From The Alpha and the Omega - Chapter Eight
by Jim A. Cornwell, Copyright © 1995, all rights reserved
    This file is attached to http://www.mazzaroth.com/ChapterEight/2014-2017.htm from “Astronomical Events To Appear Between 2014 Through 2017 A.D.” - Chapter Eight by Jim A. Cornwell, Copyright © 1995, all rights reserved.

---

SCARLET WOMAN 2022 JULY-SEPTEMBER
Or return to Astronomical Events To Appear Between 2014 Through 2017 A.D. This link will take you toScarlet Woman 2022 April-June or Scarlet Woman 2022 Oct-Dec

7/1/2022 Ky. Catholic church hosts ‘unprecedented’ service of apology to LGBTQ+ community by Jeremy Tombs – Lexington WKYT
    LEXINGTON, Ky. (WKYT) - On the last day of Pride Month, a Lexington church is apologizing to the LGBTQ+ community.
    Leaders at St. Paul Catholic Church said they want to make amends for the church’s discrimination and lack of compassion.
    “I felt betrayed by an institution.    A divine institution, and I was heartbroken,” said JR Zerkowski, director of the Catholic LGBTQ+ Ministry.
    Multiple religious leaders made remarks Thursday evening about their mistreatment within Catholic congregations and the long road they took just to be accepted.
    “It took me 20 years for my mom to accept me,” said Rev. Marsha Moors-Charles, a founding pastor at the Bluegrass United Church of Christ.
    But those same pastors sought a way to break the chains of oppression through the word of God.
    So, St. Paul Catholic Church held a service, one that Rev. Richard Watson called “unprecedented within the region,” to apologize to the LGBTQ+ community and to atone for the church’s transgressions.
    Even as they spoke, others just across the street spoke out against them. But they have a message to even those who denounce them.
    “There are those that call me a heretic, I have gotten hate mail from all over the country.    That’s okay. Love wins,” Rev. Watson said.
    One reverend called it a “courageous move” for the parish, considering the potentially divisive nature of the topic.
    We reached out to the Catholic Diocese of Lexington for comment on the event but have not heard back.
[WE ARE ALL SINNERS AND MUST ASK GOD FOR FORGIVENESS AND GOD WILL FORGIVE YOU BUT TO CONTINUE YOUR SINS WHICH ARE IN THE BIBLE AS THAT AND IF YOU DO NOT GO AWAY FROM YOUR SINS AND BELIEVE THAT IS YOUR LIFESTYLE IT IS YOUR SOUL THAT YOU ARE PLAYING GAMES WITH MAKE YOUR OWN BED TO WALLOW IN AND THE END WILL COME WITH NO WARNING.].

7/2/2022 Same-sex couples are updating legal status - Abortion ruling has them fearing for their rights by Jay Reeves, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Sydney Duncan, an attorney in Birmingham, Ala., who specializes in representing LGBTQ people, sees the
Supreme Court’s ruling on abortion as a warning shot for families headed by same-sex parents. JAY REEVES/AP     BIRMINGHAM, Ala. – Emails and phone calls from same-sex couples, worried about the legal status of their marriages and keeping their children, flooded attorney Sydney Duncan’s office within hours of the Supreme Court’s decision eliminating the constitutional right to abortion.
    The ruling last week didn’t directly affect the 2015 decision that paved the way for same-sex marriage.    But, Duncan said, it was still a warning shot for families with same-sex parents who fear their rights could evaporate like those seeking to end a pregnancy.
    “That has a lot of people scared and, I think, rightfully so,” said Duncan, who specializes in representing members of the LGBTQ community at the Magic City Legal Center in Birmingham, Alabama.
    Overturning a nearly 50-year-old precedent, the Supreme Court ruled in a Mississippi case that abortion wasn’t protected by the Constitution, a decision likely to lead to bans in about half the states.    Justice Samuel Alito said the ruling involved only the medical procedure, writing: “Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.”
    But conservative Justice Clarence Thomas called on his colleagues to reconsider cases that allowed same-sex marriage, gay sex and contraception.
    The court’s three most liberal members warn in their dissent that the ruling could be used to challenge other perhistory sonal freedoms: “Either the mass of the majority’s opinion is hypocrisy, or additional constitutional rights are under threat.    It is one or the other.”
    That prospect alarms some LGBTQ couples, who worry about a return to a time when they lacked equal rights with married heterosexual couples under the law.    Many, fearful that their marital status is in danger, are moving now to square away potential medical, parental and estate issues.
    Dawn Betts-Green and wife Anna Green didn’t waste time shoring up their legal paperwork after the decision.    They’ve already visited a legal clinic for same-sex families to start the process of making a will.
    “That way, if they blast us back to the Dark Ages again, we have legal protections for our relationship,” said Betts-Green, who works with an Alabama based nonprofit that documents the of LGBTQ people in the South.
    As a white woman married to a Black transgender man, Robbin Reed of Minneapolis feels particularly vulnerable.    A decision undermining same-sex marriage or interracial unions would completely upend Reed’s life, which includes the couple’s 3-month-old child.
    “I have no expectation that anything about my marriage is safe,” said Reed, a legal aide.
    Reed’s employer, Sarah Breiner of the Breiner Law Firm, is setting up seminars in both the Twin Cities and the Atlanta area to help same-sex couples navigate potential legal needs after the court’s decision.    Breiner said helping people remain calm about the future is part of her job these days.
    “We don’t know what might happen, and that’s the problem,” Breiner said.

7/2/2022 Couples wed as Swiss same-sex marriage law takes effect
    GENEVA – Lesbian and gay couples in Switzerland rejoiced as they legally tied the knot Friday when the rich Alpine nation formally joined many other western European countries in allowing same-sex marriage, with some saying better late than never.    The first nuptials came about nine months after 64.1% of voters backed the “Marriage for All” law in a national referendum.    It puts same-sex partners on an equal legal footing with heterosexual couples, including allowing them to adopt children together and to sponsor a spouse for citizenship.

7/2/2022 Biden discusses abortion access - Options being looked at, Democrat governors told by Chris Megerian, ASSOCIATED PRESS
President Joe Biden listens as New York Gov. Kathy Hochul speaks during
a virtual meeting on the issue of abortion rights. EVAN VUCCI/AP     WASHINGTON – President Joe Biden told Democratic governors Friday that he is “looking at all the alternatives” for protecting abortion access following the Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade.
    One day after returning from international summits in Europe, Biden described the ruling as “tragic” and warned that Republicans could try to enact a nationwide ban on abortion if they retake control of Congress.    He urged Democrats to elect at least two more senators so they could create an exception to the filibuster and codify in law the protections that had been provided under Roe v. Wade.
    At least two Democratic senators, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, have blocked efforts to sidestep the filibuster.    The party would need unanimous backing from the Senate’s 48 Democrats and two allied independents, plus the tiebreaking vote of Vice President Kamala Harris, to make that rule change over solid GOP opposition.
    New York Gov. Kathy Hochul suggested that Biden consider having abortions performed at federal facilities like Veterans Affairs hospitals or military bases in states that restrict abortions.
    New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham said Native American tribes, which have a level of sovereignty over their own lands, could also be valuable partners.
    “We’re in the process of looking at all the alternatives,” Biden said.
    However, he did not make any announcements. Some activists and Democrats have been frustrated by what they consider an overly cautious approach from the administration, especially since the court decision has been expected since a draft leaked nearly two months ago.
    The justice’s June 24 ruling overturned a 1973 decision that declared a constitutional right to abortion.    Each state will now determine whether the procedure can be performed.

7/2/2022 Alarm as US supreme court takes a hatchet to church-state separation by David Smith Washington bureau chief – The Guardian
    When America’s highest court ended the constitutional right to abortion after half a century, Jeff Landry, the attorney general of Louisiana, knew whom he wanted to thank.
© Provided by The Guardian Photograph: Stefani Reynolds/AFP/Getty Images     “This is the day the Lord has made; let us rejoice in it and be glad,” he said in an official statement.    “Today, along with millions across Louisiana and America, I rejoice with my departed mom and the unborn children with her in Heaven!”
    Related: The US supreme court is letting prayer back in public schools.    This is unsettling | Moira Donegan
    The southern state’s top law enforcement official was not the only Republican to reference God while taking a victory lap.    Nor was he alone in rooting for the supreme court to continue a pattern of forcing religion back into the US political system and tearing down the wall that separates church from state.
    The court – said to be more pro-religion than at any time since the 1950s – wrapped up one of its most consequential and divisive terms this week. Critics lamented a string of decisions that they say undermine legal traditions that prevent government officials from promoting any particular faith.
    In May the conservative majority ruled in favor of a Christian group that wanted to fly a flag emblazoned with a cross at Boston city hall under a programme aimed at promoting diversity and tolerance among the city’s various communities.
    Last month they endorsed taxpayer money paying for students to attend religious schools under a Maine tuition assistance programme in rural areas lacking nearby public high schools.
    Then they backed an American football coach at a Washington state public high school who was suspended by a local school district for refusing to stop leading Christian prayers with players on the field after games.    This ruling cast aside a 1971 precedent, known as the Lemon test, which took into account factors such as whether the challenged government practice has a secular purpose.
    In all three cases, the court decided against government officials whose policies and actions were taken to avoid violating the constitution’s first amendment prohibition on government endorsement of religion, known as the “establishment clause.”
© Provided by The Guardian A sign motivating Christian voters is seen on a roadside near a
church in Jackson, Mississippi, in September 2020. Photograph: Chandan Khanna/AFP/Getty Images     In addition, although their decision last week to overturn the 1973 Roe v Wade ruling that legalised abortion nationwide did not involve the establishment clause, it was celebrated as a seminal victory by religious conservatives.    Mike Pence, the former vice-president and a born again Christian, called for a national ban on the procedure.
    Paradoxically, the trend comes against the backdrop of an increasingly diverse and secular nation.
    Last year a Gallup survey revealed that Americans’ membership in houses of worship dropped below 50% for the first time, and last month Gallup found that the share of US adults who believe in God – 81% – was the lowest since it first asked the question in 1944.
What we’re seeing is a desperate power grab as the sun is setting on white Christian America
Robert P Jones     White Christians represented 54% of the population when Barack Obama first ran for president in 2008 but now make up only 45%.    Former president Donald Trump’s appointment of three rightwing justices, however, helped put the court on a very different track.    And the nature of its rulings have been unusually radical and sweeping.
Rabbi sues Florida over abortion ban law arguing it infringes on religious liberty
    Robert P Jones, founder and chief executive of the Public Religion Research Institute thinktank in Washington, said: “What we’re seeing is a desperate power grab as the sun is setting on white Christian America.    In the courts, instead of moving slowly and systematically, it’s a lurch.”
Jones added: “In the meantime we’re going to be left with essentially an apartheid situation in the US where we’re going to have minority rule by this shrinking group that’s been able to seize the levers of power, even as their cultural democratic representation in the country shrinks.”
© Provided by The Guardian President Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1802 that the first amendment should
represent a ‘wall of separation between church and state. Photograph: Stock Montage/Getty Images     The establishment clause prevents the government from establishing a state religion and bars it from favoring one faith over another.    Thomas Jefferson, the third president, said in an 1802 letter the provision should represent a “wall of separation” between church and state.
    Some far-right Republicans now brazenly challenge that premise.    The Colorado congresswoman Lauren Boebert reportedly told a church service last Sunday: “I’m tired of this separation of church and state junk that’s not in the constitution.    It was in a stinking letter, and it means nothing like what they say it does.”
    In its trio of provocative decisions over the past two months, the supreme court decided that government actions intended to maintain a separation of church and state had instead infringed separate rights to free speech or the free exercise of religion, also protected by the first amendment.
    In the ruling on school football coach Joseph Kennedy, the conservative justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that the court’s aim was to prevent public officials from being hostile to religion as they navigate the establishment clause.    “In no world may a government entity’s concerns about phantom violations justify actual violations of an individual’s first amendment rights,” Gorsuch opined.
    Rachel Laser, president of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which represented the school board in the case, said the separation was “under complete attack” by the supreme court as it favours the free exercise clause at the expense of the establishment clause, thereby raising the specter of religious favoritism.
    “We are at risk of taking away the religious freedom of vast numbers of Americans, which should make the founders of our country be doing somersaults in their grave and I’m sure is alarming to the world as a whole, because they see America as a beacon of light when it comes to religious freedom.”
    The line between church and state has been crucial, Laser argues, to advances in LGBTQ equality, racial justice, reproductive freedom, protecting religious minorities, the teaching of science in schools and safeguarding democracy itself.    But all this is suddenly precarious because of the court’s 6-3 conservative majority.
    This is a backlash that is meant to reinforce and cement existing power structures into our law.
Rachel Laser
    She added: “The court pandered to a religious extremist agenda and implemented it by forcing one set of religious views on all of us and taking away the right of a woman to do with her body what her religious and moral views dictate, or taking away the right of a Maine taxpayer to not fund the teaching of a religion or religious discrimination that they disagree with, or taking away the right of a Jewish or Muslim or an atheist or a Buddhist public school student not to feel pressured to pray to play and be included in public school.”
    Like Jones, Laser perceives in the court’s opinions a backlash against America’s religious pluralism, racial diversity, an increase in women’s power in society and the advent of marriage equality and progress on LGBTQ equality.
    “This is a backlash that is meant to reinforce and cement existing power structures into our law, and it panders to a white Christian right extremist agenda.    It’s incredibly divisive.    It’s dangerous to our democracy in that regard.”
    Unusually, the nine-member supreme court currently includes six Catholics: Chief Justice John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh and Clarence Thomas, all appointed by Republican presidents, and Sonia Sotomayor, seated by a Democrat.    Last year the court ruled that a Catholic social services agency in Philadelphia could ignore city rules and refuse to work with same-sex couples who apply to take in foster children.
© Provided by The Guardian Unusually, the supreme court the produced the
recent rulings on religion includes six Catholics. Photograph: Getty Images     But although most of the court’s religious rights decisions in recent years involved Christian plaintiffs, it has also backed followers of other religions.    These included a Muslim woman in 2015 denied a retail sales job because she wore a headscarf for religious reasons and a Buddhist death row inmate in 2019 who wanted a spiritual adviser present at his execution in Texas.
    The court also sided with both Christian and Jewish congregations in challenges based on religious rights to governmental restrictions such as limits on public gatherings imposed as public safety measures during the coronavirus pandemic.
    The New York Times reported recently: “Since John Roberts became chief justice in 2005, the court has ruled in favor of religious organizations in orally argued cases 83% [now 85%] of the time.    That is far more than any court in the past seven decades – all of which were led by chief justices who, like Roberts, were appointed by Republican presidents.”
    We as Americans need to really reckon with whether this 18th-century system still works for us in the 21st century.
Amanda Hollis-Brusky
    The shift has been welcomed by conservative pressure groups.    Carrie Severino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network, said: “The court’s recent pro-religious liberty streak shows how far it has come from earlier decades.    A majority of the justices continue to demonstrate a clear record of protecting religious liberty and expression, something the constitution explicitly guarantees.”
    Activists and academic experts, however, warn that the emboldened supermajority of six justices is out of kilter with the will of the people on government endorsement of religion and other issues.
    Amanda Hollis-Brusky, an associate professor of politics at Pomona College in Claremont, California, said: “It’s paradoxical but it’s also a function of our system that creates so many avenues for minority rule and that’s something that we as Americans need to really reckon with: whether this 18th-century system still works for us in the 21st century.”

7/3/2022 END OF ROE V. WADE - Abortion decision stunned Ky. clinic - Patients, staff in tears: ‘I cannot have this baby’ by Deborah Yetter, Louisville Courier Journal USA TODAY NETWORK
    “The whole (waiting) room wailed as soon as they were told the news that we could no longer offer them abortions.    Many started crying, a few hyperventilated and had to be calmed down. … I don’t think I’ll ever forget the looks on their faces when we told them that abortion was now illegal in Kentucky.”
— Staff member at EMW Women’s Surgical Center in Louisville, as told to co-owner Ona Marshall.
    It was Friday morning, June 24, and EMW staff were in the midst of seeing patients at Kentucky’s only full-time abortion clinic when their lawyers called with urgent news.
    The U.S. Supreme Court had just struck down Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision establishing abortion as a constitutional right.
    And that meant an immediate stop to abortion in Kentucky, the result of the commonwealth’s previously passed “trigger” law that banned the procedure in the event of a Supreme Court ruling reversing Roe.
    The news stunned staff and patients, many still waiting to get abortions, said Ona Marshall, co-owner of EMW, who provided an account from a staff member who was there when it happened and who asked not to be identified because of security concerns.
    “I was going through normal motions of a day at EMW.    Checking patients in, getting their history, drawing blood. …” the worker said.    “I had a patient in my chair, about to draw her blood when a co-worker came and showed me the Supreme Court ruling.”
    The worker had to tell the patient that her procedure was now canceled.    She could not receive medication to terminate her pregnancy.
    “She started to panic, begging me to act like I hadn’t seen the news yet and to ‘just give me the pill, please, I cannot have this baby.’    She started to cry and continued to beg me to help her.    It broke my heart.    I had to leave the room and hide my tears for her — for every person in the clinic and especially for all of us.”
    Fifteen patients waiting to terminate pregnancies on June 24 had to be turned away. Nearly 200 pending appointments were canceled.
    One week later, though, EMW was able to resume providing abortions after lawyers won a temporary restraining order, blocking enforcement of the law while a legal challenge in state court is pending.
    Planned Parenthood and EMW representatives, at a news conference Thursday, urged all patients whose care was disrupted or are unsure whether they can get an abortion to call their clinics to schedule appointments.
    Though the Supreme Court ruling had been anticipated since early May when a draft opinion was leaked to the media, it still stunned patients and staff at EMW, Marshall said.
    “It was one of those things that even when it was expected, it’s shocking,” she said.
    “It was devastating for patients,” Marshall said, adding some had no idea their access to abortion could end so abruptly.    “They are upset, struggling, sad, angry.”
    The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, on behalf of EMW, and Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit in Jefferson Circuit Court on Monday, arguing abortion remains a state right under the Kentucky Constitution.
    On Thursday, Jefferson Circuit Judge Mitch Perry granted them a restraining order allowing them to resume abortion services temporarily while the case is pending.
    During the seven days abortions were suspended in Kentucky, EMW remained open for follow-up care or other services, including contraception and family planning.
    “We are committed to being here for patients,” Marshall said.
    EMW also helped patients find abortion services in states that haven’t banned them.    And it referred callers to abortionfinder.org, a website operated by abortion rights advocates that helps locate the closest facilities.
    It also made referrals to the National Abortion Federal hotline at 1-800-772-9100.
    Planned Parenthood, the state’s only other abortion provider, likewise has resumed scheduling appointments for abortions at its clinic where it also offers services including health screenings, contraception and other care.
    “Planned Parenthood is committed to helping Kentuckians get the care they need,” the organization said in a statement.
Three founding physicians
    Founded in 1981, EMW Women’s Surgical Center is the longest continuously operating abortion clinic in Kentucky.
    Its name comes from the initials of three of the founding physicians, Dr. Sam Eubanks, Dr. Ernest Marshall and Dr. Walter Wolfe.
    Marshall, an obstetrician and gynecologist, is the only surviving member of the founders and remains involved with the clinic he owns with his wife, Ona.
    Marshall, a Louisville native who first learned to perform abortions as a medical resident at the University of Louisville, has said he believes, based on his own experience, that women should have access to the procedure.
    “Part of my nature is that every child should have a mother or father that wants them,” he said.    “My mother has had 13 pregnancies. … I call it pseudo slavery through reproduction.”
    Marshall’s comments were included in the book “Standing Up for Reproductive Rights in Kentucky,” by Fran Ellers, published in 2008 and commissioned by the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky.
    After the Roe v. Wade decision of 1973, abortion clinics began opening around Kentucky with nearly a dozen in operation, according to the book.    But over time and under increasing enforcement pressure from state laws, by 2017 EMW had become the only provider.
    In 2020, Planned Parenthood was granted a state license to offer abortions at its Louisville clinic.
Growing protests
    In recent years, EMW has been the target of growing protests by those opposed to abortion, some from out of town, even as lawmakers enacted more laws to restrict or try to eliminate access to abortion.
    In 2017, a major protest organized by the group Operation Save America culminated in the arrests of 11 people from multiple states who blocked the door to the clinic and refused to move.
    Protesters frequently lined the sidewalk outside EMW, some shouting at patients as they enter, following them along the sidewalk, sometimes to the front door, accusing them of killing their babies and urging them to turn around.
    In 2021, Louisville Metro Council approved a small safety zone at health clinic entrances, prompted by reports of abortion opponents following, shouting at and sometimes jostling, touching or grabbing patients trying to enter the EMW clinic.
    Protesters are not supposed to step inside the 10-foot wide area at the entrance under the ordinance.    Violators can be issued a warning for the first offense and cited for a second infraction, and more than a dozen have since Louisville Metro Police began enforcing it last September.
    Clinic operators said the safety zone made it possible for patients and companions to enter and exit the facility more easily.    But it did not stop what they view as harassment, stalking and other unconscionable behavior outside it.
    Kentucky Right to Life and Sisters for Life have filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court challenging the safety zone, arguing it violates their right to free speech to conduct a “sidewalk ministry” and to try to counsel patients entering the clinic.    The lawsuit is pending.
    Marshall said volunteer escorts will continue to stand watch outside EMW to help patients enter and exit the clinic.    Even while the clinic suspended abortion services, protesters still gathered outside, she said.
    And the goal, for now, is to keep the clinic open despite how the legal battle turns out, Marshall said.

7/3/2022 FROM WIRE REPORTS Texas Supreme Court blocks order that resumed abortions
    AUSTIN, Texas – The Texas Supreme Court late Friday blocked a lower court order that had allowed clinics in the state to continue performing abortions even after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned it’s landmark 1973 ruling that confirmed a constitutional right to abortion.    It was not immediately clear whether the clinics that resumed performing abortions would halt services again following the ruling.    A hearing is scheduled for later this month. Clinics in Texas stopped performing abortions after the Supreme Court’s decision.

7/4/2022 Cologne’s Pride parade draws upwards of 1 million in Germany
A participant of the Cologne Pride rally marches through the city center in Cologne, Germany, Sunday. MARTIN MEISSNER/AP     COLOGNE, Germany – Around 1 million people turned out for the Pride parade in the western German city of Cologne on Sunday, either to participate or to watch the colorful festivities.
    Around 180 LGBTQ groups and music floats took part in the parade through the city center – more than ever before, German news agency dpa reported.    Organizers said about 1.2 million visitors attended the celebrations. The police estimated the crowd at around 1 million.
    With the parade, Cologne is sending “a strong signal for diversity, for tolerance, against hate and against exclusion,” said Hendrik Wuest, the first governor from the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, where Cologne is based, to attend the city’s parade in its roughly 30-year history, dpa reported.
    Cologne has one of the biggest LGBTQ communities in the country.
    “Everywhere in the world, unfortunately also in Germany, there are extremists are at work who do not want to grant us our freedom,” said Sven Lehmann, the German government’s commissioner for the acceptance of sexual and gender diversity.    “The strong signal from Cologne is: We will never let them take away this freedom.”
From wire reports

7/5/2022 The Pope Confirms What We Suspected All Along About His Views On Roe V. Wade - Opinion by Haley Van Horn – The List
    On January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court ruled in the "landmark legal decision" that protected abortion access across the United States — the case is more commonly referred to as Roe v. Wade (via History).    Abortion access was elevated to the level of the Supreme Court when Texas implemented an abortion ban across the state, which the court then struck down, effectively allowing access to the medical procedure throughout the country.
© AM113/Shutterstock Pope Francis smiling     For most of the 1800s, abortion was legal in the United States.    However, many religious affiliates, such as the Catholic Church, had banned the practice dating back to 1869 (per History).    A few years later, in 1873, the United States instituted the Comstock law, which made the distribution of all contraceptives via mail illegal.    Shortly thereafter, abortion itself became unlawful in most areas of the country.
    Centuries later, the Catholic religion still holds its initial beliefs (per The Outline).    With the recent Supreme Court ruling that struck down Roe v. Wade, though, many people were looking to Pope Francis — who is regarded as a more progressive pope — to see where he stood on the matter of abortion.    He recently made a statement about the topic that spoke volumes and clarified how he really feels.br> The Pope's View On Roe V. Wade Was Not Surprising To Many
© Riccardo De Luca - Update/Shutterstock Pope Francis posing     Many popes of the Catholic Church have been conservative; however, Pope Francis has brought a more modern vision to the church's highest order in recent years (via Bustle).    When it comes to issues like climate change, LGBTQ+ marriage, and gender equality, Pope Francis has spoken out in a progressive manner.    In 2013, he said, "If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge?" (per Bustle).    This is a statement that had not been echoed by previous popes.
    However, when it comes to the issue of abortion, he stands firm in his religion's ideology.    According to TMZ, in a recent conversation at the Vatican, Pope Francis stated, "I ask, is it legitimate?    Is it right to eliminate a human life to resolve a problem?"    He continued to state that abortion, in his mind, was like "hiring a hitman to solve a problem."    While Pope Francis has been more forward-thinking in establishing his viewpoint on other social issues, it seems as though he's in alignment with the Catholic Church's longstanding opinion of abortion.

7/6/2022 AG Cameron files appeal on abortion - Asking Kentucky Supreme Court to stop procedures in state by Deborah Yetter, Louisville Courier Journal | USA TODAY NETWORK
    The Kentucky Court of Appeals has rejected Attorney General Daniel Cameron’s effort to stop abortions in Kentucky just two days after a court order allowed them to resume.
    Cameron is now asking the state Supreme Court to consider his case.    In an order issued Saturday, appeals court Judge Glenn Acree denied Cameron’s appeal of a temporary restraining order issued Thursday by Jefferson Circuit Judge Mitch Perry.    That means abortions may continue for now while a legal challenge to a state law banning almost all abortions in Kentucky continues before Perry.
    Cameron had argued that Perry erred in allowing abortions to resume in Kentucky and sought to have the restraining order blocked by the appeals court.
    Lawyers for Kentucky’s two abortion providers filed a response Friday, arguing procedural rules and case law bar lifting Perry’s restraining order.
    Cameron said in a brief statement Saturday he was “disappointed” with the decision, and on Sunday, he announced he had filed his request with the high court, saying his office is “exhausting every possible avenue.”
    “There is no more important issue than protecting life, and we are urging the state’s highest court to consider our request for emergency relief,” he said in a prepared statement.
    A spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, which represents EMW Women’s Surgical Center, one of the abortion providers, praised Saturday’s appeals court ruling as correct.
    “We’re glad to see the Court of Appeals agrees the lower court has taken proper emergency action to protect abortion access,” Samuel Crankshaw said.    “This win is temporary, but we won’t back down in the fight to defend Kentuckians’ most basic rights from extremist politicians like Daniel Cameron.”
    Meanwhile, Perry has scheduled a hearing Wednesday on whether to grant an injunction, which would continue to block the law while the case proceeds.
    The appeals court ruling comes in the midst of a dispute over the state’s “trigger law” which effectively ended abortions in Kentucky after the Supreme Court on June 24 struck down Roe v. Wade, the 1973 case declaring abortion a federal constitutional right.
    That forced the state’s only two abortion providers, EMW and Planned Parenthood, to immediately suspend abortion services.    EMW said it had to turn some patients away who had arrived at the clinic for abortions and cancel appointments of others.
    Abortion rights advocates then turned to state court, arguing in a lawsuit that the Kentucky Constitution confers the right to abortion as a matter of privacy.    They sought a temporary restraining order blocking enforcement of the law; Kentucky is one of about a dozen states where challenges are underway to try to restore abortion access under state laws and constitutions.
    EMW and Planned Parenthood were able to resume abortion services Friday under Perry’s order.
    Thursday, Cameron filed a petition with the appeals court, asking it to bar enforcement of the restraining order against the trigger law and a second law that bans abortions after about six weeks.    Perry’s order applied to both laws.
    “There is no conceivable basis for restraining enforcement of these two abortion laws,” stated the appeal filed by Cameron’s office.
    Cameron’s appeal argued court action could take weeks — “weeks in which Kentucky’s duly enacted laws cannot be enforced and weeks in which the lives of unborn children will be lost forever.”
    Acree, in his order, said he was “acutely aware of and sensitive to the substantive issue at stake — what Roe termed ‘potential life’ and its termination by abortion.”
    However, he said he did not find grounds to rule in Cameron’s favor and overturn the restraining order.
    Acree did consider the disputed matter of whether the “trigger law” banning abortion in Kentucky became instantly effective once the Supreme Court issued its June 24 decision striking down Roe.
    The 2019 trigger law calls for it to become effective immediately upon such a decision, However, lawyers for EMW and Planned Parenthood have argued Supreme Court orders are not considered to be in effect for 25 days after a certified copy of the decision is released.
    But they said both clinics temporarily suspended abortions as a precaution because the law calls for prosecution of any physicians who violate it with a felony offense.
    Cameron said in a June 24 advisory that the trigger law “became effective on June 24, 2022, the date on which the Supreme Court issued its decision.”
    Acree, in his order, said that 17 days remain before the trigger law becomes effective July 19 under Supreme Court rules.
    Cameron also had requested the appeals court to review Perry’s order through what he filed as a “writ of mandamus,” alleging legal error by Perry, Acree said.
    Acree said in his order the matter will be assigned to a three-member appeals court panel to review once the 17 days have expired before the trigger law becomes effective.
    Reach Deborah Yetter at dyetter@ courier-journal.com.        Find her on Twitter at @d_yetter.    Support strong local journalism by subscribing today: www.courier-journal.com/subscribe.
- Cameron
7/6/2022 Exclusive-Pope to give women a say in appointment of bishops by Philip Pullella - Reuters
© Reuters/REMO CASILLI Reuters exclusive interview with Pope Francis at the Vatican     VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Pope Francis said he wants to give women more top-level positions in the Holy See and disclosed that for the first time he would name women to a previously all-male Vatican committee that helps him select the world's bishops.
Exclusive-Pope to give women a say in appointment of bishops
    The role of women in the Vatican hierarchy was one of the many Church and international topics the 85-year-old pontiff discussed in an exclusive interview with Reuters in his Vatican residence on July 2.
    A new constitution for the Holy See's central administration that came into effect last month allows any baptised Catholic, including lay men and women, to head most Vatican departments.
    "I am open to giving (women) an opportunity," he said in the part of the 90-minute interview that discussed the new constitution for the central administration, known as the Curia.
    He mentioned that last year, for the first time, he named a woman to the number two position in the governorship of Vatican City, making Sister Raffaella Petrini the highest-ranking woman in the world's smallest state.
    "Two women will be appointed for the first time in the committee to elect bishops in the Congregation for Bishops," he said.
    The move, which has not been officially announced, is highly significant because women will for the first time have a say in the appointment of the world's bishops, who are all men.
    "This way, things are opening up a bit," he said.
NEW CONSTITUTION
    Francis did not name the women or say when their appointment would be announced officially.
    Members of the committee, which is now made up cardinals, bishops and priests, usually meet twice a month in Rome.
    Last month, Irish-American Cardinal Kevin Joseph Farrell, Prefect of the Dicastery for the Laity, the Family and Life, joked that with the promulgation of the new constitution, he may likely be the last cleric to head that department.
    Asked which other Vatican department conceivably be headed by a lay man or woman, Francis suggested that they could include the department for Catholic Education and Culture and the Apostolic Library. They are currently headed by male clerics.
    Francis has already named a number women, both nuns and lay women, to Vatican departments.
    Last year, he named Italian nun Sister Alessandra Smerilli to the number two position in the Vatican's development office, which deals with justice and peace issues.
    In addition, Francis has named Nathalie Becquart, a French member of the Xaviere Missionary Sisters, as co-undersecretary of the Synod of Bishops, which prepares major meetings of world bishops held every few years.
    Lay women already holding top jobs in the Vatican include Barbara Jatta, the first female director of the Vatican Museums, and Cristiane Murray, the deputy director of the Vatican Press Office. Both were appointed by Francis.
(Reporting by Philip Pullella; Editing by Alex Richardson)

7/7/2022 ABORTIONS CAN CONTINUE - Ky. Supreme Court denies AG’s request by Deborah Yetter, Louisville Courier Journal | USA TODAY NETWORK
Attorney General Daniel Cameron had argued that the judge erred in allowing abortions to resume in Kentucky
and sought to have the restraining order blocked by the appeals court. MATT STONE/COURIER JOURNAL     The state Supreme Court has rejected Attorney General Daniel Cameron’s emergency effort to try to stop abortion services in Kentucky, five days after a court order allowed them to resume.
    In a two-paragraph order released Tuesday night, Chief Justice John D. Minton said, without elaboration, that Cameron’s request was denied.
    Earlier Tuesday, lawyers for Kentucky’s two abortion providers said in a court filing Cameron had no basis for pursuing his appeal.
    Minton’s order follows a similar order issued Saturday by a state Court of Appeals judge.
    In an order issued Saturday, appeals court Judge Glenn Acree denied Cameron’s appeal of a temporary restraining order issued Thursday by Jefferson Circuit Judge Mitch Perry.
    That means abortions may continue for now while a legal challenge to a state law banning almost all abortions in Kentucky continues before Perry.
    Cameron had argued that Perry erred in allowing abortions to resume in Kentucky and sought to have the restraining order blocked by the appeals court.
    Lawyers for Kentucky’s two abortion providers filed a response Friday, arguing procedural rules and case law bar lifting Perry’s restraining order.
    Cameron said in a brief statement Saturday he was “disappointed” with the appeals court decision, and on Sunday filed an appeal with the Supreme Court.
    “There is no more important issue than protecting life, and we are urging the state’s highest court to consider our request for emergency relief,” he said in a prepared statement.
    A spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, which represents EMW Women’s Surgical Center, one of the abortion providers, praised Saturday’s appeals court ruling as correct.
    “We’re glad to see the Court of Appeals agrees the lower court has taken proper emergency action to protect abortion access,”     Samuel Crankshaw said.    “This win is temporary, but we won’t back down in the fight to defend Kentuckians’ most basic rights from extremist politicians like Daniel Cameron.”
    Meanwhile, Perry had scheduled a hearing for Wednesday on whether to grant an injunction, which would continue to block the law while the case proceeds.
    The higher court rulings come in the midst of a dispute over the state’s “trigger law” which effectively ended abortions in Kentucky after the Supreme Court on June 24 struck down Roe v. Wade, the 1973 case declaring abortion a federal constitutional right.
    That forced the state’s only two abortion providers, EMW and Planned Parenthood, to immediately suspend abortion services.    EMW said it had to turn some patients away who had arrived at the clinic for abortions and cancel appointments of others.
    Abortion rights advocates then turned to state court, arguing in a lawsuit that the Kentucky Constitution confers the right to abortion as a matter of privacy.    They sought a temporary restraining order blocking enforcement of the law, Kentucky is one of about a dozen states where challenges are underway to try to restore abortion access under state laws and constitutions.
    EMW and Planned Parenthood were able to resume abortion services Friday under Perry’s order.
    Thursday, Cameron filed a petition with the appeals court, asking it to bar enforcement of the restraining order against the trigger law and a second law that bans abortions after about six weeks.    Perry’s order applied to both laws.
    “There is no conceivable basis for restraining enforcement of these two abortion laws,” stated the appeal filed by Cameron’s office.
    Cameron’s appeal argued court action could take weeks — “weeks in which Kentucky’s duly enacted laws cannot be enforced and weeks in which the lives of unborn children will be lost forever.”
    Acree, in his order, said he was “acutely aware of and sensitive to the substantive issue at stake — what Roe termed ‘potential life’ and its termination by abortion.”
    However, he said he did not find grounds to rule in Cameron’s favor and overturn the restraining order.
    Reach Deborah Yetter at dyetter@ courier-journal.com.    Find her on Twitter at @d_yetter.    Support strong local journalism by subscribing today: www.courier-journal.com/subscribe.

7/7/2022 Putin aide: US could face ‘wrath of God’ by ASSOCIATED PRESS
    MOSCOW – A top Kremlin official warned the U.S. on Wednesday that it could face the “wrath of God” if it pursues efforts to help establish an international tribunal to investigate Russia’s actions in Ukraine, while the Russian lower house speaker urged Washington to remember that Alaska used to belong to Russia.
    Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy secretary of Russia’s Security Council chaired by President Vladimir Putin, denounced the U.S. for what he described as its efforts to “spread chaos and destruction across the world for the sake of ‘true democracy.’”    “The entire U.S. history since the times of subjugation of the native Indian population represents a series of bloody wars,” Medvedev charged, pointing out the U.S. nuclear bombing of Japan during World War II and the war in Vietnam.    “Was anyone held responsible for those crimes?    What tribunal condemned the sea of blood spilled by the U.S. there?”
    Responding to the U.S.-backed calls for an international tribunal to prosecute the perceived war crimes by Russia in Ukraine, Medvedev rejected it as an attempt by the U.S. “to judge others while staying immune from any trial.”
    “It won’t work with Russia, they know it well,” Medvedev concluded.
    In another warning, Vyacheslav Volodin, a longtime Putin aide who serves as the speaker of the lower house of parliament, warned that Washington should remember that Alaska was part of Russia when it freezes Russian assets.
[I WONDER WHAT GOD PUTIN IS TALKING ABOUT OR THE ONE WHO WILL PUNISH CHRISTIAN CHURCHES WITH CATHOLIC PREISTS IF THEY DO NOT FOLLOW THE RUSSIAN DICTATOR’S IDEA OF GOD OR THE ONE WHO WILL SLAUGHTER INNOCENT UKRANIANS WHO ARE TRYING TO ESCAPE FROM THE CITY HE IS ATACKING AND I BET THE PEOPLE OF RUSSIA DO NOT EVEN KNOW WHO THAT GOD REALLY IS AND IN THE BIBLE HE IS KNOWN AS THE GOD OF THE EARTH WHO WAS THROWN OUT OF HEAVEN IN THE FAR PAST, AND IT IS NOT THE ONE WHO IS IN HEAVEN.].

7/7/2022 Exclusive-Pope hopes London building last Vatican financial scandal by Philip Pullella - Reuters
© Reuters/REMO CASILLI Reuters exclusive interview with Pope Francis at the Vatican     VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Pope Francis said he hoped that the recent sale of a luxury London building at the centre of an ongoing corruption trial meant the Vatican can see the back of financial scandals.
    Vatican finances were one of the many Church and international topics the 85-year-old pontiff discussed in an exclusive interview with Reuters in his Vatican residence on July 2.
of the interview, he denied that he was planning to resign anytime soon, denied that he had cancer, spoke of his hopes to go to Moscow and Kyiv and disclosed that for the first time he would appoint women to a Vatican committee that helps him choose bishops.
    The interview took place a day after the Vatican announced it had completed the sale of the building on Sloane Avenue in Chelsea, taking an estimated hit of about 140 million euros.
    Ten people including a Vatican cardinal and two Italian financial brokers are on trial in the Vatican on charges including embezzlement, fraud, money laundering and extortion relating to the building.
    The pope was asked if he believed enough controls were now in place so that similar scandals could not take place again.
    "I believe so," he said.
    The Vatican's Secretariat of State first invested in the building in 2014 with funds from its own sovereign wealth fund, managed without external controls.
    Pope looks frail at weekly general audience at Vatican
    It had resisted oversight even from the Secretariat for the Economy, which the pope instituted in 2014 to oversee all Vatican finances and put a lid on decades of scandals caused by the fragmentation of finances, in which different departments exercised control in a fiefdom-like way.
    As a result of the botched and embarrassing London deal, the pope stripped the Secretariat of State of control over its own investment funds in 2020.    Last month, he instituted a committee to oversee the ethics of all Vatican investments.
    "Before, the administration (of Vatican money) was very messy," the pope said, adding that the Secretariat for the Economy is now staffed by expert, technical people, "who don't fall into the hands of quote-unquote benefactors or friends, who can make you slip up."
THE BLESSED IMELDA
    He gave the example of priests who had no financial experience being asked to manage the finances of a department and who in good faith sought outside help from friends in the outside financial sector.
    "But sometimes the friends were not The Blessed Imelda," he said, referring to a 14th century 11-year-old Italian girl who is a symbol of childhood purity.
    "And so, what happened, happened," the pope said.
    He blamed "the irresponsibility of the structure" for past financial scandals, saying the administration of money "was not mature."
    In the interview, Francis praised Australian Cardinal George Pell as "the genius" who had insisted that the Vatican needed an overarching economy ministry to control money flows and combat corruption.
    Pell was the first head of the Secretariat for the Economy, receiving a mandate from the pope to clean up the Vatican's murky finances.
    Pell, now 81, left the post in 2018 to face sex abuse charges dating back decades in Australia.    He spent 13 months in solitary confinement before being cleared of all charges on appeal in 2020.
    Cardinal Angelo Becciu, whom Pell has accused of having resisted financial reforms when he was number two at the Secretariat of State, is currently one of 10 defendants at the corruption trial over the London real estate deal.
    All of the defendants have denied wrongdoing.
(Reporting by Philip Pullella; Editing by Alexandra Hudson)

[WELL THE DEMOCRATS ARE HAVNG ADDICTIONS BECAUSE THEY CANNOT KILL BABIES EVERYWHERE IN THE U.S.A. BUT YOU KNOW THEY ARE GOING TO TRY TO FIND A WAY AROUND IT IN THEIR SCARLET WOMAN MOMENT.]
7/8/2022 Under Pressure, Biden Issues Executive Order on Abortion by The New York Times
    WASHINGTON — Under pressure to do more to respond to the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, President Biden on Friday issued an executive order that aimed to ensure access to abortion medication and emergency contraception while preparing for legal fights to come.
© Tom Brenner for The New York Times President Biden has repeatedly said that he does not have the authority to
restore the constitutional right to abortion that the Supreme Court ended when it overturned Roe v. Wade last month.     But the order is vague about how the president hopes to accomplish those goals, leaving the details largely to Xavier Becerra, his secretary of health and human services, who has said the administration has “no magic bullet” that can restore access to abortion.
    And Mr. Biden’s order stops far short of demands from abortion rights advocates, who have criticized him for failing to move quickly to take action after the court’s decision two weeks ago.
    Speaking to reporters at the White House before signing the document, Mr. Biden condemned the court’s decision as “terrible, extreme and, I think, so totally wrongheaded.”    The order would help protect some access to reproductive services, he said, but the only real way to protect access was to elect more lawmakers who support them.
    “For God’s sake, there’s an election in November.    Vote.    Vote.    Vote.    Vote,” the president said, noting that the justices in the majority “practically dares” women to assert their political power to put in place laws that restore abortion rights.    “Consider the challenge accepted, court.    But in the meantime, I’m signing this important executive order.”
    The order directs Mr. Becerra to develop a report “identifying potential actions” to protect access to abortion, but does not say what those actions will be.    Mr. Becerra will identify “steps” to ensure that pregnant women have access to emergency care, it says, by “considering updates to current guidance on obligations specific to emergency conditions and stabilizing care.”
    The order does not specify what those updates will be but directs Mr. Becerra to report back to Mr. Biden in 30 days.
    In an effort to prepare for legal challenges from abortion opponents, the order directs the attorney general and the White House counsel to “convene a meeting of private pro bono attorneys, bar associations, and public interest organizations” to encourage robust legal representation.
    In response to concerns that those seeking abortions could be prosecuted using personal information in emails, texts or web searches, the order seeks to safeguard patient privacy regarding data about women’s health services.
    It asks the chair of the Federal Trade Commission to “consider actions” to protect consumers’ privacy when patients seek information about reproductive care.    And it directs Mr. Becerra to “consider actions” to protect information.
    The order pledges that the administration will “ensure the safety of patients, providers and third parties” who are delivering or receiving abortion services.    But it does not say how agencies will ensure that amid heightened tensions after the Supreme Court’s decision.
    Mr. Biden has repeatedly said that he does not have the authority to restore the constitutional right to abortion that the court ended when it overturned Roe.    In the hours after the ruling, the president said he was powerless to restore the status quo.
    “The only way we can secure a woman’s right to choose and the balance that existed is for Congress to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade as federal law,” Mr. Biden said.    “No executive action from the president can do that.”
    Other administration officials have also said that the president’s hands are largely tied in part because of the Hyde Amendment, a provision in federal law precluding the government from paying for abortions except in cases of rape or incest or to save the life of the mother.
    Mr. Becerra has said his agency will work with the Justice Department to ensure that women have access to abortion pills — two drugs taken 24 to 28 hours apart and authorized for use during the first weeks of pregnancy — in places where state law conflicts with the judgment of the Food and Drug Administration, which approved the drugs for use and determined that they are safe and effective.
    Beyond that, Mr. Biden and Mr. Becerra have said that Americans should vote for lawmakers who support abortion rights so that Congress can take action to establish federal protections for access.
    But the attempt to shift responsibility has not gone over well among some of Mr. Biden’s core supporters, who have repeatedly called on the White House to push to find novel ways around the court’s decision and the subsequent limits on abortion that the ruling automatically imposed in more than a dozen states with Republican-led state legislatures and Republican governors.
    Some activists and lawmakers, for example, have urged the president to establish abortion services on federal land or on Native American territories, where state laws banning abortion services might not be enforceable.    The White House has dismissed those ideas as legally unworkable and potentially more dangerous for women seeking abortions.
    On Thursday, a reporter asked Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, whether the president was examining the possibility that the Department of Veterans Affairs could offer abortion services at V.A. hospitals.
    “As you know, current regulation doesn’t allow for the V.A. to provide abortions,” Ms. Jean-Pierre said.    “We’re going to continue to review.    We’re going to continue to explore every possible option to protect women’s rights and access to reproductive health.”
    Opponents of abortion rights criticized the president’s order on Friday.
    Jeanne F. Mancini, the president of March for Life, called it “tragic that this administration is using its power to push for more and more painful abortions which harm women and take innocent lives.”    She added: “Our nation today faces significant challenges; not enough abortion is not one of them.”
    Some abortion rights advocates praised the president for signing the order.
    Mini Timmaraju, the president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said in a statement that “President Biden’s executive order to safeguard access to reproductive health care, including abortion care, is an important first step in restoring the rights taken from millions of Americans by the Supreme Court.”
    But other advocates have urged Mr. Biden to step in and take bolder action, even if he risks being overturned in court.    They want him to declare a public health emergency, a move that they say would enable the administration to move quickly to expand access to abortion, including by ensuring that abortion pills can be prescribed in states where abortion is illegal.
    “You need to be willing to take some risks — even if the anticipation is it might not work,” said Andrea Miller, the president of the National Institute for Reproductive Health, an advocacy organization.    “Because we are facing an immediate crisis.”
    Until Friday, officials had been coy about how far Mr. Biden was willing to go.    Asked on Thursday about a possible executive order related to abortion, Ms. Jean-Pierre declined to answer the question, saying she would not “get ahead of the president.”
    Mr. Biden signed the executive order on Friday before leaving for a weekend at his beach house in Delaware.    The fact sheet did not include any of the more far-reaching suggestions about using federal resources to provide abortion services.

7/8/2022 Exclusive-Pope Francis calls steps against clerical abuse irreversible, despite resistance by Philip Pullella - Reuters
© Reuters/REMO CASILLI Reuters exclusive interview with Pope Francis at the Vatican     VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Pope Francis has acknowledged that there is resistance by some national Catholic Churches on implementing measures to protect children from sexual abuse by clergy but said that there is no turning back on an "irreversible" path.
    Sexual abuse in the Church and measures to combat it were among one of the many Church and international topics the 85-year-old pontiff discussed in an exclusive interview with Reuters in his Vatican residence on July 2.
    In 2019 Francis issued a papal directive ordering "public, stable and easily accessible systems for submission" of reports of sexual abuse in dioceses around the world.
    Some countries, such as the United States, established procedures, sometimes known as "listening centres," even before the 2019 directive, but others, particularly in the developing world, have been slow to conform.
    "There is resistance, but with each new step there is growing awareness that this is the way to go," Francis said.
    The Church's abuse crisis exploded onto the international stage in 2002 when the Boston Globe newspaper revealed priests had sexually abused children for decades and church leaders had covered it up.br> 'IRREVERSIBLE' DIRECTION
    Patterns of widespread abuse of children were later reported across the United States and Europe, in Chile and Australia, undercutting the moral authority of the 1.3 billion-member Church and taking a toll on its membership and coffers.
    "(After Boston) the Church started zero tolerance slowly and moved forward.    And I think the direction taken on this is irreversible," said Francis, who became pope in 2013.
    In 2019, Francis summoned presidents of all the world's bishops conferences - the leaderships of the national Churches - to Rome for a summit on sexual abuse.    By the end of that year he enacted two major pieces of legislation.
    The first instituted new reporting procedures and made bishops more accountable.    It also broadened the definition of sexual crimes to include vulnerable adults and abuse of office in sexual molestation of seminarians and women religious.
    The second was the removal of pontifical secrecy around abuse cases.
    In February this year, the pope restructured the Vatican's doctrinal department to give the disciplinary section that deals with sexual abuse cases more clout, putting it a par with the doctrinal section.
    In the interview, the pope said that the change in the doctrinal office was "going well."
Pope Francis's health concerns fuel rumours about possible resignation
CHURCH CANNOT POLICE ITSELF
    Anne Barrett Doyle, co-director of BishopAccountability.org, a respected U.S.-based organisation that tracks abuse, gave the pope's anti-abuse measures a mixed report card.
    She called the two 2019 legislations positive and long overdue.    But she said there was still far too much insularity in the Church and too little external oversight, including from lay Catholics.
    "The problem is that the pope wants trust restored on his own impossible terms ... the Catholic hierarchy cannot self-police," she told Reuters in an email, adding that "the twin crises of child sexual abuse and cover-up remain unsolved."
    "The burden of cleaning the Church remains the task of those outside the hierarchy -- the victims, whistle blowers, the public, the media, and civil authorities," she said.
    In the interview, Francis said that while statistics showed that only a small percentage of priests were responsible for abuse compared to such crimes within the general population, and that the majority of abuse occurs within the family context, even one episode of abuse in the Church was shameful.
ZERO TOLERANCE
    "We have to fight against every single case," he said.    "As a priest, I have to help people grow and save them.    If I abuse, I kill them.    This is terrible.    Zero tolerance," he said.
    Barrett Doyle said zero tolerance "still does not exist" in the Church, adding that not enough clerics involved in abuse cases or their cover-up were being permanently removed from ministry.
    In 2014, a year after his election, Francis established the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors to promote best practices and a culture of safeguarding in Catholic communities worldwide.
    It got off to a rocky start, with several members resigning in frustration, complaining that it had no teeth and that they had met internal resistance.
    The pope later appointed new members and in March this year he gave the commission much more clout when a new Holy See constitution placed it in the doctrinal department, which rules on abuse cases.
    The commission is made up mostly of lay people, including survivors of clergy sexual abuse such as Juan Carlos Cruz of Chile, one of most vocal defenders of abuse victims and critics of the Church's past policies.
    Sources say that some Vatican officials look down on the commission, seeing it as being too close to critics.
    But in the interview, Francis appeared to go out of his way to praise its president, Cardinal Sean O'Malley of Boston, and its secretary, British priest Andrew Small, as "courageous" men.
    "I totally support the commission," Francis said.
(Reporting by Philip Pullella; Editing by Frances Kerry)

7/9/2022 Is the Catholic Church Under Attack? by Molly Olmstead - Slate
    A couple hours after Roe v. Wade was overturned, the Archdiocese of New York celebrated the retreat of the “culture of death.”    But its triumphant statement came with a note of caution: “We still have a lot of work ahead of us in New York, as the loud, angry, potentially violent response of the pro-abortion movement makes clear.”
© Provided by Slate Photo illustration by Natalie Matthews-Ramo. Photo by allanswart/iStock/Getty Images Plus.     The allusion to potential violence from pro-choice activists may seem premature or recklessly dramatic to those not steeped in pro-life media.
    After all, there are very few news reports of actual violence to support that claim. But for the past couple months—and, to a lesser extent, the past couple years—the Catholic right has been ramping up its warnings about “anti-Catholic bigotry,” mainly in response to instances of vandalism, tying graffiti to omens of bloodshed.
    This has meant that the narrative about the end of Roe (even before it was overturned) has not simply been about a win at the Supreme Court, but of a religion under attack from violent and hateful radicals.    “We seem to face growing hostility for putting our faith into action,” the archbishop of New York, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, wrote in a Fox News article published the night before the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision that overturned Roe.    The conservative political group CatholicVote.org issued a similar warning earlier that month: “Our sources tell us government officials are already warning Catholic dioceses: when and if Roe v. Wade is overturned, churches and pro-life support centers will be targeted for vandalism, violence, or worse.” (The conservative Catholic League took it one step further in a press release from May titled, “BIDEN CONDEMNS ATTACKS ON GAYS, NOT CATHOLICS.”)
    It’s not untrue that the Catholic Church is intertwined with the end of Roe in the public’s mind.    While the reality is that white evangelicals are the real drivers of the anti-abortion movement (polling has consistently shown that Catholics, unlike white evangelicals, are largely ambivalent about abortion), the anti-abortion movement was founded by the Catholic Church, which still provides its intellectual framework.    There are the more visible elements too: the distinctly Catholic symbols that look good on protest signs or make for catchy chants, and the Catholic justices who struck down Roe.
    But the very real history of ugly and violent anti-Catholic bigotry in the U.S., tied to its association with immigrants, makes some Catholics understandably worried about backlash.    For older Catholics who remember now-antiquated prejudices, a radical group vowing to “burn the Eucharist” may seem to be tapping into a vein of real historical hatred.
    This has not been lost on idealogues like Cardinal Dolan.
    In a New York Post op-ed last year, in which he also referenced the 19th century anti-Catholic Know Nothing party, Cardinal Dolan described vandals who spray-painted “ACAB” on St. Patrick’s Cathedral as “pure bigots.”    In an official statement on behalf of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, the nonpartisan organization for all U.S. bishops, he called other instances of vandalism of churches “acts of hate.”
    To be fair, anecdotally there does seem to have been an increase in vandalism on churches.
    The USCCB started a running list of these instances in 2020, and according to its record-keeping, there were three instances in June and eight in May in which churches were defaced with explicitly pro-choice graffiti; the organization counted 20 cases overall in those two months in which church institutions were vandalized. (At the beginning of 2022, the USCCB called for federal funds to improve security measures at churches.)
    But those numbers should be put into perspective.    Almost all of the incidents were property crimes, and anti-Catholic hate crimes are generally around 1 percent of all hate crimes in the country—a blip compared with antisemitic crimes, per FBI data.
    Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University–San Bernardino, said that he sees an increase in anti-Catholic incidents compared with previous periods, but it doesn’t rise to the level where it is out of sync with what’s happening more broadly.
    “Anti-Catholic crime has gone up since 2020,” Levin said in a recent phone call, “but hate crime in general has gone up.    When we have a very polarized and angry society, it’s true that violence begets violence.    But it’s not necessarily evenly distributed."
    “Yes, I’m concerned about churches,” he added, “but we’ve not yet seen anything other than a smattering, not something where we can determine a conclusion.”
    According to Levin, violent action stemming from abortion-related activism has traditionally come from extreme anti-abortion activists or the far right.    “The movements behind women’s rights have been generally textbook with regard to using the processes and institutions of a pluralistic democracy to attain their ends,” he said.    “What’s different this time is it’s more than a speed bump—this will be regarded as a tectonic shift.    But the history and the subculture of women’s rights just has generally not included that deep well of violent aggressive action.”
    He acknowledged that the pro-choice movement, given its breadth and size, would likely engender some extremist action.    But he doubted it would be significantly violent.    “When you remove the machismo out of extremism, you remove a lot of extremism out of extremism,” he said.
    One radical group, known as Jane’s Revenge, has gotten a lot of attention for claiming responsibility for some fire bombings of pro-life Christian pregnancy centers as well as threatening graffiti found on churches with phrases like “if abortions aren’t safe, neither are you.”
    But it’s unclear if Jane’s Revenge is a real organized group, or if it’s genuinely a violent threat.    (No one has been injured in any of the attacks.) The Department of Homeland Security has called Jane’s Revenge a “network of loosely affiliated suspected violent extremists.”    White House assistant press secretary Alexandra LaManna condemned Jane’s Revenge’s actions in a statement to the Daily Wire: “We should all agree that actions like this are completely unacceptable regardless of our politics.”
    But the big, fearful event amplified by prominent conservatives—a “night of rage” over the Dobbs ruling, supposedly called for by Jane’s Revenge—never materialized.    And though fires at several anti-abortion pregnancy centers are being investigated as suspected arson attacks, the main problem churches have faced is aggressively worded graffiti.
    “The mere fact that we have stereotyping and derisive language around Catholicism and other organized religion and their role with respect to abortion creates a heightened risk,” Levin said.    He acknowledged that the idea of Jane’s Revenge could be extremely worrying to churches.    But otherwise, “we’re not really seeing the calls to violence that we saw with other controversies.”
    There’s another important piece of context to the “surge of anti-Catholic attacks” narrative: These talking points have been in use since 2020.
    Many cases of vandalism haven’t been related to Roe at all.
    The USCCB began tracking attacks on churches after two caught fire in separate incidents on July 11, 2020.    In both cases, the motive remains unclear. In the first, in Florida, the suspect had been diagnosed with schizophrenia and had not been taking his medication.    In the second, in California, the suspect had a history of arson-related arrests.    That church had also, incidentally, been established by St. Junípero Serra, an 18th century Spanish missionary to California seen by many Indigenous Americans as a coercive and cruel colonialist.    That summer, statues of Serra were toppled elsewhere, and missions founded by the saint were vandalized.
    This tracks with other protest actions taken after the murder of George Floyd by police. But that is not how some Catholic leaders talked about it.
    “The underlying motive of these sacrilegious attacks is clear: to intimidate and instill fear in the hearts of those who worship Christ,” the Archdiocese of Hartford, Connecticut, said in a statement to the Wall Street Journal that summer.
    (Anarchist and satanic symbols had been painted on a New Haven church’s door.)    “However, our cherished Catholic faith has survived for 2,000 years in the faces of many different oppressors, and it is not about to yield now.”
    The following summer, in Canada, unmarked graves were found at residential schools for Indigenous children that had been operated by Catholic orders or dioceses.    Several churches in Canada were vandalized or burned—enough to count as a “disturbing” and “significant” number, according to Brian Levin.    But it is unlikely that that violence had anything to do with Roe.
    In a count that goes back to May 2020, the USCCB has noted 144 incidents of arson, vandalism, and destruction on Catholic churches in the U.S. For anyone who has been paying attention to the conversation on the Catholic pro-life right, it is clear that the victimhood identification following these instances is not new or a real response to Dobbs; it has been building for years.
    And conservative Catholic media outlets such as EWTN have been playing it up.    As have other power players in the Catholic world, sometimes with agendas that might be hidden to the average observer.
    In an op-ed published in the Washington Post last year, two Catholic writers addressed an incident in which the words “Satan lives here” were spray-painted on a Denver cathedral, in large part because of the church’s opposition to abortion. (A 26-year-old woman was charged with a hate crime.    The suspect grew up Catholic; claims of anti-Catholic prejudice rarely distinguish between those committed by outsiders and those committed by former members of the church.)
    “You would likely have to go back to the early 20th or late 19th centuries, when an influx of Catholic immigrants challenged a mostly Protestant culture, to find so much public antagonism toward the Catholic Church,” the authors of the op-ed wrote.
    But the writers, Archbishop Samuel J. Aquila of Denver and Catholic philanthropist Tim Busch, aren’t just regular Catholics fighting for their rights to practice religion without fear.    They are board member and the chairman, respectively, of the Napa Institute, a network for wealthy conservative Catholics who are pushing culture war issues in elite Catholic institutions.
    They did not mention that at a Napa event, one of them once gave a speech attacking “the biggest catastrophe” of abortion in front of an audience that included Justice Sam Alito, or that one of the organization’s major donors and former board members is Leonard Leo, the man often credited with shaping the court into one that could overturn Roe.    Instead, Aquila and Busch made a reasonable-sounding plea for the kind of pluralism they would deny to others.
    “Let’s remember that all of us have a right to our own beliefs and a duty to accept that others have the same right,” they wrote.    “If we do not, things will get far worse than seeing ‘Satan lives here’ spray-painted on a cathedral door.”

7/9/2022 Presbyterians agree to divest from fossil fuel companies
    The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has opted to pull investments from five energy corporations, joining other faith-based groups in targeting fossil fuel companies over what they said are failures to address climate change.
    The denomination’s General Assembly, meeting online, voted overwhelmingly this week for a resolution targeting Chevron, ExxonMobil, Marathon Petroleum, Phillips 66 and Valero Energy for divestment.
    Presbyterian officials have in recent years sought to persuade several fossil fuel companies to take steps to reduce greenhouse gases.
    The resolution said these efforts “did not produce enough substantial change or movement” by the five corporations now targeted for divestment.
    The church’s investments are a small fraction of a percent of the five corporations’ market capitalization.    But supporters of divestment said it would send a message and help spur corporations to change policies in response to climate change.
[I WILL LAUGH IF IN THE FUTURE WHEN WE HAVE NO ENERGY TO BRING THE LIGHTS OR AIR CONDITIONER ON IN YOUR CHURCHES WHEN LACK OF OIL BACK UP FOR THE SO-CALLED WIND-SOLAR ELECTRICITY IS NOT THERE LIKE IT WAS DURING THE TEXAS ICE STORM THAT KILLED A 250 PEOPLE IN HOUSTON WHERE THEY MADE THAT DECISION TO DEPEND ON FROZEN SOLAR PANELS AND WIND TURBINES AS YOU ARE THE SAME IDIOTS AND YOU MAY BECOME UNDERPRESSUREBYTERIANS.].

7/9/2022 Muslims pray at Mount Arafat for hajj - People gather Friday as part of annual pilgrimage by Amr Nabil, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Muslim pilgrims are on their way to perform Friday prayers at Namira Mosque in Arafat,
on the second day of the annual hajj pilgrimage, near the holy city of Mecca. AMR NABIL/AP     MOUNT ARAFAT, Saudi Arabia – Hundreds of thousands of Muslim pilgrims from around the world raised their hands to heaven and offered prayers of repentance on the sacred hill of Mount Arafat in Saudi Arabia on Friday, an intense day of worship considered to be the climax of the annual hajj.
    Multitudes stood shoulder to shoulder, feet to feet, for the emotional day of supplication in the desert valley where Muslims believe the Prophet Muhammad delivered his final sermon, calling for equality and unity among Muslims.
    The experience sent many pilgrims to tears.    Muslims believe prayer on this day at Mount Arafat, about 12 miles east of the holy city of Mecca, is their best chance at salvation and spiritual renewal.    The pilgrims set out for Arafat before dawn, chanting as they trekked.    They remained until nightfall in deep contemplation and worship.
    “I feel I am so close to God,” said Zakaria Mohammad, an Egyptian pilgrim praying as the sky brightened over the hilltop. “He gave me such joy.    This is my feeling now – joy, great joy.”
    The hajj is a once-in-a-lifetime duty for all Muslims physically and financially able to make the journey, which takes the faithful along a path traversed by the Prophet Muhammad some 1,400 years ago.
    “God brought me here,” said Khadije Isaac, who traveled to Mount Arafat from Nigeria.    “I cannot describe the happiness that I have.”
    Strict pandemic limits had upended the event for the past two years, effectively canceling one of the world’s biggest and most diverse gatherings and devastating many pious Muslims who had waited a lifetime to make the journey.    This year’s pilgrimage marks the largest since the virus struck, although the attendance by 1 million worshippers remains less than half of the pre-pandemic influx.
    All pilgrims selected to perform the hajj this year are under age 65 and have been fully vaccinated against COVID-19.
    Pilgrims spend five days carrying out a set of rituals associated with the Prophet Muhammad and the prophets Ibrahim and Ismail, or Abraham and Ishmael in the Bible, before him.    The rituals began on Thursday with the circling of the Kaaba, the black cube in the center of Mecca’s Grand Mosque, which Muslims around the world face during their daily prayers wherever they are in the world.
    Around sunset on Friday, the pilgrims marched or were bused 5.5 miles west to the rocky desert of Muzdalifa, where they combed the area for pebbles to carry out the symbolic stoning of the devil.    That rite will take place on Saturday in the small village of Mina, where Muslims believe the devil tried to talk Ibrahim out of submitting to God’s will.    Pilgrims stone the devil to signify overcoming temptation.    The ritual is a notorious chokepoint for surging crowds.    In 2016, thousands of pilgrims were crushed to death in a gruesome stampede. Saudi authorities never offered a final death toll.
    In their most noticeable effort to improve access, the Saudis have built a high-speed rail link to ferry masses between holy sites.    Pilgrims enter through special electronic gates. Tens of thousands of police officers are out in force to protect the areas and control crowds.
    With so many people from so many places crammed together, public health is a major concern.    Saudi Arabia’s Health Ministry urged pilgrims to consider wearing masks to curb the spread of coronavirus, although the government lifted a mask mandate and other virus precautions last month.
    Infections have increased steadily in the kingdom in recent months.    There were no signs of social distancing in Friday’s mass procession.
    With the hajj a major source of prestige and tourism for Saudi Arabia, the government is keen to do away with pandemic restrictions.    Saudi Health Minister Fahad al-Jalajel told state-owned Al-Arabiya TV that authorities had not recorded an “outbreak” of the virus at the hajj, without elaborating on individual cases. He said he expected authorities to expand quotas for pilgrims next year.
    The ministry also advised pilgrims to drink water and be aware of the signs of heat stroke in the desert, where temperatures can exceed 105 degrees Fahrenheit.
    Once the hajj is over, men are expected to shave their heads, and women to snip a lock of hair in a sign of renewal.
    Around the world, Muslims will mark the end of the pilgrimage with Eid al-Adha, or Festival of Sacrifice.    The holiday commemorates the prophet Ibrahim’s willingness to sacrifice his son Ismail at God’s request.

7/9/2022 La. Judge Says She Can’t Extend Restraining Order On Abortion Ban
Protesters wave signs and demonstrate in support of abortion access in front
of a New Orleans courthouse Friday July 8, 2022. (AP Photo/Rebecca Santana)     Pro-life activists in Louisiana got a huge win in court.    On Friday, a state judge said she cannot extend a restraining order on the state’s so-called “trigger law” imposed by a judge in New Orleans after Roe was overturned.
    The decision came the same day President Joe Biden issued an executive order to protect access to abortion in states where it is still legal and mitigate the potential penalties women seeking the procedure may face after the high court’s ruling on June 24.
    Abortion rights advocates in numerous states have filed court challenges to laws restricting the procedure.    In Mississippi, home of the case that led to the Supreme Court decision, attorneys for the state’s sole abortion clinic filed a petition on Thursday asking the state’s highest court to temporarily block a new law that bans most abortions.    The attorneys made the request on the day the law took effect and two days after a Mississippi judge rejected the same request.
    Legal experts said this gives the state a green light to enforce its near-total abortion ban.    However, Louisiana’s Attorney General Jeff Landry lamented that judges are punting the decision to other districts.
    “If they continue to operate, they do so under their own risk,” Landry said.
    Landry went on to vow that he will fight legal challenges to the state’s abortion ban in any court he’s sent to.    He added that if residents don’t like that law they can urge their state representatives to change the law or move to another state.

7/11/2022 Kentucky patients eye Ohio abortions - ‘Camping’ in state could be short-lived, however by Jolene Almendarez and Jordan Laird, Cincinnati Enquirer USA TODAY NETWORK
A nurse holds the hand of a patient as she undergoes an abortion at the Women’s Med Center in Kettering,
near Dayton on June 30. The woman, who had traveled from Kentucky, was only a little over five weeks.
No heartbeat had been detected during her sonogram. When Roe vs. Wade was overturned June 24 by the
Supreme Court, Kentucky shut down all abortions because of trigger laws. PHOTOS BY LIZ DUFOUR/CINCINNATI ENQUIRER     Last month, a 33-year-old mother of two living in Louisville called an abortion clinic in Cincinnati.    Nobody picked up.
    She suspected she was around five weeks pregnant and the window to get a legal abortion in Ohio was closing.    Abortions are only permitted until fetal cardiac activity can be detected, usually around six weeks of pregnancy.
    She next called a clinic in Columbus and was referred to a clinic in Dayton.    A worker there told her she didn’t have much time and to come in the next day for a consultation.    So, she drove two hours both ways to Women’s Med Center in Kettering, near Dayton.
    Ohio has a 24-hour waiting period, so she made the drive again for her abortion the next day.
    “I was so mad driving back up here,” the woman said.    “I feel like it’s a woman’s choice.”
    She wasn’t the only one who traveled to Ohio for an abortion after Roe v. Wade was overturned June 24 and Kentucky’s trigger ban took effect.    A 24-year-old nursing student from Northeast Kentucky made the same trip on the same days.
    They both asked that their names not be published, citing privacy and safety concerns.
    The women crossed paths in the waiting room of the Dayton clinic last week.    They talked about their frustrations trying to book an appointment.
    They talked about traffic and poked fun at the anti-abortion advocates outside who yelled at them to reconsider their choice as they entered the clinic.
    And they talked about how hopeful they were to receive abortions – as long as the doctor did not detect fetal cardiac activity on an ultrasound.    Otherwise, abortion isn’t an option in Ohio.    They’d have to travel elsewhere.
    Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an Indiana obstetrician- gynecologist, said she had to help a 10-year-old Ohioan get an abortion days after Roe v. Wade was overturned.    A colleague who handles child abuse cases referred the patient to Bernard because the post-six-week abortion is still legal in Indiana.
    The child was six weeks and three days pregnant.
‘Camping’ in Ohio – for now
    The two Kentucky women were able to drive themselves to an abortion provider out of state.
    But not everybody has the money or support needed to make the trip.    It’s why people are doing what people on the internet call “camping.”    Camping is one of the phrases some are using online as code to support those seeking abortions, though, national organizations warn the practice isn’t safe.
    One of those people in Cincinnati is Lindsey Swadner, 28, who had an abortion about a decade ago.
    She was flat broke, in a bad relationship, and had just found out she was pregnant, she said.    A co-worker had to loan her the few hundred dollars she needed for an abortion.    When she arrived at the clinic, protesters held signs and tried to stop her from pulling into the parking lot.
    “They were very vocally violent.    They were very terrible.    They had no idea that I was trying to get out of a very bad scenario myself,” said Swadner, who owns The Hub OTR in Over-the-Rhine and is vocal on social media.
    She credits having an abortion with having set her up to live a life of her choosing, and she wants to make sure other people have the same opportunity.    She’s willing to open her home to people in need of a place to stay while they recover or travel to an abortion location.    She’s also reached out to national organizations to get connected with those who have been providing abortion access assistance for years.
What anti-abortion groups say
    Those who oppose abortion say they want to offer people different options.
    In a statement, Ohio bishops called for people to care for women and children, “both before and after delivery, with both material resources and personal accompaniment so that they can flourish and contribute to the common good.”
    That includes helping women access “life-affirming” pregnancy resource centers and other social services through organizations like Walking with Moms in Need.
    Laura Strietmann, executive director of Cincinnati Right to Life, said, the organization has worked for years to criminalize abortion and will continue the fight to end medicated abortions in Ohio.
    “And women traveling to another state to take the life of her own child shows you how tragic abortion is,” she said.
    It’s not illegal in Ohio or Kentucky to help a person find information about legal abortions or to offer them transportation.    It’s what the Kentucky Health Justice Network, and other abortion fund organizations, have been doing for roughly a decade.
    Erin Smith, executive director of the Kentucky Health Justice Network, warns that while many are trying to help those seeking abortions, people need to be careful.
    “I would not take that risk.    I do not recommend it.    I recommend calling all your state and local abortion funds,” Smith said.    The same goes for people who want to volunteer.
    Smith says organizations like the network vet and train volunteers who work at call centers and offer transportation assistance to those in need.    But online, there’s no telling who people are or what their motives may be.
    Kentucky Health Justice Network mostly serves eastern Kentucky and Appalachia, but anyone can contact the organization for help.    Volunteers are especially needed in the northern Kentucky and Cincinnati area, Smith said.
A changing legal landscape
    Kentucky’s “trigger law” immediately criminalized abortion on June 24.    But Jefferson Circuit Judge Mitch Perry granted a request to lift the trigger law while it’s challenged in court.    Attorneys for the two abortion providers in Kentucky say abortions are a right guaranteed through the state constitution.
    It’s a legal effort similar to the ones in Louisiana and Utah, where abortion bans have also been suspended.
    The legal status of abortions also remains a fluid situation in Ohio.    The Ohio Supreme Court ruled against abortion providers Friday, who requested an emergency stay on a 2019 law put into effect hours after the Supreme Court ruling.    The law criminalizes abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected.
    In addition, Gov. Mike DeWine recently said he wants to “i>go as far as we can” to prohibit abortion.
Back to their lives
    The Louisville woman who needed an abortion says she was recently diagnosed with an immune system disorder and it’s not good for her health to be pregnant.    She also has a strained relationship with the man who got her pregnant.
    The day she got her abortion, she had to hurry back to Louisville for her evening shift at a hotel.
    The nursing student is engaged and has other responsibilities: two young children and she’s trying to finish school.    Her partner knows about her choice to have an abortion.
    Money is tight for both women and they can’t afford to care for another child.
    “I’m ready to get this over with,” the nursing student said.
    At Women’s Med Center in Dayton, patients from Ohio can receive two pills to end their early pregnancies at home.    The pills are taken 24-48 hours apart.    But Kentucky patients cannot cross state lines with the pills and must receive a suction aspiration abortion instead.
    Dr. Catherine Romanos, an abortion provider at Women’s Med Center, said the clinic has always treated lots of patients from Kentucky, even before the Supreme Court ruling.    That may be because Kentucky only has two abortion clinics, both in Louisville, serving the state.
    Romanos performed the abortion on the Louisville woman last Thursday.    The 33-year-old gripped the nurse’s hand as she endured some uncomfortable pressure.    The doctor tried to distract her during the approximately five-minute procedure by asking her about plans for the long July 4 holiday weekend.
    The nursing student had her abortion before the Louisville woman.    She said the day after her abortion she felt relieved.
    “I have peace of mind and I feel like I can finally function properly again.”
Dr. Catherine Romanos, with the Women’s Med Center in Kettering, near Dayton, performs a sonogram on a woman
from Kentucky on June 30. Romanos identified the amniotic sac and said the pregnancy wasn't viable.
7/11/2022 Floating abortion clinic proposed in Gulf to bypass bans by ASSOCIATED PRESS
    MONTGOMERY, Ala. – A California doctor is proposing a floating abortion clinic in the Gulf of Mexico as a way to maintain access for people in southern states where abortion bans have been enacted.
    The idea is to provide a clinic aboard a ship in federal waters, and out of reach of state laws, that would offer first trimester surgical abortions, contraception and other care, said Dr. Meg Autry, an obstetrician and gynecologist and a professor at the University of California San Francisco.
    “There’s been an assault on reproductive rights in our country and I’m a lifelong advocate for reproductive health and choice.    We have to create options and be thoughtful and creative to help people in restrictive states get the health care they deserve,” she told The Associated Press.
    Autry said the idea is only in the fundraising stage through the non-profit, “PRROWESS” – short for “Protecting Reproductive Rights Of Women Endangered by State Statutes.”
    The proposal comes as abortion access in the southern United States has been swiftly curtailed after the U.S. Supreme Court turned the issue of abortion back to the states.
    Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas have had abortion bans take effect.    A Florida law, which is in effect after a legal back-and-forth, prohibits abortions after 15 weeks, with exceptions if the procedure is necessary to save a life, prevent serious injury or if the fetus has a fatal
    Autry said their legal team believes there is a swath of federal water where licensed providers could safely and legally provide abortions out of reach of state laws.
    For women in southern states with abortion bans, going to the coast and boarding a boat may be closer and easier than trying to travel to a state where abortion remains legal, she said.
    “This is closer and faster access for some people, particularly for working people that live in the southernmost part of these states,” she said.
    Autry said they are still trying to work out many of the details such as where the boat will launch and how women would get to the ship.

