Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds

In new comments about abortion, independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy says he would support creating a nationwide right to kill babies in abortions.

His comments come at a time when Donald Trump has released a statement saying he supports states protecting babies from abortions and has exceptions for rape and life of the mother.

“I would sign a federal law that guaranteed women have a right to choose. I think women should make the choice. I don’t think government should make the choice,” Robert F. Kennedy said.

Kennedy appeared on the KSRM radio show, where host Bob Bird asked whether he would “veto or sign a restoration of Roe versus Wade as federal statutory law.”

Kennedy confirmed he supports abortion without limits.

“Here’s what my position is, Bob, and I know that I’m different than you on this. I come from a family that was, went from pro-life to pro-choice,” he said. “And so I grew up with family members who I love, who I talk to, who I respect, who didn’t feel that the way about it is—I went back and forth throughout my life. I’ve been for the past fifteen years, I’ve been the premiere advocate in the country for medical freedom and for bodily autonomy. So I don’t believe that government or any government bureaucrat ought to be able to tell people what to do with their bodies,” he said.

Kennedy, nephew of President John F. Kennedy and son of the late Attorney General Robert Kennedy, previously confirmed on multiple occasions that he supports abortions up to birth. As such, his new statement is consistent with his long-held pro-abortion position.

Last year, Kennedy confused voters with conflicting statements about abortion, but ultimately confirmed he supports abortions up to birth with no limits.

“I believe a decision to abort a child should be up to the women during the first three months of life,” Kennedy said an in interview at an event in Iowa.

Asked whether he would sign a ban on abortions at 15 or 21 weeks, Kennedy said yes.

“Once a child is viable, outside the womb, I think then the state has an interest in protecting the child,” he continued, adding “I’m for medical freedom. Individuals are able to make their own choices.”

Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

That initial answer earned him praise from the pro-life group SBA List for at least being less radically pro-abortion than Joe Biden, who supports abortions up to birth without limits, calling it “a stark contrast to the Democratic Party’s radical stance of abortion on demand. … Kennedy is one of the few prominent Democrats aligned with the consensus of the people today. Every candidate should be asked, ‘Where do you draw the line?’”

But the Kennedy campaign very quickly corrected the record and confirmed Kennedy support abortions up o birth without limits.

“Mr. Kennedy misunderstood a question posed to him by an NBC reporter in a crowded, noisy exhibit hall at the Iowa State Fair,” a campaign representative said in an email to LifeNews.

“Mr. Kennedy’s position on abortion is that it is always the woman’s right to choose. He does not support legislation banning abortion,” the email added.

That statement is consistent with the position Kennedy has said previously during the campaign. In June 2022, Kennedy Jr. confirmed he supports killing unborn babies in abortions.

Responding to a voter’s question, Kennedy said he is “pro-choice” and supports “bodily autonomy,” WMUR 9 News reports.

“The only thing I can say to you on that issue is that I’m pro-choice,” Kennedy said when asked for a reason why pro-life voters should support him. “I don’t think there’s anybody in this country who’s worked harder for medical freedom, for bodily autonomy than me.”

His campaign made a similar comment to Newsweek in May.

Kennedy “believes strongly in the principle of bodily autonomy, whether the issue is abortion or medical mandates,” the spokesperson said. “He will keep government away from women’s childbearing choices. The moral issues are best left to the woman, her family and her religious community.”

Typically, this means a candidate supports laws that allow unborn babies to be aborted for any reason up to birth, without limits.

SBA Pro-Life’s Marjorie Dannenfelser says abortions up to birth is out of step with Americans.

“Seven in 10 Americans, including millions of rank-and-file Democrats, support limiting abortion to the first three months of pregnancy at most. A solid majority agrees Congress should act to protect babies when science shows they feel pain at 15 weeks. While pro-life advocates ultimately want every child protected under our laws, Kennedy is one of the few prominent Democrats aligned with the consensus of the people today. Every candidate should be asked, ‘Where do you draw the line?’

“Pro-life Americans are looking for a national defender of life who will boldly champion unborn children and women and work to gather support in Congress. Voters deserve clarity about where every candidate stands on the human rights issue of our time.”

Kennedy’s campaign website does not mention specific abortion policy, but it does attempt to take a more moderate approach to the issue. The website suggests “dead fetuses” are a tragedy and acknowledges that pro-lifers have a “legitimate moral position.” It also promises Kennedy will listen to pro-lifers’ concerns.

“Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has clear positions on most of today’s divisive trigger issues like abortion, guns, and immigration, but he knows that both sides have legitimate concerns and legitimate moral positions,” it states. “No one is deplorable.”

It continues: “Few relish the thought of dead fetuses, nor do they want to force women to have unwanted babies. … [Kennedy] will model careful listening, and create conditions where each group can hear the stories of the other. He will lead the way toward national reconciliation, respectful dialog, and willingness to change, to grow and to forgive.”

The post Robert F Kennedy Says He’d Create a Nationwide Right to Kill Babies in Abortions appeared first on LifeNews.com.

In a rare article, the usually pro-abortion Washington Post featured the story of a young woman whose failed, consecutive abortion attempts ended up leading to a story of birth, adoption and redemption.

The April 6 WaPo story, titled  “Her failed abortion attempts helped answer another woman’s prayers” is a long read about how two Texas women, 25-year-old Evelyn (whose last name was withheld for privacy) and Carolyn Whiteman, a 44-year-old, ended up connecting around Olivia,  a one-year old baby girl who Evelyn was not able to abort in part because of restrictive abortion laws.

Evelyn, a young woman of Native American and Black ancestry, and adoptee herself, found out in 2022 that she was pregnant after casual sex with a man she met via the internet.

Deciding to keep the secret away from her parents -both military veterans in their 70s living in San Antonio-, Evelyn found out at a San Antonio abortion facility that her pregnancy was a few days past the six weeks limit established by Texas laws.

She then decided to drive to Oklahoma as the second step in a series of failed abortion attempts that would lead her to Whiteman, an African American single woman and successful professional that was at that same time looking to adopt a baby.

Evelyn got an appointment at Tulsa Women’s Reproductive Services in Oklahoma, almost a month later.

The Post story tells that “the clinic’s doctor estimated that she was nine, possibly 10 weeks along and handed her a prescription for mifepristone… She should dissolve the pills under her tongue to start a medication abortion, according to the prescription she received from the clinic. She was told to take the remaining four pills, misoprostol, ‘orally’ at home within 48 hours.”

Two months after completing the painful process marred by  stomach cramps and blood clots, Evelyn found out that she was still pregnant.

LifeNews is on TruthSocial. Please follow us here.

“Desperate, Evelyn found a website, Aid Access, that shipped abortion medication across the country. After speaking with a doctor by phone and paying $150, she waited for pills that were being mailed from India,” the WaPo story says.

But the chemical abortifacient did not work, probably because Evelyn was past 10 weeks pregnant. She emailed the Indian company.  “In the email exchange,” says the story, “the company offered to send more medication to a pharmacy near Evelyn,” but she refused.

Past the halfway point in her pregnancy and approaching the third trimester, she found a clinic in Albuquerque (New Mexico) that offered second-trimester abortions. Evelyn connected with two abortion organizations that “covered the cost of her plane ticket, hotel, food and the $12,000 procedure.”

But she arrived at the abortion facility only to find out that she was “too far along, 32 weeks pregnant,” and the doctors at Southwestern Women’s Options “aren’t trained to perform abortions after 24 weeks,” explained the Post.

“She hadn’t seriously considered adoption until now, despite being adopted herself. But now that seemed to be the only option,” the Post also said.

After finally coming clean and receiving support from her parents, on Nov. 10, Evelyn gave birth to a healthy baby girl.

“It felt like whiplash,” the story continues. “She had tried for months not to have the child she was silently cradling. And she says she quickly discovered she was in love. She took selfie videos, with playful social media filters, holding her daughter. Her photo album quickly filled with videos of Evelyn bottle-feeding, learning to swaddle and admiring the baby’s fussy sounds.”

Meanwhile, “two hours east, in Houston, Carolyn Whiteman, the human resources executive for a chemical company, had been struggling with becoming a mother for years.”

When the two women finally met over a Zoom meeting arranged by the adoption company Carolyn had enrolled in, “they talked of spirituality, faith and the importance of family time,” the story goes.

The Post article, after giving details of the complex adoption process, describes at length the emotional process of Evelyn officially handing the baby to Whiteman.

Since then, the Post  explains, “the clinic in San Antonio she initially went to for an abortion closed, and the Oklahoma clinic that gave her medication abortion pills relocated to Illinois;” while Evelyn enrolled in community college, where she has been passing all her classes with straight A’s.

