Translate

Sunday, April 24, 2016

PLANNED PARENTHOOD PRESIDENT COMPARES ABORTION ADVOCACY TO FIGHT AGAINST RACISM DURING SPEECH AT CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY

CECILE RICHARDS, PRESIDENT OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD SPEWS HER UNGODLY OPINIONS UNCHALLENGED BY CATHOLIC AUDIENCE
Richard s Credit David Shankbone-compressed
Photo Credit: David Shankbone
PLANNED PARENTHOOD PRESIDENT COMPARES ABORTION ADVOCACY TO FIGHT AGAINST RACISM DURING SPEECH 
AT CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY 
BY HEATHER CLARK

WASHINGTON — The president of Planned Parenthood compared abortion advocacy to the fight against racism during her speech on Wednesday at the nation’s oldest Catholic university, during which she obtained a standing ovation.
Cecile Richards, the daughter of former Texas Gov. Ann Richards, had been invited by the student-run Georgetown Lecture Fund, a move that some sharply criticized.
Roman Catholic Cardinal Donald Wuerl told reporters that it was outside of Catholic tradition to give a platform to an individual who promotes abortion.
“This is the latest in a long history of scandal at Georgetown University,” Cardinal Newman Society President Patrick Reilly also stated. “Disguised as an academic event, this is nothing more than a platform for abortion advocacy at a Catholic university.”
“We’re probably the most liberal Catholic university in the nation,” Michael Khan of Georgetown Right to Life told reporters. “Many of our students and faculty aren’t Catholic and are very hostile to Catholic doctrine and Jesuit and Catholic values. We certainly have an active and strong pro-life group on campus, but there’s an equally, perhaps stronger, pro-choice group on campus.”
Khan’s group was among those who stood outside of the event to protest Richards’ appearance. The group Vita Saxa planted thousands of pink and blue flags on the Georgetown lawn to “represent the 3,562 lives lost in the U.S. to abortion each day.”
“They’ve perpetuated this myth that ‘if we go away, so goes women’s health care,’” said Missy Stone of Students for Life of America. “We’re saying no, there are 13,000 federally qualified health centers nationwide and there’s only 700 Planned Parenthood facilities.”
Richards acknowledged that her appearance came with opposition on Wednesday, but compared abortion advocacy to the nation’s fight against racism.
“Based on my Twitter feed, I know there are a lot of folks who didn’t want me to speak today. So thanks for showing up,” she said, according to audio obtained by the Christian Post. “But it is sort of appropriate, in a way, because I think every bit of progress that we have made in this country and we make as a people in the world is because there are people willing to speak out even when it is unpopular.”
Richards spoke of the opposition John Lewis faced in Selma, Alabama in speaking up for the rights of African Americans, and noted the sit-ins that were held in the South to protest racism.
“Our history with race in America is something that we all have to address, including Planned Parenthood,” she said. “It’s important that we understand our collective history and the legacy that it leaves on those that are still living in an unjust system. Lack of access to healthcare and reproductive rights is a result of many factors—race, gender, sexual orientation, geography and immigration status. In order to build true equity in America we have to address it all.”
Richards also praised founder Margaret Sanger, who was known to be a supporter of eugenics and changed the organization’s name from the Birth Control League to Planned Parenthood after some found it to be offensive.
“It is kind of interesting now to see these sepia-toned photos and from day one, there were women lined up down the block pushing baby strollers with babies on their shoulders,” she recalled of Sanger’s clinic in New York City. “Ten days later, an undercover cop who was posing as a mother busted Margaret and threw her in jail.”
While Richards received a standing ovation in the 400-seat Lohrfink Auditorium where she spoke, others were not so pleased with the presentation, nor the question and answer period that followed.
“I don’t think that today’s event represented a free exchange of ideas or a spirit of dialogue,” student Reed Howard told Religion News. “Instead, Cecile Richards was given a platform to spew her beliefs unchallenged.”
________________________________________________________
THE PROTESTORS
Published on Apr 20, 2016
Video by Ford Fischer, for The College Fix

As Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards spoke at Georgetown University on 4/20/16, many in the pro-life movement organized to protest.

