After 2,000 years, you'd think the Catholic Church would learn that the world HATES her.

The One True Church cannot win by playing by the world's rules.

She can never do enough to satisfy that which opposes her mission of love.

Her enemies do not care about victims of abuse, or the poor, or the oppressed. They only care about destroying Her.



Pope shocks Chile by accusing sex abuse victims of slander - Washington's other other newspaper ...

All that being said, Pope Francis seems ill-equipped for the task of defending the Faith. Pray that God the Holy Ghost will strengthen him so he may successfully wage the never-ending war.


Pope Francis accused victims of Chile’s most notorious pedophile of slander Thursday, an astonishing end to a visit meant to help heal the wounds of a sex abuse scandal that has cost the Catholic Church its credibility in the country.

Francis said that until he sees proof that Bishop Juan Barros was complicit in covering up the sex crimes of the Rev. Fernando Karadima, such accusations against Barros are “all calumny.”

The pope’s remarks drew shock from Chileans and immediate rebuke from victims and their advocates. They noted the accusers were deemed credible enough by the Vatican that it sentenced Karadima to a lifetime of “penance and prayer” for his crimes in 2011. A Chilean judge also found the victims to be credible, saying that while she had to drop criminal charges against Karadima because too much time had passed, proof of his crimes wasn’t lacking.

“As if I could have taken a selfie or a photo while Karadima abused me and others and Juan Barros stood by watching it all,” tweeted Barros’ most vocal accuser, Juan Carlos Cruz. “These people are truly crazy, and the pontiff talks about atonement to the victims. Nothing has changed, and his plea for forgiveness is empty.”

The Karadima scandal dominated Francis’ visit to Chile and the overall issue of sex abuse and church cover-up was likely to factor into his three-day trip to Peru that began late Thursday.

Karadima’s victims reported to church authorities as early as 2002 that he would kiss and fondle them in the swank Santiago parish he ran, but officials refused to believe them. Only when the victims went public with their accusations in 2010 did the Vatican launch an investigation that led to Karadima being removed from ministry.

The emeritus archbishop of Santiago subsequently apologized for having refused to believe the victims from the start.

Francis reopened the wounds of the scandal in 2015 when he named Barros, a protege of Karadima, as bishop of the southern diocese of Osorno. Karadima’s victims say Barros knew of the abuse, having seen it, but did nothing. Barros has denied the allegations.

His appointment outraged Chileans, badly divided the Osorno diocese and further undermined the church’s already shaky credibility in the country.

Francis had sought to heal the wounds by meeting this week with abuse victims and begging forgiveness for the crimes of church pastors. But on Thursday, he struck a defiant tone when asked by a Chilean journalist about Barros.

“The day they bring me proof against Bishop Barros, I’ll speak,” Francis said. “There is not one shred of proof against him. It’s all calumny. Is that clear?”

Francis had defended the appointment before, calling the Osorno controversy “stupid” and the result of a campaign mounted by leftists. But The Associated Press reported last week that the Vatican was so worried about the fallout from the Karadima affair that it was prepared in 2014 to ask Barros and two other Karadima-trained bishops to resign and go on a yearlong sabbatical.

According to a Jan. 31, 2015, letter obtained by AP from Francis to the executive committee of the Chilean bishops’ conference, the plan fell apart and Barros was sent to Osorno.

Juan Carlos Claret, spokesman for a group of Osorno lay Catholics who have mounted a three-year campaign against Barros, questioned why Francis was now accusing the victims of slandering Barros when the Vatican was so convinced of their claims that it planned to remove him in 2014.

“Isn’t the pastoral problem that we’re living (in Osorno) enough to get rid of him?” Claret asked.

The reference was to the fact that — guilty or not — Barros has been unable to do his job because so many Osorno Catholics and priests don’t recognize him as their bishop. They staged an unprecedented protest during his 2015 installation ceremony and have protested his presence ever since.

Anne Barrett Doyle, of the online database BishopAccountability.org, said it was “sad and wrong” for the pope to discredit the victims since “the burden of proof here rests with the church, not the victims — and especially not with victims whose veracity has already been affirmed.”

“He has just turned back the clock to the darkest days of this crisis,” she said in a statement. “Who knows how many victims now will decide to stay hidden, for fear they will not be believed?”

Indeed, Catholic officials for years accused victims of slandering and attacking the church with their claims. But up until Francis’ words Thursday, many in the church and Vatican had come to reluctantly acknowledge that victims usually told the truth and that the church for decades had wrongly sought to protect its own.

German Silva, a political scientist at Santiago’s Universidad Mayor, said the pope’s comments were a “tremendous error” that will reverberate in Chile and beyond.

Patricio Navia, political science professor at Diego Portales University in Santiago, said Francis had gone much further than Chilean bishops in acknowledging the sexual abuse scandal, which many Chileans appreciated.

“Then right before leaving, Francis turns around and says: ‘By the way, I don’t think Barros is guilty. Show me some proof,’” Navia said, adding that the comment will probably erase any good will the pope had won over the issue.

Navia said the Karadima scandal had radically changed how Chileans view the church.

People are sinners. We are always looking for excuses to justify our sins.

“In the typical Chilean family, parents (now) think twice before sending their kids to Catholic school because you never know what is going to happen,” Navia said.

TheChurchMilitant: Sometimes anti-social, but always anti-fascist since 2005.

The Blind Orange Syphilitic Squirrel in the White (Racist.) House throws decent people a bone.

The Tiny and Terrible Clump also spoke to today's March For Life "live"! (Well, as "live" as It can get.) Ain't it grand having a dictator who pretends to be conservative?


Health Workers Who Oppose Abortion Get New Protections - Ibex ...