According to the post,  now she “goes to the gym four days per week, attends a midweek Bible study meeting on campus and is looking for a criminal justice internship.”

She has also visited her biological daughter for the first time and felt relieved at finding that little Olivia was happy and well taken care of.

After the visit, “on the car ride home, she received a text from Whiteman. It contained details about a garden brunch. Evelyn and her parents were invited to Olivia’s first birthday party the next month, where they would play Olivia Trivia. There was no doubt, Evelyn knew. She would be there,” the story ends.

LifeNews Note: Joshua Mercer writes for CatholicVote, where this column originally appeared.

The post This Baby Girl Survived Multiple Abortion Attempts, Now She Has a Wonderful Adoptive Family appeared first on LifeNews.com.

In June 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade and 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey decisions. The battle over abortion was returned to the people.

Since that 2022 decision, voters in California, Michigan, Vermont, and most recently Ohio, have amended their state constitutions making abortion a “fundamental right” in their states. On the other hand, in 2018, voters in Alabama, Louisiana, and West Virginia also amended their constitutions in favor of protecting unborn life. The people of Alabama guaranteed a right to life for the unborn and both the people of Louisiana and West Virginia declared there was no right to abortion in their states.

Now, citizens and state legislators in other states are turning to their own state constitutions to decide the issue. In 2024, at least 13 states have citizen-led or legislative efforts underway to amend their state constitutions regarding abortion. These ballot initiatives vary in scope and intent. Eleven states, which include Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Maine, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, and South Dakota, have ballot initiatives that are attempting to codify abortion access or enshrine abortion as a state constitutional right.

Currently, only in Maryland is there an initiative that has secured a place on the ballot. In 2023, Maryland lawmakers sponsored a proposed state constitutional amendment and voted to put it on the 2024 ballot. If approved by voters, the amendment would grant a “fundamental right to reproductive freedom” and enshrine the right to abortion in the state. Maryland already allows abortion up to viability.

Another initiative close to getting on the ballot is in Florida. On April 1, 2024, the Florida Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that a deceptive proposal to codify unrestricted abortion in the state constitution could go before voters this November. This ballot initiative is a citizen-led effort which began as a signature petition, which still requires the signatures to be verified by the state’s certifying authority. While not officially on the ballot yet, the initiative aims to establish a constitutional right to abortion before fetal viability in Florida and dictate that no law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion.

LifeNews is on TruthSocial. Please follow us here.

In their dissents, three Florida Supreme Court justices correctly argued that the proposed amendment “misleads” voters and “fails” to convey the far-reaching legal consequences if voted into law. The justice’s stated the amendment misleads voters by “ending (as opposed to ‘limiting’) legislative and executive action on abortion;” the “ambiguous” terms have no shared meaning setting the stage for protracted litigation; and ignores personhood and poses a “devastating infringement” on a person’s right to live. If the proposed amendment gets on the ballot, it will require a supermajority of 60 percent voting “yes” to amend the state constitution.

Initiatives in only four states, which include Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, and Pennsylvania, are attempting to guarantee the right to life for unborn babies or declare no right to abortion. Notably, both Colorado and Nebraska have two separate and opposing efforts on abortion. In Nebraska, one amendment would provide a “fundamental right to abortion without interference from the state” until fetal viability while the other would protect unborn children from abortion after the first trimester. In Colorado, the “Equal Protection of Every Living Child” amendment would define a “living human child” as a human being beginning at the moment of conception and prohibit the intentional harm of that child in the womb, while a Right to Abortion initiative would codify abortion rights and health insurance coverage for abortion. Both Iowa and Pennsylvania initiatives would declare their state constitutions do not provide a right to abortion or a right to public funding for abortion.

Out of the 13 states, nine states involve citizen-led efforts that still require gathering or certifying enough signatures before getting on the ballot. Each of these initiatives have varying deadlines ranging between May to August 2024.

For the remaining four states, Maryland already has abortion on the ballot while Iowa, Maine, and Pennsylvania have initiatives that are sponsored by the legislatures which still need to hold a vote. These amendments face significant hurdles. For instance, both Iowa and Pennsylvania initiatives need to pass in both the House and the Senate in two successive legislative sessions before being placed on the ballot for voters. Both initiatives passed in the 2021-2022 sessions and would need to pass again this year to get on the ballot. In Maine, a proposed amendment to enshrine a constitutional right to “personal reproductive autonomy” needs a two-thirds majority vote in the legislature to place it on the ballot.