[WELL AS YOU CAN SEE BELOW THE DEMOCRATS ARE DESPERATE TO KILL BABIES ANYWAY THEY CAN.].
7/12/2022 Floating abortion clinic proposed in Gulf - Doctor’s planned ship would bypass bans by states by Scott Gleeson, USA TODAY
    California doctor Meg Autry has proposed an innovative solution to those seeking abortions in southern U.S. states where bans have been put in place after the fall of Roe v. Wade.
    Autry outlined an idea for a floating abortion clinic in the Gulf of Mexico as an option to maintain access for people who would be pressed to travel long distances to receive treatment.
    The proposed ship, tabbed PRROWESS, would be out of reach of state laws and offer first-trimester surgical abortions, contraception and other care, according to its website.    PRROWESS stands for Protecting Reproductive Rights of Women Endangered by State Statutes.
    Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas, all states that have abortion bans, are far from states where abortion is legal.    New Mexico, for instance, offers legal abortions as one of the closest for Texans, a 10-hour drive from Dallas.
    Also, Florida’s state law, prohibits abortions after 15 weeks, with exceptions if the procedure is necessary to save the pregnant person’s life.
    “This is closer and faster access for some people, particularly for working people that live in the southernmost part of these states,” Autry said.
    “There’s been an assault on reproductive rights in our country, and I’m a lifelong advocate for reproductive health and choice.     We have to create options and be thoughtful and creative to help people in restrictive states get the health care they deserve.”
    Autry said her legal team believes there is a portion of federal water where licensed providers could safely and legally provide abortions out of reach of state laws.
    The proposed clinic is at the early fundraising stages.    Autry told NBC Bay Area that at least $20 million would be needed for the “comprehensive” all-in-one clinic idea to come to fruition.
    “Part of the reason we’re working on this project so hard is because wealthy people in our country are always going to have access (to abortions), so once again it’s a time now where poor, people of color, marginalized individuals, are going to suffer – and by suffering, I mean like lives lost,” Autry said.
Contributing: The Associated Press

7/12/2022 Pope Francis' reforms to church governance are unlike any since Vatican II by Religion News Service
    (RNS) — After the reforms laid out by Pope Francis are fully implemented, the Vatican Curia will never be the same.    His recent predecessors talked about reforming the Curia, but compared with Francis they were simply rearranging deck chairs.
    Francis’ changes, most laid out in his March 19 apostolic constitution “Praedicate Evangelium” (“Preach the Gospel”), are the most dramatic made to church governance since Pope Paul VI, who, in 1965, established the synod of bishops to advise the pope.    This innovation never lived up to its potential because synodal bishops were forced to defer to curial cardinals.    Only under Francis have the synodal fathers been freed to speak boldly.
    Paul also reformed the papal election process by increasing the number of cardinal electors to 120 and barring cardinals over 80 years of age from participating in papal conclaves.    He also required curial cardinals to submit their resignations when they reached 75.
    The reforms of Francis are equally dramatic.
    He has opened almost all Vatican offices to lay leadership, including heads of dicasteries (formerly called congregations).    This means that the even the Dicastery for Bishops, which recommends candidates for the episcopacy around the world, can now be headed by a nun.    The head of the Dicastery for Doctrine of the Faith could be a woman theologian. Even the secretary of state, the highest Vatican official under the pope, could be a layperson.
    Needless to say, these lay people cannot be chosen from people on the street. They need the theological, diplomatic, legal or administrative training and experience required for the positions — no easy hires, especially if the Vatican cannot offer competitive salaries. Besides having the necessary formation, clerics and religious are cheaper.
© Provided by Religion News Service Pope Francis arrives for an audience for the annual exchange of Christmas greetings
with members of the Roman Curia in the Apostolic Palace at the Vatican on Dec. 23, 2021. Photo by Vatican Media     Francis sees the role of the Curia in a totally different way from earlier popes.    “The Roman Curia is not set between the Pope and the Bishops, but is at the service of both, according to the modalities proper to the nature of each,” according to the apostolic constitution.
    In other words, the Curia is staff, not part of the chain of command. It is more like civil service than a governing elite.
    This is revolutionary.    It moves the papacy away from its monarchical model, in which the pope is king with cardinals and bishops as princes and nobles, to a collegial model put forth by the Second Vatican Council.         Francis wants to enhance the potential of episcopal conferences, not denigrate them, as did John Paul and Benedict.
    However, the “Praedicate Evangelium” reflects the intentional ambiguity of Vatican II, which promoted collegiality also sought to preserve the absolute power of the papacy.    Francis’ constitution cites Vatican II in stating that the pope, “in exercising his supreme, full and immediate authority over the universal Church, employs the various departments of the Roman Curia, which act in his name and by his authority for the good of the Churches and in the service of the sacred pastors.”
    In the end, the Curia will be only as collegial as future popes want it to be. We have already seen Francis exhibit a willingness to directly intervene in dioceses where a bishop has not protected children or otherwise failed in his duties. The proper balance between papal authority and collegiality is an art that is difficult if not impossible to legislate.
Pope Francis to continue as head of Catholic church
    Much of “Praedicate Evangelium” simply codifies reforms Francis has incrementally put in place since his election.    Most important is the Secretariat for the Economy, the Vatican’s new financial cop created in 2014, which “exercises monitoring and vigilance in administrative, economic and financial matters with regard to curial institutions, offices and other institutions associated with the Holy See.”
    The financial scandals that have racked the Vatican convinced the pope of the need to have this office, which has the power to monitor the budget, spending and investments of all the Vatican offices, including the Secretariat of State.    It also prepares the annual budget and establishes guidelines for purchasing.
© Provided by Religion News Service Pope Francis talks during an audience for Christmas greetings
to the Curia in the Clementina Hall at the Vatican on December 22, 2014. (AP Photo/Andreas Solaro, Pool)     The first appointee as Secretary for the Economy, Cardinal George Pell, encountered stiff opposition from the Curia and eventually had to resign to deal with his own legal problems in Australia.    The current secretary, the Rev. Juan Antonio Guerrero Alves, is a Jesuit and a trained economist with administrative experience running his order’s major institutions in Rome.
    The Secretariat for the Economy operates under the Council for the Economy, consisting of eight cardinals or bishops and seven lay people, chosen by the pope for five-year terms and charged with following “best practices recognized internationally in the field of public administration and striving for an administrative and financial management that is both ethical and efficient.”
    Best practices for the Vatican, as in Italy, are not what they are in other places.    It is difficult to fire anyone.    The Vatican communications, for instance, centered in print and radio media, had a difficult time adjusting to the digital media environment.    Rupert Murdoch can ruthlessly fire employees, but the Vatican cannot. Professional development and retraining of employees need to be strengthened in the Vatican.
    In addition, clergy and religious, unlike laity, are supposed to leave the Curia after five years, to discourage careerism.    But this also makes it difficult to maintain an experienced professional staff.
(Luckily, exceptions can be made.)
    Much has been made in the press about the supposed equality of all dicasteries.    It is inevitable, however, that some dicasteries will be more equal than others.    Major conflicts of competencies — fights over who gets to decide what — are to be submitted to the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, but still, someone must bang heads together and mediate disputes over policy.
    Under Paul VI, the sostituto (substitute) in the Secretariat of State was the key player in coordinating policy and action in the Curia.    Under John Paul, the Congregation (now Dicastery) for Doctrine of the Faith was supreme when it came to the curial documents, while the Secretariat of State was supreme in diplomacy and politics.
    The new constitution gives to the sostituto responsibility for “fostering cooperation among the Dicasteries, agencies and offices without prejudice to their autonomy,” but gives the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith the right to review documents “through a process of discussion and mutual understanding will help in making appropriate decisions.”
© Provided by Religion News Service The sun sets behind St. Peter’s Basilica, at the Vatican, Dec. 5, 2019.
The Vatican’s sprawling financial trial may not have produced any convictions yet or any new smoking guns. But recent testimony
in May 2022 has provided plenty of insights into how the Vatican operates. (AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia, File)     One major flaw of the new constitution is that it does not rationalize the disciplinary functions of the Curia.    The Vatican needs a department of justice to investigate and prosecute ecclesiastical crimes, including heresy, sex abuse and financial crimes, especially those committed by a bishop or Vatican official.
    This office would ideally employ lawyers to present its findings to independent tribunals, who would pass judgement.    It’s a violation of due process to have investigators double as the judges.
    Francis has made great strides forward in the reform of the Curia as called for by Vatican II and the cardinals who elected him.    These reforms need to be implemented and that will take time.
    In addition, new circumstances will require new structures; new popes will have different priorities.    New ways of operating in the secular world will provide ideas on how to improve church governance.
    Like the church, the Curia is semper reformanda — always in need of reform.
[Column has been corrected to indicate the Secretariat for the Economy was established in 2014.]

[ITS NOT HARD ANYMORE TO TELL WHICH CHURCHES HAVE BECOME ANTICHRISTIAN.].
7/12/2022 The Church of England doesn’t know what a woman is - Opinion by Katelynn Richardson – Washington Examiner
    Descending further into liberal madness, the Church of England just announced it has “no official definition” of a woman.
© Provided by Washington Examiner The Church of England doesn’t know what a woman is     It’s not much of a surprise, since the church has continually made headlines for its gender activism in recent years.    In 2018, it produced guidance on how clergy could use the rite of Affirmation of Baptismal Faith to celebrate a person’s new transgender identity and publicly use the individual’s new name.    Other liturgical rituals were approved later for “recognizing and celebrating” transgender identity.    In April, the former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams signed a letter written by an LGBT activist informing Prime Minister Boris Johnson that being transgender is “a sacred journey of becoming whole.”    The church invites transgender people to pursue ordination.
    The woman issue came up at the General Synod, the Church of England’s legislative body, when lay member and Royal Navy representative Adam Kendry posed a question: “What is the Church of England’s definition of a woman?”
    "There is no official definition, which reflects the fact that until fairly recently definitions of this kind were thought to be self-evident, as reflected in the marriage liturgy,” said the Rt. Rev. Robert Innes, Bishop of Gibraltar in Europe, in a written response.
    The definition has indeed been self-evident ever since “male and female he created them.” Innes, instead of stating this, continued to cede ground.
    “The [Living in Love and Faith] project however has begun to explore the marriage complexities associated with gender identity and points to the need for additional care and thought to be given in understanding our commonalities and differences as people made in the image of God,” he said.
    Sex Matters campaign group executive director Maya Forstater told the Telegraph that the church’s readiness to give up the definition was “shocking.”
    “When the Government redefined women through the Gender Recognition Act, the Church of England could have stuck with its long-established understanding, which makes sense whether your starting point is biology or the Bible,” Forstater said.
    In the United States, denominations that take liberal theological stances in an attempt to appeal to a broader population have lost the most members.    Meanwhile, theologically conservative churches see continued health, and even growth, despite the fact that they are more frequently blamed for the decline.
    Adopting the world’s attitudes does not attract people on Sunday when they can hear the same thing anywhere else.    Rather, it destroys the church’s grasp on reality.    If you reject Genesis 1, why not the rest?    If you deny biology, what else?    The loss of the ability to define gender is a loss of grounding in truth.
Katelynn Richardson is a summer 2022 Washington Examiner fellow.

[THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE SHOULD ALARM YOU THAT THERE ARE NUTCAKES OUT THERE WHO BELIEVE THAT MEN CAN HAVE BABIES AND THEY ARE MAKING A MOCKERY OUT OF GOD'S CREATION AND WE ALL KNOW WHO IS BEHIND THIS BLASEPHEMY AND THE FUNNY THING IS THE LADY WHO SPOKE OUT HAS MADE HER TO BE A LAUGHING STOCK FOR MOST AMERICANS AND HOPEFULLY THE REPUBLICANS WILL REGAIN POWER TO PUT SOME COMMON SENSE PEOPLE BACK ON THESE COMMITTEES.].
7/13/2022 When did it become ‘transphobic’ to state scientific fact? Wait, don't answer that, Opinion by Esther Wickham – Washington Examiner
    The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing Tuesday on the legal ramifications of the Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade.
© Provided by Washington Examiner When did it become ‘transphobic’ to state scientific fact?
Wait, don't answer that. What resulted from this hearing was an argument over whether
or not men can get pregnant, and Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) being accused of transphobia.     During the hearing, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) asked Khiara Bridges, a professor at the University of California Berkeley School of Law, if an unborn child had value.
    “I think that the person with capacity for pregnancy has value,” she responded.
    Confused by her wording, Hawley questioned what she meant by “person with capacity for pregnancy.”     “Many women, cis women, have the capacity for pregnancy," Bridges said.    "Many cis women do not have the capacity for pregnancy.    There are also trans men who are capable of pregnancy as well as non-binary people who are capable of pregnancy.”
    Following her answer, Hawley then asked what the core issue was about then if its not just about a woman's right to have an abortion?    Bridges responded by calling him "transphobic."
    "I want to recognize that your line of questioning is transphobic and it opens up trans people to violence," she said.
    She then stated that his line of questioning leads transgendered people to violence and ultimately suicide — a bold claim.    Apparently, asking simple questions now leads to self-harm for woke leftists.    As the dialogue became more passive-aggressive Bridges asked Hawley whether or not he believed men could get pregnant.
    “No, I don’t think men can get pregnant,” he responded.
    “So you’re denying that trans-people exist!” she said.
    The DailyWire got it right when they titled this ridiculous exchange as “Woke Insanity.”    What it should be understood as is an effort to intimidate a lawmaker.
    The Left has not come to grips with the fact that all the insults and accusations they can hurl at those who state the obvious will never change the scientific, biological difference between men and women.    You can accuse other people of “violence” for stating the obvious, but your aggressive use of language to intimidate other people will never make you right about anything.
    Esther Wickham is a summer 2022 Washington Examiner fellow.
[ARE WE STILL ON THE EARTH THAT GOD CREATED OR HAVE WE JUMPED TO AN ALTERNATIVE UNIVERSE WHERE MEN CAN GET PREGNANT AND HAVE BABIES – WELL OF COURSE WE HOPE NOT AND WE NEED TO REQUEST FOR PYCHIATRIC TREAMENT FOR SOME PROFESSOR SUCH AS KHIARA BRIDGES, UNIVERITY CALIFORNIA BERKLEY WHICH IS A PLACE DURING MY TRAVELING DAYS IN THE 1975 WHILE IN CALIFORNIA AND I WENT IN TO TAKE A SHOWER AND WHILE TOTALLY NUDE AND SHOWERING A FEMALE STUDENT CAME IN WHILE I WAS SHOWERING AND SHOWERED WITH ME AND I ASKED HER IF I HAD GONE TO THE WRONG DORMITORY AND SHE WAS NOT SHOCKED AND I DISCOVERED THEY HAD A CO-SEX DORMITORIES AND I LIVED THROUGH THAT AND STARTED CHECKING FIRST BEFORE CONTINUING MY FREE SHOWER DAYS IN CALIFORNIA.].

[HOPEFULLY IN THE NEXT ARTICLE THEY ARE REAL WOMEN ARE BEING VETTED AND NOT FAKE ONES IN CATHOLIC CHURCHES.].
7/13/2022 Pope Francis Names Three Women To Bishop Vetting Committee In Historic Move by Carlie Porterfield, Forbes Staff - Forbes
    Pope Francis selected three women to serve on a high-ranking Vatican committee that oversees the selection of new bishops, the church announced Wednesday, the pope’s latest move that expands leadership roles for women in the Catholic Church.
© Provided by Forbes Pope Francis waves to thousands of followers as he arrives
at the Manila Cathedral on January 16, 2015 in Manila, Philippines. Getty Images Key Facts
    The Dicastery for Bishops helps the pope choose new bishops (who must be male) to lead dioceses around the globe, and until now, the committee has only been made up of men.
    One of the new members, Sister Raffaella Petrini, already holds one of the highest positions of governorship in the Holy See after Francis last year named her the Vatican City State’s secretary general, the second-highest position of governorship in the Vatican.
    Also appointed to the dicastery were Sister Yvonne Reungoat, a former superior general of the religious order Daughters of Mary the Helper, which runs youth programs worldwide, and Maria Lia Zervino, the president of the World Union of Catholic Women's Organizations and the first laywoman ever named to the committee.
    The three women joined other nominees that include a handful of cardinals and an archbishop.
Key Background
    Last week, Francis told Reuters he planned to appoint two women to the dicastery, just one month after he amended the constitution for the Vatican Curia—the administrative body that oversees church affairs—to allow any baptized Catholic, male or female, to lead more of the church’s departments.    Francis floated the idea of a layperson heading up the Catholic Education and Culture department or the Apostolic Library.    Women are not permitted to join the priesthood, based on Jesus’ disciples all being men, but Francis said last week he hoped to give women more top leadership roles in the church.    While Francis is more progressive compared to previous popes, he still sticks to the traditional Catholic view on topics like abortion, which last month he condemned and compared to "hiring a hit man."

7/13/2022 Republicans are petitioning to force the House to vote on a federal anti-transgender bill by LGBTQNation
© Provided by LGBTQNation Capitol with a rainbow Shutterstock     Republicans are trying to force House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to bring an anti-transgender bill up for a vote.,br>     While the last-ditch effort to get a vote on the bill before the midterm elections will likely fail, it shows the commitment of the GOP to attacking transgender equality and what their agenda may be should they take the House of Representatives in the midterm elections.
    Last year Rep. Greg Steube (R-FL) introduced H.R. 426, which would require state and local athletics organizations to limit participation in girls’ and women’s sports to girls and women as defined “solely on a person’s reproductive biology and genetics at birth.”
    The bill hasn’t come up for a vote in the Democratic House, but Republicans are signaling to their voters that this is a key issue for the party by pushing a discharge petition to bring the bill to the floor despite opposition from Speaker Pelosi.
Republican Supreme Court could impose national abortion ban without help from electees
    Currently, the petition has 187 signatures, short of the 218 needed for it to be successful.    All the signatures so far have been from Republican lawmakers; 89% of GOP Congressmembers have signed it.    It can’t get 218 signatures without some Democrats signing.
    But just the existence of the petition shows the sea change on the right when it comes to banning the handful of transgender girls and women who participate in school sports in the U.S.    Anti-LGBTQ activist Terry Schilling told The Hill that Republican elected officials wouldn’t even talk about the issue a couple years ago, and now they want it to be a major wedge issue in the midterm election.
    “We were having a hard time getting Trump to say anything about it,” he said.    “You fast forward to today, and it’s a litmus test for being a Republican, and it’s a litmus test for being able to rise to the national stage.”
    And Republican lawmakers are saying that they’re willing to push the issue when they get more institutional power in D.C.
    “I’m confident that this will remain a priority for our conference after 2022,” said Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN).
    Opponents of the bill argue that it would further stigmatize the already vulnerable youth, denying them the educational benefits of sports while marking them as second-class students and targets for bullying in schools.
    Moreover, it’s unclear how school districts, athletic associations, and state governments will implement the bill.    They would be asked to identify transgender students in order to deny them opportunities under the threat of losing federal education funding.    Several states have already considered – and Idaho passed – legislation that would require genital examinations for girls and women to participate in school sports.
    Steube’s bill contains no language banning states or schools from using forced genital or DNA exams on girls and women who want to participate in school sports.

7/13/2022 Pope derides Biden's abortion views, Catholic self-identity as 'incoherence' by Timothy Nerozzi – FOX News
    Vatican says Pope Francis is in 'good overall condition' post-surgery.
    Pope Francis questioned President Biden's conscience on Tuesday in an interview during which he described the commander-in-chief's religious identity and views on abortion as incoherent.
    "A month after conception, the DNA of the fetus is already there and the organs are aligned. There is human life," the pontiff said in the interview with Spanish-language outlet Univision.
    Asked about Biden — a self-professed "devout Catholic" who supports blanket legalization of abortion on the federal level — the pope dismissed the president as incomprehensible.
    "A month after conception, the DNA of the fetus is already there and the organs are aligned.    There is human life," the pope said in the Univision interview.    "Is it just to eliminate a human life?"
UNITED NATIONS 'HAS NO POWER,' POPE FRANCIS SAYS
    He added that Biden should instead question his own conscience and consult with his bishop.
    "I leave it to [President Biden's] conscience and that he speaks to his bishop, his pastor, his parish priest about that incoherence," the pope remarked.
    The pope has been hesitant to directly meddle in politics since the beginning of his papacy — afraid to devolve the Holy See into a normal, secular world power.
    Instead, Pope Francis has taken a more pastoral role via his encyclicals and apostolic journeys — many historic in content.
    The Holy Father is currently finishing preparations for a trip to Canada, after which he has committed to visiting the war-torn Ukraine.    The first-ever apostolic journey to Moscow is also currently being discussed, should Russian authorities allow the visit.
DC ARCHDIOCESE SILENT ON PELOSI COMMUNION BAN, EMAIL SAYS MEDIA REQUESTS 'WILL BE IGNORED'
    Pope Francis's resistance to handing down orders to leaders of other nations is not a new concept.

© AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes President Biden speaks about inflation and supply chain issues
at the Port of Los Angeles, Friday, June 10, 2022, in Los Angeles. AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes     According to Catholic Canon Law, bishops are the final governing authority in their diocese unless the pope personally intervenes.
    The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains, "A diocesan bishop in the diocese entrusted to him has all ordinary, proper, and immediate power which is required for the exercise of his pastoral function except for cases which the law or a decree of the Supreme Pontiff reserves to the supreme authority or to another ecclesiastical authority."
POPE CONFIRMS JOURNEY TO UKRAINE, POSSIBLY RUSSIA, BUT DETAILS YET UNKNOWN
    While the Bishop of Rome is the final authority on contested religious doctrine, Pope Francis has made efforts to stay out of local or national deliberations on church governance whenever possible.
    The office of bishop comes with extensive responsibilities and powers.    Perhaps most prominent is the bishop's responsibility for the pastoral care of Catholics and ex-Catholics in his jurisdiction.
    According to canon law, "A diocesan bishop, frequently preaching in person, is bound to propose and explain to the faithful the truths of the faith which are to be believed and applied to morals."
    Canon law continues, "He is also to take care that the prescripts of the canons on the ministry of the word, especially those on the homily and catechetical instruction, are carefully observed so that the whole Christian doctrine is handed on to all."
POPE NAMES NUNS, LAY WOMEN AMONG NEW DICASTERY FOR BISHOPS
    However, the pope may not see the canonical corrections he desires for Biden without intervening — Biden and his family attend Holy Spirit Church in the Archdiocese of Washington, DC.
    The archdiocese is overseen by Cardinal Wilton Gregory, who has gone on record saying that he would not excommunicate a politician for defending abortion rights.
    The cardinal has been so averse to addressing the issue further that his office accidentally let slip that they are "ignoring" questions from the media.
    The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., mistakenly emailed a reporter seeking comment on its position regarding the San Francisco archbishop's decision to bar House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., from receiving Holy Communion due to her stance on abortion after Pelosi reportedly took Communion in D.C. on Sunday.
    "Just sharing for you to know what comes in," the email stated.    "Email since Saturday, when I last checked the comms inbox has just been a couple of random people wanting to tell the Cardinal to bring down the hammer on Pelosi.    Aside from Jack Jenkins at RNS, this is the only new media inquiry.    It will be ignored, too."
    Speaking about the responsibility of running one of the world's oldest living institutions and the politics that come with it, the pontiff was open about his exhaustion.
© Massimo Valicchia/NurPhoto via Getty Images Pope Francis arrives to attend his weekly general audience in the
Paul VI Hall at The Vatican, Wednesday, April 13, 2022. (Photo by Massimo Valicchia/NurPhoto via Getty Images) Getty Images     "The Holy Spirit gives you many fruits, but no one ever talks about the things that make you numb," the pope lamented.    "And sometimes, you feel you are numb in the face of situations that should make you suffer greatly and make you move, without missing the opportunity."

7/14/2022 Population Of Same-Sex Couples With Children Most Prominent In Three States: U.S. Census by Richard Horgan. Knewz
© Of Same-Sex Couples With Children Most Prominent In Three States: U.S. Census     Los Angeles (Knewz) — According to the latest U.S. Census data, 99.5 percent of children under age 18 in a coupled household lived with an opposite-sex couple.
    But within that remaining half-percent, there was a dominant trend. Four in five children, or 79 percent, living with a same-sex couple are doing so with two female parents.    And three states – Maine, Massachusetts and Washington, along with the District of Columbia – have a significantly greater share of these couples than the national average. United States: Same-sex couples worry about rights to have a child
    At the other end of the statistical scale, there are 11 states with significantly lower percentages of children living with parents in a same-sex relationship.    These are: Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota and Wyoming.
    Let’s be honest. California would definitely be expected to be among the states with significantly higher averages of same-sex couples with children, along with perhaps New York state.    But neither is on that end of the list.
    Data from the U.S. Census can sometimes be mind-bending.    For example, when it comes to race, they found that significantly fewer children with male-male parents were non-Hispanic White than those with either mixed parents or a female-female household.    The same goes for non-Hispanic Other, which refers to American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander.
    Male same-sex parent couples were found to have a slight edge over female same-sex parent couples when it came to being legally married.    The estimates based on 2019 U.S. Census data are 80 percent and 70 percent, respectively.
    Some two-thirds of children with same-sex couple parents were estimated to be biologically related to one or the other adult.    However, the Census cautions that for this and all other category statistics, whoever is listed as the householder in the 2019 Census may greatly have affected or even distorted these findings.

7/14/2022 Uber Faces Sexual Assault Lawsuit From 550+ Women by OAN NEWSROOM
An Uber sign is displayed inside a car in Palatine, Ill., Thursday, Feb. 10, 2022. (AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh)     Rideshare giant Uber faces a civil suit from more than 550 women who claimed the company failed to place safeguards to protect its customers.    On Wednesday, the law firm representing the women said they were kidnapped, sexually assaulted, battered, raped, stalked, harassed and or otherwise attacked by an Uber driver.
    The suit stems from allegations beginning in 2014 and claimed Uber was aware of the alleged incidents but failed to act putting expansion over rider’s safety.    The law firm claimed that Uber overlooked typical background check standards in the interest of more quickly onboarding new drivers.
    “Uber’s whole business model is predicated on giving people a safe ride home, but rider safety was never their concern, growth was, at the expense of their passenger’s safety,” Adam Slater, founding partner of Slater Slater Schulman said.    “.”
    An Uber spokesperson told Fortune that the company seeks to prioritize passenger safety and takes seriously “every single report” of sexual assault.    The newer safety features include the ability for riders to call or text 911 through the Uber app, Ride Check to monitor if a trip has gone off-course or if perhaps a crash has occurred, GPS tracking and background checks on drivers.    The company said last year it also started sharing information with its rideshare rival Lyft about drivers who have been deactivated from the platform for safety issues.
    “There is nothing more important than safety,” the spokesperson said.    “Which is why Uber has built new safety features, established survivor-centric policies and been more transparent about serious incidents.    While we can’t comment on pending litigation, we will continue to keep safety at the heart of our work.”
    According to Uber, drivers are vetted through background checks and annual evaluations.    Despite that more than 3,800 safety reports were filed in 2019 and 2020.

7/15/2022 Presbyterian Church vote declaring Israel an apartheid state upsets Jewish groups by Eetta Prince-Gibson – The Washington Post
   U.S. Jewish organizations have responded angrily to the vote by the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) declaring Israel an apartheid state, with some saying it amounted to antisemitism. © Amanda Voisard/The Washington Post Presbyterian Church vote declaring Israel an apartheid state upsets Jewish groups     On July 8, the 1.1-million-member denomination’s general assembly voted 266-to-116 on a resolution that stated: “Israel’s laws, policies, and practices constitute apartheid against the Palestinian people.”    It also voted to add May 15 to the church calendar as a day of mourning the displacement of Palestinians in 1948 when Israel was created.    The commemoration is often called the Nakba, or catastrophe, in Palestinian communities.
    The vote was the latest in a long line of deteriorating relations between traditionally liberal Protestant denominations and the U.S. Jewish establishment, but the Presbyterian Church’s actions may be the most long-standing subject of Jewish organizations’ ire.
    “Jewish Federations are not surprised by the latest antisemitic action taken by Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) in its vote to adopt a resolution calling Israel an apartheid state,” the Jewish Federations of North America said in a statement.    “There was a time when their words mattered.    That time is long gone.”
    The Presbyterian Church’s claims are backed by several human rights groups, including Jewish ones, and in its use of the term apartheid to refer to Israel’s occupation of the West Bank.    Israeli human rights group B’Tselem published a report in January describing the Israeli government as overseeing a nondemocratic “apartheid regime.”    Human Rights Watch also used the word in a 2021 report accusing Israel of “apartheid and persecution.”   Amnesty International followed in February of this year, releasing a report titled “Israel’s apartheid against Palestinians: Cruel system of domination and crime against humanity.”
    But the Presbyterian Church’s criticisms of Israel are part of a two-decade-old decline in relations that seems to have gained momentum of late.
    In January, American Jewish organizations were outraged by comments by the Presbyterian Church’s stated clerk, or chief executive, when he described Israeli policies toward Palestinians as “enslavement.”
    In his reflection on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Stated Clerk Herbert Nelson II said, “The continued occupation in Palestine/Israel is 21st-century slavery and should be abolished immediately.”
    In 2014, the denomination voted to divest from three companies that it says supply Israel with equipment used in the occupation of Palestinian territory.    That same year, its Israel/Palestine Mission Network published “Zionism Unsettled,” a study guide calling Zionism — the movement undergirding the founding of Israel as a Jewish homeland — a “pathology” and “a doctrine that promotes death rather than life.”
Jewish rally for abortion rights held at Temple Israel in West Bloomfield
    The recent election of the Rev. Jerry Pillay, former general secretary of the Uniting Presbyterian Church in Southern Africa, to lead the World Council of Churches beginning this fall was an immediate sore point.
    Pillay published a theological paper in 2016 titled “Apartheid in the Holy Land: Theological reflections on the Israel and/or Palestine situation from a South African perspective,” which concluded that a “comparison between the Israel-Palestine conflict and the South African apartheid experience is, indeed, justifiable.”
    While U.S. Jews hold a range of views on Israeli politics, with some strongly defending and others strongly critical of Israel’s policies in the occupied territories, most Jewish institutional groups defend Israel and oppose any suggestion its actions in the occupied territories constitute apartheid.
    “It’s a tragedy,” said Rabbi Noam E. Marans, director for interreligious and intergroup relations for the American Jewish Committee.    “Presbyterians and Jews in the pews need and want each other in order to address the issues that are most challenging in America today.    This prevents that from happening.”
   Among those challenges, he cited racism, antisemitism, gun violence, immigration reform and other issues on which American Jews and Presbyterians see eye to eye.
    In the United States, views of Israeli government have taken a hit among more liberal groups.    Only 51 percent of White nonevangelical Protestants have a very or somewhat favorable view of the Israeli government, according to a recent Pew survey, and that number drops to 43% among Black Protestants.
    A Pew Research poll released this week finds views of Israel differ substantially across partisan lines.    While 71 percent of Republicans have a favorable opinion of Israel, only 44 percent of Democrats do.
    The Presbyterian Church is hardly alone among its fellow mainline Protestant denominations to take a critical stand of Israel’s 54-year occupation of Palestinian lands.   Last year, the smaller United Church of Christ resolved that the continuing oppression of the Palestinian people constituted “sin in violation of the message of the biblical prophets and the Gospel.”
    And last month, the New England Conference of The United Methodist Church overwhelmingly passed a resolution entitled “Identifying and Opposing Apartheid in the Holy Land.”    The resolution called on the U.S. government “to condition U.S. funding to Israel upon Israel’s willingness to dismantle its apartheid system and implement all the rights due to Palestinians under international law.”
    Still, the Rev. Todd Stavrakos, who is active with Presbyterians for Middle East Peace, said he believed local churches and synagogues will continue to work together: “On the local level, there’s still strong working relationships between Presbyterian churches and synagogues in their neighborhoods.    I don’t think that’s changed.”
    The denomination, meeting June 18 to July 9 in Louisville and online, also passed resolutions to divest from five oil companies and to oppose any attempt to reduce, limit or eliminate access to abortion.    The Presbyterian Church resolution had been proposed in 2020 but because of the coronavirus pandemic was delayed. — Religion News Service
[IT IS SAD WHEN VARIOUS CHURCHES FALL AWAY FROM TRUTH AND ALL THE PROPHETS IN THE BIBLE HAVE WARNED US ABOUT IT.].

[THE DEMOCRATS ARE HELL BENT TO MAKE SURE THEY CAN KILL UNBORN BABIES].
7/15/2022 Pelosi: House To Vote On Sweeping Abortion Law by OAN NEWSROOM
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif., speaks at her weekly press conference,
Thursday, July 14, 2022, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Mariam Zuhaib)     House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) revisited an abortion law in the wake of the overturning of Roe.    On Thursday, the top Democrat doubled down on her commitment to federalizing abortion policy throughout all 50 states.
    “A woman’s right to choose is a kitchen table issue,” Pelosi voiced.    “Contraception, birth control — they are kitchen table issues.”
    House Democrats planned on sending a bill to codify Roe to the Senate whether it is likely to succeed or not.    Pelosi proclaimed both congressional Democrats and Joe Biden support enshrining the procedure into national law and that the act is intrinsically American.
    “This is something that is core to who we are,” she said.    “It’s about freedom.    It’s about health care.    It’s about respect for women and that is something that the president is wedded to.”
    Pelosi promised to bring a revamped version of the Women’s Health Protection Act to the House floor, once again.    This will codify several aspects of Roe into law.    The bill would make abortion access a right, while removing waiting periods and bans which would provide admitting privileges to hospitals to perform the procedure.
    Critics of the bill have claimed it violates states’ rights as state-level restrictions would be superseded by the new law.    The House originally passed the bill, only for the legislation to be shot down in the Senate in a 49 to 51 vote.    However, Pelosi has refused to compromise on the bill’s proposals to vault the 60-vote filibuster threshold.
    Pelosi has not given up on making Roe the law of the land, even if the bill is stifled in the Senate.    The California Democrat pivoted to making an abortion based campaign pitch that encouraged Americans to vote for Democrat candidates nationwide this November.
    “In fewer than 100 days people will be voting,” she stated.    “We have to elect a couple more Democratic senators so that we can get around the filibuster.    We have great candidates.    Our country is at risk.    Our democracy is at risk.”
    Pelosi has vowed to bring the bill to a vote on the House floor as soon as Friday.

[I AM GLAD THAT I LIVE IN KENTUCKY A STATE WHERE PEOPLE KNOW RIGHT AND WRONG BUT CERTAIN CITIES SEEM TO FOLLOW THE WORSE TO THE WORSE AND WILL HAVE TO ANSWER FOR THEIR SINS.].
7/16/2022 Ky. 15-week abortion ban to go into effect by Deborah Yetter, Louisville Courier Journal USA TODAY NETWORK
“My body, my choice” and other chants were yelled outside the Hall of Justice on July 4, as abortion-rights supporters
protested the recent SCOTUS ruling that triggered several states to outlaw abortion. PHOTOS BY MATT STONE/COURIER JOURNAL     A Kentucky law banning abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy may now be enforced while a legal challenge continues to a state law banning all abortions in the state.
   For now, abortions remain legal in Kentucky for patients with pregnancies under 15 weeks, under a different court ruling.
    On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Rebecca Grady Jennings lifted her injunction against a part of House Bill 3, the “omnibus” abortion bill the legislature enacted this year, that bans abortions after 15 weeks.
    Jennings found there was no reason to block enforcement of that provision of the law following the Supreme Court’s June 24 decision to strike down Roe v. Wade, its 1973 decision that established abortion as a constitutional right.
    That ruling returned power to states to regulate abortion, and in Kentucky, a “trigger” law automatically eliminated access to almost all abortions upon the Supreme Court ruling.
    HB 3 had been challenged in federal court as unconstitutional by the state’s two abortion providers, Planned Parenthood and EMW Women’s Surgical Center, prior to the Supreme Court ruling.
    However, a legal challenge in state court has temporarily blocked enforcement of the 2019 trigger law as well as another barring abortions after six weeks of pregnancy.
    The rulings come amid a flurry of legal activity surrounding Kentucky’s multiple restrictions on abortion enacted by the Republican-controlled General Assembly.
    Jennings’ order has little immediate impact in Kentucky on the two abortions providers, both in Louisville.
    Planned Parenthood provides abortions only through 14 weeks of pregnancy, and EMW had suspended providing abortions beyond 15 weeks as a precaution following the Supreme Court ruling, while legal challenges are pending.
    Neither EMW nor Planned Parenthood objected to allowing enforcement of the 15-week ban, Jennings’ order said.    A previous Kentucky law bans abortions after 22 weeks.
   Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron, a Republican, has been defending the state’s abortion laws and had asked Jennings to lift all restrictions and allow enforcement of HB 3.
    Jennings did allow an injunction to remain in place against other parts of the far-reaching HB 3, including heavy regulation of medication to induce abortions, new restrictions for girls under 18 seeking abortions and extensive new reporting requirements for physicians who provide abortions services.
    Lawyers for Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, which represents EMW, said the additional requirements of HB 3 are so complex and far-reaching that state officials and health providers haven’t had sufficient time to develop new forms and procedures required under the law.
    Jennings said she will reserve ruling on whether to allow the rest of HB 3 to be enforced until the lawyers for all sides can provide more information.
    Meanwhile, Kentucky’s trigger law and the six-week ban remain suspended under order of a state judge.    The trigger law bans all abortions other than those necessary to save the life or prevent disabling injury to the mother, and the six-week law bans abortions once embryonic cardiac activity is detected, generally around six weeks of pregnancy.
    Jefferson Circuit Judge Mitch Perry temporarily blocked enforcement of the two laws after EMW and Planned Parenthood filed a challenge in state court, arguing that the Kentucky Constitution provides a right to abortion as a matter of privacy.
    The claim is part of a broader strategy by abortion rights groups who have filed such claims in about a dozen states, seeking to block laws that ban or sharply restrict abortions.
    Perry held a hearing on the challenge to Kentucky’s laws on July 7 and gave parties until July 18 to file final pleadings summarizing their position on whether he should grant an injunction to extend the ban on enforcing the laws while the challenge proceeds.
    He has said he plans to rule “as soon as possible.”
Reach Deborah Yetter at dyetter@ courier-journal.com.    Find her on Twitter at @d_yetter.
Ariana Kays chants with others in the middle of Jefferson Street as around 75 people took to the downtown
streets on the Fourth of July to protest the SCOTUS ruling that triggered several states to outlaw abortion.
7/16/2022 US agencies temporarily barred from enforcing LGBTQ guidance by MARK GILLISPIE, Associated Press
    A judge in Tennessee has temporarily barred two federal agencies from enforcing directives issued by President Joe Biden's administration that extended protections for LGBTQ people in schools and workplaces.
© Provided by Associated Press FILE - In this Oct. 8, 2019, photo, supporters of LGBTQ rights stage a protest
on the street in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington. A judge in Tennessee on Friday, July 15, 2022, has
temporarily barred two federal agencies from enforcing directives issued by President Joe Biden's administration
that extended protections for LGBTQ people in schools and workplaces. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta, File)     U.S. District Judge Charles Atchley Jr. in an order on Friday ruled for the 20 state attorneys general who sued last August claiming the Biden administration directives infringe on states' right to enact laws that, for example, prevent students from participating in sports based on their gender identity or requiring schools and businesses to provide bathrooms and showers to accommodate transgender people.
    Atchley, appointed by President Donald Trump in 2020, agreed with the attorneys’ generals’ argument and issued a temporary injunction that prevents the agencies from applying that guidance on LGBTQ discrimination until the matter can be resolved by courts.
    “As demonstrated above, the harm alleged by Plaintiff States is already occurring — their sovereign power to enforce their own legal code is hampered by the issuance of Defendants’ guidance and they face substantial pressure to change their state laws as a result,” Atchley wrote.
    The attorneys general are from Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee and West Virginia.
    The directives regarding discrimination based on sexual orientation was issued by the U.S. Department of Education and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in June following a landmark civil rights decision by U.S. Supreme Court in 2020 that, under a provision called Title VII, protects gay, lesbian and transgender people from discrimination in the workplace.
Judge strikes down many of Minnesota's abortion restrictions
    The Department of Education guidance from June 2021 said discrimination based on a student's sexual orientation or gender identity would be treated as a violation of Title IX, the 1972 federal law that protects sex discrimination in education.
    The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission released guidance that month about what could constitute discrimination against LGBTQ people and advised the public about how to file a complaint.
    With its guidance, the Biden administration in part took a stand against laws and proposals in a growing number of states that aim to forbid transgender girls from participating on female sports teams. The state attorneys general contend that the authority over such policies “properly belongs to Congress, the States, and the people.”
    The education policy carried the possibility of federal sanctions against schools and colleges that fail to protect gay and transgender students.
    The attorneys general argued that a delaying a legal review of the directives would “cause them significant hardship, as Defendants would be allowed to use the ‘fear of future sanctions’ to force ‘immediate compliance’ with the challenged guidance,” Atchley wrote.
    “The Court finds that Plaintiffs have shown a credible threat of enforcement,” Atchley wrote.    “Plaintiffs highlight that private litigants are relying on Defendants’ guidance to challenge Plaintiffs’ state laws.”
    Atchley noted that the U.S. Department of Education has filed a statement of interest in a West Virginia lawsuit taking a position that Title IX prohibits the state from excluding transgender girls from participating in single-sex sports restricted to girls.

7/16/2022 The Presbyterian Church voted to declare Israel an apartheid state. Jewish organizations are calling the move antisemitic by ktangalakislippert@insider.com (Katherine Tangalakis-Lippert) – Business Insider
© FABRICE COFFRINI/AFP via Getty Images Israel's Defense Force reservists, wearing mask depicting Yahya Sinwar
the Hamas chief in the Gaza Strip and holding Palestinian flags, protest outside the United Nations Offices in
Geneva on June 7, 2022. - The demonstration, organized by Israeli NOG Shurat HaDin, demands Human Right Council
upcoming Pillay Report labeling Israel an apartheid state to be cancelled. FABRICE COFFRINI/AFP via Getty Images

• The US Presbyterian Church voted to declare Israel's actions against Palestinians apartheid.
• Jewish organizations argued the move is antisemitic, calling the allegation "offensive and false."
• "[T]here is a fundamental difference between antisemitism and the right to critique the policies of Israel," read a letter by the church.

    In a move Jewish organizations are condemning as antisemitic, the Presbyterian Church USA voted to declare that the actions of the Israeli government against the people of Palestine meets the legal definition of apartheid.
    Commissioners of 225th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) voted 266 to 116 in their annual meeting to make public the church's stance that both affirms the right of Israel to provide security to its borders and criticizes human rights offenses perpetrated against Palestinians.
    "In 2018, Israel passed a nation-state law, which declares the distinction between Jews and non-Jews fundamental and legitimate, and permits institutional discrimination in land management and development, housing, citizenship, language and culture.    This decision among many other practices have confirmed that the policies and practices of Israel constitute apartheid," read a letter by Rev. Dr. J. Herbert Nelson, II, stated clerk of the general assembly of the Presbyterian Church.
    The clerk's letter added the Presbyterian Church, which consists of over 1.7 million members, recognizes the legitimacy of the Israeli state but it opposes continuing occupation of Palestine, which it declared to be "illegitimate, illegal under international law, and an enduring threat to peace in the region."
    Nelson has previously described Israeli policies toward Palestinians as "enslavement," angering some Jewish organizations.    The latest letter has garnered similar reactions, with some accusing the clerk and the Presbyterian Church itself of being antisemitic.
    "Jewish Federations are not surprised by the latest antisemitic action taken by Presbyterian Church USA PC (USA) in its vote to adopt a resolution calling Israel an apartheid state.    There was a time when their words mattered.    That time is long gone."    The Jewish Federations of North America said in a statement.    "This resolution does nothing to further peace or foster a better future for Christians, Jews, and Muslims; Palestinians or Israelis.    Its only intention is to demonize the Jews and Israel with the offensive and false allegation of apartheid."
    Rabbi Noam E. Marans, director for interreligious and intergroup relations for the American Jewish Committee told The Washington Post the Presbyterian Church's stance is a "tragedy."
    "Presbyterians and Jews in the pews need and want each other in order to address the issues that are most challenging in America today," Marans told The Post.Presbyterianism is a part of the Reformed tradition within Protestantism that traces its origin to the Church of Scotland. Presbyterian churches derive their name from the presbyterian form of church government by representative assemblies of elders. "This prevents that from happening."
    The letter written on behalf of Presbyterian leadership stated that the church remains "committed" to combating antisemitism, as well as all forms of violence and discrimination.
    "At the same time, we are convinced that there is a fundamental difference between antisemitism and the right to critique the policies of Israel deemed illegal under international law," Nelson's letter read.
[Presbyterianism is a part of the Reformed tradition within Protestantism that traces its origin to the Church of Scotland. Presbyterian churches derive their name from the presbyterian form of church government by representative assemblies of elders.]

7/16/2022 Judge blocks Biden admin directives on transgender athletes, bathrooms by Brad Brooks - Reuters
© Reuters/Lucy Nicholson A gender neutral bathroom is seen at the University of California, Irvine     (Reuters) - A federal judge in Tennessee has temporarily blocked Biden administration directives allowing transgender workers and students to use bathrooms and locker rooms and join sports teams that correspond with their gender identity.
    Judge Charles Atchley Jr. of the Eastern District of Tennessee ruled on Friday that the administration's directives would make it impossible for some states to enforce their own laws on transgender athletes' participation in girls' sports and access to bathrooms.
    A coalition of 20 Republican attorneys general brought a lawsuit last year against the federal government, noting that they stood to lose significant federal funding as the Biden directives were in conflict with their own state laws.
    Atchley agreed with that, writing in his order that the states "cannot continue regulating pursuant to their state laws while simultaneously complying with Defendants' guidance."
    Oklahoma Attorney General John O'Connor, one of the plaintiffs, said in a written statement on Saturday that Atchley's order "is a major victory for women's sports and for the privacy and safety of girls and women in their school bathrooms and locker rooms."
1 of 35 Photos in Gallery©Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images) Live updates: Democrats call on Biden to declare 'a public health emergency' after Roe v. Wade reversal

• The Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade on Friday.
• The 1973 landmark ruling established the constitutional right to an abortion.
• Over a dozen states have laws meant to immediately outlaw abortion upon a reversal of Roe.

    The Supreme Court on Friday overturned the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling that established the constitutional right to an abortion.
    The opinion in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization threw out the ruling as the nation's highest court sided with Mississippi and other states, which passed restrictive anti-abortion laws.
    Immediately after Friday's ruling, politicians on both sides of the aisle issued statements — with Republicans praising the Supreme Court and Democrats slamming the decision.
    Over a dozen states have "trigger laws" meant to ban abortion immediately upon the overturning of Roe, as the legality of abortion is now left up to state legislatures.
    The Justice Department, the Department of Education and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission are named as defendants in the lawsuit. None immediately replied to requests for comment on Saturday.    The three had earlier requested that Atchley dismiss the states' lawsuit, a motion the judge denied in his Friday ruling.
    The coalition of Republican states argued the Biden administration directives improperly expanded on a 2020 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that extended anti-discrimination protections to transgender workers.
    The top court in Bostock v. Clayton County said employers cannot terminate workers because of their gender identity or sexuality.    The justices expressly declined to decide if the ruling applied to sex-segregated bathrooms and locker rooms.
    The Supreme Court in Bostock held that the bar on workplace sex discrimination in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 extended to bias based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
    The Department of Education in its guidance issued last year concluded that because Title IX, which bars sex bias in federally funded educational programs, borrowed language from Title VII, Bostock also applied to schools.
    The department said, for example, that preventing a transgender high school girl from using the girls' restroom or trying out for the girls' cheerleading team would violate Title IX.
    Atchley on Friday agreed with the states, writing in his ruling that the Supreme Court in Bostock "explicitly refused to decide whether 'sex-segregated bathrooms, locker rooms, and dress codes' violate Title VII."
(Reporting by Brad Brooks in Lubbock, Texas; Editing by Daniel Wallis)

7/17/2022 Judge blocks Biden admin's transgender school bathroom rule, athletes by Lawrence Richard – FOX News
    A federal judge has blocked a directive from President Joe Biden’s administration that allowed transgender workers and students to use school restrooms matching their gender identities.
Former transgender teen has a message for those curious about transitioning
    It also allowed transgender athletes to join sports teams corresponding with their chosen genders.
    The directive was blocked by Judge Charles Atchley Jr. of the Eastern District of Tennessee, a Trump appointee, after a coalition of 20 Republican attorneys general sued last year, Reuters reported.
    The plaintiffs argued the federal directive clashed with state laws and prevented states from enforcing their own laws that banned transgender school bathroom use.
BIDEN ADMIN HOLDING SCHOOL LUNCH MONEY 'HOSTAGE' TO FORCE TRANSGENDER POLICIES, ACTIVIST PARENT SAYS
    Judge Atchley agreed, saying in his opinion the states "cannot continue regulating pursuant to their state laws while simultaneously complying with Defendants' guidance," Reuters reported.
    The states also argued the Biden administration's Justice Department, the Department of Education and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission — the defendants in the case — improperly justified the bathroom directive through the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. Clayton County.
© Photo by Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 16: President Joe Biden walks off Marine One
on the South Lawn of the White House on July 16, 2022 in Washington, DC. Photo by Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images     In the case, Clayton County fired county employee Gerald Bostock for "unbecoming" behavior after he participated in a gay recreational softball league.    The Supreme Court ruled in 2020, that workplace sex discrimination in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 should extend to sexual orientation and gender identity.
GOP LAWMAKERS SLAM HOUSE DEMS FOR GENDER-NEUTRAL BATHROOM PUSH AS ‘ECONOMY IS IN THE TOILET’
    The high court said in its decision they were not deciding whether "sex-segregated bathrooms, locker rooms, and dress codes' violate Title VII."
    In 2021, after President Biden was sworn into office and appointed new leadership, the Department of Education issued guidance to apply the 2020 case to schools.
EIGHTH-GRADE GIRL BLASTS SCHOOL BOARD FOR POLICY THAT WOULD ALLOW 'BOYS INTO GIRLS' LOCKER ROOMS'
    The department suggested the court’s decision should be applied to sex-segregated bathrooms — but Judge Atchley disagreed.
© Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images WASHINGTON, DC - NOVEMBER 18: Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District
of Tennessee Charles Atchley Jr. testifies during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee in the
Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill November 18, 2020 in Washington, DC. Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images     The Supreme Court in Bostock "explicitly refused to decide whether 'sex-segregated bathrooms, locker rooms, and dress codes' violate Title VII," the judge said in his opinion, Reuters reported.
    Oklahoma Attorney General John O'Connor, who was among the plaintiffs, called the decision "a major victory for women's sports and for the privacy and safety of girls and women in their school bathrooms and locker rooms," per the report.

7/18/2022 Religions don't agree on abortion. That's why some faiths plan to take their case to court by Trevor Hughes, USA TODAY
    Some activists devastated by the Supreme Court's decision ending a constitutional right to abortion are turning to a new tactic: Bring God onto their side of the fight.     Here's why some advocates think Biden's steps to protect abortion access aren't enough.
    They're planning to file religious-freedom lawsuits, hoping to use either state or federal courts to reinstate their rights, which they say are being violated by conservative Christians who've forced their theocracy upon others as a de-facto national religion in the fight against abortion rights.
© Alex Wong, Getty Images WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 29: Abortion rights activists protest in front of the
U.S. Supreme Court June 29, 2022 in Washington, DC. The Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's
Health overturned the landmark 50-year-old Roe v Wade case and erased a federal right to an abortion.
(Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images) *** BESTPIX *** ORG XMIT: 775832216 ORIG FILE ID: 1405849590     While conservative Christians typically oppose abortion, many other Christians — and many other faiths — recognize the right of women to protect their lives from a dangerous pregnancy.     In Judaism, the religion's foundational religious texts generally conclude life begins when a baby is born.     And some Muslim schools of belief also permit abortion to protect a mother's life.     "The country is being taken over by the fundamentalist Christian theology," said Rabbi Barry Silver of Congregation L'Dor Va-Dor in Boca Raton. "This is the exact type of religion the founders had in mind when they created the separation of church and state."     When does life begin? Abortion views differ among religions. Here's what they say. A conservative Christian worldview
    How abortion is framed in the United States reflects the central role conservative Christians have played, said Rebecca Todd Peters, a professor of religion at Elon University in North Carolina and an ordained Presbyterian minister.     "When you require a woman to justify their decision to get an abortion, that assumes that abortion is wrong.    And where is that assumption coming from?    Christian activists," said Peters.    "It's just stunning to me the power that ideological perspective has on everybody's life in the U.S."
    Past efforts to protect abortion rights have largely rested on personal privacy, not religious freedom, experts say.    But experts including Silver, who is also a civil rights lawyer and former state lawmaker, say religious claims might actually sway courts because those rights are specifically enumerated in state and the U.S. Constitution.     In Florida, where Silver's congregation is already suing to overturn the state's abortion ban, state law specifically bars the government from interfering with religious practices.    That law was sponsored and backed in part by conservative Christians who wanted to ensure they could exercise their faith without government interference.     "The religious argument is just every bit as strong as the privacy argument," Silver said of the lawsuit.    "They can't just toss it aside and say it doesn't matter because the whole line of the law and cases were brought by fundamentalist Christians." Americans' erratic relationship with religion will be tested again after abortion ruling, experts say Religions don't agree on abortion
    Nationally, about 49% of Americans believe abortion should be "legal and accessible," according to a USA TODAY/Ipsos poll published in April.
    Self-identified Christians — from Protestants and Catholics to Baptists and members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — make up about 63% of the U.S. population, according to a December 2021 survey conducted by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center.    That's down from nearly 80% in 2007. About 30% of Americans identify as non-religious, Pew found.
    Surveys show that about 63% of evangelicals oppose abortion, while about 33% of mainline Protestants, including Baptists, Presbyterians and Episcopalians, oppose it.    According to Pew. And about 75% of Jehovah’s Witnesses and 70% of the members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints say abortion should be illegal.
    "There's this false binary that all pro-life people are Christian and all Christians are pro-life, and that just erases whole swathes of people who do support abortion access," Peters said.    The 1.7 million-member Presbyterian Church (USA) earlier this month, for example, adopted a formal policy statement affirming the right of people to control their own bodies and to receive abortions if they choose.
    About 83% of Jews and 55% of Muslims say abortion should be legal, Pew found.    And Catholics are largely split, with 56% supporting legal abortion and 42% opposed.     "We don't take the position there should be no access to abortion, but nor do we take the position that people can get an abortion under any circumstance," said Dawud Walid, 50, a Detroit-area imam and executive director of the Council on American Islamic Relations-Michigan.
    Walid said he's also careful to draw a distinction between religious beliefs and government action.
    "As religious people, we have to be careful to not fall into a type of generalization of any type of religious group. As a Muslim leader, I'm against the demonization of Christianity, even if I see rulings that I would consider problematic," he said.    "As Americans, we have to learn that we can vigorously disagree but not use it to dehumanize our fellow Americans or villainize an entire religion."
Faith leaders on abortion ruling: 'Bracing for a long season of debate
Constitution bars favoring a religion
    The First Amendment's "Establishment Clause" bans government from establishing an official religion and also prohibits government actions favoring one religion over another.    In other words, the government can't ban Muslim prayers in the same place that it permits Christian ones, as long as the prayers themselves are functionally equivalent.
    Silver and his congregation are suing the state of Florida over its ban on abortions, arguing that the law violates their free exercise of religion.    Silver said he expects other lawsuits to follow.
    "In some cases in Judaism, you are not only allowed to have an abortion but required to, because in Judaism, the mother is a fully developed human and the fetus is not yet until it is born," said Silver, who is also an attorney and a former Democratic Florida state legislator.    "The mother's rights win out every time."
    The ACLU is also considering filing religious-freedom lawsuits, and in Ohio, a coalition of Jewish groups is preparing to back an existing ACLU lawsuit over that state's abortion ban.
    Walid, the imam, said he could foresee a pregnant Muslim person in a state without abortion access suing for that right.
    In Wyoming, Unitarian Universalist minister the Rev. Leslie Kee believes Republicans have improperly diluted the Constitutional separation between government and religion.    Kee is an adviser to the state's sole abortion clinic, which was set on fire weeks before it was set to open last month.
    "This decision, which privileges one religion's perspective to the detriment of everyone else, begs the ultimate question: How is this religious slippery slope any different than what the Taliban is doing to women in Iraq?" she asked.
    Would the Supreme Court reconsider its ruling on religious grounds?
    Americans United for Separation of Church and State is also considering legal action.    The group cited the Supreme Court's decision to permit a Washington state high school football coach to lead prayers midfield following games as an example of the court privileging conservative Christianity over other religions.
    The group said, by the court only focusing on Christian beliefs, it is "robbing everyone else of their religious freedom."
    "It is no coincidence that the erosion of the line between church and state has come alongside devastating losses on so many of the rights we cherish," the group said in a statement.    "As that line has blurred, public education, reproductive rights, civil rights and more have come under attack."
    Mark Rienzi, the president of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, said it's likely the courts would reject the arguments of many pro-abortion people who claim religious freedom.    The Becket Fund represents people of widely divergent faiths, from Catholics to Zoroastrians to Native Americans, and has represented Jewish people seeking to receive kosher food or Muslims seeking to grow beards while incarcerated.
    Rienzi said in some cases, courts would likely reject complaints because the people bringing lawsuits couldn't prove their access to abortion was part of a deeply held and sincere exercise of religion.    And he said the fact that most abortion bans include exemptions for the life of the mother would help negate the claims of others.
    "At the end of all of that, the government would still be able to defend and say that there's a compelling interest in protecting the life of the unborn child," he said.

7/18/2022 Senator Ted Cruz Says Supreme Court Was Wrong In Same-Sex Marriage Ruling by Nina Golgowski - HuffPost Biden Signs Abortion Order
    Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on Saturday said he believes the U.S. Supreme Court “was overreaching” and “clearly wrong” when it legalized same-sex marriage across the country in the 2015 landmark Obergefell v. Hodges decision.
    Cruz was speaking on his podcast about the differences between that case and the Supreme Court’s recent decision that overturned Roe v. Wade, which had previously protected abortion rights nationwide.    He criticized the court for preventing individual states from deciding for themselves whether same-sex marriage should be allowed.
    “Obergefell, like Roe v. Wade, ignored two centuries of our nation’s history.    Marriage was always an issue that was left to the states,” he said.    “In Obergefell, the court said no, we know better than you guys do, and now every state must sanction and permit gay marriage.    I think that decision was clearly wrong when it was decided.    It was the court overreaching.”
© Provided by HuffPost Sen. Ted Cruz said he believes the U.S. Supreme Court “was overreaching” and “clearly wrong”<
when it legalized same-sex marriage across the country in 2015. (Photo: Tom Williams via Getty Images)     Cruz has previously advocated for allowing individual states to outlaw same-sex marriage.    For many, his desire appears closer to a reality due to last month’s Supreme Court ruling on abortion rights in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which ignited concerns that the court might overturn other decisions.
    Justice Clarence Thomas amplified that concern, stating in a solo concurring opinion that any decision made by the Supreme Court that was stated to be supported by the due process clause of the 14th Amendment, such as Roe v. Wade was, should be reconsidered.
    “Any substantive due process decision is ‘demonstrably erroneous,’” he said last month, adding that “we have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents.”
    Other rulings citing the due process clause include Griswold v. Connecticut, which established the right for married couples to use contraception; Lawrence v. Texas, which prohibits states from banning sexual relations between people of the same sex; and Loving v. Virginia, which protects interracial marriage.
    Thomas mentioned the Obergefell, Griswold and Lawrence cases in his opinion but not did mention the Loving case, which, if overturned, could threaten his own interracial marriage.

7/18/2022 Christian nationalism taking over churches — and driving away anyone who disagrees by Travis Gettys – RawStory
© provided by RawStory Christian Leaders Lay Hands and Pray over Trump Official White House Photos by Joyce Boghosian     A number of worshipers are watching with alarm as their churches lose focus and drift into Christian nationalism.
    Donald Trump's presidency opened the door to extremism within many mainstream congregations, and some Christians have left their churches due to their discomfort with the increasingly political directions pastors have taken their sermons to promote Republican candidates and engage in partisan culture wars, reported Vice.
    “It feels to me that the churches in this area are no longer true Christian churches," said Noah Jones, a 23-year-old Southern Baptist from Dalton, Georgia.    "They’ve morphed into something that’s completely unrecognizable, and I don’t think a lot of people know that they’ve been radicalized.”
    Jones, a former Trump supporter who intended to become a pastor himself, blames conservative media for the rightward lurch he saw in his church's leadership.
    “Something has happened to these people,” he said.    “I think it’s Fox News.    I think it’s social media, causing division among people, and they’re using Christianity as a means to divide people.”
    Right-wing pastors have woven militaristic themes into their sermons to justify political violence, which has alarmed and driven out many worshipers -- some during the middle of services, as Pastor Ron Tucker, of Grace Church in St. Louis recently observed.
    “I’ve read your emails," Tucker said in a recent sermon in which he acknowledged in a recent sermon.    "I’ve watched people walk out of church as I’ve gone into the stuff."
    But one of Tucker's congregants said she's had enough with his diatribes against abortion, antifa, Black Lives Matter, critical race theory, feminism, gun laws, abortion and protesters disrupting Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh's dinner at a Washington, D.C., steakhouse, as well as claiming the Jan. 6 insurrection was a hoax.
    “He’d start his sermons with this rambling 30-to 40-minute rant that sounded like it was taken straight from, like, Fox News,” said Noelle Fortman, 23.    “One time we went there, he referred to the COVID vaccine as the ‘mark of the beast’ that we needed to fight against, and I was like, ‘Yo, this is crazy.’”
    A recent survey found that 21 percent of Christians believe the U.S. should be declared a "Christian nation," and about a quarter of them believe the federal government should stop enforcing the separation of church and state, which has prompted calls for congregations like Grace Church to be stripped of their tax-exempt status.
    “Federal law couldn’t be more clear," read a recent op-ed from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.    "Grace Church has stepped far beyond the boundaries and deserves a thorough review of its tax-exempt status.”
    American Christians have long blurred the line between their faith and patriotism, and that has allowed Christian nationalism to take over congregations around the country -- and chased away anyone who disagrees with their views.
    “Christian nationalism leads to idolatry: worship of the nation over worship of god,” said Amanda Tyler, of Christians Against Christian Nationalism.    “It confuses religious authority with political authority and leads people to abandon their theological convictions in service of nationalism.”
[IT IS TOTALLY IGNORANT TO THINK THAT TRUMP IS CHANGING BELIEFS OF CHRISTIANS WHO BELIEVE WHAT THE BIBLE STATES OF THE GOD OF ABRHAHAM, JACOB AND ISAAC, AND THE SON WHO IS JESUS CHRIST AND TRUMP HAS PROMOTED THAT MORE THAN ANYONE AND HELPED ISRAEL SO HOW OR WHEN YOU BELIEVE IT IS EASY AND NOT ABOUT A NATIONALISM BUT IT IS GLOBALISM YOU SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT
Nationalism - Ideology and movement that promotes the interests of a particular nation (as in a group of people) especially with the aim of gaining and maintaining the nation's sovereignty (self-governance) over its homeland.].

[WELL THE DEMOCRATS ARE HELL-BENT TO KILL BABIES.].
7/20/2022 ‘FOR ME, THIS IS PERSONAL’ - House approves same-sex marriage bill in retort to Supreme Court ruling by Lisa Mascaro ASSOCIATED PRESS
With the U.S. Capitol in the background, a person waves a rainbow flag at a rally in support
of the LGBTQ community in Washington last year. The U.S. House approved legislation Tuesday
to protect same-sex and interracial marriages. JOSE LUIS MAGANA/ AP FILE     WASHINGTON – The U.S. House overwhelmingly approved legislation Tuesday to protect same-sex and interracial marriages amid concerns that the Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade abortion access could jeopardize other rights criticized by many conservatives.

• In a robust but lopsided debate, Democrats argued intensely and often personally in favor of enshrining marriage equality in federal law, while Republicans steered clear of openly rejecting gay marriage.
• Instead leading Republicans portrayed the bill as unnecessary amid other issues facing the nation.
• Tuesday’s election-year roll call, 267-157, was partly political strategy, forcing all House members, Republicans and Democrats, to go on the record. It also reflected the legislative branch pushing back against an aggressive court that has raised questions about revisiting other apparently settled U.S. laws.
• Wary of political fallout, GOP leaders did not press their members to hold the party line against the bill, aides said.
• In all, 47 Republicans joined all Democrats in voting for passage.

    “For me, this is personal,” said Rep. Mondaire Jones, D-N.Y., who said he was among the openly gay members of the House.
    “Imagine telling the next generation of Americans, my generation, we no longer have the right to marry who we love,” he said.    “Congress can’t allow that to happen.”
    While the Respect for Marriage Act easily passed the House with a Democratic majority, it is likely to stall in the evenly split Senate, where most Republicans would probably join a filibuster to block it.    It’s one of several bills, including those enshrining abortion access, that Democrats are proposing to confront the court’s conservative majority. Another bill, guaranteeing access to contraceptive services, is set for a vote later this week.
    House GOP leaders split over the issue, with Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Whip Rep. Steve Scalise voting against the marriage rights bill, but the No. 3 Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York voting in favor.
    In a notable silence, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell declined to express his view on the bill, leaving an open question over how strongly his party would fight it, if it should come up for a vote in the upper chamber.
    Key Republicans in the House have shifted in recent years on the same-sex marriage issue, including Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, who joined those voting in favor on Tuesday.
    Said another Republican, Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina, in a statement about her yes vote: “If gay couples want to be as happily or miserably married as straight couples, more power to them.”
    Polling shows a majority of Americans favor preserving rights to marry, regardless of sex, gender, race or ethnicity, a long-building shift in modern mores toward inclusion.
    A Gallup poll in June showed broad and increasing support for same-sex marriage, with 70% of U.S. adults saying they think such unions should be recognized by law as valid.    The poll showed majority support among both Democrats (83%) and Republicans (55%).
    Approval of interracial marriage in the U.S. hit a six-decade high at 94% in September, according to Gallup.
    Ahead of Tuesday’s voting, a number of lawmakers joined protesters demonstrating against the abortion ruling outside the Supreme Court, which sits across from the Capitol and remains fenced off for security during tumultuous political times.    Capitol Police said among those arrested were 16 members of Congress.
    “The extremist right-wing majority on the Supreme Court has put our country down a perilous path,” said Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon, D-Pa., in a floor speech setting Tuesday’s debate in motion.
    “It’s time for our colleagues across the aisle to stand up and be counted. Will they vote to protect these fundamental freedoms?    Or will they vote to let states take those freedoms away?”
    But Republicans insisted the court was only focused on abortion access in June when it struck down the nearly 50-year-old Roe v. Wade ruling, and they argued that same-sex marriage and other rights were not threatened.
    In fact, almost none of the Republicans who rose to speak during the debate directly broached the subject of same-sex or interracial marriage.
    “We are here for a political charade, we are here for political messaging,” said Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee.
    That same tack could be expected in the Senate.
    Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., said, “The predicate of this is just wrong.    I don’t think the Supreme Court is going to overturn any of that stuff.”
    As several Democrats spoke of inequalities, they said they or their loved ones had faced in same-sex marriages, the Republicans talked about rising gas prices, inflation and crime, including recent threats to justices in connection with the abortion ruling.
    For Republicans in Congress the Trump-era confirmation of conservative justices to the Supreme Court has fulfilled a long-term GOP goal of revisiting many social, environmental and regulatory issues the party has been unable to tackle on its own by-passing bills that could be signed into law.
    The Respect for Marriage Act would repeal a law from the Clinton era that defines marriage as a heterogeneous relationship between a man and a woman.    It would also provide legal protections for interracial marriages by prohibiting any state from denying out-of-state marriage licenses and benefits on the basis of sex, race, ethnicity or national origin.
    The 1996 law, the Defense of Marriage Act, had basically been sidelined by Obama-era court rulings, including Obergefell v. Hodges, which established the rights of same-sex couples to marry nationwide, a landmark case for gay rights.
    But last month, writing for the majority in overturning Roe v. Wade, Justice Samuel Alito argued for a more narrow interpretation of the rights guaranteed to Americans, noting that the right to an abortion was not spelled out in the Constitution.
    In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas went further, saying other rulings similar to Roe, including those around same-sex marriage and the right for couples to use contraception, should be reconsidered.
    While Alito insisted in the majority opinion that “this decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right,” others have taken notice.
    “The MAGA radicals that are taking over the Republican Party have made it abundantly clear they are not satisfied with repealing Roe,” said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., referring to Trump’s backers.
    He pointed to comments from Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who said over the weekend that the Supreme Court’s decision protecting marriage equality was “clearly wrong” and state legislatures should visit the issue.
    But Schumer did not commit to holding a vote on the marriage bill.
    “Imagine telling the next generation of Americans, my generation, we no longer have the right to marry who we love.    Congress can’t allow that to happen,” Rep. Mondaire Jones, D-N.Y.
“For me, this is personal,” said Rep. Mondaire Jones, D-N.Y., who said he was
among the openly gay members of the House. ANDREW HARNIK/ AP FILE     In a robust but lopsided debate, Democrats argued intensely and often personally in favor of enshrining marriage equality in federal law, while Republicans steered clear of openly rejecting gay marriage. ANDRES KUDACKI/AP FILE

7/19/2022 Asst. Health Secy. Levin Supports Nationwide Gender Reassignment Surgery For Minors by OAN NEWSROOM
Department of Health and Human Services Assistant Secretary for Health, Adm. Rachel Levine, left, speaks after
having attended a roundtable on gender-affirming care and transgender health, along with Arianna Inurritegui-Lint,
right, CEO and founder of Arianna’s Center, Wednesday, June 29, 2022, in Miami. (AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee)     US Assistant Health Secretary Rachel Levin railed against laws banning gender reassignment surgery for minors.    In an interview Monday, She claimed such laws embolden the bullying and harassment of America’s trans youth.
    Levine specifically took issue with Florida’s recent legislation barring transgender athletes from women’s sports and medicaid coverage for transition surgeries.    The secretary stated transgender children must be federally empowered to receive gender reassignment treatments.
    Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kansas) responded on Twitter, pointing out 80 percent of children outgrow “gender dysphoria,” but the effects of such procedures are permanent.    The Republican lawmaker went as far as to call the procedures to be child abuse.

7/19/2022 Vatican bans investments in defense, weapons, embryonic stem cell research by Timothy Nerozzi – FOX Business
    The Catholic Church has announced long-term reforms of its investments in order to ensure its portfolio reflects the church's values and moral beliefs.
    Only the latest in Pope Francis' overhaul of the institution's finances, the new regulations would severely crack down on revenue streams from industries and holdings deemed unethical.
    The Holy See will no longer allow church funds to be invested in industries such as defense or weapons development.    The church will also revise its portfolios to ensure no funds are connected to embryonic stem cell research or other medical technologies that violate its views on pro-life ethics.
    "The new Investment Policy aims to ensure that investments are aimed at contributing to a more just and sustainable world; protecting the real value of the Holy See's net worth, generating a sufficient return to contribute sustainably to the financing of its activities," the Holy See wrote in an official statement.    "And are aligned with the teachings of the Catholic Church, with specific exclusions of financial investments that contradict its fundamental principles, such as the sanctity of life or the dignity of the human being or the common good."
    The new guidelines highlight a centuries-old conflict within the church on ethics of lending and borrowing money, as well as the use of investment for profit.
© AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia, Pool Pope Francis celebrates a mass for deceased prelates
in St. Peter's Basilica, at the Vatican, Nov. 5, 2020. AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia, Pool VATICAN SHUFFLES TOP CLERGY OF CATHOLIC CHURCH'S ETHICAL INVESTING PRACTICES
    In early to pre-modern Christianity, the use of loans and debt to collect interest from a consumer was a sin referred to as "usury."
    The definition of "usury" has changed dramatically over time in the face of worldwide capitalism and modern investment banking.    Different denominations of Christianity have evaluated the topic differently over the years, with some still forbidding any money lending for profit.
    On the ethics of its future investing practices, the Holy See wrote, "It is important that [investments] be aimed at financial activities of a productive nature, excluding those of a speculative nature, and above all that they be guided by the principle that the decision to invest in one place rather than another, in one productive sector rather than another, is always a moral and cultural choice."
© AP Photo/Alessandra Tarantino Visitors admire the Sistine Chapel as the
Vatican Museum reopened, in Rome on June 1, 2020. AP Photo/Alessandra Tarantino     The church's investments will now be overseen by an "i>Investment Committee" that will bear final responsibility for research and consultation into prospective investment fields.
    Cardinal Kevin Farrell of the United States is assuming the position of chairman for the committee, heading a team of financial professionals hired from inside and outside the Catholic Church.
© Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images Byrne O'Brien and other Catholic Charities volunteers distribute pre-Thanksgiving
meals at the Pepco Edison Gallery on Nov. 23, 2021, in Washington, D.C. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images     "The new Investment Committee, established by Praedicate Evangelium, will carry out – through APSA – the appropriate consultations aimed at implementing the investment strategy, and will evaluate the suitability of the choices, with particular attention to the compliance of the investments made to the principles of the Social Doctrine of the Church, as well as the parameters of return and risk in accordance with the Investment Policy."
    The announcement and rollout of the Holy See's updated investment regulations was entrusted to the prefect of the secretariat for the economy, Rev. Juan Antonio Guerrero Alves.
    The Vatican bank was founded in 1942 by Pope Pius XII to manage assets destined for religious or charitable works.    Located in a tower just inside the gates of Vatican City, it also manages the pension system for the Vatican's thousands of employees.

7/21/202 Doctor who provided abortion for girl files claim for damages against AG by Tony Cook, Indianapolis Star, USA TODAY NETWORK
    Dr. Caitlin Bernard, who was cast into the national spotlight after providing abortion services for a 10-year-old Ohio girl, has filed a claim for damages against Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita – a first step toward a possible defamation lawsuit.
    Bernard’s attorney, Kathleen DeLaney, sent a tort claim notice Tuesday to Rokita seeking unspecified damages for security costs, legal fees, reputational harm, and emotional distress.    The tort claim triggers a 90-day period for Rokita to investigate or settle the claim.    Then, Bernard can file a lawsuit.
    'Mr. Rokita’s false and misleading statements about alleged misconduct by Dr. Bernard in her profession constitute defamation per se,' the notice says.    'The statements have been and continue to be published by or on behalf of Mr. Rokita and the Office of the Attorney General.    To the extent that these statements exceed the general scope of Mr. Rokita’s authority as Indiana’s Attorney General, the statement forms the basis of an actionable defamation claim against Mr. Rokita individually.'
    Rokita went on Fox News last week to announce he is investigating whether Bernard disclosed the abortion that has become a national flashpoint.
    'We have this abortion activist acting as a doctor with a history of failing to report,' Rokita said.    'We’re gathering the evidence as we speak, and we’re going to fight this to the end, including looking at her licensure.    If she failed to report it in Indiana, it’s a crime for – to not report, to intentionally not report.'
    Rokita did not provide any evidence to back up his claims that Bernard has 'a history of failing to report' either child abuse or abortions she has performed.
    Indiana requires the immediate reporting of suspected child sexual abuse and physicians must report any abortion they perform on someone under age 16 to the state within three days.
    Records obtained by IndyStar through a public records request show Bernard reported the 10-year-old’s abortion to the Indiana State Department of Health and the Department of Child Services within the required time frame under state law.    She also indicated the girl was seeking an abortion as a result of being abused.
    Police in Columbus, Ohio, have said Franklin County Children Services had already reported the suspected sexual abuse on June 22, five days before Bernard says a child abuse doctor in Ohio first contacted her about providing abortion services for the girl.
    Bernard’s employer, IU Health, said Friday it conducted an investigation and found no HIPAA violations.
Bernard
7/21/2022 Marriage debate moves to Senate - Pressure on GOP over bill for same-sex rights by Lisa Mascaro, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    WASHINGTON – The Senate unexpectedly launched a new push Wednesday to protect same-sex marriage in federal law after a surprising number of Republicans helped pass landmark legislation in the House.    Some GOP senators are already signaling support.
    The legislation started as an election- season political effort to confront the new Supreme Court majority after the court overturned abortion access in Roe v. Wade, raising concerns that other rights were at risk.    But suddenly it has a shot at becoming law.    Pressure is mounting on Republicans to drop their longstanding opposition and join in a bipartisan moment for gay rights.
    “This legislation was so important,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said as he opened the chamber Wednesday.
    The Democratic leader marveled over the House’s 267-157 tally, with 47 Republicans – more than one-fifth of the GOP lawmakers – voting for the bill late Tuesday.
    “I want to bring this bill to the floor,” Schumer said, “and we’re working to get the necessary Senate Republican support to ensure it would pass.”
    Political odds are still long for the legislation, the Respect for Marriage Act, which would enshrine same-sex and interracial marriages as protected under federal law. Conservatives, including House GOP leaders, largely opposed the bill, and the vast majority of Republicans voted against it.
    But in a sign of shifting political attitudes and a need for an election-year win, some Republicans are signaling there may be an opening.    Few Republicans spoke directly against gay marriage during Tuesday’s floor debate in the House.    And Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell was notably silent when asked about the bill, saying he would take a look if it comes to the Senate.
    “I’m going to delay announcing anything on that issue,” McConnell said, adding he would wait to see if Schumer brings it forward.
    President Joe Biden wants Congress to send him the bill to sign as soon as possible.
    “This is something that’s personal to the president,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters traveling with the president.
    Biden is “a proud champion of the right for people to marry whom they love and is grateful to see bipartisan support for that right,” she said.    “He believes it is non-negotiable and that the Senate should act swiftly to get this to the president’s desk.    He wants to sign it, so we need this legislation and we urge Congress to move as quickly as possible.”
    So far, the legislation has just two Senate Republican co-sponsors, Susan Collins of Maine and Rob Portman of Ohio. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Thom Tillis of North Carolina are among others closely watched for possible support.
    In all 10 Republican senators would need to join with all Democrats to reach the 60-vote threshold to overcome a GOP filibuster.
    “We’re seeing progress on this, and I’ll take progress,” Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., the bill’s chief sponsor, told reporters at the Capitol.
    The No. 2 Republican, Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, was doubtful Tuesday, calling the proposed legislation little more than a political message.
    Social issues including same-sex marriage and abortion have sprinted to the top of the congressional agenda this summer in reaction to the Supreme Court’s action overturning Roe v. Wade, a stunning ruling that ended the nearly 50-year-old constitutional right to abortion access.    It set off alarms that other rights conservatives have targeted could be next.
    While Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, insisted the Roe v. Wade ruling pertained only to abortion access, it demonstrated the new conservative muscle with three Trump era justices tipping the court’s balance.    A concurring opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas, who has gained stature in the new majority, raised questions about gay marriage and other rights.
    “We take Justice Thomas – and the extremist movement behind him – at their word,” said Speaker Nancy Pelosi during the House debate.    “This is what they intend to do.”
    Both Pelosi and Schumer criticized Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who said over the weekend that the Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell vs. Hodges decision upholding gay marriage was “clearly wrong.”
    The Respect for Marriage Act was rushed to the House floor in an election year with polling showing a majority of Americans favor preserving rights to marry, regardless of sex, gender, race or ethnicity, a long-building shift in modern mores toward inclusion.
    A Gallup poll in June showed broad and increasing support for same-sex marriage, with 70% of U.S. adults saying they think such unions should be recognized by law.
    The poll showed majority support among both Democrats (83%) and Republicans (55%). McConnell, the Republican leader, is eager to regain control of the Senate, now evenly split 50-50, and his views on whether his party should support or oppose the same-sex marriage protections will almost certainly be viewed through that political lens.
    The Respect for Marriage Act would repeal the Clinton-era Defense of Marriage Act, which put into federal law the definition of marriage as a heterosexual union between a man and woman.    That 1996 law was largely overshadowed by subsequent court rulings, including Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015, legalizing gay marriage nationwide.
Schumer

7/21/2022 DOJ Files Motion To Dismiss Texas Abortion Lawsuit by OAN NEWSROOM
Attorney General Merrick Garland speaks following a briefing by Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives director Steven Dettelbach
on the progress at the one-year anniversary of the launch of the department’s regional firearms trafficking strike forces
to address violent crime, at the Department of Justice in Washington, Wednesday, July 20, 2022. (Oliver Contreras/Pool via AP)     The Department of Justice has continued to clash with Texas over a federal law requiring hospitals to provide abortions.    During a Wednesday press conference, Attorney General Merrick Garland said he plans to file a motion to dismiss the state’s lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services.
    The suit, filed last week, seeks to push back against the HHS’s declaration that hospitals must provide abortions as a form of emergency treatment if approved by a doctor.    Garland also spoke about what measures he will take to protect abortion access.
    “The Justice Department is going to use every tool we have to ensure reproductive freedom,” stated the Attorney General.    “We are going to be looking at everything from advising and are doing everything from advising our fellow federal, fellow federal agencies on their authorities to bringing affirmative litigation to entering into private lawsuits on the side of private parties.”
    Garland said he plans to enforce the law under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, which carries a $120,000 fine for each violation.
[THE DEMOCRATS WILL ONLY CONTINUE TO TRY TO FIND A WAY TO KILL BABIES BY ABORTIONS BY TRYING TO PUSH FEDERAL CREATION LAWS TO ATTEMPT TO GET AROUND THE SUPREME COURT RULING THAT THE SUPREME COURT RULED FOR THE STATES TO MAKE THEIR LAWS ON THAT SUBJECT SO FIGHT IT TEXAS AND SHOVE GARLAND’S OVERREACH UP HIS BEHIND SO HE HAS TO ABORT IT.].

