Baptist, Methodist, Episcopalian and Presbyterian Clergy Participate in Rally for Abortion

Many Judeo-Christian leaders speak out against abortion, but the few who advocate for abortion often are the ones who get the most media attention. On Monday

Source: Baptist, Methodist, Episcopalian and Presbyterian Clergy Participate in Rally for Abortion

66317410-fe24-4656-9d7c-1f68e24a434b

Too many people believe that ALL JEWS are for abortion and I want to clear that up right now.  Just like all religions, there are progressive or non-affiliated Jews who do not live by the words of the Torah.  The only exception is a case by case matter where the Rabbis have to determine whether or not giving birth will kill the mother.  The majority of religious Jews do not believe in abortion, so in this respect I must contradict the above article, although they did mention that there were Jews at the Rally fighting for pro-life.

Ann Arbor Joins UNITED 40 Days For Life Campaign – 367 Locations in 23 Nations!

On Wednesday, Sept 28th, Ann Arbor will join 366 other locations, across ALL 50 US states and 23 nations in the UNITED 40 Days for Life campaign, which runs until Sunday, November 6. This is the largest pro-life mobilization in American history… the UNITED 40Days For Life Campaign, includes a massive 50 state tour. Ann Arbor will host the Michigan statewide rally on Saturday, Oct 8th at 11 am at Planned Parenthood on Professional Dr.

Please plan to join your neighbors, of all ages, from Washtenaw County and beyond, for our Interfaith Expression of Spiritual Warfare, the Ann Arbor Jericho March and Kickoff Rally at 2:00 pm on Sunday, Sept 25th outside of Planned Parenthood. The organizers will have family friendly signs and balloons available and lead the participants in praying and singing on the one mile march around the triangular block that surrounds Planned Parenthood.

speaker

Our Featured Speaker is Erin Elizabeth Mersino, a constitutional lawyer, advocate for religious freedom, trial attorney and former prosecutor.

Please plan to join your neighbors, of all ages, from Washtenaw County and beyond, for our Interfaith Expression of Spiritual Warfare, the Ann Arbor Jericho March and Kickoff Rally at 2:00 pm on Sunday, Sept 25th outside of Planned Parenthood.

The organizers will have family friendly signs and balloons available and lead the participants in praying and singing on the one mile march around the triangular block that surrounds Planned Parenthood.

“In Washtenaw County, we have seen proven results that our prayer and faster, community outreach and 40 day long peaceful prayer vigil outside of Planned Parenthood works. We have seen a 21% drop in the number of abortion obtained since 2007, when we began,” says Ann Arbor Campaign Director, Sandie Weathers.

For more information, please go to: www.40daysforlife.com/annarbor. Or contact Sandie Weathers at 40daysforlifeannarbor@gmail.com

Submitted by: Sandie Weathers, 40 Days For Life Ann Arbor Campaign Director, 734-657-1936 or 40daysforlifeannarbor@gmail.com

HOW IS MURDERING AN UNBORN CHILD ANY DIFFERENT THAN ABORTION – WHEN “INTENTION” WAS THE MOTIVE?

NOTE:   “The bill contained the alternate title of Laci and Conner’s Law after the California mother (Laci Peterson) and fetus (Conner Peterson) whose deaths were widely publicized during the later stages of the congressional debate on the bill in 2003 and 2004 (see Scott Peterson and Laci Peterson). Scott Peterson was convicted of double homicide under California’s fetal homicide law. Law in Los Angeles, told ABCNEWS Radio: “This 8-month-old fetus was the direct intended victim, as well as the mother, of the homicidal activities of the murderer”…. According to the ACLU “Over the last twenty years, we’ve seen numerous women subjected to prosecution or civil lawsuits for engaging in (both legal and illegal) conduct that is potentially harmful to a fetus.   “HOW IS MURDERING AN UNBORN CHILD ANY DIFFERENT THAN ABORTION – WHEN “INTENTION” WAS THE MOTIVE?”

 

nrtl-logo

State Homicide Laws That Recognize Unborn Victims

 Unborn Victims of Violence

What appears below is a summary of the laws of the 37 states that recognize the unlawful killing of an unborn child as homicide in at least some circumstances. The federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act, enacted April 1, 2004, covers unborn victims of federal and military crimes.

(States With Homicide Laws That Recognize Unborn Children as Victims Throughout the Period of Pre-natal Development)

Alabama: Legislation taking effect July 1, 2006 (HB 19) amended Section 13A-6-1 of the Code of Alabama to include “an unborn child in utero at any stage of development, regardless of viability” as a “person” and “human being” for purposes of the state laws dealing with murder, manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide, and assault.