One group called the "American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property" chanted anti-abortion slogans and handed out fliers at the entrance to the school. While they invited debate, many were disturbed by their presence. On camera, one student even attempted to burn their flier with her lighter and threw it on the ground when she failed to do so.

Meanwhile, on campus, a Catholic monsignor along with members of Students for Life of America spoke out about abortion outside the building Richards spoke in.

As pro-life students who attended the speech exited, they said Richards did not satisfactorily answer their questions, but rather avoided the issue of abortion as much as possible.

PROFESSOR TEACHES ABORTION AT GEORGETOWN





Posted by at
Labels: , ,

MIKE PITTS: "SOUTH CAROLINA RESPONSIBLE JOURNALISM REGISTRY LAW" IS AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL COMMUNIST STYLE INFRINGEMENT ON FREEDOMS OF SPEECH & PRESS

NO, IT'S NOT LIBERAL NEW JERSEY
MIKE PITTS: 
"SOUTH CAROLINA RESPONSIBLE JOURNALISM REGISTRY LAW" 
IS AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL, COMMUNIST 
STYLE INFRINGEMENT 
ON FREEDOMS OF SPEECH & PRESS

South Carolina lawmakers consider forcing journalists to register with the state

SEE: http://the-trumpet-online.com/south-carolina-lawmakers-consider-forcing-journalists-to-register-with-the-state/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

http://www.liberty.news/2016-04-22-sc-lawmakers-consider-forcing-journalists-to-register-with-the-state-to-eliminate-freedom-of-the-press.html
South Carolina is considered a “red state” – that is, one whose legislature is dominated, supposedly, by small-government conservatives and whose governor, Nikki Haley, was a darling of the Tea Party when she was running for her first term. In fact, one of the most conservative of all U.S. senators, Tim Scott, was appointed by Haley to replace a retiring Republican in 2013.
So what gives with the South Carolina legislature considering a bill that is pro-big government, anti-free speech and smacks of authoritarianism?
As reported by The State, Rep. Mike Pitts, a Republican from Laurens, filed a bill recently in the South Carolina House that would establish a “responsible journalism registry” that would be managed by the S.C. secretary of state.
A summary of the legislation says the measure would “establish requirements for persons before working as a journalist for a media outlet and for media outlets before hiring a journalist.” The summary also says the bill would establish registration fees, set fines for non-compliance and establish criminal penalties for violations.
That’s about as nanny state as it gets: fees, fines and penalties.
The State reported further:
A person seeking to register with the state as a journalist would have to submit a criminal record background check and “an affidavit from the media outlet attesting to the applicant’s journalistic competence.”
The full paragraph of the bill, H. 4102, says, “A person seeking to register shall provide all information required by the office including, but not limited to, a criminal record background check, an affidavit from the media outlet attesting to the applicant’s journalistic competence, and an application fee in an amount determined by the office.”
Thankfully, not everyone in the state is in agreement that the bill is a good idea. You can include Bill Rogers, executive director of the S.C. Press Association (The State is a member of that organization), who said the registry proposal “is ridiculous and totally unconstitutional.”
Governments – state or federal – cannot require journalists to register, said Rogers. He cited the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press as evidence of that.
Pitts told The Post and Courier that while his bill is not a reaction to any particular news story, it is intended instead to stimulate a discussion over how he believes gun issues are being reported.
“It strikes me as ironic that the first question is constitutionality from a press that has no problem demonizing firearms,” Pitts said. “With this statement I’m talking primarily about printed press and TV. The TV stations, the six o’clock news and the printed press has no qualms demonizing gun owners and gun ownership.”
The measure states that persons are “not competent” to be journalists in the state if, within three years of applying for the registry, they have been convicted of “libel, slander, or invasion of privacy; or… a felony if the underlying offense was committed to collect, write, or distribute news or other current information for a media outlet.”
Also, a candidate for registry would be denied if “the person has demonstrated a reckless disregard of the basic codes and canons of professional journalism associations, including a disregard of truth, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness, and public accountability, as applicable to the acquisition of newsworthy information and its subsequent dissemination to the public.”
The assumption is that the secretary of state gets to make the determination, and that such determinations are likely to be arbitrary (“Iwas objective!” “No you weren’t!”).
While there isn’t much chance a law like this passes, even if it does it is highly unlikely it would withstand judicial scrutiny. That said, it’s hard to imagine such a law would even be proposed by a member of a political party that is supposedly opposed, ideologically, to the overarching control of nanny government.
One other point: In this day and age, the Internet has created a massive army of citizen journalists who aren’t necessarily educated as journalists or who don’t practice traditional journalism, but who nevertheless “report” news and events as they happen. A bill like this would kill citizen journalism in South Carolina.
__________________________________________________