7/22/2022 Kentucky judge extends block of state's abortion ban by DYLAN LOVAN, Associated Press
    LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — A Kentucky judge granted an injunction on Friday that prevents the state's near-total ban on abortions from taking effect, meaning the state's two clinics can continue providing abortions, for now.
© Provided by Associated Press FILE - Abortion-rights supporters chant their objections at the Kentucky Capitol
on April 13, 2022, in Frankfort, Ky. Attorneys for Kentucky’s two abortion clinics sought an injunction in court
Wednesday, July 6, 2022, to block the state's near-total ban on the procedure, one of numerous such efforts across
the country following the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling overturning Roe v. Wade. (AP Photo/Bruce Schreiner, File)     Jefferson Circuit Judge Mitch Perry's ruling says there is “a substantial likelihood” that Kentucky's new abortion law violates "the rights to privacy and self-determination” protected by Kentucky's constitution.
    The injunction issued in Louisville allows the state's only two clinics to continue providing abortions while the case is litigated.
    Kentucky’s trigger law was meant to ban abortions as soon as the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, but Perry issued a restraining order in June blocking the ban.
    Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron, a Republican running for governor, is likely to take the case next to the state appeals court.    Cameron has said Perry's order has no basis in the state constitution.
    Kentucky’s trigger law contains a narrow exception allowing a physician to perform an abortion if necessary to prevent the death or permanent injury of the pregnant woman.    Gov. Andy Beshear, a Democrat, has denounced that law as “extremist,” noting it lacks exceptions for rape and incest.
    Perry held a hearing on July 6 to listen to arguments on the injunction.    A doctor who performs abortions at one of the clinics cited statistics she said showed that pregnancy can be more dangerous to the health of a mother than abortion.
    Perry also wrote in his ruling that the trigger ban is “an arguably unconstitutional delegation of authority,” since it depended on another “jurisdictional body” — the U.S. Supreme Court.
    Kentuckians are set to vote in November on a constitutional amendment that would ensure there are no state constitutional protections for abortion.

7/22/2022 Ky. Judge Temporarily Blocks Near Total Abortion Ban by OAN NEWSROOM
Supporters of abortion rights chant slogans outside a Planned Parenthood clinic during
a protest in West Hollywood, Calif., Friday, June 24, 2022. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)     A Kentucky judge continues to block the state’s near-total ban on abortions.    On Friday, Judge Mitch Perry extended his June order which blocked the state from enforcing its so-called “trigger law” that bans abortions after six weeks.
    The ruling claimed the law would violate residents right to privacy and self-determination.    Finding significant state constitutional questions about the two laws, Perry ordered them blocked until the dispute is resolved at trial.    A trial date has not been set.
    “Once again, the courts have rightly stopped Attorney General Daniel Cameron’s relentless efforts to ban abortion, which would have devastating consequences for Kentuckians,” said a Planned Parenthood spokesperson.    “No one should be forced to carry a pregnancy against their will or flee the state to access essential health care.    Kentuckians have a right to abortion under the state constitution and we’ll continue fighting for that right so that every person in the commonwealth can get the care they need.”
    Cameron, a Republican who has been seeking to enforce the two laws and other abortion legislation enacted by the GOP-controlled General Assembly, issued a statement that he was “disappointed” with Perry’s ruling and planned to appeal.
    “The judge’s suggestion that Kentucky’s constitution contains a right to abortion is not grounded in the text and history of our state’s governing document,” Cameron voiced.    “We will continue our steadfast defense of these bipartisan laws that represent the commonwealth’s commitment to the lives of the unborn.”
    Perry’s order found that “the fundamental right for a woman to control her own body free from government interference” outweighs the state’s interest in protecting a fetus before it is viable.    In his order, Perry was determined that abortion services are health care, a point disputed by abortion opponents.
    “Plaintiffs assert and this court agrees, that abortion is a form of health care,” the judge stated.    “It is provided by licensed medical professionals in licensed medical facilities, just like many other medical procedures.”
    In the meantime, Cameron continues to vow to fight this decision at the appellate level.

7/22/2022 Catholic Archdiocese of Washington to ban Latin Mass in parishes by Marisa Iati – The Washington Post
    The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington will ban the celebration of the old Latin Mass in parishes beginning this fall — a move meant to align the region with the pope’s wishes on an issue dividing the Church along ideological lines.
© Matt McClain/The Washington Post Catholic Archdiocese of Washington to ban Latin Mass in parishes     In a decree published Friday, Cardinal Wilton Gregory mandated that beginning Sept. 21, Sunday Mass can only be said using the old rite at three nonparochial churches.    Priests who want to celebrate the Latin Mass have to request permission in writing and affirm the validity of the reforms implemented during the Second Vatican Council, which ended in 1965.
    As a result, hundreds of Catholics who attend the Latin Mass at roughly six parishes in one of the nation’s most visible archdioceses will be forced to either worship differently or find a new place to do so.
    The change follows a ruling last year in which Pope Francis severely limited the use of the old rite in a move he said was meant to increase global unity among the faithful.    He suggested then that those who preferred the Latin Mass were using it to reinforce ideological divisions within the Church.
    Gregory said Friday that he had not found that to be the case in the Washington region.
Sunday Mass at Holy Name Cathedral
    “I have discovered that the majority of the faithful who participate in these liturgical celebrations in the Archdiocese of Washington are sincere, faith-filled and well-meaning,” he wrote.    “Likewise, the majority of priests who celebrate these liturgies are doing their very best to respond pastorally to the needs of the faithful.”
    The new guidelines are an attempt to abide by Francis’s ruling while continuing to provide for Catholics who find beauty and tradition in the old form of the Mass, Gregory said.
    Many of those Catholics, however, view the decision as a slap in the face.    Kenneth Wolfe, who has attended the Latin Mass in Washington for more than two decades, said Gregory’s decision does nothing to bring together the region’s faithful.
    “There can be no unity when the cardinal fires the first shot and everybody then is expected to drive from wherever they were, at a parish, to a location that’s nowhere near them,” he said before the decree was released.    “It doesn’t make any sense.”
    These Americans are devoted to the old Latin Mass.    They are also at odds with Pope Francis.
    Under the new rules, the Latin Mass can be celebrated only at the Chapel at St. John the Evangelist Catholic Church in Forest Glen, Md., the Franciscan Monastery of the Holy Land in America in Northeast Washington and St. Dominic Mission Church in Aquasco, Md.
    Masses on Christmas and Easter, as well as sacraments including weddings and baptisms, must also use the modern form. The new rules will be reevaluated in three years, Gregory wrote.
    Most Catholics attend the modern form of the Mass, which is celebrated in the local language.    But a small number of traditionalists are intensely devoted to the Latin Mass, which was dominant before the 1960s.
    For some, celebrating the old rite is a form of protesting what they see as the Church’s liberalization since the Second Vatican Council and particularly during Francis’s papacy.    Others say they find the Latin Mass rich and are drawn to its history over more than a millennium.
    Gregory said he listened to the concerns of Catholics who attend the Latin Mass during listening sessions for the Church’s worldwide synod over the past several months and has asked archdiocesan offices to provide pastoral outreach to them.    He noted that those Catholics can attend Masses in the modern rite that incorporate elements common to the Latin Mass, including Gregorian chant, incense and long periods of silence.

7/25/2022 Elementary School Being Built With Complete Genderless Bathrooms by Jessica Marie Baumgartner – Go2Tutors
    The John M. Gandy Elementary School is being built to serve families in Ashland, Virginia.    It is set to open for the 2024-2025 school year, but its design is the first of the Hanover Public Schools to pander to gender theory. Instead of building the typical sex-segregated restroom spaces, this new school has plans to provide genderless bathrooms for students K-5.
© Provided by Go2TutorsElementary School Being Built With Complete Genderless Bathrooms     The architecture design was approved by Crabtree, Rohrbaugh, & Associates, a firm hired to add genderless bathrooms due to federal pressure to promote "equity" and gender inclusion in public schools.    The youngest students in kindergarten and first grade will have single-use genderless bathrooms available in every classroom, but for students in second through fifth grade, the design includes stalls that are enclosed from floor to ceiling.    Sinks and mirrors are to be set in the hallway, so that students have complete privacy while going to the bathroom, but none if they need to comb their hair or wash their face.
    The idea is that students won't have much time in the bathroom unsupervised and that they will be safe from others while locked in the stalls.    Yet, many concerned parents know that sex-segregated spaces do not just protect students' safety, but also their privacy.    In the crusade to be gender inclusive, young students at this school are now losing their ability to groom themselves and wash themselves without others watching as they pass through the halls.
    How this will affect students' mental health and self-esteem is unknown. What is clear is that the federal government's insertion of identity politics is damaging the social perception of scientific biology and human function.
    Genderless bathrooms were the compromise this school decided on because they were vilified for not implementing policies that allowed transgender elementary school students to use the bathroom of their choice.
    Because of this, now families of students who adhere to biology must decide whether they wish to support the school or seek out alternative education options.    It is no secret that the bathroom debate is a divisive topic.    While some parents support genderless bathrooms, many are concerned about the long-term effects of teaching children gender theory.    Gender confusion causes a host of psychological issues and pushes one-sided politics that have yet to lead children to successful outcomes.
    Although this school will not open for two more years, the response to these genderless bathrooms for children is mixed.    The majority of online reactions question the validity of the situation and express concern.    Despite this, there are a number of supporters who seem to believe that this will not affect children's ability to learn, interact, or socialize at all.
    The direct community response is still uncertain.    While many parents wish to be understanding and inclusive, the new genderless bathroom design is pushing students into the hallway to wash their hands and brush their hair.    Balancing the needs for personal space and non-discriminatory practices is a challenge that many public schools have struggled with in recent times.    How this move will affect students depends on their experiences once the new school opens.

7/25/2022 Rubio fires back at Buttigieg over same-sex marriage legislation by Sarakshi Rai – The Hill
    Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) fired back at Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg Sunday after the Biden administration official called out the Florida senator for saying that legislation protecting same-sex marriage would be a “stupid waste of time.” © Provided by The Hill Rubio fires back at Buttigieg over same-sex marriage legislation     Rubio, in a 58-second long video on Twitter, called Buttigieg a “Harvard-educated Transportation secretary” who he said didn’t know the difference between state and federal levels.
    The Florida Republican added that, on the federal level, he focuses on “federal problems that matter to real people.”
    “I’ll give you a real problem. We have a Transportation secretary named Pete Buttigieg, who believes that highways can be racist.    Who believes that $5 gas, which is killing working Americans, is a great thing, because that means people are going to drive less or because everyone’s going to go out and buy a $65,000 electric car with a Chinese battery in it,” he said?
Buttigieg fires back at Rubio after his same-sex marriage remark
    He added that he will focus on “real problems” and not on an agenda that he believes is “dictated by a bunch of affluent elite liberals” and a “bunch of Marxist misfits, who sadly today control the agenda of the modern Democratic Party.”
    Rubio posted the video hours after Buttigieg told CNN “State of the Union” host Jake Tapper that he didn’t know why Rubio wouldn’t have time to help safeguard same-sex marriages if he has the time to fight against Disney.
    Buttigieg, the first openly LGTBQ+ Cabinet secretary confirmed by the Senate, was responding to remarks Rubio made after the House advanced the Respect for Marriage Act, which would codify marriage rights for same-sex and interracial couples.
    Democrats introduced the bill after concerns about Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurring opinion in a decision overturning Roe v. Wade, in which he also called on the court to revisit other rights including marriage equality.

7/25/2022 Same-Sex Marriage Needs 10 GOP Senators For Codification by OAN NEWSROOM
FILE – Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, speaks during hearing on the fiscal year 2023 budget for the FBI in Washington, May 25, 2022.
A bipartisan group of senators, including Collins, released proposed changes July 20, to the Electoral Count Act,
the post-Civil War-era law for certifying presidential elections that came under intense scrutiny after the Jan. 6 attack
on the Capitol and Donald Trump’s effort to overturn the 2020 election. (Ting Shen/Pool Photo via AP, File)     Forty-seven House Republicans joined every Democrat in backing codification of same-sex marriage, in turn, sending the bill to the Senate.    Now in the upper chamber, the bill, which would repeal the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, codify interracial marriage and give legislative backing to the Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision, could face an uphill battle to the 60 votes needed for passage.
    All 50 Democrats have announced their support for gay marriage with the onus falling squarely on 10 Republican senators to join them and send the bill to President Joe Biden’s desk.    Sen. Susan Collins of Maine has led Republican efforts to codify gay marriage while working closely with the Senates first openly lesbian member, Democrat Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, to try and secure the 10 GOP votes.    Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski, Ohio’s Rob Portman and North Carolina’s Thom Tillis have also announced their support.
    However, even staunch conservatives are getting on board with the bill as Wisconsin’s Ron Johnson has announced his intention to vote ‘yes.’ He said that while he thinks the bill is unnecessary because overturning gay marriage would disrupt people’s lives in a way overturning abortion did not, he wouldn’t oppose its passage.
    “Unlike Roe v. Wade, this pretty well is settled law from the standpoint that people have relied on that and if you overturn it, that’s a big part of Stare Decisis, it would disrupt a lot of people’s lives,” Johnson stated.    “Roe v. Wade was about affecting people in the future…as I look at that piece of legislation from the House right now, I don’t see any reason why I should oppose it.”
    Despite this, opposition still runs steep among some parts of the Senate Republican caucus.    South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham has said that he would continue to support the Defense of Marriage Act passed in 1996 with majority support among both parties in both chambers and signed by Democrat President Bill Clinton.
    The Republican Whip in the Senate, Texas’ John Cornyn, who’s fresh off writing the latest anti-Second Amendment legislation with Democrats, has said he feels the issue is an unnecessary distraction because it’s already settled law.
    “I I think it’s a contrived issue because the Supreme Court’s decided the issue, so I don’t see any reason for the Congress to act,” he stated.
    Ted Cruz, Texas’ other Republican senator, along with a few others are also expected to vote ‘no.’ The rest of the caucus remains cagey about giving a direct answer on where they sit.    Iowa’s Joni Ernst has said she needs time to review the legislation and Utah’s Mitt Romney believes the bill is unnecessary, but is looking into it.
    Louisiana’s Bill Cassidy didn’t say if he would support the bill, but did tell reporters he was amazed they fall for distractions by the Democrats listed off a litany of pressing issues facing the country from a wide open border to record inflation.    He said the whole thing was to shift the media’s attention from those issues.
    With most Republicans not giving a firm answer one way or the other, it could be a bill with an unknown status until it comes to the floor for a full vote by the body.    If it passes, Biden has said he will sign it the moment it gets to his desk.    However, even if the bill fails, same sex marriage will still be the law of the land for the foreseeable future with Republican legislators and Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh asserting the Obergefell decision isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.

[WAKE UP AMERICA EVERY TIME YOU SEE THE WORD ‘EQUITY’ YOU SHOULD HAVE ALARMS RINGING BECAUSE YOU ARE ABOUT TO LOSE MORE RIGHTS IN THE CONSTITUTION FIRST AMENDMENT AS THE USDA: BY UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE DOES NOT HAVE THAT RIGHT
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.".].
7/27/2022 GOP AGs sue over LGBTQ school guidance - Program prohibits discrimination by Kimberlee Kruesi, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    NASHVILLE, Tenn. – More than 20 Republican attorneys general filed a lawsuit Tuesday against President Joe Biden’s administration over a Department of Agriculture school meal program that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
    The challenge, led by Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery, claims that the federal government is attempting to force states and schools to follow anti-discrimination requirements that “misconstrue the law.”
    The coalition of attorneys general are hoping for a similar result to a separate challenge from earlier this month when a Tennessee judge temporarily barred two federal agencies from enforcing directives issued by Biden’s administration that extended protections for LGBTQ people in schools and workplaces.    The judge sided with the attorneys general, ruling that the directives infringed on states’ right to enact laws, such as banning students from participating in sports based on their gender identity or requiring schools and businesses to provide bathrooms and showers to accommodate transgender people.
    “This case is, yet again, about a federal agency trying to change law, which is Congress’ exclusive prerogative,” Slatery said in a statement.    “The USDA simply does not have that authority.    We have successfully challenged the Biden Administration’s other attempts to rewrite law and we will challenge this as well.”
    In May, the USDA announced that it would include discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity as a violation of Title IX, the sweeping 1972 law that guarantees equity between the sexes in “any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” The directive requires states to review allegations of discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation, as well as update their policies and signage.
    The agency warned that states and schools that receive federal funds, which include the national school lunch program overseen by the USDA, have agreed to follow civil rights laws.    Although the agency says it wants voluntary compliance, it also has promised to refer violations to the Department of Justice.
    It is not clear whether the federal government would hold back funding for school meal programs as part of its enforcement.
    The directive followed a landmark civil rights decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2020 that, under a provision called Title VII, protects gay, lesbian and transgender people from discrimination in the workplace.
    According to the lawsuit, the attorneys general allege that the USDA’s new directive is based on a “misreading” of the Supreme Court’s ruling.
    The attorneys general involved in the lawsuit filed Tuesday are from Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia and West Virginia.
    A spokesperson for the USDA did not immediately return a request for comment.     “We have successfully challenged the Biden Administration’s other attempts to rewrite law and we will challenge this as well.”
Herbert Slatery, Tennessee attorney general
Slatery
7/27/2022 North Dakota abortion clinic prepares for likely final day by Dave Kolpack, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Protesters at North Dakota’s Red River Women’s Clinic in Fargo are flanked
by patient escorts in rainbow-colored vests on May 11. DAVE KOLPACK/AP     FARGO, N.D. – North Dakota’s only abortion clinic is preparing for what could be its final day of performing procedures, with a trigger ban due to take effect Thursday that will likely force patients to travel hundreds of miles to receive care pending the clinic’s relocation across the border to Minnesota.
    Barring a judge’s intervention, the Red River Women’s Clinic will provide abortion services Wednesday then shut down.    Owner Tammi Kromenaker is building a new clinic in Moorhead, Minnesota, with the aid of nearly $1 million raised through GoFundMe.
    Kromenaker has not said when the new clinic will open and she did not respond to messages Tuesday.    Planned Parenthood has said it can perform abortions at its own Moorhead facility to fill the gap if needed, but it is not clear if that will happen.
    Once North Dakota’s ban takes effect, the nearest abortion clinics will be in Minneapolis and Duluth, Minnesota, a drive of about four hours from Fargo, and in Billings, Montana, which is nearly four hours from North Dakota’s western border.
    Destini Spaeth, the volunteer leader of an independent group that helps fund abortions in North Dakota, is investigating temporary solutions until the Moorhead clinic opens.    That could include helping to pay for trips to Minnesota and Montana.
    “To have to cross state lines and to be treated like and spoken about like a criminal in your home state and forced to travel elsewhere, pleading for care, desperate for care,” said Spaeth, spokeswoman for the North Dakota Women In Need fund.    “It’s got to be just so traumatic.”
    Kristi Wolff, executive director of the North Dakota Women’s Network, said the women’s advocacy group still refers people to the Red River Women’s Clinic or to a physician “if that’s what’s needed.”    Wolff said she has fielded numerous calls from women showing “a lot of uncertainty and despair and anger” about what’s in store.
    “If there is no clinic operating within North Dakota, women will have to travel farther,” Wolff said.    “In order to do that, they have to have the resources for adequate transportation, you know, gas money, child care, time off work, they need all those things.    To have to do that just get to health care, that’s unacceptable.”     “I’m not holding my breath for an injunction,” Spaeth said.    “I think we’re preparing for tomorrow to be the last clinic day in North Dakota for a while.”

7/27/2022 Senate GOP, your turn to vote for marriage equity
As of last year, 70% of Americans support marriage equality, and 55% of Republicans agree that
“same-sex marriages should be recognized by the law as valid.” PAUL J. RICHARDS/AFP/ GETTY IMAGES     This is not only what the majority of Americans want, it is what most Republicans want and can advance the party.
    Forty-seven House Republicans made history last Tuesday by voting to codify same-sex marriage protections into federal law.
    The Respect for Marriage Act would repeal the Clinton-era definition of marriage as a union solely between a man and a woman, federally protect all marriages that were legal in the states where they were performed, and prohibit states from denying their validity.,br>     As the nation’s largest organization representing LGBT conservatives and their allies, we thank these 47 forward thinking Republicans for voting in favor of this bill, which we support.
    Given that even just a decade ago the GOP strongly opposed any efforts to advance marriage equality, the fact that almost a quarter of House Republicans voted for the Respect for Marriage Act should be celebrated as a turning point.
Partisan games
    Now we are encouraging Senate Republicans to do the same.
    Let’s be clear: We can see the partisan games Democrats are playing with this bill.
    They are desperate to pivot the November elections away from the Biden-Harris record by fearmongering that legal protections for marriage equality are on the Supreme Court’s chopping block after Roe v. Wade.    They’re hoping that the legislation’s failure will provide the fuel they need to keep that misleading talking point alive in the news media.
    We don’t buy their argument about the court, notably because the court’s majority opinion overturning Roe explicitly stated their decision on abortion has no implications for marriage equality or anything else.
    Nevertheless, as principled conservatives we believe that laws should be made by the legislature, not the courts, which is why we believe this bill should be turned into law.
    We acknowledge that some Republicans still remain firmly opposed to marriage equality.    We respectfully disagree.    But we also know that many Republicans support the idea of marriage equality or agree it is settled – but are unsure whether this is the right bill to move forward.
    They ask, “What is the point?    Why now?”
    These Republicans might be surprised to learn just how quickly political support for marriage equality has shifted in the past few years. Voting to codify same-sex marriages as legally valid puts the Republican Party not just in line with the vast majority of the country, but also with a majority of its own voters.
    As of last year, while a record-high 70% of Americans support marriage equality, a majority 55% of Republicans agree that “same-sex marriages should be recognized by the law as valid.”    That’s a 15-point jump from even just six years ago, and it’s trending higher.
    Supporting marriage equality is not a political liability: After President-elect Donald Trump acknowledged that marriage equality was a settled issue in 2016, the base rewarded him in 2020 with the largest number of votes for any Republican presidential candidate in U.S. history.
Don’t give Democrats more fuel
    If putting the GOP in line with its own voters is not convincing, then consider that blocking legal protections for same-sex marriages, given its increasingly mainstream acceptance, gives Democrats more fuel for their narrative that Republicans are “antigay,” out-of-touch extremists.
    Conservatives are winning the culture wars on issues like Title IX and gender ideology in classrooms – issues on which LGBT conservatives and the Republican Party are fully united.    We cannot afford the distraction of relitigating the marriage equality debate.
    Many Republicans openly admit the debate over marriage equality is settled.    A vote for the Respect for Marriage Act puts the issue firmly to bed once and for all and moves the Republican Party forward to the critical fights we are facing today.
LGBT conservatives and allies
    Our organization, Log Cabin Republicans, has worked tirelessly to build a more inclusive GOP that signals to LGBT conservatives they are welcome within the party’s big tent.    Trump won more than a quarter of LGBT voters in 2020 – we believe we can preserve and build on that progress.
    Votes on bills like the Respect for Marriage Act matter not only to LGBT voters but also to their friends and families – and to young voters who are looking for a credible alternative to the Democrats.
    Regardless of what happens with this bill, we will continue our work of persuading LGBT conservatives and their allies to vote for the GOP.    Republican support for the Respect for Marriage Act will help immensely to move that ball forward and get us back to focusing on critical issues facing our nation and the world.
    Charles T. Moran is president of the Log Cabin Republicans, the nation’s largest Republican organization dedicated to representing LGBT conservatives and allies.    Follow him on Twitter: @CharlesTMoran Charles T. Moran Log Cabin Republicans
7/27/2022 Yes, a bill punishing abortion with death was introduced in North Carolina by Emery Winter, Meghan Bragg (WCNC), Meghan Bragg (WCNC) - VERIFY
    Aviral tweet claims "Republicans in North Carolina just introduced a bill that’d make abortion punishable with death.    So very pro-life of them.”    It has received more than 100,000 likes since it was first posted July 18.
© Provided by VERIFY Yes, a bill punishing abortion with death was introduced in North Carolina     Abortion is currently legal in North Carolina, and the state’s Democratic governor has vetoed all proposed legislation to restrict abortions within the state.    Following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Republican leaders have been hoping to reinstate a pre-Roe ban on almost all abortions at 20 weeks of pregnancy.
THE QUESTION
    Did lawmakers introduce a bill that would make abortion punishable by death in North Carolina?
THE SOURCES

• North Carolina House Bill 158
• North Carolina General Assembly
• North Carolina-based Olsinski Law Firm
• N.C. Legislative Library
• North Carolina Constitution
• Michael Bitzer, Ph.D, a political professor at Catawba College in North Carolina

THE ANSWER
    Yes, lawmakers introduced a bill that would make abortion punishable by death in North Carolina, but it didn’t happen recently.    A pair of Republican lawmakers introduced the bill back in 2021, more than a year before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, and it stalled almost immediately after it was introduced.
WHAT WE FOUND
    According to the North Carolina General Assembly, the bill was introduced in February 2021 by Reps. Larry Pittman and Mark Brody.
    The bill seeks to amend the state constitution to recognize life as an individual person “from the moment of fertilization until the moment of natural death.”    A person who destroys said life, the bill says, will be accountable for first-degree murder.    As a result, any person responsible for the “willful destruction” of “persons, born or unborn,” will have committed a crime punishable by death.
    North Carolina punishes first-degree murder, according to the North Carolina-based Olsinski Law Firm, with life in prison or the death penalty.
    The North Carolina General Assembly website shows the bill is still in committee, its third referral to a committee since it was introduced.    It never made any further progress in any of its previous committees, and has been in its current committee since Aug. 4, 2021.
    "It was assigned to a committee," said Michael Bitzer, Ph.D, a political professor at Catawba College in North Carolina.    "It has gone nowhere in that committee and is in all likelihood dead for the remainder of whatever sessions the legislature comes back into."
    Bitzer explained that it’s difficult to bring legislation in the state house back to life, which would require some kind of hearing or action brought forward.
    Both the North Carolina House of Representatives and Senate are Republican-controlled.    Although state governor Roy Cooper has pledged to veto legislation that restricts abortion, the state’s Republican legislature have pushed forward abortion bills that were met with his veto.    The N.C. Legislative Library lists at least two: one from 2019, and another from 2021, the same year that the bill that would punish abortion by death was introduced and then stalled.
    Since the bill seeks to amend the state constitution, it faces greater hurdles to becoming law than an ordinary bill would.    The North Carolina Constitution says that three-fifths of both chambers of the state legislature would have to adopt the proposal, which would then be sent to the state’s voters to ratify or reject based on a simple majority.
    Republicans do not have a three-fifths majority of the state House of Representatives or Senate, although they’re just two senators shy and three representatives shy.
    Local news media reported in 2012 that Rep. Pittman, one of the bill’s sponsors, advocated for public hangings of “abortionists” in an email sent to colleagues at the time, and had confirmed that he wrote the email.
    “If murderers (and I would include abortionists, rapists, and kidnappers, as well) are actually executed, it will at least have the deterrent effect upon them,” he wrote.    “For my money, we should go back to public hangings, which would be more of a deterrent to others, as well.”

7/28/2022 Kansas nuns oppose abortion-related state amendment, challenging archbishop - Religion News Service
    (RNS) — Two Kansas nuns are voicing opposition to a proposed abortion-related amendment in their state’s constitution, despite its support by a local archbishop. The nuns argue the measure, if approved, would have negative repercussions for women and allow politicians to “impose religious beliefs on all Kansans” by passing restrictive abortion bans.
    In a letter obtained by Religion News Service and later published in The Kansas City Star, Sisters Angela Fitzpatrick and Michele Morek, members of the Ursuline Sisters order, explain their intention to vote against an amendment on Tuesday (Aug. 2) that, if passed, would alter the state’s constitution to remove the explicit right to an abortion.
    The sisters point out that abortion is already heavily regulated in Kansas and that voting against the amendment does not remove the Legislature’s authority to pass abortion regulations.    Instead, they argue, voting “no” will “make it less likely that government mandate will control health decisions of Kansas women.”
    The nuns also note negative consequences resulting from abortion bans passed in other states since the U.S. Supreme Court last month overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 case establishing the right to an abortion nationwide.    If Kansas voters agree to alter the state constitution — which the state Supreme Court ruled in 2019 affirms the right to an abortion — similar abortion bans could be passed in Kansas.
    “A church sign said, ‘Jesus trusted women.    We do too,’” reads the nuns’ letter.    “As Catholic women religious, we support Pope Francis and the social justice teachings of our Church.    We respect all people and value life.    In other states some doctors are afraid to provide lifesaving procedures for ectopic pregnancies or incomplete miscarriages.    A child rape victim was further traumatized by having to travel across state lines to receive health care.”
© Provided by Religion News Service Archbishop Joseph Naumann. Photo via Archdiocese
of Kansas City in Kansas Kansas churches heighten security as tension rise over abortion     The letter, which the sisters sent to various publications in Kansas, doubles as a challenge to Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, Kansas.    The cleric has been a vocal advocate of the amendment, which supporters call the “Value Them Both” amendment.    Earlier this month, Naumann published a letter in The Wichita Eagle rebutting allegations by a local rabbi who argued the amendment would allow Catholics and conservative Christians to impose their faith on others in the state — including Jewish Americans who do not believe life begins at conception.
    “From a Catholic perspective, abortion is not primarily a religious issue but a fundamental human rights issue,” wrote Naumann, who previously chaired the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities.    “Our faith helps us understand the dignity of every human life created in the divine image as taught in the Hebrew scriptures, but reason alone is sufficient to know that it is wrong to destroy an innocent human life.”
    But Fitzpatrick, a founding member of the Catholic social justice lobby Network, and Morek, who serves as a liaison to fellow nuns for the Global Sisters Report, appear to disagree and pose a seemingly rhetorical question in the letter, asking if the state has put into place measures that would support those choosing to carry a pregnancy to term.
    “If the VTB amendment passes, politicians in Topeka can impose religious beliefs on all Kansans, and make it more difficult for women to make decisions about their own health,” reads the opening to their letter.    “Has the legislature recently helped create an environment supporting pro-life choices by providing better healthcare, parental leave, Medicaid and other support for poor women — and daycare and child support for post-born babies?”
    Representatives for Naumann and the Archdiocese of Kansas City in Kansas did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
© Provided by Religion News Service Election signs line streets near a
polling location in Overland Park, Kansas, Wednesday, July 27, 2022. RNS photo by Kit Doyle
7/28/2022 Indiana's legal fight highlights the absurdity of the transgender movement - Opinion by Zachary Faria – Washington Examiner
    Indiana is mired in a legal fight over transgender athletes, and every detail is more absurd than the last. © Provided by Washington Examiner Indiana's legal fight highlights the absurdity of the transgender movement     The state’s ban on men and boys playing on women’s and girls’ sports teams is being challenged in court.    A federal judge ruled that a 10-year-old boy must be allowed to rejoin his girls’ softball team, not even a month after Indiana’s ban took effect.    The law was passed over the veto of GOP Gov. Eric Holcomb, who ludicrously claimed back in March that the current policies put in place by the state made the law unnecessary, because no male athletes had tried to compete in women’s sports before.
    Now, after just one case, Indiana's law is being dragged through the courts.    Holcomb had claimed the law wasn't necessary; instead, it looks like the law wasn't even sufficient.
    This legal fight was picked by the American Civil Liberties Union, a left-wing activist group that thinks that all men should be allowed to play in women’s sports.    The ACLU of Indiana claimed after this initial victory that it is “misinformation about biology and gender” to argue against men competing in women’s sports, and that it is “sex discrimination that has long been prohibited under Title IX.”
    So, we have a 10-year-old boy claiming to be a girl and humored for it by adults.    We have a Republican governor who refused to stand for the integrity of girls’ sports in a reliably conservative state.    Finally, we have the anti-science drivel from the ACLU, winning a temporary injunction in court while the organization rots from the inside out due to gender ideology.
    Could anything make the story worse?
    Yes.    Here is a line from the Indianapolis Star’s reporting, with emphasis added: "The plaintiff, who filed the lawsuit under her initials A.M., began identifying as a girl before she was four years old."
    A 10-year-old child does not have the capacity to choose the opposite gender.    A 4-year-old child absolutely does not make that decision on his or her own and has certainly been pushed down that path by parents based on one of any offhand comments children typically make.
    And yet, we are told by liberal activist groups that this must be humored and normalized, while some Republican politicians do nothing but shrug.
    Children suffering from gender dysphoria deserve sympathy.    They do not deserve this kind of abuse — to be pushed along this path by parents and liberal activists starting as young as 4 (or even 3).        Instead, groups like the ACLU will say that our entire legal system, and our entire understanding of basic biology, must be bent to the whims of transgender activists and the children they use as props.    It is a terrible movement with despicable tactics, and it must be opposed every time it picks a fight against normalcy and sanity.

7/28/2022 God does not want 'a world governed by religious laws,' pope tells Canadian clergy by Religion News Service
    QUEBEC CITY (RNS) — On his second day in Quebec City, Pope Francis offered a path forward for the Catholic Church in Canada as it seeks forgiveness and reconciliation with the Indigenous peoples harmed by its past actions.    He also addressed the challenges of both clericalism in the church and mounting secularism in the country.
    In a homily on Thursday (July 28) for clergy and church members gathered at the Cathedral of Notre Dame, the pope also criticized those who would impose the church’s beliefs on the public square.
    “God does not want us to be slaves, but sons and daughters,” Francis said.    “He does not want to make decisions for us, or oppress us with a sacral power, exercised in a world governed by religious laws.    No!    He created us to be free, and he asks us to be mature and responsible persons in life and in society.”
    The pope’s remarks take place as Christian nationalist rhetoric gains traction in conservative political parties in Europe and in the United States.    Recent comments by Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert, claiming she is “tired of this separation of church and state junk,” have sparked debates in the U.S. regarding the role of religion in government.
    His comments were also aimed at combating clericalism — privileging clergy and religious people above lay faithful in authority and importance — which the pope has blamed for allowing sexual abuse and abuse of power to propagate within the Catholic Church.
    Francis is on a six-day, self-described “penitential pilgrimage” in Canada (July 24-29), where he has formally apologized to First Nations, Metis and Inuit peoples who have suffered oppression and had their cultures nearly eradicated by religious and government authorities.
    For the church to be credible on its “new path” toward reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, it must acknowledge and atone for its past failures, the pope said.    For the first time since his arrival in Canada, the pope acknowledged the sexual abuse of minors and vulnerable adults perpetrated by clergy in the country, calling for “firm action and an irreversible commitment.”
    “Together with you, I would like once more to ask forgiveness of all the victims.    The pain and the shame we feel must become an occasion for conversion: Never again!” he said.    “Never again can the Christian community allow itself to be infected by the idea that one culture is superior to others, or that it is legitimate to employ ways of coercing others.”
    Mending the relationship with the disenfranchised Indigenous community is not the only challenge facing the Catholic Church in Canada today, the pope said. “We can immediately think of secularization,” Francis said, which has relegated faith and God “to the background.”
Pope calls for reconciliation at Canadian indigenous church
    “God seems to have disappeared from the horizon, and his word no longer seems a compass guiding our lives, our basic decisions, our human and social relationships,” he added.
    Instead of trying to impose religion on the state or lamenting the bygone times when clergy swayed political power, the pope said, “secularization demands we reflect on the changes in society that have influenced the way in which people think about and organize their lives.”
    It’s not the faith that is suffering a crisis, he continued, “but some of the forms and ways in which we present it.”
© Provided by Religion News Service Pope Francis arrives for Mass at the National Shrine
of Saint Anne de Beaupre, Thursday, July 28, 2022, in Saint Anne de Beaupre, Quebec.     To address this, the church must have “pastoral creativity,” the pope said.    Francis offered suggestions for clergy on how to embrace this transformation.    He called on the church to preach the gospel in a way that reveals “the freedom that sets others free, the compassion that asks for nothing in return, the mercy that silently speaks of Christ.”
    To be credible, he continued, the church must act as a witness. “We must begin with ourselves: bishops and priests,” he said, “who should not feel themselves superior to our brothers and sisters in the people of God. Pastoral workers, who should not understand service as power.”
    Fraternity is the final element needed for the church’s transformation, he said, to create “a welcoming community” that is “capable of listening, entering into dialogue and promoting quality relationships.”
    On Thursday morning, Pope Francis said Mass before 2,000 faithfuls at the National Shrine of St. Anne de Beaupré, where his predecessor St. John Paul II met with Indigenous peoples for the first time during his apostolic visit to Quebec City in 1984.
    Francis encouraged Catholics to embark on a “a journey from failure to hope,” referring to the atrocities committed toward the Indigenous peoples of Canada.    “In confronting the scandal of evil and the body of Christ wounded in the flesh of our Indigenous brothers and sisters, we too have experienced deep dismay; we too feel the burden of failure,” he said.
    “Nothing could be worse than fleeing in order to avoid it,” he said, while adding that only through faith and the gospel can one experience “the operative presence of God’s love and the potential for good even in apparently hopeless situations.”
    Thousands of faithful gathered outside the shrine to catch a glimpse of Pope Francis.    While many cheered him on as he circled the area aboard his popemobile, others held signs calling for the pope to take actions to accompany his words of remorse, including rescind the Doctrine of Discovery, a centuries-old papal mandate that allowed Western nations to colonize and spread Christianity in the New World.

[I AM FINALLY GLAD TO SEE SOMEONE IN THE LOUISVILLE AREA OF CONCERN AND MY HOME STATE BEGIN TO FIGHT BACK AT THE ANTI-CHRISTIAN FORCES WHO ARE TRYING TO DESTROY THIS NATION.].
7/30/2022 JCPS panel hears parent’s challenge to ‘Gender Queer’ book by Olivia Krauth, Louisville Courier Journal | USA TODAY NETWORK
    One of the few books in Jefferson County school libraries focusing on a non-binary character may be pulled from shelves if a district panel sides with an upset parent.
    Miranda Stovall, a parent tied to conservative groups including No Left Turn Kentucky, asked four schools to remove “Gender Queer” by Maia Kobabe from their school libraries over what she considers to be “pornographic” material.
    Two of her complaints are still at the school-level.    Two schools, Liberty High and the grade 6-12 Phoenix School of Discovery, declined to pull the book.
    Stovall appealed their decision to Superintendent Marty Pollio, who also refused to remove the book. Thursday morning, she faced the final step in the appeals process: a district level panel of teachers, parents and a school administrator in a public hearing.
    A few dozen protesters, including several known to protest in favor of conservative policies, showed up to JCPS’ central office to watch the testimony.
    Told in a comic book-style format, “Gender Queer” is a memoir of how the author came to identify as gender nonbinar y and asexual.
    Kobabe’s book is one of several works, largely by LGBTQ authors or writers of color, being targeted by a conservative push to remove what are being called “pornographic” materials from school libraries across the country.
    Lynn Reynolds, who oversees JCPS’ library services, said all the books currently being challenged in the district contain LGBTQ or race-related themes.
    Challenged works, including “Gender Queer” and “Lawn Boy” by Jonathan Evison, have often been misconstrued by opponents.    Sometimes the two books’ storylines are blended into one book and shared as an inaccurate meme suggesting a comic book showing a child performing oral sex is in classrooms, prompting fears of pedophilia.
    A Courier Journal reporter who read the book counted fewer than a half-dozen instances of nudity or sexually explicit images.    None of those scenes featured children.
    Stovall, who told the panel she’s read the book several times, accused school and district leaders who have refused to pull the book of robbing children of their innocence during her opening remarks Thursday.
    On top of the graphic imagery, “Gender Queer” mentions the name of a pornography website, which Stovall called up online.
    “And the first thing that comes up is, ‘Pick your porn: straight or gay,’” she said.
    Her attorney, Clint Elliott, argued leaving the book in a handful of school libraries breaks a state law prohibiting the distribution of sexually explicit materials to minors.    At one point, he likened keeping the book to rape.
    “You cannot consent for the children to distribute porn to them,” Elliott argued.    “You cannot consent for their parents to distribute porn for them.”
    In a letter from May rejecting Stovall’s request to remove the book, Pollio said “Gender Queer” doesn’t meet the law’s definition of obscene material and disagreed with her assertion that the book depicts a “prurient interest in sexual conduct” or is “patently offensive.”
    Pointing to multiple literary awards, including one focused on young adults, Pollio wrote the “extensive literary value of the work makes it clear that it is not obscene material.”
    One panel member asked Stovall and Elliott what makes “Gender Queer” different from scores of other works already in schools that feature sex scenes.    The audience laughed at the notion.
    Elliott responded that, unlike classical works like “Romeo and Juliet,” “Gender Queer” has sexual themes woven throughout the book.
    Defenders of books argue LGBTQ students should be able to see themselves represented in stories and on library shelves.    Reynolds noted schools don’t have many books featuring plot lines similar to “Gender Queer’s” exploration of identity.
    “If we ban those from the other students that are also struggling with (their identity), if you restrict it, you’re taking away opportunities for a child to live, find his space, find his voice and his purpose,” Reynolds told the panel.
    Elliott argued it has no literary value to override obscene scenes. Reynolds, who spoke on behalf of JCPS, disagreed.
    Literary value is when people gain something from a book, she said.    In the case of “Gender Queer,” non-binary people are humanized and readers build empathy, she said.    It also gives students a chance to examine a complex character.
    Restricting access to books, Reynolds argued, is “a threat to freedom of speech and choice.”
    Library materials in Kentucky are selected at the school level.    Decisions are made by school councils of parents and teachers, alongside school leadership and librarians.    Reynolds could not think of a time when a book did not make it into a library, but there have been times when a book may only be available to older students.    In the May letter, Pollio said “Gender Queer” is not available to middle school students at Phoenix.
    Stovall has been pushing against controversial books for months.    A review of her records requests to the district show requests regarding books dating back as early as mid-December.    She went viral online in March after reading a collection of quotes from “Lawn Boy” to the JCPS school board during a public comment period.
    In mid-February, Stovall sent a dispute form to nine JCPS principals, asking them to remove the book from their libraries and conduct a review of library circulations for “any other pornographic materials.”
    “I understand the controversy around ‘book burning’ however that is not what this is,” she wrote in the email.    “This book offers no educational value at all.    It is pornographic.”
    Having the book on the shelves meant making it accessible to students whose families “absolutely do not approve of this type of material,” she wrote.
    “A public school should keep in mind ALL families,” Stovall continued.
    The district appeals panel has 60 days to issue a written decision regarding the book.
    Reach Olivia Krauth at okrauth@courierjournal.com and on Twitter at @oliviakrauth.
Lynn Reynolds speaks during an appeal hearing at JCPS Van Hoose Center
in Louisville on Thursday. JOSEPH COOKE/COURIER JOURNAL
7/30/2022 Ky. AG blasts judge’s abortion order - Cameron appeals block on enforcing state’s ban by Deborah Yetter, Louisville Courier Journal USA TODAY NETWORK
    Accusing a state judge of creating “the Kentucky version of Roe v. Wade,” Attorney General Daniel Cameron is seeking to overturn Jefferson Circuit Judge Mitch Perry’s July 22 injunction blocking enforcement of a pair of laws that outlaw most abortions in the state.
    Lawyers for Cameron filed a fiery, 55-page appeal Thursday with the state Court of Appeals.    But they are asking it be transferred immediately to the state Supreme Court for a faster decision on whether to overturn Perry’s ruling.
    “There is no overstating how problematic the circuit court’s decision is,” the appeal said.    “It is not only rife with legal errors.    It threatens to push the court of justice into the political fire for decades to come.”
    For now, abortion remains legal in Kentucky through 15 weeks of pregnancy while advocates for abortion rights argue in court that the state constitution provides a right to the procedure even though the U.S. Supreme Court on June24 struck down abortion as a federal right.
    That decision, overturning the 1973 landmark case Roe v. Wade, returned control to the states with Kentucky among 26 states seeking to ban or sharply restrict abortion.
    Cameron’s appeal blasted Perry’s decision to issue the injunction, which unless overturned by the higher courts, would remain in place until he holds a trial on the legal challenge filed by Kentucky’s two abortion providers, Planned Parenthood and EMW Women’s Surgical Center.
    “The claim the Kentucky’s Constitution protects abortion is wholly detached from anything that resembles ordinary legal reasoning or analysis,” it said.
    Perry’s order suspended enforcement of two abortion laws, finding they appeared to violate rights granted by the Kentucky Constitution of privacy, self-determination, equal protection and religious freedom.
    One, Kentucky’s “trigger law,” automatically ended almost all abortion access in the event of a Supreme Court ruling striking down Roe v. Wade.    The other bans abortion at around six weeks of pregnancy, after cardiac impulses can be detected in an embryo.
    Both laws, enacted in 2019, permit abortion only to save the life of or prevent disabling injury to a pregnant patient and make no exceptions for rape or incest.    Doctors who violate the law could be charged with a felony and face up to five years in prison.
    They are among more than a dozen laws meant to restrict or eliminate abortion adopted in recent years by the Kentucky legislature, controlled by a Republican supermajority.
    Cameron, a Republican seeking to enforce those laws, disputed Perry’s findings in his appeal, declaring the state constitution contains no right to abortion and that Perry is blocking laws duly enacted by the General Assembly “The circuit court’s discovery of a right to abortion in Kentucky’s Constitution is untethered to the law,” the appeal said.    “It is contrary to the text of the constitution, unsupported by the delegates’ debates and inconsistent with Kentucky history and precedent.”
    Further, Cameron said “the temporary injunction guarantees that unborn lives will be lost while the underlying litigation proceeds.”
    The appeal also complained Perry’s 20-page opinion and order read more like a “policy paper” in that the judge declared abortion to be a form of health care, and the opinion stated that having a child “is a decision that has perhaps the greatest impact on a person’s life and as such, is best left to the individual to make, free from unnecessary governmental interference.”
    Perry, in his ruling, rejected arguments in favor of the two abortion laws and laid out detailed discussion of how they violated multiple provisions of Kentucky’s constitution, including the right to privacy, equal protection, self-determination and religious freedom.
    For example, he found the laws grounded in certain religious beliefs by stating that life begins at fertilization, which conflicts with religious beliefs of others.
    “The General Assembly has adopted the religious tenants of specific sects or denominations,” Perry’s opinion said.    “The General Assembly ignored the contending positions of other faiths regarding the origins and beginnings of life.”
    Some of Perry’s strongest language involved the fact that women bear the greatest impact of the law, noting that under the two laws, organ donors have more rights than pregnant people.
    “When a person dies, their organs can be utilized only if they consent to being an organ donor,” Perry’s opinion said.    By contrast, he said, under the abortion laws, women have few rights, an apparent violation of equal protection.
    “Only in the context of pregnancy is a woman’s bodily autonomy taken away from her,” Perry’s opinion said.    “This is a burden that falls directly, and only, on females.    It is inescapable therefore, that these laws discriminate on the basis of sex.”
    Further, he said, defenders of the law “have proffered no legitimate reason why the woman must bear all the burdens of these laws while the man carries none.”
    Kentucky’s abortion providers, both in Louisville, had filed a lawsuit in Perry’s court challenging the two laws after they were forced to temporarily suspend abortion services under the U.S. Supreme Court ruling.
    They resumed providing abortion care July 1 after Perry issued a temporary restraining order blocking enforcement of the laws.    On July 22, he issued a temporary injunction which allows abortions to continue while the lawsuit proceeds in his court.
    Cameron previously had sought to block Perry’s initial temporary restraining order, a move rejected by the state Court of Appeals and the state Supreme Court.
    Planned Parenthood and EMW, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, have until 4:30 p.m. Monday to respond to Cameron’s emergency appeal to lift the injunction and transfer the case to the Supreme Court, according to the Administrative Office of the Courts.
    The appeals court will decide whether to grant emergency relief including whether to transfer the case directly to the Supreme Court, which could agree or refuse to take the case.
    If it remains with the appeals court, a three-judge panel would be appointed to consider the case.

7/30/2022 S.F. declares monkeypox emergency - Shortage of vaccines results in long lines by Eric Risberg and Andrew Selsky, ASSOCIATED PRESS
A sign urges the release of the monkeypox vaccine during a protest July 18 in San Francisco. The mayor of
San Francisco announced a legal state of emergency Thursday over the growing number of monkeypox cases. HAVEN DALEY/AP     SAN FRANCISCO – The mayor of San Francisco announced a state of emergency Thursday over the growing number of monkeypox cases, allowing officials to cut through red tape and fight a public health crisis reminiscent of the AIDS epidemic that began devastating the city in the 1980s.
    “We are at a very scary place.    And we don’t want to be ignored by the federal government in our need.    So many leaders of the LGBT community have also, weeks ago, asked for additional help and support and assistance,” said Mayor London Breed.
    The city is in “desperate need of vaccines,” she said.
    The declaration, which takes effect Monday, was welcomed by gay advocates who have grown increasingly frustrated by what they called San Francisco’s lackluster response to a virus that so far has affected primarily men who have sex with men, although anyone can get infected.
    “San Francisco was at the forefront of the public health responses to HIV and COVID-19, and we will be at the forefront when it comes to monkeypox,” said state Sen. Scott Wiener, a Democrat who represents the city.    “We can’t and won’t leave the LGBTQ community out to dry.”
    The city has 281 cases, out of about 800 in California and 4,600 nationwide, according to the San Francisco Department of Public Health.    A national shortage of vaccine has resulted in people waiting in line for hours for scarce doses, often to be turned away when the shots run out.
    Members of the LGBTQ community expressed anger and frustration at a city hearing last week, saying they were relying on social media because the San Francisco public health department had not dispensed basic information on testing or vaccine availability.
    Supervisor Rafael Mandelman excoriated the department, saying it was unclear why it could not staff phone lines, especially after telling people to call those phone numbers for information, while the San Francisco AIDS Foundation was able to quickly staff a monkeypox information hotline.    The organization also has started a wait list for people wanting the vaccine, unlike the public health department forcing people to wait in line.
    “It’s a bad look for San Francisco,” he said.
    After attending the San Francisco Pride weekend in late June, Tom Temprano, 36, got a notification that at least one other attendee had tested positive for monkeypox.    He called four numbers that local health officials provided in an effort to get vaccinated, but no one picked up.    He left voicemails.
    “I waited and I waited and I waited,” said Temprano, “And there was just sort of – I think for myself and many people – just growing concern, really, about our safety, given that we were further and further out from an exposure.”
    Finally, on July 8, two weeks after being potentially exposed to the virus at the pride event, and monitoring gay social media networks all the while, he learned through an Instagram post that a vaccine drop-in clinic was being held at San Francisco General Hospital.    The poster said drop everything and go now.    Temprano texted a half-dozen people and rushed over.
    He waited with hundreds of other people in a line that snaked out into the street and halfway down a block.    After waiting for 3 1 /2 hours, Temprano, who is the political director of San Francisco based Equality California, got his first dose of the vaccine.    One of his friends stood in line four times before he was able to get the shot.
    Temprano was scheduled to get his second dose next week but that was canceled – with vaccine in short supply, city officials have opted to prioritize getting first doses to people.    He is frustrated those authorities have taken so long to respond, and noted they did so after LGBTQ politicians in his community raised their voices.
    “I think the saddest thing is there are people who are getting monkeypox now who tried to get that vaccine over the last month-and-a-half and couldn’t get one, who are sick and are in pain and are going to be out of work potentially for two to six weeks,” he said.
    Wiener had urged local and state officials to declare a health emergency, which he said would give the city and counties greater flexibility to respond to the growing outbreak.    For example, it would streamline getting test results to people and allow a broader array of providers to perform vaccinations.
    Wiener, who is gay, also noted the parallels to the AIDS crisis in San Francisco.    “I feel like this is like deja vu – that once again, gay men are getting attacked and demonized and blamed as we get sick, and that we can never tolerate that,” he said.
    In the early 1980s, the U.S. government was slow to react as the AIDS epidemic ravaged gay communities in San Francisco and elsewhere.    Groups like ACT UP emerged to push for action to fight AIDS.    That struggle has echoes today.
    Despite the problems with vaccine supply, federal officials said Thursday that the country’s monkeypox outbreak can still be stopped, amid worries that the U.S. has missed the window to contain the virus.
    The World Health Organization over the weekend declared the monkeypox outbreak in more than 70 countries a global emergency.

7/30/2022 Same-sex marriage gets some GOP support - Congress considers bill to protect LGBTQ rights by Mary Clare Jalonick, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., who is the first openly gay senator, says the “world has changed,” especially since
the Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision upholding gay marriage. J. SCOTT APPLEWHITE/AP FILE     WASHINGTON – When asked if he’d support legislation to protect same-sex marriage, one conservative Republican senator was almost nonchalant.
    “I see no reason to oppose it,” Ron Johnson of Wisconsin told reporters, bringing Democrats one vote closer to an unexpected victory as they move to safeguard same-sex marriage and other rights after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion nationwide.
    Johnson’s answer, which came after 47 Republicans voted for the bill in the House last week, was reflective of a stark shift in     GOP positioning after decades of fighting same-sex marriage.    Ten years ago, most Republicans proudly espoused that marriage could only be between a man and a woman.    Now, a federal law protecting same-sex marriage is within reach in an election year, with some Republican backing.
    The signal of possible support from Johnson – arguably the most vulnerable Republican senator up for reelection this year – comes as Wisconsin’s other senator, Tammy Baldwin, is the lead Democrat charged with persuading the necessary 10 Republicans to vote for the bill.    Baldwin, who is the first openly gay senator and has been working on gay rights issues since she first entered state politics in 1986, says the “world has changed,” especially since the Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision upholding gay marriage.
    A Gallup poll conducted in May showed broad support for same-sex marriage, with 71% of U.S. adults saying they think such unions should be recognized by law, including 55% of Republicans.    Polling in Wisconsin mirrors that national survey, with 54% of Republicans in the state saying that they favor same-sex marriage in a Marquette Law School poll from April. In May 2014, the state poll found support from only 23% of Republicans.
    “People began to see that the sky has not fallen,” Baldwin said, and that the 2015 decision gave legal protections to families who did not previously have them.    She said every member of Congress now has friends, family or staff who are openly gay.
    “That probably has the biggest impact on where people land,” she said.    “This is a vote of conscience.”
    The bill pending in the Senate would repeal the Clinton-era Defense of Marriage Act that allowed states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages and instead require states to recognize all marriages that were legal where they were performed.    The new Respect for Marriage Act would also protect interracial marriages by requiring states to recognize legal marriages regardless of “sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin.”
    A vote could come as soon as next week, but it will more likely be in September when Congress returns from the August recess.
    Republican Sens. Rob Portman of Ohio, Susan Collins of Maine and Thom Tillis of North Carolina have also said they will vote for the legislation; Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski has also supported same-sex marriage in the past.    Several other Republicans have said they are undecided, including Utah Sen. Mitt Romney, Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt, Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst and Indiana Sen. Mike Braun.
    Notably silent is Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who has declined to comment until Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer holds a vote.
    Baldwin and other advocates say more GOP senators are quietly contemplating the bill.    Democrats need 10 Republican votes to overcome a filibuster and get a bill through the 50-50 Senate.
    A range of Republicans voted for the bill in the House, including New York Rep. Elise Stefanik, the No. 3 House Republican; Pennsylvania Rep. Scott Perry, the chair of the conservative House Freedom Caucus; and all four Republican members of Utah’s congressional delegation.
    Still, the majority of House Republicans voted against it, and a similar dynamic is expected in the Senate.
    Republicans opposing the bill give a variety of reasons, with most arguing that the Supreme Court is unlikely to overturn Obergefell and that Senate Democrats are playing politics by putting the bill on the floor. Democrats point to Justice Clarence     Thomas concurring opinion to the June ruling overturning Roe in which he said that high court rulings protecting same-sex marriage and the right for couples to use contraception should also be reconsidered.     Asked about their opposition, many Republicans have focused on the process rather than the substance.     Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who is up for reelection this year, told CNN last week that he thinks the bill is a “stupid waste of time.”    He said later that he believes “there is zero chance, below zero chance, that the Supreme Court or anyone is going to outlaw gay marriage in this country.”
    Even Johnson blamed Democrats as he said he was unlikely to oppose it, arguing that it was settled law and the vote is unnecessary.    He said he still believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman.    But “society has pretty well accepted it and moved on,” he said.
    Other Republicans have made similar arguments, shifting from the more ideologically rigid statements of years past.
    Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who will vote against the bill, said he recognizes that “reasonable people can disagree” with him that marriage should be between a man and a woman, “and there is room for a diversity of views on that question.”
    North Dakota Sen. Kevin Cramer said he will vote against it “unless I can be compelled somehow.”    He said he believes because of his evangelical Christian faith that marriage is between a man and a woman, but “it’s not like I feel super strongly about it, either.”
    Cramer said he thinks the Senate will get the 60 votes needed to pass the bill.    “It’s more that people are ambivalent about it,” he said.
    Portman, who is pushing to get more votes from his party, notes that public opinion has changed substantially over the years.    He has supported same-sex marriage since 2013, when he announced that one of his sons is gay and that he believes people should be respected for who they are.
    He faced criticism from some fellow Republicans at the time, but he said people now come up to him frequently to thank him for his support.
    It’s not just Republicans who have evolved on the issue.    Former President Barack Obama didn’t publicly support same-sex marriage until 2012, pushed in part by then-Vice President Joe Biden, who had come out in support a few days earlier.
    When the Defense of Marriage Act passed the Senate in 1996, only 14 Democrats opposed it.
    David Stacy, a lead lobbyist for the Human Rights Campaign, said advocates for same-sex marriage faced many setbacks in the early 2000s, including state ballot measures to ban gay marriages.    But he says he believes Republicans created a backlash of sorts by trying to use the issue against Democrats.
    While the advocates lost many of those fights, “we were educating the public and moving public opinion,” Stacy said.
“I see no reason to oppose it,” said Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., about
legislation to protect same-sex marriage. BONNIE CASH, POOL/AP FILE
[I AM GLAD TO SEE THAT THE 50+ STATES ARE BEGINNING TO SHOW THAT THEY DECIDE THE LAWS FOR THEIR STATE AND WE NOW WILL KNOW WHO BELIEVES WHAT THEIR LEGISLATURE IS TO BE THE SINS OF THE SCARLET WOMAN OR A BELIEVE IN GOD AND LIFE FROM A MAN AND WOMAN.].
7/30/2022 West Virginia Senate passes abortion ban even in cases of rape after 8 weeks by Pedro Oliveira Jr. – UPI News July 30 (UPI) -- West Virginia lawmakers nearly passed on Friday the nation's first law banning abortion since Roe vs. Wade was struck.
1 of 2 Photos in Gallery©Bonnie Cash/UPI     A map of abortion laws in the South is displayed during a press conference with Democratic women sharing stories of the consequences of a depletion in women's reproductive healthcare at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Thursday. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI
    But the Republican-led state Senate had one qualm with the version of the bill already passed by the House of Delegates, which would've banned abortions after 14 weeks: it didn't go far enough.
    "This is not a pro-life bill -- this is a pro-abortion bill," said state Sen. Robert Karnes, R-Randolph, as reported by MetroNews.
    Instead, the state Senate passed a bill that narrows the window for victims of rape and incest to have access to an abortion, down to eight weeks, provided the assault is reported to law enforcement.    In this new version, medical providers that perform abortions face losing their license but no jail time.    The Senate voted 23-8 in favor of the legislation, WDTV-TV in Weston, W.Va., reported.
    Lawmakers were in session late into Friday night in a series of negotiations that were at times heated and emotional.
    West Virginia already had in the books a law from the 1800s that punished abortion with up to 10 years in prison.    That law was invalidated by the new standards set by Roe vs. Wade nearly 50 years ago.
    Now, legislators in the Republican-controlled state are all-but-set to pass a modern version of the abortion ban.
    "I think we have to understand that this is no abortion for poor women," state Sen. Hannah Geffert, D-Berkeley, told her colleagues in session.    "Poor women in the state are not going to have a choice because they can't afford to go anywhere else."
    The bill now heads to the House of Delegates for conciliation, and then to Republican Gov. Jim Justice's desk for signature.

7/31/2022 Indiana state Senate narrowly passes near-total abortion ban - Legislation would allow rape, incest exceptions by Arleigh Rodgers and Rick Callahan, ASSOCIATED PRESS/REPORT FOR AMERICA
Demonstrators rally outside the Senate chambers before the start of a special session Saturday at the Indiana
Statehouse in Indianapolis. State senators narrowly passed a near-total abortion ban. JENNA WATSON/INDIANAPOLIS STAR     INDIANAPOLIS – Indiana state senators narrowly passed a near-total abortion ban Saturday during a rare weekend session, sending the bill to the House after a contentious week of arguments over whether to allow exceptions for rape and incest.
    The Republican-controlled Senate voted 26-20 after about three hours of debate, passing the bill with the minimum 26 votes needed to send it on to the House, which Republicans also control.
    The bill would prohibit abortions from the time a fertilized egg implants in a uterus.    Exceptions would be allowed in cases of rape and incest, but a patient seeking an abortion for either reason would have to sign a notarized affidavit attesting to the attack.
    Indiana is one of the first Republican-controlled states to debate tighter abortion laws since the U.S. Supreme Court last month overturned the precedent establishing a national right to an abortion.
    But the GOP splintered after the rape and incest exceptions remained in the bill Thursday when an amendment failed that would have stripped out those exceptions.
    Ten Republican senators voted against the legislation Saturday, including a handful who support abortion rights.
    One of them, Republican Sen. Vaneta Becker of Evansville, said the measure will interfere with women’s medical choices, their lives and free will by setting strict limits on abortion access in Indiana.
    “Women deserve to have us protect their lives and free will.    Senate Bill 1 destroys both.    Shame on us for doing this,” she said, noting that only eight of the Senate’s 50 members are women.
    “We are considering dictating medical decisions with blinders and ignorant of the astounding, unintended consequences we are creating,” Becker warned, saying the Senate is “just making a mess.”
    Republican Sen. Mike Young, whose amendment calling for no exceptions other than for the life of the mother previously failed, said he voted against the bill not because he agrees with its opponents but because he has qualms with some aspects of the legislation he hopes are addressed.
    Young said one provision that concerns him states that a doctor can perform an abortion if he believes a woman’s life is in danger but it doesn’t require the doctor to inform that woman that her life is in danger.
    “She may never know the reasons why.    I just think it’s important when a person makes the most important decision of their life they ought to know if their life is in danger, and what are the reasons why it’s in danger,” he said.
    GOP Sen. Sue Glick of LaGrange, who authored the abortion bill, said during the debate she doesn’t expect the legislation approved by the Senate to be the final version the Legislature passes.    She called the Senate bill “an expression of where we believe the state of Indiana is right now.”
    The legislation’s passage “is a huge step forward in protecting the life of the unborn children in our state,” Glick said in a statement after the bill’s approval.
    “We have put together a bill that would not criminalize women and would protect the unborn whose voices have been silenced for the past 50 years under Roe v. Wade,” she added.
    Ten of the Senate’s 11 Democrats voted against the bill, with the 11th member absent for Saturday’s debate.     Democratic Sen. Tim Lanane of Anderson condemned the bill as a product of a male-dominated Legislature that’s poised to take away the control that pregnant women should have over their own bodies.
    “This is the government, the male dominated government of the state of Indiana, saying to the women of this state, you lose your choice,” he said.    “We’ve told you – papa state, big state government – is going to tell you what you will do with your body.    And I don’t think we’re ready for that.”

7/31/2022 The Respect for Marriage Act Can't Fully Replace Obergefell, but It Can Help Prevent It from Being Overturned by Kyler Alvord - People
    The Respect for Marriage Act is Congress' attempt at protecting the right to same-sex marriage — and as national polls show record-high support for marriage equality, it has a chance of earning the 60 votes it needs in Senate to become law.
© Provided by People AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin Wives celebrate the legalization of same-sex marriage outside SCOTUS in 2015     "We really think we have a shot to get this done," says David Stacy, government affairs director for the Human Rights Campaign, which helped lawmakers draft the RFMA.    "I'm not hearing deep concerns with any of these provisions."
    The RFMA, Stacy tells PEOPLE, would accomplish a few important goals.    Most significantly, it would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, a 1996 law that said the federal government will not recognize any same-sex marriages performed by states.    (DOMA is currently unenforceable thanks to landmark Supreme Court decisions United States v. Windsor and Obergefell v. Hodges, though it still exists on paper, meaning it could be reinstated if those rulings were overturned by the current court's conservative stronghold.)
    To understand other portions of the RFMA, it's important to know what Congress can and cannot legally do.    It cannot require state governments to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples or grant them state-level marriage benefits — states have the ultimate authority there, second only to the Supreme Court.    Congress can, however, exercise its power under the Constitution's full faith and credit clause by requiring every state to recognize marriage licenses, adoption orders and divorce decrees issued elsewhere.
    The legislation also solidifies that the "place of celebration" in a marriage determines your eligibility for federal benefits.    In other words, spouses are granted eligibility for federal benefits based on the place where they were married, not where they live.    So if same-sex spouses live in a state that refuses to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, they would still be recognized as spouses by the federal government, giving them access to top-tier benefits involving spousal leave, social security and taxes.
© Provided by People AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File     Stacy explains that while the RFMA can't fully meet the protections of Obergefell — the 2015 Supreme Court case that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide — it would be a strong step toward ensuring long-term marriage equality, both because of its provisions and its statement to the world.
    "We can demonstrate that both the House and the Senate have really significant and strong bipartisan support for this and we know the public is at 70% support.    That in and of itself helps secure marriage equality," he says.    "The more we can just make this the way things are in this country the less incentive the Supreme Court has to muck around; the fewer challenges will come to the court around these issues and the more the public's with us."
House passes Respect for Marriage Act in move to protect same-sex marriage
    If the Supreme Court were still to move forward with reconsidering the Obergefell precedent — as Justice Clarence Thomas recently suggested in his concurring opinion on the ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade — the very presence of the RFMA would give the public more firepower to push back against states thinking of refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
    "We think this is a positive step forward in continuing to show that this shouldn't be a partisan issue — and isn't a partisan issue," Stacy says, adding that despite its limitations, the RFMA is "the way we best protect marriage equality."
© Provided by People AP Photo/John Minchillo A couple shares a triumphant and emotional hug before their marriage ceremony on June 26, 2015     The Respect for Marriage Act passed in the House on July 19, earning the support of 47 Republican representatives, and will soon be brought to the Senate floor, where it will need the support of 10 Republicans in order to meet the 60-vote threshold and become law.
    So far, a few Republican senators have suggested they will vote in favor of the RFMA, and a handful have voiced firm opposition.    The majority of lawmakers on the GOP side are staying quiet, or offering vague statements that do little to shed light on where they stand.
    The lack of clarity over senators' mindsets is unsettling, but Stacy — along with other lawmakers and organizations working to pass this important legislation — remains optimistic.
    "We still feel good that we can get to 60," he says, noting that when Senate brought a vote on repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell in 2010, reaching the 60-vote minimum was also uncertain. It ended up passing with 65 yea votes.    Again in 2013 as the Senate brought the Employment Non-Discrimination Act to a vote, passage was not guaranteed, and that one earned 64 yea votes.
    In just a week, the HRC got more than 170 corporations and counting to join them in urging Republican senators to vote in line with Americans' values, not the tradition of their party.    And in a telling move, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has stayed neutral on the bill thus far, seemingly forgoing his power to lobby for Republicans to oppose it and giving GOP senators more freedom to vote their conscience.
    While nobody knows exactly when Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer will bring the RFMA to the Senate floor, it could be as early as next week. Senate breaks for a month-long recess on Aug. 8, and it will be up to Senate Democrats to strategize whether it's best to push a vote now or wait a little bit longer.
    "We feel at HRC that we're close enough now that we're ready at any time," Stacy says, "but obviously Sen. Schumer has to make his own determinations and figure out the floor schedule."
    Regardless of whether the bill becomes law, widespread support for Americans to marry the person they love — regardless of sex, gender identity and sexual orientation — is not going anywhere.
    "The support for marriage equality is so consistent across poll after poll after poll," Stacy notes.    "The numbers are ticking up and they're sticking."

8/1/2022 Florida teachers are being told they can't mention their same-sex partners because it could violate DeSantis' ban on LGBTQ discussions in schools by kanthony@insider.com (Katie Anthony)
© AP Photo/John Raoux, File     Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), Feb. 24, 2022, in Orlando, Fla. AP Photo/John Raoux, File

• Florida's Parental Rights in Education Act, dubbed the "Don't Say Gay" bill by critics, went into effect on July 1.
• Teachers in one Florida school district were advised against talking about their same-sex partners, the Washington Post reported.
• The bill bans discussion of sexual orientation or gender identity from kindergarten through third grade.

©Wilfredo Lee/AP Photo     PHOTOS: First Lady Jill Biden and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis find common ground at Surfside remembrance ceremony 1 year after collapse

• It's been one year since the Champlain Towers South partially collapsed in the middle of the night.
• Hundreds gathered for a remembrance ceremony with First Lady Jill Biden and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.
• Speakers also included first responders and loved ones of the victims lost.

    SURFSIDE, Florida — Hundreds of people gathered here Friday at a remembrance event to mark the one-year anniversary of the Champlain Towers South collapse.
    The event featured top speakers and attendees from across the aisle, including First Lady Jill Biden, Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
    As the start of the school year approaches in Florida, teachers are grappling with a new law governing discussions around sexual orientation and gender identity in their classrooms — with one school district advising teachers in same-sex relationships to avoid talking about their partners all together, the Washington Post reported.
    Orange County Public Schools told teachers in same-sex relationships that they can have photos of their partner in their classrooms but shouldn't talk about them, the Post reported.
    Discussions about a teacher's same-sex partner "could be deemed classroom instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity," district spokesman Michael Ollendorff told the Post.
    Orange County Public Schools didn't immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.
    But Orange County isn't the only district grappling with the new law.    In Miami-Date County, the school board is going back and forth on what textbooks are allowed in sex education, the Post reported.    A teacher in Palm Beach County told the Post that another instructor omitted a historical figure's sexual orientation from her lessons.
    This new guidance comes as a result of the state's controversial Parental Rights in Education Act, which went into effect on July 1 after being signed into law by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in March.    Critics have called the act the "Don't Say Gay" bill.
    The bill explicitly bans the discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity from kindergarten through third grade but also includes ambiguous language banning that discussion "in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate."

8/1/2022 Indiana state Senate passes near-total abortion ban bill by Adam Schrader – UPI News
    Aug. 1 (UPI) -- The Indiana Senate passed a bill Saturday that would ban nearly all abortions in the state after days of contentious testimony from the public in which both pro-abortion and anti-abortion advocates said the bill was "flawed."
1 of 4 Photos in Gallery©John Sommers II/UPI     Protesters rally outside the Indianapolis Library where Vice President Kamala Harris was meeting with Indiana state legislators for a roundtable discussion on abortion rights at the Indianapolis State Library on July 25 in Indianapolis.    Photo by John Sommers II/UPI
    The state senators passed the bill with a vote of 26-20 after ten Republicans crossed party lines to vote against the bill, CNN and WLFI reported.    The bill will now move to the Republican-controlled House which is expected to debate the issue later this week.
    The bill, authored by Sen. Susan Glick, makes abortion a Level 5 felony unless it is "necessary to prevent a substantial permanent impairment of the life of the mother" or "the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest and the fetus has a specified postfertilization age."
    Debate over the bill began in the state Senate, which is made up of 42 men and eight women, last Monday as the lawmakers listened to testimony from the public for six days.
    "The only exception in this bill truly is the life of the mother and there's so much red tape in it that it's unbelievable," Sen. Ron Alting told WLFI.    "If somebody wants a lot of government, they got it today."
    Both pro-abortion and anti-abortion advocates said the bill was "flawed" in their public comments before the vote.
    Anti-abortion speakers argued that the bill didn't go far enough in defining "meaningful enforcement" if it were passed into law -- while pro-abortion speakers argued that the bill "strips a woman of her right to choose."
    "Generally, most of these decisions are not female only and we forget there are others involved in this issue as well," Glick told WLFI.
    "So, I think we're trying to broaden the decision-making process and not narrow it to the point where no one else has anything to say in regard to these decisions."
    Glick, in comments on the Senate floor Saturday, called it a "vehicle bill" and said she expects the House will make changes to it, CNN reported.    If the House were to make changes to the bill, it would be sent back to the Senate for another vote.

8/2/2022 La. clinics halt procedures as abortion ban reinstated by Sara Cline, ASSOCIATED PRESS
New Orleans Civil Court Judge Ethel Julien’s ruling last week should result
in the immediate closure of Louisiana’s three abortion clinics. TED JACKSON/AP     BATON ROUGE – Staff at Louisiana’s abortion clinics spent Monday calling patients to cancel procedures and direct them to resources in other states as Louisiana’s near total abortion ban is once-again in effect.
    For weeks, access to abortion in Louisiana has been flickering – with the state’s three clinics relying on rulings and temporary restraining orders, that allowed them to continue operations.    But procedures came to a screeching halt Friday afternoon after an appeals court ruled that Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry can enforce the ban while ongoing legal challenges play out in court.
    “Once again, politics has superseded medical expertise and commonsense,” Amy Irvin, a spokeswoman for abortion clinics in New Orleans and Baton Rouge, said Monday.    “We remain hopeful that the Court will ultimately act with compassion and empathy on behalf of women seeking abortion in Louisiana.”
    Staff at the clinics in southern Louisiana were working to notify 120 patients, scheduled for appointments this week, about the ban being enforced once again.    Not only are patients being directed to clinics outside of the state, but Irvin said the clinics also are looking to relocate to a state “that respects and values women’s bodily autonomy.”
    Additionally, staff at Hope Medical Group for Women in Shreveport – which is at the center of the legal challenge – are still providing help.
    “We are not providing abortions, but we are not closed,” Kathaleen Pittman, director of the northern Louisiana clinic, said Monday.    “We are manning the phones and trying to help people navigate care as best we can within the limits of the law as we consider our options.”
    Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last month to end constitutional protections for abortion, Louisiana’s ban has taken effect and been blocked multiple times.    Since then, 249 abortions have been reported to the Louisiana Department of Health, according to data released last week.
    On July 21, state Judge Donald Johnson issued a preliminary injunction that allowed clinics to continue providing abortions while a lawsuit over the ban continued.    However, just eight days later, Landry took the fight to enforce the ban to a state appeals court which ruled in his favor.
    The ban went into effect later that same day, the third time the ban has gone into effect.

8/2/2022 Judge’s order further freezes Michigan’s abortion ban by Joey Cappelletti, ASSOCIATED PRESS/REPORT FOR AMERICA
Abortion rights protesters attend a rally following the United States Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade outside
the state capitol in Lansing, Mich. A judge blocked enforcement of a 1931 Michigan ban on abortion Monday. PAUL SANCYA/AP FILE     LANSING, Mich. – A judge blocked enforcement of a 1931 Michigan ban on abortion Monday, just hours after the state Court of Appeals said county prosecutors were not covered by a May order and could enforce the prohibition following the fall of Roe v. Wade.
    Oakland County Judge Jacob Cunningham stepped in at the request of attorneys representing Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat who favors abortion rights.
    Cunningham issued a restraining order against prosecutors in counties with abortion providers and scheduled a hearing for Wednesday.
    “The legal fight in Michigan continues and this temporary restraining order ensures prosecutors cannot target women or providers in the short term,” said Attorney General Dana Nessel, a Democrat who won’t defend the 1931 law, which makes it a crime to perform abortions unless the life of the mother is in danger.
    Cunningham’s decision came at the end of a remarkable day for both sides of the issue.
    In May, weeks before the U.S. Supreme Court threw out its landmark 1973 decision legalizing abortion, Judge Elizabeth Gleicher said Michigan’s dormant ban was likely unconstitutional.    She signed an injunction, which meant abortion has remained legal even after the Supreme Court decision.
    But on Monday, the appeals court said Gleicher’s injunction applied only to the attorney general’s office, not county prosecutors who handle most crimes.
    Republican prosecutors in Kent and Jackson counties said they planned to enforce the abortion ban, meaning that providers could get charged with a felony.
    “If a report is presented to this office, we will review it like we do any other report of possible criminal behavior,” Kent County prosecutor Christopher Becker said earlier in the day.    “We will make the decision to charge, or not to charge, based on the facts presented in the report and the applicable Michigan law.”
    Kent County includes Grand Rapids, the state’s second-largest city.
    Meanwhile, seven Democratic prosecutors, including Kym Worthy and Karen McDonald in the Detroit area, have said they will not enforce the 1931 law.
    Planned Parenthood of Michigan said it will continue providing abortions.
    Total or near total abortion bans are already in effect in the nearby states of Indiana, Ohio and Wisconsin, with bans expected in roughly half the states.
    Earlier this month, abortion rights activists submitted signatures to bring a constitutional amendment before Michigan voters in November that would affirm the right to make pregnancy-related decisions without interference, including abortion and reproductive services such as birth control.
    If the amendment passes, it would supersede the 1931 law.