The Trump administration announced on Thursday that it was taking new steps to protect doctors, nurses and other health workers who have religious or moral objections to performing abortions or sex-change operations, or providing other medical services.

The move, one day before the annual March for Life in Washington, was a priority for anti-abortion groups.

Administration officials urged people to report discrimination to a new unit of the federal government: the conscience and religious freedom division of the office for civil rights at the Department of Health and Human Services.

Roger Severino, the director of the civil rights office, promised that he and his staff would thoroughly investigate every complaint.

For too long, Mr. Severino said, the federal government has ignored such complaints or treated them with “outright hostility.”

Supporters of the new office, like the Family Research Council, welcomed it as a way to protect the rights of health care professionals.

Critics said the administration was giving health care providers a license to discriminate, and they raised the possibility that some doctors might deny fertility treatments to lesbian couples and that some pharmacists might refuse to fill prescriptions for certain types of contraceptives. In such situations, patients could suffer, and health care workers could violate professional or ethical obligations.

“Donald Trump’s administration is handing out permission slips for hospitals and providers to deny individuals, including women and LGBT patients, access to a full range of health services including life saving emergency care,” said Dawn Huckelbridge, director of the Women’s Rights Initiative at American Bridge, a Democratic advocacy group. “If there is any doubt about how morally repulsive, politically unpopular, and far-reaching the consequences of this rule will be, crafting it in secret behind closed doors and without public input says all you need to know.”

Eric D. Hargan, the acting secretary of health and human services, said the new initiative carries out an executive order issued last year by President Trump, who said that people of faith would no longer be bullied or silenced.

Representative Vicky Hartzler, Republican of Missouri, who attended an event announcing the new office, said, “No nurse or doctor should lose her job, her livelihood or her profession because of her faith.”

HEY MORGAN! PUT YOUR DICK DOWN AND HAVE ANOTHER DOUBLE CHEESEBURGER!

OMG, this is priceless! Commie stooge with a camera Morgan Spurlock confesses to being a serial sexual predator before the skeletons in his closet even get a chance to look up Gloria Allred's phone number!

Will his bold preemptive strike save what he thinks of as his career? Stay tuned kiddies!

From Washington's other other newspaper:

Morgan Spurlock steps down from his production company...

If SNL had any balls (or they weren't commies too) Spurlick's blog post would make a classic skit.


“Super Size Me” director Morgan Spurlock has stepped down from Warrior Poets, the New York-based production company he founded in 2004. The announcement came on Thursday, a day after he shared a confessional blog post admitting to his long history of sexual harassment.

Harassment? Says you. He sounds like a rapist to me. Or as the late Huge Hefner might call him, a "playboy".

“On behalf of Warrior Poets, (Hee-hee! "His gun's a pen.") we as partners have always supported our company and its endeavors. As of today, Morgan Spurlock will be stepping down effective immediately,” a spokeswoman for the company told The Washington Post in a statement on Thursday. No further explanation was offered.

Spurlock, who wrote that he “built a career on finding the truth,” (Oh, Margaret!) shared the detailed account of his misconduct stretching back to his college days in a post that he tweeted on Wednesday night with the note, “I am Part of the Problem.”

The message came just months after he sold his documentary “Super Size Me 2: Holy Chicken!” to YouTube Red for $3.5 million, according to Deadline. Spurlock also has a forthcoming docu-series titled “Cultureshock” on A&E, set to premiere in 2018.

“As I sit around watching hero after hero, (Who, asshole? Franken? Conyers? Clinton? Roy Moore? What a fuckhead.) man after man, (Ha! Your definition of "man" leaves quite a bit to be desired.) fall at the realization of their past indiscretions, I don’t sit by and wonder ‘who will be next?’ ” he began. “I wonder, ‘when will they come for me?’ ”

He heard the fascist left's Black Mariah driving down his street and confessed like a Menshevik at a Stalinist show trial.

In the blog post, he chronicled his multiple infidelities, verbal sexual harassment in the workplace, battle with depression and decades-long struggle with alcohol abuse.

Booze and sadness makes him hurt girls. I see a future in Country music ahead.

“I can’t blindly act as though I didn’t somehow play a part in this,” Spurlock wrote about the sexual harassment epidemic in Hollywood. “Over my life, there have been many instances that parallel what we see every day in the news.”

To support this statement, he offered several examples of his sexual misconduct throughout the post, always punctuating the harrowing stories with a variation on the phrase “I am part of the problem.”

The first instance he divulged took place in college, when he had a one-night sexual encounter with a girl that he thought was consensual but she later referred to as “rape.”

After a night of drinking, the two went back to his room and “began fooling around,” but she pushed him off her. Still clothed, the two laid in bed for a while laughing and joking. Before long they were “fooling around” again, though this time they took off their clothes.

The girl, whom Spurlock didn’t name, said she didn’t want to have sex, but they eventually did anyway. During intercourse, the girl began crying. The two stopped having sex, and Spurlock tried comforting her.

“I thought I was doing ok, I believed she was feeling better. She believed she was raped,” Spurlock wrote, adding, “That’s why I’m part of the problem.”

Actually Morgan, your giant penis was too much for her. It isn't your fault.

Spurlock next recounted the behavior that led to him settling a sexual harassment allegation with a former female assistant.

He would often yell at her from across the office, using diminutive nicknames like “hot pants” and “sex pants,” which he thought were funny but later realized had “completely demeaned and belittled her to a place of non-existence.”

When his assistant quit, she told Spurlock that he had to pay her to remain silent about his consistent verbal sexual harassment, the director wrote.

“I paid for peace of mind. I paid for her silence and cooperation. Most of all, I paid so I could remain who I was,” Spurlock wrote.

A rich, lying, fascist douche-bag. Congrats. You'll always be that.

