Tag Archives: #ProLife

Posted on by

The pro-abortionists really, really don’t like it when someone uses plain and concise language If abortion is such a good and noble thing, why must the left mealy-mouth their words about it?

We have previously noted how the credentialed media use control of language to try to influence the debate toward their favored positions, which always seem to be toward the left.

Twitter did so by prohibiting “targeted misgendering or deadnaming of transgender individuals.” Simply put, if someone wanted to tweet something about William Thomas, the male swimmer who claims to be female and is on the University of Pennsylvania’s women’s swim team using the name “Lia,” that person would have to concede to Mr Thomas’ claim that he is a woman by using the feminine pronouns and his assumed name, not his real one. The New York Times laughably gave major OpEd space to Chad Malloy, a man male who claims to be a woman going by the name “Parker” to claim that Twitter’s Ban on ‘Deadnaming’ Promotes Free Speech.

Twitter’s ban on ‘deadnaming’ — the reference to ‘transgender’ people by their birth names — and ‘misgendering’ — the reference to ‘transgender’ people by their natural, biological sex — tramples on the speech of normal people, people who do not believe that girls can be boys and boys can be girls. The argument is that, in effect, we can’t hurt their precious little feelings, and so we must concede their major point to engage in debate. Here’s hoping that Elon Musk changes that!

Now comes Jeffrey Barg, also known as the Angry Grammarian, getting upset that Associate Justice Samuel Alito used plain language, did something radical like tell the truth, in his leaked draft majority opinion on Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization: Continue reading →

Posted on by

Conservative Kentuckians need to thank Mitch McConnell! He filled an inside straight when the safe bet would have been to fold.

Screen capture from The Washington Post. Click to enlarge.

If this draft opinion truly reflects the decision of the Court, we need to give thanks exactly where it is due: to Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who, as Majority Leader at the time, prevented a vote which would have elevated Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. This allowed President Trump to instead appoint Neil Gorsuch, one of the (reported) 5-4 majority which overrules Roe v Wade 410 US 113 (1973).

When Senator McConnell took his decision, it was not at all clear that a Republican would win the 2016 election. The odious Hillary Clinton was the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party, though Bernie Sanders was still making inroads, and Donald Trump was throwing the orderly Republican nomination process into chaos. Every poll, every poll, concluded that Mrs Clinton would solidly defeat Mr Trump if that was how the November contest would be held. If that turned out to be the case, the (purportedly) more moderate Judge Garland would be replaced as nominee by a really flaming hard leftist like, oh, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Even if Mrs Clinton would simply have renewed the appointment of Judge Garland, were he on the Supreme Court he would have voted to uphold Roe.

Senator McConnell placed a serious bet, against the odds, and he won; he filled an inside straight, when the safe bet would have been to fold.

I’m very proud to say that I voted for Mitch McConnell in November of 2020!

Posted on by

“It’s a stinking business, Mr Rutledge, a stinking business!” It seems that Planned Parenthood is having difficulties finding physicians who want to perform abortions

In the musical 1776, Roy Poole, the actor playing delegate Steven Hopkins of Rhode Island, shouts to John Callum, who played Edward Rutledge of South Carolina, on slavery, “It’s a stinking business, Mr Rutledge, a stinking business!” That’s how I see abortion, and I am appalled that anyone would willingly be a part of it.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 940 OB/GYNs employed in Georgia in May of 2010, the fifth highest in the nation. The ‘location quotient’ for OB/GYNs in the Peachtree State was 1.38; BLS defines the term as:

The location quotient is the ratio of the area concentration of occupational employment to the national average concentration. A location quotient greater than one indicates the occupation has a higher share of employment than average, and a location quotient less than one indicates the occupation is less prevalent in the area than average.

There are 21 OB/GYNs employed in Georgia per 100,000 population, which is the highest number in the South, and one of the highest in the nation, but somehow, Planned Parenthood can’t find anyone in the Peachtree State willing to perform preborn infanticides! Continue reading →

Posted on by

Will other bishops and priests have this kind of courage?

Among all of the talk about denying the Eucharist to (purportedly) Catholic politicians who support abortion, I have very, very rarely heard of it actually being done. From the Catholic News Agency:

    Diocese responds after state senator says he was denied Communion

    By Kate Scanlon | July 19, 2021 | 2:30 PM EDT

    Washington, DC: After a New Mexico state senator said he was denied Communion this weekend because of a political matter, his diocese responded that it had privately warned him he should not approach for Communion, due to his obstinate support for a pro-abortion bill.

    In a tweet on Saturday, July 17, New Mexico state Sen. Joe Cervantes (D) wrote he “was denied communion last night by the Catholic bishop here in Las Cruces and based on my political office.”

    “My new parish priest has indicated he will do the same after the last was run off,” Cervantes added. “Please pray for church authorities as Catholicism transitions under Pope Francis.” The senator represents New Mexico’s 31st district, around Las Cruces.

    In response, Christopher Velasquez, director of communications for the Diocese of Las Cruces, told CNA on Monday that it is “unfortunate that a pastoral issue with a member of the local church be publicized.”

