GOP In Panic Mode As Outrage with Trump Soars

My youngest daughter - a Millennial voter - shared this photo on Facebook.  Thankfully, some Millenniasl "get it."

Part of me cannot help but laugh as many in the GOP go into complete panic mode as Friday's release of a tape of Donald Trump's misogynist comments on women goes viral.  I mean, WTF did they think they were getting with Trump?  The man has a decades long history of bigotry and anti-women misogyny. Why the feigned surprise?  Why are Republican woman just now waking up to the reality of who and what Donald Trump is and will always be?  As a former Republican who resigned from the party over the party's refusal to recognize the concept of the separation of church and state not to mention the racism always just under the surface with many Republicans, I relish that the GOP's chickens are coming home to roost.  A piece in Politico look at the panic gripping the GOP.  Here are excerpts:

The Republican Party was in a state of turmoil on Friday night over revelations that Donald Trump once bragged in explicit terms about sexually harassing women, driving GOP leaders to denounce their nominee and even prompting calls that he leave the presidential ticket.

But while Trump and his senior aides huddled to strategize next steps, many Republicans felt paralyzed -- stuck with a candidate few ever wholeheartedly embraced with only 31 days left until Election Day.

Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz withdrew his endorsement, saying: "I’m out. I can no longer in good conscience endorse this person for president. It is some of the most abhorrent and offensive comments that you can possibly imagine."

Even Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, who has emerged as a trusted Trump ally and adviser, scolded in scorching terms: "No woman should ever be described in these terms or talked about in this manner. Ever.”

The party's past nominees were unflinching in their condemnation.

“Hitting on married women? Condoning assault? Such vile degradations demean our wives and daughters and corrupt America's face to the world,” Mitt Romney, the party’s last GOP presidential nominee, wrote on Twitter. And Arizona Sen. John McCain, the 2008 nominee, said Trump could have no excuse: "No woman should ever be victimized by this kind of inappropriate behavior. He alone bears the burden of his conduct and alone should suffer the consequences.”

Even within Trump’s own campaign, there was an overriding sense of doom. One aide expressed doubt that the GOP nominee, who has successfully weathered a number of scandals, would be able to ride the current firestorm.

There's "absolutely no excuse to ever talk about women in such a crude and demeaning way," Trump’s Texas chair, Dan Patrick, was quoted as saying.

As the hours passed, some Republicans began to call for Trump to step aside, leaving the presidential race to vice presidential nominee Mike Pence. Rob Engstrom, the Chamber of Commerce’s national political director, was the first to call for Trump to quit, followed by Rep. Mike Coffman, former N.Y. Gov. George Pataki, Virginia Rep. Barbara Comstock and Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse.

Utah Sen. Mike Lee said: “You are the distraction... I respectfully ask you, with all due respect, to step aside.”

At least one of the party’s top fundraisers declared that major GOP donors were “looking to fund an effort to back someone else as the Republican nominee”, and there were vague suggestions that the party brass might be looking into its options “in case” Trump isn’t the nominee.

But the party’s officials swiftly and aggressively rejected those suggestions. And one of its elite election lawyers argued convincingly that the logistical hurdles to replacing Trump made it next to impossible. 

Again, why the shock and surprise?  They have known who Trump is for years.  All of these vapors and conniption fits are the height of hypocrisy.  As for Republican women, another piece in Politico looks at those who are belatedly pulled their heads from out of their asses.  Here are highlights:

Republican women are abandoning Donald Trump in an historic repudiation of their party’s nominee, a devastating development for the GOP candidate's chances one month before Election Day.

Trump’s lewd, sexually aggressive comments about women, revealed in a 2005 audio recording that became public Friday, have prompted large-scale defections, from female Republican senators to conservative activists in the swing states. That dynamic further jeopardizes his chances with women voters, including white, married voters who typically back Republicans. After nearly two years of listening to Trump denigrate women — including Fox News host Megyn Kelly, Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina, Heidi Cruz and former Miss Universe Alicia Machado — Republican women have had enough.

A mass desertion by white, married women would effectively torpedo Trump’s chances of defeating Hillary Clinton. That demographic has been a core part of every Republican nominee’s constituency this century — Mitt Romney and John McCain won 53 percent of married women, and still lost the election — meaning that Trump, who struggles far more with party unity than previous nominees have, has even less room for error. But he is already losing badly with women overall, and Friday’s bombshell threatens to set him back further with women of all marital statuses.

