SEE: https://christiannews.net/2018/07/04/thank-god-for-abortion-float-appears-in-new-york-city-homosexual-pride-parade/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
NEW YORK — A profanity-laced video posted to social media on Monday features an interview with the woman behind the “Thank God for abortion” float that appeared at the NYC Pride Parade on June 24. The woman, who claims that she was “blessed” to have two abortions, says that she is trying to push back against the Christian beliefs that stand against both homosexuality and abortion, and characterized the float as a “never before seen spectacle of autonomy and conviction.”
“The tie between GLQTQ and people seeking abortion rights is very much both real and unspoken—queer people need abortion access too! And the same Christian core beliefs that fuel homophobia are at the seat of the anti-abortion movement. The #TGFAPrideFloat brings that all together and together is where we need to be,” a GoFundMe page for the float reads. The fundraising effort exceeded its goal of $6,000.
Viva Ruiz states that she created the float because she wanted to celebrate autonomy, as she believes people have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies. One photo on the “Thank God for abortion” website shows Ruiz standing in front of a Ten Commandments monument wearing a “Thank God for abortion” shirt.
“[A]utonomy is where we meet as a queer community. That’s what it’s about—I have a right to do what I want with this body,” she said in the video. “This is a march in independence from a police state; a break from subjugation. That’s where we meet. Physical personhood. Autonomy.”
“And that’s where the joy comes in. We celebrate our right,” Ruiz continued. “I celebrate your right to have 20 abortions. I’ll throw you a party. Or zero. It’s a celebration.”
The large black float featured the “Thank God for abortion” motto written across the side and back, and those aboard danced as they wore shirts that read “legal,” “safe,” “free.” Ruiz wore a golden spray on her head that spelled out the word abortion. Some participants also held banners that read “Thank God for abortion.”
“There’s a release, I think, that happens with the project—to see it out in the open, to see it joyfully claimed, and to have God in it,” Ruiz said.
The video, shared to social media by The Root on Monday, has already received 74,000 views and has generated mixed response. View it in full here. Warning: profanity.
One commenter remarked, “God bless you brave and intelligent ladies. Yes, it’s your body and your baby. You all have the right to do what’s best for you. Nobody else has the right to tell you what to do with your body. … We don’t need back alley abortions to be the thing again. These so-called evangelical Christians aren’t Christians. They’re hateful, greedy and lying CINO’s. Christians in name only.”
“Pregnant people are people, and they have the rights to end parasitic relationships should they wish to. I mind my uterus, and everyone especially those without uteruses, should mind their own business,” another stated.
A third mourned, “The celebration of a murdered child. Could there be anything much more sad? Save a whale, save a tree, save a titmouse. But please blend up your unborn child for the dumpster. So heartbreaking.”
“This is blasphemy. This is pure evil. If good people continue to be silent and not call it what it is, then evil will continue. God help us, please,” another lamented.
As previously reported, Scripture teaches that men and women are to glorify God with their bodies, and no longer live in autonomy unto themselves, but to give their all to Him.
2 Corinthians 5:15 reads, “He died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto Him which died for them and rose again.”
1 Corinthians 6:20 also states, “For ye are bought with a price: therefore, glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.”
Romans 6:13 and 19 instruct, “Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God. … [F]or as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity, even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.”


SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/07/polish-lawmaker-we-will-not-receive-even-one-muslimthis-is-why-poland-is-so-saferepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
“There are a billion people in Africa. In the European Union, we have what, 500 million? How many Africans can we take? Don’t misunderstand me, we want to help the people who are suffering, but we need to help them where they are, at home. It’s not about being racist, nationalist — it’s about adopting a logical, rational system.”
Indeed. But he will be excoriated as a racist nationalist anyway. It’s what the Left does.
“EXCLUSIVE: Polish Lawmaker Speaks Out After Cathy Newman’s Latest Car Crash Interview on Illegal Migration,” by Jack Montgomery, Breitbart, July 3, 2018 (thanks to David):
Polish lawmaker Dominik Tarczyński has stuck to his guns following a frank interview on the migrant crisis with Cathy Newman, insisting his government will not take a single illegal migrant because that is what his party promised before the elections.
The Channel 4 presenter, who became infamous online following her viral interviewwith Canadian scholar Jordan Peterson, had demanded to know how many “refugees” Poland had taken, to which the Law and Justice Party (PiS) politician replied: “Zero.”
And you’re proud of that?” Newman demanded.
“If you are asking me about Muslim illegal immigrants, none, not even one, will come to Poland,” Tarczyński repeated.
“We took over two million Ukrainians — who are working, who are peaceful — in Poland. We will not receive even one Muslim, because this is what we promised… this is why our government was elected; this is why Poland is so safe, this is why we have not had even one terror attack,” he said.
“We can be called ‘populists’, ‘nationalists’, ‘racists’, I don’t care — I care about my family, and about my country.”
Breitbart London contacted the Polish lawmaker for his thoughts on the explosive interview, asking if he still felt confident that it was Poland’s strategy on the migrant crisis which had spared his country from the radical Islamic terror attacks which have plagued countries such as GermanySweden, and Spain.
Mr Tarczyński insisted that “strategy” did not come into it and that the Law and Justice government’s decision to refuse migrants from the Middle East and North Africa came down to something much more simple.
“It hasn’t been about strategy for us, but simply keeping our promises to the Polish people,” he explained.
“We promised to say no to illegal immigrants in Poland before the elections in 2015, and we have kept our promises to the voters who elected us because that’s what they expected,” he said.
“It’s incredible that these people in the European media and the European Commission — who are unelected, by the way — can’t understand this. We made a promise to the people, and we have a democratic responsibility to keep it.”
Mr Tarczyński described how he had visited genuine refugees in the Lebanese camps neighbouring Syria several times — “unlike many of Poland’s critics” — and that they made it clear to them that genuinely needy refugees simply could not afford to pay people-smugglers to make the long journey through the Near East and South-Eastern Europe to the welfare states of North-West Europe.
He added that, as the migrant crisis expanded to take in sub-Saharan Africans as well as the Middle-Easterners, open borders were simply not a viable solution to the problem.
“There are a billion people in Africa,” he said matter of factly. “In the European Union, we have what, 500 million? How many Africans can we take?” he asked.
“Don’t misunderstand me, we want to help the people who are suffering, but we need to help them where they are, at home. It’s not about being racist, nationalist — it’s about adopting a logical, rational system….