8/2/2022 Disney wedding could be yours if the price is right - ‘A ceremony inside a Disney Park starts at $10,000’ by Eve Chen, USA TODAY
Eric Nicotri, right, and Jamesofee Chimico. PROVIDED BY SUZANN THOMPSON     Stephanie Burman can’t remember life without Disney World.
    “I’ve been going to Disney since I was in my mom’s womb,” she said.    “So the thought of having a Fairy Tale wedding was just a dream. ... The fact that it came true was just unbelievable.”
    Antonio Santiago of Wenonah, New Jersey, shared the same sentiment about his Disney wedding 20 years ago.
    “It was everything that you dream about,” he said.    But dreaming isn’t enough for a Disney wedding.
    Here’s what it takes, and what it’s like for some of the thousands of couples who get married at Disney properties each year:
    Where are weddings held at Disney World?
    There are more than 100 venues at Disney properties across the globe, including more than 50 at Disney World ranging from in front of Cinderella Castle to the beach at Disney’s Yacht & Beach Club Resort.
    Eric Nicotri and his husband Jamesofee Chimico of New York got married at Disney’s Wedding Pavilion earlier this year and had their reception at the American Adventure in EPCOT’s World Showcase.
    “It was beautiful, with the columns, the lighting, everything,” Nicotri said.    He had been envisioning a simple wedding in the Hudson Valley, but joked that his husband “kind of didn’t even give me an option. ... He is a Disney fanatic.”
    They kicked off their wedding weekend with a welcome dinner at Animal Kingdom and arranged for their whole group to ride Avatar Flight of Passage together.
    “We go to Disney a lot,” Nicotri said, but many of their friends and family don’t.    “I think one of my friends hadn’t been to Disney in like 15 years, so (my husband) was like, ‘I want to be able to share this experience with them, just like boom right away.”
    Santiago and his wife Chanoa also got married at the Wedding Pavilion, but they had their reception in a ballroom at the adjacent Grand Floridian.
    Burman and her husband David got married in EPCOT’s United Kingdom pavilion last fall and had their reception in the France pavilion.
    “You don’t have to go to Europe to get Europe,” said Korri McFann, director of marketing for Disney’s Fairy Tale Weddings & Honeymoons.    She’s seen all sorts of weddings through the years, including her own at Disney’s Boardwalk Resort.
    “Tower of Terror (courtyard) is always a fun one because I think it always takes people by surprise,” she said.    “We can also do a mixed-in attraction ride after ... taking the plunge literally, I guess, right?”
    Depending on the location, capacity can range from just the wedding party to hundreds of guests.
    How much does a Disney wedding cost?
    Weddings at Disney World start at $7,500, outside of the parks.
    “The event minimum for a ceremony inside a Disney park starts at $10,000,” McFann said.    “This includes a couple’s ceremony venue, chairs, water station, a musician, and of course, a dedicated wedding planning team as well as a selection of other wedding elements that are important to the couple like floral and decor, transportation and more.”
    There is no separate event minimum for receptions.    Reception costs can go toward that starting price, but some reception venues may require additional venue fees and/or food and beverage minimums.
    Prices vary widely based upon location, day of the week, party size and what each couple wants to include in their big day.
    There is no maximum.    “If you can dream it, we can do it,” McFann said.
    What is the average cost of a Disney wedding?
    According to The Knot, the average cost of a U.S. wedding was $28,000 last year.
    “We’re right in that wheelhouse,” McFann said.
    “Certainly, people go above and certainly people spend right at that entrylevel minimum as well,” she added.
    How can I get married at Disney for cheap?
    The cheapest way to get married at Disney World is to keep the wedding small and outside the theme parks.
    “That $7,500 range is more of some of our beautiful outdoor, intimate ceremony locations,” McFann said.
    Weddings on Disney Cruise Line have a lower minimum, $5,000.
    What is included in a Disney wedding?
    “We handle everything that’s bridal,” McFann said, describing the “one-stop shopping experience” of arranging venue, decor, flowers, photography, entertainment, food, private transportation between hotels and wedding venues, and custom elements for each couple.
    Santiago and his wife flew down to Disney World to plan the bulk of their wedding.
    “We planned our whole wedding in three or four hours,” Santiago said.    They spent the rest of the day in Magic Kingdom.    “It was the most amazing thing.”
    Other couples plan from remote.    “The planning was super easy,” Burman said.    “They sent you a planning packet and you would just go through and kind of mark all the things you really wanted and what you envisioned for your day. ... The planner really just takes everything that you want and just runs with it.”
    “They come they come with very creative ideas, and it’s our job here to help them be their storytellers and bring imagination to it to really play out whatever that is drummed up in their mind,” McFann said.
    Nicotri’s husband, for example, wanted to include EPCOT’s Harmonious fireworks in their wedding.
    “That was his biggest thing,” Nicotri said.    “So, our planner recommended that we do a later wedding, if possible, the last wedding actually.    We were the last wedding for the Wedding Pavilion ... We did the wedding ceremony (from) 7 to 7:30 p.m. and then everyone got onto the bus to make it to cocktail hour” at EPCOT.    They watched the fireworks with their wedding guests in a cordoned-off area before being ushered to their reception as the park started closing to the public.
    While any couple anywhere can have a Disney-inspired wedding, experiences like that, Cinderella carriage rides and musical performances by the Dapper Dans are unique to Disney weddings.    Santiago’s wife surprised him with an appearance by Sorcerer Mickey, his favorite character, at their reception.    Disney characters don’t take part in ceremonies.
    What time are weddings at Disney?
    While some park venues are available during regular park hours, couples who want Cinderella Castle or the Tree of Life as backdrops should plan for unconventional timing.
    “Pandora is more of a sunrise setting location for us,” McFann said.    “You’ve got to be one of those couples that is willing to get the whole friends and family up early, but talk about an immersive, epic location.”
    Nighttime weddings near Cinderella Castle are held after the park closes to guests.
    “We like to call it a Cinderella start.    They normally start at around midnight, so you’ve got to be flexible,” McFann said.    “A lot of times for that, we might actually do their dinner first, then do cocktail hour and then do the ceremony.    So, there’s ways for us to play around with ways of flowing of a wedding day, and I think a lot of people are doing that now.    There is no cookie cutter.    They want to make it their own.”
A ride in Cinderella’s carriage is one of many experiences couples can book
for a Disney wedding. PROVIDED BY THAT FIRST MOMENT PHOTOGRAPHY VIA WALT DISNEY CO.
Antonio and Chanoa Santiago took their kids to see where they were married. PROVIDED BY ANTONIO SANTIAGO
8/3/2022 Abortions halted again in Kentucky - Clinics ask high court to vacate latest order by Deborah Yetter, Louisville Courier Journal USA TODAY NETWORK Cameron     Abortions again have abruptly halted in Kentucky after a judge with the state Court of Appeals granted an emergency request by Attorney General Daniel Cameron’s office to reinstate two laws banning almost all abortions in the state.
    An order Monday evening by Judge Larry E. Thompson temporarily countermands an order from Jefferson Circuit Judge Mitch Perry to suspend enforcement of the laws while a legal challenge is pending.
    On Tuesday, lawyers for Planned Parenthood and EMW Women’s Surgical Center, the state’s two abortion providers, asked the state Supreme Court to vacate Thompson’s order and reinstate the injunction against the abortion laws without delay.    “This case involves the ability of Kentuckians to access essential and time-sensitive health care,” the motion said.
    Without action by the Supreme Court, “patients would be forced to continue their pregnancies and give birth against their will,” it said.
    Meanwhile, Thompson’s order will remain in place while the appeals court appoints a three-judge panel to consider Cameron’s appeal and other matters, including his request that the case be transferred directly to the state Supreme Court for swifter resolution, the order said.
    In granting Cameron’s request, Thompson cited the attorney general’s duty to enforce state laws as well as the fact that abortions performed while a legal challenge is pending “cannot be undone.”
    Cameron’s emergency request followed the decision July 22 by Perry to block enforcement of the laws while a legal challenge is pending in his court.
    The state’s two abortion providers challenging the laws, Planned Parenthood and EMW, are both in Louisville.
    The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, which represents EMW, and Planned Parenthood both denounced Thompson’s order.
    “Kentuckians deserve better than extremist politicians who will risk your bodily autonomy to score cheap political points,” spokesman Samuel Crankshaw said.    “No Kentuckian should ever be forced to remain pregnant against their will.    Despite this setback, we will never stop fighting for your right to make the best decisions for yourself.”
    EMW for now will suspend abortion service and recommends patients seeking abortion in the meantime go to abortionfinder.org, he said.    Alexis McGill Johnson, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, denounced Thompson’s decision in a statement.    “Tonight, in one fateful moment, Kentuckians saw their reproductive freedom stolen by their elected officials.    It is devastating and cruel,” she said.    “But the fight is not over.    We will explore all options to ensure that people across the state can access abortion services.    This is not a game.    These are people’s lives.”
    Cameron, in a tweet, praised the judge’s order.
    “I appreciate the court’s decision to allow Kentucky’s pro-life laws to take effect while we continue to vigorously defend the constitutionality of these important protections for women and unborn children across the Commonwealth,” it said.
    It’s the second time abortion has been suspended in Kentucky.
    The first time was in June when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 case establishing abortion as a federal constitutional right.    That caused abortions to then be blocked by an existing Kentucky law.
    Abortion services were allowed to resume under a temporary order from Perry, which he extended with an injunction July 22.
    Cameron had asked the appeals court for an emergency decision to immediately lift the injunction and also transfer his appeal of Perry’s decision directly to the state Supreme Court for faster resolution of his case seeking to enforce the two abortion laws.
    One, the “trigger law,” automatically banned abortions once the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade.    The other bans abortions about six weeks into a pregnancy, often before most people realize they are pregnant.
    Neither law contains exemptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest and allow abortions only to save the life of or prevent disabling injury to a pregnant patient.
    Physicians who violate the laws could be charged with a felony and subject to up to five years in prison.
    Both laws had been challenged by Kentucky’s two abortion providers as being in violation of the state constitution, a strategy abortion rights advocates have adopted in multiple states after the U.S. Supreme Court on June 24 returned power to states to regulate the procedure.
    Cameron, an antiabortion Republican, has been seeking to enforce those and other laws enacted in recent years by the Republican-controlled General Assembly.
    Perry, in a 20-page opinion and order, found that the two laws violate multiple provisions of Kentucky’s constitution, including the right to privacy, self-determination and religious freedom and ordered them suspended until the case is resolved at trial.
    Perry has yet to schedule a trial date.
    Meanwhile, Cameron is asking the state appellate courts to overturn Perry’s injunction while the case is pending in the lower court.
    Reach reporter Deborah Yetter at dyetter@courier-journal.com or on Twitter @d_yetter.
Judge Mitch Perry holds a hearing June 29 on a request to suspend
the state law banning all abortion services. SCOTT UTTERBACK/COURIER JOURNAL
[WELL JOE IS IN THE MOOD TO KILL AL QAEDA LEADERS AND UNBORN BABIES WITH ABORTIONS IN ANY WAY THEY CAN.]
8/3/2022 Biden to sign another executive order seeking to protect abortion rights by Nandita Bose and Jeff Mason - Reuters
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Joe Biden plans to sign a second executive order on Wednesday meant to address the recent Supreme Court decision to end the nationwide constitutional right to abortion, as he faces pressure from fellow Democrats to be more forceful on the issue. © Reuters/POOLU.S. President Joe Biden delivers remarks on the killing
of Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri in a U.S. drone strike     The order, like his first one, is expected to have limited impact, as U.S. states enact a wave of laws restricting abortion, access to medication and funding for such services.
    Last month, Biden said the court was "out of control" after ruling in June to overturn Roe v Wade, ending a half-century of protections for women's reproductive rights.    His first order in early July directed the federal government's health department to expand access to medication abortion and ensure that women who travel for abortions are protected.
    The latest action builds on those measures, and like the first one remains vague about how it can be achieved.    It directs the Health and Human Services Department to consider using funds including Medicaid to support women traveling out-of-state for abortion services, a senior administration official said.
    It also directs the department to ensure health-care providers comply with federal non-discrimination laws when offering such services and orders it to collect data to measure the impact of the ruling on maternal health, the official added.
    Gallery: Here's what Biden can do to help Americans retain abortion access now that Roe v. Wade is overturned, advocates say (Business Insider)
1 of 5 Photos in Gallery©Lukas Barth/Pool Photo via AP     Here's what Biden can do to help Americans retain abortion access now that Roe v. Wade is overturned, advocates say

• The Supreme Court ended the federal right to an abortion by overturning Roe v. Wade last week.
• President Joe Biden condemned the decision, calling on Congress to act and citizens to vote.
• Here are the measures abortion advocates have called on Biden to implement since Roe was overturned.

    President Joe Biden on Thursday said for the first time that he's in favor of nixing the Senate filibuster to codify abortion rights into federal law.
    "If the filibuster gets in the way, it's like voting rights ... we should require an exception to the filibuster for this action," Biden said during a NATO press conference this week.
    His comments come less than a week after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, gutting federal abortion protections which were in place for nearly 50 years.
    As the nation reels from the top court's ruling, abortion advocates across the political spectrum have called for sweeping measures from President Joe Biden.
    Following the Friday decision, Biden said the Court's decision would "literally take America back 150 years" and that his administration will aggressively defend Americans' rights to receive abortion pills through the mail or to travel across state lines to receive care.
    The president called on Congress to act, despite Democrats' previous failures to enshrine abortion rights into federal law.    He also called on Americans to vote in the midterms in November.
    "Let me be very clear and unambiguous: The only way we can secure a women's right to choose, the balance that existed, is for Congress to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade as federal law," he said.    "No executive action from the president can do that."
    While Biden has said his "administration will use all of its appropriate lawful powers" to help Americans retain access to abortion, lawmakers and advocates have called on the president to implement the following measures since Roe was overturned.
    The president will sign the order at the first meeting of the interagency task force on reproductive healthcare access, which was formed in July.
    Senate Democrats rejected Biden's call to lift the chamber's "filibuster" rule requiring 60 of the 100 senators to agree on most legislation to allow them to pass a law establishing a national right to abortion.
    In the evenly divided Senate, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris can cast a tie-breaking vote.
    Since then, Biden has pivoted to urging voters to elect more Democrats to Congress in the Nov. 8 midterm elections, when Republicans are favored to win back a majority in the House of Representatives and perhaps also the Senate.
    Democrats hope the issue may help drive voters to the polls in November.
    Protecting abortion rights is a top issue for women Democrats, Reuters polling shows.    More than 70% of Americans think the issue should be left to a woman and her doctor.
    On Tuesday, Biden's Justice Department sued Idaho to block a state law that it said imposes a "near-absolute ban" on abortion, marking its first legal challenge to state abortion laws since the Supreme Court ruling.
(Reporting by Nandita Bose and Jeff Mason in Washington; Editing by Scott Malone and Leslie Adler)

8/4/2022 Kansas voters protect right to abortion access by John Hanna and Margaret Stafford, ASSOCIATED PRESS From left, Calley Malloy, Cassie Woolworth and Dawn Rattan applaud during a primary watch party
Tuesday in Overland Park, Kan. Voters rejected a ballot measure that would have allowed the
Republican-controlled Legislature to tighten restrictions or ban abortions. TAMMY LJUNGBLAD/THE KANSAS CITY STAR VIA AP     TOPEKA, Kan. – Kansas voters on Tuesday sent a resounding message about their desire to protect abortion rights, rejecting a ballot measure in a conservative state with deep ties to the anti-abortion movement that would have allowed the Republican controlled Legislature to tighten restrictions or ban the procedure outright.
    It was the first test of voter sentiment after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in June that overturned the constitutional right to abortion, providing an unexpected result with potential implications for the coming midterm elections.
    While it was just one state, the heavy turnout for an August primary that typically favors Republicans was a major victory for abortion rights advocates.    With most of the vote counted, they were prevailing by roughly 20 percentage points, with the turnout approaching what’s typical for a fall election for governor.
    The vote also provided a dash of hope for Democrats nationwide grasping for a game-changer during an election year otherwise filled with dark omens for their prospects in November.
    “This vote makes clear what we know: the majority of Americans agree that women should have access to abortion and should have the right to make their own health care decisions,” President Joe Biden said in a statement.
    After calling on Congress to “restore the protections of Roe” in federal law, Biden added, “And, the American people must continue to use their voices to protect the right to women’s health care, including abortion.”
    The Kansas vote also provided a warning to Republicans who had celebrated the Supreme Court ruling and were moving swiftly with abortion bans or near-bans in nearly half the states.
    “Kansans bluntly rejected anti-abortion politicians’ attempts at creating a reproductive police state,” said Kimberly Inez McGuire, executive director of Unite for Reproductive & Gender Equity.    “Today’s vote was a powerful rebuke and a promise of the mounting resistance.”
    The proposed amendment to the Kansas Constitution would have added language stating that it does not grant the right to abortion.    A 2019 state Supreme Court decision declared that access to abortion is a “fundamental” right under the state’s Bill of Rights, preventing a ban and potentially thwarting legislative efforts to enact new restrictions.
    The referendum was closely watched as a barometer of liberal and moderate voters’ anger over the Supreme Court’s ruling scrapping the nationwide right to abortion.    In Kansas, abortion opponents wouldn’t say what legislation they’d pursue if the amendment were passed and bristled when opponents predicted it would lead to a ban.
    Mallory Carroll, a spokesperson for the national anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, described the vote as “a huge disappointment” for the movement and called on anti-abortion candidates to “go on the offensive.”
    She added that after the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, “We must work exponentially harder to achieve and maintain protections for unborn children and their mothers.”
    The measure’s failure also was significant because of Kansas’ connections to anti-abortion activists.    Anti-abortion “Summer of Mercy” protests in 1991 inspired abortion opponents to take over the Kansas Republican Party and make the Legislature more conservative.    They were there because Dr. George Tiller’s clinic was among the few in the U.S. known to do abortions late in pregnancy, and he was murdered in 2009 by an antiabortion extremist.
    Anti-abortion lawmakers wanted to have the vote coincide with the state’s August primary, arguing they wanted to make sure it got the focus, though others saw it as an obvious attempt to boost their chances of winning.    Twice as many Republicans as Democrats have voted in the state’s August primaries in the decade leading up to Tuesday’s election.
    “This outcome is a temporary setback, and our dedicated fight to value women and babies is far from over,” said Emily Massey, a spokesperson for the pro-amendment campaign.
    The electorate in Tuesday’s vote wasn’t typical for a Kansas primary, particularly because tens of thousands of unaffiliated voters cast ballots.
    Kristy Winter, 52, a Kansas City-area teacher and unaffiliated voter, voted against the measure and brought her 16-year-old daughter with her to her polling place.
    “I want her to have the same right to do what she feels is necessary, mostly in the case of rape or incest,” she said.    “I want her to have the same rights my mother has had most of her life.”
    Opponents of the measure predicted that the anti-abortion groups and lawmakers behind the measure would push quickly for an abortion ban if voters approved it.    Before the vote, the measure’s supporters refused to say whether they would pursue a ban as they appealed to voters who supported both some restrictions and some access to abortion.
    An anonymous group sent a misleading text Monday to Kansas voters telling them to “i>vote yes” to protect choice, but it was suspended late Monday from the Twilio messaging platform it was using, a spokesperson said. Twilio did not identify the sender.
    The 2019 Kansas Supreme Court decision protecting abortion rights blocked a law that banned the most common second-trimester procedure, and another law imposing special health regulations on abortion providers also is on hold.    Abortion opponents argued that all of the state’s existing restrictions were in danger, though some legal scholars found that argument dubious.    Kansas doesn’t ban most abortions until the 22nd week of pregnancy.
    The Kansas vote is the start of what could be a long-running series of legal battles playing out where lawmakers are more conservative on abortion than governors or state courts.    Kentucky will vote in November on whether to add language similar to Kansas’ proposed amendment to its state constitution.
    Vermont will decide in November whether to add an abortion rights provision to its constitution.    A similar question is likely headed to the November ballot in Michigan.

8/4/2022 Christian flag in speech battle flies over Boston by Mark Pratt, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    BOSTON – The Christian flag that became the focus of a free speech legal battle that went all the way to the Supreme Court was raised – briefly – outside Boston City Hall on Wednesday to cheers and songs of praise.
    The flag-raising took place about three months after the Supreme Court in a unanimous decision ruled the city discriminated against Harold Shurtleff and his Camp Constitution group because of his “religious viewpoint” when it refused permission for him to fly the banner on City Hall Plaza on Constitution Day 2017.
    “i>We’re so pleased for this day,” Shurtleff, a Boston native, said at a ceremony to raise the white flag, which has a red cross on a blue background in the upper left corner.
    “We have a great Constitution, and we have a wonderful First Amendment, but just like when it comes to muscles, if you don’t use it, they get weak,” he said.    “When I got the rejection email from the city, and it said separation of church and state, I knew we had a case.”
    There are three flagpoles outside City Hall that fly the U.S., Massachusetts and Boston flags.    The city flag is sometimes taken down and temporarily replaced with another.
    The city between 2005 and 2017 approved 284 consecutive applications to fly flags, with no denials before it rejected Shurtleff’s proposal, according to Liberty Counsel, which represented Shurtleff.
    The only reason it was denied was because the word “Christian” was on his application, and he was told to replace the word if he wanted approval, Mat Staver, Liberty Counsel’s founder and chair, said Wednesday.
    City Hall Plaza “is for the people to be able to represent their views and perspectives without government telling them that they can’t,” said Jonathan Alexandre, Liberty Counsel’s senior counsel for government affairs.    “And if they open it up to one group, they must open it up to every other group.”
    The flag was up for about two hours Wednesday before Camp Constitution took it down, both the city and Liberty Counsel confirmed.
    The Supreme Court case revolved around whether the flag-raisings were an act of the government or private parties.
    “Boston did not make the raising and flying of private groups’ flags a form of government speech,” the court wrote in the ruling.    “That means, in turn, that Boston’s refusal to let Shurtleff and Camp Constitution raise their flag based on its religious viewpoint” curtailed their First Amendment free speech rights.

8/4/2022 Biden Signs Executive Order Authorizing Use Of Medicaid To Fund Out Of State Abortions by OAN Newsroom
President Joe Biden speaks at an event on lowering the cost of high-speed internet in the
Rose Garden of the White House, Monday, May 9, 2022, in Washington. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)     President Joe Biden signed a new executive order in an attempt to circumvent the Supreme Court over their decision on Roe v. Wade.    While speaking virtually in front of other top White House officials on Wednesday, the President signed the order, which authorizes the use of Medicaid funds to help pro-abortion states provide the procedure to women traveling to receive an abortion.
    “Secretary Becerra (Health and Human Services) is going to work with states through Medicaid to allow them to provide reproductive health care for women who live in states where where abortions were are being banned in that state,” Biden stated.     “The executive order makes sure healthcare providers comply with federal law, so women don’t face delays or denials of medically necessary care.”
    This latest attempt to protect so-called reproductive rights has many legal experts raising questions about whether it will violate the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits the use of federal funds for abortions except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother.    When asked about the order during a White House press briefing, Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre gave a vague response before vacating the podium.
    “This does not, uh, will not, uh, will not violate the Hyde Amendment,” she stuttered.    “It is law and we follow the law here. I have to go.”
    Meanwhile, Biden has continued to call on Congress to codify Roe v. Wade into law to ensure abortions nationwide.
    “I believe Roe got it right, it’s been the law for close to 50 years,” said the President.    “And I commit to the American people that we’re doing everything in our power to safeguard access to health care, including the right to choose that women had under Roe v. Wade which was ripped away by this extreme court.    But ultimately, Congress must codify the protections of Roe as federal law.”
    An official timeline for these changes has yet to be established by the Biden administration.

8/7/2022 NOVEMBER ELECTION - Kentucky voters will get say on abortion - Ballot question will be similar to one in Kansas by Deborah Yetter, Louisville Courier Journal USA TODAY NETWORK
Protesters gather at on the federal building in Louisville on June 24
to protest the decision to strike down Roe v. Wade. PAT MCDONOGH/COURIER JOURNAL     The survival of abortion as a legal medical procedure in Kentucky rests largely with the state’s voters, who will decide on a proposed amendment to the state constitution in November.
    “To protect human life, nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to secure or protect a right to abortion or require the funding of abortion,” the single line of the amendment states.
    The stakes are high, and opposing sides are organizing campaigns and raising money to try to win the battle of the ballot on Nov. 8.
    “Both sides are going to be wildly motivateda,” said Michael Muller, campaign manager for Protect Kentucky Access, a group formed to fight the amendment.    “It’s a ballot question that’s going to have very strong opinions.”
    Kentucky’s ballot question will follow the decisive rejection of a similar measure Tuesday in Kansas, where voters shot down an amendment declaring no constitutional right to abortion by a vote of about 60% to 40%.
    Kansas was the first state to take up such a measure since the U.S. Supreme Court on June 24 struck down Roe v. Wade, its landmark, 1973 case establishing abortion as a federal constitutional right.
    Kentucky anti-abortion groups for the amendment agree with their opponents on one thing — the extreme importance of the measure.
    With abortion no longer a federal constitutional right, each camp recognizes it’s their best chance to either preserve or end abortion as a state right.
    “It’s going to be critical, critical, that Kentuckians voice their opinion ... when they cast their ballot on Nov. 8 for the pro-life amendment,” said Addia Wuchner, executive director of Kentucky Right to Life.
    Wuchner, who is chairwoman of Yes for Life, the group supporting the amendment, was speaking July 13 at a gathering of the Louisville Forum, a non-partisan public interest group.
    While not itself a ban, the amendment, if approved, would make it impossible to argue that state laws that ban or limit abortion violate the state constitution — including through the current legal challenge filed by abortion rights advocates in Jefferson Circuit Court, said Joshua Douglas, a law professor at the University of Kentucky.
    “This amendment would completely gut that lawsuit,” Douglas said.    “It would answer the question the lawsuit is raising — is there a right to abortion under the constitution?”
    “That would be the end of the road,” he said.
    That lawsuit just cleared a hurdle July 22 when Jefferson Circuit Judge Mitch Perry issued a temporary injunction blocking enforcement of two laws that would virtually eliminate abortion access in Kentucky.    Perry found the laws appear to violate multiple provisions of the state constitution, including the rights to privacy, due process, equal protection and freedom of religion.
    But Monday, a state Court of Appeals judge lifted the injunction, once again making abortion in illegal in Kentucky. Abortion services in Kentucky were suspended for a week in late June after the Supreme Court ruling triggered a state ban on abortions later blocked by Perry.
    Judge Larry Thompson ordered the abortion ban reinstated until the appeals court can consider a request by Attorney General Daniel Cameron to lift Perry’s injunction.
Abortion opponents want to prevent ‘state-level Roe v. Wade’
    Abortion opponents, determined not to let a court case set abortion policy in Kentucky, see passage of the amendment as the way to stop that.
    “It prevents a state-level Roe v. Wade,” said Jason Hall, executive director of the Catholic Conference of Kentucky, referring to the 1973 federal case legalizing abortion that the Supreme Court recently struck down.    “We don’t want the state courts to come in and do what federal courts did 50 years ago.”
    Abortion rights advocates are equally determined and believe they have a good chance at winning once voters realize what’s at stake.
    “I think we are going to really shock the nation when we defeat the constitutional amendment in Kentucky,” said Planned Parenthood’s Tamarra Wieder, also speaking at the Louisville Forum on July 13.    “The legislature has overplayed their hand here, and people are angry and fed up and discouraged by the obsessive focus on our bodies.”
    Kentucky’s General Assembly, with a supermajority of Republicans in both chambers, has passed more than a dozen laws in recent years meant to restrict or eliminate abortion, including the two, 2019 laws subject to the current legal challenge in state court.
    One, the “trigger law,” calls for an automatic end to abortion once the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade.    The other bans abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy, before many people realize they are pregnant. Both are currently contested in lawsuits.
    Neither law allows exemptions for rape or incest, permitting abortion only to save the life of or prevent disabling injury to the pregnant patient.    Doctors who violate the law could be charged with a felony and face a prison sentence of up to five years.
    Wuchner said her organization is unwilling to make further exceptions for abortion, even when a rape results in pregnancy.    That includes the recent, highly publicized case of a 10-year-old Ohio girl who became pregnant after a rape and had to travel to Indiana for an abortion because of her state’s restrictive abortion laws.
    “We don’t compromise on human life,” Wuchner said at the Louisville Forum.
    If someone becomes pregnant through rape or incest, including a child, “A law has been broken and that means those that have committed that should go to jail,” Wuchner said.
    Wieder, Kentucky state director for Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates, calls such laws “extremist” and said voters need to understand voting “no” on the amendment is their last chance to protect access in Kentucky now that the U.S. Supreme Court has ceded control of abortion to the states.
    “Right now, it’s our constitution keeping our doors open,” Wieder said.    “We’re already in a state where’s there’s barely any access.”
    Kentucky’s two abortion providers, Planned Parenthood and EMW Women’s Surgical Center, both in Louisville, were forced to suspend abortion services for seven days after the Supreme Court ruling and were able to resume only after the judge temporarily blocked the ban. Now, things are on hold again.    Douglas, the law professor who focuses on constitutional rights and election law, said if the amendment passes eliminating a state constitutional right to abortion, the only way to restore access would be if Kentucky lawmakers change state law to allow it.
    Douglas called that “highly unlikely,” given the current legislative climate.
Money starting to flow to both sides
    Meanwhile, both sides are preparing to launch campaigns to publicize the ballot measure and try to energize voters.    As the election gets closer, they predict much greater awareness of the amendment that, so far, has attracted little public attention.
    “It’s incredibly important,” said Muller, with Protect Kentucky Access.    “It will probably wind up becoming the centerpiece of electoral activity in the state this year.”
    Both sides say the challenge is making sure voters understand the meaning of the constitutional amendment, as well as its importance.
    “I think if we succeed in raising the profile of it, I think it will be adopted,” Hall said.
    Muller said to expect more attention to the issue in coming weeks.
    Both groups registered last year as political issue committees with the Kentucky Registry for Election Finance and have begun raising funds.
    Protect Kentucky Access has reported $285,000 in donations.    Its members include Planned Parenthood, the Fairness Campaign, Sister Song — a reproductive justice collective for women of color — the Kentucky Black Birth Alliance and Sexy Sex-Ed, which promotes information about sex and sexuality.
    Its largest donors are Planned Parenthood affiliates, $235,000, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, $50,000.
    Yes for Life has reported donations of $109,759.    Its members include Right to Life, the Catholic Conference of Kentucky, the Kentucky Baptist Convention, the Family Foundation of Kentucky, the Commonwealth Policy Center and Sisters for Life.
    Its largest donors are Right to Life affiliates, $36,000; the Catholic Conference, $36,000; the Baptist Convention, $6,000; and the Family Foundation, $6,000.
    Its religious member groups also represent the two largest denominations in Kentucky, with Baptists estimating a membership of 750,000 and Catholics, 400,000, which gives them a further reach among churchgoers.
    Hall, with the Catholic conference, said parishes will be urged to spread information about the amendment, especially in the month prior to the election, with October celebrated by the church as “Respect Life” month.
    Unlike partisan political races — where churches generally avoid endorsing candidates because of rules governing their tax-exempt status — church officials are free to urge support for the ballot measure as a public issue, and they will be asked to do so, he said.
    Hall said the Catholic Conference will urge priests to promote the issue to their members.    Also, the Yes for Life campaign will have a presence Saturday at the annual political event at Fancy Farm, held on the grounds of St. Jerome Catholic Church in Western Kentucky as part of its parish picnic, he said.
    Muller said amendment opponents are still considering whether to visit the event.        Meanwhile, they are working in communities across Kentucky to organize grassroots campaigns against the amendment.
    Not all religious faiths in Kentucky support the amendment.
    The Kentucky Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, which includes Jewish, Protestant and other faiths, has joined Protect Kentucky Access in opposition to the amendment and wants Kentuckians to understand that religious views vary on the subject of abortion.
    “Religious freedom does involve so many other options.    I can still be a Christian and not be anti-abortion,” said Stephanie Compton, a board member with the coalition.    “We thought it was important to sit with these other progressive organizations in Kentucky.”
    The League of Women Voters of Kentucky also has come out against the amendment, urging people to vote “no.”
    The amendment and laws to restrict abortion “interfere with the freedom and liberty of individuals and families to make critical and timely decisions with the best medical advice without government interference,” the league said in a July 27 news release.
    Members of both political issue groups said they expect to raise more money and accelerate their work in the coming months. The next financial reports are not due until early September.
    The abortion amendment is listed as Constitutional Amendment 2 on the ballot.
    It follows a lengthier, more densely written Constitutional Amendment 1 that, among other changes affecting the General Assembly, allows the legislature to call itself into a special session once a year for up to 12 days.    Currently, the constitution requires the governor to call special legislative sessions.
    Douglas, the law professor, said constitutional amendments on the ballot don’t typically draw a lot of interest among voters, particularly if they are complicated and full of legal jargon.    But the simplicity of the second, one-line amendment and the subject could make a difference, he said.
    “The average voter is going to see that it’s about abortion and vote accordingly,” he said.
    Hall said amendment supporters are counting on the support of Kentuckians who oppose abortion.
    “Kentucky has a pro-life electorate,” he said.    “I think that’s pretty clear.”
    But Muller said he believes abortion opponents have overestimated support for the amendment, arguing polling and his group’s research shows a majority of people believe abortion should be available in at least some cases.    Few support an outright ban.
    “It’s a hard right ideological path forward which is only agreed to by a small minority, which they will find out on Nov. 8,” he said.    “We are prepared for this fight, and we are going to win this fight.”
    Reach Deborah Yetter at dyetter@courier-journal.com.
    “The average voter is going to see that it’s about abortion and vote accordingly.”
Joshua Douglas
    Law professor at the University of Kentucky who said constitutional amendments on the ballot don’t typically draw a lot of interest among voters
The amendment would make it impossible to argue that state laws that
ban or limit abortion violate the state constitution. ALTON STRUPP/COURIER JOURNAL
“I think we are going to really shock the nation when we defeat the constitutional amendment
in Kentucky,” said Planned Parenthood’s Tamarra Wieder. JEFF FAUGHENDER/COURIER JOURNAL
Addia Wuchner, executive director of Kentucky Right to Life, said her organization is unwilling to make
further exceptions for abortion, even when a rape results in pregnancy. SAM UPSHAW JR./COURIER JOURNAL
8/7/2022 Indiana adopts near-total abortion ban - Associated Press, by Arika Herron, Indianapolis Star, USA TODAY NETWORK
Law that starts Sept. 15 has narrow exceptions
Biden administration says law tramples on women’s rights
    The Biden administration on Saturday condemned Indiana’s new ban on abortions, calling it another extreme attempt by Republicans to trample women’s rights.
    'The Indiana Legislature took a devastating step as a result of the Supreme Court’s extreme decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and eliminate women’s constitutionally protected right to abortion,' White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement.    'And, it’s another radical step by Republican legislators to take away women’s reproductive rights and freedom, and put personal health care decisions in the hands of politicians rather than women and their doctors.'
Members of the Indiana House of Representatives stand for the Pledge of Allegiance
during a special session Friday in Indianapolis. Jenna Watson/IndyStar     INDIANAPOLIS – Indiana’s near-total ban on abortion will take effect Sept.15.
    Gov. Eric Holcomb announced late Friday he signed Senate Bill 1 within an hour of its passage, capping a marathon day that saw both chambers pass the bill outlawing abortion except for several narrow exceptions.
    'Following the overturning of Roe, I stated clearly that I would be willing to support legislation that made progress in protecting life,' Holcomb said.    'In my view, (the bill) accomplishes this goal following its passage in both chambers of the Indiana General Assembly with a solid majority of support.'
    Late Friday, the Indiana Senate voted 28-19 to accept Senate Bill 1 as passed by the House earlier in the day – making the Legislature the first in the nation to pass such restrictions since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade on June 24.
    'It makes Indiana one of the most pro-life states in the nation,' said Rep. Wendy McNamara, R-Evansville.
    The bill passed the House 62-38 on Friday afternoon.    The chamber’s 71 Republicans split on the issue, with nine voting against the bill.    The party has been divided on the issue, with some feeling the bill goes too far in restricting abortion and others feeling it doesn’t go far enough.
    McNamara carried the bill in the House.    She said Friday the goal of the bill was to strengthen protections for women and babies.    The majority of Republicans wanted to see a stronger bill, without exceptions for rape and incest, but most ultimately settled for what they could get passed.
    'Ultimately, they’re looking at the opportunity for 99% of abortions in the state of Indiana to be eliminated one way or the other,' she said after the vote Friday.
    No Democrats voted in favor of the bill.
    As the House’s soft-spoken chaplain led the chamber in an invocation to open the final day of the two-week special legislative session Friday – called to pass financial relief but coopted to ban abortion after the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision – a small but vocal contingent of abortion rights protesters nearly drowned out her appeal to God with chants of 'bans off our bodies.'
    The crowd of protesters flocking to the Statehouse had shrunk considerably since the start of the abortion debate two weeks ago.    A dozen or so people holding signs watched the proceedings from large windows at the back of the House chamber and another dozen or so, including several anti-abortion activists, dotted the viewing gallery.
    Likely all of them were disappointed with the bill passed Friday, which bans abortion except in cases of rape, incest, fatal fetal anomalies and when the life of the mother is at danger.
    Polling has consistently demonstrated a majority of Hoosiers support at least some degree of abortion access.
    Anti-abortion groups have opposed SB 1 because of the few cases in which it would still allow abortion.    Two weeks ago, Indiana Right to Life said it 'did not wait 50 years for the full reversal of Roe vs. Wade for this.'
    On Thursday night, the majority of Republicans in the House attempted to remove exceptions to the abortion ban in cases of rape and incest.    That effort failed, as it did last week in the Senate.
    Rep. John Jacob, R-Indianapolis, is one of the chamber’s most zealous abortion opponents and supported a failed effort to turn the bill into a total abortion ban, without exceptions.    On the floor Friday, Jacob said he would vote against SB 1 because 'it is a weak, pathetic bill that still allows babies to be murdered.'    Jacob lost his Republican primary race in May.
    Jacob’s comment incensed at least one of his fellow lawmakers.
    Rep. Renee Pack, D-Indianapolis, told the chamber she had an abortion in 1990 at Fort Hood, in central Texas, while serving in the Army.    Pack was married and the mother of two children.    She said she had to choose between having another child, or continuing her military career.
    'After everything I’ve been through in my life ...it took me getting to the Statehouse for my colleagues to call me a murderer,' Pack said, raising her voice.    'Sir, I am not a murderer. And my sisters are not murderers, either.    We are pro-choice.    That is what we are.
    'We believe we have command over our own bodies.'
    It wasn’t just amendments to make the bill more strict that were voted down.    Lawmakers also rejected an amendment that would have allowed abortions from rape or incest up until 20 weeks post-fertilization instead of 10, as is in the bill.
    Nine Republicans joined the chamber’s 29 Democrats to vote in favor of that expansion - one of many illustrations of the divide that has fractured the majority caucus over the last two weeks and made passage of the bill a delicate needle to thread.
    Democrats have derided the bill as one that’s cruel, dangerous and will result in 'forced pregnancy.'     'The government should not be making health decisions for women,' said Rep. Robin Shackleford, D-Indianapolis.    'The decision to have an abortion is extremely personal, one that should be left up to a woman and her doctor.'
Biden administration says law tramples on women’s rights
    The Biden administration on Saturday condemned Indiana’s new ban on abortions, calling it another extreme attempt by Republicans to trample women’s rights.    “The Indiana Legislature took a devastating step as a result of the Supreme Court’s extreme decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and eliminate women’s constitutionally protected right to abortion,” White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement.    “And, it’s another radical step by Republican legislators to take away women’s reproductive rights and freedom, and put personal health care decisions in the hands of politicians rather than women and their doctors.”
Associated Press

8/7/2022 Biden team condemns Ind. abortion ban - 1st state to OK ban since Roe overturn by Ken Kusmer, ASSOCIATED PRESS
“The Indiana Legislature took a devastating step as a result of the Supreme Court’s extreme decision
to overturn Roe v. Wade and eliminate women’s constitutionally protected right to abortion,”
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement Saturday. EVAN VUCCI/AP     INDIANAPOLIS – The administration of President Joe Biden and one of Indiana’s largest employers have condemned the state’s new ban on abortions, with the White House calling it another extreme attempt by Republicans to trample women’s rights.
    Indiana on Friday became the first state in the nation to approve such legislation since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a 1973 landmark case that had protected the right to abortion nationwide.
    “The Indiana Legislature took a devastating step as a result of the Supreme Court’s extreme decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and eliminate women’s constitutionally protected right to abortion,” White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement Saturday.    “And, it’s another radical step by Republican legislators to take away women’s reproductive rights and freedom, and put personal health care decisions in the hands of politicians rather than women and their doctors.”
    The ban, which takes effect Sept. 15, includes some exceptions.    Abortions will be permitted in cases of rape and incest, before 10-weeks post-fertilization; to protect the life and physical health of the mother; and if a fetus is diagnosed with a lethal anomaly.    Victims of rape and incest won’t be required to sign a notarized affidavit attesting to an attack, as had once been proposed.
    Under the bill, abortions can only be performed in hospitals or outpatient centers owned by hospitals, meaning all abortion clinics will lose their licenses.    A doctor who performs an illegal abortion or fails to file required reports will lose their medical license.
    Pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly and Co., which employs 10,400 people at its headquarters in Indianapolis, warned that the ban could lead it to reassess its presence in Indiana.
    “We are concerned that this law will hinder Lilly’s – and Indiana’s – ability to attract diverse scientific, engineering and business talent from around the world,” the company said in a statement Saturday.    “While we have expanded our employee health plan coverage to include travel for reproductive services unavailable locally, that may not be enough for some current and potential employees.”
    “Given this new law, we will be forced to plan for more employment growth outside our home state,” it said.
    Lilly has research and development hubs in New York City and the California cities of San Diego and San Francisco, and this year announced it would build a $700 million genetic medicine hub in Boston.    Lilly was not among the more than 250 businesses that opposed abortion restrictions in a letter released July 21 by the American Civil Liberties Union, The Indianapolis Star reported.
    Indiana’s largest health care system said it was studying the new law.
    “IU Health’s priority remains ensuring our physicians and patients have clarity when making decisions about pregnancy within the limits of the law.    We will take the next few weeks to fully understand the terms of the new law and how to incorporate the changes into our medical practice to protect our providers and care for the people seeking reproductive healthcare,” it said in a statement.
    The Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce urged the General Assembly to proceed with caution.
    “Over the last two weeks, the Indiana General Assembly has debated a substantial policy change on the issue of abortion in a compressed timeframe,” the chamber said in a statement Thursday.    “Such an expedited legislative process – rushing to advance state policy on broad, complex issues – is, at best, detrimental to Hoosiers, and at worst, reckless.”

8/7/2022 Some S. Carolina GOP pause at abortion ban brink - Republican lawmakers reevaluate positions by Jeffrey Collins, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    COLUMBIA, S.C. – For the past three decades, South Carolina lawmakers have chipped away at abortion access, requiring ultrasounds, parental consent and 24-hour waiting periods, and banning the procedure early in the pregnancy: first after 20 weeks, then after six.
    But now that the U.S. Supreme Court has cleared a path to ban abortion entirely in the state, some are taking a step back.    Politicians, mostly Republican, are noting what happened this month in Kansas, where nearly 60% of voters rejected a ballot measure that would have allowed the state’s conservative Legislature to ban abortion.    Republican Donald Trump received 56% of the 2020 presidential vote in Kansas.    Trump won 55% in South Carolina.
    “The Kansas vote affirms what most of us know,” said Sen. Sandy Senn, the only Republican senator to vote against the six-week abortion ban that passed 18 months ago.    “It’s the people in my party, most all of them men, yelling the loudest that women should have zero choice from the moment of conception.”
    Senn says that while she personally believes “all babies should be born,” she also thinks people should be able to decide for themselves whether to continue a pregnancy during the first few months.
    A total abortion ban with exceptions only if the life of the mother is in danger has just started its way through the South Carolina General Assembly.    Committee hearings and floor debates in the House and Senate will have to take place before any bill lands on Republican Gov. Henry McMaster’s desk.
    Republican legislative leaders agreed to the special session after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June.    But instead of a rehash of the arguments lawmakers had in early 2021, when they passed a ban on abortions after cardiac activity is detected – at about six weeks – some Republicans have begun to reevaluate their positions.
    “It’s like you are playing with live ammunition right now.    What you are deciding is going to have immediate effect on a lot of South Carolinians,” said Republican Rep. Tom Davis, who voted for the cardiac-activity abortion ban last year after exceptions were added for pregnancies caused by rape and incest and those that put the pregnant person’s life at risk.
    Davis said he is now rethinking the whole issue, weighing the rights of a fetus to live against the rights of someone to control their own body.
    He says he also will consider the views of people in his well-off coastal district around Hilton Head Island.    And he plans to introduce measures to improve prenatal care and give people more emotional and financial support during and after pregnancies.
    Rep. Bill Taylor stood just behind McMaster as he signed the six-week ban into law.    Last month he sent an email to his constituents with the all-caps title “WHAT’S THE RUSH,” saying South Carolina shouldn’t hurry to pass a full ban now.
    Instead, the state should step back for a few years to see how its new law banning the procedure after six weeks works, the Republican lawmaker said.    South Carolina should also examine what happens in states that now have a total ban and others that allow abortions later into pregnancies and study the foster care and other social service programs to see what can be done to help them handle an influx of births, he said.
    About 6,300 abortions were performed in South Carolina in 2021.
    “So many questions, so few answers, and solutions,” Taylor wrote in the email, which also included the statement: “I treasure God’s amazing gift of life.    I readily accept the label pro-life.”
    One reason some abortion opponents don’t want to wait to pass a stricter abortion ban is McMaster, who is up for reelection in November. His Democratic opponent, Joe Cunningham, has promised to veto any bill restricting abortion further.    Republicans are a few votes short of the two-thirds needed to override vetoes in both the House and Senate.
    Republican Sen. Larry Grooms, who has made ending abortion one of the biggest issues of his 25 years in the Senate, said he wants a full ban because his goal is to “save every life he can” – but he isn’t going to demand a certain bill because “when you make it all or nothing, you can end up with nothing.”
    “Every pro-life bill we’ve passed over the past 25 years has helped people understand the humanity of the child,” Grooms said.
    Democrats in the legislature say it’s too late for reflection, given the Supreme Court’s decision and the fact that the state has already restricted abortion so severely.    They fear anything is on the table, including criminalizing women who seek abortions in some way.
    “I think we will land between crazy and insane,” Democratic House Minority Leader Todd Rutherford said.    “Where that line is won’t make any sense.    And we shouldn’t be in this position in the first place.”

8/7/2022 Ind. Gov. Signs Near-Total Abortion Ban by OAN Newsroom
Abortion-rights protesters fill Indiana Statehouse corridors and cheer outside legislative chambers,
Friday, Aug. 5, 2022, as lawmakers vote to concur on a near-total abortion ban, in Indianapolis. (AP Photo/Arleigh Rodgers)     Indiana lawmakers move forward with a pro-life law in light of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade.    On Friday, Indiana Governor Eric Holcomb signed a near-total abortion ban into law during the final day of the state legislature’s two-week special session.
    The law grants exceptions for the procedure for cases of incest and rape before 10 weeks post-fertilization.    This only if giving birth harms the mother and if the fetus shows signs of a deadly illness.    This brought on the ire of Democrats and other abortion activists with the White House calling the move “devastating” and continuing to call the US Supreme Court extremist.br>     “Following the overturning of Roe, I stated clearly that I would be willing to support legislation that made progress in protecting life,” Holcomb said.    “In my view, SEA 1 accomplishes this goal following its passage in both chambers of the Indiana General Assembly with a solid majority of support.”
    On Thursday, the Indiana House rejected Republican-sponsored amendments that would have removed the exceptions for rape, incest and fatal fetal anomalies from the bill.    Members of House Republican leadership were divided as Speaker Todd Huston and Speaker Pro Tempore Mike Karickhoff voted against the amendments, while Majority Leader Matt Lehman backed the amendments.
    White House press secretary Karine Jean Pierre slammed the new law in a statement Saturday, calling the bill’s passage “another radical step by Republican legislators to take away women’s reproductive rights and freedom, and put personal health care decisions in the hands of politicians rather than women and their doctors.”
    Indiana is the first state to approve an abortion ban after the landmark Dobbs decision.    The new law is expected to go into effect September 15.

8/9/2022 Neb. won’t hold special legislative session on abortion - Governor: Not enough votes to break filibuster by Margery A. Beck, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts announced Monday that he will not call a special legislative session to try to enact a 12-week abortion ban
because the measure doesn’t have enough votes to break a filibuster. GWYNETH ROBERTS/LINCOLN JOURNAL STAR VIA AP FILE     OMAHA, Neb. – Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts announced Monday that he will not call a special legislative session to try to enact a 12-week abortion ban because the measure doesn’t have enough votes to break a filibuster.
    Ricketts – a Republican who has said he wants to ban all abortions, even in cases of rape and incest – said in a statement that Speaker of the Legislature Mike Hilgers informed him that only 30 lawmakers would vote for a measure to ban the procedure starting at 12 weeks of pregnancy.
    Thirty-three votes are needed to break a filibuster.
    “It is deeply saddening that only 30 Nebraska state senators are willing to come back to Lincoln this fall in order to protect innocent life,” Ricketts said in his statement.
    Hilgers, a Republican abortion opponent, had said in June that he anticipated a special session later this summer.
    During the Legislature’s regular session, opponents successfully filibustered a proposed “trigger law” that would have seen Nebraska outlaw abortion once the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized the procedure nationwide.
    The vote to end debate in the officially non-partisan, one-chamber Legislature was 31-15, two votes shy of what was needed.
    Ricketts’ announcement comes after voters in neighboring Kansas last week resoundingly rejected a ballot measure that would have allowed the state’s conservative Legislature to ban abortion.    Indiana on Friday became the first state to approve such restrictions since the Supreme Court’s June ruling that removed constitutional protections for the procedure.
    Abortion rights proponent Sen. Megan Hunt, of Omaha, had warned in May that she would make a special session on abortion an “excruciating, painful experience” for her fellow lawmakers.
    She said politicians across the country are seeing the effects of the Supreme Court’s June decision.
    “We’re seeing what’s happening to patients in Texas, to assault survivors in Ohio; we’re seeing what happened on the ballot in Kansas, and Nebraska antiabortion politicians are afraid of the issue,” Hunt said.    “They know that the majority of Nebraskans support the right to abortion, and they know that if they brought us into a special session, they simply wouldn’t win.”

[WELL POPE YOU AND YOUR COUNTRY ITALY HAS BOUGHT INTO THE EU’S GOING TO THE GLOBLIST SOCIALIST NEW ONE WORLD ORDER AND YOU HAVE BOUGHT INTO THEIR CONCEPTS AND NOW YOU ARE REVERSING YOUR ORIGINAL STATUS AND MUST MAKE A BIG DECISION.]
8/9/2022 German Catholics reject Vatican's abortion stance — report by Darko Janjevic, Deutsche Welle
    A majority of German Catholics don't approve of Pope Francis and the Vatican criticizing abortion, according to a survey commissioned by a Catholic weekly.    A new survey reveals a large gap between German Catholics and church leaders when it comes to abortion.
    The survey, conducted by INSA Consulere pollster on behalf of German Catholic weekly Die Tagespost, asked the responders for their stance on the following sentence: "It is good that the pope and the Church speak out against abortion."
© Eric Gay/dpa/AP/picture alliance Pope Francis has modernized
the Catholic Church, but remains a staunch opponent of abortion. Only 17% of surveyed Catholics said they agreed with it, compared to 58% who oppose it.
    The same survey also showed that only 13% of Protestants were in favor of the anti-abortion statements.     Over two-thirds of Protestants disagreed with anti-abortion comments made by Pope Francis and Catholic leaders.     The pollsters questioned a total of 2,099 people in late July and early August.
Church changes, but only to a point
    Pope Francis has moved the Catholic Church in a more liberal direction since taking over as pontiff in 2013.    He has taken a tough stance on priests involved in child abuse and chastised Western governments for not welcoming migrants, called for more help for the poor and more efforts to preserve the environment.    Publicly, he has worked to reduce prejudice against LGBTQ people, reassuring them that God "does not disown any of his children" and endorsing same-sex civil unions.
    However, the 85-year-old has also disappointed some of his more liberal supporters by rejecting the blessing of gay marriages.    He has also refused to shift from the Church's traditional stance on celibacy for priests, and most notably, abortion, which the Vatican sees as an act of murder.
    Pope's stance on abortion: 'Is it right to hire a hit man?'
    In an interview with the Reuters news agency last month, Pope Francis restated his controversial view that having an abortion is akin to hiring a hit man.
    "The moral question is whether it is right to take a human life to solve a problem.    Indeed, is it right to hire a hit man to solve a problem?" the pope said.
    The abortion issue is not the only one where the Vatican faces pushback from Germany.    Less than three weeks ago, the Catholic Church spoke out against the progressive German Catholic movement known as the "Synodal Path," warning them they do not have authority to instruct church leaders on matters of morality and doctrine.
    The movement has previously called for allowing priests to marry, women to become deacons, and for same-sex couples to receive the Church's blessing.
Copyright 2022 DW.COM, Deutsche Welle. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

8/10/2022 ‘IRREPARABLE HARM’- US Department of Justice asks judge to pause near-total abortion ban in Idaho by Rebecca Boone, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Protesters march through downtown Boise, chanting pro-abortion rights slogans, on their way to the Idaho Capitol
steps on June 24. The U.S. Department of Justice asked a federal judge this week to bar Idaho from
enforcing its near-total abortion ban while a lawsuit is underway. DARIN OSWALD/IDAHO STATESMAN VIA AP FILE     BOISE, Idaho – The U.S. Department of Justice asked a federal judge this week to bar Idaho from enforcing its near-total abortion ban while a lawsuit pitting federal health care law against state legislation is underway.
    Meanwhile, the Republican-led Idaho Legislature is asking for permission to intervene in the federal case, just as it has done in three other abortion-related lawsuits filed in state courts.
    The complex legal maneuvering playing out in Idaho is becoming increasingly common in red states as the American landscape of reproductive care continues to feel the aftershocks from the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision overturning decades of abortion rights rulings.    Judges in the neighboring states of Montana and Wyoming were weighing similar requests, with the Montana Supreme Court on Tuesday keeping three abortion laws paused and the Wyoming judge expected to issue a ruling soon.
    “If allowed to go into effect, the Idaho law will cause significant irreparable harm, including to the public health of patients across Idaho,” Justice Department attorney Lisa Newman wrote in court documents filed Monday.
    The Justice Department sued Idaho last week over the state’s strict abortion ban, saying it would force doctors to violate the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, a federal law that requires anyone coming to a medical facility for emergency treatment to be stabilized and treated.
    The law enacted in 2020 and set up as a “trigger law” automatically takes effect on Aug. 25 now that the U.S. Supreme Court has overturned its landmark abortion rights ruling nearly a half-century after Roe v. Wade.
    The law criminalizes all abortions, and anyone who performs, attempts or assists with abortions can face two to five years in prison in addition to losing their health care license.    However, physicians who perform abortions to save a patient’s life, or in cases of rape or incest, can use that information as a legal defense during the criminal trial.
    The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act requires hospitals that receive federal Medicare funds to provide stabilizing medical treatment to patients experiencing medical emergencies.    Some of those patients are pregnant, the Justice Department said, and emergency stabilizing treatment can involve terminating a pregnancy.
    Idaho has 52 Medicare-certified hospitals that together received approximately $3.4 billion in Medicare funds during the 2018, 2019 and 2020 budget years, according to the lawsuit.
    Idaho’s law is “far narrower” than the federal law, the Justice Department says, and puts physicians in impossible positions when they have patients with ectopic pregnancies, dangerously high blood pressure and serious infections.
    Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden’s office has not yet responded to the lawsuit in legal filings, but Wasden issued a statement last week calling the lawsuit “politically motivated” and criticizing the Justice Department for not first seeking a “meaningful dialogue” with state officials on the issue.
    In Nebraska, a woman was charged with helping her teenage daughter end her pregnancy at about 24 weeks after investigators uncovered Facebook messages in which the two discussed using medication to induce an abortion and plans to burn the fetus afterward.
    The prosecutor handling the case said it’s the first time he has charged anyone for illegally performing an abortion after 20 weeks, a restriction that was passed in 2010.    Before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June, states weren’t allowed to enforce abortion bans until the point at which a fetus is considered viable outside the womb, at roughly 24 weeks.
    In one of the Facebook messages, Jessica Burgess, 41, tells her then 17-year-old daughter that she has obtained abortion pills and gives her instructions on how to take them.
    The daughter, meanwhile, “talks about how she can’t wait to get the ‘thing’ out of her body,” a detective wrote in court documents.
    In early June, the mother and daughter were only charged with a single felony for removing, concealing or abandoning a body, and two misdemeanors: concealing the death of another person and false reporting.    It wasn’t until about a month later, after investigators reviewed the private Facebook messages, that they added the felony abortion-related charges against the mother.    The daughter, now 18, is being charged as an adult at prosecutors’ request.
    In Wyoming, attorneys argued Tuesday over whether Wyoming’s abortion ban should continue to be suspended amid a lawsuit contesting the new law.
    Four women, including two obstetricians, and two nonprofits, including one that planned to open a Casper women’s health and abortion clinic that was firebombed in May, filed the Wyoming lawsuit.    Wyoming’s law would allow abortions in cases of rape, incest and serious medical complications but the ban would force pregnant women and doctors in such circumstances to grapple with the risk of prosecution, they argue.
    Meanwhile in Montana, the state Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a temporary injunction blocking three abortion laws passed by the 2021 Legislature from taking effect while a legal challenge plays out.    The challenged laws would have banned abortions past 20 weeks, eliminated tele-health services for medication abortions and require abortion providers to offer patients the opportunity to listen to the fetal heart tone or view an ultrasound before performing an abortion.
    “If allowed to go into effect, the Idaho law will cause significant irreparable harm, including to the public health of patients across Idaho.” Lisa Newman
Justice Department attorney

8/12/2022 Florida Drops Medicaid Coverage of Trans People's Gender-Affirming Medications by Caitlin Cruz - Jezebel
    Florida—under the leadership of the cartoonishly transphobic Gov. Ron DeSantis (R)—will bar its residents from using Medicaid to cover the puberty blockers and hormone therapies that many have already been using for years, according to a new rule released by the state’s Agency for Health Care Administration on Wednesday.    This rule will not just affect trans kids, whose age-appropriate care the state has been trying to curb-stomp in one way or another—it will bar adults from continuing to use Medicaid to pay for gender-confirming medical care, too.
    Under this guidance, the state’s $36.2 billion Medicaid program will not cover payment for treatments like hormone therapy or puberty blockers, nor for gender confirmation surgeries.    This will add Florida to at least 10 states (including Texas and Arizona) which outlaw Medicaid dollars from being used for medications typically association with the treatment of gender dysphoria.
© Photo: Joe Raedle (Getty Images) Photo: Joe Raedle (Getty Images)     State agency spokesperson Brock Juarez told the Washington Post that the agency conducted “a very thorough process, and our in-depth work and findings really speak for itself.”
    Lambda Legal is considering “all options” to challenge this rule, according to the Post.    “It’s gut-wrenching,” Carl Charles, senior attorney of the Southern Regional Office for Lambda Legal, told the newspaper.    “People have made a decision in their lives to pursue a course of care that’s going to be life-changing, and now they’re facing the potential that they may not be able to move forward with that.”
    In April, the state board published a report saying there wasn’t enough proof that gender confirmation therapies and surgeries improved trans healthcare outcomes.    However, the report is directly contradicted by industry experts, including the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP) and the American Academy of Pediatrics as well as the American Medical Association.
    On Aug. 5, the state’s medical board began the process to ban gender confirmation treatment for kids—something that has been falsely boogeyman-ed into including vaginoplasty.    Doctors do not perform gender confirmation surgeries on children, but conservatives love to pop off regardless of the truth.
    During that same meeting, the state medical board also voted to begin the process that would institute waiting periods for adults seeking any gender confirmation care.    The 24-hour waiting periods are exactly like those instituted for abortion care.    While waiting period laws haven’t been challenged regarding gender confirmation care, these kind of laws when in the context of abortion have been held up as an “undue burden” for abortion seekers prior to Dobbs.

8/13/2022 Southern Baptists say denomination faces DOJ investigation by Holly Meyer and David Crary, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    NASHVILLE, Tenn. – Leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention said Friday that several of the denomination’s major entities are under investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice in the wake of its multiple problems related to clergy sex abuse.
    The SBC’s Executive Committee has received a subpoena, but no individuals have been subpoenaed at this point, according to the committee’s lawyers.
    “This is an ongoing investigation and we are not commenting on our discussions with DOJ,” they said.
    The statement from SBC leaders – including Executive Committee members, seminary presidents and heads of mission organizations – gave few details about the investigation, but indicated it dealt with widespread sexual abuse problems that have rocked the largest Protestant denomination in the U.S.
    “Individually and collectively each SBC entity is resolved to fully and completely cooperate with the investigation,” the statement said.    “While we continue to grieve and lament past mistakes related to sexual abuse, current leaders across the SBC have demonstrated a firm conviction to address those issues of the past and are implementing measures to ensure they are never repeated in the future.”
    There was no immediate comment from the Justice Department about the investigation.
    Earlier this year, an SBC sex abuse task force released a blistering 288-page report from outside consultant, Guidepost Solutions.    The firm’s sevenmonth independent investigation found disturbing details about how denominational leaders mishandled sex abuse claims and mistreated victims.
    The report focused specifically on how the SBC’s Executive Committee responded to abuse cases, revealing that it had secretly maintained a list of clergy and other church workers accused of abuse.
    The committee later apologized and released the list, which had hundreds of accused workers on it.     A Guidepost spokesperson declined to comment on news of the DOJ probe.
    Following the release of the Guidepost report, the SBC voted during its annual meeting in June to create a way to track pastors and other church workers credibly accused of sex abuse and launch a new task force to oversee further reforms.    Earlier this week, SBC President Bart Barber, who also signed Friday’s statement, announced the names of the Southern Baptist pastors and church members who will serve on the task force.
    Southern Baptist sex abuse survivor Christa Brown, who has long called for the SBC to do more to address sex abuse across its churches, celebrated the news of the DOJ investigation.
    “Hallelujah.    It’s about time,” Brown said in a Friday post on Twitter.    ”This is what’s needed.”
    Another survivor, Jules Woodson, went public with her abuse story in 2018 and has been pushing for reforms in the SBC ever since.    On Friday, she reacted to the investigation news by tweeting, “May justice roll down!!!”

8/13/2022 Louisiana Supreme Court rejects appeal in abortion ban case by Sara Cline, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    BATON ROUGE, La. – The Louisiana Supreme Court on Friday denied an appeal filed by plaintiffs in the ongoing legal battle over the state’s abortion ban, allowing the ban to stay in effect.
    The ruling marked a major blow to abortion-rights advocates and providers, who had hoped the ban would be blocked for a third time, allowing Louisiana’s three abortion clinics to begin performing procedures again.
    “While it is disappointing that four of the seven justices, without any written explanation, issued a ruling that will effectively deny critical care to women throughout Louisiana, the litigation continues and we are confident we can affect meaningful change,” Joanna Wright, an attorney for the plaintiff, said in addition to confirming the court’s ruling.    Following news of the ruling, Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry – a defendant in the case – tweeted that he was pleased with the court’s decision and will “continue fighting to end this legal circus.”    Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to end constitutional protections for abortion in June, access to abortion has fluctuated as the state’s three clinics relied on rulings and temporary restraining orders that allowed them to continue operating.
    Plaintiffs challenging the ban don’t deny the state can now prohibit abortions but argue that the law’s provisions are contradictory and unconstitutionally vague.    On July 21, state Judge Donald Johnson issued a preliminary injunction that allowed clinics to continue providing abortions while the lawsuit over the ban plays out in court.    But, eight days later, procedures came to a halt when a state appeals court ruled in favor of Landry, granting a “suspensive” appeal and ordering Johnson to reinstate enforcement of the ban.
    The plaintiffs appealed the 1st Circuit Court’s decision to the Louisiana Supreme Court but were unsuccessful.

8/13/2022 LGBTQ groups denounce Florida plan to limit transgender care by ASSOCIATED PRESS
    MIAMI – LGBTQ and health groups have denounced a new rule by Florida health officials set to take effect later this month to restrict Medicaid insurance coverage for gender dysphoria treatments for transgender people.
    The Florida Agency for Health Care Administration filed the new rule this month, and it is set to take effect Aug. 21, according to online records.
    The state agency previously released a report stating that puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and sex reassignment surgery have not been proven safe or effective in treating gender dysphoria.    Tom Wallace, the state’s deputy director of Medicaid, signed off on the report in June.
    Lambda Legal, Southern Legal Counsel, Florida Health Justice Project and National Health Law Program issued a statement saying the AHCA is ignoring thousands of public comments and expert testimony by finalizing a discriminatory and medically unsound rule.
    “AHCA’s actions, at the behest of Governor (Ron) DeSantis and his political appointees, are morally and legally wrong, as well as medically and scientifically unsound,” a joint statement from the groups said.    “This rule represents a dangerous escalation in Governor DeSantis’s political zeal to persecute LGBTQ+ people in Florida, and particularly transgender youth.”
    Transgender medical treatment for children and teens is increasingly under attack in many states where it has been labeled a form of child abuse and where Medicaid coverage is barred.    Critics point to the irreversible nature of many elements of gender transition treatment.
    Many doctors and mental health specialists argue that medical treatment for transgender children is safe and beneficial and can improve their well-being, although rigorous long-term research on benefits and risks is lacking.    Federal guidelines say gender-affirming care is crucial to the health and well-being of transgender and nonbinary children.
    Last year, the American Medical Association issued a letter urging governors to block any legislation prohibiting the treatment, calling such action “a dangerous intrusion into the practice of medicine.”
    In a statement, Florida Agency for Health Care Administration Secretary Simone Marstiller said “we have seen a dangerous mix of politics and medicine from doctors in the Biden Administration and many of our medical societies across the United States.”
    “It is imperative for states like Florida to step up and ensure our focus remains on the actual evidence, rather than the eminence of a medical society or association,” she said.

8/12/2022 VP Harris Decries Supreme Court During Roundtable Discussion About Abortion In Calif.
Vice President Kamala Harris speaks while meeting with Nevada state legislators to discuss
reproductive rights Wednesday, Aug. 10, 2022, in Las Vegas. (AP Photo/John Locher)     Vice President Kamala Harris visited California on Thursday to praise its abortion policies.
    During a roundtable meeting with California state officials, Harris decried the idea of states being able to pass legislation protecting or banning abortions.    Additionally, she described the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade as a “act of violence.”
    “The idea that states would be passing laws that would take from an individual their right to self-determination after they have endured such an atrocious act of violence is unconscionable,” Harris said.    “These are the kinds of things that are happening around our country, but not in California.”
    Attending the discussion was state Sen. Toni Atkins (D-Calif.) who revealed she plans to make the Golden State an abortion sanctuary.
    “Together with my legislative colleagues, we are moving 13 bills to increase, expand and protect abortion access,” Atkins announced.    “I’m leading a bill that will expand the number of available abortion providers by allowing qualified nurse practitioners to provide abortions without physician supervision.”
    Part of Atkins plan is to have California universities offer medication to female students seeking the procedure.
    “Come January at University of California and California State (universities), students will be able to get medication abortion at their campus health centers,” Atkins said.    “In our recently passed budget, we speak directly to the women who reside in states where there is no option but to come here for care.    A $20 million investment sends the message that we not only welcome you, we will support you.”
    Meanwhile, California Attorney General Rob Bonta vowed to defend the so-called reproductive rights nationwide alongside the federal government.
    “We’re defending reproductive rights nationwide, putting a stop to some of the dangerous Trump era rules challenging, unconscionable abortion bans in other states, supporting your administration’s efforts to increase access to care,” said Bonta.
    In the meantime, the Biden administration is scrambling to find ways to override the Supreme Court’s decision.

[THE FOLLOWING ARTICLES IS NOT A LIST OF WINNERS AND LOSERS IT IS A LIST OF STATES THAT CHOOSE WHAT IS RIGHT OR WRONG.].
8/14/2022 Abortion rights vary from state to state - ‘Trigger’ law shuts down procedure in Kentucky by Deborah Yetter, Louisville Courier Journal USA TODAY NETWORK
Abortion-rights supporters protest at Muhammad Ali and Fifth Street, near
a double billboard featuring infants, on July 4. MATT STONE/COURIER JOURNAL     With access to abortion uncertain in their area, some people have been turning to nearby states for care.
    But in the region surrounding Kentucky and Illinois, most of those states already limit or ban abortion.
    For instance, Indiana on Aug. 5 became the first state legislature to enact a near-total ban on abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court on June 24 struck down Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision establishing a federal right to abortion.
    Abortion rights advocates recommend the website abortionfinder.org.    Information on locating an abortion clinic and financial assistance is available through the Kentucky Health Justice Network.
    The Guttmacher Institute, a national reproductive rights organization, offers an interactive map of state abortion policies on its website.
    Here’s the situation in Kentucky and other, nearby states:
Kentucky
    Abortion is not available in Kentucky currently because of a “trigger” law that bans abortion except to save the life of or prevent disabling injury to someone who is pregnant.    It provides no exceptions for rape, incest or fetal anomaly.    Advocates for abortion rights have filed a lawsuit challenging the law, as well as another that bans abortion after six weeks of pregnancy.    The state Supreme Court is considering whether to let abortions resume while the case is pending.
Indiana
    The Indiana near-ban on abortion takes effect Sept. 15.
    The General Assembly, on Aug. 5, enacted a law that bans abortion except for incidences involving rape, incest, fatal fetal abnormalities, or to save the life or health of the mother.    The law terminates the licenses of abortion clinics, meaning the procedure will be performed only at hospitals and outpatient surgical centers owned by hospitals.
Illinois
    Illinois is the exception among most states in the region.
    Abortions are legal in Illinois up to the point where the fetus is considered viable, generally around 24 weeks.
    Illinois does not have a waiting period for an abortion, as required in some states, according to the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois.    And girls under 18 are not required to have permission of a parent or guardian for the procedure.
Missouri
    Abortion is now banned in Missouri, except in cases of medical emergency.    Like Kentucky, that state had a trigger law on the books to ban abortions once the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.    The Missouri law provides no exceptions for rape or incest.
Ohio
    Ohio bans abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy, once cardiac impulses can be detected in the embryo.    Republicans who control the Ohio legislature have proposed banning all abortions before the end of the year, and are also discussing a constitutional amendment to ensure the state constitution provides no right to abortion.
Tennessee
    All abortions will be banned in Tennessee effective Aug. 25, once the state’s “trigger law” takes effect.    Abortions already were banned at six weeks under a previous law.
    The law makes no exceptions for rape, incest or medical emergency, though physicians who provide an abortion to save the life of or prevent disabling injury to a patient may use those circumstances as “an affirmative defense,” according to The Tennessean.    The law would not prevent health providers from being charged.
Virginia
    Abortion remains legal in Virginia through viability of the fetus, according to the Guttmacher Institute.    Those under 18 must have consent from a parent, guardian or judge.
West Virginia
    Abortion remains legal in West Virginia up to 20 weeks of pregnancy, and is allowed after that only in cases of medical emergency.    However, the state’s legislature is currently considering legislation to ban all or most abortions.
Wisconsin
    Abortions became unavailable in Wisconsin after the Supreme Court’s decision on Roe v. Wade led to reinstatement of an 1849 law making abortion illegal except to save a patient’s life, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.    The law makes providing an abortion a felony punishable by up to six years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.
    Providers suspended offering abortions June 24, the day the Roe decision was announced.
    Contact reporter Deborah Yetter at dyetter@ courier-journal.com or on Twitter @d_yetter.