Spurlock then wrote that he has “been unfaithful to every wife and girlfriend” he’s ever had, adding that his hatred of this behavior “didn’t make me stop.”

That's how playboys find new girlfriends, right? Hello? Hasn't anybody heard of the Fuck-U-All Revolution? You know, girls want it just like guys so it's ok to fuck 'em like blow-up dolls and then throw them away. Anybody?

Musing on what spurred this pattern of infidelity, Spurlock wrote that he was sexually abused “as a boy and as a young man in my teens.” He told only his first wife about the abuse, “for fear of being seen as weak or less than a man.” He also wrote that he suffered from depression and has used alcohol to cope with the mental illness since he was 13 years old and that he hasn’t been “sober for more than a week in 30 years.”

Oh. Drunk, sad, abused, AND crazy. That and the fact he supports Planned Babykilling makes everything good.

Calling himself “someone who consistently hurts those closest to me,” he wrote that “I have helped create a world of disrespect through my own actions.”

He concluded the post by promising to “do better,” to “be better.” To begin, he wrote, “I’m going to be more honest with you and myself.”

Do the world a favor. SHUT UP, GO HOME, AND JERK OFF INTO YOUR PILES OF ILL-GOTTEN MONEY, YOU PRICK. 

The post received mixed reactions, because, as Andrea Mandell wrote in USA Today, “His motive remains unclear: Is Spurlock purely trying to take responsibility for his actions? Get ahead of new allegations? Preserve his reputation as a documentarian? Reassure investors, like those at CBS and A&E?”

One Twitter user said it is “brave to come forward.” Another thanked him for his “honestly and bravery.”

Many didn’t feel like he deserved any praise, however.

“Morgan Spurlock is not brave, he’s trying to get ahead of the story and give you a reason so when you hear about how garbage he is, you think of the reason,” comedian Peter Coffin wrote on Twitter.
One user called him “opportunistic.” Another said that despite his post, “he’s still bad and I want him to go away.”


TheChurchMilitant: Sometimes anti-social, but always anti-fascist since 2005.

SEX IS DEATH. (Part 123: #HimToo Crossover Episode!)

I came to Carthage, where I found myself in the midst of a hissing cauldron of lusts. I had not yet fallen in love, but I was in love with the idea of it, and this feeling that something was missing made me despise myself for not being more anxious to satisfy the need. I began to look around for some object for my love, since I badly wanted to love something.

 — St. Augustine, Confessions

Lawmaker who spun history of heroics ends life in suicide - Washington's other other newspaper ...

How about Romans 6:23 for Mr. Johnson's epitaph? "The wages of sin is death."


FRANKFORT, Ky. — The Kentucky lawmaker’s resume included enough material for an award-winning memoir: He was a peacekeeper at the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles, a White House chaplain to three presidents and a 9/11 first responder who gave last rites (WTF?) to hundreds of people at Ground Zero.

What exactly are last rites for heretics? I know what the Catholic rites are. I have a strong feeling that Mr. Johnson is full of regrets (to say the least) now that he knows The Truth.

But Republican Dan Johnson’s carefully crafted history crumbled this week following an extensively reported story from the Kentucky Center for Investigative Reporting. The story tore down his claims and portrayed him as a con man whose deceptions propped up his ministry of a church of outcasts in Louisville and hid a sinister secret: a sexual assault allegation from a 17-year-old girl.

Johnson denied it all, declaring his innocence from the pulpit of the church where he was the self-appointed “pope.” (He kept moving his reservation in Hell to lower and lower circles.) By Wednesday night, he was dead, his body found on the side of a secluded road with a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head.

Rock bottom. Let us hope he was insane as well, for the sake of his immortal soul.

The death of the 57-year-old jolted Republican leaders, who were already struggling with a sexual harassment scandal that toppled the state’s first GOP House speaker in nearly 100 years plus three other Republican committee chairmen. Most in the party had already turned their back on Johnson, calling for his resignation following the sexual assault allegation and his history of posting racist photos on Facebook that depicted President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama as monkeys.

By Thursday, many were offering messages of sympathy while acknowledging Johnson’s complex life.

“He was passionate about others, I saw it often yet he needed help himself,” GOP state Rep. Jim DuPlessis, who sat beside Johnson on the House floor, posted on Twitter.

Johnson’s wife, Rebecca Johnson, said her husband was the victim of a “high-tech lynching” and announced she would run to replace him in the Legislature.

Actually, madam, it was a gunshot wound to the head, complicated by a false religion that offers no hope to sinners. 

Elected in 2016, he was part of a wave of Republican victories that gave the GOP a majority in the Kentucky House for the first time in nearly 100 years. But before that, he was the pastor of Heart of Fire Church in Louisville, which prided itself on welcoming “real people.”

“It was a biker church, so there was lots of leather jackets, lots of long hair and people that if you ran into them on the street, you might have a different first impression,” said David Adams, a political operative who worked with Johnson on his campaign.

On the church’s website, Johnson claimed to have healed sick people during a visit to South America in 1991, including the incredible story of raising a woman from the dead. The miracles were detailed in a letter from David Fischer, pastor of a church in California. Fischer told the investigative reporting center that he did not witness those events and could not point the agency to anyone who had.

Shame, shame, shame.

On his financial disclosure forms, Johnson listed his only source of income as workers compensation from the state of New York. He said that money was from injuries he sustained while working as a chaplain immediately following the 9/11 terrorist attack in New York City. But the reporting center, after a seven-month effort, could find no evidence that Johnson was in New York that day.

In a Facebook message posted hours before his death, Johnson hinted that he suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder relating to what he witnessed in New York, details that he shared with friends through the years, including Republican state Sen. Dan Seum.

“He struggled with that. I know he did. The fact it was so horrific that he was involved in praying over these people,” Seum said. “I believed him. I had no reason not to.”