Alaska: Alaska Statutes 11.41 (as amended by Senate Bill 20, enacted June 16, 2006) establishes the crimes of “murder of an unborn child,” “manslaughter of an unborn child,” “criminally negligent homicide of an unborn child,” and “assault of an unborn child.” Alaska Statutes 11.81.900(b) defines “unborn child” as “a member of species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.”

Arizona: The “unborn child in the womb at any stage of its development” is fully covered by the state’s murder and manslaughter statutes. For purposes of establishing the level of punishment, a victim who is “an unborn child shall be treated like a minor who is under twelve years of age.” Senate Bill 1052, signed into law on April 25, 2005, amending the following sections of the Arizona Revised Statutes: 13-604, 13-604.01, 13-703, 13-1102, 13-1103, 13-1104, 13-1105, 13-4062, 31-412, 41-1604.11 and 41-1604.13.

Arkansas: Effective in August, 2013, the killing of an “unborn child” is capital murder, murder in the first degree, murder in the second degree, manslaughter, or negligent homicide. Ark. Stat. Ann. § 5-1-102(13)(b)(i)(a), read with Ark. Stat. Ann. §§ 5-10-101 to 5-10-105. (A separate Arkansas law makes it a battery to cause injury to a woman during a Class A misdemeanor to cause her to undergo a miscarriage or stillbirth, or to cause injury under conditions manifesting extreme indifference to human life and that results in a miscarriage or stillbirth. Ark. Stat. Ann. § 5-13-201 (a)(5)(a).) Until August, 2013, “unborn child” was defined as a fetus of 12 weeks or older, but Act 1032 of the 2013 Regular Session (SB 417) changed the definition to “offspring of human beings from conception until birth.”

Florida: The “Florida Unborn Victims of Violence Act,” effective October 1, 2014, provides that generally, any person who while committing a crime “causes the death of, or bodily injury to, an unborn child commits a separate offense,” and that the punishment “is the same as the punishment provided . . . had the injury or death occurred to the mother of the unborn child,” except that the death penalty may not be imposed. The law defines “unborn child” as “a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.” Florida Statutes section 775.021 (5).

Georgia: Legislation taking effect July 1, 2006 (SB 77) recognizes an “unborn child” (defined as “a member of the species homo sapiens at any stage of development who is carried in the womb”) as a victim of the offenses of feticide, voluntary manslaughter of an unborn child, assault of an unborn child, and battery of an unborn child. (Official Code of Georgia Annotated, Sections 16-5-20, 16-5-28, 16-5-29, 16-5-80) Legislation (SB 529) taking effect July 1, 2008 recognizes the crimes of “feticide by vehicle” in the first and second degree. (Section 40-6-393.1)

Idaho: Murder is defined as the killing of a “human embryo or fetus” under certain conditions. The law provides that manslaughter includes the unlawful killing of a human embryo or fetus without malice. The law provides that a person commits aggravated battery when, in committing battery upon the person of a pregnant female, that person causes great bodily harm, permanent disability or permanent disfigurement to an embryo or fetus. Idaho Sess. Law Chap. 330 (SB1344)(2002).

Illinois: The killing of an “unborn child” at any stage of pre-natal development is intentional homicide, voluntary manslaughter, or involuntary manslaughter or reckless homicide. Ill. Comp. Stat. ch. 720, §§5/9-1.2, 5/9-2.1, 5/9-3.2 (1993). Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 720 § 5/12-3.1. A person commits battery of an unborn child if he intentionally or knowingly without legal justification and by any means causes bodily harm to an unborn child. Read with Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 720 § 5/12-4.4.

Kansas: Under “Alexa’s Law,” signed into law on May 9, 2007, as part of HB 2062, effective July 1, 2007, an “unborn child,” meaning “a living individual organism of the species homo sapiens, in utero, at any stage of gestation from fertilization to birth,” is defined as a “person” and a “human being” for the purposes of the Kansas statutes against first degree murder, second degree murder, capital murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, vehicular homicide, and numerous battery offenses.
Kentucky: Since February, 2004, Kentucky law establishes a crime of “fetal homicide” in the first, second, third, and fourth degrees. The law covers an “unborn child,” defined as “a member of the species homo sapiens in utero from conception onward, without regard to age, health, or condition of dependency.”