Would Require Journalists To Register With Government

MEDIA LICENSE, FEES, PENALTIES?


SEE BILL HERE: 
_______________________________________________________

Representative Michael A. Pitts

Representative Michael A. Pitts
Republican - Laurens
District 14 - Greenwood & Laurens Counties - Map

Columbia Address

327C Blatt Bldg.
Columbia 29201
Business Phone (803) 734-2830

Home Address

372 Bucks Point Rd.
Laurens 29360
Home Phone (864) 923-2925
Send message to Representative Pitts

Personal Information

  • Retired Greenville Police
  • Born in Laurens
  • Son of the late Joseph C., Jr. and the late Lois Lollis Pitts
  • Lander University, B.S., 1985
  • June 28, 1974 married Susan W. Slay, 3 children, Nolan, Clifton, and Della
  • Ex Council of NASC
  • Life member, NRA
  • North American Hunting Club
  • Gun Owners of South Carolina
  • Member, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation
  • National Wild Turkey Federation
  • ALEC
  • President, National Assembly of Sportsmen's Caucuses (NASC)
  • Other Funds Oversight
  • Lottery Oversight
  • Agency Heads Salary and Benefits
  • Rabun Creek Baptist Church
  • United States Army Reserve
   

Committee Assignments

Sponsored Bills


  • Primary Sponsor:   
  • :  

Voting Record


  • :  

Service In Public Office

  • Vice Chairman, Laurens County Council
  • House of Representatives, 2003 - Pres

Posted by at
Labels: ,

PRIVY PRIVACY: WHY DO WE EVEN HAVE RESTROOMS?

PRIVY PRIVACY: WHY DO WE 
EVEN HAVE RESTROOMS?
POTTY RE-TRAINING FOR THOSE WHO HAVE FORGOTTEN DECENCY & THE CONSTITUTION
NO KIDDING! WHY THIS NEEDS AN EXPLANATION IN 2016
Published on Apr 23, 2016
Why don’t we just do it in the road? Why do some want to remove privacy in the privy? Why are we worried about national borders but opposed to legal boundaries on government intrusion into private property, privacy & community ideas of decency? Can a judge mandate co-ed bathrooms and showers for boys & girls? Can a state legislature dictate urinals (and men) be added to the ladies’ room? You don’t have a country if you don’t have borders and legal boundaries. You won’t have a country worth having if you destroy the borders and boundaries that define privacy, private property, the difference between men & women, and the family.

You won’t have a country worth having if you 

destroy the borders and boundaries 

that define privacy and decency



Posted by at

Saturday, April 23, 2016

HILLARY ON USING EXECUTIVE ORDERS TO TAKE GUNS: “AMEN”~CHELSEA CLINTON HAPPY THAT JUDGE SCALIA IS DEAD SO MORE GUN CONTROL LAWS CAN BE PASSED

LIBERAL RELIGIOUS FERVOR

HILLARY ON USING EXECUTIVE ORDERS TO TAKE GUNS: “AMEN”

Supporter urges Clinton to take on "the sons and daughters of Charlton Heston"