The sexual assault allegation came from Maranda Richmond, a former member of Johnson’s church. Richmond told the reporting center she was spending the night at Johnson’s house on New Year’s Eve 2012 when she awoke several hours after midnight to find Johnson standing over her. She said he stuck his tongue in her mouth and put his hands down her pants and into her vagina. She said she begged him to stop and eventually he did.

The Associated Press does not generally identify victims who report sexual assault but is doing so because Richmond has gone public with her story.

Richmond’s public comments match what she told police two years ago, according to police documents obtained by the reporting center. In 2013, police investigated the matter, including a secretly recorded phone call between Johnson and Richmond’s father. But a detective later closed the case, saying Richmond refused to cooperate. Richmond denied that.

As a result of the center’s reporting, the Louisville Metro Police Department re-opened its investigation.

Johnson held a news conference Tuesday at his church, denying the allegations with his wife by his side. He said he would not resign, calling the accusations part of a strategy to attack conservative Republicans nationwide. He saved his criticism for the media, saying he did not “want to blast this girl. I have compassion for .. I’m very sorrowful she is in this dark place in her life.”

Well, if the Orange Stain can call itself "conservative" I guess any thing can.

The reporting center interviewed people who were at the Rodney King riots and spoke with an expert on religious faith and the presidency. All of them said Johnson’s claims were false.
He insisted it was all true.

“This whole piece was so outrageous. It was as though I had never lived or never done anything I had ever done,” he told reporters.

At the end of the news conference, a reporter asked if he had ever raised anyone from the dead. Johnson stopped, turned to face the journalist and said, “God has,” before walking out of the pulpit for the final time.

That was one bold blasphemer.

Part 1: SEX IS DEATH. (Stories for boys) is here.
Part 2: SEX IS DEATH. (Distaff death) is here.
Part 3: SEX IS DEATH. (Joyously dispensing death) is here.
Part 4: SEX IS DEATH. (Sex is depression) is here.
Part 5: SEX IS DEATH. (When self-pleasuring becomes self-destruction) is here.
Part 6: SEX IS DEATH. (Sex is theft) is here.
Part 7: SEX IS DEATH. (A review of Bareback Mountain) is here.
Part 8: SEX IS DEATH. (What is the ultimate penalty?) is here.
Part 9: SEX IS DEATH. (Haven from reality) is here.
Part 10: SEX IS DEATH. (Sin-redemption-reasons-reason) is here.
Part 11: SEX IS DEATH. (Mommy loves you) is here.
Part 12: SEX IS DEATH. (George Gilder offers a clue) is here.
Part 13: SEX IS DEATH. (Post-killem depression) is here.
Part 14: SEX IS DEATH. (Whither womanhood) is here.
Part 15: SEX IS DEATH. (Saving psychology 1) is here.
Part 16: SEX IS DEATH. (Saving psychology 2) is here.
Part 17: SEX IS DEATH. (Fear of the boomers) is here.
Part 18: SEX IS DEATH. (The battle continues apace) is here.
Part 19: SEX IS DEATH. (Hot for teacher) is here.
Part 20: SEX IS DEATH. (Kids do the darndest things) is here.
Part 21: SEX IS DEATH. (Defects) is here.
Part 22: SEX IS DEATH. (Privates' privacy) is here.
Part 23: SEX IS DEATH. (National Condom Week) is here.
Part 24: SEX IS DEATH. (Wegenics) is here.
Part 25: SEX IS DEATH. (White wedding) is here.
Part 26: SEX IS DEATH. (Literally) is here.
Part 27: SEX IS DEATH. (Can't get me no satisfaction) is here.
Part 28: SEX IS DEATH. (Wrestle with mania) is here.
Part 29: SEX IS DEATH. (Press one for death/Presione uno para la muerte) is here.
Part 30: SEX IS DEATH. (Raunch culture) is here.
Part 31: SEX IS DEATH. (Gimme some of that sweet zombie lovin') is here.
Part 32: SEX IS DEATH. (The devil made me eat my baby) is here.
Part 33: SEX IS DEATH. (Mind control = womb control) is here.
Part 34: SEX IS DEATH. (The expense of playing with yourself) is here.
Part 35: SEX IS DEATH. (You can't always get what you want) is here.
Part 36: SEX IS DEATH. (Whom does a master serve?) is here.
Part 37: SEX IS DEATH. (Shootin' 5 for 8) is here.
Part 38: SEX IS DEATH. (Being a never-wed mom of four and an illegal alien is no picnic either) is here.

TheChurchMilitant: Sometimes anti-social, but always anti-fascist since 2005.

#HimToo: The end of the Fuckual (pronounced fuck-u-all) Revolution or just politics as usual?

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

If you think you are someone else, or love someone who does, you should listen to Walter Heyer.

This "gender" crap isn't going to stop until we start listening to the anguished cries of the poor people so afflicted, stop pumping them full of drugs, mutilating them and telling them all is sunshine and gumdrops from then on.

Mr. Heyer was a pioneer in the early 1980s. He was miserable as a man and then miserable as a woman for eight years. He knows exactly what he did to himself and what was done to him.

The "transgender community" and its enablers in the medical and psychological fields aren't about helping or healing. All they care about is money, power, sexual subversion, and fascist politics. Keep your loved ones away from them! (Ha, fat chance! Government is now "protecting" those confused about their sexuality with its money and guns.)

The statistics are even worse than I thought. According to Mr. Heyer, before sex-change surgery the attempted suicide rate is 46% and after the surgery that rate is 45%!

These poor souls need real love and real help, not drugs and knives.