Louisiana: The killing of an “unborn child” is first degree feticide, second degree feticide, or third degree feticide. La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§14:32.5 – 14.32.8, read with §§14:2(1), (7), (11) (West 1997).

Michigan: The killing of an “unborn quick child” is manslaughter under Mich. Stat. Ann. § 28.555. The Supreme Court of Michigan interpreted this statute to apply to only those unborn children who are viable. Larkin v. Cahalan, 208 N.W.2d 176 (Mich. 1973). However, a separate Michigan law, effective Jan. 1, 1999, provides felony penalties for actions that intentionally, or in wanton or willful disregard for consequences, cause a “miscarriage or stillbirth,” or cause “aggravated physical injury to an embryo or fetus.”(M.C.L. 750.90a through 750.90f)

Minnesota: Since 1986 the killing of an “unborn child” at any stage of pre-natal development is murder (first, second, or third degree) or manslaughter, (first or second degree). It is also a felony to cause the death of an “unborn child” during the commission of a felony. Minn. Stat. Ann. §§609.266, 609.2661- 609.2665, 609.268(1) (West 1987). The death of an “unborn child” through operation of a motor vehicle is criminal vehicular operation. Minn. Stat. Ann. §609.21 (West 1999).

Mississippi: Under a law enacted May 6, 2004, and effective July 1, 2004, for purposes of enumerated state laws dealing with various types of homicide and certain other violent crimes, “the term ‘human being’ includes an unborn child at every stage of gestation from conception until live birth and the term ‘unborn child’ means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.” (SB 2869) In 2011, the legislature revised the law to clarify that certain conduct resulting in “serious physical injury to the embryo or fetus” is a felony punishable by up to 20 years imprisonment. (SB No. 2615, signed February 24, 2011, effective July 1, 2011.)

Missouri: The killing of an “unborn child” at any stage of pre-natal development is involuntary manslaughter or first degree murder. Mo. Ann. Stat. §§1.205, 565.024, 565.020 (Vernon Supp. 1999), State v. Knapp, 843 S.W.2d 345 (Mo. 1992), State v. Holcomb, 956 S.W.2d 286 (Mo. App. W.D. 1997).

Nebraska: The killing of an “unborn child” at any stage of pre-natal development is murder in the first degree, second degree, or manslaughter. Neb. Rev. Stat. § 28-391 to § 28-394. (2002) In addition, “The Assault of an Unborn Child Act,” effective April 13, 2006, provides that a criminal attacker who causes “serious bodily injury” to an unborn child commits the offense of “assault on an unborn child” in the first, second, or third degree. “Unborn child” is defined as “an individual member of the species Homo sapiens at any stage of development in utero.” (LB 57, 2006)

North Carolina: House Bill 215, titled the Unborn Victims of Violence Act / Ethen’s Law, signed April 29, 2011 and effective December 1, 2011, recognizes an “unborn child” (defined as “a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb”) as a victim for the crimes of “murder of an unborn child,” “voluntary manslaughter of an unborn child,” “involuntary manslaughter of an unborn child,” “assault inflicting serious bodily injury on an unborn child,” and “battery of an unborn child.” (N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-23.1-14-23.8).

North Dakota: Since 1987 the killing of an “unborn child” at any stage of pre-natal development is murder, felony murder, manslaughter, or negligent homicide. N.D. Cent. Code §§12.1-17.1-01 to 12.1-17.1-04 (1997).

Ohio: At any stage of pre-natal development, if an “unborn member of the species homo sapiens, who is or was carried in the womb of another” is killed, it is aggravated murder, murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, negligent homicide, aggravated vehicular homicide, and vehicular homicide. Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §§ 2903.01 to 2903.07, 2903.09 (Anderson 1996 & Supp. 1998).

Oklahoma: House Bill 1686, signed into law on May 20, 2005, recognizes “an unborn child” as a victim under state laws against murder, manslaughter, and certain other acts of violence. The law defines “unborn child” as “the unborn offspring of human beings from the moment of conception, through pregnancy, and until live birth including the human conceptus, zygote, morula, blastocyst, embryo and fetus.” Following upon the law enacted in 2005, Senate Bill 1742, signed into law May 23, 2006, ensures that Oklahoma’s recognition of the unborn child as a separate victim applies uniformly across all of Oklahoma’s homicide statutes.

