Governor Scott Signs “Infants Born Alive” Legislation

Cantonment, Fla. – Today, Governor Rick Scott signed HB 1139 to grant infants who survive abortion procedures the same rights as infants born naturally.  Governor Scott was joined by First Lady Ann Scott and pro-life supporters from across the state to sign this bill at Florida Baptist Children’s Home in Cantonment.

Governor Scott said, “As a father and grandfather, there is nothing more precious or special than welcoming a new child into this world and by signing this bill, we are protecting the most vulnerable among us and affirming their rights as individuals. This legislation ensures common-sense measures are taken to help care for the babies who survive abortion procedures and grants those infants the same rights as infants who are born naturally.

“I also want to applaud bill sponsors Senator Anitere Flores and Representative Cary Pigman for their commitment to ensuring this bill became law. Representative Pigman is a U.S. Army reserve lieutenant colonel who is currently deployed in Kuwait and proudly serving our nation.  I was pleased he was able to join our event today via Skype so we could recognize his hard work on this legislation and for his selfless service to our nation.”

Senator Anitere Flores said, “This legislation is about protecting the sanctity of life, and with the signing of this bill today, Governor Scott is fighting for those most vulnerable-this is a victory for Florida.”

Representative Cary Pigman said, “I was pleased to sponsor this important legislation this year and proud that Governor Scott is protecting the lives of those most vulnerable.”

Representative Clay Ingram said, “Governor Scott is committed to protecting those most vulnerable, and with the signing of today’s legislation, he is making sure all babies are treated fairly and with dignity.”

Representative Matt Gaetz said, “I applaud the Governor for standing up for children. It’s amazing to me that something like this needed action by the Legislature, but I’m glad we took important steps forward in protecting life.”

Sheila Hopkins, Director for Social Concerns/Respect Life of the Florida Catholic Conference said, “The Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops applauds Governor Scott for protecting the life and human dignity of children born alive during or after an abortion.  It is our duty to protect the weakest and most vulnerable in society and this legislation does exactly that.  Thank you Governor Scott.”

Dr. Jerry Haag, President of Florida Baptist Children’s Home said, “On behalf of the Florida Baptist Children’s Homes, we applaud Governor Scott’s commitment to protecting the unborn.  Our children are our most sacred treasures and it is imperative that all children- those born and unborn- are valued and treated fairly.”

John Stemberger, President of the Florida Family Policy Council said, “The Florida Family Policy Council supports Governor Scott’s commitment to life and applauds him on signing this legislation.  We affirm with Governor the first principle that all life, born and unborn, has intrinsic worth and value and deserves to be protected. This is a great human rights victory for the Sunshine State.”

Florida Atheists Dedicating Courthouse Monument to Atheism

bradford reports:

“A Florida atheist group is planning to unveil a 1500-pound granite bench at the Bradford County courthouse praising atheism.  This action comes in response to the large sculpture of the Ten Commandments that was placed at the courthouse last year. Community Men’s Fellowship donated that monument and atheist groups instantly went on the attack, saying it made them feel like second-class citizens.  The group won the right to erect their own monument in a settlement.”

Read more.

According to American Atheists, “The unveiling is scheduled for June 29 at noon. It is the first atheist-sponsored monument on government property in the United States. American Atheists President David Silverman will deliver the dedication.”

“The monument features an excerpt from the Treaty of Tripoli, signed by President John Adams, which declares “The United States is in no sense founded on the Christian religion”; and excerpts from the Bible, quoting the biblical punishments for breaking each of the Ten Commandments–many command death,” states Silverman.

Gallup Poll Shows American Moral Pessimism

Gallup asked if the state of moral values in America is “getting better” or “worse,” 72% of Americans responded “worse.”

Although married, churchgoing, or Republican Americans were the most negative, Gallup pointed out, “No major demographic group evaluates moral values positively overall.”

But here’s the irony: Many of the Americans who recognize our moral problems are also the quickest to justify them.

As a country, we have a higher tolerance than ever for divorce (68% believe it’s morally acceptable), premarital sex (63%), out-of-wedlock births (60%), and homosexual behavior (59%). On two explosive issues–human cloning and polygamy–the public’s support has actually doubled. Believe it or not, more Americans now have a problem with “wearing fur” (59%) than aborting a human life (42%). Only adultery lost ground in the battle over values–falling just a single point, from 7% approval to 6%.

Gallup’s Bottom Line:

Last year, Gallup asked Americans to give their views on the most important problem with the state of moral values. Americans were more likely to cite a lack of respect or tolerance for other people than divisive political and social issues such as abortion or same-sex marriage. So their sour outlook on U.S. values may have more to do with basic matters of civility than with the more controversial moral issues that currently divide Americans.

Southern Baptist Convention rejects the Boy Scout’s proposed compromise

The national board of directors for the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) met on February 6, 2013 with intentions of voting on whether to allow homosexuals to have supervisory roles over boys. The board declined to make a decision at that time and decided to allow 1,400 scout officials around the country to make this important decision at the 2013 National Annual Meeting scheduled for May 22–24 in Grapevine, Texas.

The Boys Scouts of America will consider a compromise on May 22, 2013 that would drop the organization’s ban on admitting youth who are open or avowed homosexuals.  National officials tentatively plans to keep the ban on homosexual scoutmasters. A Tampa BSA leader notes that delegates to the convention are required to vote in accordance with the position of their regional members. A recent poll of BSA members indicated that 61% are against this change in policy.

