientists alive.”

The article, written by David H. Freedman, made it clear the Greek-American physician-scientist’s rising star stemmed in part from the fearlessness he demonstrated in challenging bad science in the medical research field.

“[Ioannidis is] what’s known as a meta-researcher, and he’s become one of the world’s foremost experts on the credibility of medical research,” Freedman wrote. “He and his team have shown, again and again, and in many different ways, that much of what biomedical researchers conclude in published studies—conclusions that doctors keep in mind when they prescribe antibiotics or blood-pressure medication, or when they advise us to consume more fiber or less meat, or when they recommend surgery for heart disease or back pain—is misleading, exaggerated, and often flat-out wrong.”

Today, Ioannidis is the C.F. Rehnborg Chair in Disease Prevention at Stanford University. He has authored some of the most cited medical journal articles in history.

Ten years after his glowing profile in The Atlantic, however, Ioannidis finds himself in the crosshairs of media and medical professionals for doing what he’s always done: challenging science he believes is flawed. This time, however, Ioannidis is challenging medical findings of a virus that isn’t just deadly, but deeply controversial.

Ioannidis has become perhaps the leading medical voice against COVID-19 alarmism and government lockdowns.

It began with a March 17 article in Stat that suggested governments around the world were taking sweeping and potentially harmful actions to limit the spread of COVID-19 without sufficient data. Then came a May 5 white paper he authored which suggested COVID-19 was not nearly as deadly as initially feared, a claim later supported by an NPR report that cited research from Johns Hopkins University showing a fatality risk as low as 0.5 percent. Ioannidis’s latest research on the COVID fatality rate pegs the median COVID-19 fatality risk at 0.25 percent, much lower than previous estimates but still about two and a half times higher than the seasonal flu.

Ioannidis’s credentials might be impeccable, but his findings have not been without controversy.

In an impressive piece of medical journalism published at Undark.org, investigative journalist Jeanne Lenzer and Shannon Brownlee of the Lown Institute detail the withering criticism Ioannidis has received from media and medical professionals alike.

Ioannidis appears unfazed by the attacks, which include (very thin) accusations that his study suffered from an undisclosed conflict of interest.

In the medical journal BMJ, Ioannidis recently explained why he believes government lockdowns should be lifted. (An opposing view is offered by Edward R. Melnick of the Yale Medical School.)

Even if covid-19 is far milder than feared, it can still devastate in specific settings. Massacres in overwhelmed hospitals with contaminated personnel and in nursing homes represent the lion’s share of deaths. Hospital preparedness, universal personnel screening, draconian infection control, and social distancing in these locations are indispensable.

However, blind lockdown of entire populations has questionable added benefits. Locking down healthy, no-risk people and transferring covid-19 patients to nursing homes was absurd. Proponents of “lockdown to flatten the curve” should acknowledge that this gains time for hospital preparedness but that most, if not all, covid-19 deaths will still happen when measures are relaxed—unless effective treatments and/or vaccines emerge. Moreover, the lockdown-to-flatten-the-curve rationale ignores seasonality and espouses 100 year old observational data from a 1918 pandemic with an infection fatality rate 100 times higher than covid-19.

Lockdowns have multiple components. Some, such as avoiding mass gatherings, may work; others may not. Some may even increase the number of covid-19 deaths—for instance, school closures may increase frail relatives’ exposure to children. But, regardless of the combination, lockdowns bring multifarious harms beyond those related to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, such as the consequences of health system dysfunction and extended harms eroding health, the economy, and society at large.

Lockdowns implemented during high infectious activity will force infective people to spend more time with frail relatives in cramped spaces. Low wage, essential workers adopt higher risks, and shelters for vulnerable homeless people become infection hotspots, while wealthy, healthy citizens get to stay at home. Stress may also affect our immune responses to respiratory infections. And, with the added horror spread by various media sources, lockdowns represent uniquely stressful experiences.

Under lockdown conditions many patients with acute, treatable conditions (such as coronary syndromes) avoid seeking care. This disruption may be seen in the excess deaths accruing so far in the covid-19 lockdown. Patients with cancer whose treatment is delayed have worse outcomes. And when patients avoid hospitals many health systems suffer financially, furlough personnel, and cut services. Covid-19 overwhelmed a few dozen hospitals, but covid-19 countermeasures have already jeopardized thousands of them.

Prolonged lockdowns fuel economic depression, creating mass unemployment. Jobless people may lose health insurance. Entire populations may witness decreased quality of life and mental health. Gun sales in the US have increased sharply since the lockdown began, with unpredictable consequences.

Underprivileged populations and those in need are hit harder by crises. People at risk of starvation worldwide have already exceeded one billion. We are risking increased suicides, domestic violence, and child abuse. Malaise and societal disintegration may also advance, with chaotic consequences such as riots and wars.

And how long a lockdown is enough? If we open now, will lockdown recur in autumn? Next year? Whenever authoritarianism so wishes? No dictatorship could imagine a better precedent for absolute control.

Lockdowns were desperate, defendable choices when we knew little about covid-19. But, now that we know more, we should avoid exaggeration. We should carefully and gradually remove lockdown measures, with data driven feedback on bed capacity and prevalence/incidence indicators. Otherwise, prolonged lockdowns may become mass suicide.

As Undark points out, Ioannidis’s opposition to lockdowns do not stem from libertarianism or a “Trumpian desire to benefit Wall Street,” but a longstanding skepticism of medical interventionism generally, which he says tends to be missed or downplayed by medical researchers.

Ioannidis may be no libertarian, but many of the lockdown themes he touches will sound familiar to FEE readers—deadly government policies that prohibited nursing homes from screening for COVID-19, soaring suicide, and widespread economic destruction resulting in millions of businesses wiped out and 40 million jobs lost.

While the costs of the lockdowns are apparent to all, less clear is how effective they have been in limiting the spread of the virus. A recent Bloomberg found “little correlation between the severity of a nation’s restrictions and whether it managed to curb excess fatalities.” Norway’s top health official recently stated the lockdowns probably were not necessary. Evidence from a recent JP Morgan report suggests most nations saw COVID infection rates fall after lockdowns were lifted.

These results make sense when one realizes, as studies have shown, that Americans were social distancing before lockdown orders were enforced. This fact brings to mind a quote from Nobel laureate economist F.A. Hayek.

“This is not a dispute about whether planning is to be done or not,” Hayek wrote in The Use of Knowledge in Society. “It is a dispute as to whether planning is to be done centrally, by one authority for the whole economic system, or is to be divided among many individuals.”

Hayek’s point was that centralized planning tends to be irrational because central planners lack the knowledge to make rational decisions. We mustn’t forget that human beings by nature and self-interest will take reasonable steps to protect themselves from a deadly virus. Humans manage risk every single day, and each does so possessing and processing more local knowledge than any central planner can possess.

Government officials no doubt were acting in good faith when they ordered lockdowns, but by removing choices from individuals, businesses, and other organizations they committed what appears to be one of the most costly and ultimately lethal blunders in modern history.

It’s not too late to learn from the mistake. A first step toward that end would be to admit that John Ioannidis is right: The government lockdowns must end.

COLUMN BY

Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune.

Bylines: The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.

He previously served in editorial roles at The History Channel magazine, Intellectual Takeout, and Scout. He is an alumni of the Institute for Humane Studies journalism program, a former reporter for the Panama City News Herald, and served as an intern in the speechwriting department of George W. Bush.

RELATED ARTICLES:

NPR: “Mounting Evidence” Suggests COVID Not As Deadly as Thought. Did the Experts Fail Again?

COVID-19 Lockdowns are Neither Necessary, nor Scientific, nor Helpful

Selective Social-Distancing Rules Are One of the Great Scams in American Life

Why Non-distanced Social and Commercial Interactions Have Resumed So Quickly

RELATED VIDEO: Multiple Scientists:  C0R0NAVlRUS Altered in Lab to Better Attach to Humans

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

Rigid Lockdowns vs. Relative Freedom: A Tale of Two Southern Governors

How do you explain the vastly different approach to the pandemic from two red states with similarly low coronavirus impact?


