Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds

This Thursday, 11th April, the European Parliament is due to vote on a resolution “on the inclusion of the right to abortion in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights”.* This is the last item on the voting session of this Brussels mini-plenary and was tabled as a joint resolution by MEPs from the groups Renew Europe, S&D, GUE/NGL, and the Greens/EFA.

Pro Life Campaign spokesperson Eilís Mulroy said:

“With an increasingly competitive European Parliament election being held in Ireland on 7th June, thousands of voters in Ireland will want to know where our EU representatives stand on whether a so-called ‘right’ to abortion should be placed in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Any Irish MEPs voting in favour of this extreme measure will need to justify it to their constituents.

REACH PRO-LIFE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE! Advertise with LifeNews to reach hundreds of thousands of pro-life readers every week. Contact us today.

“If adopted, this motion would misconstrue a deeply contentious issue, the legal regulation of the ending of unborn human life, as a ‘right’. This places undue pressure on member states such as Poland, Malta and Slovakia. It would generate significant opposition from millions of EU citizens who fundamentally reject the false premise that abortion should be considered a ‘fundamental right’.

“All candidates seeking election to the European Parliament across Ireland’s three constituencies should unambiguously explain where they stand on this issue and how they will or would vote on it. The Pro Life Campaign will consider the voting record and public statements of candidates a matter of critical importance as we seek to inform pro-life voters ahead of the European elections on 7th June.”

The post Pro-Life Group Calls on EU to Oppose Making Abortion a Constitutional Right appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Former child star Dakota Fanning has her eyes set on the most important role of her life: becoming a mom.

“Having kids is probably more important to me than anything, even being an actor,” Fanning reflected in an interview with Porter. “If somebody said I had to choose, I would choose having kids. I’m one of those people who has always felt that pull.”

Please follow LifeNews.com on Gab for the latest pro-life news and info, free from social media censorship.

Fanning said although she doesn’t have children yet, she’s looking forward to the different opportunities in her life that are yet to come and has set up her life and career to allow a path to motherhood.

“I don’t know how I’ll feel when that time in my life comes – and how much I’ll want to work. But, because I don’t have that at the moment, I’m trying to take advantage of the adventures now,” she added.

“I’m trying to push myself to keep saying yes to things that make me uncomfortable, to keep going to places for long periods of time that maybe I’m scared to do because — God willing — one day, it won’t be as easy.”

LifeNews Note: Kim Schwartz is the communications director for Texas Right to Life.

The post Dakota Fanning Says Having Kids Is ‘More Important’ Than Acting Career: ‘Always Felt That Pull’ appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Julian Assange is very near the end of his appeal process in his effort to prevent his extradition from Great Britain to the United States, where he is set to be prosecuted for making public US government secrets — practicing journalism.

On Wednesday, US President Joe Biden made a comment that suggests there may be hope that US charges against the WikiLeaks founder will be dropped, meaning Assange can go free after years of horrid confinement in Britain. Asked about a request from the government of Australia — the country of Assange’s citizenship — that the US end its effort to prosecute Assange, Sky News reports that Biden answered, “We’re considering it.”

Biden’s answer could be virtually meaningless, as any request from another nation can be “considered” even if it is known from the beginning that it will have no influence. Yet, by not outright shutting down the possibility that the US would let Assange escape US prosecution, Biden’s comment offers a glimmer of hope for Assange.

We’ve all wondered if the fix is already in. Given the irregularities of the last election, and the manner in which the whole of the U.S. establishment rallied around one side, maybe a Biden victory in November is a foregone conclusion.

I’m guilty of believing this. I’ve doubted every prediction that Donald Trump or RFK, Jr. can win. This is not because they won’t get votes. It’s because those votes might not matter enough.

The power of haters is awesome and ubiquitous. The whole of legacy media, government, corporate tech, pharma, and both the administrative state and the deep state are dedicated to keeping them and their supporters from power.

We don’t even know if elections really work anymore. It’s entirely possible, in this view, that millions will slog to the polls in November and do their duty in what will only end up as theater. The regime controls the ballots, surely, and nothing can overcome that. A second Biden term, the most unpopular president in my lifetime, is inevitable, in this view. The system is too broken to generate any other outcome.

Admit it: you have been tempted by this outlook too.