The Associated Baptist Press reports “The head of the SBC Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission wrote Scout officials on May 15 to reiterate the denomination’s “strident opposition” to dropping the organization’s ban on admitting youth “who are open or avowed homosexuals.”  Southern Baptist churches presently comprise a large number of the Scouting units chartered by the faith community. The Southern Baptist Convention holds that:

  • The proposed policy change is “a serious departure from the BSA’s moral foundation and traditional values.”
  • Including gays would be inconsistent with the Scout Oath “to keep myself … morally straight.”
  • By introducing homosexual identification into Scouting, the Boy Scouts would effectively require church-sponsored Scouting units to endorse that which they consider incompatible with Scripture.”  Southern Baptists do not believe embracing same-sex orientation is biblically acceptable.
  • Allowing openly homosexual youth into Scouting would cause many Southern Baptist churches, as well as many churches from other denominations, to withdraw their sponsorship rather than compromise their convictions. Already, numerous churches have told us of their intent to do so.

According to the Florida Family Association, “Changing the policy to allow open homosexual scouts erroneously validates the lifestyle before millions of boys.  Changing the policy in effect deletes the principle and oath commitment to ‘keep myself … morally straight’. It is inappropriate and irrational to change the Boy Scouts century old values and standards that millions of boys follow just to accommodate the very few who are demanding the change.”

Will George Zimmerman get a fair trial?

President Obama talked about “racism” at Morehouse College this weekend. The timing is interesting because the trial of George Zimmerman, the man who shot Trayvon Martin in February 2012, will begin in June. Zimmerman is Hispanic and Martin was black.

President Obama stated at Morehouse, “We know that too many young men in our community continue to make bad choices. Growing up, I made quite a few myself. Sometimes I wrote off my own failings as just another example of the world trying to keep a black man down. I had a tendency sometimes to make excuses for me not doing the right thing. But one of the things that all of you have learned over the last four years, is there’s no longer any room for excuses.”

President Obama interjected himself into the Zimmerman case when he said that if he had a son he would “look like Trayvon”.

Clash Daily reports, “State prosecutors in the case against George Zimmerman are pushing to keep Zimmerman’s attorneys from bringing testimony about Trayvon Martin’s past during the trial.”

Screen capture from Trayvon Martin’s social media site courtesy Clash Daily

“The state said in motions filed on Friday they want to prevent Zimmerman’s attorneys from bringing up Martin’s personal life, including his school records, previous suspension from school, fights, text messages sent prior to his death unless related to case and his social media use. The motion also says the state wants to prevent the defense from using Martin’s toxicology report, which showed the level of marijuana in Martin’s blood the night he was shot and killed,” notes Clash Daily.

Yahoo News reports:

George Zimmerman has waived his right to a pretrial hearing over whether he should be acquitted of murder charges under Florida’s “stand your ground” law.

Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer who’s charged with second-degree murder in the killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, said Tuesday in court that he did not want the preliminary hearing, the Orlando Sentinel reported.

The surprising move by Zimmerman’s legal team means the controversial case will go straight to trial in early June.

Zimmerman had the right under Florida’s 7-year-old “stand your ground” law to argue to the judge in a special hearing without a jury that he’s immune from both civil and criminal prosecution. The law,versions of which are on the books in 20 states, says people who have a reasonable belief their lives are in danger in a public place can harm an attacker without first attempting to retreat.

The 29-year-old says he acted in self defense when Martin attacked him on Feb. 26, 2012. Prosecutors say Zimmerman profiled Martin, pursuing him around the neighborhood, and then confronting and killing him with his gun.

This Florida case grabbed national political and media attention when first reported. Some Sanford residents say the Zimmerman case reflects a larger issue of black racial profiling by police.

Governor Rick Scott commissioned a task force to review Florida’s stand your ground law. According to the Miami-Herald, “A 19-member task force commissioned by Gov. Rick Scott to review Florida’s Stand Your Ground law has put out its final report, largely voicing support for the law. The task force made a handful of recommendations for the Legislature, but began the report by stating that, at its core, the self-defense law is fine as it is.”

Abortion Provider Ad: ‘Your Baby Will Thank You’

Hat tip to Kristi Burton Brown from LiveActionNews.org, “The other day, I was in the middle of doing research online when I stumbled across a Planned Parenthood ad. Planned Parenthood, over the years, has run some pretty shocking ad campaigns. Without a doubt, this one is the worst I’ve ever seen: This ad proves that insanity can indeed reach new heights.”

New Planned Parenthood banner ad:

Question: How can a dead baby thank its mother?

Lauren Enk from the Media Research Center writes, “Planned Parenthood, the nation’s leading abortion mill, just launched a decidedly strange new advertisement… The self-described ‘sexual and reproductive health care provider’ recently put out a banner ad in which a picture of a smiling mother toting a happy baby is captioned by the words “YOUR BABY WILL THANK YOU.”

“Planned P’s typical line of business is anti-life, pregnancy-terminating services, so at first it looks a little odd to suggest your baby would thank you for dropping by one of their clinics. But the ad actually attempts to shift the focus away from their abortion services to their other lines of work which haven’t been getting such gruesome negative attention lately, like birth control and other ‘family planning’ options’, notes Enk.

Alisa LaPolt Snow, Florida Planned Parenthood lobbyist.

Enk states, “Either way, and however loony, the new ad is a fairly desperate attempt to distract from Planned Parenthood’s blind-eye policy towards the children murdered in the womb at the hands of their abortionists. Even the cheerful ad looks downright absurd seen alongside the ghastly accounts about Gosnell. And it’s grimly ironic that a lobbyist for the ‘Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates told the state legislature in March that the fate of an infant born alive in a ‘botched abortion’ ‘should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician’.” In other words, the baby, a living, breathing, child, should have no legal protection from infanticide. Thanks Mom!”

Ninety-eight percent of the services Planned Parenthood gives pregnant women are abortion (and it performed more than 650,000 of them in 2008 – 2009). What’s more, the national organization has mandated that all its affiliates provide abortions, and even encourages clinics to increase the number of abortions they provide. But when you have a PR problem and tax-payers are getting queasy about subsidizing your operation, you emphasize the much-nicer sounding ‘reproductive health,’ laughable as it may be,” reports Enk.