High-profile Republican women over the weekend made clear that they have zero interest in helping Trump regain his footing, instead offering cover to other lawmakers looking to abandon Trump.

“I wanted to be able to support my party’s nominee, chosen by the people, because I feel strongly that we need a change in direction for our country,” said New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte, who is in a competitive re-election fight in a key swing state. “However, I’m a mom and an American first, and I cannot and will not support a candidate for president who brags about degrading and assaulting women.”

One particularly notable defection: Nebraska Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), who is perhaps Trump's most prominent female defender in the Senate.

"The comments made by Mr. Trump were disgusting and totally unacceptable under any circumstance," she tweeted. "It would be wise for him to step aside and allow Mike Pence to serve as our party's nominee."

Condoleezza Rice, who served as secretary of state under George W. Bush, posted on Facebook, "Enough! Donald Trump should not be President. He should withdraw."

And Fiorina, once a target of Trump’s trash talk — “look at that face! Would anyone vote for that?” he mocked during the primary — released a statement Saturday asking the Republican National Committee to replace Trump with Pence.

Again, why the shock and feigned horror?  The Donald Trump revealed in the tape on Friday id the same Donald Trump who has always existed.  Closing your eyes to the real Trump doesn't makr thr real Trump any different.  Thankfully, this revelation of the true Trump came out before the election and not afterwards.   

Bishop of Richmond Fires Assisted Living Home Director for Being Gay

Bishop DiLorenzo - anti-gay and anti-woman bigot who seems to have never missed a meal

I have noted before that Bishop Francis Xavier DiLorenzo of the Catholic Diocese of Richmond is a foul and nasty piece of work.  He is among the most reactionary appointments made by the late and anything but saintly John Paul II.   During his years in Honolulu where he served as bishop and since his installation as the Bishop of Richmond, DiLorenzo has demonstrated himself to be virulently anti-gay, anti-woman, and against any accommodation for divorced and remarried Catholics.  Whether these vicious tendencies arise from his own psycho-sexual issues or from the fact that he is a misogynist in general is anyone's guess.  Wikipedia has a good summary of DiLorenzo's reactionary and anti-women actions, as well as his long history of anti-gay efforts.  I know for a fact that he has blocked the hiring of an well qualified individual from a teaching position because the individual was divorced and remarried - the individual's spouse had come out as gay and hence the divorce - despite the desire of the school to hire the individual.  Now,  DiLorenzo has brought on a U.S. Equal Employment Commission complaint against the Richmond Diocese for the firing of the gay director of Saint Francis Home assisted living center.  ABC News and GayRVA are reporting on the firing which to me underscores the need to revoke the tax-exempt status of ALL religious institutions except those that are houses of worship.  Taxpayers should not be compelled to indirectly subsidize bigotry.  If church entities are forced out of business because they have lost the indirect public dole, so be it.  First, highlights from ABC News:

[John Murphy claims that Bishop DiLorenzo] forced his removal from the top job at a diocese-owned assisted living home because he's gay and married to his partner of 30 years.

John Murphy filed a discrimination claim against the Catholic Diocese of Richmond with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission last month. He said he served as executive director of the Saint Francis Home in Richmond for about a week before two deputies of Bishop Francis Xavier DiLorenzo told him that he was being fired because his marriage goes against church doctrine.

Murphy was terminated without severance pay and he and his husband, a retired clinical social worker, are relying primarily on Social Security benefits to get by, he said.

At least one board member has resigned out of frustration with the bishop's actions.

"I didn't want to be a part of that decision — not in this day and age," said Sam Dibert Sr., who had been vice president of the board and served on it for more than 20 years. Dibert said he didn't know that Murphy was gay until after he was hired, but it didn't affect his opinion of him or whether he thought he could do the job.

The board's president didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

Dozens of openly gay employees at Catholic institutions in the U.S have reported losing their jobs since 2010 over their same-sex relationships or support for gay marriage and gay rights, according to New Ways Ministry, which advocates for gay and lesbian Catholics.

The Equal Opportunity Employment Commission ruled in July that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act — which bars employers from discriminating against someone because of their sex, race and religion — also prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

There is a religious exemption in the law, but it goes only so far as to allow organizations from refusing to hire people who aren't part of their religion, said Samuel Bagenstos, a professor at the University of Michigan who specializes in constitutional and civil rights law.

If the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission finds that Murphy was discriminated against, it will try to negotiate a settlement between the two sides. If it finds that there has been no discrimination or a settlement can't be reached, it will likely end up in federal court, where the potential outcome is unclear.