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Staver stated, “The right to kill a child should never be up to popular vote. The right to life is an inalienable right that come from God, not government. All human life is sacred. Human life begins at the moment of fertilization.”

For more information about the 13 states with proposed constitutional amendments regarding abortion, visit Liberty Counsel’s website here.

The post 11 States May Vote on Killing Babies in Abortions Up to Birth, We Have to Stop Them appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Gordon Friesen
Through the years Alex Schadenberg has written many articles (and hosted many others) on the subject of euthanasia in the British cultural diaspora that are published on the EPC blog. By that term, I mean, above all, those countries such as Canada, Australia, and New Zealand whose populations are (or at least recently were) of majority British stock. Most lately Alex has written pieces on the Channel Islands, Scotland, and the UK itself.

Unfortunately this very significant cultural and political group appears to have fully embraced the notion of euthanasia. And because all of its members have a largely common social structure, they appear to be on track to do so in one particular fashion, for which Canada most unhappily provides us with the template.

One final example, Ireland, is found at the heart of British history, being itself one of the "British Isles", but having resolutely rejected British Imperialism all the way back to William the Conqueror! In recent memory, the Irish have literally fought their way out of the Empire, slammed the door on the Commonwealth.

Unfortunately, however, that independent streak is not reflected in their evolving policy on euthanasia.

Over the last half year, the Irish Houses of Parliament (The Oireachtas), have studied euthanasia in a Joint Committee on Assisted Dying. Readers of this blog will be familiar with the names Leonie Herx, Trudo Lemmens, and Heidi Janz, all of whom spoke before the Committee (October 17, 2023: Assisted dying in Canada), and also Mark Komrad (October 3, 2023: Assisted dying in the United States). I personally submitted a pamphlet-length criticism of euthanasia but sadly, these efforts have proved fruitless, as we may plainly see in the recently released Final Report of that body (March 2024).

Conclusions of the Irish Joint Committee on Assisted Dying

In all probability the Irish will soon authorize euthanasia for people "diagnosed with a disease, illness or medical condition... causing suffering to the person that cannot be relieved in a manner that the person finds tolerable".

There are, of course, other requirements, such as an expected death within six months (or 12 for certain conditions); of full mental capacity (including at the time of euthanasia); and of major age. However, as experience has clearly demonstrated in Canada, there can be no logical basis for confidence in any such secondary requirements:

As I have noted in previous articles, it is these two elements (true medical euthanasia employed as a "cure" or "treatment" for suffering) and euthanasia provided as a publicly guaranteed entitlement (rather than a simple liberty), which explain the amazing ten times greater frequency which separates Canada from Oregon-style assisted suicide regimes. And it is therefore the Canadian group to which Ireland will apparently belong.

I must in fairness mention a number of well-intentioned safeguards and social justice measures included by the Irish legislators in their recommendations. These include: ratification of the "Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities" (UNCRPD); extensive capacity testing; measures to avoid coercion (without, however, recognizing the inevitably coercive effect of the entire projected regime); strict oversight; clinical separation of Palliative Care from assisted death; administrative separation of Palliative Care budgets; increased support of Palliative Care; information and counselling on alternatives to euthanasia, etc., etc....

However, pious assertions regarding care of the "least fortunate" and the "most vulnerable" can do little to change actual budgetary realities. And procedural safeguards (like the three member physician committees) tend to disappear like mist on a summer morning. Or to use a time-honoured Irish colloquialism: They are not worth a Tinker's damn!

Our Irish friends should, therefore, have no illusions: 

Even Republican stalwarts like current Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell are starting to notice that something is shifting in the party. While McConnell announced recently that he would step down as Republican leader in the US Senate, in an interview last week he was adamant that he would continue to serve out his term in the Senate with one purpose in mind: “fighting back against the isolationist movement in my own party.”

He sounds worried.

What McConnell deems to be “isolationism” had for much of our history been called America’s traditional foreign policy. There have been  major exceptions, but until the emergence of the neoconservatives starting in the late 1970s we largely adhered to the words of John Quincy Adams that America, “goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.”

Why is that? The idea had always been that we would have more influence on freedom worldwide by concentrating on demonstrating the benefits of a free-market economy and protection of our Constitutional liberties at home. The US would lead the world by example rather than leading at the barrel of a gun.