New revelations about Life Dynamics of Denton, Texas an abortion provider may be more grisly than what has been found in the case of former abortion provider and now convicted murderer Kermit Gosnell  Gosnell remains unrepentant. Read more about the Texas case by clicking here. Watch this video about Life Dynamics of Denton, TX:

US Attorney General Eric Holder on the enforcement of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act passed in 2002:

RELATED COLUMNS:

Another abortion ‘house of horrors’ in TX?
Doctor accused of illegal late-term procedures…
‘Twisted heads off fetus’ necks with bare hands’…

Department of Education to delete terms ‘mother’ and ‘father’

Oliver Darcy from Campus Reform reports:

The U.S. Department of Education (DOE) has announced it will replace “gender specific terms like ‘mother’ and father’” in the 2014-2015 federal student aid form with neutral language.

The terms “mother” and “father” will no longer be used on the Federal Application for Student Aid.

The new language, “parent one” and “parent two,” is aimed at accommodating students who have grown up in gay households and have either two mothers or two fathers, according to a statement released by the DOE late last month.

“All students should be able to apply for federal student aid within a system that incorporates their unique family dynamics,” said U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan in the press release.

The new language will “provide an inclusive form that reflects the diversity of American families,” he added.

According to Duncan, “gender-specific terms also fail to capture income and other information from one parent when a student’s parents are in a same-sex marriage under state law but not federally recognized under the Defense of Marriage Act.”

A spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Education did not return calls for comment from Campus Reform.

Read more.

Crystal Wright in her column The Gay Takeover of America states, “What is happening to our country? Gays, who represent less than 3% of our population, are trying to dominate our culture and society. Love whom you want. Love the one you’re with. People don’t really care. This is the message most people want to say but are afraid to because the LBGT (lesbian, bi-sexual, gay and transgender) community will verbally flog anyone who doesn’t agree with them. Between gay marriage, gay adoptions, forcing the Boy Scouts to admit gay scouts and scout masters, and lauding a rich NBA player for announcing he’s gay, the message is clear from gay America to the 97% of the rest of us. You will accept our lifestyle as mainstream. My response: ‘No I won’t’.”

This phenomenon is taking place in the EU as well. Sun News Networks’ Michael Coren interviews Judith Reisman on The Arena. They discuss the recent visit of Judith Reisman and Tim Tate to Croatia in support of Karolina Vidović-Krišto, a respected and successful journalist and TV host, who got suspended after reviewing Tim Tate’s documentary on her public television show. Watch the interview:

The Gang of Eight Immigration Bill, Explained in One Info-graphic

The Heritage Foundation reports, “Senators return to Washington next week to debate the Gang of Eight’s comprehensive immigration bill. Heritage President Jim DeMint has said the bill is ‘unfair, it costs too much, and it’s going to make the problem worse’.”

The below video is testimony before the US Senate by the ICE Union Chief, Chris Crane, in his testimony on the 884 page new Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act (S. 744). The ICE Union won an initial court victory in its lawsuit against the Obama Administration. Federal Judge Federal Judge Reed O’Connor told the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that they had no power to refuse to deport illegal aliens.

Crane testifies before the Senate expressing his concern that law enforcement was shut out of the negotiations on the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act.

Crane testified the Act is flawed as currently written because it:

(1) does not provide for tamper proof Federal ID cards to keep track of illegal aliens

(2) does not have any provision to arrest and remove 400,000 criminal Illegal Aliens who are fugitives from justice with felony warrants

(3) does not deal with the inability of the federal government’s bureaucracy to process 18+ million Illegal aliens when the federal government hasn’t even been able to process 900,000 Veterans disability claims over a 4 year period

(4) does nothing to make Universities report (which should be under threat of felony criminal charges) the names and locations of the hundreds of thousands foreign students like the terrorists who were involved in the Boston bombing who no longer attend college classes

(5) does nothing to provide a means to cover the $6 trillion cost of the flawed 884 page Act according to research by the Heritage Foundation (the Senate Bill intentionally misled the American people by saying it would cost $22.5 billion)

(6) doesn’t cover the cost because the Senate bill provides for charging each of the 18+ million illegal aliens $500.00 when the real cost per illegal is $335,000.00

(7) intentionally misleads the American people by saying the Act would not be enacted until the border was secured when there is no provision to guarantee the border is secure after 29 years of failed promise (THE ONLY ORGANIZATION THAT CAN BE TRUSTED TO VERIFY THE BORDER HAS BEEN CLOSED IS THE ICE UNION)

(8) flagrantly discriminates against nearly 4 million unemployed Veterans by giving employers a $3000 tax credit for employing illegal aliens and relieves them from having to cover illegal aliens under the Obama Health Care law without giving those same benefits to unemployed US citizens

(9) does absolutely nothing to locate the many terrorists in the US among the 18+ million illegal aliens like the Chechen terrorists, the Times Square bomber, the first World Trade Union bombers in 1993, and Major Hassan who had all been affected by the Islam jihadists outreach program underway in the US by remaining under the radar scope of CIA and the FBI’s Watch Lists (the requirement in the Act for a tamper proof Federal ID card requiring fingerprints would help locate those terrorist suspects)

(10) does not provide provisions to prevent 80 million unskilled relatives of the 18+ million illegal aliens form coming into the US which would destroy the fragile US Welfare system & bankrupt the Republic

(11) does not have a provision to deport anyone who fails in their application (Mohammed Salameh who applied for amnesty in 1984 but was turned down was a co-conspirator in the in the first World Trade Center attack in 1993)

(12) does not provide annual quotas to process applicants so the crush of applicants won’t bring the process to a full stop, and does not have provisions in it to do a thorough background investigation of applicant from high threat countries/regions.

Heritage put together an info-graphic that explains some of the major problems with a ‘comprehensive’ approach to immigration reform. Forward this to a friend to share these concerns.