In North Carolina, Gov. Roy Cooper has adopted the policy premise that anything done in the name of safety from the coronavirus trumps all other interests, including economic, religious, or other health considerations. Despite comparatively low numbers in the Tar Heel state, the ninth most populous state in the United States, and with no evidence of the healthcare system being overwhelmed, North Carolina has been in full lockdown for over a month.

It matters not if you live in the mountains or on the coast—rural or urban—all residents are required to shelter in place. Despite the crippling effect COVID-19 has had on the $25 billion tourism industry, the devastation to the small business community, and over a million job losses, “thou shalt not work” unless the good governor has deemed you “essential.”

In Mississippi, Gov. Tate Reeves has operated under an alternative premise: that medical safety is a major consideration, but so is allowing people to protest, or to fish, or to earn a living. The governor in the Magnolia State has taken a lot of heat for being slow to slam the economy shut and quick to discuss reopening it. He has also caught a lot of flak for allowing counties and cities to determine what works best in their own communities and for refusing to tell Mississippi churches how to conduct their affairs. Like North Carolina, Mississippi has relatively low numbers of COVID-19 deaths and no apparent strain on the healthcare system, despite having a very high rate of citizens with obesity, heart disease, and diabetes.

Small businesses are on life support across both states. Jobless claims have risen to historic levels in the state of the Dogwood and in the state of the Magnolia—now higher than during the financial crisis. Medical advisers in both states are giving warnings and covering all their bases at daily briefings as they stand beside their respective governors. There is no question that both governors have taken this disease seriously and offered intelligent advice about how we should protect ourselves. So, how do you explain the vastly different approach to the pandemic from two red states with similarly low coronavirus impact?

The difference is in the tone, in the language, and in the viewpoint of how best to mitigate risks and protect citizens. Cooper’s instincts are to restrict the personal freedoms of his citizens; Reeves’ instincts are to protect the personal freedoms of his. Cooper believes shutting down businesses won’t lead to shortages of food and paper products and that denying the constitutional rights of his residents won’t lead to a citizen uprising. (Note citizens are staging weekly protests at the state capital and the governor’s mansion in Raleigh.) By contrast, Reeves has moved to open retail shops, acknowledged the rights of protestors to peacefully assemble at the Capitol, and refused to accept the premise that we must choose between prudent healthcare measures and protecting our economy.

In the state of Michael Jordan, hospitals are losing revenue and laying off personnel because the governor won’t allow the treatment of non-coronavirus patients. In the state of Archie Manning, elective procedures have begun again because the governor recognizes cancer surgeries are pretty “essential” to the patient.

History will judge how these two governors, and the other 48, managed this pandemic. But as data comes in, it’s looking like the quarantines will not prevent us from getting sick. It appears we’re basically delaying the inevitable infection rate. As these long days go by, the models continue to indicate initial predictions were vastly overstated. However, the data on the destruction of our economies and on the hopes and dreams of our citizens may be far worse than ever imagined.

The American economy is the greatest in the world because of all of the interconnected and voluntary exchanges that take place every day, in every community. It remains to be seen if this economic miracle of free enterprise can survive the kind of body blows delivered by the heavy hand of government—especially by the kind of authoritarian governors who seem hellbent on taking a sledgehammer to our economies when a scalpel would have been more useful.

COLUMN BY

Jon L. Pritchett

Jon L. Pritchett is president and CEO of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy, the state’s non-partisan, free-market think tank. Prior to his work in public policy, he worked as an investment banker, executive, and entrepreneur over a 28-year career in private business.

Ed Tiryakian

Ed Tiryakian is the chief strategist and managing director of Argentum Group; a former first vice president at UBS/Paine Webber, serving on the President’s Council. Ed is starting his 10th year at Duke University as a visiting associate professor, teaching corporate finance and business economics at Duke University and is a Contributing Fellow at the Publius Institute.

RELATED ARTICLES:

New York Admits to Intentionally Undercounting Nursing Home Deaths After Changing Reporting Rules, Report Says

America’s Exceptional Principles Will Get Us Through the COVID-19 Crisis

Why the Lockdown Lost

Struggling Business Owners Aren’t Selfish For Wanting to Preserve Their Livelihoods

YouTube bans content that contradicts WHO on Covid-19, despite its track record of misinformation

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

The Betrayal and the Programming behind Covid 19 – A UK Perspective [Part 1]

These are my views as a woman living in England, on how the culture and spirit of my country has changed over 50 years.   Why the country does not feel protected or strong any more, how it has lost, and is losing it values and decency, and how we are daily losing our free speech.


Since Cain killed Abel and the growing enmity between Ishmael and Isaac’s existence, the world has never been a safe place for us to hide from.   We can be subject to thousands of incidents, accidents and illnesses inside and outside our home every day of the week.   We take precautions; but the virus of evil is much more destructive than we can ever imagine.

It is very strange and slightly sad when you listen and bear witness to two continuous and very different narratives every day.

You see the battle between fact and fiction, reality and lies, in relation to Covid 19, are currently coexisting in a parallel world right now.   However, I sense storm clouds are gathering; and the stoic British pride of working together during a national crisis may just be about to turn a bit nasty if certain ‘other’ truths should ever get openly reported.

Right now some people are dealing with what they see as manageable in a world of sleeping, eating, on line shopping and exercising. They trust what they are told.  An initial fear and panic has slowly subsided and along with some unusual sunny weather, the British public are now, according to TV programming, ‘In this Together’ and ‘Undefeated’ against a virus which in only a few short weeks has dictated its very presence to every second of our waking moments

Between messages of staying fit, connecting with loved ones,  helping each other out (all worthy virtues) and finding new ways of interacting with each other from a distance; also including the latest technology of course, the alerts of ‘Staying Home to Protect Lives’ are constantly being aired.   And, as if by chance you should feel bad about your life, programmes are still being interrupted by how much worse it is for those who are also suffering from cancer, heart disease and arthritis, just to name a few of the many illnesses which have also affected everyone’s lives and coexisted in our world for a very long time.

Recently, as though for a moment forgotten, talking about our Mental Health state has also just been resurrected.  There is another type of suffering as a result of being confined or separated from humanity, also taking place.  Could it be the loss of a person’s identity creates confusion and fear when the world falls apart?  The negative aspects and the cost to human life are not being equally reported against the statistics for the deaths created by Covid 19.

There are also posters on a main road near to me instructing me to ‘Be Kind’.  It’s a positive message to consider, but I’m not sure if this means that we cannot speak up against any evils that we may see along the way, and I have wondered how kindness can suddenly be a virtue which can over-ride the secret evil that resides in many men’s hearts?

For some reason there seems to be a whole lot of emotions being toyed with here. It is like being bombed from a great height with no air raid shelter to protect you and you see people accepting without question any orders that they are being given.     Life, if you are not objective, is like a roller coaster, being up one moment, down the next, turned upside down and looping the loop.   The results have become a false high or an actual sickness.

Many people are now avoiding the alerts as best as they can for many different reasons.   Some are aware it frightens them and some are aware there is other information out there which does not correspond with what they are seeing.    Some have found a renewed faith and stillness and an appreciation of the simple things in life, like a silver lining around a very dark cloud.   Genuine kindness then surfaces.   In some respects a search and rescue mission has been taking place regardless of the silence of the Church of England or the religion of your best life now which is indifferent to everyone else who is perishing in their sins.

However, on the whole, the mainstream media and our TV programming are reporting a collective humanism, which is minus God of course, which is doing fine thank you, whilst still remembering the facts of the virus.     We have to remember we are in this together like a new one world religion that is strong and undefeated.