Well, I’m here to bring you some good news. The deep state has blinked. I will present evidence to you that the bad guys are actually preparing for a full-blown assault on administrative state hegemony. They are working to protect themselves against a victory by someone other than Joe Biden.

Will it work? I don’t know but what’s super critical is that they are preparing. If it were not possible to win, they wouldn’t bother. In other words, this is very good news!

The evidence comes from a largely unnoticed press release from the Office of Personnel Management. The legacy media did not report on this at all.

It reads as follows:

“The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) today announced a final rule that clarifies and reinforces long-standing protections and merit system principles for career civil servants,” says the press release.

It goes on to explain that this rule change makes it much more difficult or even impossible for any new president to reclassify “civil servants” as being under the control of the president. Instead, their jobs are permanent and thus protected against any efforts by a future president to reclassify anyone working for the federal government. None can be fired.

In particular, the press release explains, this is designed to thwart another attempt to change their employment status, as happened in November 2020.

“In the first week of the Biden-Harris Administration, President Biden revoked an Executive Order issued by the previous Administration that risked altering our country’s long-standing merit-based civil service system, by creating a new excepted service schedule, known as ‘Schedule F,’ and directing agencies to move potentially large swathes of career employees into this new excepted service status. This attempt would have stripped career civil servants of their civil service protections that ensure that decisions to hire and fire are based on merit, not political considerations.”

The “previous administration” means of course the Trump White House, which issued the greatest executive order in a hundred years.

After four years of being subverted and thwarted by the civil service bureaucracy, the White House finally figured out the core problem. There are more than 2 million permanent bureaucrats, ensconced in 430 agencies, who imagine themselves to live outside the democratic system and the U.S. Constitution itself. They believe they are the state and the elected leaders are mere decoration.

Trump’s executive order insisted that every agency do an internal audit and ferret out any employee who has something to do with making or interpreting policy; that is, anyone whose work impacts on whether the president actually has control of the executive department. All those employees would be reclassified as Schedule F, meaning that they could be replaced if need be.

That’s it. That’s the whole order. Maybe it doesn’t seem like much but it was actually brilliant. The Trump administration is the first to discover the great secret of American public life, which is that the administrative state has taken on a life of its own. After years of trying, the Trump White House finally happened upon a key lever to gain back control for the people. It’s as simple as that.

The Washington, D.C. political press freaked out. It was as if a president had found the engine room and the one switch that controls the whole thing. That was never supposed to happen. This produced mayhem inside the bureaucracy, and a doubling and tripling down on the conviction that he could never win a second term, lest this order be carried out.

That’s why one of the very first actions of the Biden administration was to repeal this executive order. That action made it very clear that Biden’s loyalties were with the deep state first and foremost. He would protect their jobs and power above all else. In fact, the OPM press release brags about this.

At issue here is a phrase from the initial Trump order. Any employee would be reclassified who deals with “confidential, policy determining, policymaking, or policy-advocating.” Notice this word confidential. This would apply to the whole of the intelligence community, perhaps. So wait, are we saying that the president should be in charge of the CIA, FBI, NSA, NSC, and the entire security apparatus, even to the point that he could fire anyone? Maybe so!

Such a situation would be intolerable to the bad guys. From their point of view, this would fundamentally upend the functioning of government in America.

Let’s face it. If the OPM and the whole of the bureaucracy believed there was no threat from Donald Trump or RFK, Jr., such a rule change would not be necessary. They believe it is necessary, which implies that the civil service thinks that the rising populist movement is a genuine threat that could succeed in taking back the country. Otherwise, they wouldn’t bother.

What is the OPM? It was founded out of the Pendleton Act of 1883, which started the permanent bureaucracy in the United States. With it came the Civil Service Commission, the first name of what later was called the OPM.

Until that time, and under the Constitution, the U.S. president had full control of the bureaucracy. The new president would typically replace a vast number of bureaucrats with loyalists. This was denounced as the “spoils system” but it could also be called simple democracy in which the people rule themselves through their elected representatives.

The permanent class of rules grew through wars and crises over a hundred years to become the government that cares not a whit for who is technically elected or otherwise appointed as agency heads. As a matter of habit, they have come to ignore all the comings and goings of the people elected by the population. Elections are just a distraction to them.

