Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds

White Togetherness
May 20 2025

___________________________________
More Vids!
+BN Vids Archive! HERE!
___________________________________
Support The Brother Nathanael Foundation!
Br Nathanael Fnd Is Tax Exempt/EIN 27-2983459

Or Send Your Contribution To:
The Brother Nathanael Foundation, POB 547, Priest River, ID 83856
E-mail: brothernathanaelfoundation([at])yahoo[dot]com
Scroll Down For Comments

If you have not yet read the recent First Things essay by the popular writer Freya India, The Right Has Forgotten Feeling, you should. 

Twenty-four-year-old India grew up in the dominant, secular culture of the UK without so much as a nominal religious bulwark against its amoral norms. Her female peers, she maintains, desperately need to know the right-coded truths that she now accepts: casual sex is a bad deal for women; religion organized around the traditional family is a good one.  

But according to India, the right’s attempts to persuade young women of these realities by way of intellectual argument are mostly futile and sometimes destructive. She counsels those who want to help girls eschew today’s amoral norms in favor of something better to embrace and fulfill—not ignore or condemn—the emotional and spiritual needs that are leading young women to uncritically embrace the secular left’s now-hegemonic lies in the first place. “The left,” India observes, “hears [young women’s] pain.” It “often has the wrong answers,” but “at least it listens.”  

I confess that I was skeptical when first saw India’s piece, with its provocative thesis of a title, pop up in my Substack feed. After all, it is one of my foundational contentions that women should eschew both mainstream feminism and “trad” antifeminism precisely because, far from forgetting feeling, each has essentially infantilized and patronized women by elevating emotion and identity to the vaunted place that we should reserve for truth and virtue.  

But India has convinced me that for all my harping on reality principles, I have largely failed to notice the only reality that matters here: the young women who most need to imbibe traditional values are constitutionally unable to do so. They cannot keep emotion in perspective, because they have no perspective. And they are not rejecting truth or virtue. A person cannot reject what she’s never seen, learned, or heard about.  

The hollow remains of an already amoral, leftist culture are all that today’s young women know. There is nothing left to push back on in youthful rebellion, and nothing left to embrace on the other side. India writes: 

Few try to understand what young women might be searching for in therapy culture, finding in liberal feminism, hearing from the left—what needs are being met that aren’t met elsewhere. Don’t we see that this world offers them no other sanctuary? Don’t we see that many young women haven’t “abandoned” faith, haven’t turned their backs on the sacred, but were born into a world already desecrated? That they haven’t forgotten their worth but were never taught it?  

India suggests a remedy: that we talk about and argue from feelings rather than statistics, research, and texts. Talk about, for example, “the wound of growing up between two homes” and “help young women see that there are things in this life that should be held sacred, and that includes young women themselves.” And maybe she’s right about how we should relate to today’s twenty-something women. Maybe we should create the equivalent of a Federalist Society for therapists to attract more people with conservative values to psychological counseling. Maybe we should flood the social media zone with as many charismatic traditionalist influencers as we can and see who catches on. For India’s peers, it might be too late for anything else; and these tactics might do some good, as far as they go. 

We have much more opportunity to steep the next generation of girls, the ones in preschool and grade school today, in truth, goodness, beauty, and wisdom before the culture lays sole claim on their attention.  We don’t want them to grow up amid this same desecration, such that we’re once again trying to find balm for their broken souls a decade from now. We don’t want to be always on the defensive, helping individuals heal from a lifetime of dashed hopes and nonexistent morals by out-emoting the left (which we’ll never be able to do). We want to prevent the souls of the next generation from being broken in the first place, even as they encounter this broken world.  

We may not know exactly how, but we can start by trying to fill the souls of today’s girls with worthy art, specifically, the kinds of great stories that address female formation in ways that subtly, and therefore deeply, steep girls in truth and virtue.  

The Power of Great Stories 

I am thirty-seven years old. I grew up in the dominant, secular culture of the US in the Sex and the City era. Things then were about as morally desecrated—though not as inhumanly pornified—as they are now.   

When I have considered why I was invulnerable to the mainstream feminist ideas about work, sex, family, and more while so many of my equally (and more) intelligent peers were felled by them, I have thought mostly of my dad. A Catholic university professor and nonpartisan public intellectual, he has made a career of dispelling popular myths and replacing them with hard truths. At his hands, as a tween and a teen, I received lasting inoculation against ideological illogic. So, when I breathed in the culture’s regnant feminism with everyone else—first the popular kind, as a girl coming of age among mainstream peers, and then the academic iteration, as an undergraduate and graduate student in the humanities—I was already inured to its flaws because I was disposed to question supposedly incontrovertible dogma.  