Please open your heart and open your mind and listen to Walter Heyer's amazing life story courtesy of Glenn Beck:

7/31/17 – A former transgender’s fascinating story (1/2 w/ Walter Heyer) 

Source: http://www.glennbeck.com/?utm_source=glennbeck&utm_medium=contentcopy_link

7/31/17 – A former transgender’s fascinating story (2/2 w/ Walter Heyer)

Source: http://www.glennbeck.com/?utm_source=glennbeck&utm_medium=contentcopy_link

TheChurchMilitant: Sometimes anti-social, but always anti-fascist since 2005.

In Vitro, No One Can Hear You Scream Update.

Let's see how long it takes the author of this feel-good piece to tell us how many kids were killed in the making of this particular bit of progress...

From US News:

Scientists Edit the DNA of Embryos for First Time in United States ...


SPOILER ALERT: ALL OF THEM!

Scientists successfully edited the DNA of multiple embryos for the first time in the United States, according to a research team from Oregon Health and Science University in Portland.

Dr. Shoukhrat Mitalipov, head of the university's Center for Embryonic Cell and Gene Therapy, led the experiments, which used the gene-altering technology CRISPR to alter the DNA of a large number of one-cell embryos that could potentially develop into living humans if implanted in a womb.

While not the first to edit human embryos, Mitalipov's research was able to surpass previous issues with "off-target" editing by injecting CRISPR into the eggs at the same time that they were fertilized with sperm, MIT Technology Review reports.

The embryos were only allowed to grow for a few days, (See, kiddies? When you manipulate language, you can literally get away with murder. Who cares a whit about "embryos"? The eggs you had for breakfast were embryos, for crying out loud. You can hide from the fact this is the wholesale murder of children, but you cannot run from the consequences of it. - F.G.) but the experiments set a milestone toward the development and birth of the first genetically-modified babies. The practice of altering the genes, referred to as "germline engineering," would enable scientists to eradicate or correct genes linked to inherited diseases and further keep the diseases from affecting future generations.

Despite cautions that genome editing could lead to weapons of mass destruction or designer babies, a report released in February by the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Medicine gave the green light toward gene editing, referring to it as "a realistic possibility that deserves serious consideration.”

Unless you happen to be one of the kids thrown in the trash, of course...

From Personhood.org comes the story of a 2014 attempt in Georgia to protect all humans from those ravenous trashcans (It failed to pass.)...

Ethical Treatment of Human Embryos (ETHNE) - Personhood Alliance


Ethical Treatment of Human Embryos

Published: 10 May 2014

The Ethical Treatment of Human Embryos Act - GA SB 169

HISTORY: The bill is based upon a bill passed in Louisiana in 1986. The Louisiana bill establishes all in vitro embryos as "juridical persons". There has been NO legal challenge to it in 23 years. The language has been updated to reflect changes in biomedical technology and medical standards since 1986.

NEED: It is apparent from the recent birth of octuplets to a southern California woman, that the fertility industry needs governmental oversight. This industry is one of the MOST lucrative medical fields and among the LEAST regulated! This results in a serious compromise to the Standard of Care for the women and children involved. With Bio-tech industries coming to Georgia, NOW is the time to develop regulatory oversight that would protect our women and children.

---

OBJECTIVES:
1.To recognize all human embryos as having the legal right to life and legal protection under the laws of the State of Ga.

2.To provide that it shall be unlawful for any person or entity to intentionally or knowingly create or attempt to create an in vitro human embryo by any means other than
fertilization of a human egg by a human sperm.

3.To provide for standards for physicians and facilities performing in vitro fertilizations.INTENDED CONSEQUENCE: In the interest of reducing the risk of complications for both the mother and the transferred embryos, including the risk of preterm birth associated with higher-order multiple gestations, a person or entity performing in vitro fertilization shall limit the number of embryos created in a single cycle to the number to be transferred in that cycle, thereby preventing what has recently occured in California with the woman who bore octuplets.LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Nothing in this article shall be construed to affect conduct relating to abortion; provided, however, that nothing in this article shall be construed or implied to recognize any independent right to abortion under the laws of this state.

2. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to create or recognize any independent right to engage in the practice of in vitro fertilization or to create in vitro human embryos by any means.Contacts:
Daniel Becker    President                          Georgia Right to Life            678-524-9504
Mike Griffin         Legislative Director         Georgia Right to Life            706-436-2646 
 

Langauge of GA SB 169

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT To amend Chapter 7 of Title 19 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to the parent and child relationship generally, so as to provide for a short title; to provide for definitions; to provide that it shall be unlawful for any person or entity to intentionally or knowingly create or attempt to create an in vitro human embryo by any means other than fertilization of a human egg by a human sperm; to provide that it shall be unlawful or any person or entity to intentionally or knowingly create or attempt to create a human-animal hybrid, to transfer a human embryo into a nonhuman womb, and to transfer a nonhuman embryo into a human womb; to provide for standards for physicians and facilities performing in vitro fertilizations; to provide for judicial standards; to provide for related matters; to provide an effective date; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF GEORGIA:

SECTION 1.
This Act shall be known and may be cited as the "Ethical Treatment of Human Embryos Act."

SECTION 2.
Chapter 7 of Title 19 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, related to the parent and child relationship generally, is amended by adding a new article to read as follows:

ARTICLE 4
19-7-60.
For purposes of this article, the term:

(1) 'Donor' means an individual from whose body gametes were obtained, or an individual from whose body cells or tissues were obtained for the purpose of creating gametes or human embryos, whether for valuable consideration or not.

(2) 'Gamete' means an egg (oocyte) or sperm.

(3) 'Human embryo' means an organism with a human or predominantly human genetic
constitution from the single-celled stage to approximately eight weeks development that is derived by fertilization (in vitro or in utero), parthenogenesis, cloning (somatic cell nuclear transfer), or any other means from one or more human gametes or human diploid cells.