The essential point: Donald Trump and RFK, Jr. represent a genuine threat to the gang that has subverted and nearly wrecked this country. Now we know that this threat is real, else we would not see these efforts to entrench the bad guys and protect them against all conceivable threats.

As this proves again, the main struggle alive in this country and all over the world is the one between the people and the deep state consisting of a vast network of elites in government, media, the corporate world, banking and finance, private foundations, and global bureaucracies, all working for their own interests at the expense of everyone else.

It’s a battle for control, and it is the underlying dynamic that shapes our lives right now.

The bad guys are scared. Now we know this for sure, or they would not be trying to pre-rig the system against fundamental change. The elites believe based on long experience that they can always outwit the rest of the population. We shall see.

It’s going to be brutal before and after the election. There will be one or several October surprises. If Donald Trump wins, the onset of Winter will kick off propaganda like you have never seen. As the inauguration approaches, absolute hysteria will dawn. The COVID racket will seem like child’s play. Every day and every hour after will consist of wild attempts to stop the administration from functioning. What a time to be alive.

Reprinted with author’s permission from The Epoch Times.

On Tuesday, the Arizona Supreme Court put back in place a 160-year-old ban on abortion, The Wall Street Journal reported. “Abortion in the state has been allowed through 15 weeks of pregnancy under a law that the GOP-controlled Arizona Legislature passed in 2022, shortly before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Abortion opponents and some Republican lawmakers argued that the recent law didn’t override one dating back to 1864 — before Arizona was a state — that banned abortion throughout pregnancy except in lifesaving situations.”

The ruling “agreed that the 19th century law still takes precedence,” WSJ added, but the “court delayed implementation of the ban for at least two weeks to allow for additional legal arguments.” In comments to The Washington Stand, Cathi Herrod, president of the Center for Arizona Policy, clarified, “The focus for [this decision] is that the Arizona Supreme Court did what justices are supposed to do: they upheld the rule of law. They did not make policy.”

She continued, “Arizona law clearly stated that if Roe v. Wade was overturned, our pre-Roe law would go back into effect. So, today’s decision was a statutory construction. It was not a constitutional one, and it was not a policy decision. There’s a lot of misinformation out there, so it’s very important to emphasize that this … is how we want judges to rule.”

Herrod went on to share how a proposed amendment called the Arizona Right to Abortion Initiative could nullify the court decision. “That amendment does not reflect Arizona values or where Arizonans are on the issue of abortion,” she contended. The amendment would “bring in unrestricted and unregulated abortion,” she emphasized. “It would overturn most — if not all — of Arizona’s pro-life laws. It would not require doctors to be part of the woman’s decision, examination, or the procedure itself. Moms and dads would have no role in the abortion of their minor daughters deciding whether or not to have an abortion. It would usher in taxpayer funding of abortion.”

Follow LifeNews on the MeWe social media network for the latest pro-life news free from Facebook’s censorship!

But given the dramatic effects of such a potential amendment, Herrod predicted, “When Arizonans read and see what the proposed abortion access amendment really is about, I’m confident Arizona voters will turn it down.”

In light of the decision by the Arizona Supreme Court, Mary Szoch, director of the Center for Human Dignity at Family Research Council, shared with TWS, “In a huge win for women and their unborn children, the Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that the law on the books protecting unborn babies from the moment of conception will go into effect. Praise God!”

She added, “Acknowledging what an abortion is, the Arizona law states that an abortionist who kills an unborn child can be punished with two to five years in prison. In recognition of the fact that the intent of an abortion is to kill the child, not to save the mother, actions taken to save a mother’s life that sadly result in the death of the unborn child will not be punishable.”

Szoch concluded, “This ruling is on hold for 14 days, but we should all pray it goes into effect. With this decision, the importance of the upcoming election cannot be overstated. Unborn babies lives will be on the ballot. Pro-lifers must turn out to vote.”

LifeNews Note: Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand, where this originally appeared.

The post Arizona Supreme Court Got it Right: There is No Right to Kill Babies in Abortions appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Former President Donald Trump today said he disagrees with the ruling yesterday by the Arizona Supreme Court to uphold a law that protect babies from abortion. https://www.lifenews.com/2024/04/09/arizona-supreme-court-rules-state-can-enforce-abortion-ban-protect-babies-from-abortions/

As LifeNews reported, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that the state can enforce its abortion ban and protect babies from abortions. The Arizona Supreme Court ruled Tuesday to uphold the state’s pro-life law as written by overturning a lower court decision that misinterpreted the law.