 GayRVA has additional details.  Here are highlights:

The former Executive Director of Saint Francis Home in Richmond, a nonprofit, assisted living facility for persons of limited financial means, was hired in March of this year and claims he had received praise for his handling of the job. But after filing his employee benefits paperwork, and marking the forms with his same-sex spouse, he found himself on the receiving end of a pink slip.

Murphy said he spoke with his employers before being hired, he mentioned his marriage and they told him it wouldn’t be a problem. But according to a press release by Equality Virginia, Virginia’s leading LGBTQ activist organization, when the Bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Richmond, Francis X. Di Lorenzo, noticed the same-sex relationship, he ordered the St. Francis Board to fire Murphy.

“I expect to be judged by my job performance, but I am appalled and deeply hurt that the Bishop of the church I grew up in would suddenly fire me solely because of the gender of the person I share my life with – a person to whom I am lawfully married according to the U.S. Supreme Court,” said Murphy in the EV statement. “It is shocking to me that this can happen in 2015 in America, and I fear for my financial survival if any employer can do this to me at any time.”

According to EV, the board unanimously refused, and some members resigned over the order. It took Bishop Di Lorenzo personally deputizing someone to go to Murphy’s house and fire him.

The state of Virginia lacks protections in employment based on sexual orientation, however a claim of sex discrimination can be filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The EEOC handles investigations into these claims, and can make decisions based on federal law.

The use of a sex discrimiantion claim is one used by a few LGBTQ Americans in recent years as it relates to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits discrimination by covered employers on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

DiLorenzo is a douche bag and is a prime example of why the Roman Catholic Church is losing members at an accelerating rate.  He also is a poster child for why the IRS needs to start revoking tax exempt status for so-called religious institutions that are not directly related t worship services.  The Founder never envisioned allowing schools, hospitals, and many other types of facilities getting a tax free ride at the expense of those targeted by religious based bigotry.   Sign the petition to force DiLorenzo to rescind Murphy's firing.

Bigoted Twins Equate HGTV Show Cancellation to D-Day, Martyrdom and "Braveheart"

I often wonder what type of mind altering drug or head trauma (or form of  mental illness) afflicts the "godly folk" who seem to suffer from a level of self-absorption that one simply does not encounter among normal individuals - or even most high drama queens.  A case in point?   David and Jason Benham who were set to start a reality TV career on HGTV involving house-flipping until word got out that the two were nasty anti-gay, anti-abortion, and anti-Muslim extremists.  Once the true despicable nature of the evil twins got out, HGTV quickly killed the show.  Ever since the twins have been bleating and whining and playing the martyr card.  The Raw Story looks at the self-absorbed batshitery of the Benham twins.  Here are highlights:

A pair of anti-LGBT twins compared losing their proposed reality TV show to religious martyrdom, the D-Day invasion, and the movie “Braveheart” earlier this month at a religious right gathering.

“We just remember June the 6th, 1944,” said Jason Benham at the Road to Majority conference. “We know what happened at D-Day. We know what happened on Omaha and Utah beach. There’s something about those men that our dad taught us when we were kids, and he said, ‘Boys, don’t you ever run from bullets. You run toward the bullets.’”

HGTV called off its plans last month for a reality series “Flip It Forward” starring the brothers, who have compared same-sex marriage to Nazi Germany and taken part in rallies against LGBT and reproductive rights, after the pair’s views were publicized.

“There are cultural bullets flying, all over today, especially religious liberty, and what’s happening right now is many spiritual leaders, elected leaders, they are running from bullets,” Jason Benham said. “But there’s a remnant of people that are ready to stand and say ‘I’m not running from these bullets any more. I’m going to take this beach.’”

Right Wing Watch reported Friday that the Benhams took part in the June 20 gathering, which was organized by Ralph Reed’s Faith and Freedom Coalition, and are scheduled to take part in the Values Voters Summit in September.

“Just like in the movie Braveheart, when all the Scottish Army was standing there, and they all had their gear on, and they were lined up and they were unified, and they were ready to fight but not a single one of them wanted to fight,” Jason Benham said. “And then as William Wallace and a few men rode in on horses with blue face paint on. They were ready to pick a fight, and what I see before me right now are a bunch of people with some blue face paint on – so let’s go get it.”

The brothers, who are the sons of anti-abortion activist Flip Benham, have portrayed themselves as victims who were silenced by satanic forces for voicing their Christian beliefs.