(4) 'In vitro' means outside the human body.

(5) 'In vitro fertilization' means the formation of a human embryo outside the human body by union of human egg(s) with human sperm.

(6) 'In vitro human embryo' means a human embryo created outside the human body.

(7) 'Transfer' means the placement of a human embryo into the body of a woman.

(8) 'Valuable consideration' means financial gain or advantage, including cash, in-kind
payments, reimbursement for any costs incurred in connection with the removal, processing, disposal, preservation, quality control, storage, transfer, or donation of human gametes, including lost wages of the donor, as well as any other consideration.

(9) ‘Human animal hybrid’ means any of the following:

            (a) A human embryo into which a nonhuman cell or a component of a nonhuman cell is introduced so that it is uncertain whether the human embryo is a member of the species homo sapiens;

            (b) A hybrid human-animal embryo produced by fertilizing a human egg with a nonhuman sperm;

            (c) A hybrid human-animal embryo produced by fertilizing a nonhuman egg with a human sperm;

            (d) An embryo produced by introducing a nonhuman nucleus into a human egg; 

            (e) An embryo produced by introducing a human nucleus into a nonhuman egg;

            (f) An embryo containing at least haploid sets of chromosomes from both a human and a nonhuman life form;

            (g) A nonhuman life form engineered with the intention of generating functional human gametes within the body of a nonhuman life form;

            (h) A nonhuman life form engineered such  that it contains a human brain or a brain derived wholly from human neural tissues.

 19-7-61.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person or entity to intentionally or knowingly create or attempt to create an in vitro human embryo by any means other than fertilization of a human egg by a human sperm.

(b) The creation of an in vitro human embryo shall be solely for the purpose of initiating a human pregnancy by means of transfer to the uterus of a human female for the treatment of human infertility.  A pregnancy shall not be initiated with the intention of deliberately destroying the embryo for scientific research.  Neither shall the embryo be gestated to the fetal stage for purposes of destroying the fetus in order to harvest tissue stem cells for research. No person or entity shall intentionally or knowingly transfer or attempt to transfer an embryo into a human uterus that is not the product of fertilization of a human egg by a human sperm.

(c) It shall be unlawful for any person or entity to intentionally or knowingly:

         (1) Create or attempt to create a human-animal hybrid;

         (2) Transfer or attempt to transfer a human embryo into a nonhuman womb;

            (3) Transfer or attempt to transfer a nonhuman embryo into a human womb;

            (4) Transport or receive for any purpose a human-animal hybrid or any product derived from such hybrid.

(d) Nothing in this section prohibits any of the following:

         (1) Research involving the use of transgenic animal models containing human genes;

         (2) Xenotransplantation of human organs, tissues, or cells into recipient animals, including animals at any stage of development prior to birth, so long as the xenotransplantation does not violate a prohibition in division (c) of this section;

         (3) An individual from receiving organs, tissues, or cells delivered from outside of this state.

19-7-62.
No person or entity shall give or receive valuable consideration, offer to give or receive valuable consideration, or advertise for the giving or receiving of valuable consideration for the provision of gametes or in vitro human embryos. This Code section shall not apply to regulate or prohibit the procurement of gametes for the treatment of infertility being experienced by the patient from whom the gametes are being derived.

19-7-63.
The in vitro human embryo shall be given an identification by the facility for use within the medical facility. Records shall be maintained that identify the donors associated with the in vitro human embryo, and the confidentiality of such records shall be maintained as required by law.

19-7-64.
(a) A living in vitro human embryo is a biological human being who is not the property of any person or entity. The fertility physician and the medical facility that employs the physician owe a high duty of care to the living in vitro human embryo. Any contractual provision identifying the living in vitro embryo as the property of any party shall be null and void. The in vitro human embryo shall not be intentionally destroyed for any purpose by any person or entity or through the actions of such person or entity.

(b) An in vitro human embryo that fails to show any sign of life over a 36 hour period outside a state of cryopreservation shall be considered no longer living.

19-7-65
A.        Any person, employer or entity, whether public or private, has the right not to participate in, and no person, employer or entity, whether public or private, shall be required to participate in any health care service that violates its conscience. No person, employer or entity, whether public or private, shall be held civilly or criminally liable, discriminated against, dismissed, demoted, or in any way prejudiced or damaged because of a refusal for any reason to participate in any health care service that violates its conscience.

 B.        For purposes of this code section:

(a)       "Conscience" means religious, moral or ethical principles.

 (b)       "Health care service" means any phase of patient medical care, treatment or procedure, including, but not limited to, the following: patient referral, counseling, therapy, testing, diagnosis or prognosis, research, instruction, prescribing, dispensing or administering any device, drug, or medication, surgery, or any other care, treatment or procedure.

(c)        "Participate" means to counsel, advise, provide, perform, assist in, refer for, admit for purposes of providing, participate in providing, pay, contract for, or otherwise arrange for the payment of, in whole or in part any health care service or any form of such service.

 19-7-66.
In the interest of reducing the risk of complications for both the mother and the transferred in vitro human embryos, including the risk of preterm birth associated with higher-order multiple gestations, a person or entity performing in vitro fertilization shall limit the number of in vitro human embryos created in a single cycle to the number to be transferred in that cycle in accord with Code Section 19-7-67.

 19-7-67.
(a) Where a woman under age 40 is to receive treatment using her own eggs or embryos created using her own eggs, whether fresh or previously cryopreserved, at the time of transfer no person or entity shall transfer more than two embryos in any treatment cycle, regardless of the procedure used.

(b) Where a woman age 40 or over is to receive treatment using her own eggs or embryos created using her own eggs, whether fresh or previously cryopreserved, at the time of transfer no person or entity shall transfer more than three embryos in any treatment cycle, regardless of the procedure used.