“We conclude that [Arizona’s law] does not create a right to, or otherwise provide independent statutory authority for, an abortion that repeals or restricts [the law], but rather is predicated entirely on the existence of a federal constitutional right to an abortion since disclaimed by Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization,” the court wrote in its opinion in Planned Parenthood Arizona v. Mayes. “Absent the federal constitutional abortion right, and because [the law] does not independently authorize abortion, there is no provision in federal or state law prohibiting [the law’s] operation. Accordingly, [Arizona’s law] is now enforceable.”

Asked if the state’s highest court “went too far” in the ruling, Trump replied:“Yes they did. And that will be straightened out.”

Please follow LifeNews on Rumble for the latest pro-life videos.

“And, as you know, it’s all about state’s rights and it will be straightened out,” Trump said. “And I’m sure the governor and everybody else have got to bring it back into reason and that it will be taken care of I think.”

His comments are ironic and confusing given that he said on Monday he supports state rights on abortion, yet now opposes a state’s highest court ruling that a state law protecting babies from abortions is valid.

After the Arizona Supreme Court upheld the state’s abortion ban yesterday, one of the big attacks against it is that the 1864 law supposedly doesn’t represent the will of the people and is antiquated.

But that contention is not true.

First, the judges on the Arizona Supreme Court represent the people. The seven justices on the state’s highest court are initially appointed by the governor to serve. They then stand for a retention vote for regular terms of six years and that is a ballot vote cast by Arizona voters. As a result, the justices represent the people via electing the governor and electing them directly.

Secondly, the law was affirmed twice after it was initially approved in 1864. As CatholicVote notes in an article:

The over century-and-a-half-old law is set to replace the state’s existing pro-life law which only protects most unborn children after 15 weeks gestation.

Republican then Gov. Doug Ducey signed the significantly weaker legislation into law in March 2022. Less than three months later, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturning Roe v. Wade.

The Arizona Supreme Court held that the 2022 law “is predicated entirely on the existence of a federal constitutional right to an abortion since disclaimed” by the Dobbs decision.

Axios reported that “[a] provision of the 2022 law had affirmed it wasn’t repealing the 19th-century law.”

FOX News noted that the 1864 law “was codified in 1913 after Arizona became a state” and “includes an exception in cases where the mother’s life is at risk.”

Planned Parenthood was challenging the potential reinstatement of the state’s near-total abortion ban from 1864, which has exceptions for life-threatening emergencies, but had been blocked by 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. The Dobbs ruling should allow it to go into effect but the nation’s biggest abortion business challenged it.

The appellate court’s ruling misinterpreted state law, against its plain meaning, to allow abortion in circumstances where the Arizona Legislature prohibited it. It also enjoined officials from fully enforcing the state’s pro-life law to protect unborn children. The Arizona Supreme Court reversed this ruling, allowing the law to be enforced as written.

“Life is a human right, and today’s decision allows the state to respect that right and fully protect life again—just as the legislature intended,” said ADF Senior Counsel Jake Warner, who argued before the court. “Life begins at conception. At just six weeks, unborn babies’ hearts begin to beat. At eight weeks, they have fingers and toes. And at 10 weeks, their unique fingerprints begin to form. Arizona’s pro-life law has protected unborn children for over 100 years, and the people of Arizona, through their elected representatives, have repeatedly affirmed that law, including as recently as 2022. We celebrate the Arizona Supreme Court’s decision that allows the state’s pro-life law to again protect the lives of countless, innocent unborn children.”

In September 2022, the Arizona Superior Court in Pima County appointed Dr. Hazelrigg as the substitute guardian ad litem to legally represent the best interests of unborn children in Arizona, a role Arizona courts have recognized for over 50 years.

The post Donald Trump Opposes Arizona Supreme Court Ruling Protecting Babies From Abortion appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

As for the concern that people with Autism are more susceptible to requesting euthanasia, Casey stated:

“One of the reasons a young person with autism may be more susceptible is due to the fact that a lot of those with autism have unusual interests and hobbies. For example, some would have an interest in the afterlife, or the occult, or similar. We also know that some individuals who are on the autistic spectrum have very fixed beliefs about things, and so can be quite suggestible.”