8/14/2022 AFTER FALL OF ROE V. WADE -Illinois becoming epicenter for abortion - Patients from Kentucky are seeking state’s services by Sarah Ladd and Tessa Duvall, Louisville Courier Journal | USA TODAY NETWORK
Julie Burkhart, co-owner of Hope Clinic for Women in Granite City, Ill., talks about the influx of patients
from other sttes on July 19. Granite City is less than a 20-minute drive fro St. Louis, and as a border facility,
Hoe Clinic has long served Missourians seeking abortions. PHOTO BY KELLY WILKINSON/INDY STAR     GRANITE CITY, Ill. — One by one, the women walked into the Hope Clinic past a shouting man at the edge of the parking lot, past the security guard booth and through the code-secured front door.
    Most made their way in the July heat up a flight of stairs and through another secured door before checking in for their appointment in a brightly lit waiting room decorated, in part, with rainbow and transgender pride flags.
    Downstairs in the recovery room, where patients stay anywhere from 30 minutes to an hour after their procedures, each wall bears encouragement — an artistic portrait of the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and signs that read: “Inhale courage, exhale fear,” “All you need is love” and “Women are angels.    When someone breaks our wings we continue to fly.”
    Outside, about 10 protesters lined the sidewalk in the summer sun.    Most were silent.    One woman held a sign that simply read: “I regret my abortion.”    Others paced the sidewalk, offering anti-abortion pamphlets to potential patients.
    Granite City is less than a 20-minute drive from St. Louis, and as a border facility, Hope Clinic has long served Missourians seeking abortions.
    But now, patients from about 19 states have descended on the Southern Illinois location, including from Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arkansas, Kentucky and Ohio.
    Julie Burkhart, co-owner of Hope Clinic and a longtime abortion-access advocate, said the facility is and will be a “point of refuge” going forward for Southern and Midwestern states with the U.S. Supreme Court decision eradicating the constitutional right to an abortion.
    The patient census has doubled since the June 24 court decision.    The clinic is now serving 40 to 50 people a day, Amy Redd-Greiner, the front-desk supervisor at Hope, said in between handing patients their intake forms and answering the ringing desk phone.
    And that patient demand is only expected to rise in the weeks and months ahead.
    “I am grateful that right now, at this point in time, we’re able to serve people and take care of people from other places, if they can get to us, who otherwise would go without,” Burkhart said.    “I’m glad that we can be here.    But I’m sad and I’m angry that people are having to travel.”
The day Roe v. Wade fell
    On the day Roe v. Wade fell, hundreds of people called the Hope Clinic.    The staff described it as “panic, panic, panic.”
    And in the abortion recovery room downstairs, in the middle of the uncertainty that day brought on, patients had one thing to tell staff: “Thank you.”
    Front-desk employees of the Granite City abortion clinic usually field no more than 200 calls a day.    But when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the federal right to abortion on that day in June, more than 600 people called the office seeking help.
    For many in the surrounding region, the Land of Lincoln suddenly became the only place to legally access abortion, following a series of state “trigger” laws banning or severely limiting the procedure.
    Redd-Greiner said the “vast majority” of patients coming into the clinic since the Roe decision have traveled from out of state.    The no-show rate among patients is also down.
    In fact, the entire state of Illinois is gearing up to see an increase in out-of-state patients seeking abortions, with Paula Thornton Greear, head of external affairs for Planned Parenthood of Illinois, predicting their clinics “could see as many as 30,000 abortion patients a year.”
    Indeed, Illinois already has seen out-of-state patients triple between 2015 and 2020 — from 3,200 to 9,700.
    Providers in the state performed 46,000 abortions overall in 2020, according to the Illinois Department of Public Health.
    Illinois’ rising profile as an “oasis in the Midwest“ for those seeking abortion care threatens to place it squarely in the crosshairs of anti-abortion supporters, who, fresh from their victory in the right-leaning Supreme Court, will increasingly turn their attention to border clinics.
    Burkhart worries about the people who will travel to protest Hope Clinic’s work.
    “Targets on us just got bigger,” she said.
‘Either help or quit’
    Daniel and Angela Michael have protested outside Hope Clinic for 29 years.
    They estimate they’ve turned more than 6,000 potential patients away from the clinic.    Two of the couple’s 13 children were adopted from people who had initially come to the clinic for abortions, Daniel said.
    They run an organization called Small Victories, which provides things such as ultrasounds, formula and diapers to people.    They commute from Highland, Illinois — about 40 minutes away — several times a week in a purple RV that advertises “Mobile Medical Unit” and “Real Hope … Real Help.”
    The Michaels, who identify as Christian, oppose abortion but criticized protesters who name-call and berate patients headed into the clinic as hypocritical.
    “They always scream and yell at people and talk them out of abortion, but they won’t help them after that,” Daniel said, his voice breaking as he spoke.
    The couple raises about $100,000 annually and uses the money to drive to the clinic, as well as provide supplies for mothers through the first year after birth, Daniel said.
    Both he and Angela feel like a lot of crisis pregnancy organizations make it too difficult for people to get assistance, such as requiring classes in exchange for supplies.
    “You can’t make it hard for these girls,” Angela said.    “You can’t selectively help women.    That’s where the hypocrisy comes.     Either help or quit …”    Despite their efforts, they don’t think Illinois will ever ban abortion, Daniel said, adding he supports the decision to put it in the hands of the states.
    “So, what’s the solution? Be here to offer women real hope and real help,” he said.
‘Our fight in Illinois’
    Nearly five hours north of Granite City in northern Illinois, the story is similar: Clinics near Chicago expect to see an influx of patients, many from Wisconsin, and not everyone is pleased.
    Eric Wallace, co-founder of the Freedom’s Journal Institute, a Black-led, Christian, conservative group, has spoken out against the Planned Parenthood clinic in the village of Flossmoor since it opened in 2018.
    “You don’t want your state or your village to be known as a place where you can go and get ‘the procedure,’” he said.    “But it is what it is right now.    And people will go out there, and we’ll protest and put up signs, and we’ll try to get people to go to Aid for Women.”
    Eric and Jennifer Wallace, his wife and institute co-founder, said they helped establish the Aid for Women crisis pregnancy center in the building next to Planned Parenthood.
    “That was in direct response to us finding out we would have Planned Parenthood in our backyard,” Jennifer said.    “The unfortunate thing is that for far too many people, they cloak the Planned Parenthood centers as health care alternatives for women …”    “We don’t consider the idea of terminating your pregnancy to be health care,” Eric added.    “Health care is to keep people alive.”
    For the Wallaces, there’s a deep sense of sadness that there’s an abortion clinic in their community and that their governor is “very pro-abortion.”    That Illinois could become a destination for abortions is ridiculous, they said.
    The Wallaces see abortion as an unfortunate reality in Illinois for the foreseeable future.    Instead of a total ban on the procedure, they’re planning to push for incremental change: restoring the parental notification requirement and shortening the timeframe in which abortion is allowed.
    “Even if we’re not able to make it illegal, maybe we can make it rare,” Eric Wallace said.    “That’s where, I think, our fight in Illinois begins.”
Another kind of fight: Expanding access
    Jennifer Welch, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Illinois, calls the state an “oasis of care as millions of patients are stranded in a vast abortion desert.”    She welcomes people in need to seek care from one of the 17 locations open around the state.
    The Illinois and Wisconsin Planned Parenthood chapters have also partnered to allow abortion providers from the Badger State to be licensed to work at the Waukegan Health Center, which opened in 2020 just south of the Illinois/ Wisconsin border, in anticipation of Roe’s fall.
    Tanya Atkinson, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, said in a July 14 virtual press conference that sites in the state were forced to end all abortion care immediately when Roe was overturned.
    “This dangerous abortion ban has had devastating consequences on people in Wisconsin,” Atkinson said, “forcing people to travel sometimes hundreds of miles for health care at great costs, great disruption to their personal lives or has forced them to remain pregnant.”
    Wisconsin already faced severe restrictions before federal protections for abortion were removed, Atkinson said, with 96% of counties in the state having no abortion provider.
    Since the Roe decision, calls for care to PPWI doubled, and all patients are being diverted out of state, mostly to Illinois.
    “Many of our patients seeking abortion care are already struggling,” Atkinson said.    “They’re struggling with poverty or trauma or abuse, the devastation of unexpected pregnancy complications or simply the complexities of traveling outside of the state for the first time to access essential health care.”
    Dr. Allison Linton, PPWI associate medical director, is one of the people who will be traveling to Illinois to provide abortion care in addition to her OBGYN work in Wisconsin.
    “The patients I see who have abortions are your friends, your family, your neighbors and members of our community, and they deserve access to safe, timely medical care,” Linton said.
    The Wisconsin staff who will work in Illinois have allowed Waukegan Health Center to double abortion services and expand other work including telehealth and family planning, according to PPIL Chief Strategy and Operations Officer Kristen Schultz.
    Waukegan 8th Ward Alderman Lynn Florian supported the health center when it quietly opened two years ago, saying she was grateful Planned Parenthood would bring its resources to their community.    Two years later, Florian remains grateful the center is available to those in her community — and beyond.
    “In some people’s minds, Planned Parenthood is just about abortion, but they provide obstetric care to women that may not otherwise have access to care,” Florian said.    “I felt like a community like ours, that’s minority, somewhat impoverished, needs to have services like those for the women in our community.”
    In recent years, Illinois lawmakers have pushed through several bills protecting abortion as a legal right.
    “I remember at the time thinking: ‘This is kind of overkill. Roe is settled law,’” Florian said.    “But now, I am so grateful that Illinois has solidified the right for a woman to choose.    I am so grateful to live in Illinois, and I am so proud that Waukegan has Planned Parenthood and has a place where women can make these difficult decisions.”
    Florian said the clinic consistently draws protesters, but to her knowledge, there’s been no physical safety concerns.    The city’s police chief has assured Florian the department will continue to protect Planned Parenthood’s patients, she said.
    And to the patients who can’t access abortion in their home states, Florian says: “I’m sorry you can’t access this care right where you live.    You shouldn’t have to travel to Illinois, but because you do, we’re here for you.”
    Elaina Dixon is among the community members who will help both Illinois patients and those from other states.    She’s been volunteering as a clinic escort for about five years.    She works with the Illinois Choice Action Team, which takes a “non-engagement” approach to escorting, where they don’t interact with the anti-abortion activists.
    There have been large groups that have protested outside the clinic where Dixon volunteers, but she anticipates there could be an increase in “anti-tourism.”
    “I do anticipate, certainly as these laws go into effect, that these groups will begin to target the states that still do have abortion access and abortion laws on the books,” she said.    “Roe getting overturned is their stepping-stone toward a national abortion ban, and as they say, an abortion-free America.    So, I think they believe it’s a huge victory, but it’s certainly not the end of the road for the antis, so nor will it be for the escorts.”
    Dixon said in recent years, escort training has grown to include more preparation for how to handle violent situations should they arise outside clinics.
    After the leaked Dobbs opinion and then the official opinion, “Initially, I felt very beaten down,” Dixon said, “but then I actually felt very grateful that I already have an actionable way to continue doing something that I feel is really important.”
‘It was a good decision’
    Lindsay Cashion knows firsthand how complicated abortion health care can be.
    When she was 19, the Du Quoin, Illinois, woman got pregnant.    It was unplanned, she said, but she still wanted the baby and wanted a normal life with him.
    Then, at her 20-week checkup, doctors discovered the baby had one nonworking kidney and another working only at 50%.
    He was diagnosed with Potter’s Syndrome, which the National Library of Medicine says is a “fatal congenital disorder” that is “incompatible with life.”
    The news “was horrible,” Cashion said.    “I didn’t know what to do.    I was 19.    I was young.    I didn’t know hardly anything about pregnancy, babies. Just very shocking.”
    Doctors estimated the fetus had a 3% chance of life, with the likelihood of being born stillborn.    A specialist in St. Louis couldn’t help, and a week later, nothing had improved.
    “He was losing weight because there was no amniotic fluid,” said Cashion, now 26, who was raised anti-abortion.    “They told me I could have an abortion in Missouri, or I could come back to Illinois and just deliver him.”
    A day shy of her 24-week mark, Cashion was induced and went through 19 hours of labor to deliver the boy she named Mason, who weighed just 1 pound.
    The hospital classified the delivery as an abortion.    She and her family did not.
    Cashion faced immediate pushback and attacks from people she knew for not trying to carry to term.
    “They said that I was horrible, that I should have delivered him to term and if he died, then he should have just died, that it wasn’t my decision.    They said I was a monster for doing what I did,” Cashion said while sitting at a picnic table in Carbondale’s Attucks Park.
    Nearby, children ran through the water fountains to get cool in the stifling heat.    Shell casings and chicken bones near the grill under the park’s picnic shelter offered a glimpse into the night before.
    The insults over Cashion’s choice had “a lot of emotional impact” on her, she said, and left her with PTSD as well as depression for a while after the birth.
    “I went to a counselor and talked to them because … I felt like I did something wrong after all of those people told me that,” she said.    “And now I see that it was a good decision.”
    Cashion said she was “very upset” to learn about Roe being overturned: “If it wasn’t for the abortion laws … I would have never been able to make that choice."
    “If there’s anything wrong with the mother or the child, they should be able to have an abortion, they should have that choice,” she said.    “If someone got pregnant and a mother or a baby is in danger, I feel like they should have that choice to abort that baby.”
    And if those patients come from other states for the care they can get in Illinois, she won’t stand in their way.
    “I fully support them if they want to make that decision …,” she said.
    Tennessee-based CHOICES plans to help make that decision easier by bringing a new clinic to Carbondale sometime in August.
    "I don’t talk about it, So, when people tell me abortion should be illegal, it makes me so angry because until you live in the footsteps of other women, how dare you.”
    Lake County Board Member Gina Roberts For safety reasons, CHOICES hasn’t disclosed the exact address of the new clinic, which will be the southernmost abortion facility in Illinois when it opens.    The clinic will go into an existing building in Carbondale and is located on the Amtrak line from New Orleans to Chicago.
    About 400 miles north, Lake County Board Member Gina Roberts shared her abortion story for the first time since the Supreme Court’s decision.
    Roberts said she was raped by a relative in California at 19 and became pregnant from the assault.
    She chose to have an abortion.    “I don’t talk about it,” Roberts said tearfully.    “So, when people tell me abortion should be illegal, it makes me so angry because until you live in the footsteps of other women, how dare you.”
    Her heart aches for the women who will now be faced with the same situation she was decades before.
    “Women,” she said, “should not have to be in that position.”
‘I can see people flocking’ to Carbondale
    Cashion said she’s already seen social media chatter about protests once the CHOICES clinic opens.    She thinks locals will protest, as well as people from out of town.
    “I can definitely see a lot of people flocking here,” she said.    “I think they should be able to do it.    As long as it’s a peaceful protest.”
    Nancy Maxwell, the outreach manager at Carbondale’s Survivor Empowerment Center, has sat with hundreds of rape survivors in the last 10 years.
    She said rape-induced pregnancy “can be devastating” for survivors.
    “It can be continuous PTSD,” she added.    “Everybody that experiences a sexual assault has a different reaction and a different way to deal with it.    And I can’t imagine how that will go for someone to be reminded consistently of this horrible day in your life where something horrific happened.”
    That’s part of why Maxwell and the center are partnering with CHOICES and will even offer beds at their rape crisis center to patients who come into town for abortion care and need to stay overnight.    Her center has 45 beds in 17 rooms and will offer whatever excess space is available to CHOICES patients.
    Maxwell said she’s preparing for protests as well, especially once the Carbondale clinic is open.
    “Of course … I can see a possibility of people traveling to Illinois to (protest),” she said.    “In a perfect world, I see it playing out that we might have one or two protesters.”
    But, she said: “I don’t know.    We’re a smaller city.    This is the Bible Belt.    So, it’s kind of … up in the air.”
    Sandy Pensoneau-Conway sits on the board of Rainbow Café LGBTQ+ Center in Carbondale and is also an associate professor in communications and gender studies at Southern Illinois University.
    Sitting on a couch inside the center Giant City Road location, she described the day Roe was overturned as “heavy.”
    “I really just had to close my office door and let it sit … for a minute,” she said.    “I felt angry.    I felt sad.    I felt scared.    You know, I felt really a feeling of disbelief that this actually was real and was happening in my lifetime.”
    But since then, she said, she’s focused on the future.
    “We’re ready to fight.    We’re ready to take that energy, that anger, that sadness, that rage, that despair, and do something with it.”
    The immediate fight in Illinois, said Pensoneau-Conway, will have to focus on solidifying the state’s reproductive freedoms.
    “What is the possibility that in Illinois, our abortion and other reproductive health care rights will be taken away?” she asked, adding that it’s “some comfort to know that the Illinois constitution does protect those rights.”
    However, “even though it’s constitutionally protected, that still can change,” she said.    “And so we need to make sure that we’re voting for people who will make sure it doesn’t change.”
    Meanwhile, a byproduct of the changes happening in Illinois and the country will be a likely economic boost to the region, she added.
    “People who are coming, whether they’re patients or support people, will need a place to stay.    They’ll need to eat, they’ll need to buy goods and use services here,” Pensoneau-Conway said.    “And so that will have an economic impact.”
    Burkhart, with Hope Clinic, said the immediate impact of Roe falling — from an economic boost to protests — isn’t fully known and, “we’ll know more after several months to, I think, a year.”
    Reach health reporter Sarah Ladd at sladd@courier-journal.com. Follow her on Twitter at @ladd_sarah.
    “I am grateful that right now, at this point in time, we’re able to serve people and take care of people from other places, if they can get to us, who otherwise would go without.    I’m glad that we can be here. But I’m sad and I’m angry that people are having to travel.”
Julie Burkhart, Co-owner of Hope Clinic
Daniel Michael and his wife, Angela, set up their charity, which helps
women choose a path other than abortion, outside the clinic in Granite City.
Nancy Maxwell, a rape crisis counselor, is also the community outreach manager at Survivor Empowerment Center
in Carbondale, Ill. She said the center will offer beds at the rape crisis center to patients who come into town for abortion
care and need to stay overnight. The center has 45 beds in 17 rooms. PHOTOS BY KELLY WILKINSON/INDYSTAR
A drawing of former Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
hangs in the recovery room area of Hope Clinic for Women.
Julie Burkhart of Hope Clinic worries about the people who will travel
to protest Hope Clinic’s work. “Targets on us just got bigger,” she said.
Lindsay Cashion shows a baby box with mementos of her late son, Mason. The hospital classified his delivery as an abortion.
She and her family did not. Cashion faced immediate pushback and attacks from people she knew for not trying to carry to term.
“They said that I was horrible, that I should have delivered him to term and if he died, then he should have just died,
that it wasn’t my decision. PHOTOS BY KELLY WILKINSON/INDYSTAR
Lindsay Cashion shows her tattoo in memory of her late son, Mason.
Work continues at Hope Clinic for Women on July 19 in Granite City, Ill.
8/16/2022 Some fear fallout from Okla. abortion laws - Those who help women concerned by Sean Murphy, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    OKLAHOMA CITY – Strict anti-abortion laws that took effect in Oklahoma this year led to the quick shuttering of every abortion facility in the state, but left questions for those who work with women who may seek their advice or help getting an abortion out of state.
    Beyond the profound repercussions the abortion laws are having on medical care, especially reproductive medicine, clergy members, social workers and even librarians have raised concerns about being exposed to criminal or civil liability for just discussing the topic.
    Those fears are well-founded, says Joseph Thai, a professor at the University of Oklahoma who teaches about constitutional law and the Supreme Court.    He described Oklahoma’s new anti-abortion laws, which include both criminal and civil penalties, as the strictest in the nation so far and sweeping in both substance and scope.
    The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in June to overturn Roe v. Wade and remove women’s constitutional right to abortion immediately triggered a 1910 Oklahoma law that makes it a felony, punishable by two to five years in prison, for every person who “advises” or provides any other means for a woman to procure an abortion.    That law allows abortion only to save the mother’s life.
    “That all-encompassing language can make anyone and everyone who helps a woman get an abortion or provides information about access to abortion – including a spouse, another family member, a friend, a classmate or coworker, a librarian, or even an Uber driver – a felon,” Thai said.    “Likewise, employers who have pledged to pay for their employees’ abortions as part of their reproductive health coverage and their insurance companies face criminal liability.”
    Although Alabama, Arizona and Texas have laws prohibiting “aiding and abetting” a woman in getting an abortion, Oklahoma’s is the strictest and the only one currently in effect, said Elizabeth Nash, a state policy analyst for the abortion-rights supporting Guttmacher Institute.
    Although former providers in Oklahoma might have halted abortions, they haven’t stopped giving advice.
    Emily Wales, CEO of Planned Parenthood Great Plains, said giving a pregnant woman information about abortion care is guarded under free speech protections in the Constitution.
    “We’ve heard from providers who aren’t sure if they can make referrals, if they can even tell people to go to Planned Parenthood’s website or abortionfinder.com,” Wales said.    “We don’t think there’s any controversy about being able to tell people what their options are and that they can access care in another state.”
    No charges have been filed in the seven weeks since the law against advising or helping a woman get an abortion went into effect and it’s not known whether anyone is being investigated.    Messages left with several Oklahoma prosecutors about how they plan to enforce the anti-abortion laws were not returned, and the head of the state’s District Attorneys Council, Kathryn Boyle Brewer, said the issue hasn’t been formally discussed by prosecutors at its regular meetings.
    Senate President Pro Tempore Greg Treat, an Oklahoma City Republican who wrote the trigger law, said he believes those who help a woman get an abortion should be prosecuted, although he said it’s unlikely prosecutors would go after a pregnant woman’s family members.
    “Absolutely, if you’re going to aid and abet in a felony, you should be held responsible,” Treat said.    “Where the bigger issue is is where these corporations are offering to pay $4,000 to help you kill an unborn life and knowingly go around Oklahoma’s statutes."
    “Since this has been in effect, there haven’t been any prosecutions.    The good news is people are not having abortions in Oklahoma, and thus far there has not been a case where someone is aiding and abetting in such a way that can be prosecuted.”
    A separate law passed by Oklahoma’s Republican-controlled Legislature this year that was modeled on a Texas law allows anyone to sue “any person” who aids and abets a woman in getting an abortion and collect a minimum $10,000 award plus attorney fees.
    “Notably, none of these criminal or civil laws limit their language to abortions performed in Oklahoma,” Thai added.    “So anyone in Oklahoma who helps a woman get an abortion outside of Oklahoma, such as in neighboring Kansas, arguably could be prosecuted or sued under these sweeping laws.”
    The Rev. Lori Walke, senior minister at Mayflower Congregational Church in Oklahoma City, said that’s left some religious leaders wondering about their potential legal exposure for helping women navigate abortion services.
    “Among my colleagues the conversation has been: ‘This is a risk we have to be willing to take because abortion bans are against our religion,’ to put it directly,” Walke said, adding that sometimes advocacy work by faith leaders includes possibility of arrest and incarceration.
    Similar concerns are being raised by social workers, many of whom believe a prohibition on advising women about abortion services conflicts with their code of ethics that requires them to respect a client’s wishes, said Steven Pharris, head of Oklahoma’s chapter of the National Association of Social Workers.
    “The changes in laws have kind of criminalized a big part of what we do, so it’s changed our role with clients,” Pharris said.    “It’s created a chilling effect on what we can and can’t say.”

8/18/2022 N.C. 20-week abortion ban back - Judge says former ruling on issue no longer stands by Hannah Schoenbaum, ASSOCIATED PRESS/REPORT FOR AMERICA
Hundreds of demonstrators’ rally in opposition to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision overturning
Roe v. Wade in Raleigh, N.C., on June 24. A federal judge has reinstated an unenforced
20-week abortion ban in North Carolina. TRAVIS LONG, THE NEWS & OBSERVER /AP FILE     RALEIGH, N.C. – Abortions in North Carolina are no longer legal after 20 weeks of pregnancy, a federal judge ruled Wednesday, eroding protections in one of the South’s few remaining safe havens for reproductive freedom.
    U.S. District Judge William Osteen reinstated an unenforced 20-week abortion ban, with exceptions for urgent medical emergencies, after he said the June U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade erased the legal foundation for his 2019 ruling that placed an injunction on the 1973 state law.
    His decision defies the recommendations of all named parties in the 2019 case, including doctors, district attorneys and the attorney general’s office, who earlier this month filed briefs requesting he let the injunction stand.
    “Neither this court, nor the public, nor counsel, nor providers have the right to ignore the rule of law as determined by the Supreme Court,” wrote Osteen, who was appointed to the court by Republican President George W. Bush.
    Unable to pass abortion restrictions that would survive Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper’s veto, the Republican General Assembly leaders urged Osteen to restore the ban in a July 27 friend-of-the-court brief after the state’s Democratic attorney general, an outspoken abortion rights supporter, rejected their demand that he brings the ban before a judge himself.
    “I am encouraged that, although our attorney general has failed to do his duty, today we have a ruling that upholds the law,” House Speaker Tim Moore said, referring to North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein.
    Osteen’s ruling adds fuel to an already contentious midterm election year after the Supreme Court ruling propelled state-level politics into the spotlight. North Carolina Republicans in November will aim to clinch the five additional seats they need for a veto-proof supermajority in the state legislature as Democrats stave off their challenges to preserve Cooper’s power.
    Republican lawmakers say a successful election season could open the door to further abortion restrictions when the General Assembly reconvenes early next year.    Moore told reporters on July 26 that he would like to see the legislature consider banning abortions once an ultrasound first detects fetal cardiac activity – typically around six weeks after fertilization and before some patients know they’re pregnant.
    Cooper and other Democrats have a viability, ready elevated abortion access as a key campaign issue. The governor signed an executive order on July 6 shielding out-of-state abortion patients from extradition and prohibiting state agencies under his control from aiding other states’ prosecutions of those who travel for the procedure.
    “Denying women necessary medical care in extreme and threatening situations, even if rare, is fundamentally wrong, and we cannot let politicians mislead people about the real-world implications of this harmful law,” Cooper said Wednesday.
    North Carolina has become a refuge for residents of its more restrictive neighboring states, like South Carolina, Georgia and Tennessee, where abortions are now illegal after six weeks.
    Before Osteen’s ruling, abortions were legal in North Carolina until fetal which generally falls between 24 and 28 weeks of pregnancy, or in certain medical emergencies.
    As other Southeastern states continue to chip away at abortion access, Alison Kiser, executive director of Planned Parenthood Votes! South Atlantic, said limiting treatment in “a critical access point state” like North Carolina will have ripple effects across the region.
    The number of out-of-state patients at North Carolina’s Planned Parenthood health centers has tripled since the Supreme Court ruling, Kiser said. So far in August, 36% of abortion patients traveled from other states, up from 14% in June.
    But Republicans argue little will change with the 20-week ban back in place.    In 2019, fewer than 1% of abortions nationwide were performed after 20 weeks of gestation, consistent with data from previous years when abortion access was protected at the federal level, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
    “Abortions after 20 weeks are rare, but it’s still incredibly important that people have access to this care,” Kiser said.    “The two primary reasons people need abortion care later in pregnancy is because they’ve received new medical information or, and ever more so now, they’re facing barriers that have delayed their care.”
    The main delay, she said, is North Carolina’s 72-hour mandatory waiting period to receive an abortion after an initial doctor’s visit.    The General Assembly extended the waiting period in 2015, making North Carolina the fifth state to require counseling three days before an abortion – one of the longest waiting periods in the country.
    The 2015 bill also amended the state law that Osteen reinstated Wednesday, narrowing the criteria for medical emergencies that could warrant an abortion after 20 weeks.

8/19/2022 Groups, states weigh in on Idaho abortion suit - Claim ban violates federal health care law by Rebecca Boone, ASSOCIATED PRESS
The Idaho House of Representatives voted March 14 to approve legislation that makes performing nearly any abortion a felony, but allows
physicians to defend themselves in court by showing the procedure was necessary to save a patient’s life. Keith Ridler/AP     BOISE, Idaho – A legal battle over abortion rights pitting one of the reddest states in the nation against the U.S. government has dozens of states and major medical associations seeking to weigh in.
    Twenty states, Washington, D.C., the American College of Emergency Physicians, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and others are among those to have filed 'friend of the court' briefs as of Wednesday, siding with the federal government’s claims that Idaho’s near-total abortion ban violates federal health care law.
    'It will really place physicians in a lose-lose situation,' said Jeff Dubner, the deputy legal director for Democracy Forward, the legal team representing the coalition of medical associations.
    Physicians who follow the federal law will be at risk of criminal prosecution and the loss of their medical license, said Dubner, and those who follow state law could damage patients’ health and place themselves and their hospitals at risk of federal fines or loss of funding.
    The Idaho abortion ban makes performing nearly any abortion a felony, but allows physicians to defend themselves in court by showing that the procedure was necessary to save a patient’s life.
    The federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act requires Medicaid-funded hospitals to provide 'stabilizing' treatment to patients experiencing medical emergencies, and the U.S. Department of Justice says that includes some abortions.
    The Justice Department sued Idaho earlier this month in federal court and asked a judge to stop the abortion ban from taking effect.
    Idaho’s neighbors in Oregon and Washington were among the states that joined to file another friend-of-the court brief, saying they fear the 'spillover effect' the abortion ban could create as Idaho patients with ectopic pregnancies or other emergencies are sent to hospitals in Seattle or Portland for treatment.
    States that are further away, like North Carolina, point out that their own pregnant residents could be at risk of death or harm if they happen to fall ill while visiting Idaho.
    'Women’s lives are at risk because politicians are trying to take away their right to get the medical care they need,' said     North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein.    'States are trying to ban abortions in all cases, including rape, incest and when the mother’s health is in danger.    Denying women health care when their life or health is at risk violates federal law.    I’m taking these actions to help North Carolinians who may need urgent care in other states as well as other women across our nation.'
    Even if the federal government wins the case, it’s likely that most abortions will remain outlawed in Idaho, where three major abortion bans have been enacted in the last two years.     In court documents, the medical organizations argued that the ban’s 'life of the mother' provision is too narrow to apply to real-life medical situations and fails to account for how quickly a pregnancy complication can turn deadly.
    In the case of a pregnant patient with severe bleeding, 'how many blood units does she have to lose?    One?    Two?    Five?' the organizations wrote in court documents.    'How fast does she have to be bleeding?    Soaking through two pads an hour?    Three?    How low does her blood pressure need to be?'
    Other professional organizations signing on to the friend-of-the-court brief include the American Medical Association, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, National Medical Association, National Hispanic Medical Association, American Academy of Family Physicians and the American Public Health Association.    The American Hospital Association and the Association of American Medical Colleges wrote a separate brief also supporting the Justice Department.
    The states, meanwhile, pointed out in court documents that abortion bans in other states have already led to delays or denials of emergency medical care.
    California, New York, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Washington state and Washington, D.C., all signed on to the friend-of-the court brief.
    Attorneys representing the state of Idaho and the Idaho Legislature have argued that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade gave states the right to determine if or how abortions will be handled, and that the state law, dubbed the 622 Statute, doesn’t actually present any risk to patients or providers.
    'The Government’s picture of a conflict between (Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act) and the 622 Statue is fabricated and false, without any foundation in fact,' attorney Daniel Bower wrote for the Legislature.
    Treating an ectopic pregnancy is not actually an abortion, and so isn’t barred by the state’s ban, the Legislature contends.    Abortions performed to save the life of the mother won’t be affected by the law, wrote Bower, and any other emergency abortions that might be affected are extremely rare.
    When they do occur, the doctors won’t be prosecuted, Bower wrote in the brief.
    Hannah Schoenbaum contributed and is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative.    Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on under covered issues.
    The federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act requires Medicaid-funded hospitals to provide 'stabilizing' treatment to patients experiencing medical emergencies, and the U.S. Department of Justice says that includes some abortions.

8/19/2022 Judge blocks Florida ‘woke’ law pushed by Gov. DeSantis by Curt Anderson, ASSOCIATED PRESS
A Florida judge has blocked the “Stop WOKE” act, which was championed
by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis. PHELAN M. EBENHACK/AP FILE     ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. – A Florida judge on Thursday declared a Florida law championed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis that restricts race-based conversation and analysis in business and education unconstitutional.
    Tallahassee U.S. District Judge Mark Walker said in a 44-page ruling that the “Stop WOKE” act violates the First Amendment and is impermissibly vague.    Walker also refused to issue a stay that would keep the law in effect during any appeal by the state.
    The law targets what DeSantis has called a “pernicious” ideology exemplified by critical race theory – the idea that racism is systemic in U.S. institutions that serve to perpetuate white dominance in society.
    Walker said the law, as applied to diversity, inclusion and bias training in businesses, turns the First Amendment “upside down” because the state is barring speech by prohibiting discussion of certain concepts in training programs.
    “If Florida truly believes we live in a post-racial society, then let it make its case,” the judge wrote.    “But it cannot win the argument by muzzling its opponents.”
    The governor’s office did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.    DeSantis has repeatedly said any losses at the lower court level on his priorities are likely to be reversed by appeals courts that are generally more conservative.
    The law prohibits teaching or business practices that contend members of one ethnic group are inherently racist and should feel guilt for past actions committed by others.    It also bars the notion that a person’s status as privileged or oppressed is necessarily determined by their race or gender, or that discrimination is acceptable to achieve diversity.
    The ruling Thursday came in one of three lawsuits challenging the Stop Woke act.    It was filed by private entities, Clearwater-based Honeyfund.com and others, claiming their free speech rights are curtailed because the law infringes on company training programs stressing diversity, inclusion, elimination of bias and prevention of workplace harassment.    Companies with 15 or more employees could face civil lawsuits over such practices.
    That lawsuit says Honeyfund – which provides wedding registries – seeks to protect the rights of private employers to “engage in open and free exchange of information with employees to identify and begin to address discrimination and harm” in their organizations.
    “Diversity in the workplace is good for business,” Honeyfund CEO Sara Margulis said on Twitter after the ruling.    “Diversity training often addresses concepts like systemic racism, unconscious bias, and privilege.    This is why @Honeyfund challenged this illegal restriction on free speech.”
    Another lawsuit, which was filed Thursday by college professors and students, claims the law amounts to “racially motivated censorship” that will act to “stifle widespread demands to discuss, study and address systemic inequalities” underscored by the national discussion of race after the killing of George Floyd, who was Black, by Minneapolis police in May 2020.

8/19/2022 Judge Upholds Injunction On Mich. Abortion Ban by OAN Newsroom
(AP Photo)     Getting an abortion remains legal in Michigan after a judge blocked prosecutors from enforcing a near total ban.
    Oakland County Circuit Judge Jacob Cunningham issued a preliminary injunction on Friday.    Cunningham argued that it’s overwhelmingly in the public’s interest to let the people of Michigan decide this matter at the ballot box.
    “As currently applied, the court finds the statute dangerous and chilling to our state’s population of child-bearing people and the medical professionals who care for them,” he said.
    The law has been on the books since 1931. It went back into effect after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June.    It would have allowed abortion providers to be charged with a felony, including manslaughter.    The measure was never enforced after Governor Gretchen Whitmer (D-Mich.) filed a suit to uphold protections in April.    She asked Michigan’s Supreme Court to determine if abortion is constitutionally protected in the state.
    “Weaponizing the criminal law against providers to force pregnancy on our state’s women is simply contrary to notions of due process, equal protection and bodily autonomy in this court’s eyes,” Judge Cunningham said.
    Republican prosecutors in Kent, Macomb and Jackson counties said they should be able to enforce the law.    Attorney David Kallman announced that an appeal is in the works.
    Outside the courthouse, he told reporters that the judge ignored all of the clear legal errors and problems in the case.    Meanwhile, Michigan’s Board of Canvassers is expected to meet at the end of the month to announce whether or not protecting abortion rights will be on the ballot on November eighth.

8/19/2022 Judge: Prosecutors cannot enforce Michigan's abortion ban by JOEY CAPPELLETTI, Associated Press/Report for America
    LANSING, Mich. (AP) — A Michigan judge on Friday blocked county prosecutors from enforcing the state’s 1931 ban on abortion for the foreseeable future, after two days of witness testimony from abortion experts, providers and the state’s chief medical officer.
© Provided by Associated Press FILE - In this Friday, June 24, 2022, file photo, abortion rights
protesters cheer at a rally following the United States Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade,
federally protected right to abortion, outside the state capitol in Lansing, Mich. The Michigan Court of
Appeals ruled Monday, Aug. 1, 2022, that county prosecutors can enforce the state's 91-year-old
abortion ban, paving the way for abortion to become illegal in parts of the state. (AP Photo/Paul Sancya, File)     The ruling follows a state Court of Appeals ruling this month that county prosecutors were not covered by a May order and could enforce the prohibition following the U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade.
    “The harm to the body of women and people capable of pregnancy in not issuing the injunction could not be more real, clear, present and dangerous to the court,” Oakland County Judge Jacob Cunningham said during his ruling Friday.
    David Kallman, an attorney for two Republican County prosecutors, said an appeal is planned.
    “The judge ignored all of the clear legal errors and problems in this case, it appears to me, simply because the issue is abortion,” Kallman told The Associated Press following the hearing.
    Cunningham filed a restraining order against county prosecutors hours after the Aug. 1 appeals court decision and following a request from attorneys representing Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.
    Although a majority of prosecutors in counties where there are abortion clinics have said they will not enforce the ban, Republican prosecutors in Kent, Jackson and Macomb counties have said they should be able to enforce the 1931 law.    Macomb, which is just north of Detroit, and Kent, in western Michigan, are the state's third-and fourth-most populated counties, respectively.
    Cunningham listened to arguments Wednesday and Thursday in Pontiac before granting the preliminary injunction, which is expected to keep abortion legal throughout the state until the Michigan Supreme Court or voters could decide in the fall.
Abortion ban injunction
    In his ruling, Cunningham found all three of the state's witnesses “extremely credible” while dismissing testimony from the defense witnesses as “unhelpful and biased.”
    The 1931 law in Michigan, which was triggered after the U.S. Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, bans abortion in all instances except the life of the mother.    The dormant ban was retroactively blocked from going into effect in May when Judge Elizabeth Gleicher issued a preliminary injunction.
    The state Court of Appeals later said that the preliminary injunction only applied to the attorney general’s office, meaning that providers could get charged with a felony by some county prosecutors.
    While Kallman said during closing arguments Thursday that granting a preliminary injunction isn’t how laws should be changed, attorneys representing Whitmer argued that allowing county prosecutors to decide whether to enforce the 1931 ban would cause confusion.
    “I'm relieved that everyone in this state knows that it doesn’t matter what county you live in now, you are not as a provider going to be prosecuted," Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald said following the ruling.    Oakland is the second-most populated Michigan county. The prosecutor for Wayne County, which includes Detroit and is the state's most populous, had also said she would not pursue such cases.
    A ballot initiative seeking to enshrine abortion rights into the state’s constitution turned in 753,759 signatures in July and is expected to ultimately decide the status abortion access in Michigan.    The amendment awaits final approval for the November ballot by the state’s Board of Canvassers.
    “This court finds it is overwhelmingly in the public's best interest to let the people of the great state of Michigan decide this matter at the ballot box,” Cunningham said Friday.
    The status of abortion in Michigan is expected to drastically impact the battleground state’s November general election, where     Whitmer and Attorney General Dana Nessel, also a Democrat, have made abortion rights a centerpiece of their reelection campaigns.
    “Absent this preliminary injunction, physicians face a very real threat of prosecution depending on where they practice," Nessel said in a statement issued following Friday's ruling.
___
    Joey Cappelletti is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative.    Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.

8/20/2022 Abortion foe eyes Ky. high court - Author of state’s ‘trigger law’ is running for a seat by Deborah Yetter, Louisville Courier Journal USA TODAY NETWORK
Joe Fischer, right, listened as Addia Wuchner, then a state legislator, spoke in favor of
a state abortion law under challenge in federal court. MATT STONE/LOUISVILLE COURIER JOURNAL     With Kentucky’s Supreme Court likely to decide whether a controversial abortion law is constitutional, its author is running for a seat on the state’s highest court in a campaign that has been rebuked for its unusually partisan nature.
    State Rep. Joe Fischer, a consistent foe of abortion during his 23 years as a Republican legislator, sponsored the 2019 “trigger law” that brought an end to abortion in Kentucky once the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade on June 24.
    And now Kentucky’s Supreme Court is considering a legal challenge to that law, the same court Fischer hopes to join next year by defeating incumbent Justice Michelle Keller, a nine-year member of the court and a judge for 16 years.
    While the abortion case may be decided before next year - and, if elected, Fischer likely would have to recuse himself from any involvement - it injects abortion into the race that could affect the outcome, said Stephen Voss, an associate professor of political science at the University of Kentucky.
    “This wouldn’t be the first time that a controversial issue has shaped the judiciary,” Voss said.
    And with two other key seats open on the seven-member court - those of retiring Chief Justice John D. Minton Jr. and Deputy Chief Justice Lisabeth Hughes - how voters feel about abortion or other social issues could make a big difference to the state’s top court, Voss said.
    “The Kentucky judicial system is clearly more moderate than the legislative branch, which has taken a hard swing to the right,” Voss said.    “That realignment rightward still hasn’t hit the courts, and it could.”
    The risk of voters electing judges based on a single, hot-button issue, Voss said, is that “you’re more likely to get hacks.”
    “The fear I have as a political scientist is that when you’re picking judges based on policy issues or ideology, you’re less likely to select for very competent people,” Voss said.
    Abortion itself is on the November ballot with voters asked to decide on an amendment that would eliminate the right to abortion from the state’s constitution.    Fischer also is the author of the 2021 law creating the amendment and made his position clear when he testified about it last year before a legislative committee.
    “Kentucky is one of the most pro-life states in the nation,” he said.    “We cannot afford to allow our state courts to invent a right to abortion and invalidate our state laws protecting unborn children.”
    The law is among more than a dozen in recent years enacted by the state legislature, where Republicans hold a supermajority.
    Fischer, 67, of Fort Thomas, with no experience as a judge, touts his background as a lawyer and his time in the General Assembly writing laws and serving as a past chairman of the House Judiciary Committee on his website.    He also has been promoting himself as “the conservative Republican” in a judicial race the state constitution designates as nonpartisan.
    Fischer did not respond to requests for comment but in a Facebook post appeared to double down on the partisan nature of his campaign, which recently drew criticism from a judicial watchdog group, the Kentucky Judicial Campaign Conduct Committee.
    “The Fischer for Kentucky Supreme Court Campaign Committee is exercising its legal right to tell voters that Joe is a conservative Republican,” said an Aug. 12 post on his campaign page.
    “I have been a registered Republican since I was old enough to vote,” Fischer’s post added.    “This is my political identity and judicial philosophy.”
    Fischer’s race has drawn financial support from Republicans, including fellow GOP lawmakers, and a Sept. 1 fundraiser where U.S. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is to appear as a “special guest.”
    Keller has criticized the partisan nature of Fischer’s campaign and said she does not plan to engage in similar tactics, citing the state constitution as well as a state Supreme Court rule that discourages judges from partisan political activities.
    “I think you’ve got to question the qualifications and fitness of someone who completely ignores the rules of the organization that he’s purporting to join,” Keller said in an interview.
    Keller, 62, who is registered as an Independent, is promoting her experience and ability in a bid for another term representing Kentucky’s 6th Supreme Court judicial district, 13 counties that stretch from Northern Kentucky to Oldham and Shelby counties.
    Her donors are largely lawyers and business people but also include some prominent Democrats, including former Gov. Steve Beshear and his wife Jane.
    Keller, of Fort Mitchell, was appointed to the Supreme Court by Steve Beshear in 2013 and was reelected to her current eight-year term in 2014.    Before that, she served as a judge on the state Court of Appeals for seven years after practicing law for 17 years.    Keller, who earned her law degree while working as a nurse, practiced in multiple areas of the law in state and federal court before becoming a judge.
    “I’ve written nearly 1,000 opinions in the almost 16 years I’ve been on the bench,” Keller said.    “I’m proud of the work I’ve done and the recognition I’ve received.”
    Keller said she finds the partisan tone of Fischer’s campaign disturbing.
    “Our Kentucky Constitution mandates the election of all judges by nonpartisan ballot,” Keller said.
    Josh Douglas, a law professor at the University of Kentucky, said the three contested Supreme Court races and Minton’s retirement could bring major change to the court.
    “I think the Kentucky Supreme Court has been pretty good about generally staying nonpartisan, and that is in large part due to the efforts of Chief Justice Minton, who has really been scrupulous about trying to keep elections nonpartisan and the public’s view of the court as above the political fray,” Douglas said.    “I’m really worried about him leaving the court and the Kentucky judiciary no longer having that mentality at the top.”
    It would be up to the Supreme Court members to elect a chief justice once Minton leaves.
    The other two contested Supreme Court races so far have attracted less attention and have a decidedly less partisan flavor though both, as with the Keller-Fischer race, feature experienced judges running against opponents who have not served on the bench.
    In Minton’s 2nd District, which takes in 17 central and southern Kentucky counties, Kelly Thompson Jr., of Bowling Green, who has served as a state Court of Appeals judge since 2006, is running against Bowling Green lawyer Shawn Marie Alcott.
    Thompson, 74, said he’s promoting his 16 years’ experience as a judge and his lengthy career in law before that as reason for his election to the high court.    So far he’s been visiting dinners, community events and other sites to engage with voters and planning to put out yard signs.
    “We’re having a very positive campaign,” he said.    As for his judicial philosophy, he said, “I’m a fiscal conservative and libertarian as far as our personal rights.”    Regarding abortion, “I’ve never had an abortion case so I can’t point to anything I’ve done,” Thompson said.
    Alcott, 54, of Bowling Green, has not served as a judge.
    In a statement, she cited more than two decades of experience as a practicing lawyer including working as a staff attorney for a former appeals court judge, which “cemented my desire to one day seek an appellate court position.”
    “Sitting as a justice on the Kentucky Supreme Court provides an opportunity to contribute to the important work of the court that is vital to our system of government and the protection of our freedom,” Alcott said.
    Her campaign website says she has lived with her family in Bowling Green for the past 28 years and worked as a staff attorney for former appeals Judge Joseph Huddleston and as an assistant Warren County attorney before entering private practice, concentrating on health law.    She also has served as a volunteer at her children’s schools, in community organizations and at her church, First Baptist of Bowling Green.
    In Jefferson County, Jefferson Circuit Judge Angela McCormick Bisig and lawyer Jason Bowman are running for the 4th District seat of Justice Hughes, who is retiring after 14 years on the court.
    Bisig, 57, who has served as Jefferson County’s chief circuit judge for the past two years, said she’s running on her experience and accomplishments as a judge for 19 years as well as community service with organizations including Dare to Care, the American Red Cross and Louisville’s “sister cities” program.    She also has prosecuted domestic violence and sexual assault cases prior to being elected judge.
    Bisig said she is committed to running a nonpartisan campaign.
    “I really believe in the independence of the judiciary,” she said.    “I think the independence and the neutrality of the judges are important.”
    Bowman, who also is seeking the seat, did not respond to a request for comment.
    His website says he is the founder and lead attorney of Bowman Legal Inc., a firm that focuses on family law.    Bowman has been a lawyer since 2005.
    Douglas, the UK law professor, said whether the lack of judicial experience in candidates is a concern is up to the voters.
    “If we’re going to elect our judges, that’s a decision the voters should make,” he said.    “I question whether it’s a good idea to elect our judges to begin with but those are questions for the voters.”
    Contact reporter Deborah Yetter at dyetter@courier-journal.com or on Twitter at @d_yetter.

8/20/2022 Attorneys argue to delay North Dakota law banning abortion by James MacPherson and Dave Kolpack, ASSOCIATED PRESS
South Central District Judge Bruce Romanick asks a question to Matthew Sagsveen, representing the North Dakota
Attorney General’s office, during a preliminary injunction hearing Friday in Bismarck, N.D. THE BISMARCK TRIBUNE VIA AP     BISMARCK, N.D. – Attorneys for North Dakota’s only abortion clinic asked a judge Friday to delay a trigger law set to ban abortion starting next week, while they pursue a lawsuit challenging the ban on constitutional grounds.
    The abortion ban is set to go into effect on Aug. 26.    The Red River Women’s Clinic in Fargo is seeking a preliminary injunction as part of a lawsuit that says the ban violates the state constitution.
    Burleigh County District Judge Bruce Romanick said he would make a decision on the motion by the end of next week.    He did not say how they would proceed with the lawsuit.
    Romanick put the trigger ban on hold last month when he ruled that Attorney General Drew Wrigley was premature in setting a July 28 closing date.    The judge issued a temporary restraining order that in effect gave the Fargo clinic time to transition to a new location in nearby Moorhead, Minnesota, where abortion remains legal, even as it seeks to block the ban.
    The clinic has been offering services at the new location for the past two weeks.
    The clinic’s lawsuit argues that the state constitution’s guarantees of rights to life, liberty, safety and happiness effectively guarantee a right to abortion.    Lauren Bernstein, an attorney for the clinic, said the ban would not only violate the constitution, it would remove 50 years of abortion access in the state.
    “The stakes really could not be any higher,” Bernstein said during the 45-minute hearing.
    Matthew Sagsveen, an attorney for the state, told a mostly empty courtroom in Bismarck that there is no fundamental right to abortion “either expressed or implied” in the state constitution.
    The Legislature passed North Dakota’s trigger law in 2007 to kick in if the U.S. Supreme Court ever overturned its 1973 ruling establishing nationwide abortion rights.    The high court did so in June.
    The trigger ban would put into effect laws that would make abortion illegal in the state except in cases of rape, incest and the life of the mother, all of which would have to be proven in court.    Otherwise, a doctor who performs an abortion would face a felony.
    Whether North Dakota’s constitution protects a right to abortion has come before state courts before.    A Cass County judge ruled that a 2011 law aimed at regulating medication abortions was unconstitutional, saying it essentially eliminated the procedure and illegally restricted abortion rights.
    The case went to the state Supreme Court, where in 2014 two justices ruled that the North Dakota Constitution does not protect abortion rights, two said it does and one justice said it wasn’t their place to decide.    It takes four justices to declare a law unconstitutional, so the lower court ruling was reversed.
    Before Romanick’s ruling, Steve Morrison, a University of North Dakota professor and expert in abortion law, said he was skeptical that the high court “or any district court judge in North Dakota is going to … start reading into the state constitution’s right to abortion.”
    A GoFundMe page set up to help pay for the Red River clinic’s relocation raised $1 million in the weeks after Roe’s reversal.
    Whether North Dakota’s constitution protects a right to abortion has come before state courts before.    A Cass County judge ruled that a 2011 law aimed at regulating medication abortions was unconstitutional, saying it essentially eliminated the procedure and illegally restricted abortion rights.

8/20/2022 16 more states hope to weigh in on Idaho abortion lawsuit by Rebecca Boone, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    BOISE, Idaho – Sixteen more states are asking to weigh in on the U.S. Department of Justice’s lawsuit against Idaho over its strict abortion ban.
    The Justice Department sued the Republican- led state of Idaho earlier this month, saying the abortion ban set to take effect on Aug. 25 violates a federal law requiring Medicaid-funded hospitals to provide “stabilizing treatment” to patients experiencing medical emergencies.    In July, President Joe Biden’s administration told hospitals that the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, or EMTALA, requires them to provide abortion services if the life of the pregnant person is at risk.
    In court documents filed Friday, Indiana, Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming characterized the federal government’s guidelines as “EMTALA’s grant conditions” and said they do not have the power to preempt state law.
    Using the Supremacy Clause to enforce conditions of federal grants is “fundamentally, a non-starter,” the states said in court documents.
    The states also contend that the Idaho abortion law does not directly conflict with the federal law because it’s possible for hospitals to comply with both, simply by turning down federal funding.
    The Idaho abortion ban makes performing an abortion a felony, but it allows physicians to defend themselves in court by showing that the procedure was necessary to save a patient’s life.
    State governments from across the U.S. are watching the case closely.    Earlier this week, 20 states and Washington., D. C., filed a friend-of-the-court brief siding with the federal government and contending that their own residents would be put at risk should they have a medical emergency while pregnant and in Idaho.    Neighboring states like Oregon and Washington also said they fear the “spillover effect” the abortion ban would create as Idaho patients with ectopic pregnancies or other emergencies are forced to seek out-of-state care.
    Coalitions of major medical associations including the American College of Emergency Physicians, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and others have also filed briefs in the case, saying Idaho’s law is too vague and difficult to medically interpret, and that it would force health care providers to choose between violating state law and being charged with a crime, or violating federal law and facing fines and the loss of federal funding.
    The medical organizations also say the law puts pregnant people in grave danger by limiting or delaying the type of care they can obtain in emergencies.
    U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill is scheduled to hear arguments Monday morning on whether the law should be temporarily stopped from taking effect while the lawsuit moves forward in court.
    Either way, most abortions are now illegal in Idaho.    A law criminalizing performing or assisting in an abortion after about six weeks’ gestation officially went into effect on Friday.    The law includes exceptions for abortions performed in medical emergencies or in cases of rape or incest – as long as the pregnant person provides the physician with a copy of a law enforcement report, which generally takes weeks or months to obtain in Idaho.
    The total abortion ban will supersede the existing ban if it is allowed to go into effect on Thursday.
    Still, abortions have effectively been banned in the state since Aug. 12, when the Idaho Supreme Court said another law allowing potential relatives of an embryo or fetus to sue abortion providers for at least $20,000 could take effect.    Under that law, a rapist would be barred from suing, but a rapist’s family members would be allowed to sue.

8/20/2022 Ruling: Transgender kids can play girls sports in Utah - Students face approval from commission instead by Brady McCombs and Sam Metz, ASSOCIATED PRESS
A 12-year-old transgender swimmer waits by a pool in Utah. RICK BOWMER/AP FILE     SALT LAKE CITY – Transgender girls in Utah will be given the opportunity to participate in girls’ sports as the school year begins, after a judge on Friday reversed a ban pending legal challenges from parents.
    Instead of an outright ban, transgender girls will now be sent before a commission that will determine on a case by case basis if their participation compromises fairness.    Utah’s Republican lawmakers created the commission in a law passed earlier this year as a fallback plan to be implemented in case of an injunction against the law.     The commission is set to go into effect while the court weighs the legal challenge to the outright ban.
    Members have not yet been appointed but will be in the coming weeks, legislative leaders said.
    The state’s association overseeing more than 80,000 students playing high school sports has said only one transgender girl competed in their leagues last year and, with school sports already underway, it’s unclear how many will go before the commission and when its decisions will take effect.    Utah’s ruling marked the latest court development in a nationwide debate over how to navigate a flashpoint issue.
    At least 12 Republican-led states – including Utah – have passed laws banning transgender women or girls in sports based on the premise it gives them an unfair competitive advantage.    Transgender rights advocates counter the rules aren’t just about sports, but another way to demean and attack transgender youth.    Similar cases are underway in states such as Idaho, West Virginia and Indiana.
    Utah’s ban took effect in July after its Republican-supermajority Legislature overrode a veto by Gov. Spencer Cox, also a Republican.
    Utah state Judge Keith Kelly said in the ruling putting the ban on hold that attorneys representing the families of three transgender student-athletes had shown they’ve suffered significant distress by “singling them out for unfavorable treatment as transgender girls.”
    The transgender girls and the parents filed the lawsuit last May, contending the ban violates the Utah Constitution’s guarantees of equal rights and due process.
    The ruling was thrilling news to the girls and their families, said Shannon Minter, legal director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights, who also represented same-sex couples in a landmark court case against Utah last decade.
    “The pressure, the strain this was putting them under was so enormous,” Minter said.    “It is just a huge relief to have that weight lifted.”
    Utah state Sen. Stuart Adams, a Republican, said in a statement Friday that the commission that will now make decisions in a way “to protect equitable and safe competition while preserving the integrity of women’s sports.”
    The commission will include a medical data statistician, a physician with experience about “gender identity healthcare,” a sports physiologist, mental health professional, collegiate athletic trainer, representative of an athletic association and a rotating member who is a coach or official in the sport relevant to each case.
    Minter said he hopes the commission will act merely as a safety net, with the presumption being that transgender girls can play unless there is an obvious issue of competitive fairness.
    “i>How it is done is very important,” Minter said.
    The ruling follows a revelation this week by the Utah High School Activities Association that it secretly investigated a female athlete – without telling her or her parents – after receiving complaints from the parents of two girls she had defeated in competition questioning whether the girl was transgender.
    The investigation – which was roundly criticized by Gov. Cox – determined she indeed was female after poring through her school records dating back to kindergarten, its spokesman David Spatafore told lawmakers this week.    The sequence of events laid out how similar Critics of the ban were upset but said they weren’t surprised by the investigation.    They said it highlighted how the impact of politicizing girls’ sports affected more than transgender student-athletes and subjected all girls to scrutiny in ways they anticipated.
    “It creates such a negative atmosphere based on stereotypes about girls and how they should look,” Minter said.    “It is really is harmful to all the kids in the state.”
    The sequence of events also laid out how officials may pursue complaints now that youth sports and the associations governing them are the subject of state laws.    Spatafore said the complaint was among several the association had looked into in its efforts to comply with the Utah law, which went into effect in July.
    “The pressure, the strain this was putting them under was so enormous.    It is just a huge relief to have that weight lifted.” Shannon Minter
    Legal director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights, who also represented same-sex couples in a landmark court case against Utah last decade

[WHAT ARE THEY TRYING TO DO HERE ATTEMPTING TO CHANGE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS WHICH I DO NOT AGREE WITH BUT WHEN A CERTAIN PARTY IS PROMOTING A GROUP OF PERVERTS ARE IN APPROVAL OF CHILDREN BEING INDOCTRINATED NOT BY CHURCH ENTITIES BUT GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS, TEACHERS AND SCHOOL PERSONNEL, AND POLITICIANS WHICH IS WORSE SINS THAN THE ARTICLE BELOW WHICH IS SEEN AS ANTI-CHRISTIAN SIGNS IN OUR TIMES.]
8/21/2022 Rally pushes change to clergy reporting by Sam Metz, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Protesters gather Friday to gain support for removing the clergy exemption
from mandatory reporting in cases of abuse. Rick Egan/The Salt Lake Tribune via AP     SALT LAKE CITY – Survivors and faith leaders rallied Friday at the Utah State Capitol to demand change to a state law that exempts religious leaders from requirements that they report child sexual abuse brought to their attention in spiritual confessions.
    'If we as a people, as churches and as a state are failing to protect our children, then we are failing,' Lindsey Lundholm, the rally’s organizer, told an audience of more than 100 in Salt Lake City that included survivors of abuse applauding while tears streamed down their faces.
    Lundholm spoke of her firsthand experience of abuse growing up in Idaho as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.    As a young girl and member of the faith widely known as the Mormon church, she said she told a local bishop about her abuse and instead of reporting it to law enforcement, the bishop guided her abuser to seek forgiveness from God.
    Lundholm’s story was one of many shared on the steps of the Capitol, which stands on a hill above the church headquarters and its Salt Lake Temple. Other women also shared their stories, using them to demand lawmakers require clergy report abuse when it’s confessed to them.
    The rally comes two weeks after an Associated Press investigation found the church’s abuse reporting system can be misused by church leaders to divert abuse accusations away from law enforcement and instead to church attorneys who may bury the problem, leaving victims in harm’s way.
    Since its publication, the church has criticized the story as flawed.    In a statement last week, its representatives said the help line 'has everything to do with protecting children and has nothing to do with cover-up,' but did not dispute any of the story’s facts.
    Utah Gov. Spencer Cox and lawmakers from different faith backgrounds and both sides of the aisle have come out in support of changing the state law exempting clergy from mandatory reporting.    But such a law could face an uphill battle in Utah, where the church commands sizable cultural and political influence, counts an estimated two-thirds of residents as members and relies on volunteer clergy members.

8/21/2022 Little change in Kansas abortion recall; 1 county not done by ASSOCIATED PRESS
    TOPEKA, Kan. – Results from eight of nine Kansas counties that recounted ballots found fewer than 35 changed votes from the Aug. 2 election, when voters soundly rejected a proposed amendment that would have removed abortion rights from the state’s constitution.
    The counties faced a 5 p.m. Saturday deadline to complete the hand recounts of ballots cast on Aug. 2. Eight counties finished on time but Sedgwick County officials said they would not meet the deadline.
    Posted results for the eight counties found a total of 13 fewer votes for those favoring tighter abortion restrictions and 19 fewer votes for those wanting to keep existing abortion rights.    Election officials attributed the changes to human error, such as voters making unclear marks on ballots.
    A Sedgwick County spokeswoman said Saturday that after the counting was complete, the election commissioner found things she wanted to check again.    It was unclear what the problems were or when the county would finish its recount.
    The nine counties were required to hand recount the votes at the request of two anti-abortion activists who questioned election procedures but did not provide proof of any specific problems.
    Initial statewide tallies showed the proposed amendment, which would have removed protections for abortion rights from the Kansas Constitution and allowed the Legislature to further restrict abortion or ban it, failed by 18 percentage points, or 165,000 votes.
    Votes were recounted in Douglas County, home to the University of Kansas’ main campus; Johnson County, in suburban Kansas City; Sedgwick County, home to Wichita; Shawnee County, home to Topeka; and Crawford, Harvey, Jefferson, Lyon and Thomas counties. Abortion opponents lost all of those counties except Thomas.

[FOR THOSE WHO DISAGREE OR TREAT THIS AS A ALARM THREAT WITH THIS WILL STAND BEFORE THAT GOD TO ANSWER WHY THEY DO NOT TRUST THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, JACOB AND ISAAC SINCE IT IS WHAT THIS COUNTRY WAS BASED ON THIS PROVIDENCE BY OUR FOREFATHERS WHO FORMED THIS COUNTRY.].
8/21/2022 Alarm over Texas law forcing schools to display ‘In God We Trust’ signs by Samira Asma-Sadeque – The Guardian
    Civil rights advocates are ringing alarm bells about officials distributing “In God We Trust” posters in Texas schools after a state law took effect requiring public campuses to display any donated items bearing that phrase.
© Provided by The Guardian Photograph: Allison Dinner/AFP/Getty Images     “These posters demonstrate the more casual ways a state can impose religion on the public,” Sophie Ellman-Golan of Jews For Racial & Economic Justice (JFREJ) told the Guardian.    “Alone, they’re a basic violation of the separation of church and state.     But in the broader context, it’s hard not to see them as part of the larger Christian nationalist project.”
    The Southlake Anti-Racism Coalition (SARC) said they were “disturbed” by the precedence the posters’ distribution could set.
    “SARC is disturbed by the precedent displaying these posters in every school will set and the chilling effect this blatant intrusion of religion in what should be a secular public institution will have on the student body, especially those who do not practice the dominant Christian faith,” the group said in a statement.
    While the phrase doesn’t explicitly mention any specific religion, many argue that “In God We Trust” has long been used as a tool to forward Christian nationalism.
    Christians were instrumental in putting the phrase on coins during the civil war, Kristina Lee of Colorado State University wrote last year, and has since used the phrase as supposed evidence to prove the United States is a Christian nation.
    The flags’ distribution in Texas is not the first time that a government body has imposed the phrase.
    In Chesapeake, Virginia, the city council ruled in 2021 that every city vehicle was to carry “In God We Trust” motto, a move that would require a budget of about $87,000.
    Ellman-Golan of JFREJ said the issue is deeply connected to other concerns, such as women’s health and education in Texas.
    “We know that state governments in places like Texas are codifying white Christian nationalist patriarchy into law at an alarming rate,” she added.    “The most dangerous examples of this are bans on abortion and gender-affirming care, as well as efforts to censor education.”
    Texas state senator Bryan Hughes, who is Republican and said he is the author of the “In God We Trust Act,” celebrated on Twitter, saying that the motto “asserts our collective trust in a sovereign God.”
    Meanwhile, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim civil rights organization, welcomed the initiative and said this might allow for an opportunity for students to learn about other faiths.
    “The notion of trusting God is common across faiths,” CAIR spokesperson Corey Saylor told the Guardian.    “Applied through that lens, the posters can foster discussions among Texas students about their various faiths and enhance understanding.”
    Saylor did not comment about how safe Texas’s Muslim students might feel in Texas about their religion.    About half of Muslim students in Texas’s Dallas-Fort Worth area have reported being bullied at school over their faith, according to a 2020 CAIR report.
    Sometimes in Texas, a fear of people from non-Christian backgrounds has prompted their being reported to police.
    For instance, in 2015, a 14-year-old Muslim boy in a Texas suburb was arrested after he brought a clock he made to school, and a teacher fearing it was a bomb called police on him.    A few months later, a 12-year-old Sikh boy in another Texas suburb was arrested after a bully told his teacher he was carrying a bomb in his backpack.
    Saylor said the “In God We Trust” initiative’s success depended on “students of minority faiths’ [feeling] supported by educators to express how they understand trusting God.”

8/22/2022 Singapore stops ban on gay sex by Eileen Ng, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia – Singapore announced Sunday that it will decriminalize sex between men by repealing a colonial-era law while protecting the city-state’s traditional norms and its definition of marriage.
    During his speech at the annual National Day Rally, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said he believed it is the “right thing to do now,” as most Singaporeans will now accept it.
    “Private sexual behavior between consenting adults does not raise any law and order issue.    There is no justification to prosecute people for it nor to make it a crime,” Lee said.    “This will bring the law into line with current social mores and, I hope, provide some relief to gay Singaporeans.”
    Lee vowed the repeal will be limited and not shake Singapore’s traditional family and societal norms, including how marriage is defined, what children are taught in schools, what is shown on television and general public conduct.
    He said the government will amend the constitution to ensure that there can be no constitutional challenge to allow same-sex marriage.
    “Even as we repeal Section 377A, we will uphold and safeguard the institution of marriage,” Lee said.    “We have to amend the Constitution to protect it.    And we will do so.”
    Section 377A of the Penal Code was introduced under British colonial rule in the 1930s.    It made sex between men punishable by up to two years in jail.
    Since 2007 when Parliament last debated whether to repeal Section 377A, its position was to keep the law but not enforce it.

8/22/2022 Kansas recount confirms ruling on abortion by Heather Hollingsworth and John Hanna, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Bipartisan counting teams prepared to recount nearly 150,000 ballots in Wichita, Kansas, on Wednesday. A constitutional
amendment that would’ve removed abortion rights from the Kansas Constitution failed. JAIME GREEN/THE WICHITA EAGLE VIA AP     OLATHE, Kan. – A decisive statewide vote in favor of abortion rights in traditionally conservative Kansas was confirmed with a partial hand recount, with fewer than 100 votes changing after the last county reported results Sunday.
    Nine of the state’s 105 counties recounted their votes at the request of Melissa Leavitt, who has pushed for tighter election laws.    A longtime antiabortion activist, Mark Gietzen, is covering most of the costs.     Gietzen acknowledged in an interview that it was unlikely to change the outcome.
    A no vote in the referendum signaled a desire to keep existing abortion protections and a yes vote was for allowing the Legislature to tighten restrictions or ban abortion.    After the recounts, “no” votes lost 87 votes and “yes” gained 6 votes.
    Eight of the counties reported their results by the state’s Saturday deadline, but Sedgwick County delayed releasing its final count until Sunday because spokeswoman Nicole Gibbs said some of the ballots weren’t separated into the correct precincts during the initial recount and had to be resorted Saturday.    She said the number of votes cast overall didn’t change.
    A larger than expected turnout of voters on Aug. 2 rejected a ballot measure that would have removed protections for abortion rights from the Kansas Constitution and given to the Legislature the right to further restrict or ban abortion.    It failed by 18 percentage points, or 165,000 votes statewide.
    The vote drew broad attention because it was the first state referendum on abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June.
    Gietzen, of Wichita, and Leavitt, of Colby, in far northwestern Kansas, have both suggested there might have been problems without pointing to many examples.
    Recounts increasingly are tools to encourage supporters of a candidate or cause to believe an election was stolen rather than lost.    A wave of candidates who have echoed former President Donald Trump’s lie that the 2020 election was rigged have called for recounts after losing their own Republican primaries.
    Kansas law requires a recount if those who ask for it prove they can cover the counties’ costs.    The counties pay only if the outcome changes.
    Leavitt and Gietzen provided credit cards to pay for the nearly $120,000 cost, according to the secretary of state’s office.    Leavitt has an online fundraising page.
    Gietzen said Sunday he doesn’t accept the results of the Sedgwick County recount because of the discrepancy about the way the ballots were sorted and because some of the recount happened Saturday without outside observers present to watch.
    “We still don’t know what happened in Sedgwick County.    I won’t pay for Sedgwick County,” he said.
    He said he’s also concerned about the results statewide because of a report out of Cherokee county in southeast Kansas about the results of one county election being transposed between two candidates when the results were transferred on a thumb drive from one voting machine to a tabulating machine.
    Gietzen said he plans to file a lawsuit Monday seeking a full statewide recall.
    Gietzen said he won’t publicly report the names of private donors helping him finance the recount, even though a state ethics official says it’s required. Gietzen, who leads a small GOP group, the Kansas Republican Assembly, argues that he’s not campaigning for the anti-abortion measure but is instead promoting election integrity.
    Votes were recounted in Douglas County, home to the University of Kansas’ main campus; Johnson County, in suburban Kansas City; Sedgwick County, home to Wichita, Shawnee County, home to Topeka; and Crawford, Harvey, Jefferson, Lyon and Thomas counties.    Abortion opponents lost all of those counties except Thomas.
    In Jefferson County, the margin remained the same, with the pro- and anti-amendment totals declining by four votes each.    Linda Buttron, the county clerk, blamed the change on things like ovals not being darkened and “the challenges of hand counting ballots.”
    In Lyon County, the anti-amendment group lost a vote. County Clerk and Election Officer Tammy Vopat said she wasn’t sure the reason. But she noted: “You have to factor in human error.”
    Johnson County, the most populous in Kansas, faced the biggest recounting challenge because it had the most ballots.    It pulled in workers from different departments to help.    The sorting process took so long that the actual counting didn’t begin until Thursday afternoon.
    “This is almost like doing an Ironman triathlon and having to add on another marathon at the end,” said Fred Sherman, the county’s Election Commissioner.    “So, it is quite a gargantuan process.”

8/23/2022 Recount confirms abortion-rights win - Heather Hollingsworth and John Hanna by ASSOCIATED PRESS Bipartisan teams prepare to recount ballots in Wichita, Kan., last week. Fewer
than 100 votes changed after nine counties did recounts. JAIME GREEN/THE WICHITA EAGLE VIA AP     OLATHE, Kan. – A decisive statewide vote in favor of abortion rights in traditionally conservative Kansas was confirmed with a partial hand recount, with fewer than 100 votes changing after the last county reported results Sunday.
    Nine of the state’s 105 counties recounted their votes at the request of Melissa Leavitt, who has pushed for tighter election laws.    A longtime antiabortion activist, Mark Gietzen, is covering most of the costs. Gietzen acknowledged in an interview that it was unlikely to change the outcome.
    A no vote in the referendum signaled a desire to keep existing abortion protections and a yes vote was for allowing the Legislature to tighten restrictions or ban abortion.    After the recounts, “no” votes lost 87 votes and “yes” gained six.
    Eight of the counties reported their results by the state’s Saturday deadline, but Sedgwick County delayed releasing its final count until Sunday because some of the ballots weren’t separated into the correct precincts during the initial recount and had to be resorted Saturday, spokeswoman Nicole Gibbs said.    She said the number of votes cast overall didn’t change.
    A larger-than-expected turnout of voters on Aug. 2 rejected a ballot measure that would have removed protections for abortion rights from the Kansas Constitution and given to the Legislature the right to further restrict or ban abortion.    It failed by 18 percentage points, or 165,000 votes statewide.
    The vote was the first state referendum on abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June.
    Gietzen, of Wichita, and Leavitt, of Colby, have both suggested there might have been problems without pointing to many examples.
    Kansas law requires a recount if those who ask for it prove they can cover the counties’ costs.    The counties pay only if the outcome changes.
    Leavitt and Gietzen provided credit cards to pay for the nearly $120,000 cost, according to the secretary of state’s office.
    Gietzen said Sunday he doesn’t accept the results of the Sedgwick County recount because of the discrepancy about the way the ballots were sorted and because some of the recount happened Saturday without outside observers present to watch.
    “We still don’t know what happened in Sedgwick County.    I won’t pay for Sedgwick County,” he said.
    He said he’s also concerned about the results statewide because of a report out of Cherokee County in southeast Kansas about the results of one county election being transposed between two candidates when the results were transferred on a thumb drive from one voting machine to a tabulating machine.
    Gietzen said he planned to file a lawsuit Monday seeking a full statewide recount.
    Votes were recounted in Douglas County, home to the University of Kansas’ main campus; Johnson County, in suburban Kansas City; Sedgwick County, home to Wichita; Shawnee County, home to Topeka; and Crawford, Harvey, Jefferson, Lyon and Thomas counties.    Abortion opponents lost all of those except Thomas.
[AS THE MAN SAID 'WE ARE NOT IN KANSAS ANYMORE'.]

8/23/2022 Fla. school cites Bible to bar LGBTQ students by Scott Gleeson, USA TODAY
    A Florida-based Christian school sent out an email informing parents that LGBTQ-identifying students “will be asked to leave the school immediately.”
    According to the email obtained by NBC News, the top administrator of Grace Christian School in Valrico, Florida, Barry McKeen, sent the email to the families for the kindergarten-grade 12 school on June 6. He later confirmed and doubled down on the policy in an Aug. 18 video on the school’s official Facebook page.
    The June email read: “We believe that any form of homosexuality, lesbianism, bisexuality, transgender identity/lifestyle, self-identification, bestiality, incest, fornication, adultery and pornography are sinful in the sight of God and the church.    Students who are found participating in these lifestyles will be asked to leave the school immediately.”
    According to the email, the school said students will be “referred to by the gender on their birth certificate.”
    The email, “Important School Policy Point of Emphasis. ... Please Read,” also emphasized, according to NBC News, a verse from the Bible, Genesis 1:26-28, as a means to condemn “elective sex reassignment, transvestite, transgender, or non-binary gender fluid acts of conduct.”
    Gender is defined as a social construct, whereas sex is defined as by biological differences, according to the National Institutes of Health.
    Messages left by USA TODAY for Grace Christian School on Monday morning were not immediately returned.
    The school’s policies are not new policies, however, the email enforcing them is.    Parents were informed through the June email they must sign documents complying with the standards before students may enroll this month.    In the August Facebook video, McKeen said: “It is true that a student cannot come to our school ... and be transgender or homosexual.    This is rooted in scriptures. ...we have had these policies in our school since day number one in the early 1970s.”

8/24/2022 O’Rourke On Abortion Rights: Texas Women Will ‘Win It Back’ In 2022 by OAN Newsroom
FILE – Democrat Beto O’Rourke listens to a volunteer before a Texas Organizing Project
neighborhood walk in West Dallas in this June 9. (AP Photo/LM Otero, File)     Democrat gubernatorial candidate Beto O’Rourke said the women of Texas are going to win back the right to an abortion in 2022.    During a Tuesday interview, he asserted no thriving democracy that respects the right to vote would end up with a total abortion ban.
    His remarks comes as the state’s trigger law is set to take effect Thursday.    It includes a near-total ban where those performing the procedure could face a life sentence and $100,000 fine.    Meanwhile, a poll conducted by the Texas Politics Project in June showed 78 percent of voters said an abortion should be available in at least some situations.
    “Jane Roe, of course, a Texas woman as were her two attorneys, Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee, who successfully prevailed upon an all-male United States Supreme Court to win protection for that right to privacy to make these very personal and sometimes painful decisions,” stated O’Rourke.    “The women of Texas won that right 50 years ago.    The women of Texas will win it back in 2022.”
    Meanwhile, recent polling from the Dallas Morning News and the University of Texas shows Republican Governor Greg Abbott is up seven points over O’Rourke.

8/25/2022 Gender dysphoria covered by disability law, court rules by Denise Lavoie, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Above: Demonstrators gather on the steps to the Texas Capitol to speak against transgender-related
legislation considered in the state Senate and House, May 20, 2021, in Austin. ERIC GAY/AP FILE     RICHMOND, Va. – A federal ruling that gender dysphoria is covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act could help block conservative political efforts to restrict access to gender-affirming care, advocates and experts say.
    A panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week became the first federal appellate court in the country to find that the 1990 landmark federal law protects transgender people who experience anguish and other symptoms as a result of the disparity between their assigned sex and their gender identity.
    The ruling could become a powerful tool to challenge legislation restricting access to medical care and other accommodations for transgender people, including employment and government benefits, advocates said.
    “It’s a very important and positive ruling to increase people’s access to gender-affirming care,” said Rodrigo Heng-Lehtinen, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality.
    The ruling is binding in the states covered by the Richmond-based 4th Circuit – Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia – but will inevitably be cited in cases in other states, said Kevin Barry, a law professor at Quinnipiac University.
    The decision came in the case of a transgender woman who sued the Fairfax County sheriff in Virginia for housing her in a jail with men.    The decision is not limited to transgender people challenging jail policies, but also applies broadly to all areas of society covered by disability rights law, including employment, government benefits and services and public accommodations, Barry said.
    “This decision destigmatized a health condition – gender dysphoria – and it says that what Congress did in 1990 wasn’t OK,” Barry said.
    The sheriff’s office did not respond to phone messages seeking comment.
    Some Republican leaders who have led efforts to limit access to transition treatment for youths have labeled it a form of child abuse.    Texas Gov. Greg Abbott this year, for instance, ordered the state’s child welfare agency to investigate reports of gender-affirming care for children as abuse.
    A new rule in Florida restricts Medicaid coverage for gender dysphoria treatments for youths and adults.
    The state health agency previously released a report stating that puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and sex reassignment surgery have not been proven safe or effective in treating gender dysphoria.
    And Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is widely touted as a potential 2024 Republican presidential candidate, recently tweeted that children should not be able to take puberty blockers “or mutilate their body by getting a sex change.”
    But leading medical entities contradict those positions, Heng-Lehtinen said.
    “This health care is under attack politically in a lot of the country, but medically all of the credible professionals involved – the American Psychiatric Association, the American Medical Association and others – have all recognized for years that this is essentially primary care,” Heng-Lehtinen said.
    In the case before the 4th Circuit, Kesha Williams was initially assigned to live on the women’s side of the Fairfax County jail when she arrived in 2018.
    Williams told the nurse she is transgender, has gender dysphoria and received hormone treatments for the previous 15 years.    But after she explained that she had not had genital surgery, she said, she was assigned to the men’s section under a policy that inmates must be classified according to their genitals.
    In her lawsuit, Williams said that she was harassed and that her prescribed hormone medication was repeatedly delayed or skipped.    Deputies ignored her requests to refer to her as a woman and instead called her “mister,” “sir,” “he” or “gentleman,” she said.
    Her requests to shower privately and for body searches to be conducted by a female deputy were denied, she said.
    A federal judge granted a motion by the sheriff’s office to dismiss the lawsuit, finding that because the Americans with Disabilities Act excluded “gender identity disorders not resulting from physical impairments,” Williams could not sue under the law.
    A three-judge panel of the 4th Circuit reversed that ruling, sending the case back to U.S. District Court.     The 4th Circuit panel said in its ruling Aug. 16 that there is a distinction between gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria.    The court cited advances in medical understanding that led the American Psychiatric Association to remove gender identity disorder from the current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and to add gender dysphoria, defined in the manual as the “clinically significant distress” felt by some transgender people.    Symptoms can include intense anxiety, depression and suicidal ideation.
    The modern diagnosis of gender dysphoria “affirms that a transgender person’s medical needs are just as deserving of treatment and protection as anyone else’s,” Judge Diana Gribbon Motz wrote in the majority opinion.
    Judge A. Marvin Quattlebaum Jr. dissented in part.
    “Whether we focus on when Congress passed the ADA or look beyond to today, the distinction Williams attempts to draw between gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria fails,” Quattlebaum wrote.

8/25/2022 Idaho can’t enforce abortion ban - Judge bars prosecution in medical emergency by Rebecca Boone, ASSOCIATED PRESS
U.S. Department of Justice attorney Brian Netter, left, and Boise attorney Wendy Olson, center,
talk with Idaho Sen. Melissa Wintrow, right, Boise Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Rev. Sara LaWall,
second from left, and Collister United Methodist Rev. Jenny Willison Hirst, after oral arguments Monday. REBECCA BOONE/AP     A federal judge in Idaho has barred the state from enforcing a strict abortion ban in medical emergencies over concerns that it violates a federal law on emergency care.
    The ruling Wednesday evening came after a federal judge this week in Texas made the opposite call, barring the federal government from enforcing a legal interpretation of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act that would require Texas hospitals to provide abortion services if the health or life of the mother is at risk.
    In Idaho, the ban makes performing an abortion in any “clinically diagnosable pregnancy” a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.    Much of Idaho’s law will still go into effect Thursday, but U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill ruled Wednesday the state cannot prosecute anyone performing an abortion in an emergency medical situation.
    That’s because abortions in those cases appear to fall under a federal health care law requiring Medicare funded hospitals to provide “stabilizing treatment” to patients, Winmill said.
    That includes cases when the health of a pregnant patient is in serious jeopardy, when continuing the pregnancy could result in a serious impairment to a person’s bodily functions, or a serious dysfunction of any bodily organ or part.
    The pause on enforcement in Idaho will continue until a lawsuit challenging the ban is resolved, the judge said in the written ruling.
    The U.S. Department of Justice sued the Republican-led state of Idaho earlier this month, saying the abortion ban set to take effect on Thursday violates the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor (EMTALA)
Act.    Idaho’s law criminalizes all abortions in “clinically diagnosable pregnancies,” but allows physicians to defend themselves in court by arguing the procedure was necessary to avert the death of the mother.
    Idaho Attorney General’s spokesman Scott Graf said his office would not comment on the ruling because the case is still working its way through the courts.
    Winmill said the case wasn’t about abortion rights but about whether state or federal law takes precedence in this situation.    The judge in the Idaho case said it was clear federal law did.
    Winmill said the Idaho law would pose a dilemma for a doctor who felt they had to, under “EMTALA obligations,” perform an abortion to save the life of the mother even though they are banned under state law.
    “At its core, the Supremacy Clause says state law must yield to federal law when it’s impossible to comply with both.    And that’s all this case is about,” Winmill wrote.    “It’s not about the bygone constitutional right to an abortion.”
    In Texas, a federal judge took the opposite approach.    Texas had sued Department of Health and Human Services and Secretary Xavier Becerra last month, arguing the federal law commonly referred to as EMTALA doesn’t require doctors to provide abortions if doing so would violate a state law.
    In a ruling late Tuesday, U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix temporarily blocked the government from enforcing the guidance in Texas, saying it would force physicians to place the health of the pregnant person over that of the fetus or embryo even though EMTALA “is silent as to abortion.”
    Performing an abortion creates an “emergency medical condition” in the fetus or embryo, the judge wrote.
    “Since the statute is silent on the question, the Guidance cannot answer how doctors should weigh risks to both a mother and her unborn child,” the judge’s order said.    “Nor can it, in doing so, create a conflict with state law where one does not exist.    The Guidance was thus unauthorized.”
    The Department of Health and Human Services said it was reviewing the legal decision to determine its next steps.
    White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre called the Texas decision, “a blow to Texans,” saying pregnant women in Texas may now be denied appropriate treatment for conditions such as dangerously high blood pressure or severe bleeding.
    “It’s wrong, it’s backwards, and women may die as a result.    The fight is not over,” Jean-Pierre said in a statement.
    The Department of Health and Human Services issued the guidance in July, weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that abortion is not a constitutional right.    The agency cited EMTALA requirements on medical facilities to determine whether a person seeking treatment might be in labor or whether they face an emergency health situation – or one that could develop into an emergency – and to provide stabilizing treatment.
    Texas argued that the EMTALA guidelines also violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which says some laws must be narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest if they affect individuals’ religious freedoms.
    In Texas, a ban on abortion at all points of a pregnancy is scheduled to take effect Thursday.    It has narrow exceptions for saving the life of the unborn child or woman, preventing a serious health condition from being aggravated or caused by the pregnancy, or removing an ectopic pregnancy.
    Texas clinics have already stopped offering nearly all types of abortion because of uncertainty over whether the state’s 1925 ban can be enforced.    The state also has a ban on abortions after embryonic cardiac activity can be detected, which is generally about six weeks into a pregnancy and often before a woman realizes she’s pregnant.

8/26/2022 Judge puts hold on North Dakota trigger law banning abortion by Dave Kolpack, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Volunteer escorts and others stand outside the Red River Women’s Clinic in Moorhead, Minn.,
on Aug. 10. The clinic moved its services from neighboring Fargo, N.D. DAVE KOLPACK/AP     FARGO, N.D. – A judge on Thursday again blocked a trigger law banning abortion in North Dakota as he weighs arguments from the state’s lone abortion clinic that the law violates the state constitution.
    Burleigh County District Judge Bruce Romanick granted the request for a preliminary injunction as part of a lawsuit brought by the Red River Women’s Clinic in Fargo.
    The ban was set to take effect Friday. The clinic already moved its services a short distance to neighboring Moorhead, Minnesota, where abortion remains legal, even as it seeks to block the North Dakota law.
    Romanick said he was not ruling on the probability of the clinic winning the lawsuit, rather that more time was needed to make a proper judgment.
    He said that even though the clinic moved its operations to Minnesota, the statute would also affect doctors and hospitals, making the decision to delay “still pertinent and appropriate,” the judge said.
    Clinic attorney Tom Dickson told The Associated Press that his team was “gratified” by the ruling.
    “The right of women to make the decisions affecting their personal autonomy should be guaranteed by the North Dakota Constitution,” Dickson said.
    The lawsuit argues that the state constitution’s guarantees of rights to life, liberty, safety and happiness effectively guarantee a right to abortion.
    It’s the second time that Romanick has put the trigger ban on hold. He ruled last month that Attorney General Drew Wrigley was premature in setting a July 28 closing date and issued a temporary restraining order that effectively gave the clinic time to move to Moorhead without a gap in services.
    Wrigley said his office will “continue our efforts to ensure the eventual enforcement of the bipartisan provision signed into law back in 2007.”
    The Legislature passed the law to kick in if the U.S. Supreme Court ever overturned its 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that established nationwide abortion rights.    The high court did so in June.
    The law would make abortion illegal except in cases of rape or incest or when the life of the mother is in danger – any of which would have to be proven in court. Otherwise, a doctor who performs an abortion would face a felony.

