viernes, 12 de diciembre de 2014

Crimes against humanity for opposing the Gay agenda!!!....La ignorancia de los legisladores, perdon de Nuestros legisladores!...The Minimum Wage is a Job Killer!

Featured Image
U.S. pastor and pro-family activist Scott Livelyhttp://livelyforgovernor.com
Kirsten AndersenKirsten AndersenFollow Kirsten

U.S. pastor faces ‘crimes against humanity’ charges for opposing gay agenda as First Circuit refuses to toss suit

The First Circuit Court of Appeals has allowed a lawsuit to proceed against U.S. pastor Scott Lively accusing him of “crimes against humanity” for his overseas activism opposing the homosexual agenda.
The plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages "to be determined at trial" and a declaration that he violated "the laws of nations" by speaking against homosexual “rights.”
Pastor Scott Lively, who recently completed an unsuccessful bid for governor of Massachusetts, was sued in 2012 by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) on behalf of "Sexual Minorities Uganda." The Ugandan homosexual activist group claims Lively’s speeches and sermons warning Ugandan leaders not to follow the liberal West’s lead on homosexuality incited murders, violence, and persecution of homosexuals in the African nation.
The lawsuit is seeking redress under the Alien Tort Statute – a controversial law that has occasionally allowed foreign nationals to sue U.S. citizens in American courts for crimes committed overseas, regardless of whether the law supposedly broken was a U.S. law, or a law in the country where the alleged crime occurred.
Lively asked Judge Michael Ponsor to throw the case out, arguing that his right to free speech is protected under the U.S. Constitution, and nothing he did or said violated Ugandan law.  But Ponsor refused in a vitriolic 79-page ruling on August 14, 2013 that called Lively’s opposition to homosexual behavior “ludicrous.”  The judge blamed Lively’s speeches for everything from isolated incidences of police brutality against homosexuals in Uganda to the introduction of a controversial bill that would have made homosexual behavior punishable by death. The penalty was later amended to life in prison, but the bill failed anyway.
Lively has expressed support in Uganda and other countries for laws banning pro-homosexual propaganda, similar to the law Russia recently enacted, however he strongly opposed the harsh penalties in the Ugandan bill.  The lawsuit claims that by sharing his views with influential people in Uganda, Lively somehow set off a chain reaction of violence and persecution against homosexuals that continues to this day.
Lively appealed to the First Circuit Court, asking them to overrule Ponsor’s judgment and dismiss the case.  He again pointed out that he had not broken any U.S. or Ugandan laws, and said he could not be held responsible for the actions of an entire foreign society, nor its individual members, just because he made some speeches in 2009.
But last week, a 3-judge panel on the First Circuit denied Lively’s request.  While they conceded that “it is debatable whether [Judge Ponsor] has properly parsed the petitioner's protected speech from any unprotected speech or conduct,” they said that Lively’s “right to extraordinary relief is not clear and indisputable.” 
Given the importance of the case to future application of Alien Tort Law, the judges said they would rather allow it to go forward in order to further explore the issues raised by Lively and his lawyers.
“This petition for [dismissal] raises a number of potentially difficult issues with respect to the Alien Tort Statute … and the First Amendment in cross-border application,” the judges wrote.  “Further development of the facts will aid in the ultimate disposition of this case.”
In 2002 and 2009, Lively was invited to speak before a group of Ugandan pastors who were concerned about the rise of pornography and homosexuality in their culture.  He shared with them the history of how American culture "had been brought low" by homosexual activists in the U.S., and warned them that unless they took action to prevent it from happening in their country, they could expect similar results. He reportedly drew connections between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, noting that historically, most homosexual behavior has started with pederasty -- men having sex with adolescent boys -- and encouraged Ugandans to protect their children from indoctrination or recruitment by gays and lesbians.
Brian Camenker of MassResistance, who works closely with Lively on pro-family issues in Massachusetts, told LifeSiteNews by email that he found the First Circuit’s decision “outrageous.”
“First of all, the charges are ridiculous on their face, and in fact false,” said Camenker.  “Second, a U.S. Supreme Court Decision last summer clearly nullified any use of the Alien Tort Act by the plaintiffs, which is the mainstay of their case.”  Camenker was referring to Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, in which the Supreme Court ruled that the Alien Tort Statute does not apply outside the United States.
Camenker added that Judge Posner “should have recused himself because of his background – going back years – of supporting the homosexual movement and its goals.”  He provided a link to an investigatory piece he wrote, which says in part: “Ponsor is openly liberal and a protégé of pro-homosexual Judge Joseph Tauro, who recently ruled to strike down DOMA in the federal court. But that's just his more visible profile.”
Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage. 
Continued Camenker, “Ponsor's bias favoring the homosexual movement goes back several years. At his judicial induction ceremony on Feb. 14, 1994 … Ponsor told the assembled crowd, ‘We have a proud, vibrant gay and lesbian community’ in Western Massachusetts. At that time, it was a particularly unusual statement to make, especially for a judge.”
Camenker noted that Ponsor has indirectly funded the plaintiffs’ legal organization for years with donations to the Community Foundation of Western Massachusetts (CFWF), which funnels money to CCR.  Additionally, Ponsor’s second ex-wife and daughter both identify as lesbians, and his first ex-wife was a prominent pro-lesbian activist. 
Perhaps more troubling is what Camenker described as Ponsor’s “troubling ties to plaintiff's local counsel, who is also a radical activist.”
“The local opposing counsel in this case, Luke Ryan, worked as a law clerk for Ponsor from 2005-2007 and appears to be close friends with him,” Camenker wrote. “Ryan is an active supporter of Arise for Social Justice, a thuggish pro-homosexual group which, along with ‘Occupy Springfield,’ has terrorized Pastor Lively's downtown coffee house mission. Ryan is also involved with Out Now, a homosexual group that demonstrated against Lively at the court hearing.”
Original Wayuu Bags