“Once something has been suggested, the person can fixate on that. I think the interest in unusual things, something we often see in those with ASD, and some of the things that are outside the norm, along with their tendency to fixate on things, would make that person particularly vulnerable. For instance, people with rigid thinking, such as many of those with ASD, find it difficult to consider alternative solutions to problems. And this may render them more than willing to choose this particular pathway to death.”

Professor Casey also commented on the Social Contagion that is likely to happen with euthanasia:

“There will be a social contagion aspect, because as we know, teenagers and young adults are always online now. One person engaging in, or planning, an assisted suicide, will be in touch with others in their group and that contagion effect is very toxic.”

“We must not forget that suicide clusters existed in the recent past, because of social contagion. And it is difficult to escape that prospect in relation to assisted suicide, also.”

Ireland is currently debating the legalization of euthanasia. A recent parliamentary report was released which advocated that euthanasia be legalized for a person diagnosed with a disease, illness or medical condition that is both incurable and irreversible; advanced, progressive, and will likely cause death within six months (or within 12 months in the case of someone with a neuro-degenerative disease, illness or condition; and suffering in a manner that the person “cannot be relieved in a manner that the person finds tolerable.”

The Irish report obviously decided to push for the legalization of euthanasia in a fairly wide open manner.

For further reading, Gordon Friesen, the President of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition issued a warning to Ireland in his article: If euthanasia is legalized as a cure for suffering, then suffering people will be "cured" with euthanasia!

On Saturday, March 23, police cars were seen arriving at Planned Parenthood Chapel Hill around 10 a.m. No ambulance arrived, leading witnesses to wonder what other type of emergency was taking place.

911 records obtained by Operation Rescue revealed that a 16-year-old girl confided in Planned Parenthood staff that she was being forced to have an abortion by others waiting outside of the building and procedure room. There were multiple people with her, including her boyfriend and at least one parent. The Planned Parenthood staffer stated she thought the boyfriend was also a minor, but she never confirmed it for the dispatcher.

LifeNews is on TruthSocial. Please follow us here.



Planned Parenthood has been caught numerous times covering up sexual abuse and coercion, especially by failing to report abortions performed on minors. This staffer did seem somewhat concerned for the girl until she said this incredibly telling statement:

“…we have a minor who did, um, disclose to us that, um, she’s being forced to have her procedure today. Unfortunately, my provider will not do the procedure if she’s being forced.”

“Unfortunately?” Operation Rescue President Troy Newman asks. “Unfortunate for whom? For the terrified child being intimidated into choosing death for her own child, or unfortunate for Planned Parenthood’s bottom line after losing the blood money her coercers would have paid to destroy two lives that day?”

In July 2023, North Carolina passed an omnibus abortion bill which created new requirements for both surgical and chemical abortions. Under the new law, abortionists are responsible for screening women for coercion for chemical abortions, and a woman has a right to sue any “physician” who provided an abortion while knowing the woman has been coerced. It is not known which type of procedure the girl was scheduled to have. However, if it was chemical, then this new law may be at least one reason why the abortionist would, “unfortunately,” not do the procedure.

In addition, federal protections are also in place that could result in legal action against any parent that attempts to “force, coerce, exert undue influence or unduly pressure” their child to have an abortion.

Advocates on the sidewalk reported that at least four police cars arrived and stayed about an hour. According to these witnesses, none of those doing the coercion were arrested at the scene or made to leave, and the girl was never seen being escorted safely away from those who were forcing her to kill her child.

North Carolina’s new abortion laws also state that when it is believed that a woman is being coerced, she must be provided with a private telephone and information for services including rape crisis centers, shelters for victims of domestic violence, restraining orders, and pregnancy care centers.

In the recording of the police dispatch, at least one officer suggested calling the “crisis unit” to the scene, but another officer told dispatch to “stand by” on that request until he had more information. It is unclear what kind of resolution for the frightened girl, if any, was ever reached.

