Homosexual activists have launched a petition drive aimed at forcing PayPal, an online e-commerce business, to stop handling donations made to a group of organizations that promote traditional family values, and which are battling the "gay" agenda. The group All Out is demanding that PayPal immediately suspend the online accounts of 10 mostly Christian organizations it calls “anti-LGBT extremist groups.” LGBT, an acronym for “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender,” is one of the most recent labels aggressive homosexuals have coined to describe their “community.”

“PayPal officially states that its users ‘may not use the PayPal service for activities that … promote hate, violence, racial intolerance,’” begins the petition, “but PayPal has become a favorite payment service for anti-LGBT extremists all over the world. PayPal must act immediately to shut down their accounts and ban all sites that promote anti-LGBT hate.”

The petition points out that “not only is it against PayPal’s rules to promote ‘hate, violence, [and] racial intolerance,’ [but] hate groups also damage PayPal’s brand and credibility. We ask that PayPal join the fight against online hate and immediately shut down the accounts of anti-LGBT extremist groups using the service.”

The Obama administration has defied a decision by the government of New Hampshire to defund abortion provider Planned Parenthood, announcing that it had “awarded family planning contracts to Planned Parenthood of Northern New England despite the state Executive Council’s vote against the group,” reported the Nashua Telegraph. The state newspaper claimed the administration was forced “to act quickly because the Executive Council had left 16,000 families without services that range from birth control to exams for breast or cervical cancer.”

In refunding the abortion giant the Obama administration declared that there was “an urgent need to reinstate services with an experienced provider that is familiar with the provision of Title X family planning services and applicable laws, regulations, and administrative requirements, and has a history of successfully providing services in these areas of the state.”

As reported by Baptist Press News, the state’s Republican-controlled Executive Council “voted 3-2 in June to prevent Planned Parenthood of Northern New England’s six New Hampshire clinics from receiving $1.8 million in federal and state family planning funds.

The Virginia Board of Health has approved tough new regulations governing the operation of abortuaries in the Old Dominion. The regulations now permit the state to closely monitor these businesses to ensure that women who seek to end the lives of their unborn children do so in a safe, sterile environment.

Abortionists and their political backers, as well as the abortion industry, opposed the regulations, but could do little to stop them. Gov. Bob McDonnell, a moderate conservative, appointed nine of the health board’s 14 members.

The new rules, approved 12-1, now go to conservative Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli for review. He and the Governor will likely approve them.

SB 924, the Rules

The new authority to monitor the abortion business arose from Senate Bill 924, which mandated that state health regulations treat abortuaries in a manner similar to hospitals.

North Carolina’s legislature placed the fate of marriage in that state into the hands of the citizenry on September 13 when the state Senate voted 30-16 in favor of a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as only between a man and a woman. That vote came one day after the state House approved the amendment by a 75-42 margin, setting up next May’s ballot referendum, which will require a simple majority approval by voters in order to inscribe the marriage protection measure into the state’s constitution.

“It is time for us to let the people of this state decide what they want in their constitution as far as marriage is concerned,” Republican state Senator Phil Berger challenged fellow lawmakers during floor debate on the amendment. “It may pass, it may fail. But it is time for them to make that decision about their constitution.”

As reported by Baptist Press News: “All four states that border North Carolina passed constitutional marriage amendments in 2004 or 2006, but leaders in the then-Democratic controlled North Carolina legislature blocked an amendment from even coming to a floor vote. That changed last year when Republicans took over both chambers for the first time in more than 100 years.”

In a shocking ruling by a Canadian appeal court, a woman who strangled her son with her underwear after secretly giving birth to him will face no jail time because the judge determined that her actions were no different from an abortion.

When Katrina Effert was 19-years old, she gave birth to a baby boy, and immediately strangled the child and threw his body over the fence into the neighbor’s yard on April 13, 2005.

Two years ago, a jury found Effert guilty of second-degree murder, but the highest court in the province decided that the jury had made a mistake. The Alberta Court of Appeal overturned the conviction, and replaced it with a lesser charge of infanticide.

The Criminal Code of Canada classifies infanticide as follows:

Pro-life leaders in Poland remain optimistic despite the narrow defeat of a bill that would have completely banned abortion in the largely Catholic nation. The historic bill, the result of a nationwide grassroots campaign that garnered 600,000 petition signatures in support of the law in two weeks, was narrowly defeated in late August in Poland’s parliament by a 191-186 vote, with five abstentions and 78 lawmakers not present for the vote, according to LifeSiteNews.com.