Mr Velasquez stated that Senator Cervantes was notified, several times, by both the Most Reverend Peter Baldacchino, Bishop of Las Cruces, and his local diocesan pastor, that if he voted for Senate Bill 10, which Mr Cervantes cosponsored, repealed a 1969 state law criminalizing abortions, he should not present himself to receive the ERucharist. That law has not been enforced since the odious Roe v Wade decision, but if the Supreme Court ever overruled Roe v Wade, the New Mexico law could come back into effect. The Bishop, Mr Valasquez said, had not received any reply from Senator Cervantes. The article did not specify whether Mr Cervantes had responded to his diocesan pastor.

It’s good to see a Bishop with the courage of his convictions and his faith. If only more bishops and priests would show the same mettle.

Posted on by

Alabama gets stupid about capital punishment A waste of time and money

Sometimes I have to wonder about the utter stupidity of some people. Willie B Smith III was sentenced to death in Alabama for the 1991 murder of Sharma Ruth Johnson in Birmingham. Mr Smith and his cronies abducted her at an ATM, forced her to withdraw $80 in cash, at which point they took her to a cemetery, upon which Mr Smith shot her in the back of the head.

The too-few readers of The First Street Journal know that I am opposed to capital punishment, but that is not the point of this article.

Mr Smith was scheduled to be executed, and requested that his pastor accompany him into the death chamber. The Department of Corrections refused, and Mr Smith’s attorney sued. The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued an injunction stating that Mr Smith had a right to have his pastor present. Alabama could have simply granted Mr Smith’s request, and proceeded with the execution, but no, the State had to get all high and mighty and appeal to the Supreme Court, where the state lost. From The Washington Post:

Supreme Court says Alabama cannot execute inmate without his pastor present

By Robert Barnes | February 12, 2021 | 8:12 AM EST

The Supreme Court said late Thursday night that Alabama could not execute a death row inmate without the man’s pastor by his side, and indicated that other states must find a way to honor final requests for a spiritual adviser in the death chamber.

The court’s order came an hour before Alabama’s self-imposed deadline of executing Willie B. Smith III, convicted of a 1991 robbery and murder. A lower court had put the execution on hold, and Alabama asked the Supreme Court to step in.

But the request divided the court’s conservative majority. For the first time since she joined the court in October, Justice Amy Coney Barrett sided with liberal colleagues in a capital punishment case, saying federal law requires states to make accommodations for prisoners like Smith.

Barrett joined an opinion by Justice Elena Kagan that said a federal law protecting the religious rights of prisoners set a high bar Alabama did not meet.

There’s more at the original.

I have to ask: why did the state not simply allow Mr Smith’s pastor into the execution chamber? If the pastor agreed to perform that onerous duty, and agreed not to be disruptive, there was no practical reason not to allow this. Faced with the injunction from the Eleventh Circuit, the State had to know that its legal position was shaky, and that if the Supreme Court declined to end the injunction, the execution date would pass with Mr Smith still breathing.

And that’s what happened. Mr Smith is still alive. As an opponent of capital punishment, I think that’s a good thing. More, it exposes just how stupid states can get when it comes to capital punishment. Pennsylvania, for instance, has 142 people on death row, but has actually executed only three men since the reinstatement of capital punishment in 1974 . . . and all three men “volunteered,” voluntarily dropped all of their appeals to just get it over. Despite all of the additional costs that come with a capital sentence, the Keystone State has not been able to put anyone to death against his will!

Governor Tom Wolf (D-PA) is an opponent of capital punishment, but does not have the authority to commute death sentences without the recommendation of the state Board of Pardons and Paroles. He can, and has, refused to advance any capital sentences toward execution. But, don’t blame Governor Wolf too much; the previous Governor, Republican Tom Corbett, a strong supporter of capital punishment, signed 47 death warrants during his four years in office, and there were still no executions during his term. Is not stupidity involved in maintaining capital punishment in the Keystone State?

California has 711 people on death row, but has executed only 13 since 1976, and the last one was in 2006. Is not stupidity involved in having capital punishment in the Pyrite State?

Alabama? Well, the state has been successful in carrying out executions, 67 of them since the restoration of capital punishment. But with the stupidity, and yes, stupidity is the right word, shown by Jefferson Dunn, Commissioner of the Department of Corrections, it’s amazing that he’s been so successful. It would have been far more efficient, and less expensive, to have simply granted Mr Smith’s last request. By doing that, the state would have been able to carry out the sentence; by fighting it, the state lost, and failed to carry out the execution.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who dissented from the decision not to vacate the injunction, wrote:

Because the State’s policy is non-discriminatory and, in my view, serves the State’s compelling interests in ensuring the safety, security, and solemnity of the execution room, I would have granted the State’s application to vacate the injunction.

But the Court has a different view and denies the State’s application. Given the stays of execution here and in Gutierrez v. Saenz, it seems apparent that States that want to avoid months or years of litigation delays because of this RLUIPA (Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act) issue should figure out a way to allow spiritual advisors into the execution room, as other States and the Federal Government have done. Doing so not only would satisfy inmates’ requests, but also would avoid still further delays and bring long overdue closure for victims’ families.

In other words, Justice Kavanaugh said to states which still have the death penalty, don’t be stupid!

As the Post noted, while we know that Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and Kavanaugh sided with Alabama, the votes of Justices Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito are not mentioned. At least one of them must have voted along with Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, Steven Breyer and Amy Barrett, to form a majority.

The easiest non-stupid thing to do would be to simply eliminate capital punishment. It’s actually cheaper to imprison someone for life than it is to execute him. And Alabama’s stupidity in this case is just one more in a long list of dumb behavior the courts have had to adjudicate as states have tried to put people to death.