It looks good and it feels good, but sadly, we are being tricked.  We have no idea of what, or who the enemy really is, if we are only listening to what we are being told.     At times like these it is worth remembering or being aware of how evil really works if you can stomach some facts, do a little research and use some rational and critical thinking for ourselves.  Another virus, the virus of inherent evil which does not care about humanity, and only cares for itself, still operates. It has always taken advantage.  It gives people a false illusion of heroism and togetherness, feeds people false facts, and offers a helping hand too.   It comes appearing as an angel of light, when really it is a demon of darkness.  It uses Commonality to promote its Purpose.   Whilst it has you feeling inclusive, it is usually carrying out it own divisive agenda.

Staying at Home to Save Lives

Whilst many people believe they are staying at home to save lives, on the 30th March, the UK government approved new measures which allow DIY abortions to be performed on women by themselves in their homes without the need of a medical professional to be present.

Considered to be a ‘temporary’ policy, it is reported doctors can prescribe mifepristone and misoprostol over the phone or via Face time and Skype, which is the new normal way of interacting.

An urgent application for a judicial review has been made by a Christian law firm.   CEO Andrea Williams states:

“The government appears to be caving to the long-standing pressure from abortion industry promoters for whom this has long been a goal.

 “If this goes unchallenged and is widely practiced there will be no going back and that is tragic for women and their children.

Staying at Home to Save Lives

Whilst many people are making sacrifices by socially distancing themselves from their loved ones and staying home, it has been reported by Brexit Party UK Leader, Nigel Farage that up until recently our borders were open and illegal immigrants were still entering the UK, together with passengers arriving by flights to the country, and were not being tested for Covid 19.   On the 28th April 2020, he tweeted “What is the Government doing to stop the boats from crossing the British channel.   Border Force seems to be complicit.   In the Telegraph he wrote:

“When you think about just how relaxed the UK government has been with regard to people arriving on our shores since this situation unfolded, isn’t the very term ‘lockdown’ a misnomer?  

The BBC, the British Broadcasting Company which sadly people no longer trust very much, reported that 40 people were recently picked up by Border Force.  They stated:

“Our priorities are to arrest and dismantle the organised crime gangs who are prepared to gamble with the lives of others and returning those who have come here illegally, from a safe country.”

Staying at Save Lives Home to

The appreciation towards the dedication that some of our doctors and nurses working for our National Health Service, and of course all of our Emergency Services goes without saying.   Prior to Covid 19, there were very mixed reactions being targeted towards our NHS who were working with a system that was overloaded and stretched unable to support the growing number of people who were using the service?   Waiting times and a lack of available beds, together with how money was being spent, were some of the problems that were constantly being criticized.

Over the last six weeks, an appreciation towards carers is now being demonstrated by residents across the country coming out of their homes at a certain time of night on a Thursday, and cheering and clapping in the streets.   There are also posters of hearts and rainbows in the windows of some people homes showing their appreciation to the NHS.

However, it is now being reported by a doctor who keeps an on line diary for the NHS on the BBC website, that they are experiencing ‘clapping injuries’.  Yes.

He writes:

People might need to be a bit more cautious, especially if they’ve been sitting down all day and then get up to clap. It might be one of the only times older people come outside and so there is a risk of falling and I’d just remind people to take care.

“The clap for carers has made us a little busier,” says Richard Pilling, consultant orthopaedic surgeon at Harrogate District Hospital.

“It’s very nice that everyone is very enthusiastic about showing support but it’s escalated, so people are coming out banging pans and seeing who can clap the loudest, and therein accidents lie.

I am embarrassed to write about this just as I would be embarrassed to warn people about clapping.  As an over-protective mother I have learnt some lessons about being too cautious and the consequences that arise from that; but seriously, clapping!

Instructing people, some of whom have fought in many different battles throughout their life about clapping, should seriously raise some questions about what is really going on right here and who and what is controlling your life.

We should remember that more than one million British military personnel lost their lives in World War I and World War II alone.  What has happened to the spirit that fought for freedom and has now been reduced to being warned about clapping?  Are we also being controlled by the same virus?

“The receptivity of the masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan.” ― Adolf Hitler

©All rights reserved

SOURCES:

The Establishment talks tough about the lockdown but stays silent on illegal immigration

“Government is being negligent over border control,” doctor tells Nigel Farage

Coronavirus: Migrants cross Channel amid Covid-19 fears

DIY abortions will cause ‘serious harm’ says expert as urgent application for judicial review filed

RELATED VIDEO: Coronavirus: ‘gobsmacked’ pilot tells Nigel Farage flights to Italy haven’t been cancelled.

PODCAST: Honest Elections Project, Philip Haney Assassinated, Trump’s Greatness in a Global Crisis

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

JASON SNEAD

Jason Snead is the executive director of the Honest Elections Project. Prior to heading the project, Jason spent 10 years at The Heritage Foundation, where he had the honor to work for former Attorney General Ed Meese. During his tenure at Heritage, Jason rose to become a senior policy analyst and a recognized expert on a wide range of subjects. He regularly studied, wrote, and spoke on topics ranging from criminal justice and civil asset forfeiture reform, to technology policy and the regulation of drones in American skies, to preserving the integrity of American elections. Jason also managed the development of the Heritage Election Fraud Database.

TOPIC: Honest Elections Project Files Brief in Minnesota Against Partisan Ballot Order Lawsuit.

JAMES SIMPSON

James Simpson is an economist, former White House budget analyst, businessman, and investigative journalist. His professional experience includes working as an economist, businessman, author, and journalist. Simpson is a member of the Sons of the American Revolution. Jim is also seeking the nomination to run for U.S. House Maryland District 2.

TOPIC: Phil Haney: My Friend and Colleague, Assassinated!

ROD THOMPSON

Rod Thomson, founder of The Revolutionary Act conservative commentary site and of The Thomson Group, a public relations and communications company based in Florida. Before launching his own business in 2012, he had 25 years of newspaper experience, from reporter to investigative reporter to columnist to executive editor. He has been published in national publications such as the New York Times, National Review, Newsmax, People Magazine and Focus on the Family. He has been a guest on the Michael Medved Show and the Hugh Hewitt Show, plus several regional programs.

TOPIC: Are We Seeing The Emergence Of Greatness In A Crisis?

© All rights reserved.

PODCAST: What We Can Expect After The Wuhan Flu Virus

By the time the Wuhan flu, coronavirus (COVID-19) has run its course, what can we expect from the fall-out? Hopefully, we will learn from this episode and make changes to address future epidemics, and believe me, this will not be the end of it as the media has discovered such disasters are bigger business than mere politics. What can we expect though from this episode and what awaits us in the months ahead?

First, this will be on everyone’s mind as we head to the voting booths in November. As of now, President Trump has been getting favorable poll ratings for his handling of the problem, so this shouldn’t effect him in a negative way. However, the key will be to see how the economy bounces back. It will undoubtedly take a dip in the Spring, but when the panic is over and life begins to return to normal, will another bull market emerge? If not, this could present a serious problem for the Republicans. As of now, the American public doesn’t blame President Trump for the declining stock markets, but when this is over, they will want to see it come roaring back.

Now that stocks are down, shrewd investors will be picking up some bargain stocks and making a killing. Transportations may be slow to rebound, but others should come back faster, such as electronics and food related companies. One of the biggest surprises during the panic was our attachment to paper products. Who would have thought toilet paper, paper towels, and tissues would be so much in demand? Companies such as Scott Paper, Kimberly-Clark, and Procter & Gamble should be sitting pretty following the panic.

Likewise, pharmacies have taken a noticeable upturn and will continue to grow.

Supply chains will need to be re-evaluated and improved in order to prevent another product shortage in the future. Freight truck sales are booming and will continue to do so to help in this regard. Freight trains should also do well.

People have learned the need for maintaining emergency supplies on hand. Look for increased sales in refrigerators and freezers to accommodate this. Shelving, storage and security items should also do well.