What's Wrong withthe Gang of Eight's Bill?

Read the Morning Bell and more en español every day at Heritage Libertad.

Soldiers of faith told Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell

Florida has twenty-one military installations, and is home to U.S. Central Command at MacDill AFB in Tampa. Florida has over 1.6 million veterans who reside in the state. The military is a major factor in Florida’ economy.

The morale and welfare of those active duty military in Florida is of importance to the national security of the nation. So why has the U.S. military become a social change petri dish?

Ken Klukowski from Breitbart reports, “The Pentagon has released a statement confirming that soldiers could be prosecuted for promoting their faith: “Religious proselytization is not permitted within the Department of Defense…Court martials and non-judicial punishments are decided on a case-by-case basis…”.

Klukowski reported in an earlier column, “‘Today, we face incredibly well-funded gangs of fundamentalist Christian monsters who terrorize their fellow Americans by forcing their weaponized and twisted version of Christianity upon their helpless subordinates in our nation’s armed forces.’ Those words were recently written by Mikey Weinstein, founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF), in a column he wrote for the Huffington Post. Weinstein will be a consultant to the Pentagon to develop new policies on religious tolerance, including a policy for court-martialing military chaplains who share the Christian Gospel during spiritual counseling of American troops.”

“Weinstein then endorses the ultra-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), who publishes a list of “hate groups.” Alongside truly deplorable organizations like the KKK, the SPLC’s list includes a host of traditional Christian organizations (for their support of traditional marriage) and Tea Party organizations (for supporting limited government). Weinstein says SPLC correctly labels them all as ‘hate groups’,” writes Klukowski.

Klukowski states, “This regulation would severely limit expressions of faith in the military, even on a one-to-one basis between close friends. It could also effectively abolish the position of chaplain in the military, as it would not allow chaplains (or any service members, for that matter), to say anything about their faith that others say led them to think they were being encouraged to make faith part of their life. It’s difficult to imagine how a member of the clergy could give spiritual counseling without saying anything that might be perceived in that fashion.”

In response to the Pentagon’s plans, retired Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, who is now executive vice president of the Family Research Council (FRC), said on Fox & Friends Wednesday morning:

It’s a matter of what do they mean by “proselytizing.” …I think they’ve got their definitions a little confused. If you’re talking about coercion that’s one thing, but if you’re talking about the free exercise of our faith as individual soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines, especially for the chaplains, they I think the worst thing we can do is stop the ability for a soldier to be able to exercise his faith.”

 The FRC was attacked by domestic terrorist Floyd Lee Corkins II who used the SPLC list of hate groups to pick his targets. “Southern Poverty Law lists anti-gay groups,” Corkins tells interrogators in the below video, which FRC obtained from the FBI. “I found them online, did a little research, went to the website, stuff like that.”

Florida doctor loses license in botched abortion

Esther Rachwal in an email to WDW states, “Here is the story of a Florida doctor that loses his license over a botched abortion. Ironically people are led to believe that abortion is safe and legal, but there have been dozens of women who have either died or developed severe medical problems from so called “legal” abortions. This information is rarely reported.”

“Even now with the Gosnell trial going on 5 weeks, with gruesome details, there is very little reporting. Yet in today’s paper (Monday), a Wildlife Sanctuary of NW Florida held a baby shower for young animals, as reported in the Pensacola News Journal. About 700 visitors brought various things and food donations to help care for the animals. And on April 7th, a large article reported on the abuses of farm animals which were video taped by animal rights activists. These tapes drew swift response from Federal prosecutors in Tennessee. Local authorities in Wyoming charged farm employees with cruelty to animals. So, can you imagine how media would have covered this Gosnell story if it were animals beheaded, and their spinal cords severed while alive?” notes Rachwal.

Cheryl Sullenger | Tallahassee, FL | LifeNews.com | 4/22/13 3:11 PM

The Florida Board of Medicine took action to suspend the medical license of late-term abortionist James Scott Pendergraft, IV on Friday after he failed to pay the board fines from a previous disciplinary action that totaled over $120,000.

The settlement agreement reached between the board and Pendergraft orders that his medical license “shall be indefinitely suspended until such time as [Pendergraft] complies” with the order to pay his fines.

This is the fifth time that Pendergraft’s medical license has been suspended by the Florida Board of Medicine. He continues to operate five abortion clinics in Florida, primarily in the Orlando area.

The fines resulted from a 2010 case where Pendergraft was heavily fined and placed on suspension related to a 2006 botched elective 19-week abortion.

Patient S.B went to Pendergraft for the second trimester abortion on Feb. 3, 2006. He prescribed doses of Cytotec, a drug that is known to cause severe and unpredictable uterine contractions and sent her home for three days to take the medication on her own. Pendergraft did not have a valid DEA number at the time.

When S.B. returned to the clinic, he further illegally administered doses of Cytotec, Demerol, and Phenergan. He attempted the abortion before the patient was adequately dilated, lacerating her cervix and sending her to the hospital where she underwent an emergency hysterectomy.

At the hospital, staff delivered the remains of S.B.’s baby and found that it was missing a lower limb. Efforts were made to locate the limb in the abdominal cavity to no avail. There were no indications on the patient’s chart. Later, it was discovered that the limb had been removed at the clinic. This lack of documentation caused issues in providing the patient with proper emergency care.

Pendergraft was suspended and ordered to pay fines in excess of $122,000. Pendergraft failed to pay, resulting in another disciplinary case attempting to seek payment. Finally, Friday’s action suspended his license until further notice.

Pendergraft has a long history of abortion abuses. An Operation Rescue undercover investigation discovered that he was working illegally in Maryland with another abortionist Harold O. Alexander, to offer late-term abortions while his license was under suspension in Florida and filed complaints. Alexander was later disciplined for destroying patient records related to his business with Pendergraft, closing down Pendergraft’s Maryland operation.