“Forced abortion is illegal in all fifty states,” Newman adds. “We have no way of knowing what happened to this little girl – whether she was protected from threatening family members or given the options for shelter and assistance the law dictates. What we do know is when a Planned Parenthood staffer found herself facing a teenager being coerced into abortion, she described the inability to do that abortion because of coercion as ‘unfortunate.’ When you kill babies for a living, of course you would think letting one live would be unfortunate.”

“We hope and pray that this young girl has found her way to a pregnancy center or group of people who will provide the support she needs. She has already shown what a wonderful mom she is by courageously choosing life and speaking up for her child in the face of intimidation and cruelty from her own family.”

LifeNews Note: Sarah Neely writes for Operation Rescue.

The post 911 Call Reveals 16-Year-Old Girl Being Forced to Have Abortion at Planned Parenthood appeared first on LifeNews.com.

After the Arizona Supreme Court upheld the state’s abortion ban yesterday, one of the big attacks against it is that the 1864 law supposedly doesn’t represent the will of the people and is antiquated.

But that contention is not true.

First, the judges on the Arizona Supreme Court represent the people. The seven justices on the state’s highest court are initially appointed by the governor to serve. They then stand for a retention vote for regular terms of six years and that is a ballot vote cast by Arizona voters. As a result, the justices represent the people via electing the governor and electing them directly.

Secondly, the law was affirmed twice after it was initially approved in 1864. As CatholicVote notes in an article:

The over century-and-a-half-old law is set to replace the state’s existing pro-life law which only protects most unborn children after 15 weeks gestation.

Republican then Gov. Doug Ducey signed the significantly weaker legislation into law in March 2022. Less than three months later, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturning Roe v. Wade.

The Arizona Supreme Court held that the 2022 law “is predicated entirely on the existence of a federal constitutional right to an abortion since disclaimed” by the Dobbs decision.

Axios reported that “[a] provision of the 2022 law had affirmed it wasn’t repealing the 19th-century law.”

FOX News noted that the 1864 law “was codified in 1913 after Arizona became a state” and “includes an exception in cases where the mother’s life is at risk.”

Planned Parenthood was challenging the potential reinstatement of the state’s near-total abortion ban from 1864, which has exceptions for life-threatening emergencies, but had been blocked by 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. The Dobbs ruling should allow it to go into effect but the nation’s biggest abortion business challenged it.

The Arizona Supreme Court ruled Tuesday to uphold the state’s pro-life law as written by overturning a lower court decision that misinterpreted the law.

“We conclude that [Arizona’s law] does not create a right to, or otherwise provide independent statutory authority for, an abortion that repeals or restricts [the law], but rather is predicated entirely on the existence of a federal constitutional right to an abortion since disclaimed by Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization,” the court wrote in its opinion in Planned Parenthood Arizona v. Mayes. “Absent the federal constitutional abortion right, and because [the law] does not independently authorize abortion, there is no provision in federal or state law prohibiting [the law’s] operation. Accordingly, [Arizona’s law] is now enforceable.”

HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

Today’s ruling was one of statutory construction, not one of constitutional significance.

“Nothing changes today in Arizona. Enforcement is stayed for 14 days as the Court gave proponents 14 days from today to assert a constitutional challenge to the pre-Roe law. Another case in Maricopa County Superior Court stays enforcement for 45 days,” says the Center for Arizona Policy.

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys represented Dr. Eric Hazelrigg, an obstetrician and medical director of Choices Pregnancy Center in Arizona, who filed a petition last March asking the state’s high court to review an Arizona Court of Appeals ruling.

The appellate court’s ruling misinterpreted state law, against its plain meaning, to allow abortion in circumstances where the Arizona Legislature prohibited it. It also enjoined officials from fully enforcing the state’s pro-life law to protect unborn children. The Arizona Supreme Court reversed this ruling, allowing the law to be enforced as written.

“Life is a human right, and today’s decision allows the state to respect that right and fully protect life again—just as the legislature intended,” said ADF Senior Counsel Jake Warner, who argued before the court. “Life begins at conception. At just six weeks, unborn babies’ hearts begin to beat. At eight weeks, they have fingers and toes. And at 10 weeks, their unique fingerprints begin to form. Arizona’s pro-life law has protected unborn children for over 100 years, and the people of Arizona, through their elected representatives, have repeatedly affirmed that law, including as recently as 2022. We celebrate the Arizona Supreme Court’s decision that allows the state’s pro-life law to again protect the lives of countless, innocent unborn children.”