(c) Where a woman is to receive treatment using donated eggs or adopted embryos, no person or entity shall transfer more than two donated eggs or two adopted embryos in any treatment cycle, regardless of the woman's age at the time of transfer and regardless of the procedure used.

 19-7-68.
In disputes arising between any parties regarding the in vitro human embryo, the judicial
standard for resolving such disputes shall be the best interest of the in vitro human embryo.

 19-7-69.
All facilities providing assisted reproductive technologies shall, at least 24 hours prior to
obtaining a signed contract for services, provide patients with informed consent as required by law and obtain a signed disclosure form before services commence. In addition to medical risks and information on outcome and success rates, the informed consent materials shall state in plain language the parental rights and duties of the donors, as well as their legal rights and duties regarding the disposition of in vitro human embryos that were not transferred due to either of the fertility patient's death, divorce, abandonment, or dispute over the custody of the in vitro human embryo.

19-7-70.
Nothing in this article shall be construed to affect conduct relating to abortion as provided in Chapter 12 of Title 16; provided, however, that nothing in this article shall be construed or implied to recognize any independent right to abortion under the laws of this state.

 19-7-71.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this article to the contrary, nothing in this article shall be construed to create or recognize any independent right to engage in the practice of in vitro fertilization or to create in vitro human embryos by any means.

19-7-72.
(a) Any person or entity that violates any provision of this article and derives a pecuniary gain from such violation shall be fined not less than $500.00 nor more than $1,000.00.

"Life is cheap."

(b) Any violation of this article shall constitute unprofessional conduct pursuant to Code Section 43-34-37 and shall result in sanctions increasing in severity from censure to temporary suspension of license to permanent revocation of license.

(c) Any violation of this article may be the basis for denying an application for, denying an application for the renewal of, or revoking any license, permit, certificate, or any other form of permission required to practice or engage in a trade, occupation, or profession.

(d) Any violation of this article by an individual in the employ and under the auspices of a licensed health care facility to which the management of said facility consents, knows, or should know may be the basis for denying an application for, denying an application for the renewal of, temporarily suspending, or permanently revoking any operational license, permit, certificate, or any other form of permission required to operate a medical or health care facility."

SECTION 3.
This Act shall become effective upon its approval by the Governor or upon its becoming law without such approval.

SECTION 4.
All laws and parts of laws in conflict with this Act are repealed.

Let's see what the babyeaters think about all of this...

From the very aptly named ScaryMommy.com:

'Personhood' Bills May Restrict Access To IVF Treatments

I understand they also own the domain name ScaredShitlessBabies.com but have no plans to develop the site...

Casey Berna had always dreamed of having a large family. When she and her husband started the process, she had no idea the challenges they would face in trying to meet that goal. Following her daughter’s birth through intrauterine insemination (IUI), Berna spent the next seven years trying to give her some siblings.

Let me help the morally obtuse (and those who make boatloads of cash from killing kids in this way) read the next paragraph.

Thirty-four embryos (kids), five miscarriages (kids), three rounds of in vitro fertilization (IVF) (Wait. Are the 39 dead children just mentioned included in this?) , two IUIs (kids), one frozen embryo (kid) transfer (FET), and zero viable (Even I, Your Humble Narrator, can't figure out what that word means. But I do know one thing - somebody got paid a lot of money for it. - F.G.) pregnancies later, Berna closed the chapter of her search to build her family with her own genetics.

Berna and her husband are part of the 1 in 8 couples who will face infertility in their lifetimes. Like millions of other families, Berna was able to try to grow her family thanks to advances made by reproductive medicine. While assisted reproductive technology has helped those with infertility achieve their reproductive goals, these advancements are currently under threat by state and federal “personhood” bills.

The big lie these unfortunate couples are swallowing is this: "It is ok to create a whole bunch of children for yourselves, and destroy all of those still alive after you get pregnant. Save one."

Or, "You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs. Ha-ha-ha."

Of course, life is much, much easier if you don't think about all the consequences of your actions.

Death, however, is a bit a bitch when it comes to consequences.


Since 2008, at least 10 bills have been introduced at the state level that look to define human life starting at the moment of conception. Staunch opposition from the infertility community, who fear defining personhood jeopardizes reproductive medicine, has defeated each and every bill at the state level.

Now, with two personhood bills introduced this year at the federal level, infertility advocates are gearing up once again to fight for their right to build a family.

***

In 2009, Nadya Suleman, better known as “Octomom,” gave birth to eight children through IVF after 12 embryos were transferred into her uterus. This practice, an extreme departure from the typical standard of care, resulted in her doctor losing his medical license and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine tightening its guidelines for embryo transfers.

It also caught the attention of lawmakers in Georgia, some 2,000 miles away from Suleman’s home state of California.

That March, two months after Suleman gave birth, the “Ethical Treatment of Human Embryos Act” was introduced in Georgia’s legislature. The bill, which set to limit the number of embryos Georgia physicians could implant in a given cycle, also included language set to define personhood. This bill was not the first attempt to establish personhood. In 2008, Colorado included a ballot initiative which would give an embryo rights from the moment of conception. The Georgia bill, however, was one of the first to add personhood language into a different piece of legislation.

“In the language of the bill was a very clear sentence that basically said that inherently the embryo was a human life in and of itself and had its own rights beyond that of the parents,” Andrew Toledo, MD, a reproductive endocrinologist in Atlanta, Georgia, told The Mighty. “It was the devil in the details, but it was there. It was really their attempt to sneak personhood into a bill,” he said.

INSTANT TRANSLATION: "Those motherfuckers are gonna cost us millions!"

Personhood bills are largely thought of as a way of restricting abortions and challenging the Supreme Court’s ruling in Roe v. Wade. Experts, however, warn that extending rights to embryos will limit those practicing and those seeking infertility treatment.