In 2011, Pendergraft was hit with a whopping civil medical malpractice judgment of $36,737,660.16 in compensatory and punitive damages in a case involving a botched 20 week abortion that resulted in the live birth of a child physically damaged by Pendergraft’s incompetent abortion process amid what was described as “third world conditions” with virtually no counseling.

Kermit Gosnell

“Pendergraft is a prime example of how an abortionist operating outside the law in a manner that is reminiscent of the Kermit Gosnell murder case. He is proof that Gosnell is not an outlier, but is a snapshot of degenerate nature of the abortion cartel in America today,” said Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue. “Pendergraft belongs in prison just as much as Kermit Gosnell, but the reticence of the Board to revoke his license means he will be back to wrecking more havoc on women. People wonder how Gosnell continues to operate for so long, but the Pendergraft case explains it. Oversight agencies are just too slow to revoke abortion offenders.”

More about Pendergraft’s sordid background can be found at AbortionDocs.org.

LifeNews.com Note: Cheryl Sullenger is a leader of Operation Rescue, a Kansas-based pro-life that monitors abortion practitioners and exposes their illegal and unethical practices. The group is known for serving as a watchdog of Planned Parenthood and other abortion businesses.

Tim Tebow first athlete presented “Great Floridian” award

Governor Rick Scott today presented one of the first “Great Floridian” awards to football legend Tim Tebow. The “Great Floridian” designation is given in recognition of the outstanding achievements of men and women who have made significant contributions to the progress and welfare of Florida.

Governor Rick Scott said, “It is an honor to present one of our first of 2013 ‘Great Floridian’ awards to football legend and Florida native Tim Tebow. Tim is a great role model for young athletes, and throughout his career, he has proven to be a true competitor and humanitarian. Tim is not just an athlete, he is a true example of someone who lives to serve others.  It is my distinct honor to recognize football legend, proud University of Florida Gator and humanitarian Tim Tebow with the ‘Great Floridian’ Award.”

Tim Tebow said, “I am so honored to be selected by Governor Scott for the Great Floridian award. It has always been wonderful to call Florida home.”

Only 66 individuals since 1981 have been given this distinct honor, and those honorees represent former governors, civil rights activists, military heroes, Florida Supreme Court Justices and others.

The Christian Science Monitor notes, “Tim Tebow joins a distinguished group of ‘Great Floridians,’ including Thomas Edison and Spanish explorer Pedro Menendez, but, until now, no athletes. Could it be a calculated political move by an unpopular governor in an election year?”

Tebow has become a target both on and off the football field for those who disagree with his strong moral stances on social issues.

On February 21st CNN reported, “NFL quarterback Tim Tebow has canceled an appearance at a controversial Dallas-area church. The outspoken Christian quarterback was scheduled to speak at First Baptist Church on April 28. The church is led by Robert Jeffress, who has been widely criticized for views against homosexuality, Islam and Mormonism. Tebow, announcing his decision Thursday on Twitter, said that he was canceling his appearance “due to new information that has been brought to my attention.”

Sally Quinn of the Washington Post wrote in January 2012:

There was also something really annoying about how people made fun of him for being a person of faith. I can see that for some, the kneeling or “Tebowing” on the field might seem a little much. But then you see players cross themselves all the time and nobody seems to have a problem with that. If Tebow didn’t live his faith it would be another story. But he does.

Because I couldn’t watch, I picked up a book I was reading, “The Last Testament: A Memoir by God” (with David Javerbaum.) Yes, it’s a satire. I thumbed through the book and found a chapter titled “Games On Sports.” Now, before Tebow I would never have read that chapter. But I was thinking, maybe there will be something revealing in here about this Tim Tebow phenomenon.

And here I quote “God” from his memoir, 1:6. “Sport is mythic; sport is epic: sport is a condensation of all human activity; it is often said that sport is a metaphor for life; it would be more accurate to say that life is a metaphor for sports.”

This definitely got my attention so I kept on reading, even though I was still listening to the roar of the crowds as the Patriots scored another touchdown.

“As a sports fan,” continues “God” in 1:18, “ I understand how much the games mean to both other fans and the athletes: the passions they stir, the tempests they roil, the loyalties they build, and above all the rivalry, violence, and rioting they so justifiably evoke.”

What drives a lot of people crazy is the fact that so many fans (43 percent in a recent survey) actually believe that Tebow is being helped by God, that God has overseen his fabulous six game winning streak and his overtime shocker over the Steelers. Some even called that a “miracle.”

Tim Tebow is a role model in the most important way possible. He understands that what he is can only be a gift from God. Congratulations Tim! Well deserved.

Media Ignoring Gosnell Trial Because It Puts Abortion Issue ‘Starkly Into Relief’

Family Security Matters posted this video of Charles Krauthammer stating that the media is ignoring the Dr. Kermit Gosnell (pictured above) trial because it puts the abortion issue ‘Starkly Into Relief’.

PHILADELPHIA (TheBlaze/AP) — An unlicensed doctor fled out the back the night the FBI raided a Philadelphia medical clinic in 2010, a witness testified Thursday as a murder trial centered on the unorthodox facility. It is just the latest horrific revelation to surface in the trial.”

Abortion provider Kermit Gosnell, 72, is charged with killing a woman patient and seven babies allegedly born alive, and with performing illegal, late-term abortions at his thriving inner-city clinic. Co-defendant Eileen O’Neill, 56, of Phoenixville, is charged with billing as a doctor and participating in a corrupt organization.”

Eight former employees have pleaded guilty, some to third-degree murder, and have testified this month about nightmarish, often-chaotic practices at the clinic.”

Ashley Baldwin spoke Thursday of starting there at age 15 through a high school training program, and soon assisting with abortions and administering intravenous drugs. Baldwin, now 22, said she worked nearly 50-hour weeks, often well past midnight, when abortions were routinely performed.”

