CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY STILL CHOOSING TO COVER ABORTIONS IN CAMPUS HEALTH PLAN
from: LiveAction News

(24 Jul.) The University of San Diego (USD), a Catholic university in California, is continuing to cover abortion in their campus health plan, claiming state laws make it mandatory for them to do so. Yet courts ruled that California cannot force churches to fund abortions – raising questions as to why USD is still keeping abortion in their health plan.

The College Fix reported that the health plan not only pays for abortion, but also for "gender affirming treatment," neither of which are supported by the Catholic Church. "USD's employee and student benefit plans are required to align with state and federal regulations," Senior Director of Media Relations Lissette Martinez told The College Fix. "The services mentioned [abortion and transgender drugs and surgeries] are typically those that are required to be covered, and individuals are encouraged to consult with their medical provider regarding the best course of treatment for any medical concern."

Yet in May, two federal courts ruled that California's abortion-coverage mandate violated the first amendment rights of two churches who sued to challenge the rule, and that churches do not have to pay for abortions. The College Fix said Martinez did not acknowledge or address those court rulings. Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) represented the churches in the lawsuits, and in a press release, made it clear that the rulings apply to all religious organizations.

"The government can't force a church or any other religious employer to violate their faith and conscience by participating in funding abortion," ADF Senior Counsel Jeremiah Galus said (emphasis added). "For years, California officials, in collaboration with Planned Parenthood, have unconstitutionally targeted faith-based organizations. This is a significant victory for the churches we represent, the conscience rights of their members, and other religious organizations that shouldn't be ordered by the government to violate some of their deepest faith convictions."

Though some Catholic politicians and institutions have claimed otherwise, the Catholic Church is strongly pro-life, and does not support abortion under any circumstances. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, "Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person – among which is the inviolable right of every innocent [human] being to life."

It continues, "Since the first century, the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law: You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish." But Cardinal Robert McElroy, who oversees the diocese in which USD is located, has not commented on the issue. [read more...]

COMMENTARY: Lissette Martinez conveniently ignored the two federal courts' rulings that government cannot compel churches or any other religious employer to abandon their doctrines and be forced to pay for abortions, contraceptives, or transgender treatment. The Roman Catholic, Orthodox and traditional Protestant doctrines are clear, but many politicians, some who claim to be Catholic, also conveniently ignore these facts for the sake of election politics.

JUST IN FROM LIVE ACTION: Planned Parenthood was recently caught handing out pornographic materials about sex to 14-year-olds. Tell the abortion giant to stop targeting kids with X-rated content. Sign the petition now: https://lifelinks.io/stop-planned-parenthood.

 

---

 

IS TRANSGENDER MEDICINE BASED ON ROCK-SOLID EVIDENCE?
from: BioEdge.org

(20 Jul.) It is becoming harder and harder to assess claims that transgender medicine is based upon rock-solid evidence. Much of the time, the debate is carried on in columns of newspapers, not medical journals.

The latest skirmish in America's Trans Wars was found in the letters page of the Wall Street Journal. On July 4, the president of the Endocrine Society, Stephen R. Hammes, published an indignant refutation of "misinformation" about trans medicine. "More than 2,000 studies published since 1975 form a clear picture," he wrote. "Gender-affirming care improves the well-being of transgender and gender-diverse people and reduces the risk of suicide."

A few days later 21 physicians from 9 countries published a rebuttal of these claims. In Europe, medical associations and national health departments are increasingly sceptical of the value of gender-affirming medicine. They claimed that Dr Hammes's complacent view was "not supported by the best available evidence."

"Every systematic review of evidence to date, including one published in the Journal of the Endocrine Society, has found the evidence for mental-health benefits of hormonal interventions for minors to be of low or very low certainty. By contrast, the risks are significant and include sterility, lifelong dependence on medication and the anguish of regret. For this reason, more and more European countries and international professional organizations now recommend psychotherapy rather than hormones and surgeries as the first line of treatment for gender-dysphoric youth.

"Dr. Hammes's claim that gender transition reduces suicides is contradicted by every systematic review, including the review published by the Endocrine Society, which states, "We could not draw any conclusions about death by suicide." There is no reliable evidence to suggest that hormonal transition is an effective suicide-prevention measure.

"The politicization of transgender healthcare in the U.S. is unfortunate. The way to combat it is for medical societies to align their recommendations with the best available evidence—rather than exaggerating the benefits and minimizing the risks." [read more...]

COMMENTARY: There are many reports of trans people who have undergone sex change surgery experiencing "buyer's remorse" – deep regrets after having their bodies mutilated. Proponents claim that these people experience better mental health and self-image, but statistics show that just the opposite is true: a much higher rate of suicide among this group, 10 times to 20 times greater.

 

---

 

HOW THE MEDIA MISLEAD ABOUT AMERICANS' CONSENSUS ON ABORTION
from: THE HILL

(11 Jul.) Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) was recently asked by a national media outlet whether he supports any limits on abortion prior to a baby's due date. The Democrat gave an uncommonly clear answer: "No."