When we strayed from that idea we got disasters like Vietnam.

But then in the 1980s, the neoconservatives seized control of the foreign policy of the Republican Party (and eventually much of the Democratic Party). They were determined to remake the world in their image through the use of force.

The military-industrial complex and all the special interests loved this takeover because it meant a huge transfer of wealth from the middle class to them, the moneyed class. The American people at first accepted the hollow promises of the interventionist neocons, believing as they were told that it was the “patriotic” thing to do.

What we are now seeing – and it is evident in the polls as well as in speeches of our politicians – is a shift away from interventionism. The mood has changed, and more Americans are tired of being told they must sacrifice to save the rest of the world from itself.

Recently Col. Douglas Macgregor posted on Twitter, “We have lost $14 TRILLION over the last 20 year on dumb interventions in other countries. What good has it done?”

Many Republicans are asking that same question. What have we gotten for the first $100 billion to Ukraine? A victory for “freedom” like we were promised? No. We got rampaging inflation, decreasing standard of living, and demands for another $100 billion!

What did we get for the trillions we spent in the 20-year war in Afghanistan? Peace and democracy in the region? Hardly. As it’s often said, we spent 20 years in Afghanistan replacing the Taliban with the Taliban. All the money wasted, all the lives destroyed, all the blood spilled over 20 years and the interventionists achieved nothing. Worse than nothing.

Speaker Mike Johnson is facing serious pressure from House Republicans over his desire to keep spending on overseas intervention. That’s one reason the “national security supplemental” foreign aid bill has not been brought to the Floor. All of a sudden interventionism is a loser with more of the American people, and politicians are paying attention.

McConnell may think that he can stem the tide by preaching more intervention, but not even the Senate Republican leader can stop an idea whose time has come.

In a brand-new video message released today, Donald Trump slammed Joe Biden for supporting abortions up to birth and celebrated overturning Roe v. Wade – the radical decision that allowed abortions up to birth across America.

In a four-minute long video posted on Truth Social, trump said he was “proudly the person responsible for the end of Roe v Wade,” the 1973 landmark ruling that had enshrined unlimited abortion.

“Many people have asked me what my position is on abortion and abortion rights, especially since I was proudly the person responsible for something that all legal scholars both sides wanted and in fact demanded be ended: Roe vs Wade. They wanted it ended,” he said.

He thanked the six conservative Supreme Court justices – three of whom he appointed – for “having the courage for this long-fought battle to end”.

“This 50-year battle over Roe v Wade took it out of the federal hands and brought it into the hearts, mind and votes of the people in each state – it’s really something,” he said.

Trump accurately condemned Democrats who support abortions up to birth and even infanticide.

SUPPORT LIFENEWS! If you want to help fight abortion, please donate to LifeNews.com!

“That’s exactly what it is. The baby is born, the baby is executed after birth,” he claimed.

Trump went on to say that he believes abortion laws should be decided by individual states – hinting that he would not implement a federal abortion ban should he defeat Biden in November.

“Many states will be different, many will have a different number of weeks or some will have more conservative than others and that’s what they will be. At the end of the day, this is all about the will of the people,” he said.

Trump praised Alabama’s legislature for passing legislation to preserve the availability of IVF in the state – coming after the state’s Supreme Court ruled that fertility clinics can be held accountable for kill9ing human embryos.

“The Republican party will always support the creation of strong, thriving and healthy American families. We want to make it easier for mothers and families to have babies – not harder,” he said.

“That includes supporting the availability of fertility treatment like IVF in every state in America. Like the overwhelming majority of Americans including the vast majority of Republicans, conservatives, Christians and pro-life Americans, I strongly support the availability of IVF for couples who are trying to have a precious baby – what could be more beautiful or better than that.”

Here is a transcript of the full statement:

The post Donald Trump Celebrates Overturning Roe, Slams Democrats for Supporting Abortions Up to Birth appeared first on LifeNews.com.

The Republican presidential candidate has avoided making a federal policy pledge on the contentious issue

Individual US states should decide how abortions are regulated, rather than the federal government, former President Donald Trump has declared in a video statement.

Reproductive rights and restrictions on the termination of pregnancies were propelled to the forefront of US politics following the Supreme Court’s decision in 2022 to overturn the landmark 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling.