At least twice, she saw aborted babies move after the procedure, only to have Gosnell explain that it an involuntary response. In one case, she said, “the chest was moving.””>At least twice, she saw aborted babies move after the procedure, only to have Gosnell explain that it an involuntary response. In one case, she said, “the chest was moving.”

Her mother, Tina Baldwin, had started at the clinic in 2002, referred by a business school where she had studied to be a medical assistant. She mostly worked at the front desk, where her duties included giving patients medicine to start their contractions.”

Her mother, Tina Baldwin, had started at the clinic in 2002, referred by a business school where she had studied to be a medical assistant. She mostly worked at the front desk, where her duties included giving patients medicine to start their contractions.”

Read more.

RELATED VIDEO:

RELATED COLUMNS:

Pay Attention to the Gosnell Trial – The Daily Beast

Four Reasons Why Media Isn’t Covering Gosnell Mass Murder Trial …

NBC Won’t Cover Gosnell Trial, Tweets News From Another Source …

Kermit Gosnell Trial

Why Is the Media Not Reporting on the Philly Abortion Clinic Doctor Trial?

Infants Born Alive Bill passes unanimously out of Florida Senate Health Policy Committee

Today, Gov. Rick Scott released the following statement regarding the Infants Born Alive Bill (SB1636) passing unanimously out of Florida Senate Health Policy Committee:

“The Infants Born Alive bill, SB 1636 – and its House companion, HB 1129 – ensure common sense measures to help care for the babies who survive abortion procedures. It is essential that we protect the weakest among us, and I am grateful for the Senators and Representatives in both parties who are supporting care for these babies.”

There is a growing trend among states to restrict abortions.

According to Remapping Debate, “Though the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Roe v. Wade affirming a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion remains the law of the land, states enacted more restrictions on abortion in 2011 and 2012 than in any other years since Roe was decided four decades ago.” This trend appears to be continuing with the advancement of SB1636.

Elizabeth Nash from the Guttmacher Institute, a research group in Washington, D.C. and New York, stated, “What we’ve seen over time is a wholesale change in the abortion landscape. Particularly in the last two years, we have just seen a tidal wave of restrictions rolling across the country.”

According to Nash, 92 new restrictions were enacted in 2011 and 43 were enacted in 2012, the highest and second-highest number of annual restrictions ever.

Nash said, many states have recently passed laws requiring physicians to be in the physical presence of the patient when prescribing mifespristone — a pharmaceutical drug that induces an abortion at a very early stage of pregnancy — effectively prohibiting doctors from prescribing the medication over the telephone and reducing access to abortion in rural areas. Onerous regulatory restrictions placed specifically on abortion providers (TRAP laws), bans on the coverage of abortion by health insurance policies that will be offered through state exchanges beginning next year as part of the Affordable Care Act, and laws requiring abortion providers to perform ultrasounds and show the image of the fetus to their patients before the procedure have also been common in the last two years.”

To view a chart showing the extent of your states efforts to restrict abortion click here.

RELATED COLUMN: 

Planned Parenthood calls for killing babies born after botched abortion (+ video)

Analysis of the Prop 8 and DOMA “gay marriages” cases before US Supreme Court — what’s going on and what could happen.

The following comprehensive analysis is provided by MassResistance.org:

As most people know, this is a terribly critical time regarding the imposition of “gay marriage” on America.

On Tuesday, March 26, the United States Supreme Court in Washington heard arguments on the lawsuit to overturn the Proposition 8 Constitutional Amendment vote in California. The following day, the Court heard arguments on the lawsuit to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

Either of these would be huge wins for the homosexual movement and could change the country similar to the way that the repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” changed the military.

Christian-bashing. Homosexual activist taunts Christians gathered near US
Supreme Court building during “gay marriage” arguments. Expect to see
more of this if any of these cases wins.

Both of these cases were strategically targeted and crafted for maximum success. And they were filed in carefully chosen venues to get the most gay-friendly federal judges. All of that worked out stunningly for the homosexual legal teams. Both cases sailed through the federal courts with barely a hitch. And both, as we shall see, were further aided by less than stellar representation by their opposition.

Both cases have generated mountains of paperwork in their filings, amicus briefs, and rulings, along with the myriad of groups and individuals that have been involved on each side,. It can be quite overwhelming. Our aim here is to explain all this in reasonably simple terms.

Most important to understand is that both of these cases have used the “equal protection under the law” clause of the US Constitution’s 14th Amendment as their primary argument. And in our opinion, this what the pro-family side has largely failed to effectively defend.

The Proposition 8 Case

Since 1998, 30 states have passed constitutional amendments to ban same-sex “marriage.” An additional state, Hawaii, passed an amendment to allow the legislature to decide. Nine states currently allow same-sex “marriage.”

The homosexual movement calculated that it could undo all of this by getting a federal court to declare such an amendment unconstitutional. They decided to target the California amendment, known as “Proposition 8”, which was passed in 2008.

Tolerance? During Proposition 8 campaign in California, two lesbians parked this car in front of home of parents and 5 children who supported Proposition 8.

There were good reasons for this choice. California is in the very liberal 9th Circuit federal court district. But in addition, they were able to arrange for Judge Vaughn Walker to preside over the case. Walker, who later publicly acknowledged he was homosexual, struck down the amendment. (However, he did order a stay of enforcement until it worked its way through the legal system. This stay was challenged in court by the homosexual legal team but in this they were not successful.)

The gist of the case, as mentioned above, is that under the “equal protection under the law” clause of the US Constitution, homosexuals who want to marry were being treated differently from heterosexuals who want to marry. Instead, California allows them to enter into civil unions. Such discrimination is unconstitutional, they argue. Homosexual couples should have the same rights to marry as heterosexuals, because they as citizens have the same basic civil rights. The federal judge and the appeals judges all agreed with that reasoning.