Pennsylvania: An individual commits criminal homicide in the first, second, or third-degree, or voluntary manslaughter of an “unborn child” if the individual intentionally, knowingly, recklessly or negligently causes the death of an unborn child. 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. §§ 2601 to 2609 (1997) “Unborn child” and “fetus.” Each term shall mean an individual organism of the species Homo sapiens from fertilization until live birth.” On December 27, 2006, in the case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Bullock (J-43-2006), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court unanimously rejected an array of constitutional challenges to the law, including claims based on Roe v. Wade and equal protection doctrine.

South Carolina: S. 1084, signed into law and effective on June 2, 2006, recognizes a “child in utero” who is enjured or killed during an act of criminal violence as a separate victim of a separate offense. The term “child in utero” is defined as “a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.”

South Dakota: The killing of an “unborn child” at any stage of pre-natal development is fetal homicide, manslaughter, or vehicular homicide. S.D. Codified Laws Ann. §22-16-1, 22-16-1.1, 22-16-15(5), 22-16-20, and 22-16-41, read with §§ 22-1-2(31), 22-1-2(50A) (Supp. 1997).

Tennessee: Effective July 1, 2012 (HB 3517, enacted as Pub. Ch. 1006), Tennessee law includes “a human embryo or fetus at any stage of gestation in utero” as a victim of such offenses as murder, voluntary manslaughter, vehicular homicide, and reckless homicide. See Tennessee Code Annotated, Sections 39-13-107 and 39-13-214. This law replaces a law that took effect in 2011, which had applied the same principle to “a fetus of a human being.” The new language is intended to ensure that the protection extends throughout the period of pre-natal development, along with other technical changes. Prior to 2011, Tennessee law recognized an unborn child as a crime victim only after “viability.”

Texas: Under a law signed June 20, 2003, and effective September 1, 2003, the protections of the entire criminal code extend to “an unborn child at every stage of gestation from fertilization until birth.” The law does not apply to “conduct committed by the mother of the unborn child” or to “a lawful medical procedure performed by a physican or other licensed health care provider with the requisite consent.” (SB 319, Prenatal Protection Act)
Utah: The killing of an “unborn child” at any stage of pre-natal development is treated as any other homicide. Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-201 et seq. (Supp. 1998)and UT SB 178 (2002). See Utah Supreme Court decision in State of Utah v. MacGuire (January 23, 2004).

Virginia: Effective July 1, 2004, Code of Virginia Section 18.2-32.2 provides: “Any person who unlawfully, willfully, deliberately, maliciously and with premeditation kills the fetus of another” may be imprisoned from 20 years to life; and any person who does so without premeditation may be imprisoned for not less than five nor more than 40 years.
West Virginia: 2005 Senate Bill 146, signed into law on May 20, 2005, provided that “a pregnant woman and the embryo or fetus she is carrying in the womb constitute separate and distinct victims” for purposes of the state laws governing murder, manslaughter, and certain other crimes of violence. Code of West Virginia Section 61-2-30.

Wisconsin: Since 1998 the killing of an “unborn child” at any stage of pre-natal development is first-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide, second-degree intentional homicide, second-degree reckless homicide, homicide by negligent handling of dangerous weapon, explosives or fire, homicide by intoxicated use of vehicle or firearm, or homicide by negligent operation of vehicle. Wis. Stat. Ann. §§939.75, 939.24, 939.25, 940.01, 940.02, 940.05, 940.06, 940.08, 940.09, 940.10 (West 1998).

Partial-Coverage Unborn Victim States (8)

(States with Homicide Laws That Recognize Unborn Children as Victims, But only During Part of the Period of Pre-natal Development)

NOTE: These laws are gravely deficient because they do not recognize unborn children as victims during certain periods of their pre-natal development. Nevertheless, they are described here for informational purposes.

California: California Penal Code § 187(a) says, “Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought.” The words “or a fetus” were added by the legislature in 1970. The California Supreme Court later interpreted “fetus” to apply “beyond the embryonic stage of seven to eight weeks.” (People v. Davis, 1994) In addition, Penal Code § 190.2(3) makes a defendant eligible for capital punishment if convicted of more than one murder, and the California Supreme Court ruled that fetal homicide is included under this provision as well (People v. Dennis, 1998).

Indiana: The killing of “a fetus that has attained viability” is murder, voluntary manslaughter, or involuntary manslaughter. Indiana Code 35-42-1-1, 35-42-1-3, 35-42-1-4.