In what has been described as his most detailed statement on the issue so far, Trump released a roughly four-minute video on his Truth Social platform on Monday, reiterating that the Supreme Court decision was made possible by conservative judges he had nominated during his presidency.

He insisted, however, that he wants each state to make its own decision on abortion, contrary to claims by critics that a new Trump presidency would result in a highly restrictive nationwide federal ban.

“My view is now that we have abortion where everyone wanted it from a legal standpoint. The states will determine by vote or legislation, or perhaps both,” Trump said, adding that whatever they decide “must be… the law of the state.”

“Many states will be different. Many will have a different number of weeks, or some will have more conservative than others, and that’s what they will be,” the former leader continued. “You must follow your heart, or in many cases your religion or your faith.”

The presumptive Republican nominee for this year’s presidential election expressed his party’s backing for a ‘pro-life’ stance, including the availability of in vitro fertilization treatment. Trump added that he is “strongly in favor” of exceptions that allow abortion in cases of rape or incest, or when the mother’s life is at risk.

Critics have accused Trump of being evasive on the issue. Responding to the video, Ammar Moussa, the spokesperson for President Joe Biden’s reelection campaign, claimed that Trump “is endorsing every single abortion ban in the states, including abortion bans with no exceptions. And he’s bragging about his role in creating this hellscape.”

READ MORE: France enshrines abortion in its constitution

Mike Pence, who served as vice president under Trump, has publicly backed some of the most radical policies limiting abortions. Before ending his bid for the GOP nomination, Pence said last year that he would impose a federal ban for all pregnancies after six weeks.

Berlin’s military support enables acts of genocide in Gaza, according to the Central American country

Nicaragua called on the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Monday to halt Germany from providing military aid to Israel, arguing that Berlin’s support enables acts of genocide and breaches of international humanitarian law in Gaza.

Nicaragua’s Ambassador to the Netherlands, Carlos Jose Arguello Gomez, told the 16-judge panel that Berlin was ignoring its obligations under international law by continuing to provide military assistance to Israel.

“There can be no question that Germany (...) was well aware, and is well aware, of at least the serious risk of genocide being committed,” in Gaza, Arguello Gomez stated, urging that this situation “has got to stop.”

The German government has rejected Managua’s allegations. Tania von Uslar-Gleichen, a legal adviser for the German Foreign Ministry, called Nicaragua’s case “grossly biased” and denied that Berlin is breaching international law.

“Germany does not, and never did, violate the Genocide Convention nor international humanitarian law, neither directly nor indirectly,” she told journalists at the hearing.

Berlin will present its arguments in court on Tuesday.

The case brought by Nicaragua comes at a time of growing calls worldwide to stop the supply of arms to Israel. Germany is the second-largest military exporter to the Middle Eastern country, after the US.

On Friday, the UN’s top human rights body called on countries to stop selling or shipping weapons to Israel. The US and Germany opposed the resolution.

In January, the ICJ imposed provisional measures ordering Israel to do all it can to prevent death, destruction and acts of genocide in Gaza. The orders came through a case filed by South Africa accusing Israel of breaching the 1948 Genocide Convention. The court has not ruled on the merit of the claims, and declined to order Israel to halt its military operations.

Last week, the ICJ ordered Israel to take measures to improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza, including opening more land crossings to allow food, water, fuel and other supplies into the war-ravaged enclave.

Israel declared war on Hamas after the Palestinian militant group carried out a surprise attack on the country last October, killing around 1,100 people and taking more than 200 hostages. More than 30,000 Palestinians have since been killed during Israel’s operations in Gaza, according to local authorities.

A leading pro-life group says Donald Trump’s statement on abortion is a “step in the right direction.”

On Monday, Trump published a video on Truth Social where he stated that he believed abortion laws should be made by states, which could mean he would not sign any abortion limits as president and would allow states that have legalized abortions up to birth to continue doing so.

“My view is…the states will determine by legislation or vote or perhaps both, and whatever they decide must be the law of the land. In this case, the law of the state. Many states will be different, many will have a different number of weeks or some will have more conservative than others, and that’s what they will be. At the end of the day, this is all about the will of the people,” Trump said in the statement. “You must follow your heart or, in may cases, your religion or your faith. Do what’s right for your family and do what’s right for yourself…do what’s right for our country.”

