Lawsuits Against Religious Communities Over Gay Marriage & Abortion Are Crossing 'Red Lines of Liberty'!

By Michael Gryboski, published by The Christian Post on 19 November 2013.

A legal expert and head of a conservative law firm has stated that government actions against religious groups over same-sex marriage and abortion are "red lines of liberty" being crossed.

Mat Staver, founder and chairman of the Liberty Counsel, told The Christian Post while part of an event in the Washington, D.C.-area on Monday that these red lines involve coercion on the part of government.

"These red lines of liberty are coming very rapidly. They're not just issues that are contrary to Christian values that you can coexist with," said Staver.  "These are issues where the government is seeking to force you to affirm ideas and values that are completely contrary to your Christian faith."

Staver spoke in regard to measures like the HHS "preventive services" mandate, which critics say forces some religious organizations to violate their moral objections to abortion and birth control, as well as recent lawsuits leveled against Christian businesses that refuse to provide their services to same-sex weddings and receptions.

"It's a zero-sum game, not because we made it a zero sum game, but because they've made it a zero-sum game," said Staver. "The sanctity of human life transcends politics and now we're moving into a situation where the federal government, under the HHS mandate, is forcing employers to fund the taking of innocent human life; otherwise be fined or go out of business."

Staver's remarks came at a two-day event sponsored by the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, titled "Justice Summit 2013."  Beginning Monday afternoon and held at the Crystal City Hilton near Ronald Reagan National Airport, the summit features several Christian leaders from various churches and organizations. In addition to Staver, guest speakers include Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission; Bishop Harry Jackson of Hope Christian Church; and Danielle Jones, chair for the FreedomUNITED Campaign.

"The NHCLC Justice Summit is an opportunity to amplify our influence, to dialogue and strategize about key justice issues," reads an entry on NHCLC's website.  "The NHCLC Justice Summit 2013 is an effort to increase our unified commitment and propose answers, from a Christian worldview perspective, to key issues such as: immigration reform, poverty, the struggle against human trafficking, the defense of the right to life and religious liberty."

Gus Reyes, director of the Hispanic education initiative for the Baptist General Convention of Texas, served as emcee for the summit.  Samuel Rodriguez Jr., president of the NHCLC, gave remarks early Monday afternoon where he spoke inspirational words and provided an overview of the summit.  In his remarks, Rodriquez stressed that he believes true justice comes from God and that far too often the word "justice" has been "exploited" by ideological partisans.

"Justice is not a term to be exploited. It is not a copyrighted nomenclature to be exploited by political operatives on the left or on the right," said Rodriguez.  "Justice does not belong to the donkey or the elephant, justice comes from the heart of the lamb. And we are here these days to lift up, to elevate justice."

At one point, Rodriquez went "off script" and led the audience through an emotional prayer based in "reflection and repentance" in which a majority of summitt attendees went to their knees.  "We repent before you in the name of Christ as a nation, as a community, and people of the Church, we have fallen short," prayed Rodriquez.

Staver, who presently serves as executive board vice president and chief legal counsel for NHCLC, told CP that the event was some time in the making.  "We've been actually talking about and planning an event like this for quite a while. So it's good to see it come to pass," said Staver.

Said to be the largest Latino Christian organization in the United States, the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference is a sister organization to the National Association of Evangelicals.

Link: http://www.christianpost.com/news/expert-lawsuits-against-religious-employers-over-gay-marriage-abortion-are-crossing-red-lines-of-liberty-109037/cpt

By Katherine Weber, published by The Christian Post on 19 November 2013.

A small town in upstate New York has rallied together to continue funding its local community's Christmas celebration, even though an atheist's complaint forced the local government to stop supporting the event.

The town of Spencerport, N.Y., a small village located just outside of Rochester, has been celebrating its annual "Christmas on the Canal" event for 17 years until this year, when Elaine Spaziano, the event's founder and organizer, announced that the tradition had to be canceled after an atheist complained about First Amendment rights and the separation of church and state to the local government... 

According to the local Rochester YNN news, after word got around that the "Christmas on the Canal" event had been canceled, donations from local residents and businesses began pouring in, in an effort to keep the decades-long tradition going. Resident Ralph Parmelee began imploring local businesses to donate to the event, and the town has now officially raised enough money to hold "Christmas on the Canal" for another year.

"We cannot let this die. For the generations that are coming, the young people and all, we can't take Christmas out of the picture. It's got to stay there and we're going to keep it there," Parmelee told the local media outlet.

Read more here:

http://www.christianpost.com/news/ny-town-rallies-to-keep-christmas-event-after-atheists-complaint-cancels-government-funds-109132/cpt

Canadian Archbishop warns U.S. of dire consequences of gay ‘marriage’

BY JOHN-HENRY WESTEN.