Maryland: Under 2005 House Bill 398, amending Section 2-103 of the Annotated Code of Maryland, signed into law on May 26, 2005 and effective October 1, 2005, “A prosecution may be instituted for murder or manslaughter of a viable fetus,” if the person prosecuted “intended to cause the death of the viable fetus, intended to cause serious physical injury to the viable fetus, or wantonly or recklessly disregarded the likelihood that the person’s actions would cause the death of or serious physical injury to the viable fetus.”

Massachusetts: The killing of an unborn child after viability is vehicular homicide. Commonwealth v. Cass, 467 N.E.2d 1324 (Mass. 1984). The killing of an unborn child after viability is involuntary manslaughter. Commonwealth v. Lawrence, 536 N.E.2d 571 (Mass. 1989).

Montana: In 2013, the Montana legislature enacted a law under which it is, depending on the circumstances, “deliberate homicide” or “mitigated deliberate homicide” if a person “purposely or knowingly causes the death of the a fetus of another with knowledge that the woman is pregnant.” The bill defines “fetus” as “an organism of the species homo sapiens from 8 weeks of development until complete expulsion or extraction from a woman’s body.” (HB104, amending Sections 45-5-102 and 45-5-103, Montana Code Annotated.)

Nevada: The killing of an “unborn quick child” is manslaughter. Nev. Rev. Stat. § 200.210 (1997.

Rhode Island: The killing of an “unborn quick child” is manslaughter. The statute defines “quick child” to mean a viable child. R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-23-5 (1994).

Washington: The killing of an “unborn quick child” is manslaughter. Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 9A.32.060(1)(b) (West Supp. 1999).

Conflicting Statutes

New York: Under New York statutory law, the killing of an “unborn child” after twenty-four weeks of pregnancy is homicide. N.Y. Pen. Law § 125.00 (McKinney 1998). But under a separate statutory provision, a “person” that is the victim of a homicide is statutorily defined as a “human being who has been born and is alive.” N.Y. Pen. Law § 125.05 (McKinney 1998). See People v. Joseph, 130 Misc. 2d 377, 496 N.Y.S.2d 328 (County Court 1985); In re Gloria C., 124 Misc.2d 313, 476 N.Y.S.2d 991 (N.Y. Fam. Ct. 1984); People v. Vercelletto, 514 N.Y.S.2d 177 (Co. Ct. 1987).

 

Who Really are the Racists?

abc_ntl_kkk3_121026_mn

The KKK was/is the terrorist wing of the Democrat Party.

“Our nation’s top historians reveal that the Democratic Party gave us the Ku Klux Klan, Black Codes, Jim Crow Laws and other repressive legislation which resulted in the multitude of murders, lynchings, mutilations, and intimidation (of thousands of black and white Republicans). On the issue of slavery: historians say the Democrats gave their lives to expand it, the Republicans gave their lives to ban it.

The Democrats:

  • Democrats fought to expand slavery while Republicans fought to end it.
  • Democrats passed those discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws.
  • Democrats supported and passed the Missouri Compromise to protect slavery.
  • Democrats supported and passed the Kansas Nebraska Act to expand slavery.
  • Democrats supported and backed the Dred Scott Decision.
  • Democrats opposed educating blacks and murdered our teachers.
  • Democrats fought against anti-lynching laws.
  • Democrat Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, is well known for having been a “Kleagle” in the Ku Klux Klan.
  • Democrat Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, personally filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for 14 straight hours to keep it from passage.
  • Democrats passed the Repeal Act of 1894 that overturned civil right laws enacted by Republicans.
  • Democrats declared that they would rather vote for a “yellow dog” than vote for a Republican, because the Republican Party was known as the party for blacks.
  • Democrat President Woodrow Wilson, reintroduced segregation throughout the federal government immediately upon taking office in 1913.
  • Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s first appointment to the Supreme Court was a life member of the Ku Klux Klan, Sen. Hugo Black, Democrat of Alabama.
  • Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s choice for vice president in 1944 was Harry Truman, who had joined the Ku Klux Klan in Kansas City in 1922.
  • Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt resisted Republican efforts to pass a federal law against lynching.
  • Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt opposed integration of the armed forces.
  • Democrat Senators Sam Ervin, Albert Gore, Sr. and Robert Byrd were the chief opponents of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
  • Democrats supported and backed Judge John Ferguson in the case of Plessy v Ferguson.
  • Democrats supported the School Board of Topeka Kansas in the case of Brown v The Board of Education of Topeka Kansas.
  • Democrat public safety commissioner Eugene “Bull” Connor, in Birmingham, Ala., unleashed vicious dogs and turned fire hoses on black civil rights demonstrators.
  • Democrats were who Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the other protesters were fighting.
  • Democrat Georgia Governor Lester Maddox “brandished an ax hammer to prevent blacks from patronizing his restaurant.
  • Democrat Governor George Wallace stood in front of the Alabama schoolhouse in 1963, declaring there would be segregation forever.
  • Democrat Arkansas Governor Faubus tried to prevent desegregation of Little Rock public schools.
  • Democrat Senator John F. Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil rights Act.
  • Democrat President John F. Kennedy opposed the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King.
  • Democrat President John F. Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI.
  • Democrat President Bill Clinton’s mentor was U.S. Senator J. William Fulbright, an Arkansas Democrat and a supporter of racial segregation.
  • Democrat President Bill Clinton interned for J. William Fulbright in 1966-67.
  • Democrat Senator J. William Fulbright signed the Southern Manifesto opposing the Supreme Court’s 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision.
  • Democrat Senator J. William Fulbright joined with the Dixiecrats in filibustering the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1964.
  • Democrat Senator J. William Fulbright voted against the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
    Southern Democrats opposed desegregation and integration.