Google News: El perjucio que causa la ignorancia del legislador

Google NewsAyer día 10 de diciembre de 2014, Google ha anunciado que a partir de la entrada en vigor de la nueva Ley de Propiedad Intelectual, cierra en España su servicio de Google News. Para quienes no lo conozcan, este servicio extrae automatizadamente una porción de las cabeceras de los titulares de la versión digital de los periódicos, las agrupa y las sirve como enlaces. Es lo que se conoce como un agregador de noticias.
Que Google News iba a desaparecer de España lo sabíamos todos, menos el legislador y los empresarios de los medios de comunicación integrados en AEDE (Asociación de Editores de Diarios Españoles) quienes en un ejercicio de ignorancia absoluta han utilizado sus medios como plataformas para justificar un impuesto absolutamente ilógico, conocido en España como la Tasa Google o el Canon AEDE, sirviendo el legislador como correa de transmisión de las necesidades financieras de los medios.
Y hoy es noticia en toda la prensa que Google News se desactiva en España. Lógico. Ya fue imposible implantar la Tasa Google en Bélgica, en Francia y más recientemente en Alemania, cuando los editores de los periódicos observaron una pérdida del 80% de los visitantes. En un mundo en el que la atención es el bien más escaso, intentar cobrar a quien te trae visitantes es de cortos mentales, mientras que legislar en este sentido es de ignorantes. La Tasa Google sería equivalente a un mundo en que los restaurantes pretendiesen cobrar a los guías turísticos por llevarles un autobús lleno de clientes.
No nos quedemos en la anécdota de que Google News se va de España. El problema no es ese. El problema es que nos hallamos en manos de unos legisladores ignorantes que dictan leyes cuya finalidad es llenar las arcas de sus socios empresarios, persistiendo en el tipo de actos que nos han llevado a la ruina moral y económica actual. El problema no es la piratería de Google a quien se le reprocha explotar noticias ajenas, el problema son los corsarios que nos gobiernan a golpe de Boletín Oficial del Estado.Lea la versión completa aquí © Libertad Digital

MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE COST AMERICANS 1.4 MILLION JOBS. LOW SKILLED WORKERS AND YOUTHS HARDEST HIT

Resulted in loss of 1.4 million American jobs and hurt unskilled workers most
Minimum Wage Increase Cost Americans 1.4 Million Jobs. Low Skilled Workers and Youths Hardest Hit
by INVESTMENTWATCH DECEMBER 11, 2014