Polish Official: “We Will Not Receive Even One Muslim” in Poland

SEE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/29454-polish-official-we-will-not-receive-even-one-muslim-in-polandrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
A sea change is occurring in Europe — and the continent may never be the same again. Whereas just some years ago immigration would not be questioned, the ice is now beyond broken: European nations are increasingly rebelling against globalist, culture-rending European Union migration policies. The latest example is a Polish official who, responding to an attempt at politically correct shaming, unabashedly told a British television host, “We will not receive even one Muslim, because this is what we promised…. This is why our government was elected, this is why Poland is so safe, this is why we have not had even one terror attack.”
Breitbart reports:
Polish lawmaker Dominik Tarczyński has stuck to his guns following a frank interview on the migrant crisis with Cathy Newman, insisting his government will not take a single illegal migrant because that is what his party promised before the elections.
The Channel 4 presenter, who became infamous online following her viral interview with Canadian scholar Jordan Peterson, had demanded to know how many “refugees” Poland had taken, to which the Law and Justice Party (PiS) politician replied: “Zero.”
“And you’re proud of that?” Newman demanded.
“If you are asking me about Muslim illegal immigrants, none, not even one, will come to Poland,” Tarczyński repeated.
“We took over two million Ukrainians — who are working, who are peaceful — in Poland. We will not receive even one Muslim, because this is what we promised… this is why our government was elected; this is why Poland is so safe, this is why we have not had even one terror attack,” he said.
“We can be called ‘populists’, ‘nationalists’, ‘racists’, I don’t care — I care about my family, and about my country” ARVE Error: The [[arve]] shortcode needs one of this attributes av1mp4, mp4, m4v, webm, ogv, url
There are multiple reasons — some reflecting idealism, others what I’ll call “anti-Westernism” — why many Westerners have a lust affair with the invasion known as (im)migration. First, the desire to preserve the EU and, related to this, the belief that with no nations there’ll be no wars, has birthed an effort to dissolve national cohesion via population mixing. For example, if the French reach a point where many aren’t “French” and don’t see such status as important, there’ll be little desire to preserve French sovereignty.
Second and related to the above (there can’t be successful statist EU schemes without empowering statists), the Left long ago realized it can win elections by importing voters. In the United States, 85 to 90 percent of our immigrants hail from the Third World, and 70 to 90 percent of them vote Democrat upon naturalization. In Europe, the phenomenon is the same, which is why Britain’s leftist Labour Party panders to Islamists.
Then there’s immigration, the dogma that immigration is always good, always necessary, and must be the one constant in an ever-changing universe of policy. The notion was long ago disgorged by pseudo-elites and, as ideas will, it took on a life of its own. Enough citizens in many Western countries believe it so that instead of reflexively recoiling at anti-Western, open-borders, immigration politicians, they support them, often enticed by other policies (e.g., offering handouts). Some years ago I ran into a woman who fit this mold; though she was a rank-and-file Republican, she told me with a straight face that a million immigrants annually into the United States weren’t enough.
Yet another idea has now taken on a life of its own: A nationalist, pro-European-culture wave is sweeping Europe. Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán has led this charge, warning of globalist forces aiming to destroy Christian civilization and saying unabashedly last month, “We do not want to be mixed with others[;] we are fine the way we are now.”
Poland’s Law and Justice Party followed this lead. Among other things, Prime Minister Beata Szydło responded last year to Europe’s importation of a jihadist threat by issuing the following call to the continent: “Rise from your knees and from your lethargy or you will be crying over your children every day.” She also stated, “It needs to be said clearly and directly: This [migration scheme] is an attack on Europe, on our culture, on our traditions.”
In the same vein, pro-Western forces have taken power in Italy with its Five Star Movement/Lega government and in Austria with its Austrian People’s Party/Freedom Party of Austria ruling coalition. The latter’s anti-invasion chancellor, Sebastian Kurz, recently targeted “political Islam” by closing mosques and expelling imams. And Italian interior minister Matteo Salvini said last month in reference to his government’s pledge to deport up to 500,000 migrants, “get ready to pack your bags.”
The point is that critical mass might have been reached. The fire of European cultural survival is spreading, and with each passing day increasing numbers of the continents’ natives are willing to stand up and say that they will no longer serve their civilization-destroying EU would-be masters. Oh, immigration and the hate-speech laws helping to enforce it still hold the reins, but they no longer reign supreme.
As for Poland’s Tarczyński, he also pointed out that the genuinely needy migrants cannot even make it to the West. He told Breitbart that he visited Lebanese refugee camps and was informed that these hapless people simply can’t afford to pay smugglers to ferry them all the way to Europe.
This accords, mind you, with the testimonial of Dr. Mudar Zahran, a Jordanian Opposition Coalition leader currently living as an asylee in Britain. He said in a 2015 interview that Syrians in their nation’s “disaster areas cannot … leave.” And this explains Hungarian bishop Laszlo Kiss-Rigo’s 2015 observation that the Muslim migrants do not deserve assistance because they “have money” (a phenomenon we see in the United States as well).
Of course, Europe isn’t yet at the Japanese’s point. Approximately 20 years ago, their island nation expelled a large number of illegal migrants and stated (I’m paraphrasing), “Japan is for Japanese. Others are welcome to come and visit, but they’re expected to return home.” This raises the exit questions: Are the Japanese “racist”? Why isn’t there a push to diversify them into demographic destruction?
And why was such a statement from the Japanese barely noticed by immigrationists, when far less from pro-Western leaders brings the harshest condemnation?


SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/07/video-hungarys-foreign-minister-chides-unbalanced-one-sided-bbc-anchor-for-pro-eu-pro-migration-rantrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Emily Maitlis’ disgraceful performance here is just one manifestation of the indefatigable determination of the political and media elites to destroy the very concept of the nation state, as well as the concept of ethnicity, in their pursuit of a utopian vision of a socialist internationalist global order that will obviate the need for wars, as every place will be pretty much like every other place, and people will be pretty much the same everywhere. In reality, however, they are bringing the virtual certainty of chaos and civil war to Europe, and to North America as well, unless they’re stopped. Will Maitlis be spared by the jihadis who will enter the UK among peaceful migrants? Unlikely.
“Hungarian Minister Chides ‘Unbalanced, One-sided’ BBC Anchor for Pro-EU, Pro-Migration Rant,” by Jack Montgomery, Breitbart, June 30, 2018 (thanks to the Geller Report):
Hungarian foreign minister Péter Szijjártó had to chide BBC anchor Emily Maitlis for “unbalanced, one-sided” journalism after she lost her temper and launched into a rant about the EU standing for “tolerance, diversity, and human rights”.
Speaking to Szijjártó on the publicly-funded broadcaster’s flagship BBC Newsnightprogramme, Maitlis took umbrage with the Hungarian statesman’s claim that “the current migration policy of the European Union can be very easily translated as an invitation” to illegal migrants.
“On World Refugee Day this week, you passed a new law which makes it illegal to help migrants. It criminalises helping undocumented immigrants, and that includes asylum seekers. Why would you do that?” she asked.
Szijjártó attempted to correct the presenter, saying that the anti-illegal immigration package — dubbed ‘Stop Soros’ — was aimed only at those organisations which “help people to ask for asylum even if they have no legal basis for that… and promoting [immigration] opportunities with no legal basis”.
Maitlis appeared not to take heed of Szijjártó’s explanation, however, jabbing her finger at the foreign minister and doubling down on her previous claims.
“You will be making it illegal to help refugees fill in form,” she alleged, leaning forward aggressively.
“You will make it punishable by jail to organise or distribute information that could help migrants.
“Now, you accept that this legislation flouts not only human rights, but it also breaks an international treaty you have signed,” she asserted, laughing incredulously.
“The content of the law is not what you have listed,” replied the Hungarian, perplexed.
“The content of the law is that if you promote illegal possibilities to come to Hungary–” he began to explain, before Maitlis interrupted him.
“No, I want to talk about this question of ‘illegal’, right, because anyone who lands in your country who calls themself an asylum seeker has the right to have their papers and their situation examined,” she insisted.
Szijjártó attempted to explain that Hungary, which lies in Central Europe, is surrounded by peaceful countries, and that there is “no point of reference in any piece of international regulations why you should be allowed or helped or assisted to violate the border between two peaceful countries”.
Maitlis did not address this point, but turned openly scornful, sneering: “You do know you don’t have an immigrant problem in Hungary? You do know that your own official data says you have 3,600 asylum seekers in a country of ten million? You do know that there were 300 asylum claims only this year? You don’t have an immigrant problem in your country!”
Szijjártó explained that illegal migration into Hungary — which was running at 3,000 a day at the height of the migrant crisis, as Maitlis herself reported at the time — has only been brought under control because of the tough stance adopted by the Hungarian government, and that the country remains on the frontline as the situation in the Balkans looks set to boil over again….


SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/07/independence-day-why-we-fight-3republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Another Independence Day is upon us. Each one presents to us a challenge: will we also fight for freedom and independence, or give them up? The struggle for freedom has not changed, and will never change. It is the eternal struggle over whether human beings will live free, or willingly submit to slavery.
All over the world today, slaves are seeking slavery. Slaves everywhere are defending and even glorifying slavery. As those who are standing against tyranny continue to be excoriated as enemies of the people, demonized, and marginalized, avoiding slavery will be harder than ever. People everywhere defend oppressors and carry water for bullies and tyrants, and think all the while that they’re serving the cause of freedom.
In reality, you are either fighting for one thing, or the other. If you’re not working to advance the cause of freedom, you’re working to advance the cause of slavery. The cause of slavery has so very many advocates today. Be an advocate for freedom — for what we must defend, not what we must fight against:
1. Governments deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
What we must defend:
“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…” — Declaration of Independence
What we must defend it against:
Non-Muslims have “absolutely no right to seize the reins of power in any part of God’s earth nor to direct the collective affairs of human beings according to their own misconceived doctrines.” If they do, “the believers would be under an obligation to do their utmost to dislodge them from political power and to make them live in subservience to the Islamic way of life.” — Syed Abul Ala Maududi, founder of the Pakistani political party Jamaat-e-Islami
2. Equality of rights before the law.
What we must defend:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” — Declaration of Independence
What we must defend it against:
“The indemnity for the death or injury of a woman is one-half the indemnity paid for a man. The indemnity paid for a Jew or Christian is one-third the indemnity paid for a Muslim. The indemnity paid for a Zoroastrian is one-fifteenth that of a Muslim.” — Reliance of the Traveller, a classic manual of Islamic sacred law (o4.9)
“Thus if [a] Muslim commits adultery his punishment is 100 lashes, the shaving of his head, and one year of banishment. But if the man is not a Muslim and commits adultery with a Muslim woman his penalty is execution. … Similarly if a Muslim deliberately murders another Muslim he falls under the law of retaliation and must by law be put to death by the next of kin. But if a non-Muslim who dies at the hand of a Muslim has by lifelong habit been a non-Muslim, the penalty of death is not valid. Instead the Muslim murderer must pay a fine and be punished with the lash. … Since Islam regards non-Muslims as on a lower level of belief and conviction, if a Muslim kills a non-Muslim, then his punishment must not be the retaliatory death, since the faith and conviction he possesses is loftier than that of the man slain…Again, the penalties of a non-Muslim guilty of fornication with a Muslim woman are augmented because, in addition to the crime against morality, social duty and religion, he has committed sacrilege, in that he has disgraced a Muslim and thereby cast scorn upon the Muslims in general, and so must be executed. … Islam and its peoples must be above the infidels, and never permit non-Muslims to acquire lordship over them.” — Sultanhussein Tabandeh, A Muslim Commentary on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
3. Freedom of speech
What we must defend:
“Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…” — First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
What we must defend it against:
“In confronting the Danish cartoons and the Dutch film ‘Fitna’, we sent a clear message to the West regarding the red lines that should not be crossed. As we speak, the official West and its public opinion are all now well-aware of the sensitivities of these issues. They have also started to look seriously into the question of freedom of expression from the perspective of its inherent responsibility, which should not be overlooked.” — Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, secretary general of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation
“Pakistan will ask the European Union countries to amend laws regarding freedom of expression in order to prevent offensive incidents such as the printing of blasphemous caricatures of Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) and the production of an anti-Islam film by a Dutch legislator…” — Daily Times of Pakistan
“The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” — Barack Hussein Obama
“We also understand that, for 235 years, freedom of expression has been a universal right at the core of our democracy. So we are focused on…us[ing] some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming, so that people don’t feel that they have the support to do what we abhor.” — Hillary Clinton
“We are going to have the filmmaker arrested.” — Hillary Clinton, referring to the filmmaker whose YouTube video about Muhammad she blamed for the Benghazi jihad massacre
4. Freedom of religion, and non-establishment of religion
What we must defend:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” — First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
What we must defend it against:
“Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.” — Hamas-linked CAIR co-founder and longtime board chairman Omar Ahmad (he denies saying it, but the original reporter stands by her story)
“I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future.” — Hamas-linked CAIR’s Ibrahim Hooper
The Muslim Brotherhood “must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.” — Mohamed Akram, “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America”
Never surrender. Never submit. Never be silenced. Freedom and independence forever.




14    Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,
18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

SEE: https://peopleofpraise.org/

QUOTE FROM: https://slate.com/human-interest/2018/07/amy-coney-barretts-alleged-religious-group-people-of-praise-what-is-it.html :
“Law professor and Senate candidate Richard Painter tweeted the old Times story this weekend and said People of Praise “looks like a cult”; another prominent critic one-upped Painter by calling it a “secretive religious cult.””

Amy Coney Barrett & “People of Praise”: 

5 Fast Facts | Heavy.com

TENTEN TV:Federal Judge Amy Coney Barrett, who is on Donald Trump’s short list of 25 candidates to replace Anthony Kennedy on the United States Supreme Court, belongs to a religious group known as the “People of Praise” that assigns advisers once called handmaids and heads to members, according to The New York Times, which interviewed current and former members of the organization.

Trump has now revealed that he’s narrowed the field to replace Kennedy down to five people, two of whom are women.


The following Wikipedia articles raise serious concerns about her personal beliefs & associations:
SEE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amy_Coney_Barrettrepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes, except for references which are blocked out.

Amy Coney Barrett

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

Amy Coney Barrett
Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Assumed office
November 2, 2017
Appointed by Donald Trump
Preceded by John Daniel Tinder
Personal details
Born Amy Vivian Coney
New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.
Spouse(s) Jesse Barrett
Children 7

Notre Dame Law School(JD)

Academic work
Discipline Jurisprudence
Institutions University of Notre Dame
Website Notre Dame Law Biography
Amy Coney Barrett (born Jan. 28, 1972) is a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit who previously served as the Diane and M.O. Miller Research Chair of Law and Professor of Law at Notre Dame Law School.[1]
Barrett has been included on President Trump’s “shortlist” of potential Supreme Court nominees since 2017. Following the retirement announcement of Anthony Kennedy, she has been mentioned as a possible successor.[2][3]