BY PAUL JOSEPH WATSON
SEE: http://www.infowars.com/hillary-on-using-executive-orders-to-take-guns-amen/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Hillary Clinton plans to use executive orders to chip away at the gun rights of American citizens.
HILLARY: "LET THE CONGREGATION SAY 'AMEN'"
During an event in Philadelphia, a Hillary-supporting gun control advocate rose to urge Clinton to take on “the sons and daughters” of former NRA icon and legendary actor Charlton Heston.
“We need you to be able to use your executive powers to legislate that you can’t carry guns in cars,” said the man, adding, “You can’t bring guns in buildings that are not insured to carry them.”
Hillary nodded in agreement before the man asserted, “We need executive powers that say we will fight for life and will not kowtow to the sons and daughters of Charlton Heston. We can’t kowtow to the sons and daughters of Charlton Heston.”
“We must have a greater voice. Thank you for coming and I will elect you,” concluded the man.
“Whoa…let the congregation say, ‘Amen,'” responded Hillary.
Hillary hasn’t shied away from expressing her support for gun control while on the campaign trail.
Earlier this month at a similar event, the former Secretary of State nodded along vigorously as a member of the panel described gun owners as terrorists.
“Citizens are the terrorists, right?” the woman states as Hillary nods multiple times. “We’re so worried about terrorism but we have terrorism on our own soil,” she continued.
Earlier this month at a similar event, the former Secretary of State nodded along vigorously as a member of the panel described gun owners as terrorists.
“Citizens are the terrorists, right?” the woman states as Hillary nods multiple times. “We’re so worried about terrorism but we have terrorism on our own soil,” she continued.
The Clinton’s appetite for gun control runs in the family.
During a separate speech, Chelsea Clinton expressed enthusiasm about the opportunity to restrict firearms rights now that Supreme Court Judge Antonin Scalia had died.
______________________________________________________________

Chelsea Clinton: Gun Control Can Now Be Passed Thanks To Scalia's Death
Published on Apr 23, 2016
During a speech in support of Hillary Clinton’s campaign for President, her daughter Chelsea told those gathered that there is now a great opportunity to pass strict gun control laws since Supreme Court Judge Antonin Scalia has passed away.http://www.infowars.com/chelsea-clint...


CHELSEA CLINTON: GUN CONTROL CAN BE IMPLEMENTED NOW SCALIA IS DEAD

"The next time the Court rules on gun control, it will make a definitive ruling."

BY STEVE WATSON
SEE: http://www.infowars.com/chelsea-clinton-gun-control-can-be-implemented-now-scalia-is-dead/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

During a speech in support of Hillary Clinton’s campaign for President, her daughter Chelsea told those gathered that there is now a great opportunity to pass strict gun control laws since Supreme Court Judge Antonin Scalia has passed away.

“It matters to me that my mom also recognizes the role the Supreme Court has when it comes to gun control.” Clinton said
“With Justice Scalia on the bench, one of the few areas where the Court actually had an inconsistent record relates to gun control,” she added.
“Sometimes the Court upheld local and state gun control measures as being compliant with the Second Amendment and sometimes the Court struck them down.”
Clinton then touted several gun control lobbyist groups who have supported Hillary Clinton, and predicted that if Hillary becomes president, new laws will be implemented.
“So if you listen to Moms Demand Action and the Brady Campaign and the major efforts pushing for smart, sensible and enforceable gun control across our country, disclosure, have endorsed my mom, they say they believe the next time the Court rules on gun control, it will make a definitive ruling,” Clinton said.
“So it matters to me that my mom is the only person running for president who not only constantly makes that connection but also has a strong record on gun control and standing up to the NRA.” Chelsea continued.
“This is one of those issues I didn’t know I could care more about until I became a mother. And I think every day about the Sandy Hook families whose children every day, don’t come home from school. And I can’t even imagine that living horror and tragedy.” she concluded.
Scalia’s death in February was mired in confusing circumstances after he was found alone in his room with a pillow over his head, and his body was quickly embalmed following the decision not to conduct an autopsy.
A poll conducted by the Conservative Outfitters website finds that 79% of its readers suspect “foul play” was involved, while intelligence insiders also surmised that all was not right with the circumstances of Scalia’s passing.
Although the leftist media has attempted to portray any examination of the narrative about Scalia’s death as crass and insensitive, the same standards seemingly don’t apply when it comes to leftists themselves celebrating the death of the Supreme Court Justice.
______________________________________________
HILLARY COMING FOR YOUR GUNS

WANTED 25% TAX ON GUNS IN 1993









Posted by at
Labels: ,

RAND PAUL PUSHES BILL TO BLOCK OBAMA'S SOCIAL SECURITY GUN BAN

RAND PAUL PUSHES BILL TO BLOCK OBAMA'S SOCIAL SECURITY GUN BAN 
BY AWR HAWKINS
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Senator 
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) 
has introduced legislation to stop President Barack Obama from imposing a stealthy gun ban on an estimated 75,000 Social Security beneficiaries.