In my view, the Benhams are examples of what is wrong with conservative Christianity.  They are all about condemning and hating others and demanding religious freedom only for themselves.  It's small wonder that the under 30 generations are fleeing institutional Christianity.  If there is anything Satanic going on, I'd say its the Benhams and their modern day Pharisee allies.

The Frightening "Manosphere" That Devalues Women

Image from "Return of Kings"

I've noted before the sick aspects of American society that pushes a warped view/definition of masculinity and too often produces males who see women as objects and targets for violence, both physical and sexual.   Many of these sick males likewise are raging homophobes and feel threatened by gays who do not fit their definition of brutish macho masculinity.  It's a sick world view that is too often ignored but which tracks directly to spousal violence and misogyny.  A column in the Washington Post looks at this frightening phenomenon, one that Elliot Rodgers apparently bought into.  Here are excerpts:

Elliot Rodger will forever be known as the 22-year-old who murdered six people in Santa Barbara on May 23. But Rodger’s extensive digital footprint, as well as his stomach-turning YouTube send-off and 137-page manifesto, suggest that he may have identified himself differently: as an “incel,” or involuntary virgin; as an aspirational, if frustrated, pick-up artist; and as an adherent of the so-called “manosphere” — that corner of the Internet where boys will be boys, girls will be objects, and critics will be “feminists,” “misandrists” or “enemies.”

If you’re not familiar with these terms, you’re not alone: The manosphere and its various components tend to only make mainstream news over tragedies (like this one) and controversies (like one “activist’s” opposition to date-rape seminars on college campuses). But to thousands of men across the Internet — including, apparently, Rodger — they’re home.

Rodger has personally been linked to an account on the pick-up site PUAhate.com, where he advocated an overthrow of “this oppressive feminist system” and envisioned “a world where WOMEN FEAR YOU.” . . . .  In his last YouTube video, in which he chillingly announces the start of his killing spree, Rodger even cops some classic pick-up lingo: “You will finally see that I am, in truth, the superior one. The true alpha male.” (Emphasis mine.)

Rodger’s misogynistic rhetoric seems undeniably influenced by the manosphere, and his manifesto has kicked off a loud debate about how modern society treats women, online and off. If there was ever a time to take a closer look at online misogyny, it’s now.

Alas, even from a distance, it doesn’t look too pretty.

When people talk about the “manosphere,” they’re basically talking about a vast, diverse network of blogs and forums that take a certain antagonistic stance toward women and dating.  . . . . their core philosophy basically boils down to this: (1) feminism has overrun/corrupted modern culture, in violation of nature/biology/inherent gender differences, and (2) men can best seduce women (slash, save society in general) by embracing a super-dominant, uber-masculine gender role, forcing ladies to fall into step behind them.

[B]elief in retro gender roles has fueled a whole system of sites that denigrate women and advocate for a socio-cultural regression that puts ladies back in the kitchen and bedroom.

[T]he “manosphere” is frequently enough to make any progressive lady — or guy! — choke back bile. The Southern Poverty Law Center, which identifies hate groups, even went so far as to publish a report on it in 2012. (“Although some of the sites make an attempt at civility and try to back their arguments with facts,” the report read, “they are almost all thick with misogynistic attacks that can be astounding for the guttural hatred they express.”)

[I]ts ideology regarding the “right” kinds of men and women is pretty inflexible, too. Gay, lesbian or transgendered people are, needless to say, completely out. “Masculine” women (i.e. women with short hair, women with high-powered jobs, women with outspoken opinions) also earn the manosphere’s derision. But the community reserves a special kind of disdain for “effeminate” or “beta” men — men who either do not have “game” or who are still taking what believers call the “blue pill.”

Blue-pilled guys are the hapless, sexless dummies still treating women as equals and asking them out in conventional, non-pushy ways. This distinction, while it sounds ridiculous, is actually pretty critical to understanding Rodger and his place in the manosphere … such as it was.

Return of Kings . . . . A sampling of recent advice from the site, presented without comment: “all women are nymphomaniacs who crave rough sex”; “if your girlfriend insists on a big wedding, dump her.”

Having two daughters and a granddaughter, I find this mindset very, very scary.   A look at "Return of Kings" will send a shiver down your spine.

The Trouble with Pope Francis

In a number of posts I have tried to stress the reality that despite an improvement in tone(but not Church dogma) towards gays and a renewed sensitivity of the plight of the poor, NOTHING has really changed under Pope Francis.  Far too many people and pundits keep ignoring this harsh reality as they fall over themselves gushing about Francis.  A piece in Religion Dispatches lays out three troubling issues that those with their heads in the sand (or noses up Francis' ass) need to remember.  Here are highlights:

The phenomenon of a pope becoming a pop culture icon is fascinating, troubling, and not a little confusing. Here are a few of the puzzles I'm struggling with as I try to make sense of the current Catholic religious scene.