Such clarity is, sadly, rare in the media. Around the first anniversary of the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade, newspaper headlines and television chyrons have largely clung to the familiar narrative that the consensus among Americans favors radical abortion policies like those generally espoused by Cardin and his party.

This couldn't be further from the truth.

Even after 50 years under Roe, the American public strongly embraces protections for human life before birth. One major reason is that scientific advancements since the 1970s have given rise to greater understanding of babies' development during pregnancy.

Today, more than ever, Americans recognize the humanity of the child in the womb. For instance, medical advancements have demonstrated that babies need anesthesia for surgery in utero as early as 15 weeks. Certainly, these tiny humans deserve protection from brutal life-ending procedures.

The idea of protecting children in the womb from pain is not controversial. It is a belief most Americans share. Marist polling has been tracking opinions about where to draw the line on abortion for over a decade. In that time, opinion hasn't changed much, as indicated in the 2023 findings showing that almost seven in 10 Americans support limiting abortion to the first three months of pregnancy at most.

And despite the media narrative to the contrary, this poll is not an outlier – in fact, Marist's results track with recent Gallup, NPR, Harvard-Harris and Associated Press polls. When asked for their specific views – in terms of weeks or trimesters – Americans consistently express a desire to protect the unborn throughout most of their nine months of gestation.

The media generally frame their coverage... labeling any protections for the unborn as an outright "ban." Even laws that allow for abortions for any reason for five full months get the absurd misnomer "20-week ban." In case they missed it, the dictionary definition of "ban" is "to forbid someone to do something." In no state are all abortions forbidden. Every state that has enacted life-affirming laws makes some exceptions.

The partisan press further takes a side on this issue by blacking out references to the humanity of children inside the womb, including scientifically observed milestones such as their heartbeat, fingerprints, development of unique facial features, and capacity to feel pain. The Associated Press even instructs journalists to use the cold and clinical "cardiac activity" instead of "heartbeat." [read more...]

COMMENTARY: Our minds are being made up for us by the liberal-leaning media. They are not simply providing us the facts in the news, they are slanting the news to reflect a leftist worldview. We need to find alternate news sources so we don't automatically succumb to the leftist line and to challenge these hidden messages when we see or hear them.

 

---

 

CDC FINDS 'SIGNIFICANT INCREASE' IN KIDS WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
from: Disability Scoop

(17 Jul.) The number of children with developmental disabilities is on the rise with new data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showing that nearly 1 in 11 kids are diagnosed with autism, intellectual disability or developmental delay.

Between 2019 and 2021, incidence of developmental disabilities grew from 7.4% to 8.56% among children ages 3 to 17 across the country, according to a report issued this month from the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics.

During that time, the prevalence of autism and intellectual disability remained relatively flat, but the uptick was driven by an increase in kids diagnosed with other developmental delay, the federal agency said.

The findings come from data collected through the government's National Health Interview Survey, a routine poll soliciting information about health matters from people across the country. Participants were asked if a doctor or other health professional had ever told them that their child had autism, intellectual disability or any other developmental delay.

Overall, the researchers found a "significant increase" in diagnosis of developmental disabilities. Boys were twice as likely to have the conditions as compared to girls and the diagnoses were least common among Asian children.

Prevalence of developmental disabilities remained fairly steady across the age groups studied, but the report indicated that intellectual disability was more common as kids grew older while cases of other developmental delay were more concentrated in younger age groups. Benjamin Zablotsky, the main author of the CDC report, said that it's unclear what's driving the growth in diagnoses. [read more...]

COMMENTARY: The focus of this article is on developmental delay, which should have been clearly mentioned in the headline. It is important to track and investigate the reasons for this uptick: is it just an increase in ability to track these delays, or is it something in our environment?

 

---

 

UNESCO CONDEMNS RUSSIAN STRIKE ON ODESA'S TRANSFIGURATION CATHEDRAL
from: Religious Information Service of Ukraine

(23 Jul.) A Russian missile destroyed the central altar of the Transfiguration Cathedral in Odesa, as a result of which the temple was partially destroyed. This is according to the Odesa Diocese of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Moscow Patriarchate (UOC-MP), Ukrinform reports.

"On the night of July 23, 2023, during a Russian terrorist attack on the city of Odesa, an enemy missile hit the Transfiguration Cathedral. The missile directly hit the central altar, as a result of which the cathedral building and the three lower floors were partially destroyed, while the interior and icons were significantly damaged," the posting reads. It is noted that the service premises of the lower part of the cathedral were decimated and it is clarified that a guard was injured in the cathedral.

"The Odesa Diocese of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church once again condemns Russia's aggression against Ukraine, this act of terrorism against the main shrine and spiritual heart of the city of Odesa – the Holy Transfiguration Cathedral, around which peaceful civilians reside, and the cathedral itself is in no way connected with military facilities," the diocese added. On the night of July 23, Russian troops launched another major attack on the territory of Odesa and Odesa region. As a result, one person died and 22 people were injured, including four children.

The related RISU article "UNESCO condemns Russian strike on Odesa" states – The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) condemned the missile attack by Russian forces on Odesa in the early hours of Sunday, July 2023. This was announced on the organization's [UNESCO's] website, Ukrinform reports. "UNESCO is deeply dismayed and condemns in the strongest terms the brazen attack carried out by the Russian forces, which hit several cultural sites in the city center of Odesa, home to the World Heritage property ‘The Historic Centre of Odesa,'" the statement reads.

