In this week's episode of "you cannot choose winners and losers" Erika Shields, Police Chief of Louisville Kentucky found out the hard way that you cannot choose to allow an officer to walk in uniform with one group while prohibiting an off duty officer from walking with a different group, just because you may be against the group's cause. I know that sentence is mind-numbing, as this author never presented himself as an English Major (Me flunk English? That's UN-possible).
The story goes like this: An off duty, but fully uniformed police officer prayed outside at an abortion mill during 40 Days for Life prayer vigil. He was later suspended for his actions while in uniform. He eventually won some money, back pay, etc. However, other officers reportedly were allowed by Ms. Shields to take part in BLM and LBGT+ activities in full uniform with no consequences. Here is a quote from the article: In October, the Thomas More Society, along with Louisville attorney Blaine Blood, filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Schrenger against both the city and the police department, arguing that the law enforcement officer’s civil and constitutional rights had been violated when he was stripped of his duties and cut off from his income. “A quiet, off-duty prayer, on a public sidewalk, resulted in Schrenger being immediately suspended for over four months, stripped of his police powers, and placed under investigation,” the complaint stated. The suit named Police Chief Erika Shields, the Louisville Metro Police Department, Mayor Greg Fischer, and the City of Louisville, Kentucky as defendants. Matt Heffron, Schrenger’s attorney, said the city’s treatment of the officer was “unfair” and an instance of “discrimination,” calling Schrenger’s suspension “a significant and inexcusable violation of a loyal officer’s Constitutional rights.” “The unfair discipline revealed undeniably content-based discrimination against Officer Schrenger’s personal pro-life views and violated his First Amendment rights,” Heffron said, adding that the Catholic cop “did not engage in any political protest on duty” but merely “prayed quietly.” According to Heffron and the Thomas More Society, the police department’s actions against Schrenger appeared to be targeted against his religious beliefs and political views since the department had not “taken disciplinary action against on-duty, uniformed officers who marched with Black Lives Matter protestors and in LBGT parades.” KICKER! This author believes that no one in uniform should march in ANY cause other than "Back the Blue" as our police should never be seen taking sides in any activity that could alienate other NON VIOLENT voices of resistance. One can even argue that BLM is NOT nonviolent, but that is another blog post. But as Ms. Shields and the police department has learned, you cannot pick your favorite cause to promote or ban. Original Article: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/catholic-cop-wins-settlement-after-city-suspended-him-for-praying-outside-abortion-facility/?utm_source=home_more_news&utm_campaign=usa Mary Szoch is Director of the Center for Human Dignity at Family Research Council. Joy Zavalick is Research Assistant for the Center for Human Dignity at Family Research Council.
From the Federalist. https://thefederalist.com/2022/02/01/no-one-benefits-from-highly-inaccurate-prenatal-tests-more-than-planned-parenthood/
A prenatal exam should not determine a life, accurate or not. Before taking these tests, parents should look into whether the results will actually help their child or not. They should also consider looking into the companies profiting from the test. Planned Parenthood’s website inconspicuously recommends that mothers discuss prenatal testing with their doctors in order “to make sure you’re healthy and that your fetus is developing normally.” Of course, the abortion giant stands to gain from convincing mothers to receive prenatal testing that will incorrectly tell many that their child will be born with painful or life-threatening conditions. The eugenic and ableist mindset peddled by the abortion industry manipulates parents into believing it would be more merciful to end their children’s lives rather than subject them to an unknown amount of suffering caused by a genetic disorder. This creates a demand for the tests. Thus, the genetic testing industry and abortion industry both stand to profit from the other’s existence. There are several known connections between the abortion industry and the genetic screening industry — including companies such as Natera, Labcorp, Roche, Myriad Genetics, and Quest Diagnostics — that should make everyone pause. For example, Roche has sponsored Planned Parenthood events. Nicole Lambert, Myriad Genetics’ chief operating officer, was a volunteer at Planned Parenthood. Dr. Richard P. Lifton, an executive with Roche, participated in a study of genetic risks of cerebral palsy that was partially authored by the Shanghai Institute of Planned Parenthood Research. Notably, Planned Parenthood does not offer treatment for people with cerebral palsy; however, they do abort them. D. Gary Gilliland and Peter Neupert are directors at Labcorp. Both have ties to the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center — Gilliland receives a seven-figure salary as the president and director emeritus and Neupert served as a trustee until 2020. The Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center uses aborted fetal tissue donations from a Planned Parenthood in Washington state and has advocated at the federal level for the ability to use human fetal tissue in research. Timothy M. Ring, the lead independent director of Quest Diagnostics, was also the president and director of C. R. Bard, Inc. from 2003 to 2017. During that time, the company was a donor to Planned Parenthood. Perhaps it is merely a coincidence that high-ranking individuals at genetic testing companies are pro-abortion, and there is no actual collusion between such corporations and the abortion industry. However, when the results of prenatal genetic screening tests are wrong 85 percent of the time, it does inspire questions about the motives behind manufacturing those tests and encouraging women to continue taking them despite their inaccuracy. Genetic screening exploits parents’ fear of the unknown and perpetuates the false mindset that children are only a blessing when they lack a diagnosis. With their 85 percent inaccuracy rate, these tests cause unnecessary distress and confusion for parents. If the tests are more likely to be wrong than right, and the companies offering the tests are profiting by stealing parents’ peace of mind — and possibly the lives of their unborn children — then the logical conclusion is to refuse to play their game. As the referees of the medical testing industry, it is time the FDA blows the whistle. |
Archives
June 2024
Categories |