In September 2022, the Arizona Superior Court in Pima County appointed Dr. Hazelrigg as the substitute guardian ad litem to legally represent the best interests of unborn children in Arizona, a role Arizona courts have recognized for over 50 years.

The post Arizona Abortion Ban Represents the People, Legislature Affirmed Pro-Life Law in 2022 appeared first on LifeNews.com.

The government wants your money.

It will beg, steal or borrow if necessary, but it wants your money any way it can get it.

This is what comes of those $1.2 trillion spending bills: someone’s got to foot the bill for the government’s fiscal insanity, and that “someone” is the U.S. taxpayer.

The government’s schemes to swindle, cheat, scam, and generally defraud taxpayers of their hard-earned dollars have run the gamut from wasteful pork barrel legislation, cronyism and graft to asset forfeiture, costly stimulus packages, and a national security complex that continues to undermine our freedoms while failing to making us any safer.

Americans have also been made to pay through the nose for the government’s endless wars, subsidization of foreign nations, military empire, welfare state, roads to nowhere, bloated workforce, secret agencies, fusion centers, private prisons, biometric databases, invasive technologies, arsenal of weapons, and every other budgetary line item that is contributing to the fast-growing wealth of the corporate elite at the expense of those who are barely making ends meet—that is, we the taxpayers.

According to the number crunchers with the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, in order to spend money it doesn’t have on programs it can’t afford, the government is borrowing roughly $6 billion a day.

Basically, the U.S. government is funding its existence with a credit card.

Let’s talk numbers, shall we?

The national debt (the amount the federal government has borrowed over the years and must pay back) is more than $34 trillion and will grow another $19 trillion by 2033.

The bulk of that debt has been amassed over the past two decades, thanks in large part to the fiscal shenanigans of four presidents, 10 sessions of Congress and two wars.

It’s estimated that the amount this country owes is now 130% greater than its gross domestic product (all the products and services produced in one year by labor and property supplied by the citizens).

In other words, the government is spending more than it brings in.

The U.S. ranks as the 12th most indebted nation in the world, with much of that debt owed to the Federal Reserve, large investment funds and foreign governments, namely, Japan and China.

Interest payments on the national debt are more than $395 billion, which is significantly more than the government spends on veterans’ benefits and services, and according to Pew Research Center, more than it will spend on elementary and secondary education, disaster relief, agriculture, science and space programs, foreign aid, and natural resources and environmental protection combined.

According to the Committee for a Reasonable Federal Budget, the interest we’ve paid on this borrowed money is “nearly twice what the federal government will spend on transportation infrastructure, over four times as much as it will spend on K-12 education, almost four times what it will spend on housing, and over eight times what it will spend on science, space, and technology.”

In ten years, those interest payments will exceed our entire military budget.

This is financial tyranny.

We’ve been sold a bill of goods by politicians promising to pay down the national debt, jumpstart the economy, rebuild our infrastructure, secure our borders, ensure our security, and make us all healthy, wealthy and happy.

None of that has come to pass, and yet we’re still being loaded down with debt not of our own making while the government remains unrepentant, unfazed and undeterred in its wanton spending.

Indeed, the national deficit (the difference between what the government spends and the revenue it takes in) remains at more than $1.5 trillion.

If Americans managed their personal finances the way the government mismanages the nation’s finances, we’d all be in debtors’ prison by now.

Despite the government propaganda being peddled by the politicians and news media, however, the government isn’t spending our tax dollars to make our lives better.

We’re being robbed blind so the governmental elite can get richer.

“We the people” have become the new, permanent underclass in America.

We have no real say in how the government runs, or how our taxpayer funds are used, but we’re being forced to pay through the nose, anyhow.

We have no real say, but that doesn’t prevent the government from fleecing us at every turn and forcing us to pay for endless wars that do more to fund the military industrial complex than protect us, pork barrel projects that produce little to nothing, and a police state that serves only to imprison us within its walls.

If you have no choice, no voice, and no real options when it comes to the government’s claims on your property and your money, you’re not free.

It wasn’t always this way, of course.