Hikes in the minimum wage have other effects besides just giving low-income workers a raise.
Important new research suggests that minimum wage increases in the late 2000s resulted in the loss of some 1.4 million American jobs and hurt unskilled workers most of all.
new study by researchers Jeffrey Clemens and Michael Wither from the University of California San Diego found that low-skilled workers were the most adversely affected by minimum wage increases, despite the fact that this was the group that such legislation sought to help.
The study shows that between July 23, 2007 and July 24, 2009, the federal minimum wage rose from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour. During this period, the employment-to-population ratio declined substantially—by 4 percentage points among adults aged 25 to 54, and by 8 percentage points among those aged 15 to 24.
Minimum Wage Maximum Unemployment
Study: Low-level workers put out by wage hikes
Minimum wage hikes hurt the people that politicians claim to help, according to a new study.
University of California at San Diego professors Jeffrey Clemens and Michael Wither found that the $7.25 minimum wage passed in 2007 contributed to job losses for entry level and low-skilled workers. The wages may have been high on paper, but the take home pay for workers fell during the first three years of the new wage.
“We find that binding minimum wage increases had significant, negative effects on the employment and income growth of targeted workers,” the study says.
http://freebeacon.com/issues/minimum-wage-maximum-unemployment/
Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/study-minimum-wage-increase-cost-americans-1-4-million-jobs/#dcCqlvXCt6PlmS80.99

jueves, 11 de diciembre de 2014

End of the World: 12 Disasters...Irán: un Lobo vestido de Oveja...Why Obama's daughters don't eat what their MOM wants all children to eat?

12 DISASTERS THAT COULD BRING ABOUT THE END OF THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT

Our way of life is far more vulnerable than most people would ever dare to imagine
12 Disasters That Could Bring About The End Of The World As We Know It
Image Credits: NASA
by MICHAEL SNYDER | END OF THE AMERICAN DREAM DECEMBER 11, 2014

Our way of life is far more vulnerable than most people would ever dare to imagine.  A single major catastrophe could fundamentally alter all of our lives at any moment.  But since most people have not experienced such a catastrophe during their entire lifetimes, most people just assume that there will never be one.  This is called “normalcy bias” and it can lull us into a very false sense of complacency. The other day, Michael Hanlon of the Telegraph wrote an article entitled “How will the world end? From ‘demonic’ AI to nuclear war — seven scenarios that could end human race“.  Below, I discuss each of those seven scenarios along with five additional ones that I have added.  We live in a world that is becoming increasingly unstable, and as a society we have become exceedingly dependent on the technology that we have surrounded ourselves with.  If something were to happen which would force us to live like our grandparents and great-grandparents did, most of us would be in a tremendous amount of trouble.  And as our technology has advanced, so has the potential that this technology will be used for war and destruction.  There is great evil in the heart of man, and the potential to hurt others with that evil has never been greater.  And of course there are always other “black swan events” to be concerned about as well.  The following are 12 disasters that could bring about the end of the world as we know it…
1. ASTEROID STRIKE
A single asteroid could potentially produce an “ELE” – an extinction level event.  And scientists are finding more asteroids that are potentially a danger to Earth all the time.  For example, just the other day Russian researchers discovered a massive asteroid that will fly close to our planet every three years
Scientists have calculated that 2014 UR116 asteroid will fly in dangerous proximity to Earth every three years. If it collides with the planet the energy of the explosion could be a thousand times greater than the impact of the Chelyabinsk meteorite.

Vladimir Lipunov, a leading scientist on the team which discovered the asteroid this October, says the scientists now know its orbit and its period which is 3 years, but they cannot say precisely when the asteroid will approach the Earth.

“We should track it constantly. Because if we have a single mistake, there will be a catastrophe. The consequences can be very serious,” he said in the documentary “Asteroids attack” posted on Roscosmos website.