Education and career

Barrett graduated from St. Mary’s Dominican High School in New Orleans in 1990.[4] In 1994, Barrett graduated magna cum laude with a Bachelor of Arts in English literature from Rhodes College, where she was a Phi Beta Kappa member. In 1997, she graduated from the Notre Dame Law School with a Juris Doctor, where she was executive editor of the Notre Dame Law Review.[5]
After graduation, Barrett served as a law clerk to Judge Laurence Silberman of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. She then spent a year as clerk to Associate Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1998–99. From 1999 to 2002, she practiced law at Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & Lewin in Washington, D.C.[6][7]
In 2002, she began teaching at the Notre Dame Law School, where she was named a Professor of Law in 2010, and, from 2014–17, held the Diane and M.O. Miller Research Chair of Law. Barrett continues to teach as a sitting judge.[8]
She is a member of the conservative Federalist Society.[9]

Federal judicial service

On May 8, 2017, President Donald Trump nominated Barrett to serve as a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, to the seat vacated by Judge John Daniel Tinder, who took senior status on February 18, 2015.[10][11] A hearing on her nomination before the Senate Judiciary Committee was held on September 6, 2017.[12]
During Barrett’s hearing, U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein questioned Barrett about whether her Catholic faith would influence her decision-making on the court. Feinstein, concerned about whether Barrett would uphold Roe v. Wade given her Catholic beliefs, stated “the dogma lives loudly within you, and that is a concern”.[13][9][14] The subject of Feinstein and other Democrats’ concern was a 1998 article by Barrett where she argued that Catholic judges should in some cases recuse themselves from death penalty cases because of their moral objections to the death penalty.[15][9] Feinstein’s line of questioning was criticized by some observers and legal experts[16][17] while defended by others.[18] During her hearing, Barrett said: “It is never appropriate for a judge to impose that judge’s personal convictions, whether they arise from faith or anywhere else, on the law.”[16]
On October 5, 2017, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted on a party-line basis of 11–9 to recommend Barrett and report her nomination to the full Senate.[19][20] On October 30, 2017 the Senate invoked cloture by a vote of 54–42.[21] The Senate confirmed her with a vote of 55–43 on October 31, 2017.[22] She received her commission on November 2, 2017.

Personal life

Amy Vivian Coney wed Jesse M. Barrett, now an Assistant United States Attorney for the Northern District of Indiana.[23]
They have seven children: five biological children and two children adopted from Haiti.[24][25]
Barrett is a practicing Roman Catholic.[9] The New York Times reported that Barrett was a member of a small, tightly knit Christian group called People of Praise.[9]
SEE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_of_Praiserepublished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes, except for references which are blocked out.

People of Praise

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
People of Praise

Abbreviation POP
Formation 1971
Type Ecumenical Christian organization
Headquarters South Bend, Indiana
about 3,000[1]
Website peopleofpraise.org
People of Praise is a charismatic Christian parachurch organization that provides community, spiritual direction and opportunities for service to its members. It is not a church or denomination, and membership is open to any baptized Christian who affirms the Nicene Creed and agrees to the community’s covenant. The majority of its members are Catholics, but Protestants can also join. It has 21 branches in the United States, Canada, and the Caribbean, with approximately 3,000 members including children. It founded a group of non-denominational Christian schools, Trinity Schools.
People of Praise was formed in 1971 by Kevin Ranaghan and Paul DeCelles. Both men were involved in the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, in which Pentecostal religious experiences such as baptism in the Holy Spiritspeaking in tongues and prophecy were practiced by Catholics. In its early history, it influenced the institutional development of the Catholic Charismatic movement in the United States and played important roles in national charismatic conferences.
People of Praise practices a controversial form of spiritual direction that involves supervision of a member by a more spiritually mature person called a “head”. People of Praise maintains that members retain their freedom of conscience under such direction. The community excludes women from the highest leadership positions and teaches that men are the spiritual leaders of their families. At the same time, it encourages women to pursue higher education and employment. Former People of Praise member and Catholic critic Adrian Reimers has accused People of Praise of being too ecumenical and of compromising Catholic teaching by embracing Protestant ecclesiologyPeter Leslie Smith, a Roman Catholic auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon, has been a member since 1983.[2][3]