The service industry should prosper substantially; “Sit down” restaurants will eventually recover but there will be an explosion in “To Go” ordering, something people have become used to during the panic and has altered our eating habits. Look for a revolution in home delivery. Walmart, Amazon, and the major Supermarkets have been moving in this direction for a long time, but the panic clearly demonstrated its viability.

The tobacco industry will take a hit as we were once again reminded of the ill-effects of tobacco. Not surprising, liquor sales held strong as people got together in impromptu groups and enjoyed libations to pass the time of day.

As much as we hate the politically correct expression, “Social Distancing,” it will become a part of life from now on as it has become a habit. There will be fewer handshakes and hugs, people will keep their distance, and there will still be fewer group activities, including nonprofits and church meetings. Also watch for surgical masks to become more commonplace, as well as the re-introduction of gloves at group events.

Perhaps the most noticeable coming attraction will be a baby boom in December. As people went into hibernation during the panic, as requested by government, they had to find ways to entertain themselves. Hence, we are on the verge of a major baby boom, the likes of which will make the old New York blackouts seem pale by comparison. Inevitably, even more paper products will be needed to accommodate the influx of infants.

Should there be another virus like this, it is hoped we will be better prepared. Personally, I would like to see someone take the news media to task, but this will likely never happen. And I certainly hope a panic such as this never happens again during an election year. This was too much of a coincidence for my liking.

By the way, Rod Serling couldn’t have written a better script than what the coronavirus politicians and media did.

Keep the Faith!

P.S. – Also, I have a NEW book, “Before You Vote: Know How Your Government Works”, What American youth should know about government, available in Printed, PDF and eBook form. DON’T FORGET GRADUATION DAY. This is the perfect gift!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Just As President Trump Saved My Life, He’s Fighting to Save Yours Too!

Why Economic Freedom Is Critical to Beating the Coronavirus

The System-Wide Campaign to Battle the Corona Crisis in Israel

EDITORS NOTE: This Bryce is Right column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

How Long Will Americans Tolerate Corona-Madness

A usually level-headed Christian conservative lashed out on Facebook scolding everyone they thought was not taking the Corona virus seriously enough. Fake news media has successfully infected many with irrational fear.

Hearing Gov Larry Hogan on my car radio announcing his executive order to close bars, restaurants, gyms and theaters sounded like the script of a 1950s horror movie. “We will stop the spread of this deadly disease!”, dramatically proclaimed Hogan. Little more than 100 have died in the U.S. and under 9,000 worldwide. According to the CDC, during the 2018-2019 flu season, an estimated 16.5 million people got sick and 34,000 died in the U.S.

When Hogan mentioned plans to restrict church gatherings, a chill went up my spine. In the United States of America, government is mandating that people not attend church. Wow!

CDC data confirms that the martial-law-light mandates steamrolling across America are disproportionate to the threat of the virus. Some governors and most corporations are responding to media-mob pressure to halt life in America. Others see an opportunity to land a death-blow to the Trump Administration.

Insidiously ignoring the CDC’s no-need-to-panic-data, fake news media created and is gleefully fueling Corona-madness. Using their huge bully pulpit, fake news media says anyone who dares to contradict their you’re-all-gonna-die narrative will be dragged into the high tech public square, stripped naked, branded an irresponsible idiot with a hot iron and their career will be canceled.

It is disturbing that there is practically zero push back against governors instantaneously overruling our constitutional freedoms. Sadly, many youths are clueless regarding their constitutional freedoms. They grew up in public schools where progressive teachers taught them that the Constitution is an out-dated piece of paper written by racist, sexist, homophobic and Christian dead straight white men.

We have far too many Bernie Bro youths who say, “If the government is going to give me free stuff, I am down with whatever controls government deem necessary.”

A gentleman said this about Democrats/fake news media in an email, “…they are willing to destroy hard working people’s jobs to accomplish their power play.” This guy is spot on correct. This is why I regard Democrats’/fake news medias’ gleeful spread of Corona-madness so loathsome and evil.

Democrats and fake news media are 100% committed to destroying Trump, their greatest Nemesis. Collapsing the U.S. economy and even the loss of American lives is acceptable collateral damage in their quest for power to control every aspect of our lives. They believe Corona is their highly sought after kryptonite to kill We-the-Peoples’ superman president.

A wise woman emailed me, I think a lot of people are willing to do social distancing, etc., but they’re unwilling to live in perpetual fear.”I say, “Amen sister.”

How long can fake news media/Democrats successfully keep Americans at a fever pitch level of irrational panic and fear? How long will U.S. businesses allow media to bully them into losing billions of dollars simply because they hate Trump. How long will it take Americans to say screw this nonsense, “I’m going out for a burger and a beer.” I believe there will be a tipping point when Americans say enough is enough, I’m going to resume my life.

My baby boomer generation is still the largest demographic. We know our constitutional rights and will fight for them. We will not go gentle into Democrats’ snap-of-their-fingers repeal of our constitutional freedoms intended to collapse our economy.

The simple truth is the Corona virus has had very little affect, causing less than 125 deaths nationwide. What has caused the unprecedented closing down of America is media-hype about the Corona virus. We are suffering the consequences of deranged Democrats and fake news media willing to sacrifice everything to stop a president from implementing his America-first agenda.

Democrats and fake news media view the Corona virus as blood in the water to create a feeding frenzy of criticism of Trump.

Remarkably, every crazy, illegal and evil scheme to remove Trump from the White House has failed. So will Corona-madness. Why? Because God put Trump into the White House and only God will take him out.

Two buddies of mine said the hysteria is causing seniors in nursing homes to be isolated from visits from their loved ones. But Democrats/fake news media do not care. All they ever care about is furthering their socialist, communist and progressive agendas and damaging Trump. Thank God Trump caught and denied Democrat Nancy Pelosi’s sneaky attempt to hide abortion funding in Trump’s Corona relief spending.

In response to a 50 degree temperature day after people who have been cooped up in their homes because of a brutally cold winter, people rush outside wearing t-shirts and flip-flops. I believe Americans will eventually respond the same way, becoming emotionally-burnt out over Corona-madness. This will spark a huge economic boom.

Folks, the light I see at the end of the Corona-madness tunnel is the strong will, spirit and instincts of the American people. Without analyzing their feelings through a lens of political ideology, Americans will begin demanding to have their lives back; working, weddings, kid’s birthday parties, restaurants and so on. We are Americans!

Trump is the perfect man in office when that day comes. He will gladly say, “I am with you folks. Let’s get back to keeping America great!

Life During the Pandemic (and afterwards)

By Wallace Bruschweiler and William Palumbo

Through personal conversations, and by listening to statements from politicians (federal, state, local, and international) and media pundits, it is apparent that very few people, if any, are prepared to think through the implications and consequences of what we are facing today.  The purpose of this article is to provide some context, insight, and – modestly – foresight into the current crisis created by the coronavirus (aka Covid-19, aka the Wuhan virus).

The next two to three months will be a period that we have to go through all together, and will come out on the other end changed.  This applies to us individually as well as to various facets of our society – commercially, politically, culturally, and financially.

Safety First

Let’s start with the obvious: to slow and finally contain the spread of the virus, there is no alternative to total lockdown.  We must isolate ourselves as much as practically possible.  Although the virus is most lethal in the elderly population (80+), any person regardless of age can contract and transmit the virus.  Therefore, people of all ages are equal opportunity vectors.  Lockdown measures have been applied in China, Italy, and Spain, and will almost definitely be used throughout Europe and the United States within the next few days.

What does that look like?  In Italy, for example, you are not allowed to travel outside your zone unless you have written form permission.  The list of exceptions is limited: for example, if you have an elderly relative to visit, if your job requires your physical presence (hospitals, delivery services, supermarkets, pharmacies), or your role in society is essential to keeping order (e.g., law enforcement) or ensuring survival (food and pharmaceutical production and distribution).  Police checkpoints enforce the rules; violators are fined, potentially jailed, and (if not jailed) sent back to their zones.