about tens of millions of deaths and the collapse of entire nations.  The following is an excerpt from one of my previous articles about what could happen if a very large asteroid were to come crashing down just off the east coast of the United States…
According to the University of California at Santa Cruz website, if a massive asteroid were to crash into the Atlantic Ocean it could produce a giant tsunami with a wall of water as high as 400 feet that would slam into the east coast of the United States…
If an asteroid crashes into the Earth, it is likely to splash down somewhere in the oceans that cover 70 percent of the planet’s surface. Huge tsunami waves, spreading out from the impact site like the ripples from a rock tossed into a pond, would inundate heavily populated coastal areas. A computer simulation of an asteroid impact tsunami developed by scientists at the University of California, Santa Cruz, shows waves as high as 400 feet sweeping onto the Atlantic Coast of the United States.
In case you were wondering, yes, that would be absolutely catastrophic.
2. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Could the machines one day rise up and take over?
Personally, I am skeptical, but some of the brightest minds in the world are deeply concerned about this.  Just consider the following excerpt from Michael Hanlon’s article in the Telegraph
Humanity may have already created its own nemesis, Professor Stephen Hawking warned last week. The Cambridge University physicist claimed that new developments in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) mean that within a few decades, computers thousands of times more powerful than in existence today may decide to usurp their creators and effectively end humanity’s 100,000-year dominance of Earth.
This Terminator scenario is taken seriously by many scientists and technologists. Before Prof. Hawking made his remarks, Elon Musk, the genius behind the Tesla electric car and PayPal, had stated that “with artificial intelligence, we are summoning the demon,” comparing it unfavourably with nuclear war as the most potent threat to humanity’s existence. KEEP READING
 Wayuu Bags


Irán y el ciberespionaje

Bandera de IránEs posible que Irán no sea el que más ciberataques ha sufrido en los últimos años, pero pocos países se han visto tan afectados por la acción de los piratas informáticos. El caso más famoso fue el de Stuxnet, que tenía como objetivo el programa nuclear de la República Islámica y que hizo que los ayatolás tomaran conciencia de la importancia de la guerra cibernética.
La evolución de la capacidad de Irán para intervenir en sistemas electrónicos de otros países ha sido tan rápida que tan sólo cuatro años después de Stuxnet, en junio de 2014, el primer ministro israelí, Benjamín Netanyahu, denunciaba los continuos ciberataques de organizaciones iraníes contra servicios esenciales de Israel, como los relacionados con el suministro de agua y electricidad o el sistema bancario. Tres meses después, el diario The Wall Street Journal acusó a Irán de perpetrar un ataque informático contra la red interna de la Marina Estadounidense en San Diego. Estos ataques serían parte de la denominada Operación Cleaver, de la que la empresa estadounidense especializada en ciberseguridad Cylance acaba de dar cuenta, tras dos años de investigaciones.
Los expertos de Cylance han recogido pruebas que apuntan al régimen iraní como el impulsor de esa campaña de ataques contra Gobiernos y grandes empresas occidentales. Tanto los nombres utilizados como el registro de los dominios utilizados para intentar irrumpir en redes ajenas sitúan a los hackers en Irán. Además, la vasta utilización de medios y la cantidad de ataques realizados hacen que resulte muy poco probable que se trate de un pirata aislado o de un pequeño grupo de activistas. Cylance está convencida de que la Operación Cleaver está impulsada, organizada y financiada por el Gobierno de Teherán. En concreto, los expertos de la firma norteamericana atribuyen a la Guardia Revolucionaria la responsabilidad de este programa, del que hasta ahora no se tenía noticia en los medios occidentales.
La Operación Cleaver se ha venido concentrando en compañías aéreas, corporaciones energéticas y firmas relacionadas con la industria militar, principalmente radicadas en EEUU. En Cylance creen que las actividades ilegales de los hackers iraníes pueden afectar muy negativamente en grandes infraestructuras y recursos básicos de países occidentales. Los ataques a compañías responsables de las infraestructuras más sensibles de Corea del Sur podrían indicar también cierto grado de colaboración de Irán con Corea del Norte, país con el que Teherán mantiene un acuerdo de cooperación tecnológica.
El documento de la empresa Cylance incluye una serie de recomendaciones a las empresas de todo el mundo para que extremen las medidas de seguridad en sus sistemas informáticos y redes de comunicaciones. Es posible que la amenaza haya sido sobrevalorada con propósitos comerciales, pero la recopilación de pruebas y ataques padecidos por instituciones occidentales es suficientemente apabullante como para que la opinión de estos expertos sea, al menos, escuchada.