Link: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/canadian-archbishop-warns-u.s.-of-dire-consequences-of-gay-marriage

MINNEAPOLIS, October 12, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – “You are summoned to a tribunal where you cannot have a defense lawyer and you cannot record the proceedings nor have a witness present. The people judging and prosecuting you have no legal qualifications. The accusation is ambiguous, having to do with ideas the state does not like. The penalties could include fines equal to several thousands of dollars, public recanting, and rehabilitation classes. You are a bishop. This is not China. This is Canada. The offense: explaining why homosexual relations are a sin.”

Abp. Terrence Prendergast has seen the American church's future.

So began the address of Ottawa Archbishop Terrence Prendergast to St. Thomas University Law School Monday, October 8, where he laid out the alarming consequences of same-sex “marriage” from the Canadian experience. 

The archbishop was describing the true experiences of Calgary Bishop Fred Henry, who in 2005 was hit with a human rights complaint for proclaiming the Church’s teachings on homosexuality. The complaint was subsequently dropped by the plaintiff, who admitted that he only filed the complaint to get media attention.

Others, however, have not been so lucky. Alberta pastor Stephen Boissoin, for instance, was dragged through a several year process in a human rights commission, at the end of which he was found “guilty.” His crime? Writing a letter to the editor of a local newspaper expressing his concern about the gay agenda in schools. Boissoin was hit with a fine and ordered never again to publicly speak about his views on homosexuality.

Archbishop Prendergast also expressed his concern for those who, thanks to the legalization of gay “marriage,” are deceived into destructive lifestyles, approved of and funded by Canadian governments. "The Bible is being called hate literature,” he said. “Clearly, the Church is in the crosshairs. There will be growing pressure for the Church to comply or to be shut down.”

Enumerating the “consequences of same-sex marriages and related sexual license are already manifesting themselves,” the Archbishop noted:

- restrictions on freedoms; 

- forced sex education; 

- sexually confused children; 

- sexual experimentation among children; 

- muzzling and debilitating the Church; 

- more births out of wedlock; 

- more in vitro fertilizations;

- more abortions; 

- more poverty; 

- more misery; 

- more disease; 

- more addictions; and 

- higher health care costs.

Click “like” if you want to defend true marriage. 

“By reassigning financial benefits to same-sex marriage, what was once an incentive to fruitful, traditional families has become an incentive to sterile, destructive social arrangements,” he said.

Archbishop Prendergast ended his address on a positive note. “Every challenge to the Church’s teaching is an opportunity to clarify it,” he said. “Media attention is putting the Church on the front page, and we must see that as a good thing.”

“Just the same,” he warned, “the playbook of our opponents is unrelenting attempts to change or destroy the Church.” The state of Minnesota is set to vote on a referendum to protect traditional marriage on November 6.

Call for ban on disability abortions after Paralympics

By John Bingham. Published by The Telegraph on 19 September 2012.

The success of the Paralympics should trigger a rethink of Britain’s abortion laws to make it illegal to terminate a pregnancy because a child will be born disabled, a coalition of campaigners and charities argues today. An alliance of pro-life campaigners and religious groups is launching a new push to restrict the 1967 Abortion Act, to prevent doctors terminating pregnancies on the grounds of physical abnormality.

In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, they describe the practice of aborting foetuses on physical grounds as a form of “eugenics”. The letter, signed by leading figures from groups such as Life and the Pro-Life Alliance, as well as the Catholic Bishops Conference of Scotland and a number of evangelical Christian groups, argues that the current law enshrines a form of disability discrimination.

Also among the nine signatories is Peter Elliott, a businessman who founded the Down Syndrome Research Foundation UK, after the birth of his son, David, in 1985. The signatories say that while pregnancies can be terminated even up to 40 weeks on physical grounds in certain circumstances, the moment the child is born a “moral volte-face” is performed and the official approach is “full of compassion”.

“The recent Paralympics made this contradiction yet more glaring,” the letter says. “The athletes produced such astonishing examples of courage and triumphs over disability that we now have to rethink what we mean by ‘disabled’ and ‘able’.”

The 1967 abortion act, as it is currently applied, allows terminations up to 24 weeks if two doctors agree that the physical or mental health of a pregnant woman is in jeopardy. After that, however, abortion is possible in cases in which there is a “substantial risk” that the child will suffer from a “serious handicap”. It is also permitted in cases where the life of the mother is judged to be at risk from the continuation of the pregnancy.

The most recent figures available show that there were 146 abortions after the 24-week limit in 2011 in England and Wales out of a total of almost 190,000. But overall there were more than 500 abortions after screening for Down’s Syndrome. The campaigners argue that this amounts to a form of eugenics – the belief that a society can be “improved” through controlled breeding to increase the occurrences of desirable characteristics.

But supporters of abortion reacted with anger saying that the term – with its Nazi connotations – was an “insult” to women who had faced agonising choices.