But India’s essay made me see that credit for my own invulnerability to the dominant culture around women’s issues goes not to my dad, but to my mom. Long before I was intellectually capable of his reason, I was emotionally and spiritually formed by her stories. Certainly, the books and ideas my dad provided taught me, on an intellectual level, how marriage and family formation benefit society. But more immediately important to me when I was India’s age was that, thanks to the books and films my mom introduced, I knew how falling in the kind of love that is likely to result in a happy, lasting marriage should (and shouldn’t) feel.  

This is the emotional and spiritual formation that today’s right needs to encourage for today’s young women. Arguments will not reach people who are fundamentally unaware that there is anything left to argue about. We need to seize any opportunity to plant the emotional and spiritual seeds that could help girls to see and long for a world before—and maybe after—these ruins.  

Here, in order of first publication or release, are five formational (sets of) stories that might help, or at least, serve as a starting point. 

Louisa May Alcott’s Little Women (1868), Eight Cousins (1875), and Rose in Bloom (1876): For men and women alike (I read Little Women to my sons, too), self-mastery and self-sacrifice constitute responsible maturation, not intolerable oppression. Unfettered freedom is empty. Seek in potential romantic partners the steady friendship and loyal devotion that make a good husband, not the fickle infatuation that often leads to a broken heart. (The 1994 Little Women movie captures the book well, but there’s no substitute for reading it, along with the other two.) 

L. M. Montgomery’s Anne of Green Gables (1908) and Anne of Avonlea (1909): Imagination and passion are best deployed not to fantasize about a dream world that doesn’t exist, but to appreciate and improve the corner of the actual world that you inhabit. Perhaps more relevant than ever today: don’t be so intent on hooking some unattainable Prince Charming who checks all your predetermined requirements (or on living exactly the life that you conjured for yourself without the compromises that inevitably attend coupledom) that you overlook a more suitable match. (The 1987 miniseries is as good as or better than the books). 

Yours, Mine, and Ours (1968): True love does not set you free; it does the opposite. The idea of love and sex as separate from commitment and responsibility is now a technical possibility, but it is nevertheless an eternal lie. Real love looks outward, to a life filled with as much chosen obligation to others as a given couple can handle.  

American Girl’s original Felicity, Kirsten, Addy, Samantha, and Molly story sets (1986-1994): The timeless qualities of strength, bravery, and responsibility are for girls, too. The self-expression that we valorize today is actually infantilization, not empowerment. Growing up means growing past absolute beliefs about what should be, and into nuanced understanding about how to make the best of what is.  

Disney’s Mulan (1998) and The Princess and the Frog (2009): Your ambition, intelligence, and drive do not militate against marriage; the men worth marrying find women who demonstrate these Tocquevillian virtues attractive. Moreover, prioritizing and/or achieving romantic partnership does not make you any less ambitious, intelligent, or driven. But women and men do not typically express ambition, intelligence, and drive in the same ways or to the same ends, nor should they be expected to.  

This admittedly idiosyncratic set of stories is not didactic, moralistic, or antiquated. In fact, these stories are poised to fulfill the distinctly female craving for emotional authenticity and psychological intimacy with other women, fictional or otherwise. They do so in a way that militates toward truth and virtue, rather than against them. This—not argument, and not high art—is one powerful way that young women can establish a foundational sense of how a female life well-lived should feel.  

Right now, the dominant version of womanhood ostensibly well-lived is constructed by Tik Tok influencers and flimsily feminist-coded cartoon heroines with all the hollowness of Sleeping Beauty and (remarkably) even less worthy ambition. Most girls will encounter this content, and most of them will be influenced by it, and many of them will influence one another accordingly. This is doubly true in an era when ideas about what being a woman looks and feels like are transmitted ever more entirely by popular culture and peers, due to ever fewer intergenerational family and community ties.  

But if we believe in the sanctity of the human spirit—and we must, if we are to have any hope at all—then we have to bet that exposure to all the nonsense will damage a young woman far less if she is also exposed to quality stories that provide her with a deeper, broader, less presentist and more universal perspective. Imbibing quality art despite living in a decadent age is the mental and spiritual equivalent of eating nutritious meals despite also consuming junk. If the alternative is eating only junk, even some nutritious meals make a big difference to your general health.  