Locking down the United States for a period of two to three months (following the example of China and others) presents a unique set of challenges.  Each state will likely implement their own protocols.  The specific measures may reach down to the county level, with discretion given to police departments or sheriffs.  Specifics will be negotiated, or are more likely already negotiated, between parties at the governmental and corporate level.  The United States is leveraging contingency plans we all wish we never had to use.  The private sector will play an active role in distribution and planning: Walmart and CVS, and surely others, will serve as distribution points.  Google is assisting with the testing website.  Insurance companies will pay for the tests, as their contribution to the effort.  Pharmaceutical companies are working in concert to develop a vaccine.  More on vaccines later.

Logistics become the primary economic challenge.  Movement is very limited.  Schools and many businesses must temporarily be closed.  The National Guard may be used to distribute food and other vital supplies, and to help enforce the rules.

If this sounds Draconian, consider that the last time the United States government took comparable sweeping actions for any extended period of time (for a completely different reason) was during World War II.  (The same, incidentally, can be said for Italy, France, U.K., etc.)  But given the risk to the whole US, and global, population there is no absolutely reasonable alternative.  The implications that result from our almost definite future – lockdown – are sprawling and profound.

The Economy

The stock market is basically a predictive engine. Since concern about the virus has proliferated, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is down from an all-time historic high of 29,568 to 23,85 (6,382 points down).  That’s a 21.5% economic drop already (from what we once expected).  For many investors, especially savers, this probably means a mainly paper loss.  But it is useful information because it provides a barometer of what we should expect.

Disruptions in travel and supply chains mean lost opportunities and lost revenues.  Business plans for the next 9-12 months will all need to be entirely reevaluated, and many postponed until it is possible to end isolation.  Restaurants and other small businesses face a strong threat of bankruptcy.  More on the travel industries later.

In Israel, which has a mandatory two-week quarantine for anyone (including citizens) entering the country, the airline El Al has told 75% of their staff to stay home.  It is not unreasonable to expect all major airlines to be in a similar position shortly.  Eventually, even though these measures are temporary, they have real economic consequences down to the employee and family level.  We suspect that two things will occur: the government will make low or no interest loans available, sustaining the majority of businesses through the period.  And businesses, with their bottom lines chopped, will use it as a pretext for retiring some “dead wood.”  Nice or not, that’s how things often work in the real world today.

Further economic relief will likely come in the form of tax breaks, tax deferments, and, as already announced, elimination of interest on student loans (expect other loans to be added to that list where and when possible). The Fed just cut interest rates to between 0.00-0.25%.  They did this in coordination with their international counterparts.  What effect will this have on credit card or mortgage debt – of an individual or business – with a 20% or 6% loan?  What will be acceptable rates in today’s situation?

All of these government tools, along with the equally complex situation in the financial markets, need to be thought through by officials and their private sector counterparts, and come to an agreement to put in to practice.  This all takes time, and no doubt these discussions are ongoing right now.

Once the crisis has ended, our entire approach to pandemics, in the United States and globally, will be (better be) overhauled.  The US dependence Chinese on manufacturing for our pharmaceuticals and other critical medical supplies will come into sharp relief, and the American pullback will have further economic consequences, as countries around the world reevaluate their dependence on China.  Reverberations will be felt for years, if not decades.

Hopefully, part of our future vigilance will be proactive development of vaccines against particularly virulent virus types.  On the hope for a coronavirus vaccine, it is a solution for a future date.  Let’s assume that one was discovered today.  We would still need to manufacture hundreds of millions of doses, and then deliver those injections to hundreds of millions of people.  If we really want to solve the problem, taking into account the global population, we need to inject billions.

So, to reiterate: for our immediate future, the vaccine and talk of one is irrelevant.  Let that continue in the background among the experts.  Today’s situation will be controlled without a vaccine, i.e. through 0lockdown and self-isolation, or it will not be controlled or solved at all.

Politics and International

Internationally, going forward leaders will have to be ready for pandemic control.  The WHO’s broad failure should result in dramatic and lasting changes.  Each country will certainly have to rewrite their pandemic playbooks.  A few days ago, the European Council President and European Commission President scolded President Trump for not consulting him before enacting the travel ban with Europe.  This is unhelpful and unserious: no country should ever ask permission to protect its own people.  The ban is for Schengen area due to lack of borders, so it was banned as a whole (including Switzerland).

A word on politicians: Every mayor, governor, president (etc.) is taking advice from their experts in this area.  President Trump, for example, is not setting policy based on politics but on scientific advice from the government’s top epidemiologists and infectious disease doctors.  CDC, HHS, and their partners are running the show now.  The President has to coordinate the entire effort, but in terms of the containing the disease the professional bureaucrats rule the day.  Let them, for they know best.

President Trump’s efforts have, at times, felt frustratingly slow.  As Americans, we assume that our government had the ability to test all of us in the event of a pandemic.  We now know this was not true.  They are developing, on the fly, a new system that should have been thought of and implemented 10, 20, or just 3 years ago.

It’s easy to say “we should have been prepared.”  Hindsight it always 20/20.  Although our response feels bumbling, it is equally true that the knowledge that something like this could happen with a coronavirus has been known to the scientific community for decades.  Although this may be the “novel coronavirus,” coronaviruses and their treat to human life is anything but novel.  We, as societies, are now exposed as negligent to prevent, detect, and vaccinate against such diseases.  Who do we blame for that?  The “experts?”  Sure.  But also get a mirror.  (We will, too.)

For Trump’s part, we can only offer this prognosis: he must embrace this challenge, or he will fail to be reelected.  From the outset his presidency has never sought to be at war; he has fought to end our foreign military presence across the globe.  His focus was always economic and cultural.  In this moment, however, we are on a wartime footing and must be prepared to stop the virus.  The economy will suffer, obviously, but wartime leaders who guide their people through incredible hardships are, in history, the most beloved ones.  (How popular is Calvin Coolidge today compared to FDR?)  We believe that President Donald J. Trump has strength, fortitude, and an exceptional, professional team around him to rise to the unforeseen and incredible occasion.  It’s a hell of a way to finish a first term, which will decide not only November but also the fate of hundreds of millions, nationally and internationally.

© All rights reserved.

Abortion: No Right to Choose for Nurses, No Choice for Mothers

Swedish nurses’ conscience case rejected by European Court of Human Rights.


Ellinor Grimmark and Linda Steen, two Swedish nurses who have been denied midwife posts for refusing to carry out abortions, have now lost their legal bid to take Sweden to court for violating their beliefs after they took their case to the European Court of Human Rights.

The nurses argued that being denied employment due to their beliefs against abortion was an illegal breach of their rights to freedom of religion and conscience. Despite this, the ECHR “declined to take up the case, with a panel finding that Swedish authorities acted lawfully.” (‘Swedish anti-abortion nurses lose court battle’, Telegraph, March 14, 2020).

Most people think of nurses as trained in the vocation of saving lives, but now, apparently, they must be trained in taking lives. Somewhere along the line this has become normal, since we used to have just “nurses” and now we have “anti-abortion nurses”.

Ms Grimmark and Ms Steen have been fighting their corner for four years, and it might be thought that the ECHR, founded to protect human rights, would look favourably on their case. But although the right to freedom of conscience is a recognised human right respected in all civilised nations, Europe’s highest court refused them a hearing.

The decision was described by religious freedom group ADF International – which has been supporting the pair – as a “dangerous departure from the Court’s purpose in protecting fundamental freedoms.” Ms Grimmark said:

“I chose to become a midwife because I wanted to help bring life into this world. I cannot understand why the Swedish government refuses to accommodate my conscientious convictions. I am now working in Norway, where my conscience is respected, but no-one can explain why Sweden cannot do the same.”

Rather than defending the right to conscience, however, the Swedish Association of Midwives defended the authorities’ right to refuse Ms Grimmark work, its president, Mia Ahlberg, telling the BBC that upholding her challenge might result in, for example, a Jehovah’s witness refusing to perform a blood transfusion: “It’s part of our professional competence – so the employer had a right to say ‘you cannot work here.”