Obama Children Eat Like Royals as America's Students Eat Trash

     
While students around the country are going hungry while revolting against Michelle Obama’s lunch program, the Daily Caller has unveiled the lunch menu for Sidwell Friends School, the institution where Sasha and Malia Obama attend.
The menu for December 9th was as follows.   
Potato Sausage Soup 
Firecracker Slaw
California Chef’s Salad
Jamaican Jerk Chicken Wings
Sweet Potato Black Bean Bake
Sautéed Local Greens
Gemelli Alfredo
Sliced Pineapple
Of course, the students around the country are getting nothing like the Obama royals. 
  

miércoles, 10 de diciembre de 2014

$18 Billones de Dolares es la deuda de USA...quien creen que la va a pagar?....The Left and its love with Rape....Abortion clinic worker convert to Pro-life!!!

EE.UU.: $18,000,000,000,000 de deuda

DeudaEn este Black Friday 2014, la deuda de Estados Unidos sobrepasó los $18 billones. Eso representa una deuda de $124,000 por cada hogar americano o de $56,378 por persona.
El país tardó 205 años en acumular su primer billón de dólares de deuda en el año 1981, pero sólo nos ha llevado 403 días acumular nuestro billón más reciente. Incluso resulta complicado pensar en cifras tan grandes; si tuviera que contar hasta un millón necesitaría una semana; si quisiera contar hasta un billón tardaría 31,000 años.
Al igual que ocurre con nuestras deudas personales, puede que en realidad contraer deudas tenga algunas ventajas. La tele de pantalla plana y los regalos de Navidad que compramos endeudándonos probablemente incrementen nuestro nivel de vida y bienestar. Sin embargo, esta ganancia a corto plazo se paga a menudo con sacrificios a largo plazo. Y la moneda de pago de ese sacrificio son los intereses.
Los intereses son el precio de la deuda. De modo que cuando alguien compra un televisor mediante un plan de pagos, en realidad estamos comprando dos cosas: el televisor y la deuda que lo acompaña. Aunque pueda que merezca la pena gastar unos cuantos dólares extra para ver a nuestros jugadores de fútbol favoritos en HD, gastar una gran parte de nuestros ingresos en intereses puede reducir seriamente nuestra calidad de vida ya que tendremos que renunciar a otras compras para pagar los intereses.
Ése es el punto al que ha llegado nuestro país con sus intereses por la deuda nacional.
El año pasado, Estados Unidos gastó $430,000 millones sólo en el pago de intereses. Eso significa que cada año los contribuyentes están pagando $3,500 únicamente en intereses. Se trata de un dinero que no se está destinando a pagar carreteras, puentes, educación, investigación médica o defensa.
Esto se pone aún más aterrador. Los tipos de interés de la deuda nacional están históricamente bajos en este momento, en torno al 2.5%. Cuando suban, el pago de los intereses aumentará exponencialmente gracias a la “maravilla” de los tipos compuestos. Digamos que los tipos de interés suben al 5%, aún bajos según los estándares históricos. Eso significa que deberemos cerca de $1 billón anual sólo en intereses. ¡Es casi dos tercios de lo que el gobierno federal recauda cada año por la totalidad del impuesto sobre ingresos!
Menos servicios y mayores impuestos: el despilfarro del Tío Sam podría acabar perjudicándonos a todos.
 Original Wayuu Bags