There are many possible ways to increase adolescent girls’ exposure to such healthy content. Perhaps a reprint of the original American Girl books by a conservative publishing house with deep pockets is in order, or a prefab book club to encourage reading them in schools and libraries. Or, we might benefit from excellent live action films of Mulan and The Princess and the Frog or new film adaptations of those other old books—ones that honor rather than undermine their life lessons. These are all mere starting points, but they are a start, nonetheless. None of these measures, standing alone, will restore our fallen culture on any scale. But repeated exposure to spiritually gripping, emotionally evocative stories of female formation in truth and virtue might at least open the eyes of some girls to the possibility of creating something better over their own horizons. Then those girls may encounter the dominant culture with at least the knowledge that alternatives—including ones providing different ways of accessing similar kinds of girl-coded emotional succor—can and do exist. And if, for even one woman, that seed of knowledge blossoms into a tree of truth and virtue, we’ll already be doing better by tomorrow’s young women than we are today.  

Image licensed via Adobe Stock.

The coroner’s inquest into the euthanasia death of Normand Meunier continued last week in Saint-Jérôme, Québec.

The inquest examined how Meunier acquired the horrific bedsore that resulted in Meunier dying by euthanasia (Medical Assistance In Dying—MAID).

Coroner’s inquest into Québec euthanasia death of man with a bed sore.

On May 13, Leora Schertzer reported for the Montreal Gazette that:

Geneviève Paradis, a nurse who cared for Normand Meunier during his time in the ICU, testified Monday that she did not check Meunier’s bedsores, noting that the hospital was short staffed. Another nurse, Rachel Lanthier, testified she thought one bedsore was significant, but did not see any records of it in Meunier’s hospital file to make a comparison and track the wound’s growth.

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

Meunier’s decision to seek MAID, she wrote,

was a last resort for a patient who had been systemically neglected by Quebec’s health-care system, Patrick Martin-Ménard, the lawyer representing Meunier’s family, explained in an interview.

“The crumbling health-care system allowed the pressure wounds to reach a point at which there was no possible recovery. And that in itself, I find it to be extremely shocking,” Martin-Ménard said.

Schertzer explained the extent of Meunier’s bed sores.

Meunier, 66, was brought to the ER for a respiratory issue in January 2024 and was left on a stretcher for 96 hours. When he was admitted to the hospital, he had three bedsores that were at risk of worsening without proper care. By the time he chose to end his life two months later with MAID, the wounds spanned nearly the entire width of his buttocks, exposing his internal organs.

The Canadian Press reported on May 15 that Sylvie Brosseau, Meunier’s wife, advocated for his care but was ignored:

Brosseau says Meunier loved the outdoors and had many dreams and plans despite being quadriplegic.

All that changed after he was left on a stretcher at the St-Jérôme hospital for 96 hours and developed a severe pressure sore that never healed.

Brosseau says she repeatedly asked for Meunier to be given a special therapeutic mattress that prevents sores, but she says she felt ignored by hospital staff.

Meunier requested medical assistance in dying two months after developing the sore and died March 29, 2024.

Meunier’s lawyer, Patrick Martin-Ménard, said:

although it’s tragic Meunier had to turn to MAID because of Quebec’s crumbling health-care system, the option at least let him die with dignity.

Martin-Ménard is missing the reality that euthanasia (MAiD) is used to cover up the crumbling health-care system. Th death of Normand Meunier is one of many tragic euthanasia deaths.

So it’s not that – at least he could “die with dignity” but rather that, he was driven to die by euthanasia.

Euthanasia adds to the tragedy, it is not some sort of consolation.

LifeNews.com Note: Alex Schadenberg is the executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and you can read his blog here.

The post Canadian Man Euthanized Because He Had Bedsores appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Kathi Aultman is a former abortionist who is now a pro-life advocate. She told her story in an interview with Lila Rose from Live Action.

Dehumanizing Preborn Babies

Aultman was strongly pro-choice when she entered medical school. A doctor she really admired committed late-term abortions, and she was eager to learn from him.

She bought into the pro-abortion argument that women’s bodily autonomy gave them the right to have abortions.

She liked the challenge of doing abortions and was not put off by doing them late in pregnancy:

I was challenged by the procedure and I really hate to say this, but the bigger the better. I cringe now when I say that, but I wanted to do the biggest ones I could. It was a challenge, and my whole focus was being good at what I did and stretching the limits.

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

She did not see the babies she aborted as human beings:

I think part of the problem was that I didn’t see a fetus any [differently] than a chick embryo. The chick embryos that we dissected in college. And I didn’t see them as human beings.

She did not feel any emotional conflict about tearing preborn babies apart. In fact, she was fascinated by the babies’ bodies:

As a matter of fact, and again I hate to admit this, but when I would look at the parts that I had taken out, I was fascinated with them. I thought, “Oh, these are so cute. And they’re great, they’ve got little fingers and toes.”