8/26/2022 Court: Arkansas can’t ban treatment of transgender kids by Andrew DeMillo, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    LITTLE ROCK, Ark. – A federal appeals court on Thursday said Arkansas can’t enforce its ban on transgender children receiving gender-affirming medical care.     A three-judge panel of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a judge’s ruling temporarily blocking the state from enforcing the 2021 law.    A trial is scheduled for October before the same judge on whether to permanently block the law.
    Arkansas was the first state to enact such a ban, which prohibits doctors from providing gender-confirming hormone treatment, puberty blockers or surgery to anyone under 18 years old, or from referring them to other providers for the treatment.    There are no doctors who perform gender-affirming surgery on minors in the state.
    “Because the minor’s sex at birth determines whether or not the minor can receive certain types of medical care under the law, Act 626 discriminates on the basis of sex,” the court’s ruling Thursday said.
    The American Civil Liberties Union challenged the law on behalf of four transgender youth and their families, as well as two doctors who provide gender- confirming treatments.
    “The Eighth Circuit was abundantly clear that the state’s ban on care does not advance any important governmental interest and the state’s defense of the law is lacking in legal or evidentiary support,” Chase Strangio, deputy director for Transgender Justice at the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project, said in a statement.    “The state has no business categorically singling out this care for prohibition.”
    Arkansas argued that the restriction is within the state’s authority to regulate medical practices.
    Republican Attorney General Leslie Rutledge will ask the full 8th Circuit Court of Appeals to review the ruling, said spokeswoman Amanda Priest, adding that Rutledge was “extremely disappointed in today’s dangerously wrong decision by the three-judge panel.”
    The 8th Circuit covers Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska and the Dakotas.
    The ruling on Arkansas’ law comes after the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals that covers Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia ruled last week that gender dysphoria is covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act.    Experts and advocates have said that decision could help block conservative political efforts to restrict access to gender-affirming care.
    Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson vetoed Arkansas’ ban last year, and GOP lawmakers overrode him.
    Pediatricians, social workers and the parents of transgender youth said the measure would harm a community already at risk for depression and suicide.    Hutchinson has said he would sign such legislation if it only focused on gender confirming surgery.    On Thursday, he called Arkansas’ ban the “most extreme law in the country” and urged lawmakers to scale it back next year “with a narrower focus to protect our children.”
    “No other state has passed such a law that interferes with a parent making health care decisions for minor children based upon a doctor’s recommendations when the recommendations are based upon generally accepted medical guidance,” Hutchinson, who leaves office in January, said in a statement.
    Multiple medical groups, including the American Medical Association, oppose the ban and have said the care is safe if properly administered.    The Justice Department has also opposed the ban as unconstitutional.
    An attorney for the ACLU told the appeals panel in June that reinstating the restriction would create uncertainty for families.
    A federal judge in May blocked a similar law in Alabama.    A Tennessee ban that was enacted last year on transgender treatments for youth, which is limited to providing gender confirming hormone treatment to prepubescent minors, remains in effect.

8/26/2022 Nebraska school officials shut down student newspaper after LGBTQ+ issue by Guardian staff and agency – The Guardian
    Administrators at a Nebraska school closed down the award-winning student newspaper just days after an edition that included articles and editorials on LGBTQ+ issues.
Photograph: McKenna Lamoree/AP© Provided by The Guardian     The action prompted press freedom advocates to decry an act of censorship.
    The staff of Northwest public schools’ 54-year-old Saga newspaper was informed on 19 May of the paper’s elimination, the Grand Island Independent reported.
    Three days earlier, the newspaper had printed its June edition, which included an article titled Pride and prejudice: LGBTQIA+ on the origins of pride month and the history of homophobia.
    It also included an editorial opposing a Florida law that bans some lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity and dubbed by critics as the Don’t Say Gay law.
    Officials overseeing the district, which is based in Grand Island, have not said when or why the decision was made to eliminate the student paper.    But an email from a school employee to the independent cancelling the student paper’s printing services on 22 May said it was “because the school board and superintendent are unhappy with the last issue’s editorial content.”
    The paper’s demise also came a month after its staff was reprimanded for publishing students’ preferred pronouns and names.    District officials told students they could only use names assigned at birth in future.
    Emma Smith, Saga’s assistant editor in 2022, said the student paper was informed that the ban on preferred names was made by the school board.br>     That decision directly affected Saga staff writer Marcus Pennell, a transgender student, who saw his byline changed in the June issue, against his wishes, to his female birth name.
    “It was the first time that the school had officially been, like, ‘We don’t really want you here,’” Pennell said.    “You know, that was a big deal for me<.”
    Northwest principal PJ Smith referred the independent’s questions to district superintendent Jeff Edwards, who declined to answer questions other than to say it was “an administrative decision”
    Some school board members have made no secret of their objection to the Saga’s LGBTQ content, including board president Dan Leiser, who said “most people were upset” with it.
    Board vice president Zach Mader directly cited the pro-LGBTQ+ editorials, adding that if district taxpayers had read the last issue of the Saga, “they would have been like, ‘Holy cow.    What is going on at our school?’”     “It sounds like a ham-fisted attempt to censor students and discriminate based on disagreement with perspectives and articles that were featured in the student newspaper,” said Sara Rips, an attorney for the Nebraska chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.
    Nebraska Press Association attorney Max Kautsch, who specializes in media law, noted that press freedom is protected in the US constitution.

[AS THE ARTICLE BELOW ITS GOOD TO SEE SOMEONE FIGHT BACK AGAINST SCARLET WOMEN SEXUAL DEPRAVITY ON AMERICA.
8/28/2022 Missouri to ban sexual images in school library books by Summer Ballentine, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – A new Missouri law outlawing books with sexually explicit images from school libraries is about to take effect.
    Starting Sunday, it will be a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail or a $2,000 fine for librarians and other educators to give students access to such material.
    The law does not apply to written descriptions of sex or sexual acts; only photos, drawings, videos and other visual depictions are prohibited.
    The law defined explicit sexual material as images 'showing human masturbation, deviate sexual intercourse,' 'sexual intercourse, direct physical stimulation of genitals, sadomasochistic abuse,' or showing human genitals.
    There are exceptions for anatomy, biology, sex education, art and other images considered educational.
    Melissa Corey, the president of the Missouri Association of School Librarians, said the law likely will only apply to certain comic books and graphic novels, which are longer comic books.
    Republican state Sen. Rick Brattin spearheaded the legislation by tacking it on to another bill aimed at protecting sexual assault victims’ rights.    He initially proposed a more expansive ban that would have prohibited written descriptions of sexual acts, but that was scaled back during closed-door negotiations.
    'When you go read the definition of what is outlawed – literal sex acts, graphic human masturbation – these are things that are within the definition, and people are finding this controversial that it should be before kids,' Brattin said. 'I’m really blown away by how controversial this has turned.'
    Democratic state Sen. Barbara Washington said Democrats tried to limit the scope of the law to save books such as Nobel laureate Toni Morrison’s debut novel 'The Bluest Eye,' which is not banned under the new law.
    'We have works of art and books of literature that may have things that may be offensive to some, but taken as a whole would not necessarily be offensive,' Washington said.
    Brattin cited 'Fun Home: A Family Tragicomic' as a book he wants to see removed from schools under the new law.    The graphic memoir is about author Alison Bechdel’s fraught relationship with her late father and includes drawn depictions of masturbation and oral sex.
    Corey said it’s unclear which books, if any, will be pulled from Missouri school libraries.    Those decisions are made at the school district level, and she said schools have policies that outline the formal process for reviewing which books students can access.
    Corey said the association advised librarians to work with local school boards to best follow the law, particularly the exceptions for art and biology.
    Librarians follow district-specific policies in deciding which books to offer Missouri students, Corey said.    She said books are approved for different grade levels based on what educators deem is age-appropriate, meaning high school students and kindergartners do not have access to the same literature.

8/28/2022 Georgia Abortion Restrictions Spark Fresh Debate Over Fetal Personhood by Laura Kusisto, Cameron McWhirter – The Wall Street Journal
    In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade, Georgia is emerging as the lead testing ground for an idea some abortion opponents have touted for decades: that fetuses deserve the same types of legal protections as people after birth.
Georgia Abortion Restrictions Spark Fresh Debate Over Fetal Personhood© Bob Andres/Associated Press     The state is one of about a dozen that have banned many or most abortions since the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ended federal constitutional protections for the procedure.    But Georgia has taken an additional step, declaring that “natural persons include an unborn child,” with potentially wide-ranging implications for everything from taxes to welfare benefits.
    The state’s law bans abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy, with exceptions for medical emergencies, rape or incest, or if a fetus isn’t medically viable.    The law was passed in 2019 but blocked in the courts until it was allowed to move forward about a month ago.
    Ed Setzler, the bill’s Republican author, said the recognition of fetal personhood is the logical extension of abortion bans.    “If at the point of detectable heartbeat we’re going to protect children from the violence of abortion, naturally that protection should apply across Georgia law,” he said.
    Democrats and some legal scholars say the law opens the door for any of the dozens of local Georgia prosecutors to charge women with murder for taking abortion pills or traveling to an abortion clinic in another state.
    “Folks are going to be really surprised just how significant of a law this is,” said Jen Jordan, the Democratic candidate for attorney general and a state senator who voted against the law.
    Republicans say the law isn’t designed to penalize women for abortion.    “Under Georgia law, women cannot be convicted of murder because of this statute,” Mr. Setzler said.
    Agencies in Georgia are now grappling with how to implement the law.    The Georgia Department of Revenue recently issued guidance that said taxpayers with an unborn child “with a detectable human heartbeat” can claim a personal income tax exemption of $3,000 per unborn child.    The department declined to explain how someone would provide proof of an unborn child, or what should happen in the event a woman miscarries after claiming the exemption.    The department will answer further questions about the impact of the law on taxes later this year, a spokesman said in an email.
    The author of the bill said it could also allow pregnant women to drive in commuter lanes that require more than one passenger.    The state Department of Transportation said the issue would be one for local law enforcement to decide.
    Elizabeth Reed, leadership director with the Georgia Life Alliance, which helped write the law, said the group has connected lawyers with women seeking child support during pregnancy.    The new Georgia measure says that a court can award support up to the full amount of medical and pregnancy-related expenses.
    “I think it will also just inspire or ignite men, a little bit forcibly, to take responsibility for these things and be committed to be a father,” Ms. Reed said.
    A 2019 letter from the state’s legislative counsel said the law was also likely to increase demand for public benefits because undocumented immigrants could potentially be eligible for certain support, including food stamps and Medicaid, through their unborn children, who would be U.S. citizens at birth.    The Georgia Department of Human Services, which administers such benefits, didn’t respond to questions seeking comment.
    Efforts to implement personhood protections for fetuses have been largely unsuccessful over many years.
    Voters rejected efforts to pass personhood amendments to state constitutions in conservative states such as Mississippi and North Dakota, while a number of laws with similar provisions were blocked by the courts, which said they would violate protections for abortion established in Roe v. Wade.
    A federal appeals court allowed Georgia’s abortion law, including the personhood component, to go into effect after the Dobbs decision, but abortion providers are still challenging the personhood part of the statute, arguing it is vague and should be unenforceable.
    Both sides in the abortion debate say the Supreme Court’s decision to overrule Roe has given the push for personhood laws new momentum.
    “For years, they’ve been viewed as promoted by fringe actors and never going to go anywhere.    I think post-Dobbs we can’t assume that anymore,” said Jessica Arons, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union.
    Josh Craddock, a scholar with the James Wilson Institute, a conservative think tank that opposes abortion, said the work of legislators on both the federal and state level won’t be done until unborn children have a full spectrum of legal rights.    “Talk isn’t enough, there has to be action as well, because fetal personhood is the capstone for the pro-life movement,” Mr. Craddock said.
    Legislators, he said, can craft rights to take into account the differences between unborn children and others in society.
    Georgia’s law is the most explicit in enumerating the rights granted to unborn children, but National Advocates for Pregnant Women, a left-leaning legal organization, says there are at least 10 other states that have fetal personhood language on the books that could be interpreted similarly to Georgia’s law after the Dobbs decision.    A bill introduced in Ohio in July seeks to recognize personhood from conception, a proposal that could test the political appetite for such measures post-Dobbs.
    A decision this week by a Texas judge temporarily blocking the Biden administration from requiring doctors to perform abortions in certain emergencies also could provide a boost for the fetal personhood movement.    The judge said medical providers must balance the interests of a fetus against the interests of a pregnant woman when deciding whether to perform an abortion.
    With elections in November looming, Democrats have sought to make the Georgia law a top political issue, especially with female voters.    Campaign officials for Stacey Abrams, the Democratic candidate for governor, have criticized the personhood law and blanketed metro Atlanta television stations in recent weeks with a commercial showing tearful, angry women.
    Republican Gov. Brian Kemp’s remarks on abortion and personhood have been limited during the campaign.    After the Supreme Court’s ruling, he said he was overjoyed by the decision and pledged that the state would focus on supporting adoption and other services.    His campaign literature and ads make no mention of abortion but focus instead on improving the economy and battling inflation, which his campaign blames on the Democratic Party.
    Write to Laura Kusisto at laura.kusisto@wsj.com and Cameron McWhirter at cameron.mcwhirter@wsj.com

8/29/2022 Pennsylvania mom rips school district's 'double standard' for allowing 'Satanic Club' event by Bailee Hill – FOX News
Pennsylvania parents outraged over district allowing 'Satan Club' event
    Pennsylvania parents are outraged after a school district allowed a "Satanic Club" event amid back-to-school festivities as students return to the classroom this fall.
    Northern York County School parent Ashley Lynn Crider joined "Fox & Friends First" Monday to discuss what she calls the district's "double standard" as it pertains to religious liberty.
    "If they do a Bible study, the church has to pay to bus the students off of school grounds, and then they bring the students back," Crider told co-host Todd Piro.    "We send our kids to school to get an education.    Anything beyond that is home life or in your community."
NORTH CAROLINA PARENTS OUTRAGED OVER SCHOOL'S ‘SATAN CLUB’
    "It doesn't matter what any child believes, or their family believes… this is public school," she continued.    "We send our children to school to get an education, not for all this other stuff that is meant for outside of school."
    Crider said many students are "not okay" with the district allowing the Satanic Temple event, and those advocating for the event are not members of the school district.
    She also mentioned she was even silenced when trying to sound the alarm during a school board meeting.
    "They cut my mic off, I was mad," Crider said.    "They shut my mic off… They don't address anything at those meetings… They're just here like they're to listen to everybody… so nothing's ever addressed."
FILE: The Baphomet statue is seen in the conversion room at the Satanic Temple where a "Hell House" is being held
in Salem, Massachusett on October 8, 2019. JOSEPH PREZIOSO/AFP via Getty Images© JOSEPH PREZIOSO/AFP via Getty Images     "People that were there for the Satanic Club, like I said, they couldn't even talk during that meeting because they're not in the community," she continued.
    The co-founder of the Satanic Temple, Lucian Graves, released a statement defending the event despite widespread backlash.
    "We don't decry or begrudge anybody having a prayer event or anything like that," Graves's statement read.    "It does become a problem, a serious problem when you allow a back-to-school prayer event, but you don't allow any other religious representation."
    All right.    Bringing God back into public schools.
Texas schools to put up donated 'In God We Trust' posters
    The Northern York County School District also responded to the community's outrage saying, "As a public school district, the use of our school facilities must be permitted without discrimination.    We cannot and do not arbitrarily pick and choose which organizations may or may not use our facilities.    If we allow one organization, we must allow all organizations."
    "In approving any request, the school district does not endorse the activity of any outside organization that rents our facilities," the statement continued.    "Nor are these entities permitted to use the school district's name or logo."

8/30/2022 California may act as US refuge for transgender youth by Don Thompson, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Flags promoting LGBTQ+ and transgender pride fly above Oracle Park in San Francisco as streamers are shot
into the air before a baseball game between the Giants and Chicago Cubs in June. DARREN YAMASHITA/USA TODAY     SACRAMENTO, Calif. – California would present itself as a haven for transgender youth facing discrimination in other states under a bill that advanced Monday, much as it is positioning itself as a sanctuary for those seeking abortions.
    The Assembly approved the measure without debate, 48-16, sending it to the Senate for a final vote before lawmakers adjourn at month’s end.
    The legislation is designed to provide legal refuge to parents from other states who risk having their transgender children taken away or being criminally prosecuted if they support their children’s access to gender-affirming procedures and other health care.
    Democratic Sen. Scott Wiener sought the measure in response to actions in several Republican-dominated states including Arkansas, Tennessee and Texas.    He said 19 other states have since introduced similar “trans refuge state” bills.
    “Trans kids and their parents are being criminalized and used as political punching bags by right-wing zealots,” he said in a statement.    “No one should ever have to worry about being separated from their child simply for allowing that child to be who they are.”
    Conservative groups argued the bill could shield parents who use it as a pretext.
    The bill mimics a new California law that bars the enforcement of civil judgments against doctors who perform abortions on patients from other states.    It’s among several measures designed to make California a sanctuary for people seeking or providing abortions.
    The transgender bill would similarly reject any out-of-state court judgments removing transgender children from their parents’ custody because they allowed their children to receive gender-affirming healthcare.
    It would also bar California health officials from complying with out-of-state subpoenas seeking medical or related information about people who travel to California for gender-affirming care.
    The measure would also prohibit arrests or extraditions of people charged with violating another state’s law that criminalizes allowing a person to receive or provide gender-affirming health care.    Brad Dacus, president of the conservative nonprofit Pacific Justice Institute, said it would allow parents to bring their children to California “under the guise of securing genital surgeries,” a move he equated to “kidnapping children from conservative states.”
    It would “make California a safe haven for child abductors and predators” and “condone the taking of children from other states in violation of court orders,” he warned in a fundraising letter to supporters.
    Greg Burt of the California Family Council said the bill “declares war on parents throughout the country who don’t want their children sterilized because of their gender dysphoria.”

8/30/2022 Pope meets with cardinals on future direction of church by FRANCES D'EMILIO, Associated Press
    ROME (AP) — Pope Francis on Tuesday wrapped up two days of closed-door meetings with about 180 cardinals, many of them young enough to elect a future pontiff, including discussions about how the Catholic Church's governance could be made more inclusive.
Pope Francis speaks to cardinals in St. Peter's Basilica at The Vatican during a mass he celebrated
for the newly-created cardinals, Tuesday, Aug. 30, 2022, that concludes a two-day consistory on the
Praedicate Evangelium (Preach the Gospel) apostolic constitution reforming the Roman Curia which was
promulgated in March. Francis created 20 new cardinals on Saturday. (AP Photo/Andrew Medichini) © Provided by Associated Press A Vatican Swiss Guard stands at ease during a mass for the new cardinals celebrated by Pope Francis
in St. Peter's Basilica at The Vatican Tuesday, Aug. 30, 2022, that concludes a two-day consistory on the
Praedicate Evangelium (Preach the Gospel) apostolic constitution reforming the Roman Curia which was promulgated
in March. Francis created 20 new cardinals on Saturday. (AP Photo/Andrew Medichini) © Provided by Associated Press     The sessions focused on a new Apostolic constitution that, among other things, allows lay people to head important Vatican offices, envisioning greater decision-making roles for them, including women.
Newly-created Cardinal Robert Walter McElroy, third from left, Bishop of San Diego, CA, leaves at the end of a mass for the new
cardinals celebrated by Pope Francis in St. Peter's Basilica at The Vatican Tuesday, Aug. 30, 2022. The mass concludes a two-day
consistory on the Praedicate Evangelium (Preach the Gospel) apostolic constitution reforming the Roman Curia which was
promulgated in March. Francis created 20 new cardinals on Saturday. (AP Photo/Andrew Medichini) © Provided by Associated Press     But since the church has closed the door to women in the priesthood, the most prestigious, and ultimately most powerful roles — including that of a pontiff — remain the realm of men.
    The reforms also lend more institutional weight to efforts to fight clerical sex abuse.    The document, made public earlier this year, replaced the constitution written by St. John Paul II in 1988.
    Francis on Saturday raised 20 churchmen to the rank of cardinal, including 16 younger than 80 and thus eligible to vote in a conclave to elect his successor, when the time comes.
    Until Pope Benedict XVI resigned in 2013, the first pontiff in almost 600 years to do so, conclaves in recent centuries had followed the death of popes.    Francis, who is 85, has said that resignation can be a valid option for pontiffs who can't adequately carry out their role as leader of the world's more than 1.3 billion Catholics.
Pope Francis waives to cardinals during a mass he celebrated in St. Peter's Basilica at The Vatican
Tuesday, Aug. 30, 2022, for the new cardinals. The mass concludes a two-day consistory on the Praedicate
Evangelium (Preach the Gospel) apostolic constitution reforming the Roman Curia which was promulgated in
March. Francis created 20 new cardinals on Saturday. (AP Photo/Andrew Medichini) © Provided by Associated Press     But he has brushed off talk that he is contemplating stepping down soon despite health problems, including a bad knee that necessitates frequent wheelchair use.
    In his homily at a Mass in St. Peter's Basilica to close out the meetings, Francis offered no details about this week's discussions.    But he exhorted the cardinals, known as the “princes of the church,” to be on guard against the “cancer, the woodworm, of worldly spirituality."
    While in Rome these days, cardinals from around the world could size each other up. Encounters, including informal ones, allow them to see who might have the potential to become a future pope as well as to ponder possible alliances among geographical groupings or among like-minded churchmen from more conservative or more progressive factions.
Pope Francis gives his blessing during a mass he celebrated in St. Peter's Basilica at The Vatican
Tuesday, Aug. 30, 2022, for the new cardinals. The mass concludes a two-day consistory on the Praedicate Evangelium
(Preach the Gospel) apostolic constitution reforming the Roman Curia which was promulgated in March. Francis
created 20 new cardinals on Saturday. (AP Photo/Andrew Medichini) © Provided by Associated Press     The Vatican said among themes discussed were the role of lay persons, financial transparency, the managerial structure of the Vatican bureaucracy as well as how to “announce the Gospel in an epoch like the current one.”
    Francis has worked to reform the Holy See's finances, including its multimillion-dollar investments, one of which is at the heart of a trial underway at the Holy See and involving, among others, a Vatican cardinal.
    Francis has tried to make the church more inviting to those who might feel unwelcome, including LGBTQ Catholics, or undervalued, including women.
    On Monday, a half-dozen female activists protested as cardinals, with their iconic red headgear, flocked to the meeting on Vatican grounds.    The women held up red parasols with slogans reading, “Sexism is a Cardinal Sin.”    Other slogans were: “It's reigning men” and “Ordain Women.”
Cardinals attend a mass celebrated by Pope Francis in St. Peter's Basilica at The Vatican for the
newly-created cardinals, Tuesday, Aug. 30, 2022, that concludes a two-day consistory on the Praedicate Evangelium
(Preach the Gospel) apostolic constitution reforming the Roman Curia which was promulgated in March. Francis
created 20 new cardinals on Saturday. (AP Photo/Andrew Medichini) © Provided by Associated Press     One protester, Miriam Duignan, lamented that the cardinals were "going to talk about the future of the church without half of the church.”
    Sabrina Sergi contributed to this report.
Pope Francis speaks to cardinals during a mass he celebrated in St. Peter's Basilica at The Vatican
Tuesday, Aug. 30, 2022, for the new cardinals. The mass concludes a two-day consistory on the Praedicate
Evangelium (Preach the Gospel) apostolic constitution reforming the Roman Curia which was promulgated in March.
Francis created 20 new cardinals on Saturday. (AP Photo/Andrew Medichini) © Provided by Associated Press A Vatican Swiss Guard stands at ease during a mass for the new cardinals celebrated by Pope Francis in
St. Peter's Basilica at The Vatican Tuesday, Aug. 30, 2022. The mass concludes a two-day consistory on the
Praedicate Evangelium (Preach the Gospel) apostolic constitution reforming the Roman Curia which was
promulgated in March. Francis created 20 new cardinals on Saturday. (AP Photo/Andrew Medichini) © Provided by Associated Press Pope Francis prepares to leave at the end of a mass he celebrated in St. Peter's Basilica at The Vatican Tuesday,
Aug. 30, 2022, for the new cardinals. The mass concludes a two-day consistory on the Praedicate Evangelium
(Preach the Gospel) apostolic constitution reforming the Roman Curia which was promulgated in March.
Francis created 20 new cardinals on Saturday. (AP Photo/Andrew Medichini) © Provided by Associated Press Pope Francis sits during a mass he celebrated in St. Peter's Basilica at The Vatican Tuesday,
Aug. 30, 2022, for the new cardinals. The mass concludes a two-day consistory on the Praedicate Evangelium
(Preach the Gospel) apostolic constitution reforming the Roman Curia which was promulgated in March.
Francis created 20 new cardinals on Saturday. (AP Photo/Andrew Medichini) © Provided by Associated Press
8/30/2022 Court upholds ACA injunction for religious groups by ASSOCIATED PRESS
    WICHITA FALLS, Texas – A federal appeals court on Monday upheld a Texas federal court ruling that exempts a group of religious health care providers from the abortion and gender rights requirements of the Affordable Care Act.
    In an 18-page opinion filed Friday, the three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans upheld the permanent injunction by U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor in Wichita Falls, Texas.
    The Franciscan Alliance, a Catholic hospital network in Indiana and Illinois, and the Christian Medical & Dental Associations and their 19,000 members nationwide sued to block the Biden administration from enforcing ACA provisions they feared would require them to perform abortions or gender-transition treatment.
    In his August 2021 ruling, O’Connor interpreted regulations of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services as forcing the plaintiffs to choose between their beliefs and their livelihood, resulting in “irreparable injury.”
    The Justice Department, which represented HHS in its appeal, did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

8/31/2022 SC House approves abortion ban with exceptions by Jeffrey Collins and James Pollard, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Protesters gather outside the statehouse in Columbia, S.C., on Tuesday in opposition to
a proposed abortion ban by the South Carolina House of Representatives. JAMES POLLARD/AP     COLUMBIA, S.C. – The South Carolina House on Tuesday approved a bill that outlaws abortion except in the cases of pregnancies caused by rape or incest.
    The chamber initially rejected the bill without the exceptions by eight votes.    But once Republicans saw the outcome, they quickly went through a number of complex procedures and votes to bring the bill back from the brink of failure.
    The exceptions were added by enough lawmakers shouting “aye” and the bill passed by a vote of 67-38.
    The bill has one more routine vote before it goes to the Senate, where stricter bans on abortions have seen tougher fights.
    The bill allows abortions up to 12 weeks after conception if a woman tells a doctor she was raped.    The doctor has to tell the woman he is going to report the rape to the county sheriff and has 24 hours after the procedure to give deputies the woman’s name and contact information.    It also allows abortions to save a mother’s life.
    Some of the House’s most conservative lawmakers said Monday they would not support a bill with the rape and incest exceptions, but when it came to a final vote, they changed their minds.
    “But here’s the thing – at the end of the day we passed a good pro-life bill in South Carolina,” said Republican Rep. John McCravy, who shepherded the bill through the chamber.
    The dizzying parliamentary maneuvers happened after Democrats joined with those conservatives to try to keep the bill as restrictive as possible.
    Republicans accused Democrats of playing politics as they also voted down an amendment supporters said would allow abortions for women carrying fetuses with medical problems leaving them unlikely to be born alive.
    “The ladies of South Carolina, they are gambling with your body,” Republican Rep Micah Caskey said.
    Democrats said they didn’t want to debate abortion again after the General Assembly agreed to a six-week ban in 2021, but Republicans decided to call a special session after Roe v. Wade was overturned.
    “It is not our bill.    We’re not the ones trying to control their bodies,” Democratic Rep. Leon Stavrinakis said.
    The leader of a non-profit organization that fights for women’s health and economic rights was offended that Republicans saw the debate as a game.
    “We’ve got to get past the point of seeing this as a political game and start seeing the impact it has on real peoples lives.    And I’m afraid that’s been lost in the Statehouse today,” said Ann Warner, CEO of the Women’s Rights and Empowerment Network.
    Republicans who have nearly twice as many members as Democrats, took an hour break just before the vote to get their most conservative members to agree to the exceptions.
    Other changes voted down in the debate included language supporters said would protect in vitro fertilization and birth control, and proposals that would allow prosecutors to charge a woman who gets an abortion with murder.
    About 100 people gathered in the Statehouse lobby for the debate.    They chanted phrases like “Abortion is health care” and “My body, my choice” and drew honks from passing cars.    Law enforcement closed the House gallery Tuesday.
    South Carolina currently has a six week ban but the South Carolina Supreme Court suspended the law earlier this month while the justices decide on a Planned Parenthood lawsuit that says the ban is an unreasonable invasion of privacy under the state constitution.    The decision leaves South Carolina’s abortion ban at 20 weeks for now.
    Republican Gov. Henry McMaster hasn’t given his opinion on this specific bill but has said he would like to see a day where there are no abortions in the state.

8/31/2022 Ind. abortion clinics sue to block law - Operators say state’s near-total ban violates ‘fundamental rights’ by Tom Davies and Arleigh Rodgers, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Indiana Republican Senate President Pro-Tem Rodric Bray, left, and Sen. Sue Glick of LaGrange speak
with reporters Aug. 5 in Indianapolis after the state became the first to pass an abortion bill
in its Legislature after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June. ARLEIGH RODGERS/AP     INDIANAPOLIS – Indiana abortion clinic operators filed a lawsuit Tuesday seeking to block the state’s near-total ban on abortions before it takes effect in about two weeks.
    The lawsuit filed in a Monroe County court claims the ban “strips away the fundamental rights of people seeking abortion care” in violation of the Indiana Constitution.    It asks for a judge to block the law from going into effect on Sept. 15, arguing the ban “will infringe on Hoosiers’ right to privacy, violate Indiana’s guarantee of equal privileges and immunities, and includes unconstitutionally vague language.”
    Indiana’s Republican-dominated Legislature approved the tighter abortion restrictions during a two-week special legislative session that ended Aug. 5, making it the first state to do so since the U.S. Supreme Court eliminated federal protections for abortions by overturning Roe v. Wade in June.
    The Indiana law includes exceptions, allowing abortions in cases of rape and incest, before 10 weeks post-fertilization; to protect the life and physical health of the mother; and if a fetus is diagnosed with a lethal anomaly.
    The legal question of whether the Indiana Constitution protects abortion rights is unclear, said Ken Falk, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, which filed the lawsuit.
    Falk pointed to a 2004 state appeals court decision that said privacy was a core value under the state constitution that extended to all residents, including women seeking an abortion.    But the Indiana Supreme Court later upheld a law mandating an 18-hour waiting period before a woman could undergo an abortion while not deciding whether the state constitution included a right to privacy or abortion.
    The leader of Indiana’s most prominent anti-abortion group argued the state constitution protects life as among the “inalienable rights.”
    “We are confident the state will prevail and pray the new law is not blocked from going into effect on September 15, knowing that any delay will mean the indiscriminate killing of unborn children will continue at abortion clinics across Indiana,” Indiana Right to Life CEO Mike Fichter said in a statement.
    Jennifer Drobac, an Indiana University law professor, said she believed the argument that the state constitution prohibits lawmakers from stripping legal privileges from some residents that are available to others is a strong argument against the abortion ban.
    “When you look at people who become pregnant, their medical care is being regulated in a way that the medical care of people who do not become pregnant is not being regulated,” she said.    “Men, for example, can access the full panoply of available medical resources in a health situation.”
    Under new Indiana law, abortions could be performed only in hospitals or outpatient centers owned by hospitals, meaning all abortion clinics would lose their licenses.    Any doctors found to have performed an illegal abortion would be stripped of their state medical licenses and could face felony criminal charges punishable by up to six years in prison.
    Indiana’s ban followed the political firestorm over a 10-year-old rape victim who traveled to the state from neighboring Ohio to end her pregnancy.    The case gained wide attention when an Indianapolis doctor said the child came to Indiana because of Ohio’s “fetal heartbeat” ban.
    The lawsuit was filed on behalf of abortion-rights supporters including Planned Parenthood, which operates four of Indiana’s seven licensed abortion clinics, along with groups that operate two of the other clinics and a doctor who performs abortions.
    It will be heard by a judge in southern Indiana’s Monroe County, which includes the liberal-leaning city of Bloomington and Indiana University’s main campus.
    All nine of the county’s nine judges are Democrats, while all other counties with abortion clinics have judges who’ve either been elected as Republicans or been appointed by Republican governors.
    The ACLU’s Falk said the suit was filed in Monroe County because an abortion clinic is located there but did not respond to a question about whether the group was seeking a friendly judge.
    Drobac said she believed filing in the complaint in Bloomington could be where the ban opponents “have the greatest opportunity for success.”
    Republican legislative leaders said they believed the abortion restrictions would be upheld by the courts.
    “We set out to pass a bill in the special session that would protect life and support mothers and babies, and that’s what we did,” Senate President Pro Tem Rodric Bray said in a statement.    “It was always our intent to draft a bill that could withstand a constitutional challenge, and I hope to see that will be the case.”
    Under Indiana law, abortions could be performed only in hospitals or outpatient centers owned by hospitals, meaning all abortion clinics would lose their licenses.
People watch from the gallery before a vote is held on Senate Bill 1 during a special session on
Aug. 5 at the Indiana Statehouse in Indianapolis. The bill bans abortions at zero weeks except in the cases
of rape, incest or to protect the life and physical health of the mother. JENNA WATSON/INDIANAPOLIS STAR
8/31/2022 Pope meets with cardinals on future direction of church by Frances D’Emilio, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Pope Francis speaks to cardinals during Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican on Tuesday. ANDREW MEDICHINI/AP     ROME – Pope Francis on Tuesday wrapped up two days of closed-door meetings with about 180 cardinals, many of them young enough to elect a future pontiff, including discussions about how the Catholic Church’s governance could be made more inclusive.
    The sessions focused on a new Apostolic constitution that, among other things, allows lay people to head important Vatican offices, envisioning greater decision-making roles for them, including women.
    But since the church has closed the door to women in the priesthood, the most prestigious, and ultimately most powerful roles – including that of a pontiff – remain the realm of men.
    The reforms also lend more institutional weight to efforts to fight clerical sex abuse.    The document, made public earlier this year, replaced the constitution written by St. John Paul II in 1988.
    Francis on Saturday raised 20 churchmen to the rank of cardinal, including 16 younger than 80 and thus eligible to vote in a conclave to elect his successor, when the time comes.
    Until Pope Benedict XVI resigned in 2013, the first pontiff in almost 600 years to do so, conclaves in recent centuries had followed the death of popes.    Francis, who is 85, has said that resignation can be a valid option for pontiffs who can’t adequately carry out their role as leader of the world’s more than 1.3 billion Catholics.    But he has brushed off talk that he is contemplating stepping down soon despite health problems, including a bad knee that necessitates frequent wheelchair use.
    In his homily at a Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica to close out the meetings, Francis offered no details about this week’s discussions.    But he exhorted the cardinals, known as the “princes of the church,” to be on guard against the “cancer, the woodworm, of worldly spirituality.”
    While in Rome these days, cardinals from around the world could size each other up.    Encounters, including informal ones, allow them to see who might have the potential to become a future pope as well as to ponder possible alliances among geographical groupings or among like-minded churchmen from more conservative or more progressive factions.    The Vatican said among themes discussed were the role of lay persons, financial transparency, the managerial structure of the Vatican bureaucracy as well as how to “announce the Gospel in an epoch like the current one.”
    Francis has worked to reform the Holy See’s finances, including its multimillion-dollar investments, one of which is at the heart of a trial underway at the Holy See and involving, among others, a Vatican cardinal.
    Francis has tried to make the church more inviting to those who might feel unwelcome, including LGBTQ Catholics, or undervalued, including women.
    On Monday, a half-dozen female activists protested as cardinals, with their iconic red headgear, flocked to the meeting on Vatican grounds.    The women held up red parasols with slogans reading, “Sexism is a Cardinal Sin.”    Other slogans were: “It’s reigning men” and “Ordain Women.”
    One protester, Miriam Duignan, lamented that the cardinals were “going to talk about the future of the church without half of the church.”

9/1/2022 Abortion ban reaches Senate in S. Carolina despite GOP factions by James Pollard, ASSOCIATED PRESS/REPORT FOR AMERICA
Much of the landscape has changed since South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster signed the state’s temporarily
blocked abortion ban around six weeks at the presence of cardiac activity. JEFFREY COLLINS/AP FILE     COLUMBIA, S.C. – While the results of last month’s Kansas abortion vote have shaken some Republicans’ appetite for additional restrictions, South Carolina lawmakers on Wednesday advanced a ban with limited exceptions.
    By a 67-35 vote, the South Carolina House sent the Senate a bill banning abortion with exceptions only when the pregnancy risks the mother’s health or up to 12 weeks when it is the result of rape or incest.
    But much of the landscape has changed since South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster signed the state’s temporarily blocked ban around six weeks at the presence of cardiac activity.    Now, members of a state Republican Party divided on the issue’s details are no longer constrained by federal law.
    Conservative lawmakers have been emboldened to pursue further restrictions since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.    But factions within the party were made plain Tuesday when Republican leadership called a nearly two-hour recess to convene members before the House ultimately passed an abortion ban with limited exceptions.
    “We knew that we were all over the place,” Republican Rep. Davey Hiott said Tuesday evening of the caucus meeting.    “If I told you it was pleasant in there I’d be lying to you.”
    “We have no idea what the Senate will do,” Hiott, the House majority leader, added.    “Our goal was to get a bill over there that we were comfortable with.”
    Those shifting fault lines will determine whether the upper chamber follows suit or carves out a new proposal when lawmakers convene next week.
    At a Monday news conference, Republican Sen. Richard Cash and Rep. Stewart Jones said they represented a “growing consensus” that would not commit to voting for a proposal that included exceptions outside of protections for a mother’s life.
    But that faction ultimately lost in the House when Republicans – by a voice vote – added exceptions for pregnancies up to 12 weeks caused by rape or incest.    Jones did not vote on the bill’s final passage.    While Cash’s uncompromising position is backed by Republican Sens. Danny Verdin and Rex Rice, whether other colleagues support him remains to be seen.
    Charleston Republican Sandy Senn said she would vote against any proposal that bans abortion before the first trimester ends and lacks exceptions for rape, incest, a mother’s life and fetal anomaly.
    “Most people in our state would support such a reasonable bill, and I believe most of my colleagues internally would too.    Some senators will feel the heat of the party base to vote a certain way,” Senn said in an email.    “I don’t because that base is in the minority even within our party.”
    Republican Sen. Katrina Shealy – who represents Lexington County, one of the state’s more conservative districts – said the chances are “slim to none” that the Senate passes the House version.
    According to Shealy, enough Republican senators want to see how the state’s “heartbeat bill” pans out before taking additional action.
    “I wish (the House) hadn’t sent us anything and left it alone,” Shealy said.    “We had a good bill.    Leave it like it is.”
    Democratic Sen. Marlon Kimpson – who in 2018 filibustered a bill that would have outlawed most abortions – is not optimistic he can repeat that success.    Since then, procedural rule changes and the loss of several moderate Republican voices have made it less likely he will successfully block any proposal.    Plus, Kimpson said the remaining moderate members are less comfortable voicing opposition out of increased fears they might lose their next primary.
    To defeat any new restrictions, Democrats will have to find eight Republicans to join their ranks – a “challenging” task, according to Kimpson.
    “At the end of the day it’s about numbers.    And the game is set in favor of the party whose controlled both houses and the governor’s offices for almost two decades or more,” Kimpson said.    “It’s going to an uphill battle.”
    With the House advancing its proposal, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are looking ahead to January’s regular session.    Democrats on Wednesday asked when the legislature will better fund the foster care system, increase SNAP benefits, and expand Medicaid, among other policies.    Republicans on Monday mentioned a planned bill to streamline adoption.

9/1/2022 NM leader vows $10M for clinic - Site would provide abortions, other care by Susan Montoya Bryan, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Anti-abortion and abortion rights advocates hold up signs during the Emergency Pro-Life Rally for New Mexico in
Las Cruces on July 19. New Mexico’s Democratic governor, Michelle Lujan Grisham, said Wednesday that New Mexico already
has seen an influx of patients as abortions have ceased in other states. MEG POTTER/THE LAS CRUCES SUN NEWS VIA AP     ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. – New Mexico’s governor on Wednesday signed a new executive order that pledges $10 million to build a clinic that would provide abortions and other pregnancy care.
    “The goal here is build it and they will come,” Democrat Michelle Lujan Grisham said after signing the order during a virtual announcement that included members of the state’s Commission on the Status of Women and several legislators.
    The governor noted that New Mexico already has seen an influx of patients following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in June to overturn Roe v. Wade as abortions have ceased in neighboring Texas and elsewhere.
    Lujan Grisham, who is running for reelection against Republican Mark Ronchetti, signed her first executive order on the matter in late June.    It was aimed at ensuring safe harbor to people seeking abortions or providing abortions at health care facilities within the state.
    The latest order reiterates her commitments to protecting access in addition to directing state agencies to leverage their resources to expand access to reproductive health care – including abortion – in underserved areas of the state.    The order also calls for the state Department of Health to review the feasibility of providing medication abortions at its public health clinics.
    Ronchetti on Wednesday said state funds shouldn’t be spent on a clinic where late-term abortions would be available for people who come from out of state.    He has proposed limiting abortion to the first 15 weeks, or in cases of rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is at risk.
    “Using taxpayer dollars to enable and fund abortion up until the point of birth is not only out of line with New Mexican values, it is extreme,” he said in a statement.
    The Democratic-led Legislature will hash out the next state budget, including capital investments, when it meets in January.
    As for the one-time proposed infusion of $10 million for a new clinic in the Las Cruces area, Lujan Grisham said she envisions a partnership with medical schools and private providers, such as the Mississippi clinic at the center of the Roe court battle that relocated to southern New Mexico in early August.
    One of the largest abortion providers in Texas, Austin-based Whole Woman’s Health, also still has plans to move some of its operations to New Mexico and states in the southeastern U.S.
    The Commission on the Status of Women in a resolution read Wednesday made clear its focus on protecting access to abortions, protecting health care providers and expanding access to what the panel called a full spectrum of pregnancy care – which includes abortions as well as post-birth care.
    Commission Chairwoman Lisa Curtis said there needs to be a special emphasis on underserved areas across the rural state and investment in programs that will develop a pipeline of trained health care providers.
    New Mexico lawmakers last year repealed a dormant 1969 statute that outlawed most abortion procedures as felonies, thus ensuring access to abortion following the Supreme Court’s action.    Some Democratic lawmakers said Wednesday that they will push for measures during the next legislative session to further enshrine access and protections in state law.
    The governor said the work being done by her allies and advocacy groups is saving women’s lives.

9/2/2022 Michigan high court asked to OK abortion on ballot by Joey Cappelletti and Sara Burnett, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Members of the Michigan Board of State Canvassers, from left, Richard Houskamp, Anthony Daunt
and Mary Ellen Gurewitz listen to attorneys Olivia Flower and Steve Liedel during a hearing Wednesday
in Lansing, Mich. The elections board rejected an abortion rights initiative. CARLOS OSORIO/AP     LANSING, Mich. – An abortion rights group on Thursday asked the Michigan Supreme Court to approve a November ballot question on whether a right to abortion should be enshrined in the state constitution.
    Reproductive Freedom for All filed its request with the high court after the state canvassing board rejected the ballot question on Wednesday.    That body deadlocked 2-2 along partisan lines, with a pair of Republican commissioners citing what they called spacing errors in the petitions calling for the ballot question.
    Abortion-rights supporters say it’s important for state residents to be able to weigh in on the abortion question, especially because of a 1931 law that would ban all abortions except to save the life of the pregnant patient that abortion opponents had hoped would be triggered by the U.S. Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade in June.    The law has been blocked by months of court battles.
    In the filing, the group asked the court to order the Board of State Canvassers to certify the question for the November ballot, and to do so by Wednesday.    That would give board members time to certify the initiative before the board’s meeting on Sept. 9, which also is the deadline set by state law for the board to certify the ballot to the Secretary of State.
    RFFA submitted more than 750,000 signatures, attorneys for the group wrote, making it the largest number submitted for a ballot initiative in state history.    State law required a minimum of about 425,000 valid signatures, and state officials determined last week that the petition contained nearly 600,000 valid signatures.
    RFFA said the volume of signatories demonstrated “widespread grassroots support.”
    “This court should safeguard the right of the people to exercise their political power and protect it from strained interpretations of law that stand to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of voters,” attorneys argued.
    Abortion-rights supporters have criticized the Republican members of the state board – a panel once seen as handling largely routine, administrative matters – as bowing to political pressure to try to stop the measure from appearing on the ballot.
    Democrats believe the issue has helped the party gain ground on Republicans this election cycle since the U.S. Supreme Court eliminated constitutional protections for abortion.    In conperbole” servative Kansas, for example, voters overwhelmingly defeated a measure that would have allowed the Republican-controlled Legislature to tighten restrictions or ban the procedure outright.
    Michigan, a swing state that also is a presidential battleground, has several high-stakes races on the ballot in November, including contests for governor, secretary of state and attorney general.
    RFFA argued in its filing to the Michigan Supreme Court that its petitions met all prerequisites to appear on the Nov. 8 ballot, both in number of signatures and the format, and that the Board of State Canvassers overstepped its authority, violating “its clear legal duty,” when it rejected the initiative.
    No party has disputed that the group turned in enough signatures, RFFA noted.    Rather, opponents “resorted to hy-regarding the spacing of language on the petition," calling the small spaces between some word’s “gibberish” and “incomprehensible argle-bargle,” the group said in its filing.    They argue that Michigan election law doesn’t provide requirements for spacing and said the opponents “are unable to point to a single individual that did not understand” the petition.
    Opponents of the ballot initiative said the board did the right thing in rejecting what they called a “mistake-riddled, anything goes” proposal.    They said the initiative would insert “gibberish” into the state constitution.
    “The Michigan Supreme Court should support this move to protect our constitution from their vandalism as well,” Christen Pollo, of Citizens to Support Michigan Women and Children, said after Wednesday’s vote.
    John Pirich, a Michigan election law expert, said that the petition’s language could be understood even with the spacing issues and that “any language that would be in doubt will be printed with the proper spacing in the constitution.”
    “The question is: Does someone read this and have they been confused as to what the intent is or misled as to what the intent of the petition is?” Pirich said.    “I clearly understood the language.”
    In a statement Wednesday, abortion rights supporters said they are confident the court will decide in their favor and order the initiative go before voters on the November ballot.    A majority of justices were put on the court by Democrats.
    Abortion opponents protested outside of Wednesday’s board meeting, their yells at times audible inside the hearing room.    The board also heard several hours of public comment, primarily from people who oppose abortion and told the board the procedure is immoral.

9/3/2022 SC lawsuit: Cheerleaders sexually abused by coaches by Jeffrey Collins, ASSOCIATED PRESS
A lawsuit was filed by four girls and two boys with claims they were abused by Scott Foster and others affiliated with Rockstar Cheer in Greenville, S.C.
It suggests there could be up to 100 more survivors of the abuse. Foster, 49, was found dead in his car at a state park on Aug. 22.
He shot himself in the head, the Greenville County Coroner’s Office ruled. SABRINA SCHAEFFER/GREENVILLE NEWS     COLUMBIA, S.C. – Multiple cheerleading coaches in South Carolina – including a coach who recently killed himself – sexually abused at least six boys and girls and provided them with drugs and alcohol, a federal lawsuit alleges.
    A “coven of sexual predators” surrounded Rockstar Cheer of Greenville for more than a decade, according to one of the lawyers for the alleged victims.
    Attorney Bakari Sellers contends that what happened is a result of the same kind of institutional failure seen in the case of Larry Nassar, the former USA Gymnastics and Michigan State University doctor who is serving a minimum of 40 years in prison after admitting that he molested some of the nation’s top gymnasts for years.
    The lawsuit was filed Thursday by four girls and two boys who said they were abused by Scott Foster and others affiliated with Rockstar gyms.    It suggests there could be up to 100 more survivors of the abuse.
    “Scott Foster and his allies did their best to intimidate and isolate their targets, making these young people feel alone and somehow responsible.    Well, they’re not alone anymore,” attorney Jessica Fickling said in a statement announcing the suit.    Foster, 49, was found dead in his car at a state park on Aug. 22. He shot himself in the head, the Greenville County Coroner’s Office ruled.
    “He knew this was going to be a moment when the light was going to be shined on what I think will turn out to be a coven of sexual predators surrounding Rockstar,” said attorney James Bannister.
    A number of people either knew Foster was abusing his cheer students and ignored it or did not have rules and procedures in place to stop the abuse, the lawsuit says.
    State and federal police are investigating Foster’s Rockstar Cheer and other cheerleading outlets.

9/3/2022 Ariz. Planned Parenthood restarts services - State abortion laws contested in courts by Bob Christie, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    PHOENIX – Planned Parenthood Arizona has joined several other providers that have restarted abortion care in the state – although it may only be temporary – after clinics ceased providing the service when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that women do not have a federal right to end a pregnancy.
    The organization has for years done the most abortions in the state, but it ended the practice after the high court overturned the Roe v. Wade ruling on June 24.
    Planned Parenthood and other providers shut down because of the legal uncertainty over a pre-statehood law that bans almost all abortions and a “personhood” law that they feared could be used to prosecute doctors and nurses providing that care.
    A federal judge blocked the personhood law on July 11 after abortion rights groups sued, saying it was unconstitutionally vague.    That prompted some providers to restart services, including two clinics in Phoenix and one in Tucson.    Some provide the abortion pill, and others have both the pill and surgical abortions.
    Separately, a state judge in Tucson in considering the attorney general’s request to lift an injunction barring enforcement of the pre-statehood law.    Attorney General Mark Brnovich had announced that law was enforceable after the Supreme Court decision, but then he acknowledged the injunction remained in place.
    Planned Parenthood Arizona this week began providing both medication and surgical abortions at its Tucson clinic, one of four in the state where it provided abortions.    Those four and three others run by the group never halted other care, such as pap smears, contraception and other reproductive services.    Planned Parenthood plans to begin offering vasectomies in the fall.
    Brittany Fonteno, Planned Parenthood Arizona’s president and CEO, said the decision to open just the one clinic for abortions came down to the staff being willing to take a risk and go back to providing services that some Republicans contend are illegal.
    “We have providers who, even with this bit of legal clarity that we’ve been able to get over the past couple of weeks, they’re still not comfortable,” Fonteno said Friday.    “So, we chose Tucson because that’s where we had providers that felt comfortable in resuming abortion care.”
    Other Planned Parenthood clinics could restart abortion care in the coming weeks, she said.
    A judge in Tucson heard arguments on Aug. 19 on Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich’s request to lift the 1973 injunction blocking enforcement of the state law banning nearly all abortion.    She said she will rule on or after Sept. 20.    Brnovich said the only reason that law was blocked was because of the Roe v. Wade decision.
    Planned Parenthood and its Arizona affiliate told Pima County Superior Court Judge Kellie Johnson that she should only allow the law to be enforced against people who are not doctors so that other abortion restrictions that the Legislature has enacted since Roe remain relevant.
    The court battles in Arizona are just two of many playing out in mostly Republican states in the wake of the Supreme Court’s conservative majority overturning Roe. There are legal fights about whether abortion bans – either those predating Roe, or those passed to trigger bans in case Roe was overturned – can be enforced.

9/3/2022 GOP escalates fight against citizen-led ballot initiatives by DAVID A. LIEB, Associated Press
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — Hundreds of thousands of people signed petitions this year backing proposed ballot initiatives to expand voting access, ensure abortion rights and legalize recreational marijuana in Arizona, Arkansas and Michigan. FILE - Members of the Michigan Board of State Canvassers, from left, Richard Houskamp, Anthony Daunt and Mary Ellen Gurewitz
listen to attorneys Olivia Flower and Steve Liedel during a hearing, Wednesday, Aug. 31, 2022, in Lansing, Mich.
Republican-dominated courts and legislatures have been pushing back against citizen-led ballot initiatives to keep them off the ballot,
in what critics say is a partisan attack on direct democracy. (AP Photo/Carlos Osorio, File) © Provided by Associated Press     Yet voters might not get a say because Republican officials or judges have blocked the proposals from the November elections, citing flawed wording, procedural shortcomings or insufficient petition signatures.
Election 2022 Ballot Initiatives© Provided by Associated Press     At the same time, Republican lawmakers in Arkansas and Arizona have placed constitutional amendments on the ballot proposing to make it harder to approve citizen initiatives in the future.
    The Republican pushback against the initiative process is part of a several-year trend that gained steam as Democratic-aligned groups have increasingly used petitions to force public votes on issues that Republican-led legislatures have opposed.    In reliably Republican Missouri, for example, voters have approved initiatives to expand Medicaid, raise the minimum wage and legalize medical marijuana.    An initiative seeking to allow recreational pot is facing a court challenge from an anti-drug activist aiming to knock it off the November ballot.
Part of the initiative petition amendment to the Michigan constitution is seen, Thursday, Sept. 1, 2022 in Detroit.
An abortion rights group in Michigan has asked the state's Supreme Court to approve a ballot question asking
voters whether a right to abortion should be enshrined in the state's constitution. The filing Thursday came a day
after the state's canvassing board deadlocked on the matter, with two Republican members voting to reject the
question because of supposed spacing errors in petitions for the measure. (AP Photo) © Provided by Associated Press     Some Democrats contend Republicans are subverting the will of the people by making the ballot initiative process more difficult.
    “What is happening now is just a web of technicalities to thwart the process in states where voters are using the people’s tool to make an immediate positive change in their lives," said Chris Melody Fields Figueredo, executive director of the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, which has worked with progressive groups sponsoring the blocked initiatives.
    "That is not the way our democracy should work,” she added.
    Republicans who have thrown up hurdles to initiative petitions contend they are protecting the integrity of the lawmaking process against well-funded interest groups trying to bend state policies in their favor.
    “I think the Legislature is a much purer way to get things done and it represents the people much better, rather than having this jungle where you just throw it on the ballot,” said South Dakota state Rep. Tim Goodwin, who has perennially targeted the initiative process with restrictions.
    About half the states allow citizen initiatives, in which petition signers can bypass a legislature to place proposed laws or constitutional changes directly before voters.    But executive or judicial officials often still have some role in the process, typically by certifying that the ballot wording is clear and accurate and that petition circulators gathered enough valid signatures of registered voters.
FILE - Marijuana plants for the adult recreational market are seen in a greenhouse at Hepworth Farms in Milton, N.Y., Friday, July 15, 2022.
Missouri voters are set to be the first in the nation to sign off on automatically forgiving past marijuana crimes if they approve
a constitutional amendment to legalize recreational pot in November 2022. (AP Photo/Mary Altaffer, File) © Provided by Associated Press     In Michigan this past week, two Republican members of the bipartisan Board of State Canvassers blocked initiatives to enshrine abortion rights in the state constitution and expand opportunities for voting. Each measure had significantly more than the required 425,000 signatures.    But GOP board members said the voting measure had unclear wording and the abortion measure was flawed because of spacing problems that scrunched some words together.
FILE - Terry Goddard speaks during an election night party on Nov. 4, 2014, in Phoenix. Republican Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey
and the GOP leaders of the state House and Senate are urging the state Supreme Court to overrule lower court judges and block
three voter initiatives from the ballot. Goddard, a former Arizona attorney general is among a bipartisan group including business
figures backing an initiative requiring full disclosure of political spending. (AP Photo/Matt York, File) © Provided by Associated Press     Supporters have appealed both decisions to the Michigan Supreme Court, which consists of a majority of Democratic-appointed judges.
Group tries to nitpick typography to stop popular abortion state ballot measure
    The Arkansas Supreme Court, whose justices run in nonpartisan elections, is weighing an appeal of an August decision blocking an initiative that would legalize recreational marijuana for adults.
    The State Board of Election Commissioners, which has just one Democrat among its many Republicans, determined that the ballot title was misleading because it failed to mention it would repeal potency limits in an existing medical marijuana provision.    Because the deadline has passed to certify initiative titles, the Supreme Court has allowed the measure on the general election ballot while it decides whether the votes will be counted.
    A lawsuit by initiative supporters contends a 2019 law passed by the Republican-led Legislature violates the Arkansas Constitution by allowing the board to reject ballot titles.
    “The (initiative) process in Arkansas has gotten consistently harder each cycle, as the Legislature adds more and more requirements," said Steve Lancaster, a lawyer for Responsible Growth Arkansas, which is sponsoring the marijuana amendment.
    It would get even harder if voters support a legislatively referred amendment on the November ballot that would require a 60% vote to approve citizen-initiated ballot measures or future constitutional amendments.
    In Arizona, the primarily Republican-appointed Supreme Court recently blocked a proposed constitutional amendment that would have extended early voting and limited lobbyist gifts to lawmakers.    The measure also would have specifically prohibited the Legislature from overturning the results of presidential elections, which some Republicans had explored after then-President Donald Trump’s loss in 2020.
    After a lower court initially ruled the measure could appear on the November ballot, Arizona's high court instructed the judge to reconsider.    Then it upheld a subsequent ruling throwing out enough petition signatures to prevent the initiative from qualifying for the ballot.
    Still on the ballot are several other amendments referred by Arizona's Republican-led Legislature.    Those measures would limit initiatives to a single subject, require a 60% supermajority to approve tax proposals and expand the Legislature's authority to change voter-approved initiatives.
    Those proposals come after Arizona Republicans have spent the past decade enacting laws making it more difficult to get citizen initiatives on the ballot.    State laws now require petition sheets to be precisely printed and ban the use of a copy machine to create new ones.    Other laws require paid circulators to include their registration number on each petition sheet, get it notarized and check a box saying they were paid.
    “The effect is to make it much harder, much more expensive to get the signatures to put one of these propositions on the ballot,” said Terry Goddard, a Democrat who served as the state’s attorney general from 2003 through 2011.
    After years of trying, Goddard finally succeeded this year in getting an initiative on the ballot that would require nonprofit groups that spend large amounts on elections to reveal their donors.
    Earlier this summer, South Dakota voters defeated a measure that would have made it harder to pass initiatives on taxes and spending.    The proposal from the Republican-led Legislature would have required a 60% vote to raise taxes or spend over a certain amount of money.    Voters rejected the measure by 67%.
    “This just seems like a way to suppress voters. honestly,” Joshua Matzner, a Democrat, said after voting against it.
___
Associated Press writers Bob Christie in Phoenix and Stephen Groves in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, contributed to this report.
___
Follow AP for full coverage of the midterms at https://apnews.com/hub/2022-midterm-elections and on Twitter, https://twitter.com/ap_politics

9/3/2022 Pope dissolves Knights of Malta leadership, issues new constitution by Philip Pullella - Reuters
FILE PHOTO: Members of the Order of the Knights of Malta arrive in St. Peter Basilica
for their 900th anniversary in Vatican© Reuters/Alessandro Bianchi     VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Pope Francis on Saturday dissolved the leadership of the Knights of Malta, the global Catholic religious order and humanitarian group, and installed a provisional government ahead of the election of a new Grand Master.
    The change, which the pope issued in a decree, came after five years of often acrimonious debate within the order and between some top members of the old guard and the Vatican over a new constitution that some feared would weaken its sovereignty.
FILE PHOTO: Pope Francis meets cardinals at the Vatican© Reuters/Vatican Media     The group, whose formal name is Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of St. John of Jerusalem, of Rhodes and of Malta, was founded in Jerusalem nearly 1,000 years ago to provide medical aid for pilgrims in the Holy Land.
    It now has a multi-million-dollar budget, 13,500 members, 95,000 volunteers and 52,000 medical staff running refugee camps, drug treatment centres, disaster relief programs and clinics around the world.
    The order has been very active in helping Ukrainian refugees and war victims.
    It has no real territory apart from a palace and offices in Rome and a fort in Malta, but is recognised as a sovereign entity with its own passports and licence plates.
    It has diplomatic relations with 110 states and permanent observer status at the United Nations, allowing to act as a neutral party in relief efforts in war zones.
    Cardinal Silvano Tomasi, the pope's special delegate to the order, told reporters at a briefing along with some members of the provisional government that the order's new constitution would not weaken its international sovereignty.
    But as a religious order, it had to remain under the auspices of the Vatican, said Cardinal Gianfranco Ghirlanda, a member of the working group that prepared the new constitution approved by the pope on Saturday.
    Francis convoked an extraordinary general chapter for Jan. 25 to begin the process of electing a new Grand Master.
    The last one, Italian Giacomo Dalla Torre, died in April.
    "We hope this will re-establish unity in the order and increase its ability to serve the poor and the sick," Tomasi said.
    Tomasi and the Lieutenant of the Grand Master, Canadian John Dunlap, will lead the group to the general chapter.    A new Grand Master is expected to be elected by March, officials said.
    Under the previous constitution, the top Knights and the Grand Master were required to have noble lineage, something reformers said excluded nearly everyone except Europeans from serving in top roles.
    The new constitution eliminates the nobility rule as well as the tradition of Grand Masters being elected for life.
    "It will be more democratic.    The question of nobility has now become secondary," Tomasi said.
    Future Grand Masters will be elected for 10-year terms, renewable only once, and will have to step down at age 85.
    Reformers, backed by the Vatican, had called for a more transparent government to bring in fresh blood and allow the order to better respond to the massive growth it has seen in recent years.
(Reporting by Philip Pullella, Editing by Louise Heavens)

9/5/2022 ACLU, others sue Indiana on abortion ban - Suit argues that new law violates right to privacy by Shari Rudavsky, Indianapolis Star USA TODAY NETWORK
Abortion-rights and anti-abortion protesters rally July 25 in Indianapolis. MICHELLE PEMBERTON/INDYSTAR     The ACLU of Indiana and Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit last week challenging the state’s new near-total ban on abortions, which currently will go into effect Sept. 15.
    The lawsuit, which was filed in Monroe County Circuit Court in Bloomington on Aug. 30, argues that Senate Bill 1 violates an individual’s right to privacy and equal privilege protections as outlined in the state constitution.
    Signed into law by Gov. Eric Holcomb, the bill prohibits abortions except in the case of rape or incest up to 10 weeks, the life or severe health of the mother, or fatal fetal anomalies.
    “Deeply private, personal, and unique decisions about reproductive health should be made by women in consultation with their doctors,” said Ken Falk, legal director of the ACLU of Indiana.    “Whether Indiana elected officials personally agree with abortion access or not, it is not up to the government to make these decisions for Hoosiers.”
    Republicans passed the bill without any votes from Democrats during a two-week special session this summer.
    Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita said in an emailed statement that his office is dedicated to defending the law, which he described as “life-saving.”
    “The Left is notorious for fighting to erase all of the progress and protections secured by the pro-life movement,” he said.    “We don’t need the warped opinions of organizations like the ACLU and Planned Parenthood dictating how we do things in Indiana.”
New Indiana abortion law
    Under the law, doctors who perform abortions that are deemed to be illegal could face one to six years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.
    Plaintiffs in the case include Planned Parenthood of Great Northwest, Hawaii, Alaska, Indiana, Kentucky, a group which operates four out-patient clinics in Indiana that provide about half of the abortions in the state; Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, which runs an abortion clinic in South Bend; Women’s Med Group, which has a clinic in Indianapolis; and All-Options Inc., a pregnancy resource center based in Bloomington.
    Under the new law, abortions can only be performed in hospitals.    If the new law is allowed to go into effect, officials at many of the clinics where abortions are currently performed expect to cease operations.
    In 2021 more than 95% of the more than 8,400 abortions performed occurred in one of these outpatient clinics, according to the Indiana Department of Health’s annual report on pregnancy terminations.
    “Unlike Indiana politicians, our physicians are dedicated to the welfare of our patients, meeting them where they are with compassion and respect,” said Dr. Martin Haskell, medical director at Women’s Med Group, in a statement.    “Without a court order, we will no longer be able to provide this essential care to our patients.    That is simply unacceptable.”
    The suit names as defendants the state’s Medical Licensing Board and prosecutors in seven counties that currently have clinics where abortions are performed, including Hendricks, Lake, Marion, Monroe, St. Joseph, Tippecanoe, and Warrick counties.
    As states around the country take steps to restrict abortion, local ACLU chapters have filed suits to block those new laws.
    While abortion remains banned in Kentucky for now, in November the Kentucky Supreme Court is scheduled to start hearing arguments in a case the ACLU brought, saying abortion bans violate right to privacy, bodily autonomy and self-determination.    In West Virginia, abortion legal for now, as the ACLU is in the midst of a suit to prevent a 19th Century law from going into effect to ban it.

9/7/2022 Appeals court upholds Washington State's conversion therapy ban by Darryl Coote – UPI News
    Sept. 7 (UPI) -- A three-judge panel has dismissed a challenge to Washington State's ban on so-called conversion therapy, ruling state legislators who passed the law were right to prevent licensed healthcare providers from performing the controversial practice on minors.
Statue of Justice. Photo by sebra/Shutterstock© sebra/Shutterstock     The 66-page ruling on Tuesday comes in a challenge brought last year by licensed marriage and family therapist Robert Tingley against the state's 2018 law that bans healthcare professionals from performing conversion therapy on those under 18 years of age under threat of disciplinary action.
    Tingley claimed the law chilled his speech and caused him to self-censor in violation of his First Amendment rights, while also arguing the ban was unconstitutional vague, and in contravention the 14th Amendment.
    While the three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit viewed Tingley had standing for them to view the case, they unanimously ruled Tuesday that the Washington State legislature "rationally acted" by amending its regulatory scheme for licensed healthcare providers to add that performing conversion therapy on minors to its list of unprofessional conduct.
    "States do not lose the power to regulate the safety of medical treatments performed under the authority of a state license merely because those treatments are implemented through speech rather than through scalpel," Judge Ronald Gould wrote in the ruling.
    "The Washington legislature acted rationally when it decided to protect the 'physical and psychological well-being' of its minors by preventing state-licensed healthcare providers from practicing conversion therapy on them."
    Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson said in a brief statement that Tuesday's ruling "protects LGBTQ+ youth."
    "We must keep fighting to defend freedom and uphold science from those seeking to deny identity and take rights away," he said.
    So-called conversion therapy is psychological interventions that seek to change a person's sexual orientation or gender identity, and has been widely panned by medical organizations.
    Washington State is one of more than 20 in the nation to have implemented laws that prevent minors from being subjected to the controversial practice, and the judges on Tuesday said the state relied upon scientific evidence to prohibit the practice on children, regardless of religious beliefs.
    Tingley had argued the law violated one's freedom of religion and freedom of exercise under the First Amendment, stating the legislature knew that most people sought conversion therapy for religious reasons.
    However, the three-judge panel rejected this argument on the grounds that the legislature was aware people seek conversion therapy also for secular reasons, including social stigma, family rejection and societal intolerance for sexual minorities.
    "Affirming the dismissal of Tingley's challenge under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, the panel held that the law was a neutral law targeted at preventing the harms associated with conversion therapy, and not at the religious exercise of those who wish to practice this type of therapy on minors," Gould wrote.
    The judges also rejected Tingley's claim that the law was unconstitutionally vague, specifically due to its use of the terms "sexual orientation" and "gender identity."
    "Neither term is unconstitutionally vague," Gould said.    "'Sexual orientation' and 'gender identity' have common meanings that are clear to a reasonable person -- let alone a licensed mental health provider."
    Mathew Shurka, cofounder of Born Perfect, a campaign to end conversion therapy by the National Center for Lesbian Rights, said laws such as the one passed by Washington State are critical to protecting minors from unethical therapists.
    "As a survivor of more than five years of conversion therapy, I know firsthand how damaging these practices are to young people and their families," Shurka said in a statement emailed to UPI.    "The medical community has rejected these practices because they are harmful, ineffective and unnecessary."
    "Being LGBTQ is not a mental health disorder.    Trying to change such a fundamental aspect of a person's identity not only impossible, it is profoundly dangerous and cases serious, lasting harm."

9/7/2022 Rape, incest exceptions out of South Carolina abortion bill by Jeffrey Collins, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    COLUMBIA, S.C. – A South Carolina Senate committee voted Tuesday to remove exceptions for rape and incest from a proposed abortion ban, setting up a showdown among Republicans wary of passing such a restrictive bill.
    Democrats helped set up the fight, choosing not to vote with three moderate Republicans who wanted to keep the exceptions in the bill.
    The same bill without the exceptions appeared to fail in the more conservative state House last week before some Republicans maneuvered through a series of votes to allow abortions for rape and incest victims up to the 12th week of pregnancy.
    The Senate Medical Affairs Committee vote 9-8 with two Republicans joining all Democrats – to send the bill to the full Senate, where debate is expected to begin Wednesday morning.    The exceptions could be restored during that debate.
    Democrats also refused to vote on other proposals by Republican Sen. Tom Davis, who has said for weeks the bill needs to be modified from a total ban before he can support it.
    They included increasing access to contraceptives and including birth control as part of the state’s abstinence-based sex education as well as assuring that a doctor can perform the abortion if it is determined a fetus has a medical condition that won’t allow it to live outside the womb.
    Democrats are not going to help Republicans out of a box of their own making by making “an awful bill a very bad bill,” Senate Minority Leader Brad Hutto said.
    “i>We think by highlighting the fact a bunch of extreme, Republican men are trying to control women’s decisions in South Carolina – they need to own that.    The governor needs to own that,” Hutto told reporters.
    Republicans told their Democratic colleagues their strategy was shortsighted.
    “We heard a lot of talk about protecting women’s rights.    It looks like when they had a chance, they didn’t,” Republican Sen. Michael Gambrel said.
    Several Republicans senators have said they cannot support the bill without the exceptions for pregnancies caused by rape and incest.    There are 30 Republicans and 16 Democrats in the state Senate.
    “We think by highlighting the fact a bunch of extreme, Republican men are trying to control women’s decisions in South Carolina – they need to own that.” Brad Hutto
South Carolina Senate minority leader
    Senators will get another chance to change the bill Wednesday, including adding the exceptions back or any amendments that were rejected at Tuesday’s meeting.
    The bill bans all abortions in South Carolina except when the mother’s life is at risk.
    Before they were removed, the bill also included exceptions for pregnancies caused by rape and incest.    In those cases, the doctor would have to tell the woman the rape will be reported and her name given to the county sheriff within 24 hours of the procedure.    The bill would have only allowed abortions in those cases up to 12 weeks after conception.
    The proposal also starts child support payments at the date of conception and requires a father to pay half of pregnancy expenses, including the mother’s share of insurance premiums.    The father of a child conceived by rape or incest must also pay the full cost of mental counseling from the attack.
    South Carolina currently has a ban on abortions once cardiac activity in a fetus is detected, which is usually about six weeks.    But that law has been suspended as the South Carolina Supreme Court reviews whether it violates the state’s constitutional right to privacy.    That leaves South Carolina’s older 20-week abortion ban as the current benchmark.
    Abortion bans have had mixed success in state legislatures since Roe v. Wade was overturned.    Indiana passed a ban in August that goes into effect later this month with the rape, incest and life of the mother exceptions.    West Virginia’s Legislature could not agree on stricter rules during a special session in July.
    And lawmakers in South Carolina suddenly started paying much closer attention to Kansas when nearly 60% of voters rejected a ballot measure that would have allowed the state’s Legislature to ban abortion.    The states voted for Republican Donald Trump in nearly identical percentages in the 2020 presidential election.

9/8/2022 Senate to vote on same-sex marriage bill in coming weeks by Mary Clare Jalonick, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said there will be a vote on
legislation to protect same-sex marriage “in the coming weeks.” MARIAM ZUHAIB/AP     WASHINGTON – Majority Leader Chuck Schumer vowed Wednesday that the Senate will vote on legislation to protect same-sex marriage “in the coming weeks” as a bipartisan group backing the bill negotiates changes to gain more Republican support.
    The vote, expected by the end of the month, comes as Democrats and a small group of Republicans are moving to safeguard same-sex marriage following the Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade and the federal right to an abortion.    Lawmakers fear the court’s ruling, and a concurring opinion from Justice Clarence Thomas, indicate that an earlier high court decision protecting same-sex marriage could come under threat.
    “We all want to pass this quickly,” Schumer said.    “I hope there will be 10 Republicans to support it.”
    A bipartisan group of senators, led by Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, is working to round up those 10 GOP votes needed to overcome a filibuster and get the legislation through the 50-50 Senate.
    “I think the momentum is going in the right direction,” Baldwin said after the bipartisan group met on Wednesday.
    The Senate push for the historic vote – and the openness by some Republicans to back it in an election year – reflects a seismic shift on the issue since the Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision legalizing gay marriage nationwide.    Some 70% of U.S. adults in a June Gallup poll said same-sex unions should be valid under the law.
    The bill protecting same-sex marriage cleared the House in a July vote with the support of 47 Republicans – a larger than expected number that gave the measure a boost in the Senate.
    To win over more Senate Republicans, negotiators are planning to introduce amendments aimed at addressing concerns from some about “religious liberty” – the rights of religious institutions or religious business owners to oppose same-sex marriage, for example.    Supporters say such religious liberty is already enshrined in law, but new language would simply make that clear.
    Another proposed tweak to the bill would make clear that a marriage is between two people, an effort to ward off some far-right criticism that the legislation could endorse polygamy.
    Baldwin and two of the Republicans supporting the marriage bill, Maine Sen. Susan Collins and North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, said Wednesday that the group was drafting the amendments to address the concerns they’ve heard from their GOP colleagues.
    “There’s no harm in doing it,” Tillis said, even though some Democrats have pointed out that those rights are already protected under law.
    Collins said the amendment would “make crystal clear that it does not in any way infringe religious liberties” and allow Republicans to have input on the bill.
    “I’m never confident until the roll is called but we’re making good progress,” Collins said.

9/8/2022 Judge strikes down 1931 abortion law - Ruling says ban violates Michigan constitution by Ed White, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Abortion rights protesters attend a rally outside the state Capitol in Lansing, Mich., on June 24.
A judge on Wednesday struck down Michigan’s 1931 anti-abortion law. PAUL SANCYA/AP FILE     DETROIT – A judge on Wednesday struck down Michigan’s 1931 anti-abortion law, months after suspending it, the latest development over abortion rights in a state where the issue is being argued in courtrooms and, possibly, at the ballot box.
    The law, which was long dormant before the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June, violates the Michigan Constitution, said Judge Elizabeth Gleicher.
    “A law denying safe, routine medical care not only denies women of their ability to control their bodies and their lives – it denies them of their dignity,” Gleicher of the Court of Claims wrote.    “Michigan’s Constitution forbids this violation of due process.”
    The decision comes as the Michigan Supreme Court is considering whether to place a proposed amendment on the Nov. 8 ballot that would add abortion rights to the state constitution.    A Friday deadline is looming.
    Supporters submitted more than 700,000 signatures, easily clearing the threshold.    But a tie vote by the Board of State Canvassers over spacing issues on the petition has kept it off the ballot so far.
    In the case handled by Gleicher, the 1931 law makes it a crime to perform an abortion unless the mother’s life is in danger.
    The judge said the law “compels motherhood” and prevents a woman from determining the “shape of her present and future life.”
    The law “forces a pregnant woman to forgo her reproductive choices and to instead serve as ‘an involuntary vessel entitled to no more respect than other forms of collectively owned property,’ ” Gleicher wrote, quoting constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe.
    The law was suspended in May with an injunction, following a lawsuit by Planned Parenthood of Michigan.    Gleicher said her latest decision applies to all state and local prosecutors.    An appeal by the Republican-controlled Legislature is possible.
    Gleicher acknowledged in July that she has been a regular donor to Planned Parenthood and gave $1,000 to the 2018 campaigns of Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Attorney General Dana Nessel, both Democrats who support abortion rights.
    But that support wasn’t a reason to pass the case to another judge, said Gleicher, who also serves as chief judge on the Michigan Court of Appeals.
    “Judges are presumed to be unbiased and impartial,” she said.
    In a separate lawsuit, Whitmer has repeatedly asked the state Supreme Court to bypass lower courts and settle the status of the 1931 law.

9/8/2022 Abortion floor debate splits South Carolina Republicans by Jeffrey Collins, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Republican South Carolina Sen. Katrina Shealy said the 41 men in the Senate would be better
off listening to their wives, daughters, mothers, granddaughters and nieces. COLUMBIA, S.C. – The South Carolina Senate’s three Republican women all said Wednesday that they could not support an abortion ban that did not include exceptions for pregnancies caused by rape or incest.
    Two different attempts to get the exceptions back into the bill failed later in the day.    Senators adjourned Wednesday evening without a final vote.
    Republicans are facing off against one another over the ban. On one side is a core group that views any abortion as ending a life.    On the other are conservatives who have digested developments elsewhere since Roe v. Wade was overturned and say they don’t want 14-year-old rape victims to have to give birth or force a mother to carry to term a fetus unable to live outside the womb.
    Democrats are mostly letting them argue among themselves, refusing to help more moderate Republicans and keeping the bill as strict as possible to try to defeat it.
    Senators have been told the proceedings could last days.    If the legislation is approved and signed into law, South Carolina would join Indiana as states that have passed near-total abortion bans since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June.
    If the bill passes, it will return to the House, which approved a version last week with rape or incest exceptions up to the 12th week of pregnancies.
    A first vote to try to add back the exceptions up to the 20th week of pregnancy was rejected 23-6.    None of the Senate’s Democrats voted.    A second attempt to allow abortions for pregnancies caused by rape or incest up to six weeks after conception failed 23-18 as many Democrats did finally vote, following their strategy to keep the ban as absolute as possible.
    The three Republican women in the Senate rose early in the debate and spoke back-to-back, saying they can’t support it unless the rape and incest exceptions are restored.
    “Are we simply baby machines? Are you pregnant with a dead baby?    Too bad.    Raped at 11 by your grandfather and got pregnant?    That’s just too bad,” Sen. Penry Gustafson said.
    Gustafson watched as the Senate’s longest-serving woman, Sen. Katrina Shealy, said the 41 men in the Senate would be better off listening to their wives, daughters, mothers, granddaughters and nieces.
    “Yes, I’m pro-life.    I’m also pro-life for the mother, the life she has with her children who are already born.    I care about the children who are forced into adulthood, made up by a Legislature full of men so they can feel good about it,” Shealy said.
    Senators who support the ban said the state needs to show it values all life by taking advantage of the opening created by the U.S. Supreme Court.
    Sen. Richard Cash compared abortion to slavery Tuesday, asking if “the human being in the womb is nothing more than the property of a woman?”
    “Does an unborn human being have the most fundamental civil right of all, which is the right to life?” said Cash, who has made ending abortion his chief focus in five years in the Senate.
    The same bill without the exceptions appeared to fail in the more conservative state House last week before some Republicans maneuvered through a series of votes to allow abortions for rape and incest victims up to the 12th week of pregnancy.
    Senators did agree to change the bill to allow abortions when a doctor determines a fetus has a serious medical problem and will not survive outside the womb, and to allow dependents to get birth control if their parents get insurance through the health plan for state employees.
    The bill would ban all abortions in South Carolina except when the mother’s life is at risk.    Before they were removed, the bill also included exceptions for pregnancies caused by rape or incest, allowing abortions up to 12 weeks after conception.    In those cases, the doctor would have had to tell the patient that the crime and the abortion will be reported, with her name given to the county sheriff within 24 hours of the procedure.
    South Carolina currently has a ban on abortions once cardiac activity in a fetus is detectable, which is usually about six weeks.    But that law has been suspended as the South Carolina Supreme Court reviews whether it violates the state’s constitutional right to privacy.    That leaves South Carolina’s older 20-week abortion ban as the current benchmark.
Republican South Carolina Sen. Richard Cash speaks about a bill banning abortion
on the Senate floor in Columbia, S.C., on Wednesday. PHOTOS BY JEFFREY COLLINS/AP
9/9/2022 Florida school board votes down recognizing LGBTQ+ month
    MIAMI – The Miami-Dade School Board overwhelming decided against recognizing October as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer History month which included a measure to teach 12th graders about two Supreme Court cases affecting the LGBTQ community.    Parents, teachers and students spoke for more than three hours Wednesday.    The board then voted 8-1 against the measure.    Other months are recognized to teach students about history, including Hispanic Heritage, Black history and women’s history.
[NOW IF WE CAN ONLY GET A WHITE MONTH SINCE WE DO EXIST - JOKINGLY.].