That the Swedish midwives’ president is unable to distinguish between a blood transfusion, vital for saving life, and an abortion, which takes human life, is disturbing enough, but it’s of a piece with the attitude of her counterpart in the UK.

In 2014 Glasgow midwives Connie Wood and Mary Doogan went all the way to the Supreme Court to defend the right of midwives not be involved in abortion, only to discover two years later that the Royal College of Midwives’ president, Professor Cathy Warwick, had given the RCM’s backing to abortion provider BPAS’s campaign for all legal restrictions to be removed from abortion – without consulting thousands of midwives.

With the upper echelons of the medical profession seemingly taken over by abortion advocacy, the impression can be given that abortion has the blessing of medicine – a “trusted brand”.

And with the highest human rights court in Europe no longer interested in human rights – at least, human rights with which they disagree – it does not bode well for a young mother’s case to be able to keep vigil outside an abortion clinic and offer help to women attending the clinic.

Alina Dulgheriu this week lost her bid for the Supreme Court to hear her case against Ealing Council for imposing a Public Spaces Protection Order around an abortion facility in West London.

Ms Dulgeriu feels an obligation to offer the kind of help which she herself gratefully accepted when she was sacked by her employer and abandoned by her boyfriend. She is now the mother of a six-year-old daughter. She is considering taking her case to the ECHR, and Laurence Wilkinson, Legal Counsel for the London branch of ADF International, which is providing her legal support, commented:

“In refusing permission to appeal, the Supreme Court has denied Alina the opportunity to argue her case before the highest court in the country and failed to recognise the human rights violations caused by the Order. Free societies must be free to discuss even ideas some consider controversial rather than simply criminalising them. Evidence shows that hundreds of women – like Alina – have accepted the help offered by peaceful pro-life groups outside abortion facilities.”

Despite all the rhetoric about freedom and choice, not only must nurses fight for the right to conscience regarding abortion, but anyone who publicly disagrees with it or attempts to offer positive alternatives will be silenced if they try to do so in the place that really matters – outside the clinic, at the last minute.

No wonder a quarter of pregnancies in the UK now end in abortion. But instead of wondering if enough help is in place for these women, their desperate decisions have been greeted as a triumph for choice.

In politics, in government, in the media and in the health sector, and most especially in feminist circles, abortion has become the idea that is too big to fail, even when women themselves reject it.

COLUMN BY

Ann Farmer

Ann Farmer lives in the UK. She is the author of By Their Fruits: Eugenics, Population Control, and the Abortion Campaign (CUAP, 2008); The Language of Life: Christians Facing the Abortion Challenge (St Pauls, 1995), and Prophets & Priests: the Hidden Face of the Birth Control Movement (St Austin Press, 2002).

RELATED ARTICLE: Schumer Exposed the Democrats’ Abortion Extremism

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

Schumer Threatens Gorsuch, Kavanaugh on Abortion Case: They ‘Will Pay the Price’

Editor’s update: Chief Justice John Roberts issued a statement Wednesday condemning Chuck Schumer’s remarks, saying: “Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous.”


Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer warned two Supreme Court justices Wednesday that they “have released the whirlwind” and that they “will pay the price,” adding that they “won’t know what hit you” if they rule the wrong way.

Schumer spoke Wednesday at a rally in front of the United States Supreme Court where justices heard June Medical Services v. Russo, a case in which an abortion provider challenges a 2014 Louisiana state law that requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges in a hospital within 30 miles of the abortion facility.

Opponents say the law would hinder and potentially eliminate abortion access in Louisiana. Louisiana lawmakers and pro-life activists maintain that the law protects women from unsanitary or unsafe abortion clinic practices.

Both pro-abortion and pro-life activists gathered Wednesday at the Washington, D.C. rally where the New York senator warned Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Neil Gorsuch against taking away “fundamental rights” related to abortion.

“I want to tell you, Gorsuch,” Schumer said, video from the event shows, “and I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price.”

“You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions,” he added.

The senator’s comments referenced the political price Republicans “will pay for putting them on the court” as well as “a warning that the justices will unleash major grassroots movement on the issue of reproductive rights against the decision,” Schumer spokesman Justin Goodman told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“Let me ask you, my friends, are we going to let Republicans undo a woman’s right to choose?” Schumer asked the crowd. “Are we going to stay quiet as they try to turn back the clock? Are we going to give up or waver when things get tough?”

The pro-abortion activists in the crowd responded to each of these questions with a resounding “No.”

“No, we are going to stand together in one voice and take a stand on behalf of women and families throughout the country,” Schumer said. “We are going to stand against all these attempts to restrict a woman’s right to choose and we will win.”

Republican Sen. Ben Sasse slammed Schumer, saying that Schumer threatened Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.

“The Democratic Party is so radicalized on abortion politics that today Chuck Schumer threatened Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh if they didn’t strike down a simple, commonsense, pro-woman law that simply says that abortion doctors need to have admission privileges at a local hospital,” Sasse said in a statement provided to The Daily Caller News Foundation.

The Nebraska senator pointed out that if a Republican threatened Supreme Court Justices Sonia Sotomayor or Ruth Bader Ginsburg, “it would be the biggest story not just in Washington but all across America.”

“But, Chuck Schumer’s bully tactics aren’t getting much air time right now because there’s so many people in bed with his defense of abortion and his attack on an independent judiciary,” Sasse added. “These bullying tactics need to stop.”

The case marks the first time the Supreme Court has reviewed an abortion case since Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court justice’s confirmation was marked by anxiety from the pro-abortion movement that Kavanaugh would rule favorably for pro-life policies.

He was accused of sexual assault by Christine Blasey Ford, whose lawyer Debra Katz said Ford’s accusations were motivated by putting “an asterisk next to” Kavanaugh’s name before “he takes a scalpel” to Roe v. Wade.

“In the aftermath of these hearings, I believe that Christine’s testimony brought about more good than the harm misogynist Republicans caused by allowing Kavanaugh on the court,” Katz says in a video exclusively obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation in September 2019.

“He will always have an asterisk next to his name,” Katz continues. “When he takes a scalpel to Roe v. Wade, we will know who he is, we know his character, and we know what motivates him, and that is important; it is important that we know, and that is part of what motivated Christine.”

COLUMN BY

Mary Margaret Olohan

Mary Margaret Olohan is a reporter covering social issues for The Daily Caller News Foundation. Twitter: @MaryMargOlohan.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Schumer Faces Rare Censure for Threatening Supreme Court Justices

Schumer Owes Kavanaugh, Gorsuch a Real Apology

Ban on Killing Babies Born Alive During Failed Abortion Becomes Law in West Virginia

Flashback: Here’s What Sen. Schumer Had to Say When Trump ‘Publicly Attacked’ Judges

What You Need to Know About Louisiana’s Pro-Life Law as Supreme Court Decides Its Fate

RELATED PODCAST: The Daily Signal’s Rob Bluey breaks down the case with Louisiana Attorney General Jeffrey Landry and Louisiana Solicitor General Liz Murrill, who argued it.

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 this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

VIDEO: South African Doctor in China discusses Wuhan Flu misinformation (Canada is among worst)

H/T Matt Bracken

Coronavirus – China’s Lies affect us all

EDITORS NOTE: This video posted on the Vlad Tepes Blog by Eeyore is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

The other ‘marriage story’: divorce is at a 40-year low. And more kids are being raised in intact families.

The rise of divorce and the decline of marriage following the sexual revolution have destabilised the family life of two generations and have been the source of much unhappiness both for children and parents. We have lamented these trends often enough on MercatorNet, and a new movie dramatises the pain of divorce in wrenching detail.

But there is another, true and encouraging story about divorce – not the much bruited “good divorce” but the fact that divorce is in a four-decade decline, and family stability indicators are ticking up.