The organization noted that a number of significant cultural objects were damaged as a result of the attack, including the Transfiguration Cathedral, the first and main Orthodox church in Odesa, founded in 1794. "This act of hostility comes only days after other attacks that impacted many cultural heritage sites in areas protected under the World Heritage Convention in Lviv and Odesa.," UNESCO noted. [read more...]

COMMENTARY: This cathedral belongs to the UOC-MP, so it is strange that Russia would attempt to destroy one of Moscow's own cathedrals. Or is it really strange? It may indicate that the Russian state doesn't really care about the Russian Orthodox Church other than using it as an ideological justification for Russian nationalism and expansionism.

 

---

 

MAKING MAiD UNTHINKABLE
from: Mere Orthodoxy

(6 Jul.) In the last few months, many American Christians have been up in arms about MAiD. MAiD is Medical Assistance in Dying, Canada's euthanasia program. Canada has assisted terminally ill patients with dying since 2016, but in 2021 they expanded the categories of eligible people. The result has been a dramatic increase in medically-assisted deaths and an increasing cultural awareness of the program, in Canada and the United States.

MAiD has become a phenomenon – there are commercials for it in Canada, think pieces about it everywhere, and many, many questions. It has not only gained popularity, it has gained some Christian support in Canada. It also has Canadian Christian opponents, but the course of events has led to some necessary and serious conversations in the United States about what is happening across the border and how Christians should respond. A recent Plough article on the topic quoted Stanley Hauerwas: "If in a hundred years, Christians are identified as the people who don't kill their children or kill their elders, we will have done well." Hauerwas is right but rejection of MAiD is not enough. Churches should be places where no one would seek or suggest MAiD because we do so well at caring for our marginalized members.

The Christian reasons for objecting to MAiD are many. Most obviously, it fails to affirm the dignity of all human life. It also suggests that suffering negates the value of life. MAiD-eligible criteria not only include people with terminal illness but people with chronic illness or mental illness, such as depression. The expansion is especially troubling. The practice could easily function as a form of eugenics and it certainly is already applied in a way that seems to eliminate the most needy members of society. MAiD certainly reflects very distressing cultural trends and is an opportunity to create clear distinctions between Christians and the culture around them. To effectively resist MAiD and its implications, we should look at it from a few different angles.

In some ways, the expansion and embrace of MAiD reflect a shift in how our society sees happiness. It's not new to pursue happiness. The pursuit of happiness is in our constitution. We can find it in the classical era, too. But in the past fifty years, we have built more and more of our expectations around happiness. In fact, some people connect the emphasis on happiness with adult child-parent estrangement. Many children are no longer satisfied with being raised with enough of everything, they can be resentful if they were not given a happiness-filled childhood. Hard times and sad memories may be a reason never to call your parents again. MAiD also suggests that if there is not enough happiness – due to the suffering of long-term depression or some similar condition – life is inadequate.

Every Christian we know has an imperfect life, but that doesn't mean that we always emphasize the fact that suffering does not diminish the meaning of one's existence. There are plenty of think pieces about it, but how often do we consider that an underlying core value when we develop new programming or make practical decisions? We live in a nearly Brave New World Society, with CBD on every corner for all that ails us and non-stop streaming services – we have to think of practical ways to remind ourselves that the good life includes some suffering. This isn't the kind of thing that can only be doctrinally affirmed and have an impact.

Christians in America can resist legislation, but will we also embrace our elderly? In truth, we have a pretty serious bias against older Christians. A church that ministers primarily to the elderly or an older demographic is very often considered "dying." That is the actual terminology we use. A denomination preferred by older people is one we dismiss. A church that plays music older people might like is often considered to be making a mistake. We can cater to everyone's tastes except theirs.

It is difficult to affirm the dignity of all life when we make it clear that we don't care as much about older people as we do others. In our private lives, we often put older people in homes. In our church lives, we put them outside the circle of significance. They used to be in the choir, but, in many cases, we've discontinued the choir. Lots of churches have stopped "shut in" ministry, too. Many churches pour almost all of their resources into children's and youth ministry, emphasize the needs of younger families, and, when they pursue seekers, often aim for under 65. It's not wrong to minister to younger people, but sometimes it seems that souls over sixty-five are not our concern. [read more...]

COMMENTARY: This article states – "The pursuit of happiness is in our constitution." Actually, it's in our Declaration of Independence, but that's a trivial point. The article's essential point is right on target: modern society's real but unconscious confirmation bias suggests that unborn babies or older people with a disability are worth less than young, healthy adults. We as a society have devolved to thinking of people as economic assets or liabilites. The term "Human Resources" indicates that business people consider humans as just another resource to use up until it's worn out, like a machine, then replace it with a new model. This same mentality applies to marriage for many men: "Trade in your forty-year-old for two twenties" is an all-too-true joke. Not funny! People – unborn little people or elderly people – are intrinsically valuable because both are created in the image of God.

 

---