… I just wanted to find out everything about them that I could. But I did not see them as human beings. I just saw them as embryos and fetuses. Not as people.

Doing Abortions While Pregnant

Aultman became pregnant. She continued to do abortions throughout her pregnancy:

I got pregnant while I was in residency, and I was moonlighting at an abortion clinic at the time doing abortions. And I was almost proud of the fact that here I was pregnant, and I was still doing abortions. I felt like, well, my baby is wanted, theirs is not. They have the right to abort their babies. And so, I continued to do abortions during my whole pregnancy.

But when her baby was born, Aultman found that her attitude had shifted. Things about her work that hadn’t bothered her before began to.

She stopped doing abortions because of three women she encountered.

Three Patients That Changed Everything

She describes the first woman:

The first one was a young girl that came in, and she was scheduled that morning. I had done three abortions on her myself… And she had had other abortions that I didn’t do, but I had done three of them.

And I told the people at the clinic that I didn’t want to do it. And they said, “You don’t have the right to judge. It’s her choice. If she wants to use abortion as birth control, that’s up to her.”

I looked at them, and I said, “Yeah, but I’m the one that’s having to do the killing.” So, I ended up doing the abortion, and afterwards I tried to get her to take birth control and she refused, so she left.

The casual attitude of the woman using abortion as birth control troubled her. The next encounter was with a woman who had a similar attitude:

Then the next woman came in with a friend, and sometimes people did want to see the tissue. And the friend said, “Do you want to see the tissue?” And she said, “No. I just want to kill it.”

And it just hit me, like cold water in the face. And I thought, “What did this baby do to you?” It’s not the baby’s fault.

The third woman was a mother of four who really wanted to keep the baby. She and her husband didn’t believe they could afford a fifth child. Pressured by financial circumstances, the woman was forced to “choose” abortion.

She cried the entire time she was at the abortion facility. Aultman was able to see how little choice this woman had and how devastated she was by her abortion. Aultman says, “Thankfully, she was my last patient because I just — I couldn’t do them after that.”

She says:

I think I had finally made that baby = fetus connection. And I realized that that was a little person, just like my daughter was a little person. And the fact that they were no longer wanted was not enough for me to kill them.

Seeing Young Mothers

Aultman quit and resolved never to do abortions again. But she was still pro-choice. She still supported keeping abortion legal and would refer patients for abortions, even if she wouldn’t do them herself.

Aultman had always believed the pro-choice narrative that people, particularly young girls, needed abortions because a baby would destroy their lives. But what she saw in her practice proved otherwise:

It wasn’t until I started to see young girls in my practice who had babies and did really well. I had always thought that an unplanned pregnancy for a young girl was the worst thing that could happen to her. That’s sort of the normal thinking…

That’s the narrative. And to see these girls do so well. And then I had other patients who were seeing psychiatrists or were struggling with the physical complications of abortions. And it just wasn’t what I expected. It didn’t jive with the rhetoric, the rhetoric that I had embraced.

Aultman became a Christian and began going to church. Her new beliefs had no effect on her pro-choice views. But she saw young girls in her church have babies. Just like the young girls in her practice, these young women’s lives were not destroyed by their children.

She got to know the babies and watched them grow, all the while knowing that had their mothers been her patients, she would’ve given them abortions. She says:

And as I watched those little children grow up into these wonderful people, I began to again see, okay, these are real people that we are killing. Who never get a chance to be alive. And we never get to see who they’re going to become.

The Conversion

But the final, pivotal event that won her to the pro-life cause was reading an article given to her by some pro-life friends.

The article drew a parallel between the Holocaust in Nazi Germany and abortion in America today. Although abortion and the Holocaust are very different, the article pointed out that both were enabled to happen because people did not see the victims as human beings. Both preborn babies and the victims of the Holocaust were dehumanized.

Aultman says:

My dad was with… the group that [liberated] the first concentration camp during World War II. And so, I grew up with all those stories and those horrific pictures. And then, when I became a doctor, I couldn’t understand how the German doctors could do the things that they did…

When I read that comparison between the Holocaust and abortion, I finally understood how they could do the horrible things that they did. Because just as I didn’t see the fetus as a person, they didn’t see the Jews and the Gypsies and the others as people. And if you don’t consider someone human, you can do anything you want.

That’s when I realized that I was a mass murderer. I had killed all of these people. And that’s when I completely changed my opinion on abortion.

Aultman made the connection between the dehumanization of babies in the womb and the dehumanization of other victims of violence.