9/9/2022 Senate to vote on same-sex marriage by Mary Clare Jalonick, ASSOCIATED PRESS
'We all want to pass this quickly,' said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer. Mariam Zuhaib/AP     WASHINGTON – Majority Leader Chuck Schumer vowed Wednesday that the Senate will vote on legislation to protect same-sex marriage 'in the coming weeks' as a bipartisan group backing the bill negotiates changes to gain more Republican support.
    The vote, expected by the end of the month, comes as Democrats and a small group of Republicans are moving to safeguard same-sex marriage following the Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade and the federal right to an abortion.    Lawmakers fear the court’s ruling, and a concurring opinion from Justice Clarence Thomas, indicate that an earlier high court decision protecting same-sex marriage could come under threat.
    'We all want to pass this quickly,' Schumer said.    'I hope there will be 10 Republicans to support it.'
    A bipartisan group of senators, led by Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, is working to round up those ten GOP votes needed to overcome a filibuster and get the legislation through the 50-50 Senate.
    'I think the momentum is going in the right direction,' Baldwin said after the bipartisan group met Wednesday.
    The Senate push for the historic vote – and the openness by some Republicans to back it in an election year – reflects a seismic shift on the issue since the Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision legalizing gay marriage nationwide.     Some 70% of U.S. adults in a Gallup poll released in June 2021 said same-sex unions should be valid under the law.
    The bill protecting same-sex marriage cleared the House in a July vote with the support of 47 Republicans – a larger than expected number that gave the measure a boost in the Senate.
    To win over more Senate Republicans, negotiators are planning to introduce amendments aimed at addressing concerns from some about 'religious liberty' – the rights of religious institutions or religious business owners to oppose same-sex marriage, for example.    Supporters say such religious liberty is already enshrined in law, but new language would simply make that clear.
    Another proposed tweak to the bill would make clear that a marriage is between two people, an effort to ward off some far-right criticism that the legislation could endorse polygamy.
    Baldwin and two of the Republicans supporting the marriage bill, Maine Sen. Susan Collins and North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, said Wednesday the group was drafting the amendments to address the concerns they’ve heard from their GOP colleagues.    'There’s no harm in doing it,' Tillis said, even though some Democrats have pointed out those rights are already protected under law.
    Collins said the amendment would 'make crystal clear that it does not in any way infringe religious liberties' and allow Republicans to have input on the bill.
    The legislation would repeal the Clinton-era Defense of Marriage Act and require states to recognize all marriages that were legal where they were performed.    The new Respect for Marriage Act would also protect interracial marriages by requiring states to recognize legal marriages regardless of 'sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin.'

9/9/2022 SC senators reject abortion ban - 5 Republicans, all Dems refuse to back measure by Jeffrey Collins, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Republican state Sen. Tom Davis opposes a blanket ban on abortions in South Carolina and said he would argue against
the bill until the 46-member Senate mustered the 26 votes required to end the filibuster. JEFFREY COLLINS/AP     COLUMBIA, S.C. – South Carolina senators rejected a ban on almost all abortions Thursday in a special session called in the aftermath of the U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade after five Republicans, including all the chamber’s women, refused to support it.
    The 30 Republicans in the 46-member chamber had a majority to pass the ban, but did not have the extra votes to end a threatened filibuster by Republican Sen. Tom Davis.
    Davis, the chief of staff for former Gov. Mark Sanford before being elected to the Senate in 2009, was joined by the three Republican women in the Senate, a fifth GOP colleague and all Democratic senators to oppose the proposed ban.
    Davis said he promised his daughters he would not vote to make South Carolina’s current six-week abortion ban stricter because women have rights, too.
    “The moment we become pregnant we lost all control over what goes on with our bodies,” Davis said, recalling what his daughters told him.    “I’m here to tell you I’m not going to let it happen.”
    After a recess to work through their options, Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey conceded the abortion ban likely couldn’t pass.
    “We were never going to pass a total abortion ban,” Massey said.    “We never had the votes to pass even what the House passed.”
    Senators did pass a few changes to the six-week ban, including cutting the time that victims of rape and incest who become pregnant can seek an abortion from 20 weeks to about 12 weeks and requiring that DNA from the aborted fetus be collected for police.
    The bill goes back to the House, which passed a ban with exceptions for rape or incest.
    South Carolina’s six-week ban is currently suspended as the state Supreme Court reviews whether it violates privacy rights. In the meantime, the state’s 2016 ban on abortions 20 weeks after conception is in effect.
    South Carolina’s General Assembly was meeting in a special session to try to join more than a dozen other states with abortion bans.
    Most of them came through so-called trigger laws designed to outlaw most abortions when the U.S. Supreme Court threw out the constitutional right to end a pregnancy in June.    Indiana’s Legislature passed a new ban last month that has not taken effect.
    The debate started Wednesday with the three Republican women in the South Carolina Senate speaking back-to-back, saying they couldn’t support the bill unless the rape or incest exceptions were restored.
    Sen. Katrina Shealy said the 41 men in the Senate would be better off listening to their wives, daughters, mothers, granddaughters and looking at the faces of the girls in Sunday School classes at their churches.
    “You want to believe that God is wanting you to push a bill through with no exceptions that kill mothers and ruins the lives of children – lets mothers bring home babies to bury them – then I think you’re miscommunicating with God.    Or maybe you aren’t communicating with Him at all,” Shealy said before senators added a proposal allowing abortions if a fetus cannot survive outside the womb.
    Massey helped broker the compromise among Republicans that briefly returned the exceptions to the bill.
    He pointed out state health officials recorded about 3,000 abortions in 2021 within the first six weeks of a pregnancy.
    “Heartbeat is great, but this I think is better,” Massey said.    “I don’t think abortion should be used as birth control.”
    Senate Minority Leader Brad Hutto said Republican women stood up for all women in South Carolina, while Republican men let them down. He said Democrats didn’t want any changes to current laws.
    “There may be a sentiment that this is the same as what we already had.    It’s not.    It’s worse in many regards,” Hutto said.
    Republican Gov. Henry McMaster, who has said before he would be happy if there were no abortions in the state, thought the Senate version struck an appropriate balance, governor’s spokesman Brian Symmes said “It is the governor’s hope that the House and Senate will soon come to an agreement and send a bill to his desk for signature,” Symmes said.
    Republican Sen. Sandy Senn, who didn’t vote for the six-week ban in 2021, said a total ban would be an invasion of the privacy against every woman in the state.
    “If what is going on in my vagina isn’t an unreasonable invasion of privacy for this legislature to get involved in, I don’t know what is,” Senn said.

9/9/2022 Michigan’s high court puts abortion question on ballot - State’s voters to decide whether to protect rights by Joey Cappelletti, Sara Burnett and Ed White, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    LANSING, Mich. – Voters will determine whether to place abortion rights in the Michigan Constitution, the state Supreme Court declared Thursday, settling the issue a day before the fall ballot must be completed.
    Abortion rights would be guaranteed if the amendment passes on Nov. 8. A 1931 state law makes it a crime to perform most abortions, but the law was suspended in May and a judge this week followed up by striking it down as unconstitutional.    Though appeals of that decision are likely, the law would be trumped if voters approve the amendment in the fall election.
    There are political implications beyond the ballot question.
    Democrats say the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade is mobilizing voters and will help Democratic candidates this fall, when top races including governor, secretary of state and attorney general are on the Michigan ballot.     They point to conservative Kansas, where voters overwhelmingly defeated a measure that would have allowed the Republican controlled Legislature to tighten restrictions or ban the procedure outright.
    In Michigan, a state elections board on Aug. 31 deadlocked along party lines on whether the abortion initiative should appear on the ballot, with Republicans voting no and Democrats voting yes.    The 2-2 tie meant the measure wasn’t certified for the ballot.
    Supporters submitted more than 700,000 signatures, easily clearing the minimum threshold. But Republicans and abortion opponents argued the petitions had improper or no spacing between certain words and were confusing to voters.
    “What a sad marker of the times,” Chief Justice Bridget McCormack said in a brief statement that accompanied the Supreme Court’s 5-2 order.
    McCormack said “there is no dispute” that every word was legible and in the correct order.
    Republican members of the Board of State Canvassers “would disenfranchise millions of Michiganders not because they believe the many thousands of Michiganders who signed the proposal were confused by it, but because they think they have identified a technicality that allows them to do so, a game of gotcha gone very bad,” McCormack said.
    The majority was made up of Mc-Cormack, three other Democratic justices and a Republican justice.    Two Republicans dissented.     The court directed state canvassers, who meet again Friday, to sign off on the ballot question.    Tony Daunt, a Republican who had voted against the proposal, last week said that the board would obey a court order.
    Attorney General Dana Nessel, a Democrat who supports abortion rights, hailed the decision.     “Our state Constitution provides the people with direct access to the democratic process and that access should not be limited by appointed individuals acting beyond the scope of their duty,” Nessel said.
    A group called Citizens to Support MI Women and Children said it will campaign against the amendment.    Right to Life of Michigan also will be a major opponent.
    “Current events continue showing us that any nation that sees the next generation as an existential threat – rather than an existential necessity – has no future,” Right to Life said on Facebook.
    There was no immediate comment from Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who is in favor of the ballot question and is seeking reelection.    Her Republican opponent, Tudor Dixon, opposes abortion rights except to save the life of the mother.
    Results of a poll published this week by The Detroit News and WDIV-TV showed abortion and women’s rights was the top issue motivating Michigan residents to vote in November, ahead of inflation and cost of living, education, and the economy and jobs. The poll also showed a majority of likely voters support a proposed constitutional amendment guaranteeing abortion rights.
    In a dissent, Justice Brian Zahra said supporters of the abortion question did not have a “clear legal right” to the ballot.
    “Words separated by spaces cease being words or become new words when the spaces between them are removed,” Zahra said.

9/10/2022 Justices block recognition of LGBTQ club at Yeshiva U by ASSOCIATED PRESS
    WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court has temporarily blocked a court order that would have forced Yeshiva University to recognize an LGBTQ group as an official campus club.
    The court acted Friday in a brief order signed by Justice Sonia Sotomayor that indicated the court would have more to say on the topic at some point.
    The university, an Orthodox Jewish institution in New York, argued that granting recognition to the group, the YU Pride Alliance, “would violate its sincere religious beliefs.”
    On the other side, the club said Yeshiva already has recognized a gay pride club at its law school.
    A New York state court sided with the student group and ordered the university to recognize the club immediately.    The matter is on appeal in the state court system, but judges there refused to put the order on hold in the meantime.
    The Supreme Court has been very receptive to religious freedom claims in recent years.
    In June, conservatives who hold a 6-3 majority struck down a Maine program prohibiting state funds from being spent at religious schools and ruled a high school football coach in Washington state has the right to pray on the field after games.

9/10/2022 Planned Parenthood maps strategy to protect abortion - Leaders meet in Calif. to plan for abortion rights by Sophie Austin and Adam Beam, ASSOCIATED PRESS
“Anti-freedom states have been playing the long game. They have successfully led a ruthless, coordinated siege on reproductive
freedom,” says California Attorney General Rob Bonta. “It’s time that we play that game as well.” RICH PEDRONCELLI/AP FILE     SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Planned Parenthood leaders from 24 states gathered in California’s capital Friday to begin work on a nationwide strategy to protect and strengthen access to abortion, a counteroffensive aimed at pushing back against restrictions that have emerged in more than half of the country after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.
    Their goal is to emulate the success liberals have had in California, where state lawmakers passed some of the most robust abortion protections in the country this year, culminating in a statewide election this fall that would make abortion a constitutional right in the nation’s most populous state.
    California Attorney General Rob Bonta, speaking to a group of 25 leaders in a hotel conference room in Sacramento, with another 30 watching online, said abortion advocates could channel what he called the “ruthless energy” of anti-abortion advocates – “but not as a way to hurt people.”
    “Anti-freedom states have been playing the long game.    They have successfully led a ruthless, coordinated siege on reproductive freedom,” Bonta said.    “It’s time that we play that game as well.”
    But duplicating California’s results in the rest of the country won’t be easy.    California’s government is dominated by Democrats who support abortion access and rushed to support new legislation this year after the court overturned the landmark 1973 decision that effectively legalized abortion nationwide.
    In Washington, although Democratic President Joe Biden supports abortion, Democrats hold narrow majorities in the House and Senate – advantages that could be wiped out after the midterm elections in November.
    Even if Democrats retain control of the U.S. Senate, they likely still would not have enough votes to stop Republicans from blocking abortion legislation.
    Democrats in the House have already voted to pass a bill that would make abortion legal nationwide, but they have been unable to get the bill past an evenly divided Senate.
    “We can only get so far through our inside maneuverings.    We also need your outside mobilization to rally support at the grassroots level, as you do so well,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat from San Francisco, said in a video message to the group on Friday.
    Jodi Hicks, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, said in an interview that one goal of Friday’s meeting was for leaders across different states to discuss what strategies have worked to protect abortion access and to create a unified blueprint in the coming months.
    “We really want to learn from each other,” Hicks said.
    Participants were not specific about their strategies to protect and expand abortion access during the portions of Friday’s meeting attended by a reporter for The Associated Press.
    Abortion opponents also are mobilizing nationally.    One anti-abortion group, National Right to Life, has proposed model legislation for states that would ban all abortions except to prevent the death of a pregnant woman.    New legal frontiers could include prosecuting doctors who defy bans, and skirmishes over access to medication abortions already are underway.    Others hope to get more conservatives elected in November to advance an anti-abortion agenda.
    Abortion rights groups feel an urgency to act, especially with bans and restrictions in place in a majority of states.    Just three months after Roe v. Wade fell, abortion access in more than half of U.S. states is considered “restrictive,” according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports abortion rights.
    That includes abortion bans in 11 states, two states where abortion is prohibited after six weeks of pregnancy and nine states that limit access in other ways.

9/10/2022 SC Senate looks to Jan. session on abortion by James Pollard, ASSOCIATED PRESS/REPORT FOR AMERICA
    COLUMBIA, S.C. – Nearly three months after the Supreme Court opened the door for a new abortion law, the South Carolina Senate sent a bill revising the state’s previous six week ban back to the House, where legislators passed a much more restrictive proposal.    It comes after the Senate rejected a total abortion ban that would not have made exceptions for pregnancies caused by rape or incest.
    House Republican lawmakers must now decide whether an altered ban at cardiac activity – which one senator said should lift the state Supreme Court’s temporary injunction – was worth their summer return.    Regardless, the upper chamber’s party leaders are looking ahead to January’s regular session, where they have suggested the host of other issues around healthcare and children’s welfare raised this summer will arise.
    The Senate changed the currently blocked six-week ban by cutting the period during which pregnancies resulting from rape or incest may be aborted from 20 weeks to about 12 weeks.    The new bill would also require that police receive the aborted fetus’ collected DNA.    It also includes exceptions for the life and health of the pregnant patient, and fatal fetal anomaly approved by two doctors.
    Rep. John McCravy, who chaired the House committee tasked with drafting the ban, blasted the new proposal in a Friday statement.    The Senate’s “pro-life majority,” he said, should stand against the “Beaufort Bully,” referring to Republican Sen. Tom Davis, who successfully filibustered a ban on almost all abortions.
    “This amended version does not advance the cause of life in SC and I cannot concur with a bill that does nothing,” McCravy said.    “We were not called back to pass a bill we already have – we were called to re-write the laws of our state after the Dobbs decision.”
    Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey told reporters Thursday evening he hopes the House understands the Senate lacked the votes for a “more aggressive” proposal and passes the upper chamber’s bill.    While the outcome was not ideal to him, he said it’s unlikely the body votes on another abortion ban this winter.
    “I don’t know that there’s education in the second kick of the mule,” Massey said.    “It’s pretty clear to me where the votes are.    And I don’t want to try some futile effort if you don’t have the votes to do it.”
    Massey said recent laws giving paid family leave to state employees and removing the need for a prescription to access birth control are “a step in the right direction.”    But he added that the legislature has more work ahead to support women.    Massey specifically said adoption should be less costly.
    At a news conference last week, Republican Sen. Richard Cash said legislators are working on “making adoption easier, faster, more economical.”    Palmetto Family Council President Dave Wilson said the Christian, conservative non-profit would work with lawmakers to “create an expressway for those adoptions.”
    Senate Minority Leader Brad Hutto agreed that the debate highlighted shortcomings in the state’s current laws around women’s and children’s health.    He said elected officials this January should bolster insurance coverage, expand access to contraceptives and improve “age-specific” sex education.
    Amanda McDougald Scott is a policy researcher and early childhood advocate who protested against the abortion bans at the state house this week.    On Wednesday, Scott warned that childcare is “crumbling” and badly needs more funding.
    “Providing the money for the infrastructure for childcare in general would be a great first step,” she said.    “It can’t just be grants or band-aids.    It has to be real, sustained support.”
    But one of the three Republican women in the upper chamber threw cold water on the likelihood that these conversations will be backed up with action.
    Republican Sen. Katrina Shealy said Wednesday that her colleagues had failed to support her legislation to improve foster care, prevent sex trafficking and give free school meals.

[THE SINS OF AN INDIVIDUAL DOES NOT JUSTIFY KILLING OF A BABY BUT THE SICK INDIVIDUAL DESERVES EXECUTION AND THE PEOPLE OF LOUSIVILLE NEED TO COME DOWN ON THESE TYPE OF INDIVIDUALS WITH THE FULL CHARGES OF THE LAW.]
9/11/2022 State data: Patients as young as 9 got abortions - Youngsters now have to carry baby to term by Deborah Yetter, Louisville Courier Journal USA TODAY NETWORK
Kentucky Right to Life Director Addia Wuchner, seen here in 2018, won’t say
if exceptions should be made for girls. MATT STONE/COURIER JOURNAL     In July, the case of a 10-year-old, pregnant Ohio girl forced to travel to Indiana for an abortion after she was raped sparked national outrage — and skepticism by some anti-abortion politicians who questioned whether the account was true.
    It was.    Within days, a Columbus man was arrested after police said he admitted to raping the child at least twice in the state where abortion recently had been banned after six weeks of pregnancy.
    While such a pregnancy in a young girl is rare, it is not unique.
    In Kentucky, the two youngest patients to receive an abortion over the past two years were age 9.    Under Kentucky law, sexual intercourse with a 9year-old is considered first-degree rape.
    In 2021, and again this year, one 9-year-old each year had a pregnancy terminated, according to data from the Kentucky Office of Vital Statistics obtained by The Courier Journal through an open records request.    The records provide no other details about the individuals.
    In all, 34 girls ages 15 or younger received abortions in 2021, according to state statistics, with 16 generally regarded as the age where minors are able to consent to sexual intercourse.
    Yet stringent new abortion laws in Kentucky and some other states, including Ohio, now largely ban abortion, even if a pregnancy resulted from rape and despite the age of a person. The laws follow the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 24 decision to strike down Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark case establishing abortion as a federal constitutional right.
    Abortion in Kentucky has not been available since Aug. 1, except in case of a medical emergency, while a legal challenge to the state trigger law and another, banning abortion after six weeks of pregnancy, is pending.
    And that outrages abortion rights advocates, including medical professionals who care for girls and teens.
    “Do we expect a fourth-grader to carry a pregnancy to term, deliver and expect that child to carry on after this horror without permanent psychological trauma,” asked Dr. Anne-Marie Amies Oelschlager, a University of Washington professor of pediatric and adolescent gynecology.    “Are we really expecting this of our pregnant youth, even if the pregnancy may not result in death?”
    Furthermore, she said, young girls and teens aren’t physically mature enough to carry a pregnancy to term, which increases risks to the patient as well as the fetus.
    Oelschlager’s comments were provided by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which considers abortion to be essential health care.
    What is Kentucky’s ‘trigger law’?
    In Kentucky, a “trigger law” that took effect after the Supreme Court ruling makes no exceptions for rape or incest and permits abortion only to prevent the death, substantial risk of death or damage to a “life-sustaining organ” of a pregnant patient. It requires the physician in such cases to make “reasonable efforts” to save the life of the patient and “the unborn human being.”     Ohio’s law bans abortion at six weeks of pregnancy, before most people realize they are pregnant, with no exception for rape or incest.    It does allow abortion to prevent death or disabling injury to the pregnant patient.     A new Indiana law takes effect Sept. 15 that bans abortions with narrow exceptions for rape, incest, fatal fetal abnormalities or the life and health of the pregnant individual.     Abortion opponents in Kentucky are unwilling to allow exceptions beyond those meant to save the patient’s life or prevent disabling injury.    They include Rep. Joe Fischer, R-Fort Thomas, and sponsor of House Bill 148, which became Kentucky’s trigger law ending almost all abortions after Roe v. Wade was struck down.
    “This bill will reflect what I think are Kentucky values and will protect all human life from the moment of conception,” Fischer said, testifying in 2019 before a legislative committee.     Addia Wuchner, executive director of Kentucky Right to Life, declined to say an exception should be made for girls as young as 9 who become pregnant.
    “It is still a life that has been formed,” Wuchner said.    “All life is sacred and we’re in an area where this child, this unborn child, is being punished because of the father.”
    Wuchner said to her, the key questions when a young girl becomes pregnant from rape are, “Who was there to protect that child? … Was this reported to the authorities?”
    But Planned Parenthood, which supports abortion rights, had harsh words for laws that limit abortion, including for those who have experienced sexual assault.
    “Every person, in every circumstance, deserves access to health care when and where they need it,” said Katie Rodihan, a spokeswoman for the six state Planned Parenthood group that includes Kentucky.    “Shame on lawmakers in Kentucky for abandoning victims of rape and incest — including children — and subjecting them to the immense trauma of forced pregnancy by their predator.    This law is cruel and inhumane.”
    Kentucky’s total abortion numbers are not yet available for 2021 but in 2020, 4,104 abortions were performed in Kentucky with 36 of the patients ages 15 or younger and 368 of them ages 19 or younger, according to a state annual report.
    In 2018, state law changed to include rape as an offense in cases where girls 16 and 17 have sexual intercourse with someone at least 10 years older, said Jenna Cassady, an assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney in Fayette County who prosecutes sex offenses and pushed for the change in the law.
    Cassady said she can’t understand why child rape victims who become pregnant don’t have access to abortion.     “They are victims,” she said.    “They shouldn’t be forced to carry a pregnancy when this entire thing is forced upon them.”
    Dorislee Gilbert, a former prosecutor of child sexual abuse cases in Jefferson County, said she thinks some people simply don’t want to believe such heinous crimes occur.
    “Nobody wants to believe a 10-yearold could become pregnant,” she said.
    That disbelief involving child rape includes some jurors in cases of sex abuse she prosecuted despite evidence and testimony of the crime, Gilbert said.
    “I’ve seen it over and over,” she said.    “The minute you think someone could be so vile and evil as to do that to a child you’re not safe anymore.    Your perfect world is no longer safe.”
    Gilbert said she sometimes prosecuted perpetrators who preyed on young girls in the belief they couldn’t become pregnant because they haven’t started menstrual periods, which mark the onset of fertility.
    USA TODAY reported in July that some children start their first menstrual cycle as early as 8 years old and could become pregnant while others may not get their first period until 14.
    And girls can become pregnant before that, said Dr. Oelschlager, the University of Washington physician.
    “Pregnancy can happen prior to the first period,” she said.
    If girls have started periods, they may be irregular and adolescents may not know they are pregnant right away, she said.
    Referring to the case of the 10-yearold in Ohio, Oelschlager said such situations involving rape and pregnancy are more frequent than many want to believe.
    “For those who wish that this would be a rare case, I would like you to know that I have cared for hundreds of patients who were sexually assaulted in adolescence and much younger,” she said.    “My heart aches for this 10-yearold and all the other adolescents who are in a similar situation across our country right now.”
    Contact reporter Deborah Yetter at dyetter@courier-journal.com.    Find her on Twitter at @d_yetter.
Protesters hold up signs to support abortion rights in Louisville. on June 24, 2022. JOSEPH COOKE/COURIER JOURNAL
9/11/2022 GOP nominee for Kansas governor tries to flip abortion issue - Kelly says Schmidt lied about her stance on issue by John Hanna, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt, right, the Republican nominee for governor, debates as
Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly watches at the Kansas State Fair on Saturday in Hutchinson. Both candidates
are appealing to independents and moderate Republicans, who are crucial swing voters. JOHN HANNA/AP     HUTCHINSON, Kan. – The Republican candidate for Kansas governor tried Saturday to make the Democratic incumbent’s support for abortion rights a political liability, even with a strong statewide vote last month in favor of preserving access to abortion.
    GOP nominee Derek Schmidt, a three-term Kansas attorney general, said during a debate at the Kansas State Fair that he respects the Aug. 2 vote, in which voters decisively rejected a proposed amendment to the state constitution to allow the GOP-controlled Legislature to greatly restrict or ban abortion.    But he argued that Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly favors abortion with no restrictions “up to the moment of birth” and public funding for elective abortions.
    The statewide vote “does not mean the discussion has ended,” Schmidt told a crowd of about 800 people.
    “What was not on the ballot was Gov. Kelly’s position,” he said.
    Kelly said she’s confident that she stands with a majority of Kansas in opposing the proposed constitutional change.    While she has strongly supported abortion rights throughout her career in politics, she has avoided suggesting that she’d push for the repeal of existing restrictions.    That wouldn’t be likely anyway, with Republicans in control of the Legislature.
    Asked about Schmidt’s characterization of her position on abortion, she said, “He’s making that up.    You know, I have never said that.”
    Kelly is the only Democratic governor running for reelection this year from a state carried by former President Donald Trump in 2020, making her a tempting GOP target.    Many Republicans still anticipate that frustrations with high inflation and red-state opposition to Democratic President Joe Biden will boost Schmidt’s chances of winning in November.
    Schmidt’s television ads seek to tie Kelly to Biden, blame them both for inflation and portray the two Democrats as big-spending liberals, and he continued that throughout the State Fair debate before its raucous crowd, drawing chants from Kelly supporters of “Schmidt’s unfit!” and “Bull-Schmidt!”    The fair debate is a tradition for governor’s and U.S. Senate races, and organizers encourage partisans to chant, shout and wave signs as other fairgoers take in exhibitions, ride Midway attractions and sample cuisine such as “moink,” meatballs wrapped in bacon on a stick.     Pat McFerron, a Republican pollster from Oklahoma City who’s worked for Kansas Republican U.S. Sen. Jerry Moran, said people concerned most about economic issues tend to be swing voters.
    “Two months ago, they were all voting Republican, when gas prices were high,” he said.
    But Kelly brushed off the criticism, touting the state’s improved finances and her efforts to lure businesses to Kansas, noting several times that Japanese electronics giant Panasonic Corp. announced in July that it planned to build a multi-billion-dollar plant to manufacture batteries for electric-powered vehicles employing as many as 4,000 people. Kansas is providing $829 million in taxpayer-funded incentives over 10 years.
    As for being tied to Biden, Kelly said after the debate, “I have really stayed away from Washington politics.”
    Schmidt has promoted conservative causes as attorney general, frequently bringing Kansas into GOP lawsuits against Democratic presidents, though he also has an affable public persona. After the 2020 presidential election, he joined an unsuccessful lawsuit by Texas seeking to overturn the results in four battleground states won by Biden.
    He noted several times that he’s been willing to challenge the Biden’s administration on a wide variety of issues, including environmental regulations.    He called himself a Republican in the mold of the late U.S. Senate Majority Leader and GOP icon Bob Dole.
    “We will stand up and fight back,” Schmidt said in his closing.
    Neither candidate has focused much on abortion as an issue, despite the statewide vote in August, though some Democrats have argued that doing so would help Kelly. Schmidt opposes most abortions, saying he’d support exceptions to preserve the pregnant patient’s life, in cases of rape and incest and when a fetus wouldn’t survive after birth.

9/12/2022 Pope seeks prayers for peace pilgrimage - Francis to meet with religious leaders by ASSOCIATED PRESS
Pope Francis delivers his blessing as he recites the Angelus noon prayer from the window
of his studio overlooking St.Peter’s Square at the Vatican on Sunday. ANDREW MEDICHINI/AP     VATICAN CITY – Pope Francis on Sunday asked for prayers to accompany him this week on what he calls his “pilgrimage of peace” in Kazakhstan for a meeting of religious leaders.
    In remarks to the public in St. Peter’s Square, Francis noted that on Tuesday, he begins a three-day visit to the central Asian country to participate in a gathering of heads of world and traditional religions.
    “It will be an occasion to meet so many religious representatives and to dialogue as brothers, animated by the common desire for peace, the peace for which our world is thirsting,” Francis said.    “I ask everyone to accompany with prayer this pilgrimage of peace.”
    He had been hoping to meet during his trip with the Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill, who has sought to justify Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on spiritual and ideological grounds in a “metaphysical” battle with the West.    But earlier this summer, Kirill bowed out of the interfaith gathering.
    Francis had the first-ever encounter between a pope and a Russian Orthodox patriarch in 2016.    Plans for a second encounter earlier this year were postponed over the fallout of the war in Ukraine.br>     After Francis cited his pilgrimage, he urged continued prayers for the Ukrainian people, so that the “Lord gives them comfort and hope.”    He said a Polish cardinal who serves as his official almsgiver is in Ukraine to visit various communities and give concrete testimony of the closeness of the pope and the Catholic church.
[AND WE DO NOT HEAR FROM ANYONE ABOVE ABOUT THE ISSUE IN THE NEXT ARTICLE.].

9/12/2022 Thousands protest planned Pride gathering in Serbia by ASSOCIATED PRESS
People march during a protest against the international LGBT event EuroPride in Belgrade, Serbia, Sunday. DARKO VOJINOVIC/AP     BELGRADE, Serbia – Thousands of opponents of a pan-European LGBTQ event planned for this week in Belgrade marched through the Serbian capital on Sunday despite an announced ban of Europe’s largest annual gay gathering.
    The procession called by the conservative Serbian Orthodox Church and led by its clergy included anti-Western slogans as well as Russian flags and portraits of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
    After the march, Serbian Patriarch Porfirije held prayers at the main Saint Sava temple in Belgrade, saying “evil forces” want to “desecrate the purity of the family by imposing anti-God and unnatural unions as a substitute for marriage and family.”
    Organizers of the EuroPride – which includes a week of events and a Pride march in Belgrade on Sept. 17 – have said they will ignore the police ban and hold the LGBTQ festivities.
    Members of the European Pride Organizers Association chose Serbia’s capital three years ago to host the annual event, hoping it would represent a major breakthrough for a Slavic country that is traditionally conservative and under strong influence from the Orthodox Church.
    Serbia is formally seeking European Union membership, but has for years been moving closer to Russia’s political orbit.
    The Balkan country has voted for U.N. resolutions condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but has refused to join Western sanctions against Moscow.
    Serbia’s populist President Aleksandar Vucic, who has announced the ban, said Serbia’s police cannot cope with possible riots by right-wing groups against the Pride march amid a crisis over Serbia’s breakaway province of Kosovo as well as the energy crisis caused by the war in Ukraine.
    Serbia’s rights groups have urged supporters to join the Pride march as part of struggle for democracy that they say is under threat in Serbia from Vucic’s autocratic regime.
    Several EU officials have said they will join the LGBTQ events, while those calling on the Serbian government to reverse the announced ban include U.S. State Secretary Antony Blinken.
[I AM GLAD TO SEE THAT AN EU COUNTRY IS BRINGING TO LIFE THE ANTICHRIST ACTIONS AND DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT FOR NOW AND SUCCEED AGAINST GOVERNMENT OVER-REACH.].

9/13/2022 Faculty, students sue Christian school over LGBTQ hiring ban by David Crary, ASSOCIATED PRESS
A group of students, faculty and staff at Seattle Pacific University have sued leaders of the board of trustees for refusing to scrap
an employment policy barring people in same-sex relationships from full-time jobs at the Christian university. CHRIS GRYGIEL/AP     Divisions over LGBTQ-related policies have flared recently at several religious colleges in the United States.    On Monday, there was a dramatic new turn at one of the most rancorous battlegrounds – Seattle Pacific University.
    A group of students, faculty and staff at the Christian university sued leaders of the board of trustees for refusing to scrap an employment policy barring people in same-sex relationships from full-time jobs at SPU.    The 16 plaintiffs say the trustees’ stance – widely opposed on campus – is a breach of their fiduciary duties that threatens to harm SPU’s reputation, worsen enrollment difficulties and possibly jeopardize its future.
    The lawsuit, filed in Washington State Superior Court, requests that the defendants – including the university’s interim president, Pete Menjares – be removed from their positions.    It asks that economic damages, in an amount to be determined at a jury trial, be paid to anyone harmed by the LGBTQ hiring policy.
    “This case is about six men who act as if they, and the educational institution they are charged to protect, are above the law,” the lawsuit says.    “While these men are powerful, they are not above the law… They must be held to account for their illegal and reckless conduct.”
    In addition to Menjares, the defendants are board chair Dean Kato; trustees Matthew Whitehead, Mark Mason and Mike Quinn, and former trustee Michael McKee.    Whitehead and Mason are leaders of the Free Methodist Church, a denomination whose teachings do not recognize same-sex marriage and which founded SPU in 1891.
    There was no immediate response to the lawsuit from SPU, though its communications office acknowledged receiving a query from The Associated Press and said a reply was in the works.
    SPU’s LGBTQ-related employment policy has been a source of bitter division on the campus over the past two years.    One catalyst was a lawsuit filed against SPU in January 2021 by Jeaux Rinedahl, an adjunct professor who alleged he was denied a full-time, tenured position because he was gay.
    That lawsuit eventually was settled out of court, but it intensified criticism of the hiring.    Through surveys and petitions, it’s clear that large majorities of the faculty and student body oppose the policy, yet a majority of the trustees reaffirmed it in May – triggering resignations by other trustees and protests by students that included a prolonged sit-in at the school’s administrative offices.
    At SPU’s graduation on June 12, dozens of students protested by handing gay-pride flags to Menjares, rather than shake his hand, as they received diplomas.
    Kato, the trustees’ chair, responded to the protests with a firm defense of the hiring policy.
    “We acknowledge there is disagreement among people of faith on the topic of sexuality and identity,” Kato’s wrote to student activists.    “But after careful and prayerful deliberation, we believe these longstanding employee expectations are consistent with the University’s mission and Statement of Faith that reflect a traditional view on biblical marriage and sexuality.”
    In June, Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson notified SPU that his office was investigating “possible discriminatory employment policies and practices” at the school.    SPU was asked to provide details on hiring and firing policies related to individuals’ sexual orientation and involvement in a same-sex marriage or relationship.
    On July 27, SPU filed a federal court lawsuit against Ferguson, contending that his investigation violated the university’s right to religious freedom.
    “Seattle Pacific has asked a federal district court to step in and protect its freedom to choose employees on the basis of religion, free from government interference or intimidation,” the school said in a statement.
    Ferguson responded two days later, declaring that his office “respects the religious views of all Washingtonians” but chiding SPU for resorting to litigation.
    “The lawsuit demonstrates that the University believes it is above the law to such an extraordinary degree that it is shielded from answering basic questions from my office regarding the University’s compliance with state law,” Ferguson said.
    Ferguson said his office intervened after receiving numerous complaints from SPU faculty and students.
    Their basic concern, he said, was that the university – located in one of the country’s most liberal cities – “discriminates against faculty and staff on the basis of sexual orientation,” which is prohibited by state law.
    The plaintiffs in the new lawsuit against the trustees include six SPU students and 10 members of the faculty or staff.
    Among them is Chloe Guillot, who graduated from SPU earlier this year and now – despite her differences with the trustees – attends the university’s seminary.
    “I’m stubborn – there’s a part of me that refuses to give up,” she said, “I love professors I’ve had.”
    “One thing that’s been hard to communicate to the public is how the actions of the board are so different from the rest of the university,” Guillot said. “The lawsuit goes through the ways these board members have orchestrated a coup that contradicts everything the university stands for.”
    Among the faculty plaintiffs is Lynette Bikos, a professor of clinical psychology.    She described the board’s behavior as “nefarious” – jeopardizing SPU’s future and undermining its longstanding commitment to diversity.
    She cited the possibility of a 25% reduction in faculty positions and said consultants had warned professors that SPU might have only a few more years of financial viability unless circumstances change.
    The lawsuit, filed in Washington State Superior Court, requests that the defendants – including the university’s interim president, Pete Menjares – be removed from their positions.

9/13/2022 Boarding school in Missouri can remain open, with oversight by Jim Salter, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    A Christian boarding school in southwestern Missouri can remain open despite the state attorney general alleging a “dark pattern of behavior,” a judge ruled Monday.
    Judge David Munton’s ruling allows continued round-the-clock monitoring of Agape Boarding School in Stockton by Missouri child welfare workers.    The school serves about 60 boys.
    The Kansas City Star reported that the state was prepared to call two former Agape students to testify on Monday.    Agape attorney John Schultz told the judge there was no proof of any immediate health or safety concern for students and allowing former students to testify was “simply for publicity,” the Star reported.
    The judge didn’t allow the testimony but scheduled another hearing for Sept. 21.
    Attorney General Eric Schmitt’s office first sought to shut down Agape on Wednesday after learning that someone on the state registry for child abuse and neglect was actively working there.    On Friday, the attorney general’s office filed an amended motion alleging systemic abuse.
    “Agape’s operation of a residential care facility must cease because it presents an immediate health and safety concern for the children residing at Agape,” the court filing stated.    It also accused Agape of providing the state with incomplete information concerning which adults have access to children.
    “These new developments are sadly consistent with the dark pattern of behavior at Agape previously exposed by the Attorney General’s Office” and the Missouri Department of Social Services, the filing stated.
    Agape’s website proclaims, “We’re still open and accepting students!”    It calls itself a “Christian Boarding School That Turns Around Rebellious Boys.”
    Munton last week considered closing the school, but Agape officials told authorities that the person on the abuse and neglect registry was fired on Wednesday.    Munton allowed the school to remain open, with state supervision.
    Allegations of physical and sexual abuse at Agape and nearby Christian boarding school Circle of Hope Girls’ Ranch prompted a state law last year requiring stricter oversight of such facilities.    Among other things, the new law allows state or local authorities to petition the court for closure of a facility if there is believed to be an immediate health or safety threat to the children.
    Last year, Agape’s longtime doctor, David Smock, was charged with child sex crimes and five employees were charged with low-level abuse counts.    Schmitt’s office contended that 22 workers should have been charged, and with more serious crimes.    But in Missouri, only the local prosecutor can file charges, and Cedar County Prosecuting Attorney Ty Gaither has said no additional employees would be charged.
    Meanwhile, the husband-and-wife founders of Circle of Hope, Boyd and Stephanie Householder, face a combined 99 charges that include child abuse and neglect, sex crimes and other counts.    The school was ordered shut down in 2020.
    Several lawsuits filed on behalf of former students also have named Agape and Circle of Hope.

9/13/2022 Indiana abortion law to proceed - Hearing seeking to block ban set for next week by Tom Davies, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Anti-abortion supporters rally as the Indiana Senate Rules Committee meets at the Statehouse in Indianapolis
on July 26 to consider a Republican proposal to ban nearly all abortions in Indiana. MICHAEL CONROY/AP FILE     INDIANAPOLIS – An Indiana judge won’t hear arguments until next week on a lawsuit seeking to block the state’s abortion ban, leaving that new law set to take effect on Thursday.
    The special judge overseeing the case issued an order Monday setting a court hearing for Sept. 19, which is four days after the ban’s effective date.
    Indiana’s Republican-dominated Legislature approved the tighter abortion restrictions during a two-week special legislative session that ended Aug. 5, making it the first state to do so since the U.S. Supreme Court eliminated federal abortion protections by overturning Roe v. Wade in June.
    Indiana abortion clinic operators filed the lawsuit Aug. 31, saying the ban, which includes limited exceptions, “strips away the fundamental rights of people seeking abortion care” in violation of the Indiana Constitution.
    The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, which is representing the clinics, asked the judge Monday to issue an order before Thursday to temporarily prevent enforcement of the law.    It argued that allowing the law to take effect “will prohibit the overwhelming majority of abortions in Indiana and, as such, will have a devastating and irreparable impact on the plaintiffs and, more importantly, their patients and clients.”
    The lawsuit was filed in southern Indiana’s Monroe County, which includes the liberal-leaning city of Bloomington and Indiana University’s main campus, but two elected Democratic judges from that county declined to handle the case without stating any reasons.
    Judge Kelsey Hanlon, a Republican from neighboring Owen County, accepted appointment as special judge last week.
    Hanlon, who was first elected as a judge in 2014, was among three finalists that the state Judicial Nominating Commission selected in July for GOP Gov. Eric Holcomb to consider for appointment to the state appeals court.
    No court action had yet taken place as of Monday on a separate lawsuit filed Thursday in Marion County arguing the ban is at odds with the state’s religious freedom law, which Republicans enacted seven years ago.
    The Indiana ban includes exceptions allowing abortions in cases of rape and incest, before 10 weeks post-fertilization; to protect the life and physical health of the mother; and if a fetus is diagnosed with a lethal anomaly.
    The new law also prohibits abortion clinics from providing any abortion care, leaving such services solely to hospitals or outpatient surgical centers owned by hospitals.
    Planned Parenthood, which operates four of Indiana’s seven licensed abortion clinics, has said it planned to keep those sites open for other medical services, while those operated by other providers faced possible closure.
    The lawsuit argues the ban would violate the state constitution by infringing on “Hoosiers’ right to privacy, violate Indiana’s guarantee of equal privileges and immunities, and includes unconstitutionally vague language.”
    The question of whether the Indiana Constitution protects abortion rights is undecided.
    A state appeals court decision in 2004 said privacy was a core value under the state constitution that extended to all residents, including women seeking an abortion.    But the Indiana Supreme Court later upheld a law mandating an 18-hour waiting period before a woman could undergo an abortion while not deciding whether the state constitution included a right to privacy or abortion.
    The state attorney general’s office hasn’t yet filed a response to the lawsuit in court, but Republican Attorney General Todd Rokita said in a statement that “The text, history, and structure of our Constitution excludes any serious argument that abortion is a fundamental right in our state.”

9/13/2022 SC House to meet after divergent Senate bill on abortion by James Pollard, ASSOCIATED PRESS/REPORT FOR AMERICA
    COLUMBIA, S.C. – South Carolina Republican lawmakers will keep trying to enact new abortion restrictions later this month.
    Speaker Murrell Smith announced Monday that the House will meet on Sept. 27, more than two weeks after the Senate sent back a markedly different proposal from the one passed earlier by the lower chamber.    Contentious debates among Republicans over exceptions have emerged in a special session on abortion that convened after the U.S. Supreme Court’s June decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.
    It is unclear if the House will take up the Senate’s bill.    Smith told reporters earlier Monday that “all options are on the table.”        While Smith was disappointed with the outcome last week, he said this is how legislation gets made.     “I understand that each body has a different makeup and each body has the ability to put their imprint on a bill,” Smith said to reporters.    “I respect the Senate as a body and their votes.”
    The House passed a ban on abortion at all stages of pregnancy in late August with exceptions for the mother’s life and rape or incest up to 12 weeks.    The Senate passed a six-week ban, based on detection of cardiac activity in an embryo, with exceptions for pregnancies caused by rape or incest, to save the life of the mother and, when approved by two doctors, in cases of fatal fetal anomaly.
    The upper chamber’s bill varies slightly from a 2021 South Carolina law that’s on hold while the state Supreme Court considers a new legal challenge from abortion providers.    One change included cutting the period when pregnancies resulting from rape or incest may be aborted from 20 weeks to about 12 weeks.    The proposal also requires that police receive the fetus’ DNA.
    The state currently bans abortions 20 weeks after conception.

9/14/2022 ABORTION - BILL UPENDS DEBATE - GOP’s Graham unveils plan for nationwide ban after 15 weeks “We’re going nowhere. We welcome the debate. We welcome the vote in the United States Senate as to what America should look like in 2022.” Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham by Lisa Mascaro, ASSOCIATED PRESS
“America’s got to make some decisions,” Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham said Tuesday at a press conference at the Capitol in Washington. MARIAM ZUHAIB/AP
Top: Sen. Lindsey Graham’s own party leaders did not immediately embrace his abortion ban bill, which
would prohibit the procedure after 15 weeks of pregnancy with rare exceptions. KEVIN DIETSCH/GETTY IMAGES     WASHINGTON – Upending the political debate, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham introduced a nationwide abortion ban Tuesday, sending shockwaves through both parties and igniting fresh debate on a fraught issue weeks before the midterm elections that will determine control of Congress. h Graham’s own Republican Party leaders did not immediately embrace his abortion ban bill, which would prohibit the procedure after 15 weeks of pregnancy with rare exceptions, and has almost no chance of becoming law in the Democratic-held Congress.    Democrats torched it as extreme, an alarming signal of where “MAGA” Republicans are headed if they win control of the House and Senate in November.
    “America’s got to make some decisions,” Graham said at a press conference at the Capitol.
    The South Carolina Republican said rather than shying away from the Supreme Court’s ruling this summer overturning Roe vs. Wade’s nearly 50year right to abortion access, Republicans are preparing to fight to make a nationwide abortion ban federal law.
    “Oh, no, no, no, no, no, no, we’re going nowhere,” the senator said flanked by women advocates from the antiabortion movement.    “We welcome the debate.    We welcome the vote in the United States Senate as to what America should look like in 2022.”
    Reaction was swift, fierce and unwavering from Democrats who viewed Graham’s legislation as an extreme example of the far-right’s hold on the GOP, and as a political gift of self-inflicted pain for Republican candidates now having to answer questions about an abortion ban heading toward the midterm elections.
    “A nationwide abortion ban – that’s the contrast between the two parties, plain and simple,” said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.
    Sen. Patty Murray, a Democrat from Washington who is in her own fight for reelection, said Republicans “want to force” women to stay pregnant and deliver babies.
    “To anyone who thought they were safe, here is the painful reality,” she said.    “Republicans are coming for your rights.”
    The sudden turn of events comes in a razor-tight election season as Republicans hoping to seize control of Congress are struggling to recapture momentum, particularly after the Supreme Court’s landmark decision sparked deep concerns among some voters, with signs of women voters peeling away from the GOP.     In a midterm election where the party out of the White House traditionally holds an advantage, even more so this year with President Joe Biden’s lackluster approval ratings, the Democrats have regained their own momentum pushing back the GOP candidates in House and Senate races.     Tuesday’s announcement set up an immediate split screen with Biden and Democrats poised to celebrate their accomplishments in a ceremony at the White House after passage of the Inflation Reduction Act and Republicans forced to answer for Graham’s proposed abortion ban.
    “This bill is wildly out of step with what Americans believe,” said White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre in a statement.
    “While President Biden and Vice President Harris are focused on the historic passage of the Inflation Reduction Act to reduce the cost of prescription drugs, health care, and energy – and to take unprecedented action to address climate change – Republicans in Congress are focused on taking rights away from millions of women,” Jean-Pierre said.
    Graham’s legislation has almost zero chance of becoming law, but it elevates the abortion issue at a time when other Republicans would prefer to focus on inflation, border security and Biden’s leadership.
    The Republican bill would ban abortions nationwide after 15 weeks of pregnancy, expect in cases of rape, incest or risks to the physical health of the mother.    Graham said it would put the U.S. on par with many other countries in Europe and around the world.
    In particular, Graham’s bill would leave in place state laws that are more restrictive.    That provision is notable because many Republicans have argued the Supreme Court’s ruling leaves the abortion issue for the states to decide.
    But the legislation from the Republicans makes it clear states are only allowed to decide the issue if their abortion bans are more stringent.
    Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who is one seat away from majority control, declined to embrace Graham’s legislation.
    “I think every Republican senator running this year in these contested races has an answer as to how they feel about the issue,” McConnell said.    “So I leave it up to our candidates who are quite capable of handling this issue to determine for them what their response is.”    The Democratic senators most at risk this fall and other Democratic candidates running for Congress appeared eager to fight against Graham’s proposed nationwide abortion ban.
    Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, the Democrat from Nevada tweeted that Graham “and every other anti-choice extremist can take a hike.”
    Her Republican opponent, Adam Laxalt, has during his campaign insisted that abortion is protected in the state constitution, which it would no longer be under this bill.
    In Colorado, another Democratic up for reelection, Sen. Michael Bennet, tweeted: “A nationwide abortion ban is outrageous.“
    Bennet pledged “to defend a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions, no matter what ZIP code she lives in.    We cannot afford to let the Republicans take back the Senate.”
    His opponent in Colorado, Republican Senate hopeful Joe O’Dea, who supports putting abortion access that had been guaranteed under Roe vs. Wade into law, agreed, in part: “A Republican ban is as reckless and tone deaf as is Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer’s hostility to considering any compromise on late term abortion, parental notification or conscience protections for religious hospitals.”
    The races for control of Congress are tight in the split 50-50 Senate where one seat determines majority control and the House, where Speaker Nancy Pelosi can afford to lose only a very few seats.
    Pelosi called Graham’s bill the “clearest signal of extreme MAGA Republicans’ intent to criminalize women’s health freedom in all 50 states and arrest doctors for providing basic care.    Make no mistake: if Republicans get the chance, they will work to pass laws even more draconian than this bill.”
    Republican leaders on Capitol Hill tried to hold the party together amid the differences.
    “I think that what it’s attempting to do is probably change the conversation a little bit,” said Sen. John Thune, a Republican from South Dakota, and second- ranking party leader.
    “A nationwide abortion ban – that’s the contrast between the two parties, plain and simple.” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer

9/14/2022 California launches website promoting abortion services by Adam Beam, ASSOCIATED PRESS
California is promoting efforts to bring women from other states to its abortion clinics, a policy aimed at
increasing access to a procedure that has been outlawed or restricted in many states. RICHARD VOGEL/AP     SACRAMENTO, Calif. – California launched a publicly funded website on Tuesday to promote the state’s abortion services, listing clinics, linking to financial help for travel and lodging and letting teenagers in other states know they don’t need their parents permission to get an abortion in the state.
    The website is part of Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom’s pledge to make California a sanctuary for women seeking abortions now that the U.S. Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade – the landmark 1973 decision that said states could not ban abortion.
    The state budget includes $200 million to strengthen access to abortion in California, including money to build a website promoting the state’s abortion services.    That website went live on Tuesday, following an announcement from Newsom.
    “Abortion is legal, safe and accessible here in California – whether or not you live here, know that we have your back,” Newsom said in a news release.
    The website – abortion.ca.gov – includes information on different types of abortion and how to get one.    The site has sections devoted to people who live outside of California and immigrants who are living in the country without legal permission, saying federal policies keep immigration officials away from health care facilities.
    There’s a map showing the location of 166 abortion clinics statewide.    People can click to see an entire map, or they can enter a city and get a list of clinics nearby.    It says people who live in California might be able to get abortion medication by mail, foregoing the need to visit a clinic.
    Anti-abortion advocates have lamented the use of public funds to boost such services, arguing California has a myriad of other problems more deserving of public funding.
    But they haven’t been able to stop it in a state that is dominated by Democratic lawmakers and where public polls show a majority of voters support abortion rights.
    Newsom announced the website the same day Republican U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina introduced a bill that would ban abortions nationwide after 15 weeks of pregnancy.
    In a post to his Twitter account, Newsom juxtaposed Graham’s bill with California’s new website, saying Democrats are helping women while Republicans want to control them.
    “That’s their agenda,” Newsom tweeted.    “CA’s fighting back.”

9/14/2022 West Virginia lawmakers’ OK abortion ban with few exceptions by Leah Willingham, ASSOCIATED PRESS
West Virginia state senators debate a sweeping bill to ban abortion with
few exceptions on the Senate floor in Charleston, W.Va. LEAH WILLINGHAM/AP     CHARLESTON, W.Va. – West Virginia’s Legislature passed a sweeping abortion ban with few exceptions Tuesday, approving a bill that several members of the Republican supermajority said they hope will make it impossible for the state’s only abortion clinic to continue to offer the procedure.
    “It is going to shut down that abortion clinic, of that I feel certain,” Republican Sen. Robert Karnes said on the Senate floor, amid shouts from protesters standing outside the chamber doors.    “I believe it’s going to save a lot of babies.”
    Under the legislation, rape and incest victims would be able to obtain abortions at up to eight weeks of pregnancy, but only if they report to law enforcement first.    Such victims who are minors would have until 14 weeks to terminate a pregnancy and must report to either law enforcement or a physician.
    Rape and incest victims would have to report the assault within 48 hours of getting an abortion, and a patient must present a copy of a police report or notarized letter to a physician before the procedure can be performed.     Abortions also would be allowed in cases of medical emergencies.
    The bill now heads to the desk of Republican Gov. Jim Justice, who has signed several anti-abortion bills into law since taking office in 2017.    Lawmakers resumed debate on the bill Tuesday after failing to come to an agreement in late July, giving up the chance for the state to become the first to approve new legislation restricting access to abortions since the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in June removing its protected status as a constitutional right.
    Both the Senate and the House of Delegates speedily approved the bill, after several hours of debate.
    Dozens of protesters wearing pink shirts reading “bans off our bodies” and holding signs reading “abortion is healthcare” staged a rally in the     Capitol rotunda while lawmakers were in session.        Some of the group sat in the gallery as legislators discussed the bills, with some shouting down to legislators in frustration as they spoke in support of the bill.    Legislative leadership asked that the onlookers remain silent as lawmakers conducted business.    At one point, at least one protester was escorted out of the building by police.
    Lawmakers inserted several provisions they said were specifically targeted at the Women’s Health Center of West Virginia, which was the state’s first abortion clinic when it opened in 1976 following the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark case Roe v. Wade.    It has existed as the state’s sole abortion clinic for years, making it the ever-increasing target of anti-abortion lawmakers and protesters.
    The bill states that surgical abortions can only be performed at a state-licensed hospital by a physician with hospital privileges. Anybody else who performs an abortion, including nurse practitioners and other medical professionals, could face three to 10 years in prison.    A physician who performs an illegal abortion could lose their medical license.
    Pregnant people who obtain illegal abortions will not face any form of prosecution under the bill, however.
    Kaylen Barker, spokesperson for the Women’s Health Center of West Virginia, said the clinic will not be shutting down, even if the staff is no longer able to provide abortions.    Like many clinics that perform abortions, the facility did not offer the procedure daily.

9/15/2022 Indiana’s abortion ban to become law by Tom Davies, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Abortion-rights protesters fill Indiana Statehouse corridors outside legislative chambers on Aug. 5. Indiana’s
new abortion ban will make nearly all abortions illegal in the state as of Thursday. ARLEIGH RODGERS/AP FILE     INDIANAPOLIS – An abortion ban is set to take effect in Indiana, which was the first state to pass one after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June.
    When the law starts being enforced on Thursday, Indiana will join more than a dozen states with abortion bans, though most were approved before that Supreme Court ruling and took effect once the court threw out the constitutional right to end a pregnancy.
    West Virginia legislators approved an abortion ban on Tuesday and Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina introduced a bill that would ban abortion nationwide after the 15th week of pregnancy, with rare exceptions, intensifying the ongoing debate inside and outside of the GOP though the proposal has almost no chance of becoming law in the Democratic-held Congress.    Abortion rights supporters have filed two lawsuits trying to block Indiana officials from enforcing the ban but no court rulings have been issued yet and all seven of the state’s abortion clinics will lose their licenses to perform the procedure under the new law.
    What’s covered in the abortion ban?
    The Indiana ban includes exceptions allowing abortions in cases of rape and incest before the 10th week of pregnancy and to protect the mother’s life and physical health.    It also allows them if the fetus is diagnosed with a lethal anomaly.    The ban will replace state laws that generally prohibited abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy and tightly restricted it after the 13th week.
    Under the new law, abortions can be performed only in hospitals or outpatient centers owned by hospitals, meaning all abortion clinics will lose their licenses.
    Any doctors found to have performed an illegal abortion would be stripped of their medical license and could face felony charges punishable by up to six years in prison.
    How is Indiana’s action unique?
    Indiana’s Republican-dominated Legislature approved the ban during a two-week special legislative session following a political firestorm over a 10year-old rape victim who traveled to the state from neighboring Ohio to end her pregnancy.    The case gained worldwide attention when an Indianapolis doctor said the girl came to Indiana because of Ohio’s ban on abortions once fetal cardiac activity can be detected, which is usually around the sixth week of pregnancy and is often before the mother knows she’s pregnant.
    The Republicans who passed Indiana’s ban were deeply divided over whether to include exceptions beyond one for protecting the mother’s life, such as for cases of rape and incest.
    Similar divides among Republicans over such exceptions and whether to allow criminal charges against doctors stalled bills on tighter abortion restrictions in West Virginia and South Carolina this summer.    The ban that West Virginia legislators passed Tuesday is similar to Indiana’s and it now heads to Republican Gov. Jim Justice, who is expected to sign it into law.
    What is happening to Indiana’s abortion clinics?
    Indiana abortion clinic operators have told The Associated Press that they’ll stop offering abortions when the ban takes effect but continue to support patients with information about out-of-state clinics.    Planned Parenthood plans to keep its four Indiana clinics that offer abortions open and provide sexually transmitted disease testing and treatment, and contraception and cancer screenings, which it says comprise the bulk of its services.
    Indiana University Health, the state’s largest hospital system, has set up advisory teams that include a lawyer for consultations on whether patients meet the legal requirements for abortions.    Indiana hospitals performed 133 of the 8,414 abortions reported to the state Department of Health in 2021, with the remaining 98% taking place at clinics.
    What is status of lawsuits?
    The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed two lawsuits in the past two weeks seeking to delay the ban.
    One argues that the ban violates the Indiana Constitution by infringing on the right to privacy and the guarantee of equal privileges.    The other claims the ban conflicts with the state’s religious freedom law that Indiana Republicans passed in 2015 and that sparked a widespread backlash from critics who said it allowed discrimination against gay people.
    The question of whether the state constitution protects abortion rights is undecided.    A state appeals court ruled in 2004 that privacy is a core value under the state constitution that extends to all residents, including women seeking an abortion.    But the Indiana Supreme Court later upheld a law requiring an 18-hour waiting period before an abortion, though it didn’t decide whether the state constitution included the right to privacy or abortion.
    Indiana University law professor Daniel Conkle said bringing the lawsuits so soon before the ban was set to effect made it hard to get an injunction blocking it, but that it taking effect won’t end the court fight.

9/15/2022 County judge temporarily blocks Ohio law banning most abortions by Julie Carr Smyth, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    COLUMBUS, Ohio – A judge temporarily blocked Ohio’s ban on virtually all abortions Wednesday, again pausing a law that took effect after federal abortion protections were overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in June.
    The decision means abortions through 20 weeks’ gestation can continue for now, in keeping with state law in place before the ban.
    Hamilton County Judge Christian Jenkins’ decision to grant a 14-day restraining order against the law came as part of a lawsuit brought by the ACLU of Ohio on behalf of abortion providers in the state.    The clinics argue the law violates protections in the state Constitution guaranteeing individual liberty and equal protection. The suit also says the law is unconstitutionally vague.
    The law was signed by Republican Gov. Mike DeWine in April 2019, and prohibits most abortions after the first detectable “fetal heartbeat.”    Cardiac activity can be detected as early as six weeks into pregnancy, before many people know they’re pregnant.
    DeWine’s opponent in the November election, Democrat and abortion rights proponent Nan Whaley, called Wednesday’s ruling “a victory, albeit a temporary one, for Ohio women.”
    Abortion providers and their defenders have said the law has already created a host of hardships, including forcing a 10-year-old Ohio rape victim to travel to Indiana for an abortion.
    Right to Life of Greater Cincinnati had anticipated the judge was leaning toward a pause after a hearing held last week, when he asked questions about the 10-year-old’s case and suggested, “We should just be very honest about what we’re talking about here.”
    “Let’s just be very honest,” the antiabortion group wrote, “it is always, always best when LIFE is chosen.”

9/15/2022 Justices side with LGBTQ group at Jewish university – for now - 5-4 vote lifts temporary hold on court order by Mark Sherman, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court has cleared the way for an LGBTQ group to gain official recognition from a Jewish university in New York, though that may not last.
    By a 5-4 vote Wednesday, the justices lifted a temporary hold on a court order that requires Yeshiva University to recognize the group, the YU Pride Alliance, even as a legal fight continues in New York courts.
    Two conservatives, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, sided with the court’s three liberal justices to form a majority.
    The disagreement among the justices appears to be mostly about procedure, with the majority writing in a brief unsigned order that Yeshiva should return to state court to seek quick review and temporary relief while the case continues.
    If it gets neither from state courts, the school can return to the Supreme Court, the majority wrote.
    Four conservative justices dissented, in an opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito that said recognition should have been kept on hold because Yeshiva has made a strong case that its First Amendment religious rights have been violated.
    The Constitution “prohibits a State from enforcing its own preferred interpretation of Holy Scripture.    Yet that is exactly what New York has done in this case, and it is disappointing that a majority of this Court refuses to provide relief,” Alito wrote.    Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett joined his opinion.
    The upshot, Alito wrote, is that Yeshiva probably will have to recognize the Pride Alliance “for at least some period of time (and perhaps for a lengthy spell).”     On Friday, Justice Sonia Sotomayor signed the order that put things on hold and indicated the court would have more to say on the topic.
    The university, an Orthodox Jewish institution in New York, argued that granting recognition to the Pride Alliance, “would violate its sincere religious beliefs.”
    The club argued that Yeshiva’s plea to the Supreme Court was premature, also noting the university already has recognized a gay pride club at its law school.
    A New York state court sided with the student group and ordered the university to recognize the club immediately.    The matter remains on appeal in the state court system, but judges there refused to put the order on hold in the meantime.
    The Supreme Court has been very receptive to religious freedom claims in recent years.
    In June, conservatives who hold a 6-3 majority struck down a Maine program prohibiting state funds from being spent at religious schools and ruled a high school football coach in Washington state has the right to pray on the field after games.

9/16/2022 ELECTIONS 2022 - Abortion battle nets $2M+ in donations - Campaign contributions balloon over referendum by Joe Sonka, Louisville Courier Journal USA TODAY NETWORK
Protesters railed against Kentucky’s new restrictive abortion law outside Louisville Metro Hall on April 21, while
counter-protesters held signs aiming to block out the messages and share their side. ALTON STRUPP/COURIER JOURNAL     Two opposing political issues committees in Kentucky have amassed more than $2 million of contributions in a high-stakes battle over a constitutional amendment on the ballot, the fate of which may ultimately decide whether abortion remains illegal in the state.
    Tuesday marked a major political fundraising deadline in Kentucky with less than 60 days to Election Day, as candidates and political committees filed their first campaign finance reports of the general election season.
    Among the largest fundraisers in this week’s reports were Yes For Life, which supports the ballot referendum to declare there is no right to an abortion in the state constitution, and Protect Kentucky Access, an abortion rights coalition that opposes the amendment — and has raised four times the amount of their anti-abortion opposition.
    Candidates for several prominent judicial positions also pulled in a large amount of contributions, including competitive races for a Supreme Court district in Northern Kentucky and a seat on the influential Franklin Circuit Court — where a fundraising record has already been broken.
    Here is a rundown of the fundraising reports for those contests, as well as a look at the state legislature, where Republicans seek to further expand their dominant supermajority with several GOP committees building up an impressive war chest.
Abortion rights group takes big fundraising lead in amendment fight
    Protect Kentucky Access had already raised $285,000 by the last reporting deadline at the end of 2021, but reported hauling in nearly $1.5 million more over the past nine months — with a large majority of that coming after the Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade in June.
    Planned Parenthood affiliates contributed $701,000 to the abortion rights group in this period, adding to the $235,000 they had contributed last year.
    Other large donors to Protect Kentucky Access this year include the American Civil Liberties Union, which gave $300,000, and new federal super PAC Families United for Freedom, which pitched in $250,000.
    Protect Kentucky Access has already spent nearly half a million dollars this year, largely on campaign consultants and polling, but still had more than $1.2 million left at the end of the reporting period last week.
    Yes For Life was far behind their rival in fundraising this year, as it reported raising $350,000 and ending the period with $390,105 cash on hand.
    The anti-abortion amendment backers raised an additional $111,000 from Right to Life affiliates, $94,000 from the Family Foundation, $72,000 from the Kentucky Baptist Convention and $64,000 from the Catholic Conference of Kentucky — the same four groups that made up nearly all of Yes For Life’s $85,000 of contributions last year.
    The fundraising figures of the two groups are expected to significantly rise as the high-stakes referendum on abortion rights draws nearer, just as they did in Kansas this summer — where groups on both sides of a similar constitutional amendment spent more than $22 million, most coming in the final weeks.
    Kansas voters overwhelmingly rejected the proposed amendment to declare no constitutional right to abortion by a vote of 60% to 40%, despite Republicans having a huge partisan advantage in the state — and groups on both sides of the issue spending roughly the same amount, just more than $11 million.
    The current law banning nearly all abortion procedures in Kentucky was held up by the Court of Appeals and is now being taken up by the Kentucky Supreme Court, though the first hearing in the case is not until a week after the election — with the result of the referendum likely to play a large factor in the court’s ultimate ruling.
    Four new issues committees opposing the Kentucky amendment were formed this summer — Reproductive Access For All, Speak Up Speak Out Frankfort Committee, Northern Kentuckians for Reproductive Access and Kentuckians for Freedom — though they collectively reported raising only $6,000 as of last week.
Phillip Shepherd builds lead in record-breaking Franklin Circuit race
    Franklin Circuit Judge Phillip Shepherd is facing serious opposition from a well-funded and Republican-backed opponent, but is stepping up with an eye-popping fundraising total that will make this the most expensive circuit court race in Kentucky history.    Reporting $174,717 of contributions in the last two months from 564 individuals, Shepherd’s reelection campaign for a third 8-year term has now raised a total of $461,442 since last year.
    According to Kentucky Registry of Election Finance records dating back two decades, Shepherd’s fundraising total alone narrowly eclipses the previous high of what two candidates for a circuit court judgeship have raised and spent on a single race — all with two months remaining before the election.
    Shepherd’s campaign has already spent nearly $150,000 in the past two months, much of it on advertising and media buys, still leaving him with $267,782 cash on hand — more than double that of his opponent, Joe Bilby.
    Bilby — the general counsel for the Kentucky Department of Agriculture under Commissioner Ryan Quarles — has still raised an impressive amount, with his $49,275 of contributions over the summer bringing his total campaign haul to $171,833.
    Though judicial races are nonpartisan, Bilby has been helped along with direct support from GOP elected officials and political committees, as Republicans in Frankfort have railed against Shepherd’s ruling for many years — even successfully passing a bill last year to divert litigation against state agencies or regarding constitutional matters out of the Franklin Circuit.
    Bilby has received $4,000 from the Bluegrass Committee of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and other contributions from his inner circle, as well as from the Franklin County Republican Party and chairman of the Republican Party of Kentucky.     Senate President Robert Stivers also hosted a fundraiser for Bilby, who has received contributions from five Republican state legislators and state Treasurer Allison Ball.
    Bilby’s campaign spent just $20,000 over the summer, with $130,445 cash on hand left of last week. Kentucky Supreme Court Justice Michelle Keller fends off challenge from GOP legislator
    Kentucky Supreme Court Justice Michelle Keller is expected to face a tough reelection battle against longtime Republican state Rep. Joe Fischer in the 4th District, though she reported strong fundraising numbers Tuesday.
    Keller raised $121,520 over the past two months, bringing her total campaign haul to just shy of $200,000.    Her campaign spent $47,251 over the summer, with $117,143 remaining as of last week.
    The campaign of Fischer — the architect of the law banning abortion and chief sponsor of the abortion amendment now on the ballot — had raised nearly $29,000 through July, but has not yet filed his first general election finance report.
    Similar to the race between Shepherd and Bilby, Fischer has picked up considerable direct support from Republican elected officials, as Stivers and six other Republican state senators hosted a fundraiser for his campaign in July, as did McConnell two weeks ago.
    An independent watchdog group recently admonished Fischer for running what they called an overly partisan campaign, noting that he has promoted himself as “the conservative Republican” candidate in the nonpartisan judicial race.
    In the Supreme Court’s 2nd District race to replace retiring Chief Justice John Minton Jr., Court of Appeals Judge Kelly Thompson Jr. has been slightly outraised by fellow Bowling Green attorney Shawn Marie Alcott.
    Thompson, who has served as a state Court of Appeals judge since 2006, has now raised nearly $100,000 in the race, though Alcott raised $91,393 over the last two months to pull him into the overall fundraising lead.
    Both candidates’ campaigns have benefited from personal loans, with Thompson loaning himself $40,000 and Alcott loaning $50,000.
    In the 4th District race encompassing Jefferson County, Jefferson Circuit Judge Angela McCormick Bisig has built a commanding fundraising lead over her opponent, attorney Jason Bowman.
    Bisig’s has raised $218,909 for her run, while Bowman has run a limited campaign and only netted a $3,000 loan from himself in his June campaign filing.    Bowman failed to file his first general election report Tuesday.
GOP committees look to expand legislative supermajority
    Republicans already hold a dominant supermajority in both chambers of the Kentucky General Assembly — 75 of 100 seats in the House and 30 of 38 seats in the Senate — but are optimistic that this will grow even larger after the general election.
    The most recent fundraising report lend more reason for such optimism, as Republican political committees are building large war chests — with few signs of life from Democrats.
    KSL, Inc. — an unauthorized campaign committee (UCC) that pitched in well over half a million dollars worth of ads for GOP legislative candidates in the party’s 2020 routs — is poised to do the same in November, reporting more than $366,000 cash on hand as of last week.
    The GOP campaign committee spent nearly $190,000 to support Republican incumbents in the May primary who faced challengers from the “liberty” wing of the party, but replenished their account with more big contributions over the summer.
    KSL, Inc. received another $150,000 from the Republican State Leadership Committee, along with $35,000 from Washington-based kidney dialysis company Davita and $13,000 from the Kentucky Senate Caucus Campaign Committee.
    Kentucky For Small Business, another UCC whose treasurer is the staff attorney for the House GOP, also reported having at least $50,000 this summer from “gray machines” manufacturer Pace-O-Matic, though it has not yet filed a general election report.
    The UCC of the socially conservative Commonwealth Policy Center, which spent nearly $90,000 in support of GOP legislative candidates in the 2020 general election, also reported raising $18,700 this week, including $3,500 from Rocket Oil Company CEO Barry Eveland of Hanson.
    No UCCs have emerged yet that could provide significant support to Democratic legislative candidates in the fall, while the party’s caucus committees have fallen well behind those of Republicans in fundraising.
    Despite collectively spending more than $380,000 in the GOP primary in support of incumbent and other candidates facing “liberty” opponents, the House and Senate GOP caucus campaign committees ended July with $365,000 and $319,000 cash on hand, respectively.
    Meanwhile, the Democrats’ House caucus campaign committee reported just $222,000 cash on hand, while the Senate caucus committee raised just $3,000 in the second quarter, leaving it with $49,000.
    Tuesday marked a major political fundraising deadline with less than 60 days to Election Day, as candidates and political committees filed initial campaign finance reports for the general election season.

9/16/2022 Pope criticized over interfaith event by Nicole Winfield, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Pope Francis waves at the end of a meeting during the interfaith peace
conference in Nur-Sultan, Kazakhstan, Thursday. ALEXANDER ZEMLIANICHENKO/AP     NUR-SULTAN, Kazakhstan – Pope Francis reaffirmed the critical value Thursday of interfaith dialogue to contrast the “folly of war,” even as one of his own bishops warned that Francis’ participation in a big interfaith peace conference in Kazakhstan could imply papal endorsement of a “supermarket of religions.”
    Francis delivered the closing speech to the Kazakh government’s triennial conference of traditional religions, which gathered some 80 Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist and Taoist faith leaders who called for greater interfaith efforts to combat war, poverty, climate change and other ills facing the world.
    Francis praised the summit and underlined its conclusion that religion can never be used to justify war – a call that came against the backdrop of the Russian Orthodox Church’s support of Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine.    The final document says “extremism, radicalism, terrorism and all other forms of violence and wars, whatever their goals, have nothing to do with true religion and must be rejected in the strongest possible terms.”
    Without mentioning Russia or any other warring country by name, the final document calls on world leaders to “abandon all aggressive and destructive rhetoric which leads to destabilization of the world, and to cease from conflict and bloodshed in all corners of our world.”
    Francis told the gathering that interfaith encounters such as the Kazakh summit are “more valuable than ever in challenging times like our own, when the problems of the pandemic have been compounded by the utter folly of war.”
    A note of caution, however, came from Bishop Athenasius Schneider, the auxiliary bishop of Astana and one of Francis’ most vocal critics.    Schneider has joined other traditionalist and conservative cardinals and bishops in criticizing several of Francis’ signature gestures and what they say are his doctrinal ambiguities on issues such as homosexuality and interfaith outreach.
    As an auxiliary bishop of Kazakhstan’s capital, Schneider had to help play host to Francis during his three-day visit and had a prominent role in the pontiff’s Thursday morning visit to the capital’s cathedral.
    But Schneider has also joined American Cardinal Raymond Burke in criticizing a landmark 2019 document Francis signed with the grand imam of al-Azhar university in Cairo which, among other things, said that all religions are “willed by God.”    Some Catholic critics have said the idea that God actively wanted a plurality of religions could lead to relativism that would accept that all religions are equally valid paths to God, when the Vatican holds that Catholicism provides the only true path to salvation.
    Speaking to reporters at the cathedral, Schneider defended his occasional criticism of the pontiff as borne out of love and providing “true help for the church.”
    “This is normal because we (bishops) are not employees of the pope,” he said.    “We are brothers.    We have to say with respect when we recognize something is a danger for the entire church.    This is a help.”

9/16/2022 Montana defies order on transgender birth certificates by Matthew Brown and Amy Beth Hanson, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    BILLINGS, Mont. – Just hours after a Montana judge blocked health officials from enforcing a state rule that would prevent transgender people from changing the gender on their birth certificate, the Republican-run state on Thursday said it would defy the order.     District Court Judge Michael Moses chided attorneys for the state during a hearing in Billings for circumventing his April order that temporarily blocked a 2021 Montana law that made it harder to change birth certificates.
    Moses said there was no question that state officials violated his earlier order by creating the new rule.    Moses said his order reinstates a 2017 Department of Public Health and Human Services rule that allowed people to update the gender on their birth certificate by filing an affidavit with the department.
    However, the state said it would disregard the ruling.
    “The Department thoroughly evaluated the judge’s vague April 2022 decision and crafted our final rule to be consistent with the decision.    It’s unfortunate that the judge’s ruling today does not square with his vague April decision,” said Charlie Brereton, director of the Department of Public Health and Human Services.
    Brereton said the agency was keeping the rule it issued last week in place and an agency spokesperson said the department is waiting to see the judge’s written order before considering its next steps.
    ACLU attorney Malita Picasso expressed dismay with the agency’s stance and said officials should immediately start processing requests for birth certificate changes.
    “It’s shocking that after this morning’s hearing the department would allege there was any lack of clarity in the court’s ruling from the bench,” Picasso said.    “It was very clear that Judge Moses expressly required a reversion to the 2017 policy, and anything short of that is a continued flagrant violation of the court’s order.”
    Such open defiance of judge’s order is very unusual from a government agency, said Carl Tobias, a former University of Montana Law School professor now at the University of Richmond.    When officials disagree with a ruling, the typical response is to appeal to a higher court, he said.
    “Appeal is what you contemplate – not that you can nullify a judge’s orders.    Otherwise, people just wouldn’t obey the law,” Tobias said.    “The system can’t work that way.”’    The move could leave state officials open to contempt of court charges, which in some cases can lead to jail time for offenders, Tobias said.    He added that the attorneys representing the state were likely aware of the potential consequences but were “caught in the middle” between a recalcitrant agency and the judge.
    The legal dispute comes as conservative lawmakers in numerous states have sought to restrict transgender rights, including with bans on transgender girls competing in girls school sports.
    The Montana law said people had to have a “surgical procedure” before they could change the sex listed on their birth certificate, something Moses found to be unconstitutional because it did not specify the type of procedure.
    Gov. Greg Gianforte’s administration then created a new rule that blocked changes to birth certificates entirely, unless there was a clerical error.
    Moses said during Thursday’s hearing that his April ruling had been “clear as a bell” and compared the state’s subsequent actions to a person twice convicted of assault who tries to change their name following a third accusation to avoid a harsher punishment.
    “Isn’t that exactly what happened here?” Moses asked.    “I’m a bit offended the department thinks they can do anything they want.”
    One of the plaintiffs in the case, Amelia Marquez, said she was disgusted by the state’s response.
    “We have people that think that they’re above the law and don’t have to listen to the judiciary branch of our government,” she said.    Shawn Reagor with the Montana Human Rights Network said the organization “will not stand by while the Gianforte administration blatantly disregards rulings from the courts to continue a vindictive attack on the trans community.”
    Only Tennessee, Oklahoma and West Virginia have sweeping prohibitions against birth certificate changes similar to what Montana has pursued, advocates for transgender rights say.    Bans in Idaho and Ohio were struck down in 2020.
    A Republican lawmaker who voted in favor of the 2021 law suggested Moses was biased in favor of the plaintiffs in the case.    Moses was appointed by former Gov. Steve Bullock, a Democrat.