SHAPIRO: To The Left, Lying About Rape Is Just Dandy

     
This week, Rolling Stone printed an editor's note retracting one of the most highly praised pieces of investigative journalism in its history. That piece, written by Sabrina Rubin Erdely, alleged that several members of the University of Virginia fraternity Phi Kappa Psi, had raped a 19-year-old student named Jackie, including with foreign objects, as she lay on a floor covered with broken glass. The article resulted in the university suspending the fraternity's activities, and national outrage over the so-called "rape culture" on campus.
That rape culture supposedly leads to one in five women being sexually assaulted on campus -- a faulty statistic from a poll that didn't even ask women if they were raped or sexually assaulted, and instead defined sex while inebriated at any level as rape. With regard to reported rape, the federal government reports a rate of just 1.3 per 1,000 Americans. That is, of course, far too high. But it is not a rape culture by any plausible definition.
Nonetheless, the narrative of women as victims of brutish male society must be forwarded at all costs, for political purposes. If Americans are brutish sexists waiting to rape unsuspecting women, bigger government becomes a necessity. That's why President Obama has cited that one-in-five statistic, and suggested that America experiences "quiet tolerance of sexual assault."
In order to forward that narrative, all rape stories are treated as fact sans investigation of any kind. And so Jackie's story of gang rape received plaudits across the media landscape.
Then it fell apart.
The Washington Post quickly debunked the story. According to the Post, the fraternity says there was no event the night Jackie was allegedly raped, Jackie's friends "have not been able to verify key points in recent days," and one of the men named in Jackie's report stated that "he never met Jackie in person and never took her out on a date."
As the Rolling Stone report collapsed, members of the left jumped to defend Jackie. Sally Kohn of CNN.com tweeted that people should stop questioning Jackie's story: "While aspects of UVA rape story now in question, still unsettles me that pouncing by skeptics mirrored sort of doubt rape victims often face." Feminist Melissa McEwan wrote, "If Jackie's story is partially or wholly untrue, it doesn't validate the reasons for disbelieving her."
Under this logic, Atticus Finch was the villain in "To Kill a Mockingbird." After all, how dare he question the rape allegations of a victimized woman and defend Tom Robinson?
But for the left, it's narrative first, facts second.
The same holds true regarding allegations made by HBO star Lena Dunham, who wrote of her own alleged rape at the hands of an Oberlin "college Republican" named Barry. When it turned out that Barry, a readily identifiable person from Dunham's days at Oberlin, did not rape her, the media largely went silent; Dunham still has not spoken on the issue.
Narrative first. Facts second.
Here is the reality: All decent human beings believe that rape is evil. They also believe that false allegations of rape are wrong. These two positions are not mutually exclusive. They complement one another. False rape allegations do actual rape victims a tremendous disservice: to lump in false accusations of rape with true accusations of rape makes people more skeptical of rape victims generally, a horrible result. Rape should be taken seriously; rape accusations should be taken seriously. That means taking factual questions seriously, not merely throwing the word "rape" around casually, without evidence, and without regard for truth. 
Featured Image
Jewels Green
Jewels Green

I worked at an abortion clinic. I was 100% pro-choice. Then two women opened my eyes.

For much of my life, I was so entrenched in the pro-choice worldview that I would completely shut down conversations that invited me to examine or question my position. Even with my history of being pressured into an abortion at 17 and surviving my subsequent suicide attempt, I remained a vehement and vocal advocate for abortion. I even worked at an abortion facility for five years. College, grad school, marriage, giving birth to three babies—nothing swayed me from my myopic view of a "woman's right to choose" abortion.
Four Novembers ago that began to change.
While discussing abortion and surrogacy in an online forum with a group of women I knew from a natural childbirth support group, the topic of in-vitro fertilization came up. I held fast to the standard pro-abortion rights theorizing that a "bunch of cells" could not possibly be as worthy of our respect and protection as an adult woman. I was baffled (but intrigued) by two voices speaking clearly, consistently, and compassionately (against the tide of a dozen opponents) in support of the right of these microscopic humans to live to maturation.
In the ensuing conversations neither Lindsey nor Lauren ever berated, belittled, or otherwise bashed those of us who disagreed with them—but they also never backed down. Their unshakable belief and eloquent defense of the value of all human life put a chink in the armor I'd spent decades carefully constructing. What was life if not a continuum from conception to death? Wasn't I once a tiny collection of cells? I finally began thinking about these issues of life in a new way.
Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE
As the forum expanded to discussions about surrogacy, I was primed for further interior examination of my long-held, never-before-questioned position... and I slowly began to consider that a child in womb just might be, in fact, a child.
Then I learned of a surrogate who was paid her full contract price to abort the baby she was carrying after the biological parents were disappointed by an in-utero diagnosis of Down syndrome. The chink in the armor became a chasm and the truth was blindingly clear: abortion is wrong. Abortion kills a living, growing member of the human family. And to quote Feminists for Life, women deserve better than abortion.
Only as I look back do I see the blinders. My willful ignorance, my avoidance of true introspection, my stubbornness. I can never thank Lindsey and Lauren enough for their unwavering witness to the sanctity of life. These two remarkable women (unknowingly at the time) set me on a path of discovery that culminated in my wholehearted acceptance of the right to life from conception to natural death and of a life devoted to furthering the cause of LIFE.
Thank you, Lindsey.
Thank you, Lauren.
Reprinted with permission from SecularProlife