She struggled to cope with the guilt and remorse she felt for killing so many people. It took years of therapy, reflection, prayer, and spiritual guidance for her to come to terms with what she had done. Now Aultman is pro-life and speaks out against abortion.

Thoughts on Other Abortionists

She says that she is far from the only former abortionist, but most former abortionists never tell their stories:

[N]ot many people can continue to do abortions. They may do them during their residency training, but very few of them go on to do abortions because the normal human cannot be ripping apart and killing other human beings for very long, if you have a conscience.

And that’s why there aren’t that many abortionists, because people just can’t continue to do it. Something happens along the way, where they see the light, and they realize what they are doing.

Most former abortionists, she says, keep quiet because of the stigma of abortion and their shame in taking part in so many deaths. Many of the ones still in practice know that women don’t want their babies delivered by an abortionist or former abortionist. They fear losing their patients, and they fear the judgment of people in their lives.

Aultman speculates that if more doctors spoke out about their experiences, it would greatly help the pro-life movement. The pro-life movement needs to create a welcoming environment that encourages former abortion doctors to tell their stories.

At the end of the interview, Aultman encourages those currently doing abortions to feel the same compassion for the babies that they feel for the mothers:

So you’re thinking you’re helping this poor woman. There are alternatives for her, okay?

There aren’t any alternatives for the baby. So you’re, in order not to inconvenience this person, or make her feel bad about “giving her baby away” or whatever, you’re then taking the life of this other person, who never gets to experience the light of day.

Never can grow up and be who they’re supposed to be. So, have as much compassion for the baby as you do for this woman.

Pro-Lifers Must Be Compassionate

She also reminds pro-lifers of the importance of reaching out to people on the other side with compassion:

It wasn’t people yelling at me, berating me, trying to make me feel guilty, that’s not what changed my opinion. It was people loving me, even though I was pro-abortion and me respecting them and then them telling me, “well, maybe you should consider this.”

Aultman’s conversion was a process, and it took time. Pro-life friends, such as the ones who shared the article, were pivotal in opening her eyes. Pro-lifers must approach pro-choicers with respect and compassion and be willing to befriend them. Many times, it is through friendship that conversions happen.

You can watch the full interview and read the transcript here.

LifeNews Note: Sarah Terzo covered the abortion issue for over 13 years as a professional journalist. In this capacity, she has written nearly a thousand articles about abortion and read over 850 books on the topic. She has been researching and writing about abortion since attending The College of New Jersey (class of 1997) where she minored in Women’s Studies. This article originally appeared on Sarah Terzo’s Substack. You can read more of her articles here.

The post She Did Abortions Because She Didn’t See Unborn Babies as Human Beings. Now She’s Totally Pro-Life appeared first on LifeNews.com.

LifeNews Note: Congressman Chris Smith gave the following remarks during his address at Catholic University of America, which bestowed on him an honorary degree.

Thank you, Dr. Kilpatrick, for this honorary degree.

Thank you for offering students a world-class education here at the Catholic University of America that is faithful to, and centered on, the teachings of Jesus.

Great to be in Father O’Connell’s Hall—named for the former President of CUA—the extraordinarily effective, wise and holy Bishop David O’Connell of my Trenton, NJ diocese whom you honored right here in mid-March.

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

Special thanks to my multi-decades long friend Bill Saunders for his amazing leadership at the Center for Human Rights as well as the Masters in Human Rights—initiatives that enlighten and empower women and men to strive to protect the weakest and most vulnerable.

The world needs their voices and commitment now more than ever.

Thank you for your commitment to heroic human rights defenders like Chen Guangcheng—who, along with his wife, endured and overcame torture and gross mistreatment by Xi Jinping for exposing and combatting the Chinese Communist Party’s draconian one-child policy with its reliance on forced abortion and coercive sterilization to achieve its nefarious goals.

And of course, we absolutely celebrate our new American Pope, Leo XIV.  The renewed hope and well-founded expectations are remarkable.  Apart from the Holy Spirit, who saw that coming?

Protection of human rights is the core motivator for my service in Congress and it begins with the right to life. Stopping the violence of abortion is what led me to run for the House, with the complete support of my dear wife Marie.

As a college student, I met Marie at a campus Mass at then Trenton State College, now College of New Jersey, more than fifty years ago. She joined me and Marty Dannenfelser— best known now as the husband of the president of Susan B Anthony Pro-life America Majorie Dannenfelser— in the pro-life group we established on campus as part of the National Pro-Life Youth Coalition—the forerunner of Students for Life.