“Like Ronald Reagan, I am strongly in favor of exceptions for rape, incest and life of a mother,” the presumptive GOP presidential candidate said.

Students for Life Action President Kristan Hawkins told LifeNews.com that she appreciated Trump’s comments supporting life.

Hawkins observed: “Unlike President Biden, President Trump begins his remarks on abortion celebrating ‘the ultimate joy in life’ – children and family. That kind of love and support for the bedrock of society, the family, will be a welcome change in the White House.”

But Hawkins said Trump needs to meet with pro-life leaders to develop a better understanding of pro-life issues.

“We clearly have some work to do to educate the Trump Administration to come on the many ways that abortion has been made federal. But with the mutual goals of supporting families and welcoming young children, we can work together to restore the culture of life stripped away by the national Democratic Party and their leadership,” she said.

Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

“I’m pleased to see that President Trump listened to pro-lifers and isn’t going to allow a divisive late-term limit that some GOP insiders were been pushing, which would have embraced more than 9 in 10 abortions, to be a distraction from Joe Biden’s abortion extremism,” Hawkins added. “However, to be clear, the Pro-Life Movement is united that abortion is a federal issue, and we won’t stop working until every child, in every state, is protected in life by law and service. Your state lines should never mean the beginning or end of your human rights.”

She continued: “We clearly have some work to do to educate the GOP on the lawlessness of a predatory IVF industry, whose own sloppiness has caused the painful headlines we all have seen. It’s an industry in need of regulation and change, even as we understand the desire and passion for a family. We want to compassionately embrace families who want children as well as the children turned into a disposable commodity by predatory and negligent businesses. But Pro-Life Generation can work with an administration preparing to welcome the next generation, rather than fast-tracking their deaths by abortion.”

 “We hope that President Trump’s agenda will end the anti-baby, anti-family bias of President Biden’s Administration. Our SFLA-You Gov poll shows less than one in ten Youth Voters supports the Democratic Party Abortion Position: Abortion without limits, Paid for by taxpayers, Without conscience protections for medical professionals, or Respect for the rights of states to enact laws. Add in the Democratic Party’s efforts to block medical care to infants born during botched abortions, and infanticide, and that’s a horrific agenda. 

“Fighting against that kind of abortion extremism is a reason to vote for Donald Trump.”

Trump’s position follows what the Supreme Court has ruled ine one sense but not in another. The nation’s highest court determined that states do have the right to protect babies from abortions. But it left the decisions to “elected representatives” not just to the states. That includes Congress passing laws like the partial-birth abortion ban that protect babies from abortions.

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. We now overrule those decisions and return that authority to the people and their elected representatives,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority.

“The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision, including the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey now chiefly rely—the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion. “That provision has been held to guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such right must be ‘deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition’ and ‘implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.’”

“Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences,” Alito wrote. “And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division.”

Trump also came out in support of IVF, in-vitro fertilization and the artificial creation of human beings — a process which sometimes involves the destruction of human embryos, unique human beings after conception.

“We want to make it easier for mothers and families to have babies, not harder. That includes supporting the availability of fertility treatments like IVF in every state in America.”

Although the statement is disappointing for pro-life Americans who understand babies should not be killed in abortions, when it comes to the presidential election, Americans have a clear choice between the most pro-abortion president in history and the president who compiled the most pro-life record in history.

With Joe Biden and Donald Trump, American will choose between a president who promotes abortions up to birth and one who slams late-term abortions.

In recent comments, Cardinal Gerhard Müller, who previously lead the Vatican’s highest doctrine office, called abortion “infanticide” and saying those politicians who actively support abortion like Biden should be “excommunicated.”

And he called on Americans to reject Joe Biden’s “murderous” abortion agenda.

“The word ‘abortion’ is too much a soft word. The reality is killing, murder of a living person,” said Gerhard Cardinal Müller. “There’s no right to kill another person. It’s absolutely against the Fifth Commandment.”

“They cannot, on the one hand, protest against the killing of innocent people in Ukraine, while on the other hand allow the killing of their own children,” he added.

Biden has a long pro-abortion record and his FY 2025 budget proposal once again calls for eliminating the Hyde Amendment, which has protected unborn babies and their mothers for over 40 years by ensuring that federal tax dollars don’t fund elective abortion. It also calls for eliminating the Dornan Amendment (“D.C. Hyde”).