The counter-argument was that the same laws on marriage apply to everybody — i.e., everyone can marry someone of the opposite sex — therefore, there’s no “equal protection” problem. But that was rejected by the judges. The fact that the lawyers on our side accepted California’s civil union law as a legitimate compromise made that argument difficult to defend. (That was another strategic reason for choosing California as the target.)

But beyond that, the pro-family handling of that case was widely criticized as a “perfect storm” of incompetence and non-aggression. See the MassResistance report from 2010 on this.

It’s always appeared to us that the only effective way to discredit the “equal protection” argument would be to discredit homosexual behavior itself. It should be easy. There’s certainly an enormous amount of material to do that. But the pro-family lawyers have almost completely avoided that approach.

Thus, during the US Supreme Court arguments, when the right made a brief foray into some stronger points, it didn’t go well. Here’s how (the far-left pro-gay) Mother Jones magazine reported on pro-family lawyer Charles J. Cooper’s interchange with the justices:

When Cooper argued that California was justified in enacting the ban because of “society’s interest in responsible procreation,” Justice Elena Kagan asked if it would be constitutional to ban marriages between infertile couples. When Cooper argued that it’s possible that same-sex marriage harms children, Justice Anthony Kennedy pointed out that there were already more than 40,000 children being raised by same-sex couples in California. Asked by Kennedy and Kagan how same-sex marriage could have a negative effect on “traditional” marriages, Cooper couldn’t offer any examples.

According to reports, throughout all the court hearings the pro-family lawyers were trying craft arguments that would fit the predicted the temperament of Justice Kennedy, the assumed “swing vote,” rather than on the strict legal aspects of the case. It’s an interesting type of calculated risk.

If the Supreme Court ultimately agrees with the lower courts, what does that mean? The answer: It’s devastating. 

It would effectively strike down all laws and state constitutional amendments in the US against same-sex “marriage.” This is the holy grail of the entire homosexual movement. It will basically undo all the work that’s been done in defending marriage, and in one stroke will completely redefine the family unit for the entire country. Like the 1973 abortion ruling, it would be a sweeping mandate by judicial fiat with no possibility of fighting back by the citizens.

The Defense of Marriage (DOMA) case

DOMA was passed in 1996 by huge majorities in Congress and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton. The law (1) bars the federal government from recognizing same-sex “marriages” in any of its laws, programs, benefits, etc. It also (2) gives individual states the legal option not to recognize them, even if other states allow them.

The homosexual movement’s strategy here was to file several cases and hope that at least one was successful. In 2009 and 2010 four separate federal lawsuits seeking to overturn DOMA were filed: two in Massachusetts, one in Connecticut, and one in New York. All four were filed in “pro-gay” federal court venues with relatively gay-friendly judges presiding.
July 9, 2010: The DOMA ruling in Boston Federal Court was celebrated in the mainstream press as a great civil rights victory.

July 9, 2010: The DOMA ruling in Boston Federal Court was celebrated in the mainstream press as a great civil rights victory.

But the “equal protection” clause was the primary argument they used, but one of the Massachusetts lawsuits also invoked the 10th Amendment “states’ rights” argument. (Ironically, the “states’ rights” argument has also been used — more persuasively — by lawyers on our side of this case. They argue on the rights of states NOT to recognize “gay marriage” on a federal level.)

MassResistance had followed the two lawsuits in Massachusetts, one filed by Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley and the other by Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) legal group, as they went through the federal court in Boston. Read our analysis published in 2010.

VIDEO: Telling it like it is. After the Boston Federal Court ruling, Brian Camenker of MassResistance was interviewed by CNN.(Also see video of local TV interview.)

All four anti-DOMA lawsuits won in the federal courts. A contributing factor was the weak-kneed defense of DOMA by the Obama Administration’s justice department. The DOJ’s reluctance to be aggressive was admitted to in a statement in February, 2011.

From these, the US Supreme Court selected the New York case, Windsor v United States, to hear. But after seeing how poorly the Obama Administration defended the DOMA case in the lower courts, the House of Representatives sued and won the right to hire its own legal counsel to defend it before the Supreme Court. They hired former Solicitor General Paul Clement.

After Clement accepted case, his high-profile firm, King and Spaulding in Atlanta, caved in to pressure from homosexual activists and withdrew the firm it! So Clement resigned from the firm and has continued defending DOMA.

The DOMA lawsuit targets particular part of the law (Section 3 in the statute) which states:

In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word “marriage” means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word “spouse” refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.’

The plaintiffs have argued that the federal government must treat “gay marriages” the same as regular marriages throughout all its laws, regulations, etc., because “gay people” have the same rights as everyone else and “gay marriages” are still marriages. Otherwise, “gay people” are not being treated equally under the law. And it’s the right of the states to determine that.

Unfortunately, in our opinion, Clement’s oral arguments before the Supreme Court and in his briefs were only moderately better than the pro-family Proposition 8 lawyers. He didn’t aggressively take on the heart of the matter regarding “equal protection” — the issue of homosexuality and homosexual behavior. Instead, he mostly stuck to the states’ rights argument and the traditional purposes and reasons for the institution of marriage.

Interestingly, it was Justice Kagan who brought out the fact that DOMA was originally passed because of the widespread disgust over homosexuality in America. As Politico reported:

Kagan read aloud from the House Judiciary Committee report on DOMA which described the statute as a way to resist the immorality of homosexuality. “I’m going to quote from the House report here….’Congress decided to reflect an honor of collective moral judgment and to express moral disapproval of homosexuality,'” she said.

How important are these points? No one can really tell.