Marie chaired the group until her graduation in 1977, the same year that now Pope Leo XIV graduated from neighboring Villanova where he had established a student pro-life group.

She has been a powerful, talented and incredibly wise, faith-filled pro-life leader, especially in the battle to defend human life around the world serving on Holy See delegations at the United Nations and through an organization she founded two decades ago called the Parliamentary Network for Critical Issues (PNCI).

Words are inadequate to express my love, respect, admiration and gratitude for Marie. She couldn’t join us this evening because she is recovering from a serious illness.

Like you, we know that the cruel injustice of abortion need not be forever and that each day, despite setbacks, many unborn children and their mothers have been and are being protected.  We have hope.

We are a people of indomitable hope—we absolutely refuse to entertain discouragement or defeat.

One such man of hope is Bishop Su—a leader of the Underground Catholic Church—who I met in Beijing in 1994.

Despite decades of incarceration and torture, Bishop Su told me that he earnestly prayed for his persecutors and harbored no malice for his tormentors—an awe-inspiring example of faithfulness to Jesus’ teaching in the Gospel from Luke: “To you who hear I say, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.”

Women and men of faith around the world are facing unspeakable violence as religious persecution explodes throughout the world—from Nicaragua, to Nigeria to the Middle East to China to  North Korea and elsewhere..

The scrouge of modern-day slavery, sex and labor trafficking, is denying millions of people their human rights.  Twenty five years ago, the U.S. Congress approved and the President signed historic legislation that I authored—the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000—a comprehensive  whole-of-government initiative to combat sex and labor trafficking in the United States and around the world.

The TVPA created a new, well-funded whole-of-government domestic and international strategy and established numerous new programs to protect victims, prosecute traffickers and to the extent possible, prevent human trafficking in the first place—the three Ps. (This week in New York, the trial of P. Diddy Combs is underway. Like Jeffrey Epstein, Diddy has been charged for allegedly committing heinous sex trafficking crimes and the U.S. Attorney is using the the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000—to prosecute. To date more than 2,225 convictions with very long jail sentences have been rendered using the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000.)

Forced organ removal is another horrific human rights violation.

Last week, the House of Representatives passed legislation I sponsored entitled the Stop Forced Organ Harvesting Act of 2025 that targets the worldwide barbaric practice of murdering victims to steal their vital organs.  Special thanks to the Chief of

Staff of the Congressional-Executive China Commission Piero Tozzi for his research and work in passing the bill.

The Chinese Communist Party is committing this trafficking abuse like no other—and Xi Jinping is making billions.

Each year, tens of thousands of young victims, perhaps more—average age 28— are slaughtered by the Chinese Communist Party for their organs. Ethnic groups targeted for mass harvesting include Muslim Uyghurs—who suffer from Xi Jinping’s ongoing genocide—and the Falun Gong, whose peaceful meditation and exercise practices—and exceptional good health—make their organs highly desirable. The Chinese Communist Party has declared them to be an ‘evil cult’—fit for butchering.

Under my bill, anyone complicit with these crimes would face both civil and criminal penalties including up to 20 years in prison.

Human rights violations need warriors to stop the practices and protect the victims. I pray that Catholic U, especially the Center for Human Rights, will create such warriors.

Jesus implored us in Matthew 25:45, “Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.”

We must never quit nor grow weary in the defense of human rights.  Injustice need not be forever. Many are depending on us.

The post Congressman Chris Smith: We Must “Stop the Violence of Abortion” appeared first on LifeNews.com.

 This Tuesday afternoon at The Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls:

An anti-Christian, anti-life terrorist detonated a car bomb outside a California fertility clinic, blowing up the media narrative that pro-life Christians have been waging a “war on IVF.” His actions reveal the blind eye the Biden-Harris administration turned to violent leftists. Yet his actions and the media response, especially the triumphant announcement that no embryos had been harmed, can teach us all a great deal about the value of every life.

The tragedy began around 11 a.m. local time last Saturday, May 17, when police say 25-year-old Guy Edward Bartkus detonated his 2010 silver Ford Fusion outside the American Reproductive Centers in Palm Springs. The FBI called the explosion “probably the largest bombing scene that we’ve had in Southern California.” The blast, which injured four others and damaged buildings as far as 250 feet away, left only one casualty: Bartkus.

Click Like if you are pro-life to like the LifeNews Facebook page!

(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.10"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Those seeking answers heard FBI Assistant Director Akil Davis of the Los Angeles Field Office say Sunday that Bartkus expressed “nihilistic ideations” while carrying out “an intentional act of terrorism.” In fact, Bartkus expounded an all-encompassing anti-life philosophy known as Efilism, longed to initiate “a war against pro-lifers,” and once vowed “I’d choose Satan” over Jesus Christ.