Early Americans went to war over the inalienable rights described by philosopher John Locke as the natural rights of life, liberty and property.

It didn’t take long, however—a hundred years, in fact—before the American government was laying claim to the citizenry’s property by levying taxes to pay for the Civil War.

It’s all gone downhill from there.

Yet there was a time in our history when our forebears said “enough is enough” and stopped paying their taxes to what they considered an illegitimate government. They stood their ground and refused to support a system that was slowly choking out any attempts at self-governance, and which refused to be held accountable for its crimes against the people. Their resistance sowed the seeds for the revolution that would follow.

Unfortunately, in the 200-plus years since we established our own government, we’ve let bankers, corporate turncoats and number-crunching bureaucrats muddy the waters and pilfer the accounts to such an extent that we’re back where we started.

Once again, we’ve got a despotic regime with an imperial ruler doing as they please.

Once again, we’ve got a judicial system insisting we have no rights under a government which demands that the people march in lockstep with its dictates.

And once again, we’ve got to decide whether we’ll keep marching or break stride and make a turn toward freedom.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, we’re no longer living the American dream.

We’re living a financial nightmare.

Reprinted with permission from The Rutherford Institute.

Putin Has Allowed the Ukraine Conflict to Spiral Out of Control

Paul Craig Roberts

As I have consistently warned, it is only a matter of time before Putin’s never-ending war spirals out of control. That time is now.

The war has widened far from Donbass into Russian cities–Belgorod from which there have been evacuations, Tula, Kalunga, 
Bryansk, and Moscow–and military bases, oil refineries, and concert halls. The attacks are mainly defeated by Russian air defense, but the attacks show that the conflict has spread beyond Donbas into Russia. NATO satellites and personnel are providing the intelligence for Ukraine’s attacks on Russia. NATO members have announced that most NATO members already have troops serving various capacities in Ukraine.

There is a perceived NATO force buildup around Russia. American tanks and armored vehicles have been sent to Greek ports. https://tass.com/world/1761465#:~:text=US-made%20Abrams%20tanks%20and%20Bradley,increase%20NATO’s%20potential%20in%20Europe

In Romania the largest military base in Europe is being built near the border with Ukraine. https://www.twz.com/news-features/romanian-airfields-transformation-into-a-giant-nato-base-is-underway

Romanian soldiers together with their American instructors are conducting exercises with Moldavian soldiers, possibly with the intent of occupying Transnistria, a breakaway province in which 2,000 Russian troops guard a large arms depot from Soviet days. https://voicefromrussia.ch/en/moldova-transnistria-the-next-stage-of-escalation-between-russia-and-nato/
There are indications that the US and NATO may move soldiers into Odessa in order to prevent Russian military support to Transnistria and to save Ukraine’s last port on the Black Sea. A move of NATO forces into Odessa could be part of a general move of NATO soldiers into Western Ukraine.

Remember that US Secretary of State Blinken recently declared that Ukraine for certain would be incorporated into NATO and that the process is underway. Both the occupation of Odessa by NATO forces and Ukraine’s membership in NATO are Putin red lines that he would have to enforce or be discredited in the eyes of Russia and the world.

These facts indicate that Macron, the French president, was not speaking out of turn when he said that it is necessary to save the West from a shattering defeat that would destroy its prestige by sending NATO and French troops to Ukraine. As I warned early on, prestige gets involved in conflicts, and the conflicts spin out of control. To avoid this, Putin needed to use sufficient force to immediately terminate the conflict. This failure has brought on wider war.

Don’t be fooled that these expensive developments are just a bluff to force Putin into a peace deal favorable to Ukraine. These are moves toward general war.

It is a war that Putin has brought on by trying to avoid it.

As I recently wrote, Putin has a very short time in which to end Ukraine’s resistance before he finds Russia in war with the West.

Note: Geoffrey Pyatt, a US State Department official who conspired with Victoria Nuland to install a puppet government in Ukraine following Washington’s overthrow of the elected government, has announced that the US government intends to prevent Russia’s Arctic development of liquid natural gas. “Our goal is to ensure that Arctic LNG i2 is dead in the water.”

Sounds like another Nord Stream Pipeline event is being planned. Will Putin for a third time after the pipeline and Crocus refuse to name Washington as the perpetrator?