Democrats opposed:

  • The Emancipation Proclamation
  • The 13th Amendment
  • The 14th Amendment
  • The 15th Amendment
  • The Reconstruction Act of 1867
  • The Civil Rights of 1866
  • The Enforcement Act of 1870
  • The Forced Act of 1871
  • The Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871
  • The Civil Rights Act of 1875
  • The Freeman Bureau
  • The Civil Rights Act of 1957
  • The Civil Rights Act of 1960
  • The United State Civil Rights Commission

Republicans gave strong bi-partisan support and sponsorship for the following
legislation:

  • The Civil Rights Act of 1964
  • The Voting Rights Act of 1965
  • The 1968 Civil Rights Acts
  • The Equal Opportunity Act of 1972
  • Goals and Timetables for Affirmative Action Programs
  • Comprehensive Employment Training Act of 1973
  • Voting Rights Act of Amendment of 1982
  • Civil Rights Act of 1983
  • Federal Contract Compliance and Workforce Development Act of 1988

The Republicans:

  • Republicans enacted civil rights laws in the 1950’s and 1960’s, over the objection of Democrats.
  • Republicans founded the HBCU’s (Historical Black College’s and Universities) and started the NAACP to counter the racist practices of the Democrats.
  • Republicans pushed through much of the ground-breaking civil rights legislation in Congress.
  • Republicans fought slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom, citizenship and the right to vote.
  • Republicans pushed through much of the groundbreaking civil rights legislation from the 1860s through the 1960s.
  • Republican President Dwight Eisenhower sent troops into the South to desegregate the schools.
  • Republican President Eisenhower appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the Supreme Court, which resulted in the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision.
  • Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois, not Democrat President Lyndon Johnson, was the one who pushed through the civil rights laws of the 1960’s.
  • Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois wrote the language for the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
  • Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing.
  • Republican and black American, A. Phillip Randolph, organized the 1963 March by Dr. King on Washington.

The 1964 Civil Rights Act Roll Call Vote: In the House, only 64 percent of the Democrats (153 yes, 91 no), but 80 percent of the Republicans (136 yes, 35 no), voted for it. In the Senate, while only 68 percent of the Democrats endorsed the bill (46 yes, 21 no), 82 percent of the Republicans voted to enact it (27 yes, 6 no).

Thaddeus Stevens, a Radical Republican that introduced legislation to give African Americans the so-called 40 acres and a mule and Democrats overwhelmingly voted against the bill.

During the Senate debates on the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871, it was revealed that members of the Democratic Party formed many terrorist organizations like the Ku Klux Klan to murder and intimidate African Americans voters. The Ku Klux Klan Act was a bill introduced by a Republican Congress to stop Klan Activities.

History reveals that Democrats lynched, burned, mutilated and murdered thousands of blacks and completely destroyed entire towns and communities occupied by middle class Blacks, including Rosewood, Florida, the Greenwood District in Tulsa Oklahoma, and Wilmington, North Carolina to name a few.

History reveals that it was Abolitionists and Radical Republicans such as Henry L. Morehouse and General Oliver Howard that started many of the traditional Black colleges, while Democrats fought to keep them closed. Many of our traditional Black colleges are named after white Republicans.

After exclusively giving the Democrats their votes for the past 25 years, the average African American cannot point to one piece of civil rights legislation sponsored solely by the Democratic Party that was specifically designed to eradicate the unique problems that African Americans face today.