Bomber: ‘I’d Choose Satan’ over the Christian God

Bartkus reportedly left behind recordings and a manifesto on a website describing himself as a “pro-mortalist”: He believed life brings pain and should be ended as quickly as possible. To further his philosophy, Bartkus wanted to start “a war against pro-lifers” and “begin the process of sterilizing this planet of the disease of life.”

When someone raised the possibility of his spending eternity in Hell, Bartkus responded: “Your [G]od definitely doesn’t exist, but if [H]e did, I’d choose [S]atan over your evil [G]od. Did you ever think that maybe the [B]ible is just slander against [S]atan, and that [S]atan just realized what a f****** creep your [G]od is?”

“[R]eligion is retarded,” he concluded.

At a minimum, the fact that a pro-Satanic, anti-life radical perpetrated the first IVF facility bombing (of which we’re aware) should quell Democratic claims that pro-life Christians are waging a “war on IVF.”

Democrats: Pro-life Republicans Waging ‘War on IVF’

Ever since an Alabama Supreme Court ruled that a couple could sue for the loss of an embryo, the Left has fear-mongered about a purported war on IVF. Joe Biden fibbed in his 2024 State of the Union Address, “The Alabama Supreme Court shut down IVF treatments across the state, unleashed by a Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade.” Kamala Harris repeatedly tried to insert the issue into the 2024 presidential campaign. The Democrat-to-legacy-media pipeline fed the narrative all year:

• “Remember the war on IVF, abortion, reproductive care is really a war on women’s rights,” lectured Ohio State Rep. Anita Somani (D-8) last February.
• Arwa Mahdawi, a columnist for the far-Left U.K. website The Guardian, wrote about “the holy war on IVF” last February.
• “The Conservative War on IVF Means More Stigma for People Like Me,” claimed Natalie Albaran in Cosmopolitan last December.
• “As someone who went through nine rounds of IVF, saw 10 fertility doctors and underwent treatment in both the U.S. and Israel over four years to create embryos that resulted in our daughter in 2015, I have been sounding the alarm bells for years about the religious right’s war on IVF,” wrote Amy Klein, condemning a position taken by the Southern Baptist Convention and the Roman Catholic Magisterium, in a column for The Forward last June.
• “Katie Britt Keeps Trying to Distance the GOP From Its War on IVF,” asseverated Kylie Cheung of the website Jezebel.

In reality, the IVF facility bombing was the work of another odd, left-wing movement espousing violence which the Biden administration apparently left untroubled — much like the murder of Border Patrol Agent David “Chris” Maland on January 20, allegedly by members of a transgender cult known as the “Zizians.”

Rather than investigate them, during the Biden-Harris-autopen administration, “the FBI singled out Americans who are pro-life, pro-family, and support the biological basis for sex and gender distinction as potential domestic terrorists,” explained a 17,019-page report from the House subcommittee on weaponization of the government. Biden’s DHS awarded federal grants to organizations that linked Christian broadcasters to neo-Nazis. Biden’s targets were pro-life counselors, “violent extremists in radical-traditionalist Catholic” churches, alleged Russian infiltration of the growing Eastern Orthodox Church, and January 6 suspects. “Terrorism from white supremacy is the most lethal threat to the homeland today,” said Biden. (Ditto Merrick Garland and Christopher Wray.) For all his myopic emphasis, we still know remarkably little, publicly, about President Trump’s two would-be assassins (although the second, Ryan Routh, spouted Trump-hating clichés while repeatedly claiming he visited Ukraine to recruit soldiers for its military). “He believed the rhetoric of Biden and Harris, and he acted on it,” said President Trump of Routh.

The Democrats, in turn, have internalized the broader points of anti-natalism and evangelized for the cause at every opportunity.

Liberals Worried America Will ‘Return to Being a Christian Nation’ and ‘Producing a Lot of Children’

In a recently aired video from May 1, Hillary Clinton warned darkly that the second Trump administration wants America to “return to the family — the nuclear family — return to being a Christian nation, return to producing a lot of children.” (The horrors.) Nor is her view an outlier in her party, deeply mired in environmental pessimism bleeding over into Malthusianism. In 2019, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) cited an elusive “scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult,” which allegedly raised a “basic moral question” for every U.S. citizen: “Is it okay to still have children?” Similarly, Bernie Sanders promised Democratic primary voters in 2019 that reducing the number of babies born, “especially in poor countries,” is “something I very, very strongly support.” (At roughly the same time, Elon Musk forecast more accurately, “The biggest issue in 20 years will be population collapse.”)