INSTANT TRANSLATION: "Those motherfuckers are gonna cost us millions!"

Advocating for patients and physicians in Oklahoma, targeted as the state most likely to pass a personhood bill, is Eli Reshef, MD, a reproductive endocrinologist in Oklahoma City.

“Over the years of fighting personhood legislation, I realized that many of the supporters of personhood legislation are poorly informed about the unintended consequences of such legislation,” Reshef said. “Giving embryos the same rights as adults — the cornerstone of such legislation and a clear effort to outlaw abortions — creates various situations that place the practice of IVF at risk.”

INSTANT TRANSLATION: "Those motherfuckers are gonna cost us millions!"

Reshef said only 30% of embryos will be born as babies; the rest will either miscarry or fail to implant. Without the ability to consent to assisted reproductive technology, there are dozens of scenarios where embryos that have yet to be implanted could be deemed at risk.

That is a 70% kill rate of the children they decide to "use". How many more are kept frozen until their parents decide to throw them away?

“It’s going to prevent us from doing IVF because no lab tech in their right mind will be willing to stand the risk of being accused of murder if they drop a dish with embryos in the lab, inadvertently,” he added.

INSTANT TRANSLATION: "Those motherfuckers are gonna cost us millions!"

Beyond shutting down IVF practices, personhood bills would change how reproductive endocrinologists practice medicine, said Toledo, who’s part of the coalition of physicians who fought Georgia’s personhood bill, adding: “We would freeze a lot more eggs unfertilized, and we would only fertilize the eggs we hoped we were going to transfer. It would lower pregnancy rates, because you have less options now, and it would create more cost for patients because they would have to go through more cycles to be successful.”

INSTANT TRANSLATION: "Those motherfuckers are gonna cost us millions!"

Should a personhood bill become law, advances in IVF would be set back decades, according to Toledo, and physicians would be required to rely on techniques used in the early ’80s when IVF first came to the U.S. Instead of joining sperm and egg in the lab, more physicians would revert to gamete intrafallopian transfer (GIFT) — a surgical procedure where eggs are removed from a woman’s ovary and placed, along with sperm, in the fallopian tubes, thus increasing the rate of ectopic and tubal pregnancies.

INSTANT TRANSLATION: "Those motherfuckers are gonna cost us millions!"

Even ectopic pregnancies — nonviable pregnancies that occur outside of the uterus and threaten the life of the mother — raise questions from reproductive physicians. “What about ectopic pregnancies that are viable and place the pregnant person’s health at risk, yet surgical or medical intervention may be construed as killing a person?” Reshef asked.

INSTANT TRANSLATION: "Those motherfuckers are gonna cost us millions!"

These questions and more remain unanswered by current personhood bills, many of which are only a few sentences long and lack explicit protections for those seeking IVF.

INSTANT TRANSLATION: "Those motherfuckers are gonna cost us millions!"

It’s unlikely a personhood bill could include satisfactory language protecting those seeking or practicing IVF from prosecution, said Barbara Collura, the president and CEO of Resolve: The National Infertility Association. “I have never seen any carved out protection for IVF in a personhood legislation that actually worked,” she added, “but I will tell you that at the state level when we’ve seen legislators try and amend or draft it, it is extremely difficult.”

INSTANT TRANSLATION: "Those motherfuckers are gonna cost us millions!"

In 2012, Virginia, where Collura lives, tried to pass HB1, its own version of a personhood bill. “The backstory on that was that a chair on a key committee had done IVF, so there was an attempt to carve out IVF,” Collura told The Mighty. But despite an attempt to add protections, “the carve-out was completely inadequate.”

Despite testimonies from those living with infertility and members of Resolve, HB1 passed committee. “It’s callous and unfair to take legislation aimed at those who don’t want children to devastatingly affect pro-family infertility patients’ rights to treat their disease,” Whitney Anderson, who testified against Virginia’s bill, told The Mighty. “I didn’t choose to be infertile. There is safe (For whom, Madame? - F.G.) and effective treatment available and I should be allowed access to the best standard of care. I was lucky enough to become a mother using IVF, and my heart hurts thinking about how that opportunity could be taken away.”

After making it out of committee, HB1 died in a special vote on Virginia’s Senate floor.

***

There are currently two personhood bills pending at the federal level — H.R.586 “Sanctity of Human Life Act” sponsored by Rep. Jody Hice (R-GA) and H.R.681 “Life at Conception Act,” sponsored by Rep. Alexander Mooney (R-WV). While the bills have made little progress, their existence and support — 29 co-sponsors for H.R.586 and 62 co-sponsors for H.R.681 — have infertility advocates concerned.

“Going through infertility for me was like being knocked down many times a day over and over, year after year and having to get back up each time knowing you’re about to get another punch to the gut,” Anderson said. “I can’t imagine being in the middle of an IVF cycle with all of my hopes and dreams wrapped up in that and then having to curtail the cycle, not to mention losing $10,000 to $15,000 that most people have to pay 100% out-of-pocket for. I would have been devastated.”

Like I've been telling you, some ghouls are getting rich off this shit.

Neither bill mentions any protections for those seeking or providing infertility treatments. The only reference to in vitro fertilization comes in Rep Hice’s bill, H.R.586, which states that human life includes any method of fertilization including cloning, giving embryos created in the lab the same rights as their parents.

“Infertility was one of the most challenging, physical and emotional events that my husband and I ever had to endure,” Berna said. “When it really comes down to it, we’re all just fighting for the freedom to make medical decisions with our doctors and not have politicians involved making stressful situations more stressful.”

Nobody has the right to kill in order to get what they want.

TheChurchMilitant: Sometimes anti-social, but always anti-fascist since 2005.