Writing in USA Today before Christmas family scholar Brad Wilcox and Institute for Family Studies blog editor Alysse Elhage highlighted three positive trends in the US: the continuing decline of divorce; falling births to unmarried women; and a rising share of children being raised by married parents. Divorce, in fact, has been falling since its peak in 1980 and is predicted to decline further.

At the same time British family advocate and researcher Harry Benson reported that marriages are lasting longer in the UK. Including couples who marry overseas, he finds that for marriages starting today, the median duration before divorce or death would be 40 years, not the 30 years estimated by the Office for National Statistics, let alone the oft-quoted “12 years”, which is the average duration of marriages ending in divorce, not all marriages.

So, what’s going on?

Divorce is down: Benson says almost all the decline in divorce in the UK is due to fewer wives wanting out of their marriage. In the absence of social pressure to marry, he suggests, men in particular are becoming more intentional about it. “More committed men means fewer unhappy wives filing for divorce.”

According to Wilcox and Elhage, it’s because modern marriage is about children:

Surveys tell us that Americans are less tolerant of divorce today. That’s in large part because, as family scholar Richard Reeves put it, “Modern marriage is not principally about money, sex, or status. It’s about children.” Today’s married couples seem to invest more in staying together, unlike the Boomers who were obsessed with their own fulfillment in the ’70s,offering their children a better shot a more stable family life and future.

Children following marriage: Non-marital births have been falling for nearly a decade in the US, the American writers note:

The rate of nonmarital childbearing has fallen from 41.% in 2009 to 39.6% in 2018. We think what has happened, in part, is that young adults in America have become more cautious in the wake of the Great Recession about forming families and, hence, are less likely to leap into parenthood without a ring on their finger.

 

Intact families: The share of US children being raised by their own married parents seems to have bottomed out, rising from 61.8 percent in 2014 to 62.6 percent in 2019, say Wilcox and Elhage, who expect the trend to continue. They add:

What does all this mean for American children? Children raised by their married parents enjoy a host of life-long benefits compared to children born into other family forms, including more financial stability, greater physical safety, more involved fathers, and greater educational, social and psychological outcomes.

This might not be the marriage story Hollywood wants to tell, but it’s a true story and young people have a right to hear it at home, in church, school and on social media, for their own sakes and that of the next generation.

COLUMN BY

CAROLYN MOYNIHAN

Carolyn Moynihan is deputy editor of MercatorNet.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Marriage Story’ dissects the tragic injustice of American divorce

The 2010s: A Decade of Marital and Sexual Erosion

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

CHANGED: Former gays against the Democrat’s ‘Equality Act’ — ‘Sexual behavior should not be a protected right.’

“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” – Voltaire, French Enlightenment writer, historian, and philosopher.


NBC News’ Gwen Aviles in an article titled Ex-gays descend upon D.C. to lobby against LGBTQ rights quotes Kathy Grace Duncan, a member of Changed who formerly identified as a transgender man,

They’re [the Democrats] asking for certain rights in this legislation [the Equality Act – H.R. 3570/the Therapeutic Fraud Prevention Act], but these are rights that they [the LGBTQ+ community] already have.

Aviles goes on to quote Jim Domen, founder of Church United, who identifies as formerly gay,

“Sexual behavior should not be a protected right.”

Aviles noted,

Domen and Duncan claim that sexual orientation and gender identity are choices, and individuals displeased with their current status can “overcome” it through therapy and religious support.

I was cleaning out some old research materials and pamphlets about homosexuality from the Family Research Institute founded by Dr. Paul Cameron, headquartered in Washington, D.C. The Family Research Institute also created the Empirical Journal of Same-Sex Sexual Behavior website.

Replacing ‘sex’ with ‘gender identity’

The idea of same-sex attraction is an issue that is coming to the forefront. The U.S. Supreme Court has heard oral arguments in two cases involving LGBTQ rights. In an October 6, 2019 article Ryan T. Anderson wrote:

This week, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in cases that ask whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bans employment discrimination on the basis of sex, extends to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and transgender status.

It’s an odd legal argument, given that the public meaning of the word “sex” in 1964—and today, for that matter—refers to our status as male or female, not our sexual attractions, desires, actions, or identity.

That’s why progressive activists have been trying for the past forty years to get Congress to pass laws that would add “sexual orientation” as a protected class, and it’s why they’ve been doing the same for “gender identity” for the past dozen years.

What does past research tell us about sexual orientation?

In the Family Research Institute 2007 Year End Report we find a reference to an article by Paul Cameron, Ph.D titled Teacher-Pupil Sexual Interaction: How Much is Homosexual? Dr. Cameron found:

In news stories in English across the world for 1980-2006, 902 teachers engaged in sex with 3,457 pupils. Teachers engaging in same-sex sex constituted 63% of perpetrators in Ireland, 62% in New Zealand, 60% in Canada, 54% in Scotland, 48% in Australia, 47% in England, and 35% in the U.S.; in smaller samples, homosexuals accounted for 71% of perpetrators in mainland Europe, 26% in Africa, and 13% in Asia. 

Proportionately more same-sex sexual activity with pupils occurred in the West as compared to Asia and Africa. Most (54% of 810 male, 83% of 92 female) teachers violated only opposite sex pupils; 43% of perpetrators engaged in homosexuality; and 55% of victims were boys. Findings for each country or set of countries were consistent with U.S. studies based on superintendent report, principal report, self-report, and convictions indicating that a male homosexual is the most and a female heterosexual the least apt to have sex with pupils.

In a second 2007 report by Dr. Cameron titled Do Those Who Engage In Homosexual Sex More Frequently Rape and Murder The Underage? A Test Of Traditional Morality noted:

Traditionalists regard those who engage in same-sex sex (e.g., ‘homosexuals’) as immoral; psychiatric professional associations consider morality unrelated to participation in homosexuality. Frequency of committing a heinous crime – rape and murder of children — was examined as one empirical test of this disagreement. For 1980-2005, 668 stories about the rape and murder of children (<18 yr.) in 50+ major newspapers in the USA, Australia, Great Britain, Canada, etc. indexed by Lexus-Nexus were found: 202 (30%) involved perpetrators who engaged in homosexual sex (35% of
the 206 stories from 1980-1994; 28% of the 462 from 1995-2005).

Males constituted 96% and boys (<18 yr.) 6% of the 714 perpetrators. The 209 perpetrators who engaged in homosexual sex accounted for 364 (40%) of the 914 victims – 53.5 (9%) of the 600 girls,
and 310.5 (99%) of the 314 boys. About three-quarters of children victimized were <13 yr. In Britain, 30 (51%) of 59 stories involved homosexuality.

Fast forward to 2019

Today we find the Catholic Church, Boy Scouts of America and public schools in the United States and abroad are immersed in homosexual scandals.

Church Militant has been in the forefront in reporting on the “gay mafia” that now runs the Catholic Church. Watch: Sodomitic Filth.

Florida, the state in which I live, has seen a steady rise in the number of HIV/AIDs cases between 2013 to 2018. The Florida Department of Health HIV Data Center reports that the number of Floridians diagnosed with HIV has gone from 4,360 in 2013 to 4,906 in 2018. Florida currently has 119,661 individuals with HIV/AIDs living in the sunshine state. Health statistics for HIV, AIDS and HIV-related deaths in Florida can be found at this web link.

According to a December 12, 2018 report in the Wall Street Journal, the Boy Scouts of America may be filing for bankruptcy in the near future due to escalating legal costs related to lawsuits over how it handled reports of child sexual abuse allegations and child molester Scout leaders.

Public schools across America are now hosting “drag queen” reading hours for young children in libraries, much to the chagrin of parents who can’t opt-out.

Conclusion

The Family Research Institute in a 1992 pamphlet titled What Causes Homosexual Desire: Can It Be Changed concludes with:

Can homosexuality be changed?

Certainly. As noted above, many people have turned away from homosexuality — almost as many people as call themselves “gay.”