The climate-driven anti-natalist hysteria got so bad that a leading United Nations climate scientist lamented, “The atmosphere created by the media has been provoking anxiety. The latest idea is that children are a negative thing.” Petteri Taalas, then-secretary-general of the U.N.’s special agency on weather and climate, the World Meteorological Organization, asked liberals to stop reading climate change statements “in a similar way to the Bible” (good advice!), seeking to “try to find certain pieces or sections from which you try to justify your extreme views.” He encouraged young people, in essence, to stop worrying and have babies.

The greatest threat to safety is palpable disregard for the sanctity of human life ingrained in federal law since January 1973 and embraced as the only meaningful policy articulated in the Democrats’ last presidential campaign. The second greatest threat is the decision to ignore a growing terrorist threat on the Left while weaponizing the government against every politically disfavored segment of the American Right. U.S. citizens should rejoice they now have a government seeking their physical safety, not the president’s political advantage. The ultimate end of President Trump’s alleged “revenge tour” has stanched the Left’s instrumentalization of the federal police force in a four-year cycle of vengeance.

Sadly, IVF Clinics Kill More Embryos than Bartkus

It is not at all clear Republicans will rise to the challenge of defending life. The GOP, always eager to flee the Democrats’ evolving calumnies, have positioned themselves as inventors of IVF. The president issued an executive order asking for policy proposals within 90 days — which elapsed Monday. IVF carries deep, ethical challenges.

Ironically, had Bartkus waited, the IVF facility would have done most of his work for him. There are a panoply of ethical and moral issues with IVF, not least the fact that parents intentionally end the lives of most embryos and stand at high risk of miscarriage. Even the media response reveals some of this.

What a Life-Hating Bomber, First Responders, and the Bible Can Teach Us about Life

One silver lining shone through all the coverage of the IVF bombing: “We were able to save all of the embryos at this facility,” beamed Davis. “Good guys: one. Bad guys: zero.”

Why announce this if embryos hold no value in themselves? The legacy media’s (usually) unspoken assumption holds that unborn babies’ worth is entirely contingent on the value imputed by their parents (read: mother). If their parents (read: mother) wants the child to live, the embryo’s loss represents a tragedy; if their parents (read: mother) do not want the child to live, the child’s death or abandonment is a neutral, or positive, development.

The people who teach the most about the value of life may well be the first responders and the perpetrator himself.

Local media reported that the moment Deputy Fire Chief Greg Lyle arrived at the site of the blast, he began “saying saving the embryos was non-negotiable.” He rushed into the facility, although it had suffered structural damage, and realized he had to restore the power to maintain the temperature of the tanks that stored the frozen embryos at -321 degrees Fahrenheit. KQED reported Lyle and his team “put their lives on the line to make sure the embryos survived.” In the process, they won a public commendation from Palm Springs Fire Chief Paul Alvarado, who said, “Despite the building suffering structural collapse, this was nothing short of heroic, and I’m so proud of our firefighters.”

No one asked why the force should risk multiple lives to rescue so many “clumps of cells.”

Ironically, Bartkus’s immediate motivation apparently came from the pain death inflicts. In his online manifesto, Bartkus wrote that 27-year-old Sophie Tinney of Fox Island, Washington, apparently convinced her boyfriend (29-year-old Lars Eugene Nelson) to “shoot her in her sleep.” “Recently my best friend Sophie killed herself (she got the guy she was living with to shoot her while she was sleeping, her preferred method),” he wrote. “I’ve never related to someone so much, and can’t imagine I ever would again. It’s just too much of a loss when there’s nobody else you really relate to significantly.” One personality trait that bound them was their shared borderline personality disorder.

Even Bartkus, in his grief-ridden (and likely demon-possessed) state, recognized the value and impact of a human life. For Christians, the thoughts that should guide us include:

• “Lo, children are an heritage of the Lord: and the fruit of the womb is his reward. As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth. Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them” (Psalm 127:3-5).
• “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; Before you were born I sanctified you” (Jeremiah 1:5).
• “The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul” (Genesis 2:7).
• “I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvelous are thy works” (Psalm 139:14).
• “There is no God besides Me; I kill, and I make alive” (Deuteronomy 32:39).
• “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13).

We must take every legislative and administrative means to save unborn children. And one day, like the first responders in Palm Springs, justly go down in history as the heroes and champions of life.

LifeNews Note: Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

The post IVF Clinic Bomber Wanted to Wage a “War Against Pro-Lifers” appeared first on LifeNews.com.