Breitbart News previously reported last July that Obama’s gun ban would hit Social Security beneficiaries who are labeled as having “mental health” issues. That category is so broad that it includes people who need help to handle personal finances.
Obama added this gun ban into the executive gun controls he announced in January.
The White House explained that the Social Security Administration would execute the ban by reporting beneficiaries with a “mental health issue” to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). This, in turn, would bar them from purchasing a gun.
The reporting would happen “in consultation with the Department of Justice” and would “cover appropriate records of the approximately 75,000 people each year who have a documented mental health issue, receive disability benefits, and are unable to manage those benefits because of their mental impairment.”
Senator Paul has now introduced legislation to shield beneficiaries from losing gun rights simply because they need help balancing a checkbook.
Paul’s legislation–Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act–explicitly “prevents the Social Security Administrator from reporting individuals to NICS unless [that] individual has been adjudicated as mentally incompetent.”
In other words, it makes a finding of mental incompetence the result of a process rather than a proclamation. This protects the due process rights of each individual who might otherwise have simply been proclaimed mentally incompetent.
Moreover, even after the proper process has been followed, Paul’s bill requires the Attorney General to certify each adjudication–which is one more way of taking pains to ensure the protection of individual rights. And once an adjudication is lifted or absolved, rights are restored to the individual.
________________________________________________________
04.14.16

Sen. Rand Paul Introduces Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Rand Paul today introduced the Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act, which would provide protection for gun owners by ensuring due process rights are upheld in the event an individual’s eligibility is questioned and reported to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
“The Obama administration is at it again, and this time they are unilaterally stripping gun rights from our nation’s veterans and seniors. The Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act will provide necessary protection for gun-owning Americans, and ultimately ensure that the Second Amendment is not infringed upon,” Sen. Paul said.
The Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act has gained support from the following organizations: the Gun Owners of America and the National Association of Gun Rights.
“Senator Paul’s ‘Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act’ will do much to block President Obama’s ability to strip the Second Amendment rights from law-abiding gun owners, veterans, and senior citizens without due process. Furthermore, it would restore rights for thousands of law-abiding gun owners, veterans, and senior citizens who were stripped of their Second Amendment rights without getting their day in court. Once again this bill shows that Senator Paul is one of Washington’s leading advocates for gun owners and the Second Amendment,” said the National Association of Gun Rights.
To read the legislation in its entirety, click HERE. Top-line bullet points and background information on the Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act can be found HERE or below.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR THE PROTECTING GUN RIGHTS AND DUE PROCESS ACT
  • Prohibits the sale or disposition of a firearm or ammunition to an individual that has been adjudicated as mentally incompetent or committed to a psychiatric hospital. Adjudication requires findings by a judicial officer or court and the individual receives notice to participate with counsel. 
  • Within 90 days, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs must review and remove from NICS any veteran that has not been adjudicated as mentally incompetent. The Attorney General will certify that the removal of names has taken place.
  • Prevents the Social Security Administrator from reporting individuals to NICS unless individual has been adjudicated as mentally incompetent. Attorney General will conduct a yearly review to certify reported names have necessary documentation.
  • Attorney General must certify a state’s report indicating a person had been adjudicated as mentally incompetent prior to inclusion to NICS.
  • All individuals considered to no longer be adjudicated as mentally incompetent will be notified and have their rights restored. 
Posted by at
Labels: , ,

SAUDI ARABIA THREATENS TO DUMP $750 BILLION IN U.S. INVESTMENTS IF SECRET 28 PAGES OF 9/11 REPORT ARE RELEASED

MUSLIM BLACKMAIL FROM SAUDIS
FURTHER PROOF ISLAM IS NOT PEACEFUL AND/OR COMPATIBLE WITH CHRISTIANITY

Pamela Geller & Robert Spencer
on Sean Hannity Radio Discussing
Saudi involvement in 9/11


This Is Why The Saudi's Are So Scared Of Trump And The 28 Pages


Bailout The Truth! Saudis Attempt $750B Blackmail Over Secret 28 Pages
Published on Apr 19, 2016
When it comes to allowing the American people to know what the 9/11 Commission said about Saudi involvements, the Senators running for President — Clinton, Sanders, Cruz — are either indifferent or oppose disclosure and compensation as the Saudi’s threaten economic blackmail.