Clearly the easier problem to eliminate is homosexual behavior. Even as many heterosexuals control their desires to engage in premarital or extramarital sex, so some with homosexual desires discipline themselves to abstain from homosexual contact.

One thing seems to stand out: associations are all-important. Anyone who wants to abstain from homosexual behavior should avoid the company of practicing homosexuals. There are organizations including “ex-gay ministries,” designed to help those who wish to reform their conduct. Psychotherapy claims about a 30% cure rate, and religious commitment seems to be the most helpful factor in avoiding homosexual habits. [Emphasis added]

Today groups like Changed are making a difference in turning men and women away from homosexuality. The best way is to keep homosexuals away from our our youngest and most vulnerable – our children.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Taking the lid off the box’: The value of extended clinical assessment for adolescents presenting with gender identity difficulties

Ex-Planned Parenthood Trainer: Sex Ed Book Seeks ‘to Groom Children’

Kids are lab rats in school boards’ transgender social engineering experiments

Planned Parenthood continues to target teens in new book for adolescents

Democrats fund raise off of the tragedy of a gay man having HIV! How low can Dems go?

We’re Filled with PRIDE (Equality Democrats)  in a September 27th, 2019  email titled “we’re sending Jonathan Van Ness a card (will you sign??)” state:

Rich, our hearts are FILLED with pride — Queer Eye’s Jonathan Van Ness came out as HIV positive:

2O,OOO Equality Democrats Needed: Sign the Card to Thank Jonathan Van Ness for his bravery >>

SIGN THE CARD TO THANK JONATHAN VAN NESS →


We know about 1.1 MILLION people in the U.S. are living with HIV.

We know research shows more than 38,000 were diagnosed in 2017.

And we know Trump wants to SILENCE them all!

But LGBT+ icon Jonathan Van Ness is bravely sharing his story with the WORLD. We could not be more proud!!

He has opened up about his experiences with sexual assault, sex work, and addiction in hopes to shed light on these traumas, which are far too common in the LGBT+ community.

Through the ups and downs of his own life, he is working to destigmatize HIV and the realities of being an LGBT+ American.

Jonathan Van Ness is nothing short of I-N-C-R-E-D-I-B-L-E!!!

So we’re sending him a card to say THANK YOU for everything he is doing for LGBT+ rights and true Equality.
Don’t miss your chance to express your gratitude. Sign the card to Jonathan Van Ness below >>

SIGN THE CARD TO THANK JONATHAN VAN NESS →

https://go.fightforequality.org/Thank-JVN

-Equality Democrats

When you click on the SIGN THE CARD TO THANK JOHATHAN VAN NESS it takes you to an Equality Democrats page where there is a form (below). The Equality Democrats ask for personal information and at the end ask for a donation:

LGBT+ icon Jonathan Van Ness is bravely sharing his HIV story with the WORLD. We could not be more proud!!

Sign the card to tell him THANK YOU right now:

VIDEO EXPOSE: The Secret History of Kinsey’s Pedophiles

EDITORS NOTE: There is a global movement to mainstream pedophilia. This effort has the goal of re-branding pedophiles as “minor attracted persons.” Pedophiles are attempting to join the LGBTQ movement.


The following videos are a Yorkshire Television production for Channel 4, produced and directed by Tim Tate, aired August 10, 1998. The show features interviews with Kinsey team members Paul Gebhard and Clarence Tripp, Kinsey Institute director John Bancroft and several of Kinsey’s biographers.

PART 1:

PART 2:

PART 3:

PART 4:

PART 5:

PART 6:

ABOUT YORKSHIRE TELEVISION

ITV Yorkshire, previously known as Yorkshire Television or YTV is the British television service provided by ITV Broadcasting Limited for the Yorkshire franchise area on the ITV network.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Canada’s Ball-Waxing Controversy Is an Omen for America

Democrats and Hollywood Mainstreaming Pedophilia

A Primary Goal of Leftists is to Lower the Age of Consent for Sex — Pedophilia in Mexico, the Middle East & the European Union

Latest on Scientist who Mainstreamed Pedophilia by Bob Unrah

Pedophiles Believe They Should Be A Part Of The LGBT Community

RELATED VIDEO: They’re mainstreaming pedophilia!

Should We Panic over the Measles Outbreaks?

In general, it is not a good idea to panic about anything. The panic itself often causes more harm than the original threat.

Crisis situations, real or contrived, lead to new intrusive laws that the public would never accept otherwise. We supposedly cherish freedom, but if we believe that the world will end if we don’t act NOW, then we may clamor for the government to save us. Cynical politicians bent on increasing their power never let a crisis go to waste.

Something like the Green New Deal—the end of our comfortable, prosperous lifestyle—takes a truly apocalyptic threat. But to eliminate our freedom to decline a medical treatment, the threat that “millions will die” of measles is evidently enough. Or if not millions (most older people had measles and recovered fully), a few especially vulnerable children, who can’t be vaccinated themselves, might catch measles and die.

There are several hundred cases of measles nationwide, more than in 2014, and bills are being pushed through state legislatures to eliminate all but very narrow exemptions to the 60 shots now mandated for school attendance.

In New York City, people are receiving summonses based on Mayor Bill de Blasio’s emergency order. Everybody, adult or child, who lives in four ZIP code areas must get an MMR shot or prove immunity, or face the prospect of a $1,000 fine ($2,000 if you don’t appear as ordered). Your religious exemption is overridden. The threat of 6 months in prison and the prospect of forcible vaccination were removed before a hearing on a lawsuit brought by five mothers. The judge dismissed the case.

Health Commissioner Oxiris Barbot said that the purpose of the fines is not to punish but to encourage more people to proclaim the message that vaccines are safe and effective. Get it? If you say something to avoid a fine, that makes it true.

It’s about the need for herd immunity, they say. We need a 95 percent vaccination rate for herd immunity to measles. With only 91 percent or so we are having outbreaks! If we could just vaccinate another 4 or 5 percent!

Mayor De Blasio has a point about vaccinating everyone. Adults are getting measles because their shots have worn off. It is likely that we have survived for decades with a large part of the adult population vaccinated—but not immune. So where do the mandates stop?

Outbreaks have occurred in populations with a near-100 percent vaccination rate. Was it vaccine failure? Or was the vaccine not refrigerated properly? Or was a claimed outbreak real? One in Ann Arbor, Michigan, was called off when a special test, a reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) showed a vaccine-strain measles virus rather than a wild-strain measles virus. Some 5 percent of vaccinees may get an illness that looks like measles, but it is just a “vaccine reaction.” Can they shed live virus? Yes. Should you keep your immunocompromised child away from recently vaccinated people? Just asking.

Like all medical treatments, vaccines are neither 100 percent effective, nor 100 percent safe. Read the FDA-required, FDA-approved package inserts. Arizona defeated a law that would have required making these available to parents in obtaining informed consent. (You can get them on the internet.) Vaccine Court has paid out about $4 billion in damages—recently for two children with severe brain damage from encephalopathy (that’s brain inflammation) after a fight lasting about 15 years. Just incidentally, they had an autism diagnosis also. Parents bring their severely injured children to hearings. You won’t see these children on tv, only pictures of babies with measles. No “fear-mongering” allowed about “rare,” possibly coincidental problems from vaccines.

There are trade-offs with vaccines: risks and benefits. But in the panic about measles, the right to give or withhold informed consent—fundamental in medical ethics as well as U.S. and international law—is being sacrificed. And so is free speech. The AMA wants to censor “anti-vaccine” information on social media. I happened on a factual article by investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson, but was not able to retweet it because it had been removed.

The threat of infectious diseases is real and increasing. We need more robust public health measures, better vaccines, and improved public knowledge and awareness. Deploying vaccine police and shutting down debate will erode trust in health authorities and physicians, although more people may get their shots. But such heavy-handed measures will not defeat the enemy—measles and worse diseases.