1.  Pope and Papacy
All of the enthusiasm about Francis’ style does not change the fact that the institutional Roman Catholic Church is a rigid hierarchy led by a pope—the warm feelings in response to Francis shore up that model of church by making the papacy itself look good. To my mind, this is a serious danger.

Even when I agree with his statements about eradicating poverty, becoming friends with our enemies, and the like, I have scruples about giving the new pope too much praise—as if other people have not said the same things and more for eons.

The papacy is the ultimate bully pulpit, but it works both ways—on things that are progressive and things that are conservative. It is risky to embrace papal remarks when one agrees, only to live long enough to have another pope undo them. 
2.  Women and Gays
A second difficulty flows from the first, in that nothing has changed for women or LGBTIQ people with regard to Catholicism during the early months of this papacy. Nor is there much prospect on either issue given what the pope has said publicly.

Regarding women’s ordination, Francis has been clear: “On the ordination of women, the Church has spoken and said no. Pope John Paul II, in a definitive formulation, said that door is closed.” Just what is it that the media see as so promising here? Or, is it the case that what happens to Catholic women does not really matter much?

We have heard from Francis all about women’s superior qualities, and how Mary trumped the apostles in importance. But who is naïve enough to believe that without any say in how the church operates locally or globally Catholic women are valued? To say that to think about women cardinals is a species of clericalism is beyond logical explanation.

The same goes for the now-famous “Who am I to judge?” line about same-sex love that won Francis such favor in both mainstream and gay press. Two intertwined issues emerge. One is that every human being is called to judge what is good, to recognize love when they see it, and to acknowledge the value of committed relationships as part of what constitutes a strong social foundation. To assume that “judge” always means something negative, punitive, rejecting is simply to fall into the Catholic trap that has ensnared so many for centuries.

[T]he very phrasing of the pope’s seemingly revolutionary comment as a rhetorical question stands in sharp contrast to his usual blunt, declarative approach to economic issues, for example. The turn of phrase piqued my curiosity, aroused my suspicion about what he really thinks about same-sex love. I want him and everyone else to judge love positively where and when they find it.

A second critical issue raises my suspicion even higher. Auxiliary Bishop Charles Scicluna of Malta alleged that Pope Francis said that he was “shocked” by the notion of same-sex adoption as part of a move toward civil unions in Malta. He claimed that the Pope “encouraged me to speak out” against it. Mr. Scicluna has done just that, though it is not clear that other bishops of one of the most Catholic countries in the world (also one of the smallest) agree.

It is perplexing this papal doublespeak.

3.  PR and Substance
A third conundrum of contemporary Catholicism is the remarkable, even enviable public relations success, not to say coup, that the papacy of Pope Francis represents.

I am not suggesting that there is no substance to Francis’ agenda, that change does not underlie it. Conservatives would not be so hot under their collective collars if that were not the case. But I am cognizant of the very powerful public relations machine that has turned an ecclesial ocean liner on a dime, transformed an all but written-off patriarchy into one of the most inviting, benevolent monarchies the world has seen in modern times.

But substantive structural and doctrinal issues do not evaporate just because the pope does not wear Prada.

Is this the stuff of real change or is it a way of shoring up a model of church that has endured for centuries? Are those who reject the kyriarchal model as I do simply to be told like other protesters before us that we can go elsewhere when we are as Catholic as the Pope?

Where are the women theologians called in to consult, the young people invited to discuss their lives and choices? Where are the lay people who might preach at the pope’s daily mass so he would listen instead of speak sometimes? Where are the lesbian and gay seminarians to explain the facts of life to an old Jesuit who entered the Society of Jesus before gay was gay? Where are the survivors of sexual abuse by priests and cover-ups by bishops to whom the institutional church, beginning in Rome, owes reparations? I do not see signs of them anywhere, nor do I expect to any time soon. Opus Dei is not a clothing line, but a deeply ideological Catholic group that stands for very conservative religious values.

Granted nine months is a short gestation even for a newbie pope. But waiting quickly becomes complicity when there is so much at stake—so many lives to be enhanced and spirits to be warmed, so much damage to be undone and suffering to be prevented.