Senator Bob Graham tells 60 Minutes
the secret 28 pages prove Saudi Arabia
financed 9/11 attacks


Ron Paul Reports:
Saudi 9/11 Blackmail: 'We'll Dump Dollar!'
Streamed live on Apr 18, 2016
The Saudi foreign minister threatened to dump $750 billion in US Treasuries if Congress passes a bill suspending sovereign immunity over state involvement in terrorist attacks on US soil. The possible release of the secret 28 pages of the 9/11 report may implicate Saudi state organs in the attack. Who will blink?

Be sure to visit http://www.ronpaullibertyreport.com for more libertarian commentary.


Posted by at
Labels: ,

TRUMP'S PRESBYTERIANISM NOT BIBLICAL, BUT EXPEDIENT MORAL RELATIVISM: ABORTION EXCEPTIONS; TRANSGENDERS IN BATHROOMS

CHAMPION FOR CHRISTIANS???

TRUMP TAKES THE BROAD WAY, NOT THE NARROW WAY OF JESUS:

 WON'T FIGHT ON MORAL ISSUES; 

"LEAVE IT THE WAY IT IS"; 

BECAUSE IT CAUSES TOO MUCH "STRIFE"

Except Trump Wants Republican Platform Changed to Include Abortion Exceptions 

(Even if it Causes Strife)

BY HEATHER CLARK
SEE: http://christiannews.net/2016/04/22/trump-wants-republican-platform-changed-to-include-abortion-exceptions/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Trump abortion-compressed
During his appearance on NBC’s “Today” show on Thursday, Republican presidential candidate Donal Trump said that he would like the Republican platform changed to include exceptions to abortion.
Co-host Savannah Guthrie noted to Trump during the broadcast that the current platform does not cite any exceptions, and asked Trump if he would like them to be included.
“The Republican platform, every four years, has a provision that states that the right of the unborn child shall not be infringed. And it makes no exceptions for rape, for incest, for the life of the mother. Would you want to change the Republican platform to include the exceptions that you have?” she asked.
“Yes, I would,” he replied. “Yes, I would. Absolutely. For the three exceptions, I would.”
“Would you have an exception for the health of the mother?” Guthrie inquired.
“I would leave it for the life of the mother,” Trump responded, “but I would absolutely have the three exceptions.”
The current Republican platform reads in part, “Faithful to the ‘self-evident’ truths enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children.”
As previously reported, in January, Trump wrote in an op-ed for the Washington Examiner that he supports abortion exceptions.
“Let me be clear—I am pro-life,” he stated. “I support that position with exceptions allowed for rape, incest or the life of the mother being at risk.”
Trump said that he “did not always hold [his current] position,” but, without explanation conveyed that he “had a significant personal experience that brought the precious gift of life into perspective for me.” Trump stated that he now sees that Roe v. Wade has resulted in the deaths of millions of Americans.
“Over time, our culture of life in this country has started sliding toward a culture of death,” he wrote. “Perhaps the most significant piece of evidence to support this assertion is that since Roe v. Wade was decided by the Supreme Count 43 years ago, over 50 million Americans never had the chance to enjoy the opportunities offered by this country.”
Roe v. Wade, however, centered on a Texas woman named Norma McCorvey who sought an abortion over an alleged rape, which Trump states that he would allow for an exception. McCorvey later admitted that she had lied, as she was never raped. She also never obtained an abortion, but placed her child up for adoption and became a vocal pro-life advocate.
Trump’s statements allowing for exceptions are similar to those made by other recent Republican presidents, including George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush.
“My own position on abortion is well-known and remains unchanged. I oppose abortion in all cases except rape or incest, or where the life of the mother is at stake,” George H.W. Bush said in 1992.
”My position has always been three exceptions: rape, incest and the life of the mother,” George W. Bush likewise outlined in 2006.
Last month, following controversy over his remarks about abortion, Trump said that “at this moment, the laws are set, and I think we have to leave it that way.”
“You had told Bloomberg in January that you believe abortion should be banned in some pregnancies,” John Dickerson with CBS’ “Face the Nation” asked. “Where would you like to see a ban…?”
“Well first of all, I would’ve preferred states’ rights,” Trump said. “I think it would’ve been better if it were up to the states. But right now, the laws are set. And that’s the way the laws are.”
“But do you have a feeling on how they should change?” Dickerson asked. “There are a lot of laws you wan to change. You’ve talked about them—everything from libel to abortion. Anything you’d want to change on abortion?”
“At this moment, the laws are set. And I think we have to leave it that way,” Trump replied.
_______________________________________________________________