As of 2004, the Democrat Party (the oldest political party in America) has never elected a black man to the United States Senate, the Republicans have elected three.”

NOTE:  Bill Clinton made insensitive ‘race jab’ about Obama in 2008, only days before he (Kennedy) would nominate Barack Obama for re-election (trying to get the support for his wife, Hillary)  reports claims that former President Bill Clinton said of him (Obama): “A few years ago, this guy would have been carrying our bags.” (There is a contradiction if Bill Clinton used the word “bags” or “coffee”). After Kennedy sided with Obama, Clinton reportedly griped, “the only reason you are endorsing him is because he’s black. Let’s just be clear.”

NOTE: Upon Senator Byrd’s death in 2010, Hillary Clinton heaped praise upon the ex-Klansman, calling him a “friend and mentor.”  Mentor – the same admiration Hillary and Nancy Pelosi used to describe their feelings about winning the Margaret Sanger Award, a woman who was known to work with the Ku Klux, Klan to rid the United States of blacks.

She (Sanger) wrote to Gamble, “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population…by the late 1940s, she spoke about ways to solve the “Negro problem” in the United States. Describing blacks as “weeds”, “feebleminded”, and “unfit”.

Many African American women have been subject to non consensual forced sterilization. Some did not even know that they were sterilized until they tried, unsuccessfully, to have children. In 1973, Essence Magazine published an expose of forced sterilization practices in the rural South, where racist physicians felt they were performing a service by sterilizing black women without telling them.”

Every major city that is plagued with crime, poverty, plight, drugs, unemployment, and horrible education is and has been led by the democratic party for decades upon decades, while all the time adding more abortion mills in them and backing Planned Parenthood for their help, and then using lies to blame everything on the republican party.  IT IS TIME TO WAKE UP AMERICA!

 
(The majority of original article was published on a blog that is no longer active, so I’m not sure who wrote this history, but they certainly did their homework, and I’d love to give them the credit they deserve.  I, in no way want to infringe on any copyright privileges, so if anyone knows who the WordPress blogger is, please let me know.  Had the blog been active, I would have gladly just reposted the original post, if given that opportunity.)

 

National Day of Remembrance for Aborted Children at Assumption Grotto

What a beautiful and Blessed day for so many people to attend the National Day of Remembrance for Aborted children. The rain and storms predicted held off until after the service, the fellowship, and as we walked to the cars to leave. The video is long and contains still pics and shortened video clips. Sit back and enjoy and join in prayer as Br. Ybarra of Assumption Grotto gave the Opening Prayer that LIFE begins at conception.

URGENT: NIH PROPOSES TAXPAYER-FUNDED RESEARCH ON ANIMAL-HUMAN CHIMERAS

image009PUBLIC COMMENTS NEEDED

Your help is needed to defend the dignity of human life and there is a limited time to act. The National Institutes of Health (NIH), a federally-funded medical research agency, is soliciting comments from the public through Tuesday, September 6, 2016 on an important life issue, the creation of human-animal chimeras. Comments must be submitted before midnight (Eastern) on September 6. Please read the directions below carefully to submit comments online or by mail.

On August 4, 2016 the NIH announced that it plans to lift its moratorium on funding research that involves injecting human embryonic stem cells into animal embryos thus creating part-human and part-animal organisms known as chimeras. This means that, for the first time, the Federal government will begin spending taxpayer dollars on the creation and manipulation of new beings whose very existence blurs the line between humans and non-human animals. 

This research is ethically problematic for several reasons: 1) It relies on the killing of humans at the embryonic stage to harvest their stem cells;  2) It involves the production of animals that could have partly or substantially human brains; 3) It involves the production of animals that could have human sperm or eggs (with a stipulation that precautions are taken so such animals are not allowed to breed); 4) It allows the introduction of human embryonic stem cells into animal embryos early in their development such that it may be very difficult to know the extent to which human cells contribute to the final organism.  Consequently, researchers won’t know what their moral obligations may be toward that being.  Tragically, the NIH has apparently given little, if any, consideration to these or any other ethical concerns with regard to this research.