“Eugenic abortion is bad medicine,” the letter states. “Killing people with disabilities, rather than striving to support and care for them, is contrary to the high principles of medicine.” They insist that the “positive and civilised” approach is exemplified by the work of baby hospices and greater research into fetal conditions rather than allowing terminations.

Prof Jack Scarisbrick, founder of the anti-abortion group Life, said that the group is hoping to mobilise pro-life MPs to bring forward a private members bill in the Commons to amend the act. A simple two-clause bill could make it illegal to terminate a pregnancy after screening for conditions such as Down’s syndrome, he said. “We are very hopeful that now we can make a move from a new direction, that rather than focusing on weeks and grounds for abortion we can tackle this particular aspect which we believe we can win.

“That would send a wonderful signal across the world.”

But Darinka Aleksic, campaigns coordinator at the Abortion Rights group, said: “Every year about one per cent of abortions are carried out on the grounds of fetal abnormality. “A diagnosis of this sort places families in an extremely painful and difficult situation, which requires privacy and support as they decide whether to continue with the pregnancy.

“We believe that the decision is a matter for the parents and their doctors alone. It should not be used as a political football. “Using terms like 'eugenic abortion' is an insult to people who are faced with this difficult choice. “Pro-choice supporters respect the rights of all women, including those with disabilities, to make their own reproductive choices. We believe women are best placed to make the right decision for themselves and their families."

A Department of Health spokesman said: "There are some circumstances where the law permits an abortion beyond 24 weeks - for example where there is a substantial risk of serious physical or mental handicap. "This decision is not taken lightly. Two doctors must agree on the seriousness of the handicap, while also taking into account the facts and circumstances of each individual case.

"The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists' guideline on abortion and foetal abnormality is clear that a woman needs sufficient information and time to help her understand the nature of the foetal abnormality and the probable outcome of the pregnancy so that she is able to make an informed decision about the options available to her."

Read more:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9551305/Call-for-ban-on-disability-abortions-after-Paralympics.html

http://davidalton.net/2012/09/19/new-calls-to-end-eugenic-abortions-in-the-week-a-judge-handed-down-a-sentence-of-8-years-for-the-death-of-an-unborn-child/

In the same week that a  Judge handed down a sentence of eight years to a woman who killed her unborn baby at 39 weeks gestation, calls have been made to end eugenic abortions in Britain. There is a link between these two stories because if the convicted mother had been able to claim that her baby had a disability – such as cleft palate or Down’s Syndrome – she would legally have been able to kill the baby right up and even during its birth.

There is also a link, as the article below points out, between our celebration of the achievements of people with disabilities and our discriminatory abortion laws which single out babies with disabilities for “special” treatment – that is, their death. This is cold blooded eugenics – for which no sentence of years in jail is handed down to those who legislated to make it legal or those who end these babies lives.

More British women aborting their children over financial worries, say UK doctors

BY HILARY WHITE, 

ROME CORRESPONDENT.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/more-british-women-aborting-their-children-over-financial-worries-say-uk-do

LONDON, August 14, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A survey by a market research firm has found that the global economic crisis may be influencing more British women to abort their children. The research by Insight Research Group found that about one-fifth of GPs are reporting more women requesting abortion for financial concerns.

Seventeen percent of GPs surveyed felt there was an increase in patients who “were specifically requesting terminations due to financial concerns.” Fifty-four percent of those GPs said they believed the biggest increase was among women ages 26-35. Another twenty-three percent believed the biggest increase was among single women with no previous children, while twenty-one percent said they believed it was among single women living with a “partner” with 1 to 3 previous children.

Thirty-four percent of all the GPs surveyed said that they are seeing women putting off having children “until their financial security improved.”

The findings echo those of Russian demographers who fear that recent gains in the country’s abysmally low fertility rate will be lost as more women turn to abortion to ease financial worries http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/international-life-and-family-roundup1 . 

Although pro-life observers say that they have no argument with the study’s findings, they question the reaction of GPs who endorse abortion for financial reasons.

Anthony Ozimic, the communications manager for the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, said that for authority figures like doctors to affirm with their actions that an abortion is an acceptable solution to financial anxiety sends a profoundly negative message to the culture at large.

“Whatever the merits or otherwise of this study, Western society will continue in its moral and demographic declines as long as the message goes out that women should abort their children or significantly postpone conceiving because of financial concerns,” Ozimic said.

The UK should follow the lead of other EU countries who are offering financial, tax and other incentives to increase the financial security of families and encourage couples to marry earlier and have children, Ozimic said. Instead, the myth is being promulgated that there is such a thing as a “perfect” economic condition in which to have children, when the reality is that such conditions will not exist while the European fertility rate continues to decline.

“While prudence in planning a family is necessary, optimal economic conditions for raising children are illusory.”