Multiple post-Dobbs polls show that at least seven in 10 Americans support significant limits on abortion. A clear majority of Americans oppose taxpayer-funded abortion on demand domestically, and more than two thirds oppose using tax dollars to promote abortion overseas.

SBA Pro-Life America is tracking the pro-abortion extremism of the Biden-Harris administration at sbaprolife.org/biden-harris.

The post Pro-Life Group Calls Donald Trump’s Abortion Statement a “Step in the Right Direction” appeared first on LifeNews.com.

There’s so much beauty and history in the Catholic Church!

March 25 is the Feast of the Annunciation. (However, in 2024, the Church moved the feast to April 8 since the March date fell during Holy Week.) The Catholic Church celebrates Mary’s “yes” to the Archangel Gabriel after he asked her to be the Mother of Jesus.

This feast also takes place nine months before Christmas Day.

According to tradition, the Basilica of the Annunciation in Nazareth, Israel, was established at the very site of the angel Gabriel’s appearance to Mary. It is also believed to be Mary’s childhood home.

The basilica contains two levels. Nazareth’s Catholic parish community uses the top level. The bottom level consists of a cave and grotto where it is believed Mary once lived and said “yes” to the angel Gabriel.

It is also the largest Christian Church in the Middle East.

While the large basilica was constructed in 1969, it is said an original shrine consisting of an altar and a cave was built in the mid-fourth century.

Here’s a photo of the location in the Basilica where Gabriel appeared to Mary:

This 18th-century altar is located on the bottom level of the Basilica of the Annunciation. Tradition holds that it contains the remains of Mary’s childhood home and is the location where the annunciation took place.

The altar’s Latin inscription reads, “Verbum Caro Hic Factum Est,” which means, “here the word was made flesh (Jn. 1:14).”  The stairs behind the altar lead to “Mary’s kitchen” and a yard exit.

The pillar to the right of the altar, most likely built around the fourth century, represents the location where the angel Gabriel appeared to Mary.

Here are some additional photos of the cave and grotto, or the lower level of the basilica:

Here are some photos of the basilica’s upper level:

This 170-ft cupola represents a lily! ☝️

There are also many Marian mosaics throughout the inside and outside of the basilica:

Here are some more beautiful exterior photos of this incredible church:

Here’s another statue of the young Mary:

What do you think of the basilica?

24/7 Media and No Valid Information

Paul Craig Roberts

The English language Russian media, such as RT, is better at news reporting than the Western media, but Russian media also supports official narratives, such as the claim that 
Evgeny Prigozhin, leader of the Wagner Group staged a mutiny against Putin. If the Wagner Group had attempted a coup, it probably would have succeeded. https://www.rt.com/russia/595507-ex-wagner-fighters-join-chechen-unit/

What actually happened is that a small contingent from the group held a march on Moscow to protest the senseless casualties of fighting a war with both hands tied. Prigozhin wanted to get the war with Ukraine over with, not drag it on endlessly and needlessly.

A protest is not a mutiny. The Russian military, jealous of the Wagner Group wanted Prigozhin’s warriors brought under their control. They used the protest to alarm Putin about a mutiny. Putin, who is unable to admit that his “limited military operation” is a blunder, came down hard on Prigozhin. The military got what they wanted. Prigozhin died in a mysterious plane crash, and the Wagner Group was dispersed among Russian military units, thus breaking up the best fighting force Russia had.

I have also noticed that RT and Sputnik support US official narratives, such as the “Jan 6 Insurrection.” The explanation for this could be self-censorship by the English language Russian media so that they are not banned from the US.

If you think about it, the question arises: Do people anywhere in the Western world have a factual understanding of any important event? The assassination of President John F. Kennedy? The Gulf of Tonkin? The 1964 Civil Rights Act? The Soviet collapse? 9/11? Saddam Hussein’s “weapons of mass destruction”? The overthrow and murder of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi? The Maidan Revolution? The Ukrainian-Russian conflict? The Israeli genocide of Palestine? The 2020 US presidential election? The charges against Trump?

For truth to prevail, honest journalism is required, but as Martin Gurri explained in The City Journal, what the West has is “post-journalism” which consists of advocacy of agendas and protection of the narratives that support those agendas. Facts are no longer part of the picture. The Woke turn to the NY Times, CNN, and NPR to slate their emotions with their hate fix for the day.

Consequently, no one knows what is really happening, not even those who know that something is wrong.