Nonetheless, said Polish pro-life commentator Tomasz Terlikowski, in spite of the “undeniable defeat of the entire project, it was a huge success.” Terlikowski told LifeSiteNews that the victory came in “the introduction to public debate, unthinkable in other European countries, of a total ban on abortion.” He added that those in Poland who are committed to defending the unborn, “among whom I count myself, certainly will not rest. In the next Parliament we will re-submit the bill banning all abortions.”
 

Texas Governor Rick Perry continued to take fire from his rivals in the September 12 CNN/Tea Party Express debate on the issue of mandating Gardasil injections for 12-year-old girls by executive order. And the Texas Governor defended legislating by executive order.

Fellow Texan Congressman Ron Paul, who is a medical doctor, said the worst part of Perry's decision was not the medicinal part of the decision but how he ignored the legislative branch in mandating the STD inoculation designed to prevent cervical cancer. "That is what is so bad," Paul stressed. "I made a promise that as President I would never use the executive order to legislate." Paul added: "Some executive orders are legal. When the President executes proper function of the presidency, like moving troops and other things, yes it's done with an executive order. But the executive order should never be used to legislate."

According to a new behavioral study, Spongebob SquarePants may cause short-term attention and learning problems in 4-year olds. The study indicates that watching a mere nine minutes of the program can have such an effect.

Fox News reports:

The problems were seen in a study of 60 children randomly assigned to either watch SpongeBob, or the slower-paced PBS cartoon Caillou or assigned to draw pictures. Immediately after these nine-minute assignments, the kids took mental function tests; those who had watched SpongeBob did measurably worse than the others.

Those who watched SpongeBob SquarePants scored an average of 12 points lower than the other groups. The children who watched Calliou and drew pictures scored nearly the exact same. Another test administered to the three groups was how long the children were able to wait before eating snacks presented to them when the researcher left the room. Those who watched Calliou or drew illustrations waited approximately four minutes, as opposed to those children who watched Spongebob, who waited just two and a half minutes on average.

Under the authority of the Department of Justice (DOJ), over the past two years or so the Obama Administration has aggressively targeted pro-life activists and counselors who try to persuade women arriving at abortion clinics from killing their unborn babies.

National Public Radio (NPR) reported that under the 1994 Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), signed into law by President Clinton, “the Justice Department’s civil rights division has filed eight civil cases since the start of the Obama administration. That’s a big increase over the George W. Bush years, when one case was filed in eight years.”

Subtly connecting the efforts of peaceful pro-lifers with the violent murder of late-term Wichita abortionist George Tiller by a lone gunman, NPR cited the claims of the National Abortion Federation that major violence against abortionists (which has never risen above isolated incidents — all of them condemned by legitimate pro-life groups) has plummeted over the past two years, thanks, in part, to DOJ diligence in pursuing “anti-abortion” activists.

An Illinois appeals court has ruled against a woman who sued a Planned Parenthood clinic because it did not inform her that the abortion she requested would take a human life. As reported by LifeSiteNews.com, “The plaintiff, identified only as Mary Doe, had an abortion at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Chicago in 2004, before which she says she had specifically asked a clinic counselor if her unborn child was a human being. Two years later, she filed a malpractice action against the clinic based upon the fact that the counselor had erroneously told her no.”

On August 22, the First District Appellate Court dismissed the case, affirming a lower court decision. “No court, regardless of where it sits, has found a common law duty requiring doctors to tell their pregnant patients that aborting an embryo, or fetus, is the killing of an existing human being,” wrote Justice Rodolfo Garcia wrote in a 16-page court opinion, as reported by the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin. Garcia said the “negative answer from the Planned Parenthood counselor to the plaintiff’s question of whether ‘there was already a human being in existence’ during the plaintiff’s intake evaluation simply reflects the opinion of Planned Parenthood on when life begins.” He wrote that it was clear from the consent form the plaintiff signed that she knew “there was going to be a termination of pregnancy and that she would not have a child.”

Page 10 of 15
JBS Facebook JBS Twitter JBS YouTube JBS RSS Feed