[W]hile I wish Francis “multos annos,” I am realistic enough to know that what he does to bring about change in the Roman Catholic Church and in the world he had better do now while the window is still open and he can still see out of it. 

ACLU Sues Catholic Bishops Over Policies on Abortion at Hospitals

The U.S. Roman Catholic bishops enjoy trampling on the rights of others as they hide behind the false cloak of "religious freedom" to disguise their quest to impose their beliefs on all citizens.  Thus, it is rather sweet to see the hypocrisy filed bishops on the receiving end of a lawsuit challenging the bishops' efforts to thwart abortion and contraception services at Catholic hospitals that receive federal funding.  Leading the charge against the bishops' disingenuous claims of religious freedom is the ACLU.  The New York Times looks at the lawsuit filed against the bitter old men in dresses.  Here are article excerpts:

The American Civil Liberties Union announced on Monday that it had filed a lawsuit against the nation’s Roman Catholic bishops, arguing that their anti-abortion directives to Catholic hospitals hamper proper care of pregnant women in medical distress, leading to medical negligence.   

The suit was filed in federal court in Michigan on Friday on behalf of a woman who says she did not receive accurate information or care at a Catholic hospital there, exposing her to dangerous infections after her water broke at 18 weeks of pregnancy. 

In an unusual step, she is not suing the hospital, Mercy Health Partners in Muskegon, but rather the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Its ethical and religious directives, the suit alleges, require Catholic hospitals to avoid abortion or referrals, “even when doing so places a woman’s health or life at risk.” 

The suit opens a new front in the clash over religious rights and medical care. The Catholic Church has fought against requiring all health plans to include coverage of contraception and is likely to call the new lawsuit an attack on its core religious principles.

Catholic hospitals account for about one in six of the country’s hospital beds and in many regions their influence is spreading as they forge alliances with non-Catholic medical groups. 

“This isn’t about religious freedom, it’s about medical care,” said Louise Melling, deputy legal director of the civil liberties union, in a telephone news conference on Monday.

Tamesha Means, the plaintiff in the lawsuit, said that when she was 18 weeks pregnant her water broke and she rushed to Mercy Health, the only hospital in her county. 

Her fetus had virtually no chance of surviving, according to medical experts who reviewed the case, and in these circumstances doctors usually induce labor or surgically remove the fetus to reduce the mother’s chances of infection. 

But the doctors at Mercy Health, Ms. Means said, did not tell her that the fetus could n t survive or that continuing her pregnancy was risky and did not admit her for observation. She returned the next morning, bleeding and in pain, and was sent home again. That night she went a third time, feverish and writhing with pain; she miscarried at the hospital and the fetus died soon after. 

At the news conference Monday, Dr. Douglas W. Laube, an obstetrician at the University of Wisconsin Medical School, described the care Ms. Means received as “basic neglect.” He added, “It could have turned into a disaster, with both baby and mother dying.”

In 2010, the diocese of Phoenix stripped a hospital of its affiliation after doctors there said they performed an abortion to save a mother’s life. 

The bishops continue their fetus worship while not giving a damn about the lives of mothers.  It's but further proof that women are treated as inferior and disposable by the bitter old queens in dresses. 

Join Us in Supporting Mark Herring for Virginia Attorney General

 

This year's statewide elections in Virginia are perhaps some of the most important in Virginia's history.  Never before has a major political party nominated a group of such extremists as those who comprise the Republican Party of Virginia statewide ticket.  In contrast, the Democrat ticket is comprised of individuals who hold mainstream positions and seek to move Virginia forward.  After four years of an extremist ideologue in the Attorney General's, we need Mark Herring as Attorney General.  His opponent's views on gay rights, women's health issues and minority rights are frightening and nothing short of Medieval.  We are hosting an event for Mark Herring on October 12th.  Please join us or feel free to send a check if you cannot attend.  Here are the details: 

Please join

Michael Hamar and Barry Menser

For an event in Support of:

Virginia’s Next Attorney General

State Senator Mark Herring

Saturday, October 12th

3:00pm-5:00pm

At the home of:

Michael Hamar and Barry Menser

1615 Chesapeake Ave

Hampton, VA 23661

Friend: $50       Supporter: $100

Sponsor: $250      Co-Host: $500      Patron: $1000

Please RSVP Here: https://secure.actblue.com/page/10.12.13

By emailing megan@herringforag.com

Or by calling 703.928.5770

              Paid for and authorized by Mark Herring for Attorney General.

Contributions are not deductible for federal income tax purposes.

Printed In-House; labor donated.