Trump: Let Men Dressed Like Women Into Women’s Restrooms

BY HEATHER CLARK
SEE: http://christiannews.net/2016/04/21/trump-let-men-dressed-like-women-into-womens-restrooms/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:



Being interviewed at a town hall event in Indianapolis on Thursday, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump expressed objection to North Carolina’s “bathroom bill” and said that he is fine with those who identify as the opposite sex using the restroom of their choice.
“Tell us your views of LGBT and how you plan to be inclusive,” he was asked by a viewer of NBC’s “Today” show. “Please speak about the North Carolina bathroom law.”
“Oh, I had a feeling that question was going to come up, I will tell you. North Carolina did something that was very strong. And they’re paying a big price. There’s a lot of problems,” he replied.
Trump said that he believes that matters should have been left alone as disagreement over North Carolina’s law caused controversy in society and effected the state economy.
“[O]ne of the best answers I heard was from a commentator yesterday saying, leave it the way it is right now,” Trump said. “There have been very few complaints the way it is. People go. They use the bathroom that they feel is appropriate. There has been so little trouble.”
“And the problem with what happened in North Carolina is the strife and the economic—I mean, the economic punishment that they’re taking,” he continued.
The Republican presidential candidate said that he doesn’t like the idea of creating separate restrooms for “transgendered” persons.
“First of all, I think that would be discriminatory in a certain way. That would be unbelievably expensive for businesses in the country,” he explained. “Leave it the way it is.”
Trump was also asked if Bruce “Caitlyn” Jenner were to enter Trump Tower, if he would be fine with Jenner using the restroom of his choice.
“That is correct,” Trump replied.
As previously reported, in February, Trump was asked by a lesbian reporter if he would support homosexual causes as president, to which he replied that he would in the name of bringing people together.
“[W]e’ve had some great progress for the gay and lesbian community through politics, through all sorts of judicial actions and elected actions over the past 20 years,” said Susan O’Connell, the publisher of Bay Windows, which according to its website is “New England’s largest publication for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender readers.”
“When President Trump is in office can we look for more forward motion on equality for gays and lesbians?” she asked.
“Well, you can,” Trump replied. “And look, again, we’re going to bring people together. And that’s your thing and other people have their thing. We have to bring all people together, and if we don’t we’re not going to have a country anymore. It’s going to be a total mess. It’s a mess right now, and it’s going to be worse.”
Trump has stated that he does not support same-sex “marriage,” but also told reporters last year that he believes the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges is “the law of the land.”
“I like the idea of amending the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include a ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation,” he told the homosexual publication “The Advocate” in 2000. “We don’t need to rewrite the laws currently on the books, although I do think we need to address hate-crimes legislation. But amending the Civil Rights Act would grant the same protection to gay people that we give to other Americans. It’s only fair.”
________________________________________________________________

A Warning to Conservative Christians Supporting Trump
Published on Apr 21, 2016
In light of Donald Trump's comments on 4-21-16 re: abortion, transgender rights, and the North Carolina bathroom privacy bill, Dr. Brown raises concerns for conservative Christians looking to Trump for support and protection.



Posted by at
Labels: , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)