If the Supreme Court upholds the lower court ruling and overturns the key Section 3 of DOMA, the homosexual movement can accomplish the following:

  • It would require the federal government (funded by taxpayers in all 50 states) to include homosexual “marriages” in all federal benefits. This includes Social Security, federal pensions, Medicare, Medicaid, Veteran’s benefits, and everything else involving marriage, including filing jointly on Federal income taxes.
  • It also includes access to federal programs and other things run or controlled by the federal government, such as housing, federal loans, passports, health insurance, military housing, burial in military cemeteries, etc. Thus, the federal government would recognize homosexual behavior as equal to regular marriage throughout the range of all its activities.

  • But even more frightening: Given the wording of the decision it would also likely extend to any activities that receive federal funding, such as state programs, college programs, and virtually anything else involving federal money, such as federal contracts. We believe that the Obama administration would use this as a lever to accelerate the forced equalization of homosexuality with heterosexuality in all federal activities or anything connected to federal money — similar to the way it did in the military with the repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.”

Also going on: Massive nationwide PR assault

The two Supreme Court cases are the homosexual movement’s “ground war.” There is also the “air war” going on.

Most people, even pro-family activists, don’t realize that for the last few months America has been under what’s likely the largest and most expensive public relations campaign in the history of the homosexual movement.

All of those politicians (including some Republicans) who are suddenly very publicly “coming around” on the “gay marriage” issue isn’t a coincidence but clearly the result of a very intense lobbying effort — targeted for the time when the Supreme Court would be considering the “gay marriage” cases.

The same goes for the huge news generated when Sen. Portman’s “gay” son conveniently persuaded them to change his mind at just the right time. And how does it happen to get into all the right media in the right way? It goes on and on. There are the full-page ads in major newspapers listing the major corporations supporting “gay marriage.” The influx of gay-marriage and gay-relationship issues on this season’s TV shows. The magazine stories, including TIME with the homosexual kisses. Even the flood of Internet ads (even on conservative sites) on gay marriage. And of course, the phony polls on major networks showing a huge national support for gay marriage. We’ve even seen “gay rights” sidewalk canvassers in some cities.

“Gay” ads flood the Internet. And we meaneverywhere! Actual screenshot of National Review Online website, Feb. 13, 2013 with two prominent ads for Human Rights Campaign, radical homosexual group. Ads say: “Take a stand against fear, hate-mongering, and bigotry. Make a monthly gift.”

Most of the money for this seems to be flowing from established groups like Human Rights Campaign, GLAAD, and National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. But there are obviously other vehicles that are less visible at work.

It a D-Day-like effort to persuade the nation — and especially the Supreme Court — that “gay marriage” is inevitable and that trying to fight it is fruitless.

A tale of two marriage rallies: DC and Boston

The two “gay marriage” rallies that took place the first day of the first Supreme Court “gay marriage” oral arguments said a lot about the nature of this battle.

On Tuesday, March 26, thousands of regular pro-family people made the trip to Washington DC and marched outside the Supreme Court building, easily outnumbering the homosexual activists gathered there. The speakers were various pro-family activists, group leaders, and a few politicians.

That same day in downtown Boston it was the elites: The homosexual lobby and the liberal establishment held its own rally celebrating the DOMA lawsuit which was first filed in Boston. It attracted a few hundred activists and press. But the speakers were an impressive gathering of at least a dozen prominent city, state, and federal politicians, including the Mayor of Boston, Congressman Ed Markey, along with major homosexual activist leaders. (There was one Republican, US Senate candidate and current state rep. Dan Winslow, who gave a rousing pro-gay speech.)

VIDEO: What it was like. Scenes from the two marriage rallies: Washington DC the Boston.

How will the Supreme Court rule?

As the battle continues across the country, over the next few months the Justices and their staffs will digest the oral arguments and the large number of amicus briefs submitted by both sides, and also discuss the cases among themselves. It’s generally predicted that they will release their decision in the latter part of June, just before this year’s session ends at the end of June.

If this were decided strictly on the rule of law, we think that both cases would lose. Applying “equal protection under the law” to homosexual behavior is absurd by any rational application. And the states’ rights argument is far-fetched, despite the liberal Boston judge’s ruling; DOMA was written to protect states’ rights. But unfortunately, there’s a long history of the courts ignoring the obvious constitutional law.

The conventional wisdom is that Anthony Kennedy will be the deciding vote on this. So most of the national focus has been on him. Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and Alito are considered safe traditionalists expected to decide against both cases, and Ginsberg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan are seen as left-wing on just about everything and will support both. (The fact that Sotomayor and Kagan, the Obama nominees with documented radical pasts, are even on the Supreme Court is a testament to the cowardice of the Republican Party for not blocking them when they should have.)

Many commentators have also read in their tea leaves that Kennedy is not eager to have the courts mandate national “gay marriage” by fiat the way the court did with the much-maligned and contentions 1972 abortion ruling. But it’s hard to believe that they would leave the homosexual movement with nothing at all.

Our prediction is that Kennedy will not overturn Proposition 8 and mandate gay marriage everywhere. But he’s likely to strike down DOMA to at least some degree, and force it throughout the federal government.

But who knows? Whatever side of the bed Kennedy gets up on that day could determine the fate of the family structure and morality in America. It’s a terrible situation. The Founding Fathers never intended courts to have this kind of despotic power over the country. But our politicians (and ultimately the citizens) and have allowed it to happen.

On the other hand, there’s still two months to go. Anything can happen. If anything the fight needs to be stepped up.

International Topless Jihad Day: ‘Our boobs stronger than their stones’

19-year-old Tunisian activist Amina Tyler

Michael Dorstewitz from BizPac Review reports:

Topless activists across Europe appeared at mosques and Tunisian embassies on Thursday in the first-ever “International Topless Jihad Day.”

The event was organized by Femen, a Kiev-based feminist organization known for staging similar topless, anti-sexism protests throughout Europe.

Thursday’s protest was held in support of 19-year-old Tunisian activist Amina Tyler, who posted two topless photographs of herself on her Facebook page.

The following clip shows one of the demonstrations held in front of a mosque.

Read more.