Ozimic confirmed that the law does not technically allow for abortions for financial or “social” reasons, but said that doctors have been granted enormous latitude in deciding what factors in a woman’s life constitute a threat to her “mental health”.

This is acknowledged even by the courts to be the case, despite voluminous research demonstrating that abortion has a serious, long-term negative impact on women’s mental health and increasing skepticism http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/new-study-says-pregnancy-is-safe-even-beneficial-for-women-recovering-from/  among the psychiatric community of the existence of any mental health benefits of abortion.

Abandon My Baby? No Way, Says Unwed Mum

Published by Free Malaysia Today, 20 August 2010. By Stephanie Sta Maria.

PETALING JAYA: September is set to be a bittersweet month for Dina*. The shy 20-year-old will be delivering her firstborn -- and then handing him over to his adoptive parents.

Dina's eyes turned misty as she contemplated this not-so-distant future. She is already besotted with her unborn son but raising him is out of the question for she is an unwed mother.

“I was raped by a family friend old enough to be my father,” she said softly. “When I found out I was pregnant, it was too late for an abortion. My father cried when I told him and it was a long time before my mother could look me in the eye.”

Despite offering emotional support, her parents struggled to conceal their pain and Dina eventually moved out. Her anxious search for refuge led her to OrphanCARE, a non-profit organisation that finds homes for orphans and abandoned babies.

The organisation works closely with the Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development and the Welfare Department and has found homes for 14 babies since its launch last April. Dina, however, is its first live-in unwed mother.

“Housing unwed mothers is not one of our services because of space and financial constraints,” explained its deputy president, Noraini Hashim (picture). “But we couldn't turn Dina away. Not when she wanted to take care of a baby that she could have easily abandoned.”

Noraini's words ring truer today than ever before.

Baby dumping, which has long been among the social ills in Malaysia, is finally having its turn in the spotlight and is dubbed the latest “phenomenon” to arrest the attention of politicians, social workers and the media.

Deep compassion

According to the Federal CID director commissioner Mohd Bakri Zinin, the number of cases has risen to 472 since 2005, which makes the probability of Dina's son being another statistic frighteningly high. Until you consider that Dina herself isn't interested in being a statistic.

“I used to curse my baby for ruining my life,” she admitted, placing a gentle hand on her rounded belly. “But abandoning him never crossed my mind. How can I when a part of me lives in him? I've grown to love him and I would keep him if I could give him the life that he deserves.”

But Dina is far from taking a holier-than-thou stance. She's fully aware that her situation would be very different had she been rejected by her family and OrphanCARE. And this has left her with a deep compassion for unwed mothers who abandoned their babies.

“They must have faced terrible circumstances to be driven to do that,” she emphatised. “No mother would carry her child for nine months and then willingly abandon it. These mothers would have had no other choice.”

Noraini agreed. In many situations, she said, that choice fell into the hands of the father or a male family member and was made easier when the new mothers were too exhausted or terrified to fight for their baby's life.

“In one case, the father snatched up the newborn, stuffed it in a plastic bag and threw it into a river,” she recalled. “It is the fastest route to getting rid of the stigma and responsibility. Having said that, we've also met many young fathers who accompany the mothers to hand their baby over to us. These are the people who give us hope.”

Baby hatch still unused

OrphanCARE also introduced the country's first baby hatch in May this year in a move to reduce the number of abandoned babies. The office is a house tucked in the corner of a quiet street in a residential area that shield unwed mothers and couples from curious eyes.

The hatch is a vault-like structure built into the house exterior. Inside is a makeshift cot, a night light, an air-conditioning unit and a CCTV which is trained only on the baby. When a baby is placed into the hatch and the door is shut, an alarm is triggered in the caretaker's room.

After checking the CCTV to ensure that it isn't a prank, the caretaker allows the parents time to leave the premises before collecting the baby from the hatch. The baby is then matched with one of the 300 couples who have registered with OrphanCARE to be adoptive parents.

The attraction of a baby hatch is the anonymity it guarantees but to Noraini's surprise, the babies continue to be brought in by their parents.

“Like Dina said, given a choice, these mothers don't want to abandon their babies,” Noraini said. “But they don't want to face being judged any further either. So we're glad that they view us as a neutral party to which they can entrust their baby's welfare.”

Dina can vouch for that. She has found a safe haven in OrphanCARE and implicitly trusts that it will fulfil her hopes for her son. When asked what hopes she harbours for herself, she hesitated and then replied that she simply wanted to move on.

“I will never forget my baby but he will belong to someone else. So I have to continue with life. I don't know if I will ever marry because I'm afraid of men now.”

“But if I do meet someone, I won't tell him about my past. Regardless of the circumstances, being an unwed mother is a stigma that can never be erased. The only solace I cling to is that I did the right thing for my son.”

*Name has been changed to protect identity.