Recommended actions to take immediately:

  • Submit your comments today using the NIH online comment form with the following steps:
    • Copy the suggested message below to your clipboard and paste it into the first large box on the NIH form. To copy, please move your mouse cursor to the first letter of the message; in this case the letter “I”. Once there, click your left mouse button and hold while dragging the mouse down the page until you get to the end of the message then release your left mouse button. Now that the message text has been highlighted, you may hold down your left CTRL Key and press the letter “C” to copy.
    • You may then go to the NIH form (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/rfi/rfi.cfm?ID=57) and click your left mouse button inside the first large blank text box where you will see your cursor blinking. You may then hold your left CTRL button once again then click the letter “V” to paste the message in the box. For those that are on a Apple (Mac) computer, follow the same instructions as above but use the command key instead of the CTRL button for both the copy and paste functions.
    • Once you have pasted the message into the first large text box, please enter your name in the first box and then scroll down the form page, skipping over all other blank boxes, until you get to the bottom of the page and see the red text asking you to insert a code number for security purposes. Please enter the code that is showing next to the box and once done, you can scroll down a little farther and click the SUBMIT button. You do not need to fill in the Name or Type of Organization or Function areas of the form.
  • Comments may also be submitted by mail. Even if you have submitted electronic comments, you can download and print and mail the .pdf of the letter prepared for your use. Click here to print the letter.
Please print the letter, sign and date it, and mail immediately to:
Office of Science Policy
The National Institutes of Health
6705 Rockledge Drive, Suite 750
Bethesda, MD 20892
  • Share this alert by Facebook, Twitter or email.
  • REMEMBER COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY MIDNIGHT (EDT) TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6. IF SUBMITTING BY MAIL, PLEASE DO SO IMMEDIATELY.

Suggested Message:

I object strongly to the NIH’s proposal to rescind its moratorium on funding of research involving human-animal chimeras.  I do not want my tax dollars being used for grossly unethical research involving the creation and manipulation of part-human, part-animal beings whose very existence blurs the line between humans and non-human animals.  This proposed research raises all the ethical problems of human embryonic stem cell research in general and serious additional problems related to the creation of human-animal beings with partly or substantially human brains and/or human gametes.

I also object strongly to the NIH’s apparent lack of consideration for the ethical issues implicated by this research.  Indeed, the NIH pledged to “undertake a deliberative process to evaluate the state of the science in this area, the ethical issues that should be considered, and the relevant animal welfare concerns associated with these types of studies” when the moratorium was put in place in 2015. Yet, to date there is no evidence of any discussion of the ethical issues involved in creating partly human animals.

I strongly urge you to maintain the current moratorium on funding research involving the creation and manipulation of human-animal chimeras.

 

Catholics Protest Tim Kaine Outside his Church

11556914_G

Outside St. Elizabeth’s Catholic Church
RICHMOND, Va.

A group of Virginia Catholics is blasting Hillary Clinton’s running mate, Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine.

About a dozen Catholics protested peacefully outside Kaine’s church Sunday morning.

They claim his voting record contradicts the Catholic faith, particularly on issues of abortion and gay marriage.

“He supports death, and therefore he should not get votes,” demonstrator Jacqueline Hawkins said.

“You are a CINO, you are a Catholic in name only,” organizer Frances Bouton said.

Kaine has attended St. Elizabeth’s Catholic Church in Richmond for about 30 years.

But now the Jesuit-educated, former missionary is in hot water with some fellow Catholics.

“He is not America’s dad at all. If people just scratched the surface … he’s really, all I can say, is evil,” Bouton said.

Bouton says Kaine is not in good standing to accept Holy Communion.

Years ago, Kaine supported more restrictions on abortion and said he personally opposed it. But now he has a 100 percent voting record on Planned Parenthood’s 2016 congressional scorecard.

“Tim Kaine, quit lying that you are not pro abortion, because you are pro abortion,” Bouton said.

While NBC29 stayed outside the church, the director of communications for the Catholic Diocese of Richmond came over and requested we not disturb parishioners leaving the service.

Deborah Cox also said the Rev. James Arsenault of St. Elizabeth’s would not be available to speak with us.

But, last month, Arsenault appeared on NPR for an interview.

“He really extends a hand to help people and is very compassionate, approachable, available and friendly,” Arsenault said about Kaine.

At times, Kaine has also faced criticism for being personally opposed to the death penalty, while allowing executions to be carried out as governor. On that issue, Arsenault said, “The church has a teaching with regard to we’re pro-life, and we believe in that seamless garment of life. We respect sometimes lawmakers make difficult decisions.”

Parishioners coming out of church Sunday said they love Kaine, but they were not willing to go on camera. Someone inside church said toward the end of Mass, parishioners were encouraged not to speak with the media. Kaine was not at Sunday’s Mass.

To see news broadcast, click on the “Source” link below.

Source: Catholics Protest Tim Kaine Outside his Church