9/17/2022 Abortion ban for W.Va. signed - State is second to prohibit procedure since Roe overturned by Leah Willingham, ASSOCIATED PRESS
West Virginia’s abortion ban takes effect immediately, except for the criminal penalties, which will go into effect
in 90 days, according to Gov. Jim Justice, who signed it into law. CHRIS DORST/CHARLESTON GAZETTE-MAIL VIA AP     CHARLESTON, W.Va. – Republican Gov. Jim Justice on Friday signed into law a ban on abortions at all stages of pregnancy, making West Virginia the second state to enact a law prohibiting the procedure since the U.S. Supreme Court’s June ruling overturning Roe v. Wade.
    The bill will go into effect immediately, except for the criminal penalties, which will go into effect in 90 days, Justice said.    He described the legislation on Twitter as “a bill that protects life.”
    “I said from the beginning that if WV legislators brought me a bill that protected life and included reasonable and logical exceptions I would sign it, and that’s what I did today,” he said.
    The ban has exemptions for medical emergencies and for rape and incest victims until eight weeks of pregnancy for adults and 14 weeks for those under the age of 18. Victims must report their assault to law enforcement 48 hours before the procedure.    Minors can report to the police or a doctor, who then must tell police.    The bill requires abortions to be performed by a physician at a hospital – a provision that at least two Republican lawmakers have said was intended to shut down abortions at the Women’s Health Center, which has provided the procedure since 1976 and was the state’s sole abortion clinic.    Providers who perform illegal abortions can face up to 10 years in prison.
    Shortly after lawmakers passed the bill Tuesday, Women’s Health Center of West Virginia Executive Director Katie Quiñonez said the clinic’s attorney advised them to suspend abortions immediately.    Dozens of West Virginia women have had to rebook canceled appointments at out-of-state clinics in places such as Pennsylvania and Virginia, she said.    The Women’s Health Center has been providing them with resources to book appointments out of state and funding to help cover travel and the procedure, Quiñonez said.     After Justice announced he signed the ban, the ACLU of West Virginia released a statement on Twitter calling the ban a “forced-birth bill” and saying the governor has “snubbed the vast majority of West Virginians and sided with extremists.”
  &nbs; “This law is anything but pro-life.    It places lifesaving health care out of reach for tens of thousands,” the tweet said.    “Our work continues.”
    Indiana’s abortion ban – signed by Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb in August – started being enforced Thursday.
    Indiana and West Virginia now join more than a dozen states with abortion bans, though most were approved before the Supreme Court ruling and took effect once the court threw out the federal right to end a pregnancy.
Katie Quiñonez, executive director of the Women’s Health Center of West Virginia, the state’s only abortion
clinic, says the clinic’s attorney advised them to suspend abortions immediately. CHRIS JACKSON/AP FILE
9/17/2022 Judge blocks investigations of trans youth families by Andrew DeMillo, ASSOCIATED PRESS
The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services says as of last week it opened
12 investigations since Gov. Greg Abbott’s directive was issued. DARIO LOPEZ-MILLS/AP     A Texas judge on Friday expanded her order blocking the state from investigating families of transgender youth who have received gender-affirming medical care.
    Judge Amy Clark Meachum issued a temporary injunction preventing the state from investigating members of the LGBTQ advocacy group PFLAG Inc. over the medical care. The group has more than 600 members in Texas.
    Meachum in July issued an order blocking the investigations against two families of transgender children who had sued the state.    Meachum’s order on Friday also blocked the state from investigating the family of another teen that had sued, though the family said after the lawsuit was filed, they learned the investigation against them had been dropped.
    Meachum wrote that without the order, the families would “suffer probable, imminent, and irreparable injury in the interim.”
    The ruling was the latest against the state’s efforts to label gender-affirming care as child abuse.
    The Texas Supreme Court in May allowed the state to investigate parents of transgender youth for child abuse while also ruling in favor of one family who was among the first contacted by child welfare officials following the order by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott.
    The latest challenge was brought by Lambda Legal and the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of the families of three teenage boys – two 16-year-olds and a 14-year-old – and PFLAG.
    “Once again a Texas court has stepped in to say what we knew from the beginning: State leaders have no business interfering with life-saving care essential for transgender youth,” Adri Perez with the ACLU of Texas said in a statement.
    The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services said as of last week it had opened 12 investigations since Abbott’s directive was issued.    Only four remain open and no youth have been removed from their homes as a result of the investigations, the department said.    A judge in March put Abbott’s order on hold after a lawsuit was brought on behalf of a 16-year-old girl whose family said it was under investigation.    The Texas Supreme Court in May ruled that the lower court overstepped its authority by blocking all investigations going forward.
    The lawsuit that prompted that ruling marked the first report of parents being investigated following Abbott’s directive and an earlier nonbinding legal opinion by Attorney General Ken Paxton labeling certain gender-confirming treatments as “child abuse.”    The Texas Department of Family and Protective Service has said it opened nine investigations following the directive and opinion.
    Abbott’s directive and the attorney general’s opinion go against the nation’s largest medical groups, including the American Medical Association, which have opposed Republican-backed restrictions filed in statehouses nationwide.     The latest injunction follows rulings in other states against Republican-led efforts to restrict gender affirming care for children.
    A federal appeals court panel last month ruled Arkansas can’t enforce its law banning gender affirming care for minors, and the state plans to ask for the full appeals court to review that decision.    A federal judge in May blocked a similar law in Alabama.

9/18/2022 Virginia seeks new transgender policies - Changes to roll back some accommodations by Sarah Rankin, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s administration has rewritten Virginia’s model policies for the treatment
of transgender students at schools in the state. DANIEL SANGJIB MIN/RICHMOND TIMES-DISPATCH VIA AP     RICHMOND, Va. – Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s administration has rewritten Virginia’s model policies for the treatment of transgender students, issuing guidance for school divisions that would roll back some accommodations and tighten parental notification requirements.
    The new model policies from the Virginia Department of Education, which were posted online Friday, say students’ participation in certain school programming and use of school facilities like bathrooms or locker rooms should be based on their biological sex, with modifications offered only to the extent required under federal law.    The policies also say that students who are minors must be referred to by the name and pronouns in their official records, unless a parent approves the use of something else.
    Regarding parental notification, the guidelines say school divisions may not encourage teachers to conceal information about a student’s gender from his or her parents.    And they say parents must be given an opportunity to object before counseling services pertaining to gender are offered.     The guidance is subject to a 30 day public comment period that opens later this month.    Then, in accordance with a 2020 state law, local school boards must adopt policies that are “consistent with” the department’s but may be “more comprehensive,” the document says.
    Macaulay Porter, a spokesperson for Youngkin, said in a statement that the updated policy “delivers on the governor’s commitment to preserving parental rights and upholding the dignity and respect of all public school students.”
    The revisions mark a sharp departure to guidance that was first issued in 2021 during Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam’s administration.    Those guidelines said schools should let students use names and gender pronouns that reflect their gender identity without “any substantiating evidence.”    They also said students could participate in programming and access facilities in a manner consistent with their gender identity and urged schools to weigh sharing information about students’ gender identity with parents on a “case-by-case” basis, considering the health and safety of students.
    The updated guidelines say school divisions must ensure no student is discriminated against or harassed on the basis of his or her sex and should “attempt to accommodate students with distinctive needs, including any student with a persistent and sincere belief that his or her gender differs from his or her sex.”
    Single-user bathrooms and facilities should be made available in accessible areas and provided with appropriate signage, indicating accessibility for all students, the guidelines say.
    Conservative lawmakers and advocacy groups welcomed the changes.
    “We are thrilled to see Governor Youngkin leading our schools toward respecting the privacy and dignity of all students and the preeminent role of parents in the lives of their children,” said Victoria Cobb, president of The Family Foundation.
    Democrats, the Virginia Education Association and LGBTQ advocacy groups, meanwhile, criticized Youngkin, saying the changes would harm vulnerable children.
    The new policy “calls for the misgendering and outing of children in schools where they’re supposed to be safe.    Absolutely shameful,” tweeted Democratic Del. Mike Mullin.    Senate Democrats, in a collective statement, called the move “an outright violation of Virginians’ civil rights” and said it perpetuated “the national MAGA playbook of obliterating any inference of diversity, equity, or inclusion in our communities.”
    Some LGBTQ advocates suggested the changes could be contested in court.    The ACLU of Virginia said it was “appalled” by the overhaul, was reviewing the proposal and would have “more to say in the days to come.”
    Virginia’s initial guidance was developed in accordance with a bipartisan 2020 law, which required the Department of Education to craft the policies concerning the treatment of transgender students in public schools and make them available to local school boards.    The school boards were then directed to adopt policies “consistent with” the state’s model policies.
    But many school boards never complied, according to a recent analysis by Equality Virginia, an LGBTQ advocacy group.    A Department of Education spokesman told the Virginia Mercury last year the agency was not even tracking which divisions were meeting the standards.

9/18/2022 California enacts law to help LGBTQ military veterans by ASSOCIATED PRESS
    SAN FRANCISCO – A new law in California will help military service members who were discharged under “don’t ask, don’t tell” policies because of their sexual or gender identities to reestablish their eligibility for Veterans Affairs benefits, Gov. Gavin Newsom said Saturday.
    “For decades, our bravest heroes, men and women who wore the uniforms of the armed services had to hide who they really were, and many were other than honorably discharged if their sexuality was discovered,” Newsom said in a statement after announcing he had signed the bill.
    Gays and lesbians were banned in the military until the 1993 approval of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” which allowed them to serve only if they did not openly acknowledge their sexual orientation. Rather than helping, advocates say, the policy created more problems.    In its entire history, the military dismissed more than 100,000 service members based on their sexual or gender identities – 14,000 of them during “don’t ask, don’t tell.”
    Repeal of the law was approved by Congress and then President Barack Obama in late 2010 and took effect nine months later, allowing lesbian, gay and bisexual people to serve openly.
    The Department of Defense subsequently created a path for veterans who had been discharged under the policy to receive the full range of veterans’ benefits.
    “But many veterans sadly don’t know or can’t even access this important process,” Newsom said, adding that some veterans trying to reclaim benefits have had to hire expensive legal counsel and other assistance to navigate the process.    “We’re taking steps to fix this.”
    The law will require the California Department of Veteran Affairs to establish the Veterans Discharge Upgrade Grant Program to help advise LGBTQ veterans who were discharged under “don’t ask, don’t tell” and to help those who qualify to update and correct their records and access veterans’ benefits.

9/19/2022 Abortion is the X factor in November - Expert: The sleeping giant has awakened by Morgan Watkins, Louisville Courier Journal USA TODAY NETWORK
Protesters converge in June on the Federal Building in Louisville to protest the Supreme Court's decision. How Kentuckians vote
in November could significantly impact the future of abortion access here. PAT MCDONOGH/COURIER JOURNAL     Editor’s note: Monday marks 50 days until this fall’s general election. This is the third in our ‘Countdown to Election Day’ series.    Every 25 days until Nov. 8, watch for a new story giving an in-depth look at an aspect of the upcoming election in Kentucky.
    When the U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority eliminated the nationwide right to abortion, that radically restricted abortion access in Kentucky - and potentially fired up a lot of voters.
    “It’s almost (like) the sleeping giant has awakened,” Western Kentucky University political science professor Saundra Curry Ardrey said of Americans who support abortion rights.
    Abortion is now prohibited in Kentucky, with exceptions only for life-threatening health risks, due to a “trigger” ban the Republican-controlled state legislature passed that took effect after the Supreme Court’s June ruling that struck down Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that held the U.S. Constitution includes a right to the procedure.
    How Kentuckians vote in November could significantly impact the future of abortion access here.    The key races include:

• Constitutional Amendment 2: Voters potentially could restore broader access to abortion if they vote against this proposal.    The amendment would prevent the state constitution from protecting a right to abortion, cutting off a possible route to legally overturn the legislature’s near-total abortion ban.
• Kentucky Supreme Court: Three judicial seats are up for grabs, and Republican state Rep. Joe Fischer - the lead sponsor of the trigger ban and Amendment 2 - is running for one of them.    This court’s role in reviewing abortion laws became more important since the U.S. Supreme Court remanded decisions on abortion to state governments.
• Congress: The Democratic Party could push to reinstate Roe v. Wade’s nationwide right to abortion (and restore broader access to the procedure in Kentucky) if it keeps control of the House of Representatives and expands its slim majority in the Senate.    Anti-abortion Sen. Rand Paul’s seat and all six of Kentucky’s U.S. House seats are on the ballot.
• Kentucky General Assembly: Antiabortion Republican supermajorities rule the legislature and are highly likely to maintain that power after this election.    Chipping away at the size of those majorities by electing Democrats who support abortion rights could factor into lawmakers’ future decisions on abortion legislation.

    Addia Wuchner, executive director of the anti-abortion Kentucky Right to Life group, expressed confidence that past and present lawmakers’ choices to restrict abortion reflect the long-term values of the state’s overall electorate.     “Politics may change ... But the heart of the people has been pro-life,” she said.
    Ardrey, meanwhile, doesn’t expect Kentucky’s increasingly conservative electorate to send out a big blue wave but said Republican candidates’ margins of victory could shrink if people who support abortion rights vote accordingly.
    She said she’s seeing enthusiasm from collegiate women in Warren County who are fired up after losing Roe v. Wade.    It seems like a wake-up call for young Americans, especially, Ardrey said.
    “They missed sort of the movements of the ‘60s, the ‘70s, the ‘80s.    They just assumed that those rights were given to them and they were going to be there,” she said.    “This may be just the beginning of a surge of another movement.”
    Wuchner said the Supreme Court’s June ruling “changed everything” and added, “We’re in a new dynamic.”
Where Kentuckians stand on abortion
    There doesn’t appear to be much recent publicly available polling on Kentuckians’ abortion views, but one summer survey provided some data.
    A consortium that includes Northeastern, Harvard, Rutgers and Northwestern universities did a nationwide survey from June 8 to July 6 that gathered responses from just under 475 Kentuckians. (The Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade on June 24, but Politico revealed the court’s planned decision on May 2 after it was leaked.)
    The survey included a range of questions about whether respondents support or oppose abortion in different situations, and Kentucky consistently ranked among the 15 states that were least supportive of abortion.
    However, a higher percentage of the Kentuckians surveyed supported abortion versus the percentage who opposed it in four scenarios:

• If a fetus is likely to be born with serious health problems or birth defects;
• If a pregnancy resulted from rape;
• If a pregnancy could harm a woman’s health but is very unlikely to cause her death; and
• If staying pregnant could cause the woman’s death.

    Abortion isn’t allowed in Kentucky under those first three circumstances due to the trigger ban. Turning out voters for Kentucky’s abortion fight
    The fate of a lawsuit challenging the ban could hinge on if voters approve or reject Amendment 2.
    Republican Secretary of State Michael Adams said he and county clerks wonder if the battle over that amendment could drive up November’s turnout, which is otherwise anticipated to be under 40%.
    “But certainly, the Amendment 2 issue is an X factor, and we don’t know what to expect,” he said.
    Notably, about 10% of Kentucky’s electorate isn’t registered as a Democrat or a Republican.    Adams said the ranks of such independents are often growing at a faster rate each month than the ascendant GOP, which outnumbers the Democratic Party in the state.
    People unaffiliated with any political party were key to the coalition of Kansas voters who rejected a constitutional amendment similar to Kentucky’s Amendment 2, said Rachel Sweet, who managed a big campaign against the proposal in Kansas, a traditional red state.
    Kansas voters voted down their antiabortion amendment, 59% to 41%. Of all the voters in that August election, she said, about 20% were unaffiliated.
    Now Sweet is managing Protect Kentucky Access’s campaign to defeat Amendment 2.    That coalition includes several core partner organizations, but other groups have been joining the cause, too.    They’ll all work to talk to voters statewide.
    It has long been a mainstream position that abortion should be legal, Sweet said.
    “It was just something that I think for many voters was kind of out of sight and out of mind.”
    To date, Protect Kentucky Access has far outraised the pro-Amendment 2 Yes for Life group, with over $1.2 million left on hand in early September versus Yes for Life’s roughly $390,000.
    Wuchner, Yes for Life’s chair, said its coalition started out with a handful of organizations but there’s a “groundswell” of more organizations taking up their cause.    They’re focused on asking people to turn out and vote yes on Amendment 2 this fall.
    Though they’re campaigning for different outcomes, Sweet and Wuchner shared a similar outlook on what’s on the line in this election.
    “When it comes to abortion ... it’s all at stake,” Wuchner said.
    Morgan Watkins is The Courier Journal’s chief political reporter.    Contact her at mwatkins@courierjournal.com.    Follow her on Twitter: @morganwatkins26.
Addia Wuchner, executive director of Kentucky Right to Life group, expressed confidence that past and present lawmakers’ choices
to restrict abortion reflect the long-term values of the state’s overall electorate. MATT STONE/COURIER JOURNAL
9/20/2022 Montana to allow transgender people to change birth record by Amy Beth Hanson, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Montana District Judge Michael Moses warned of motions for contempt. MATTHEW BROWN/AP     HELENA, Mont. – After months of defiance, Montana’s health department said Monday it will follow a judge’s ruling and temporarily allow transgender people to change the gender on their birth certificates.
    The judge issued a scathing order Monday morning saying health officials made “calculated violations” of his order, which had told them to temporarily stop enforcing a law blocking transgender people from changing their gender on their birth certificates unless they had undergone surgery.
    District Court Judge Michael Moses said Monday he would promptly consider motions for contempt based on continued violations of his April order, which he clarified in a verbal order at a hearing on Thursday.    Just hours after that hearing, the Republican-run state said it would defy the order and keep in place a rule that disallowed any changes to birth certificates unless they were due to a clerical error.
    On Monday afternoon, the Department of Public Health and Human Services issued a statement saying it would comply with the order, despite disagreeing with it.    During Thursday’s hearing, attorneys for the state had argued that blocking the law did not prevent the health department from promulgating new administrative rules.    The state, Moses wrote, engaged “in needless legal gymnastics to attempt to rationalize their actions and their calculated violations of the order.”    He called the state’s interpretation of his earlier order “demonstrably ridiculous.”
    “The department stands by its actions and analysis concerning the April 2022 preliminary injunction decision, as set forth in its rulemaking that addressed critical regulatory gaps left by the court,” said Jon Ebelt, spokesperson for the health department.    The agency is considering its next steps in the litigation, the statement said.
    “It’s unfortunate that it has taken two very clear court orders and many months to comply with the law,” said Alex Rate, an attorney with the ACLU of Montana.    The ACLU represents the plaintiffs, two transgender people who want to change their birth certificates.
    “But from the perspective of transgender Montanans who are seeking to obtain accurate identity documents, today’s announcement is certainly progress,” Rate said.
    Ebelt did not respond to an email asking when the state might start processing applications. Rate did not know how many people have sought to correct their birth certificate in recent months, but he was aware of people who had contacted the court after the April injunction and up through Monday.
    In April, Moses temporarily blocked a law passed by the Republican-controlled 2021 Legislature that would require transgender residents to undergo a surgical procedure and obtain a court order before being able to change the sex on their birth certificate. He said the law was unconstitutionally vague because it did not specify what kind of surgery would be required.
    Rather than returning to a 2017 rule that allowed transgender residents to file an affidavit with the health department to correct the gender on their birth certificate, the state instead issued a rule saying a person’s sex could not be changed, even after having surgery.
    The health department “refused to issue corrections to birth certificates for weeks in violation of the order,” Moses wrote.    The state did not appeal Moses’ ruling either.
    The ACLU of Montana had requested the judicial clarification due to the state’s inaction.

9/20/2022 Judge hears bid to block abortion ban - Indiana’s near-total ban went into effect last week by Tom Davies, ASSOCIATED PRESS
On Monday, Indiana Solicitor General Thomas Fisher derided arguments that Indiana’s
new abortion ban violates the state constitution. DARRON CUMMINGS/AP FILE     INDIANAPOLIS – A top state lawyer derided arguments that Indiana’s new abortion ban violates the state constitution, saying Monday that opponents of the ban are trying to invent a state right to privacy.
    A judge heard arguments for about an hour in a Bloomington courtroom on a request from abortion clinic operators to block the Indiana abortion ban that went into effect on Thursday.
    Owen County Judge Kelsey Hanlon, who is the special judge in the case, didn’t make an immediate decision but said she would issue a ruling “expeditiously.”
    State Solicitor General Thomas Fisher told the judge that “too many leaps” were needed in legal arguments that abortion was protected under an Indiana constitutional right to privacy when that word isn’t mentioned in the document.
    He said a ban was in place when the constitution was drafted in 1851.
    The abortion clinics are pushing “a novel, unwritten, historically unsupported right to abortion,” said Fisher, a top deputy to Republican state Attorney General Todd Rokita.
    The ban, which includes limited exceptions, was approved by the state’s Republican-dominated Legislature on Aug. 5 and signed by GOP Gov. Eric Holcomb.
    Judge Hanlon turned down without explanation a request last week from the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, which is representing the abortion clinics, to prevent the ban from going into effect.
    Ken Falk, the ACLU of Indiana’s legal director, pointed to the state constitution’s declaration of rights including “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” in arguing that included a right to privacy and to make decisions on whether to have children.
    Falk asked the judge to restore the state’s previous abortion laws, which generally prohibited abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy and tightly restricted it after the 13th week.
    “We’re not asking the court to write to rewrite the legislation,” Falk said.    “We’re asking the court to recognize the Legislature’s gone too far.”    The Indiana ban includes exceptions allowing abortions in cases of rape and incest before the 10th week of pregnancy; to protect the mother’s life and physical health; and if the fetus is diagnosed with a lethal anomaly.
    Under the new law, abortions can be performed only in hospitals or outpatient centers owned by hospitals, with the state’s seven abortion clinics losing their licenses for the procedure.    Any doctors found to have performed an illegal abortion would be stripped of their medical license and could face felony charges punishable by up to six years in prison.
    Fisher said questions on whether any abortions should be allowed in the state ought to be decided by the elected members of the Legislature.

[IT WONT BE LONG BEFORE CALIFORNIA STARTS DOING SOYLENT GREEN INSTEAD OF COMPOST].
9/21/2022 California legalizes human composting bill against opposition by Catholic bishops by Religion News Service – Religious News Service
    (RNS) — The process of converting bodies into soil is now legal in California after Gov. Gavin Newsom on Sunday (Sept. 18) signed a bill that will allow human composting in the Golden State.
Giant Redwood trees in northern California. Photo by Dan Meyers/Unsplash/Creative Commons© Provided by Religion News Service     Burial, cremation and alkaline hydrolysis have been the only death care choices available in California.    Beginning in 2027, human composting, or natural organic reduction, will be another option for “individuals who want a different method to honor their remains after death.”
    The process for composting a body was introduced by the Seattle-based company Recompose, which is now open for business after the state of Washington legalized the process in 2019. Colorado was the second state to legalize it, followed by Oregon and Vermont.    It’s seen as a more sustainable alternative to cremation, which requires fossil fuels and releases carbon dioxide.
    In the human composting method, a body is placed in a reusable vessel, covered with wood chips and aerated, which creates an environment for microbes and essential bacteria.    The body, over a span of about 30 days, is fully transformed into soil.
RELATED: Amid Catholic opposition, states are legalizing composting of human remains
    In California, where the massive number of COVID-19 deaths inundated funeral homes and even led to Los Angeles County’s suspension of air quality regulations on cremation, State Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia, a Democrat who introduced the legislation, said this was another “” of the need to offer a “more environmentally friendly option.”
    Garcia has sought to pass this bill for the last three years.    “I look forward to continuing my legacy to fight for clean air by using my reduced remains to plant a tree,” Garcia said in a statement after the governor’s signature.
An example vessel that is used in the Natural Organic Reduction process created by Recompose, which converts
human bodies into soil. Photo by Sabel Roizen, courtesy of Recompose© Provided by Religion News Service     Catholic bishops have opposed this process in states where human composting has been legalized.
    Kathleen Domingo, executive director for the California Catholic Conference, said the process “reduces the human body to simply a disposable commodity.”    The California Catholic Conference in June submitted a letter of opposition in reaction to the bill.br>     In the letter, Domingo likened natural organic reduction to methods of disposal of livestock, “not as a means of human burial.”    Using this method, Domingo said, “can create an unfortunate spiritual, emotional and psychological distancing from the deceased.”
    In New York, where a similar bill awaits the governor’s signature, the New York State Catholic Conference in a statement said composting human remains is inappropriate.
    “While not everyone shares the same beliefs with regard to the reverent and respectful treatment of human remains, we believe there are a great many New Yorkers who would be uncomfortable at best with this proposed composting/fertilizing method, which is more appropriate for vegetable trimmings and eggshells than for human bodies,” it said.
    Death care specialists say this new and environmentally friendly procedure is crucial as cemeteries fill up and people seek more sustainable practices.
    Under the California bill, the soil created by the human composting method could be used on private land with permission and would be subject to the same restrictions as scattering cremated remains in the state, according to the Los Angeles Times.    It also prohibits human remains from being “commingled with those of another person,” unless they are family.
    Soylent Green is a 1973 American ecological dystopian thriller film directed by Richard Fleischer, and starring Charlton Heston, Leigh Taylor-Young, and Edward G. Robinson in his final film role. Loosely based on the 1966 science fiction novel the investigation into the murder of a wealthy businessman, and a dystopian future of dying oceans and year-round humidity due to the greenhouse effect, resulting in pollution, poverty, overpopulation, euthanasia and depleted resources.
9/22/2022 Graham: Why I Will Fight For My National 15-Week Abortion Ban, Despite GOP Leadership’s Pushback by Neil W. McCabe, National Political Correspondent
    WASHINGTON The senior senator from South Carolina defended his bill that would ban all abortions after weeks of pregnancy in an exclusive sit-down interview with OAN’s Washington Bureau Chief John Hines, even as Republican leaders are begging him to pull the bill.
    “If Republicans will push back and not run for the hills, we’ll do just fine,” said Sen. Lindsay O. Graham (R.-S.C.), whom Sept. 13 filed his “Protecting Pain-Capable Unborn Children from Late-Term Abortions Act.”
    In May, Senate Minority Leader A. Mitchell “Mitch” McConnell (R.-Ky.) told USAToday that if the Supreme Court used its Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ruling to overturn the Roe v. Wade decision that created a federal right to abortion, it was possible that Republicans would propose a national abortion ban.
    After the justices’ June 24 Dobbs decision reversed Roe, McConnell has been more circumspect.    He and his leadership team, which includes Minority Whip John R. Thune (R.-S.D.) and Assistant Minority Leader John Cornyn (R.-Texas), have repeatedly dismissed talk of a national ban, preferring to allow the states to work out their own rules.
    Graham said he could not stand back and do nothing.
    “What world do you wanna live in?    Do you want to be like China and North Korea in the United States?” he asked.    “Or do you wanna be in the civilized world?”
    Republicans can do the right thing and win, he said.
    “I hope Republicans will look the camera in the eye and say: ‘If I go to Washington, I will never vote to use your taxpayer dollars to allow baby to be aborted up to the moment of birth.    That’s not who we are as a nation–that’s out of sync with the civilized world–hold them accountable for the most extreme position on abortion.”
    Graham said it if the American people understood the reality of the Democrats’ abortion agenda, they would be shocked.
    “I think the Democratic Party has made a serious mistake,” he said.
    “The reason they’re coming after me is ‘cuz I’m coming after them,” he said.
    “Thank God for OAN and other outlets, who allow me to talk,” the retired Air Force Reserve colonel said.    “In the liberal media world, abortion is something that Republicans should run away from and being pro-life is a political loser in my world.”
    Graham said he pegged the limit at 15 weeks because that is the point children in the womb become pain capable, and it is the time limit imposed in most European nations that allow abortion.
    Current American abortion restrictions are inhumane, he said.
    “There are no rights attached to this child.    I find that to be extreme, to be cruel,” he said.
    The senator said it is accepted medical practice to administer anesthesia whenever doctors operate on a baby in the womb after 15 weeks.
    “Why would you provide anesthesia to an unborn child? If they can’t feel pain, it is a standard medical practice at 15 weeks to provide anesthesia to the unborn child if you’re trying to repair some damage to save its life,” the senator said.
    What about what the unborn child experiences when it is aborted, he said.    “Can you imagine what it’s like for that child to be dismembered?”
    “What am I doing?” he asked.    “At 15 weeks, I’m drawing a line nationally–you can do anything below 15 weeks at the state level, but 47 of 50 European nations outlaw or stop abortion on demand at 14 weeks.”
    Graham said his bill is actually less stringent than the European standard.
    “I’m one week beyond them with exceptions, for rape and incest and life of the mother,” he said.
    It is the Democrats who are being extreme by opposing any time limit, the senator said.
    “Taxpayer-funded abortion, no restrictions up until the moment of birth,” he said.
    “What they don’t want the public to know is that their abortion position is the most extreme in history,” he said.    “It’s the Democratic party trying to impose on the nation an abortion standard like China and North Korea.”
    Ten Senate Democrats, led by Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D.-N.Y.) and Sen. Patricia L. Murray (D.-Wash.), the chairwoman of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, held a Sept. 15 press conference to blast the Graham bill.
    Schumer said Americans support abortion rights.
    “Republicans are twisting themselves into pretzels to explain their position on abortion because they know the American people overwhelmingly side with a woman’s right to choose,” Schumer said.
    “The Republican abortion ban introduced this week shows the stark contrast between Democrats who are focused on creating jobs, lowering costs, and bringing our country together, and MAGA Republicans who are pushing a radical, extremist agenda,” he said.
    “Several months ago, we had a vote on the floor of the United States Senate authored by Senator Schumer that would create a national policy,” he said.    “It would preempt every law at the state level, allowing abortion on demand funded by the taxpayer up to the moment of birth.”
    The Democrats are using his abortion bill to distract voters from the damage they have done to the country and its reputation, he said.
    “I hope they keep talking about this,” Graham said.
    “Listen, crime and inflation are issues that are very important, a broken border, the withdrawal from Afghanistan, but the Democrats believe they’re gonna win this election on the abortion issue,” he said.
    “To my Republican colleagues, if you do not tell the public about the extreme views of the Democrats, Schumer and others, you’re missing an opportunity.”

9/23/2022 Catholic churches vanishing in Black neighborhoods
St. Anthony, with its beautiful lace spire, is one of 16 former churches the Archdiocese of Louisville has
shut down in areas with growing African American populations since 1985. MICHAEL CLEVENGER/COURIER JOURNAL     It’s hard to drive through a Black neighborhood in Louisville and not see an old Catholic church that has been shut down.
    Some of them house some sort of nonprofit mission, others are now apartment homes, while some were replaced by Protestant churches that bought them.
    A few are empty. Rotting. One’s stone skin crashing to the sidewalks around it.
    Windows broken.    Dragging down the neighborhood where it once served as the hub.
    Louisville’s not alone.    It’s a phenomenon that has played out in city after city around the United States where the old Irish, Italian, German and French Catholic neighborhoods aged, giving way to influxes of African Americans who are much less likely to be Catholic.
    In part, the Catholic Church is to blame.    A poll earlier this year by the Pew Research Center found that only 6% of African Americans nationally are Catholic.
    The Rev. Pat Delahanty, a retired priest who spent decades serving churches in Louisville’s Black neighborhoods said the late Rev. Vernon Robertson often made the case for keeping the churches open, arguing that even though the individual churches might not be self-sufficient, the
The problems may have seeds that go back more than 200 years
    Columnist Louisville Courier Journal USA TODAY NETWORK
    Catholic Church still had a responsibility in these neighborhoods.
    He ultimately was overruled.    In Louisville, there are 23 old Catholic churches that have closed since 1985 and either been repurposed for another use or now sit vacant.    Three other churches have been bulldozed in that time.    Sixteen of those former churches are in areas that have become increasingly African American in the last 60 or 70 years.
    In his book, “White Too Long: The Legacy of White Supremacy in American Christianity,” Robert P. Jones deals mainly with white supremacy in Protestant churches but says the Catholic Church’s abandonment of the inner cities around the nation is also part of a pattern.
    But the problems that have made it difficult for the churches to survive in Louisville’s Black neighborhoods may have seeds that go back more than 200 years.
A history of racism
    When Bishop Benedict Joseph Flaget came to Kentucky in 1808 as the leader of the first diocese west of the Allegheny Mountains, he brought with him slaves – even though Pope Benedict XIV had condemned slavery nearly 70 years before.
    Orders of Catholic sisters that formed in Kentucky owned slaves as well.    Black men and women were often accepted as dowry for the young women when they entered the convent.
    Some of the sisters have apologized for their history.    The Sisters of Charity of Nazareth were the first to do so a decade ago.    They’ve placed a monument to the slaves they relied on at their campus outside Bardstown.
    The Archdiocese of Louisville, part of a religion that strongly believes in redemption but only after one confesses their sins, is yet to atone.
    Many Catholics who settled the area around Bardstown and Springfield, the cradle of the Catholic Church in Kentucky, owned slaves and their families continued to own slaves up until the Civil War, said Nathaniel Green, who wrote a book about the archdiocese’s Black Catholics in 1972.
    In that book, titled “The Silent Believers,” Green wrote about segregation in the Catholic Church that limited where Black Catholics could sit in white churches, required them to receive communion after the white people were finished, and was the root of Black-only churches being built in communities large enough to support them.
    St. Augustine, on Broadway, was one of the first Black Catholic churches in the nation.
    In an interview, Green said many Catholic slave owners had their slaves baptized and educated – perhaps in part because of the guilt they felt for going against the church’s teachings.    “They knew slavery was wrong,” he said.
    Many Black Catholics in Louisville today can trace their roots back to those slaves, he said. Jim Crow and the church
        But even after slavery ended with the American Civil War, Catholics in Louisville practiced their own version of Jim Crow.
    Louisville didn’t see its first Black Catholic pastor until Archbishop Thomas McDonough appointed the Rev. Joseph C. Bell III, a Benedictine priest, to lead the old Holy Cross Church in 1971.
    “Too many small mistakes and large mistakes have been made in dealing with the Black people in the Catholic churches,” Bell told The Courier Journal that year.
    It wasn’t until 1974 that the Louisville Archdiocese ordained its first Black priest – the Rev. Edward Branch, a former Xaverian brother who taught at Flaget High School in Louisville’s West End before going to the seminary.
    Delahanty said under Archbishop John A. Floersh, who led the Catholic Church in Louisville from 1924 until his retirement in 1967, Black applicants for the priesthood were told to join a religious order or go to another diocese if they wanted to be ordained.
    As such, it took the Catholic Church in Louisville longer to desegregate than it took the University of Kentucky’s basketball team, which signed its first Black player in 1970.
    The church’s record on race, though, was sometimes conflicted.    The late Monsignor Alfred Horrigan was chairman of the Jefferson County Human Relations Commission and is in the Kentucky Civil Rights Hall of Fame.
    Floersh, for all his faults, urged Catholics to join the civil rights movement.    And St. Xavier High School became the first white school to play the all-Black Central High School in sports in 1951.
Black Catholics not accepted
    Monsignor Branch, the first Black priest ordained in Louisville, didn’t come to Kentucky until about the same time as McDonough - who had been heavily involved in the civil rights movement when he was the bishop of Savannah, Georgia - came to Kentucky.
    But Branch, who lives in Atlanta now, said some racism was present in the Catholic Church here and elsewhere at the time.    But he said one problem was the church didn’t understand its Black members.    When Branch was ordained, McDonough told The Courier Journal he thought there were about 2,000 Black people in the archdiocese.     “There were probably that many in Bardstown and Springfield alone,” Branch said.
    The archdiocese says there are 16,000 Black Catholics in its 24 counties that stretch south to the Tennessee line.
    But the biggest problem: “The church was no different than the rest of the country when it came to putting African Americans in positions of leadership,” Branch said.
    He noted that the National Black Catholic Clergy Caucus, when it met in 1968, put out a paper that began, “The Catholic Church in the United States is primarily a white racist institution ….”
    Green said the problem with the church at the time was that “it never really accepted the fact that Blacks were part of the diocesan community … I don’t believe that there was any kind of true partnership with the Blacks in the Catholic Church.    It was a necessity, but not necessarily a partnership.”
    And so it shouldn’t be a big surprise when the Catholic families that built the old churches in the old Catholic neighborhoods of Louisville moved away, that the Black families didn’t consider becoming Catholic.
Leaving the inner city
    The Church shut Loretto High School, a girl’s school on West Broadway, because of declining enrollment in 1973.    A year later, it closed Flaget High School, a boy’s school on River Park Drive, for the same reason.
    About the same time, it closed its first West End churches, shuttering Sacred Heart at 17th and Broadway in 1971 and St. Peter on Garland in 1973. They were both demolished.
    Over the next four decades, more churches in Black neighborhoods went away.    St. Patrick on West Market and St. John on East Muhammad Ali closed.    St. Patrick is now home to a Dismas Charities halfway house and St. John is a center for homeless men.
    In 1990, St. Charles Borromeo and St. Benedict were closed in the West End and sold to Protestant churches.    Two years later, St. Paul in Smoketown closed; it now belongs to the St. Vincent de Paul Society, which serves meals to the poor there.
    Six years later, the church closed St. Columba near 35th and West Market.    It’s an apartment building now.    That same year it closed St. Vincent de Paul in Shelby Park and St. Mary Magdalen near the western edge of Smoketown.    St. Vincent de Paul is now Sojourn Church.    St. Mary Magdalen, where President John F. Kennedy attended Mass when he visited Louisville in 1962, is now owned by the city of Louisville and appears destined for the wrecking ball.
    In 1997, St. Ann, on Algonquin Parkway, and St. Basil in Shively closed.    Two years later St. Andrew, which had been St. George and was renamed two years earlier, closed.    In 2000, it was St. Peter Claver in Smoketown.
    Finally, in 2009, the church closed St. Anthony in Russell, St. Cecilia in Portland and St. Denis and St. Matthias in Shively.
    There are still 57 Catholic churches in Jefferson County but the 2009 closures left only four Catholic churches serving the Black community in the West End – St. Augustine, Christ the King, Immaculate Heart of Mary and St. Martin de Porres.
A chance for the Catholic Church to repent
    Now Louisville has its first African American Catholic leader.
    Archbishop Shelton Fabre, who was appointed to his post in March, is the chairman of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Ad Hoc Committee Against Racism.
    He declined to be interviewed for this column.    “The archbishop is still getting to know Louisville and our entire region, and he is not yet familiar enough with all of the history of parishes and other themes for the story you are working on,” Brian Reynolds, the archdiocese’s chancellor and chief administrative officer, said in an email.
    Perhaps it’s time – after years of closing churches and other Catholic institutions in Black neighborhoods, for the Catholic Church to reach back out to Black people.    Maybe open an elementary school in the West End as some Black Catholics have been clamoring for.
    The church is working on a plan to move its Catholic Charities offices from the St. Anthony campus to the former AAA office on East Broadway.    Reynolds said the purchase of the AAA building has not been finalized and no plan has been developed for the old church, but the archdiocese will look to reuse it.    It would be a great place for a West End school.
    And now might be the right time for the church to confess its sins.
    And maybe Fabre is the right person to lead those efforts.
    Joseph Gerth can be reached at 502-582-4702 or by email at jgerth@courierjournal.com.
Joseph Gerth
Archbishop Shelton Fabre smiles during a ceremony at the Kentucky International Convention Center on March 30.
Fabre is the Tenth Bishop and the Fifth Archbishop of Louisville. MATT STONE/COURIER JOURNAL
St. Anthony, on West Market, closed in 2009. Catholic Charities offices were then moved there. The Archdiocese is hoping to
move those offices to another location and hasn't decided what to do with the 155-year-old campus. JOSEPH GERTH/COURIER JOURNAL
St. Charles Borromeo Catholic Church was closed in 1990 and sold to a Protestant church that
has now closed as well. Its exterior is crumbling. JOSEPH GERTH/COURIER JOURNAL
9/23/2022 Abortion clinics in Indiana reopen after judge blocks ban by Tom Davies and Arleigh Rodgers, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Abortion rights protesters rally in the Indiana Statehouse in Indianapolis last month.
A judge on Thursday blocked the state’s abortion ban from being enforced. ARLEIGH RODGERS/AP     INDIANAPOLIS – After an Indiana judge on Thursday blocked the state’s abortion ban from being enforced, phones started ringing across Indiana abortion clinics, which are preparing to resume the procedure a week after the ban had gone into effect.
    “People are getting the word that abortion is now legal again, and people are ready to get their health care that they deserve and that they desire,” Dr. Katie McHugh, an abortion provider at Women’s Med in Indianapolis, told The Associated Press.
    Owen County Judge Kelsey Hanlon issued a preliminary injunction against the ban, putting the new law on hold as clinic operators argue in a lawsuit that it violates the state constitution.
    Indiana’s seven abortion clinics were to lose their state licenses under the ban – which only permits abortions within its narrow exceptions to take place in hospitals or outpatient surgical centers.
    The ban was approved by the state’s Republican-dominated Legislature on Aug. 5 and signed by GOP Gov. Eric Holcomb.    That made     Indiana the first state to enact tighter abortion restrictions since the U.S. Supreme Court eliminated federal abortion protections by overturning Roe v. Wade in June.
    The judge wrote “there is reasonable likelihood that this significant restriction of personal autonomy offends the liberty guarantees of the Indiana Constitution” and that the clinics will prevail in the lawsuit.    The order prevents the state from enforcing the ban pending a trial on the merits of the lawsuit.     Republican state Attorney General Todd Rokita said in a statement: “We plan to appeal and continue to make the case for life in Indiana,” calling the abortion ban law “a reasonable way” to protect the unborn. Women’s Med is expecting to see patients again starting Friday, McHugh said.
    “I had really hoped for this, but honestly, I didn’t really expect it,” she said.    “So the fact that this is what happened is such a pleasant surprise and such a validation of what we have been saying this whole time.”
    Whole Woman’s Health, which operates an abortion clinic in South Bend, said its staff members “are making plans to resume abortion care in the near future.”
    “Of course, this landscape of legal back-and-forth leads to disruption in patient care and uncertainty for our staff,” said Amy Hagstrom Miller, president and CEO of Whole Woman’s Health.
    Indiana’s ban followed the political firestorm over a 10-year-old rape victim who traveled to the state from neighboring Ohio to end her pregnancy.    The case gained wide attention when an Indianapolis doctor said the child came to Indiana because of Ohio’s “fetal heartbeat” ban.
    An Ohio judge has temporarily blocked that state law, indicating he will allow abortions to continue up to 20 weeks’ gestation until after a court hearing scheduled for Oct. 7.
    With Indiana now on hold, bans on abortion at any point in pregnancy are in place in 12 Republican-led states.    In Wisconsin, clinics have stopped providing abortions amid litigation over whether an 1849 ban is in effect.
    The Indiana ban replaced state laws that generally prohibited abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy and tightly restricted them after the 13th week.    The ban includes exceptions allowing abortions in cases of rape and incest, before 10 weeks post-fertilization; to protect the life and physical health of the mother; and if a fetus is diagnosed with a lethal anomaly.
    The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, which is representing the abortion clinics, filed the lawsuit Aug. 31 and argued the ban would “prohibit the overwhelming majority of abortions in Indiana and, as such, will have a devastating and irreparable impact on the plaintiffs and, more importantly, their patients and clients.”
    Ken Falk, the ACLU of Indiana’s legal director, pointed to the state constitution’s declaration of rights including “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” in arguing before the judge on Monday that it included a right to privacy and to make decisions on whether to have children.
    The state attorney general’s office said the court should uphold the ban, saying arguments against it are based on a “novel, unwritten, historically unsupported right to abortion” in the state constitution.

9/23/2022 Montana voters will decide on ‘born alive’ bill by Amy Beth Hanson, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Jenn Banna of Missoula, Mont., speaks during a rally at the Montana State Capitol in Helena
on Wednesday in opposition to a referendum that requires that all infants born alive be provided
with medical care and treatment. THOM BRIDGE/INDEPENDENT RECORD VIA AP     HELENA, Mont. – A referendum on the Montana ballot in November raises the prospect of criminal charges for health care providers unless they take “all medically appropriate and reasonable actions to preserve the life” of an infant born alive, including after an attempted abortion.    Supporters of the referendum say the proposed Born-Alive Infant Protection Act is meant to prevent the killing of infants outside the womb after failed abortions.    That is already illegal.
    Opponents argue the act could rob them of precious time with infants that are born with incurable medical issues if doctors are forced to try to treat them.
    Americans United for Life, which has offered model legislation for state “born alive” laws, argues the federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act of 2002 only applies at federal facilities and those that receive federal funding, and not at private clinics.
    At least half of U.S. states have similar post-abortion born-alive laws in place, according to Americans United for Life, a Washington, D.C.-based organization that opposes abortion, aid in dying and infant stem cell research.
    Montana law allows for homicide charges if a person purposely, knowingly or negligently causes the death of a premature infant born alive, if the infant is viable.
    When presenting the bill in the Montana Senate last year, Sen. Tom McGillvray said the current state law “basically says ‘don’t kill it.’    This bill says ‘save it.’    That’s the difference.”
    The legislation says its purpose is to protect the life of any infant born alive after an abortion.    However, the text says: “A born-alive infant, including an infant born in the course of an abortion, must be treated as a legal person under the laws of the state, with the same rights to medically appropriate and reasonable care and treatment.”
    The difference in interpretation appears to be how to define “medically appropriate and reasonable care and treatment” and whether the proposed law would apply in cases where an infant is born with medical issues, such as undeveloped vital organs, that are not compatible with life.
    “Unfortunately, there are limits to the medical interventions that can change these outcomes,” Tim Mitchell, a maternal fetal medicine physician in Missoula, said in Helena at a news conference held by Compassion for Families, which opposes the referendum.
    Jenn Banna of Missoula spoke Wednesday about her daughter, who she knew was going to be born without a properly developed brain.    The referendum, she said, might have robbed her family of the little time they were able to spend with her after her birth.
    “We knew if she was born alive, we may only have a few minutes to snuggle her until she passed away,” Banna said.

9/24/2022 Ariz. judge: State can enforce abortion ban - Doctors could face jail time if defiant by Bob Christie, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Protesters march around the Arizona Capitol in Phoenix after the Supreme Court’s June ruling that reversed Roe v. Wade.
A judge ruled Friday that Arizona can enforce a near-total ban on abortions that has been blocked for nearly 50 years. ROSS D. FRANKLIN/AP FILE     PHOENIX – Arizona can enforce a near-total ban on abortions that has been blocked for nearly 50 years, a judge ruled Friday, meaning clinics statewide will have to stop providing the procedures to avoid the filing of criminal charges against doctors and other medical workers.
    The judge lifted a decades-old injunction that blocked enforcement of the law on the books since before Arizona became a state.    The only exemption to the ban is if the patient’s life is in jeopardy.
    The ruling means the state’s abortions clinics will have to shut down and anyone seeking an abortion will have to go out of state.    The ruling takes effect immediately, although an appeal is possible.
    Abortion providers have been on a roller coaster since the U.S. Supreme Court in June overturned the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision guaranteeing women a constitutional right to an abortion. At first providers shut down operations, then reopened, and now have to close again.
    Planned Parenthood had urged the judge not to allow enforcement, and its president declared that the ruling “takes Arizonans back to living under an archaic, 150-year-old law.”
    “This decision is out of step with the will of Arizonans and will cruelly force pregnant people to leave their communities to access abortion,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s president and CEO, said in a statement.
    Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich, who had urged the judge to lift the injunction so the ban could be enforced, cheered.    “We applaud the court for upholding the will of the legislature and providing clarity and uniformity on this important issue,” Brnovich said in a statement.    “I have and will continue to protect the most vulnerable Arizonans.”
    Sen. Mark Kelly, under a challenge from Republican Blake Masters, said it “will have a devastating impact on the freedom Arizona women have had for decades” to choose an abortion. Democrat Katie Hobbs, who is running for governor, called it the product of a decades long attack on reproductive freedom by Republicans that can only be fended off by voters in November.
    Masters and Kari Lake, the Republican running against Hobbs, both back abortion restrictions. Their campaigns had no immediate comment.
    Pima County Superior Court Judge Kellie Johnson ruled more than a month after hearing arguments on Brnovich’s request to lift the injunction.
    The near-total abortion ban was enacted decades before Arizona secured statehood in 1912. Prosecutions were halted after the injunction was handed down following the Roe decision.
    Even so, the Legislature reenacted the law several times, most recently in 1977.
    Assistant Attorney General Beau Roysden told Johnson at an Aug. 19 hearing that since Roe’s overturning, the sole reason for the injunction blocking the old law is gone and she should allow it to be enforced.    Under that law, anyone convicted of performing a surgical abortion or providing drugs for a medication abortion could face two to five years in prison.
    An attorney for Planned Parenthood and its Arizona affiliate argued that allowing the pre-statehood ban to be enforced would render more recent laws regulating abortion meaningless.    Instead, she urged the judge to let licensed doctors perform abortions and let the old ban only apply to unlicensed practitioners.
    The judge sided with Brnovich, saying that because the injunction was filed in 1973 only because of the Roe decision, it must be lifted in its entirety.
    “The court finds an attempt to reconcile fifty years of legislative activity procedurally improper in the context of the motion and record before it,” Johnson wrote.    “While there may be legal questions the parties seek to resolve regarding Arizona statutes on abortion, those questions are not for this court to decide here.”     In overturning Roe on June 24, the high court said states can regulate abortion as they wish.
    A physician who runs a clinic providing abortions said she was dismayed but not surprised by the decision.
    “It kind of goes with what I’ve been saying for a while now – it is the intent of the people who run this state that abortion be illegal here,” Dr. DeShawn Taylor said.    “Of course, we want to hold onto hope in the back of our minds, but in the front of my mind I have been preparing the entire time for the total ban.”
    Republicans control the Legislature, and GOP Gov. Doug Ducey is an abortion opponent who has signed every abortion law that reached his desk for the past eight years.
    Johnson, the judge, said Planned Parenthood was free to file a new challenge.    But with Arizona’s tough abortion laws and all seven Supreme Court justices appointed by Republicans, the chances of success appear slim.

9/24/2022 Indiana abortion clinics see patients amid legal changes by Arleigh Rodgers and Rick Callahan, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    INDIANAPOLIS – Dr. Jeanne Corwin traveled about two hours on Friday from her hometown of Cincinnati to an Indianapolis abortion clinic, where she saw the clinic’s first 12 patients the day after an Indiana judge blocked the state’s abortion ban from being enforced.
    It’s a trip Corwin has made several times over the past few months, as her Ohio medical license allows her to sign off on required paperwork for Women’s Med patients in Indiana to access care in the clinic’s sister location in Dayton.
    But with Indiana’s abortion ban temporarily on hold – paired with a judge’s Sept. 14 blocking of an Ohio ban on nearly all abortions – Women’s Med and other Indiana abortion clinics resumed seeing patients on Friday while anticipating further change amid mercurial abortion access in the country following the U.S. Supreme Court’s June decision overturning Roe v. Wade.
    “It’s a glimmer of hope and common sense,” Corwin said of Thursday’s ruling blocking Indiana’s abortion ban.
    One patient who went to the clinic on Friday was an Indianapolis woman who spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity due to privacy concerns.    It was for the 31-year-old’s second abortion, she said.
    Her first was at 16, when she was afraid of caring for a child and worried what her parents would think about her being pregnant.
    “At the time, I felt like I was too young to have a child,” the patient said.    “I can’t even imagine what life would be like now.”
    Now focused on a career and with a son she had at 25, the patient said she chose an abortion because she and her partner decided another child would not be best for them right now.
    Hours after Owen County Judge Kelsey Hanlon on Thursday issued a preliminary injunction against Indiana’s abortion ban, the state filed a promised appeal and motion asking the state’s high court to take up the case.
    Under Indiana’s ban, which has exceptions, abortion clinics would have lost their licenses and been prohibited from providing any abortion care, leaving such services solely to hospitals or outpatient surgical centers owned by hospitals.
    The ban also only permits abortions in cases of rape and incest before 10weeks post-fertilization; to protect the life and physical health of the patient; or if a fetus is diagnosed with a lethal anomaly.
    With Indiana’s law on hold, bans on abortion at any point in pregnancy are in place in 12 Republican-led states.    In Wisconsin, clinics have stopped providing abortions amid litigation over whether an 1849 ban is in effect.
    Georgia bans abortions once fetal cardiac activity can be detected.    And Florida and Utah have bans that kick in after 15 and 18 weeks gestation, respectively.
    The state attorney general’s office had asked Hanlon to uphold the state’s ban, saying arguments against it are based on a “novel, unwritten, historically unsupported right to abortion” in the state constitution.
    The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, which is representing the abortion clinics, filed the lawsuit Aug. 31 and argued the ban would “prohibit the overwhelming majority of abortions in Indiana and, as such, will have a devastating and irreparable impact on the plaintiffs and, more importantly, their patients and clients.”
    Ken Falk, the ACLU of Indiana’s legal director, said Friday that the plaintiffs now have 15 days to file their response to the state’s request for the stay.    He said he did not expect any immediate hearings on the matter.
    Mike Fichter, president and CEO Indiana Right to Life, said in a statement the organization is “encouraged by the judge’s acknowledgement of the state’s legitimate interest in protecting unborn babies” and “hopeful the blockage will be brief.”
    While such legal conflicts play out in the background, Women’s Med will provide abortions while it can, most likely starting next week, said Dr. Katie McHugh, an abortion provider at the clinic.

9/26/2022 Vow to target rapists rings hollow at clinics - GOP is divided over absence of exceptions by Paul J. Weber and Jamie Stengle, ASSOCIATED PRESS
A Sexual Assault Evidence Collection Kit, or Rape Kit, is unpacked in an examination room in Austin, Texas.
After a Texas law banning abortions past about six weeks, even in cases of rape or incest, went into effect
a year ago, Gov. Greg Abbott said the state would strive to “eliminate all rapists from the streets.” ERIC GAY/AP     AUSTIN, Texas – When Texas’ new abortion law made no exceptions in cases of rape, Republican Gov. Greg Abbott defended it with an assurance: Texas would get to work eliminating rapes.
    One year later, Lindsey LeBlanc is busy as ever helping rape victims in a college town outside Houston.     “The numbers have stayed consistently high,” said LeBlanc, executive director of the Sexual Assault Resource Center in Bryan, near Texas A& M University.    Despite hiring two additional counselors in the past six months, she still has a waitlist for victims.
    “We are struggling to keep up with demand,” she said.
    The constant caseloads in Texas are another example of how Republicans have struggled to defend zero-exception abortion bans that are unpopular in public polling, have caused uproar in high-profile cases and are inviting political risk heading into November’s midterm elections.    A year since Texas’ law went into effect in September 2021, at least a dozen states also have bans that make no exceptions in cases of rape or incest.
    The absence of exceptions has caused divisions among Republicans, including in West Virginia, where a new law signed this month allows a brief window for rape and incest victims to obtain abortions only if they report to law enforcement first.    Recently, South Carolina Republicans scuttled a proposed ban after failing to get enough GOP support.
    “It really disgusts me,” said Republican South Carolina state Sen. Katrina Shealy, ripping into her male colleagues on the floor of the state Senate.
    Republican U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, also of South Carolina, allowed exceptions under the proposed national abortion ban he introduced last week.    The proposal has virtually no chance of passing, with even GOP leaders not immediately backing it, reflecting how Republicans have broadly struggled to navigate the issue of abortion with voters since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade this summer.
    Overwhelming majorities of voters think their state should generally allow abortion in specific cases, including rape, incest or if the health of the pregnant person is endangered.    Even Republicans are seeing it as a line with some voters.
    “It’s a very gray issue,” said Claudia Alcazar, the GOP chairwoman in Starr County along the Texas-Mexico border that has become a new political battleground after Republicans made big gains with more conservative Hispanic voters in 2020.
    She said she knows those who are “hardcore, never have abortion for any reason, period.    And then I have the other ones that are like, ‘Well, you know, it depends.’”    In Texas, the blowback was swift when Abbott said last September: “Texas will work tirelessly to make sure that we eliminate all rapists from the streets.”    Critics called it detached from reality.    A sexual assault hotline in Houston has answered almost 4,800 calls through August this year – putting it on track to exceed last year’s volume of 4,843.
    As of this summer, all abortions were banned in Texas except if it would save a mother’s life.
    Asked what Abbott has done in the past year to eliminate rape, spokeswoman Renae Eze highlighted older measures to clear rape test kit backlogs, a law signed in June aimed at coordinating and expanding sexual assault resources and a task force his office launched in 2019 to address the issue.
    “To prevent such heinous crimes before they happen, and to prosecute any criminals to the full extent of the law, Governor Abbott has aggressively fought against defunding the police and led bail reform efforts to prevent the release of dangerous criminals,” Eze said in a statement.
    More than 14,000 rape crimes have been reported in Texas since the law took effect last year, according to data from the Texas Department of Public Safety.    That was slightly down from the year before and consistent with a decline in other violent crime figures across the state.
    Crisis centers in Texas say the number of rape victims they’ve accompanied to hospitals for exams is rebounding since the pandemic restrictions kept advocates from entering.    The Women’s Center in Fort Worth has made more than 650 visits to counsel victims undergoing exams in the past year compared to about 340 in the year prior, said Alisha Mathenia, the assistant director of crisis services at the center.
    The majority of sexual assaults are never reported to police, making any available data an incomplete picture.    And about 8 out of 10 sexual assaults are committed by a person known to the victim, according to the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network.
    “We’re not talking about a large of number of rapists walking around on the street.    That’s a myth,” said Democrat Donna Howard, a state representative in Austin who co-authored the bill creating Abbott’s task force.
    At The SAFE Alliance in Austin, where sexual assault victims can get exams and medical care at its Eloise House, senior director Juliana Gonzales said it’s admirable for Texas to work on rape prevention.    “But I also think it’s important for the state to live in the reality that we have to respond to sexual assault,” she said.
    Stengle reported from Dallas.

9/27/2022 Cuba votes to legalize same-sex marriage by Cristiana Mesquita, ASSOCIATED PRESS
    HAVANA – Cubans have approved a sweeping “family law” code that would allow same-sex couples to marry and adopt as well as redefining rights for children and grandparents, officials said Monday, though opposition in the national referendum was unusually strong on the Communist Party-governed Island.
    The measure – which contains more than 400 articles – was approved by 66.9% to 33.1%, the president of the National Electoral Council, Alina Balseiro Gutiérrez, told official news media, though returns from a few places remained to be counted.
    The reforms had met unusually strong open resistance from the growing evangelical movement in Cuba – and many other Cubans – despite an extensive government campaign in favor of the measure, including thousands of information meetings across the country and extensive media coverage backing it.
    Cuban elections – in which no party other than the Communist is allowed – routinely produce victory margins of more than 90% – as did a referendum on a major constitutional reform in 2019.
    The code would allow surrogate pregnancies, broader rights for grandparents in regard to grandchildren, protection of the elderly and measures against gender violence.
    The measure had been approved by Cuba’s Parliament, the National Assembly, after years of debate about such reforms.

9/27/2022 Ariz. abortion patients travel - Neighboring states prepare to treat more after ruling by Jonathan J. Cooper and Terry Tang, ASSOCIATED PRESS
Protesters gather outside the Capitol in Phoenix on Friday to voice their
dissent after an Arizona judge’s abortion ruling. MATT YORK/AP     PHOENIX – When an Arizona judge ruled last week that prosecutors can resume enforcing a near-total ban on abortion that dates to the Civil War, it fell to the staff at Camelback Family Planning to break the news to the women scheduled for appointments in the coming weeks.
    The staff faced “crying, a lot of very, very angry people, denial,” nurse Ashleigh Feiring said Monday.    One woman argued, “But I’m only five weeks (along).”
    Women seeking abortions across Arizona were forced to find alternatives beyond the state’s borders after the ruling, which clears the way for prosecutors to charge doctors and others who help a woman end a pregnancy unless her life is in danger.    The state’s major abortion providers immediately halted procedures and canceled appointments.,br<     Providers in neighboring states, already seeing an increase in traffic from other conservative states that have banned abortion, were preparing to treat some of the 13,000 Arizona patients who get an abortion each year.
    Planned Parenthood Arizona on Monday asked Pima County Superior Court Judge Kellie Johnson to put her ruling on hold pending an appeal, saying it created confusion about the status of the law in Arizona.    Lawyers cited conflicts created by the abortion ban dating to 1864, a more recent law banning abortions after 15 weeks, and a variety of other laws regulating the processes and paperwork when terminating pregnancies.
    Johnson’s ruling lifted an injunction that was imposed after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision guaranteed a right to abortion in 1973.
    At the Camelback Family Planning clinic in central Phoenix, a young woman took off from work Monday afternoon for an appointment to get medicine to help with an abortion.    The 20-year-old is afraid she is prone to miscarriage and already miscarried two years ago.
    “I don’t want to experience this.    I don’t have the time and energy to go through that again,” said the woman, who declined to give her name.
    But she never made it past the checkin window.    Instead, she got a slip of paper with a website to order medicine by mail and left visibly upset.
    She says she never got a call that the ruling by a Tucson judge last Friday effectively voided her ability to get an abortion in Arizona.
    “I can guarantee I would not have wasted my time leaving work early and losing money to come here,” the woman said.    “I need to get it done – regardless if that’s going to a different state or going across the border.    It just sucks that this is the last resort for people.”
    The doctors and nurses at Camelback Family Planning had an inkling last week that a court decision on abortion could come down.    But they thought it would be a ban on abortions after 15 weeks into pregnancy.    So, several of the abortions performed last week were for patients over 20 weeks along.     “We cleared our schedule to do as many of those later-term ones,” said Feiring, the nurse.    So they postponed some patients less farther along until this week.
    Feiring and other staff at the Phoenix clinic are letting patients know the clinic is still available to do follow-up abortion care.    They refer them to websites and organizations that help with abortion access.
    Planned Parenthood has patient navigators who work with women seeking abortions to find an affiliate in a state where abortion is legal, and to help with money and logistics, said Brittany Fonteno, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Arizona.    Many Arizona patients are getting abortions in California, Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado.
    “This is really a traumatic experience, to be told that one day a basic health care procedure is available to you and then out of the blue the next day it’s been stripped away from you and has the potential to completely alter the course of your life,” Fonteno said.
    In California, the second-largest Planned Parenthood affiliate in the country says it is considering opening a new health center in part because of an expected increase in patients from Arizona and other states.
    Planned Parenthood of Orange and San Bernardino counties operates nine health centers in Southern California that catered to 250,000 medical visits last year – largely for services other than abortion, like cancer screenings and birth control, according to Nichole Ramirez, the group’s senior vice president for communications.
    The group started preparing for an influx of patients from other states last year by hiring more providers, offering more abortion appointment slots and helping patients pay for things like gas, hotel rooms and plane tickets.
    “We knew this was going to happen slowly, in a way, as state by state has been banning abortion,” Ramirez said.    “The number is going to continue to increase.”
    California is already seeing evidence of an increase in abortion patients coming from other states. Last week, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced a new website – abortion.ca.gov – that promotes all of the state’s abortion services, including a list of clinics and information about state laws.
    On Monday, the Governor’s Office said the website – while not tracking and storing people’s personal information – had seen an increase in out-of-state page views, with about 58% of traffic coming from people in other states.    That increase comes after Newsom used some of his campaign money to pay for billboards in seven conservative states to promote the website.
    Meanwhile, a California Access Reproductive Justice – a nonprofit that helps people pay for the logistics of getting an abortion – said 10 of the 63 people it helped in August were from Arizona.
    “This is really a traumatic experience, to be told that one day a basic health care procedure is available to you and then out of the blue the next day it’s been stripped away from you and has the potential to completely alter the course of your life.” Brittany Fonteno
President and CEO of Planned Parenthood Arizona

9/27/2022 Virginia Gov. Youngkin reversed schools' transgender protections. Students plan to walk out by Cady Stanton, USA TODAY
    ARLINGTON, Va. — Students at nearly 100 Virginia middle and high schools on Tuesday planned to walk out in protest of the state's reversal of transgender protections that put decisions on students' identities and preferred names at school exclusively in the hands of their parents.
Science.    Your sex is assigned at birth based on biological
Gender identity and sex: Find out how they differ based on science and spectrum
    What's in the policy: The guidelines, released Sept. 16 by Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin's administration, require students to use restrooms, pronouns and names based on their official school record.    It limits sports teams to gender assigned at birth, and it tightens parental notification requirements.
Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin speaks with reporters after touring a Loudoun County elections facility
at the County Office of Elections, in Leesburg, Virginia, on Tuesday, Sept. 20, 2022. © Cliff Owen, AP     The bigger picture: The walkouts are part of greater nationwide youth pushback to an uptick in anti-LGBTQ policies in schools, including Florida's so-called "Don't Say Gay Bill" and bans in 18 states against transgender athletes participating in sports that match their gender identity.
    What does Youngkin's education policy reverse?
    Last year, Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam's administration instituted model policies that protected transgender and other LGBTQ students at school.    The guidelines released this month, called The 2022 Model Policies on the Privacy, Dignity, and Respect for All Students in Virginia's Public School, revises those Department of Education guidelines.
    Under the new policy:

• Students should be referred to by the name and pronouns in their official records, unless a parent approves the use of an alternative.
• Schools may separate sports teams on the basis of sex assigned at birth and are not required to allow students of one sex to participate on sports teams reserved for members of another sex.
• Students must now file legal documents if they wish to be called by different pronouns.
• Schools may not encourage teachers to conceal information about a student's gender from their parents.

    The policy acknowledges that "every effort should be made to ensure that a transgender student wishing to change his or her means of address is treated with respect, compassion and dignity," but ultimately requires a guardian sign off on the change, presenting challenges for students with non-LGBTQ-affirming parents.
    What's next?
    A 30-day public comment period opened Monday and has already collected more than 16,000 responses. The state school board will not vote on the model policy but the Superintendent of Public Instruction may amend the final draft based on comments, state department of education spokesman Charles Pyle told Education Week.
    How have people reacted?
    School response: Multiple school boards have suggested they may resist and push back on the policies, including Alexandria City Public Schools and Falls Church City Public Schools, the Washington Post reported.
    What Youngkin says: Youngkin spokesman Macaulay Porter said in a statement that the updated policy “delivers on the governor’s commitment to preserving parental rights and upholding the dignity and respect of all public school students.”
    Youngkin also joined several states in suing the Biden administration for requiring schools to update policies and signage as well as investigate discrimination allegations involving sexual orientation and gender identity in order to qualify for federal school lunch funding.
Impact on transgender students
    Students and parents who've spoken out against the guidelines say the changes put LGBTQ youth in danger because it bans they/them pronouns and allows students to be deadnamed or misgendered.
    Casey Calabia, a 17-year-old senior at McLean High School, said their biggest concern was a change permitting schools to out students as transgender to their parents without their permission.    Calabia is an organizer with the student-led group that's leading the walkouts, Pride Liberation Project.
    "I know people personally who are out at school but not out at home," Calabia told USA TODAY.    "If they got outed through this transgender model policy, it would absolutely ruin their lives. They do not have supportive households."
Nationwide: A look at other efforts
    The Biden administration is currently reviewing comments to its proposed revisions to Title IX regulations, which include codifying protections for transgender and nonbinary students under nondiscrimination categories.
    But LGBTQ and survivor advocate groups have also pushed back on the Department of Education for neglecting to address guidelines on transgender and nonbinary student participation in gender-specific sports teams in the revised regulations.    Federal Education Department officials have said they plan to propose separate rules on the topic, but have not yet released a timeline for doing so.
    The so-called "Don't Say Gay" bill in Florida that passed in March was the most high-profile example of legislation targeting LGBTQ youth in the United States.    It limited speech on sexual orientation and gender identity in public school classrooms.    Bills in other states also restrict transgender student participation in gender-specific sports teams and require parental permission for student participation in LGBTQ extra-curriculars.
Contributing: Kayla Jimenez and Chris Quintana, USA TODAY
    This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Virginia Gov. Youngkin reversed schools' transgender protections. Students plan to walk out.

9/28/2022 JCPS panel dismisses attempt to ban book - Parent objected to story of nonbinary person by Olivia Krauth, Louisville Courier Journal USA TODAY NETWORK
Miranda Stovall and her attorney, Clint Elliott, appear at a SBDM Appeals Board hearing to
argue against the book “Gender Queer” in JCPS libraries. JEFF FAUGHENDER/COURIER JOURNAL     A memoir about a nonbinary person’s identity will remain on the shelves at two public school libraries in Louisville after a district panel rejected a parent’s challenge of the book.
    In a meeting that took less than four minutes, a group of educators and parents with final say over library challenges in Jefferson County Public Schools unanimously voted Monday afternoon to keep “Gender Queer” by Maia Kobabe at Liberty High School and the Phoenix School of Discovery.
    In doing so, they sided with multiple school principals and the district’s head of media services in arguing the book’s literary value and impact on LGBTQ students override a handful of scenes involving nudity and sex.
    A key role of school libraries, the panel wrote in a six-page decision, is to provide “access to diverse literary works that allow our students to see themselves and their peers reflected and to grow and learn in a safe and inclusive environment.”    Miranda Stovall, the parent who filed the complaint against the book, said she was “a little disappointed” in the panel’s decision.
    “My biggest concern is that this sets the precedent of JCPS not caring what parents think about what their children have access to, and this issue is going to snowball as it already has,” Stovall said.
    Chris Hartman, the leader of the Fairness Campaign, was one of a handful of people who came to JCPS’ central office to watch the brief meeting.    He said afterward that he wasn’t surprised by the panel’s decision.
    “This is a book that is instrumental for LGBTQ and particularly queer youth to be able to learn about who they are and the community that they’re a part of,” Hartman said.
    Monday’s decision ends a monthslong quest from Stovall to pull the book, which she considers to be “pornographic,” from the handful of JCPS libraries that offer it.
    Kobabe’s memoir has been a top target of a conservative–fueled movement to bar books featuring LGBTQ characters or themes from school libraries.    Critics, including Stovall’s attorney, Clint Elliott, argue sexual references in the books are obscene, violating a state law prohibiting the distribution of sexually explicit materials to minors.
    A Courier Journal reporter who read the book found fewer than a half-dozen depictions of nudity or sexual acts.    None involved children as some misinformation circulating online has inaccurately suggested — an observation the panel noted in their decision.
    “While a few passages contain sexual references or material, the work as a whole is not predominantly appealing to a prudent interest in sexual conduct,” the panel wrote.
    Books in schools can include sexual themes as long as the overall body of work has literary value.    In a July hearing over Stovall’s appeal, JCPS’ director of media services Lynn Reynolds argued the book had literary value.
    Reynolds also noted that “Gender Queer” is one of just a few books centering on a nonbinary character.    She, along with principals who refused to pull the book at Stovall’s request, felt the memoir and books with similar LGBTQ themes play an important role in creating an inclusive environment for LGBTQ students.
    The panel pointed to the awards “Gender Queer” has won, including the 2020 Alex Award, which is given out by a young adult division of the American Library Association.    Elliott, during the July hearing, discounted the book’s accolades, arguing adult magazines could win awards but would still be obscene.
    In a footnote in Monday’s decision, the panel called the analogy “offensive, misleading and to strain credibility.”
    In a July hearing over her appeal, Stovall also accused school and district leaders of robbing children of their innocence for keeping the book in school libraries.
    The panel “understands and respects” a parent’s right to have a say in what materials their child uses at school, but educators routinely work with parents on any issues, so the panel decided to continue allowing access to “Gender Queer” for parents who don’t request otherwise.
    Stovall is the only person to have challenged a book’s space in a JCPS library since August 2021, a review of district records shows.    All of her formal disputes have focused on “Gender Queer,” an illustrated memoir of how Kobabe came to identify as gender nonbinary and asexual.
    Two remaining disputes to remove the memoir from Atherton and Central are still in the appeals process.    It is unclear how Monday’s decision impacts those appeals.
    Library materials are typically decided at the school level, by the same councils of teachers and parents that vote on challenged materials.    When schools don’t have those councils, as in the case with Liberty and Phoenix, school librarians recommend books and other materials to the principal for purchase.
    To challenge instructional materials in JCPS, someone first sends their concern to the school’s principal. After meeting with the principal or a designee, the principal has five days to issue a written decision.    Someone can appeal the principal’s decision, and it is reconsidered by the school’s school-level council of teachers and parents.
    If the school council also declines to pull the book, then someone can appeal the decision to the superintendent, who weighs in.    After the superintendent, the appeal lands at a district-level panel, which holds a public hearing on the measure before issuing a written and final decision.
    Reach Olivia Krauth at okrauth@ courierjournal.com and on Twitter at @oliviakrauth.

9/28/2022 ABORTION IN KENTUCKY - Constitutional amendment puts fate in voters’ hands - Stakes are high for both sides of the debate by Deborah Yetter, Louisville Courier Journal USA TODAY NETWORK
Katie Milby joins a rally in Louisville in June to protest the U.S. Supreme Court’s striking down of Roe v. Wade.
A law banning nearly all abortions in the state is pending before the Kentucky Supreme Court. PAT MCDONOGH/COURIER JOURNAL     One of the hottest items on Kentucky’s Nov. 8 general election ballot this year could be Constitutional Amendment 2 to eliminate the right to abortion in the commonwealth.
    Though constitutional amendments - often in dense legal jargon - tend to make voters eyes glaze over, supporters and opponents predict this one is different.
    The topic fired up voters in Kansas, where an unexpectedly large turnout in August rejected by 18 percentage points a similar attempt to eliminate abortion rights from that state’s constitution.
What Kentucky’s abortion ballot question says
    Kentucky’s one-sentence amendment states: “To protect human life, nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to secure or protect a right to abortion or require the funding of abortion.”
What the vote on Kentucky’s abortion amendment could do
If approved, the measure changes
    People attend a Right to Life rally in Louisville in January. Kentucky is among about a dozen states that enacted a “trigger law,” which essentially ended abortion in the state. JEFF FAUGHENDER/ COURIER JOURNAL
    Kentucky’s constitution to eliminate the right to abortion.
    If rejected, it leaves open the possibility abortion could be declared a state right.
    And with Kentucky among states that have largely banned abortion since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade on June 24, the stakes are high.
    “We’re going to do our best to make sure this issue is front and center when people go into the voting booths Nov. 8,” said Rachel Sweet, campaign manager for Protect Kentucky Access, a coalition of abortion rights groups that oppose the amendment.    “I think we have the opportunity to make a really compelling case as to why this policy is bad for Kentucky and why it should be rejected.”
    Sweet ran the successful campaign to reject the Kansas amendment.
    But supporters of Kentucky’s amendment led by the Yes for Life campaign are working to make sure the amendment passes to block any possibility a court decision or change in the law could restore abortion rights in Kentucky.
    “This constitutional amendment reiterates that the constitution does not secure or protect the right to abortion or protect the funding of abortion,” said Addia Wuchner, executive director of Kentucky Right to Life and chair of the Yes for Life Alliance.
    It ensures “you do not have laws or radical judges making law from the bench,” she added.
    Currently a challenge to two laws that have shut down abortion access in Kentucky is pending before the state Supreme Court, which does not plan to hear the case until Nov. 15, a week after the voters are to decide the amendment.
    Kentucky was among about a dozen states with a “trigger law” to end abortion should Roe v. Wade fall.    It also had a law on the books that bans abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy, before most people realize they are pregnant.
    Both laws allow abortions only in medical emergencies to save the life of or prevent disabling injury to a patient.
    Contact reporter Deborah Yetter at dyetter@courier-journal.com.    Find her on Twitter at @d_yetter.
With Kentucky among states that have largely banned abortion since the
U.S. Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade on June 24, the stakes are high.
Voters will consider Constitutional Amendment 2 on the November 2022 ballot, which could change whether
Kentucky’s constitution will allow abortions in the commonwealth. JEFFERSON COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS
9/30/2022 N.Y. Appeals Court Hears Case On Banning Trans Athletes In Conn. by OAN Newsroom
    Danbury High School sophomore Alanna Smith speaks during a news conference at the Connecticut State Capitol in Hartford, Conn.,
, Tuesday, Feb, 12, 2020. Smith, the daughter of former Major League pitcher Lee Smith, is among three girls suing to block a state
policy that allows transgender athletes to compete in girls sports. (AP Photo/Pat Eaton-Robb) Pat Eaton-Robb/Associated Press     A New York appeals court hears a case against the Connecticut Athletic Conference for allowing transgender athletes to compete in high school sports.    The case goes back to a lawsuit that was filed in federal court in 2020.
    The Alliance Defending Freedom is pursuing the case on behalf of four female athletes.    The four women claimed that their chances to compete as athletes in high school were taken away by transgender males who were competing in their sports.
    However, the appeal was dismissed last year with the judge stating that since both transgender athletes in the suit graduated high school, they had no case.    The judge also stated that the four women did not identify any other transgender athletes they would be competing against.    This lead to the dropping of the case.
    The plaintiffs argued the athletics policy violated Title IX. Title IX requires equal opportunities for women and girls in education and in sports.
    One of the four plaintiffs, Chelsea Mitchell, believes the case is about fairness in women’s sports.    Selina Soule, another female athlete who is apart of the lawsuit, testified on Thursday.    Soule disclosed that she was forced to compete against men for her entire high school athletic career.
    The lawsuit was also filed to change state track results and records set by two transgender athletes.    Christiana Kiefer, the attorney for the female athletes, said her clients’ achievements and records mattered.    Kiefer claimed that the records were taken away from her clients due to males being included in their sports.
    Three of the four women in the case currently compete in NCAA Division 1 track and field programs.


    This page created on 7/1/2022, and updated each month by 7/31/2022, 8/31/2022, 9/30/2022.

Please close this window when done, or select the previous tab or back button to return to previous page.
Or return to the Table of Contents - Chapter Eight or
Or return to the Astronomical Events To Appear Between 2014 Through 2017 A.D.
Or return to the Beast That Came Out Of The Sea or
2011-2022 ????? Unknown future of the Sixth group of Twelve years
Or this link will return you to Scarlet Woman 2022 April-June or continue to Scarlet Woman 2022 Oct-Dec.