People of Praise grew out of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, which began in the United States in 1967 and saw Pentecostal religious experience and practices such as baptism in the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues embraced by members of the Catholic Church. In the early days of the renewal, a number of Catholic covenant communities were formed, the first major one being the Word of God community in 1967. Another major covenant community was the Mother of God Community.[4]
These covenant communities were influenced by the communitarianism of the 1960s counterculture.[5] Historical theologian Paul Thigpen writes that in general these covenant communities “typically involved a commitment to at least some degree of sharing financial resources, regular participation in community gatherings, and submission to the direction of the group’s designated authorities.”[6] Larger communities were often divided into “households”, which did not always mean members were living in the same house. However, members of the same household needed to live close enough to each other to share meals, prayer times and other forms of fellowship. Most households were made up of one or two families, but others might be for single men or women.[4]
People of Praise was formed by Kevin Ranaghan and Paul DeCelles in 1971 at South Bend, Indiana.[7] It experienced early growth recruiting from major universities and was especially closely connected to the University of Notre Dame.[8] The group helped develop important institutions for the larger Catholic Charismatic movement. Until 1990, the South Bend community was the headquarters for the National Service Committee (a coordinating body for the various Catholic charismatic groups). It was also the headquarters of the Charismatic Renewal Services (a national distribution center for religious books and tapes) and published a magazine called New Heaven, New Earth. It also played the major role in the renewal’s annual national conferences.[9] By 1987, People of Praise had around 3,000 members, including children.[10] By the end of the 1980s, Catholics were 92 percent of the membership.[8]
Members of the community have also been involved with the International Catholic Charismatic Renewal Services, located first in Brussels and later in Rome.[11] They have also worked ecumenically through participation in the International Charismatic Consultation,[12] the Charismatic Concerns Committee, the Charismatic Leaders Fellowship [13] and, more recently, in the Rome-based Gathering in the Holy Spirit.[14] Members also served with Cardinal Josef Suenens in drafting of Malines Documents I and II,[15] and with Fr. Kilian McDonnell. O.S.B., in the writing of Fanning the Flame.[16] These documents have contributed to the articulation and understanding of charismatic renewal and its place in the Catholic Church. They have also contributed to an understanding of how this movement can be understood by members of Protestant denominations of Christianity.


People of Praise defines itself as an ecumenical, charismatic covenant community “of families and single people who seek to participate in the mission of the church in our time and to live our lives communally”.[1] Members live in their own homes, and sometimes single people will live with an unrelated family.[17] There are some households in which only single men or single women live together.[5]
People of Praise is not a church. All members of the community simultaneously remain members of their local parishes.[18] The majority of its members are Catholics, with LutheransAnglicansMethodistsPentecostals and nondenominational Christians also represented.[19] The Spirit and Purpose of the People of Praise states that “we will live our lives together as fully as our churches permit, with hope that we may soon attain a unity of faith in the fullness of Christ our Lord.” [20]
Members of the People of Praise support each other through weekly meetings that include religious teaching, Scripture readings, witnessing, and prayer for those with needs. Local groups may also hold charismatic prayer meetings and meet for dinner, fellowship and praise and worship. Members also meet in small groups.[21]


See also: Church covenant
The People of Praise considers itself to be a “covenant community”, in which one becomes a member by agreeing to a covenant, a solemn agreement between two or more parties. The community considers the covenant with its members to be one of mutual care and service in spiritual, material, and financial matters.[22] The covenant is not an oath or vow; a member is released from it if they believe God is calling them to another way of life.[19] The covenant states:
Therefore, we covenant ourselves to live our lives together in Christ, our Lord, by the power of his spirit. We agree to be a basic Christian community, to find within our fellowship the essential core of our life in the spirit, in worship and the sacraments, spiritual and moral guidance, service and apostolic activity. We accept the order of this community, which the Lord is establishing with all the ministry gifts of the Holy Spirit, especially with the foundational ministry gifts of apostles, pastors, prophets, teachers and evangelists. We agree to obey the direction of the Holy Spirit manifested in and through these ministries in full harmony with the Church. We recognize in the covenant a unique relationship one to another and between the individual and the community. We accept the responsibility for mutual care, concern, and ministry among ourselves. We will serve one another and the community as a whole in all needs: spiritual, material, financial. We agree that the weekly meeting of the community is primary among our commitments, and that we will not be absent except for a serious reason.[23]
Membership is open to all baptized Christians who believe in the Nicene Creed.[5] There are two stages of membership in the community: underway and covenanted. People who are new to the community join as underway members. This stage of membership is meant as a time for people new to the community to freely explore (in consultation with the leadership) whether they belong in the community. While a member is underway, he or she actively participates in all aspects of the community life. Full membership occurs when one makes a public commitment to the covenant. Members make this pledge freely after a formation and instruction period that normally lasts three to six years.[22]

Leadership and spiritual direction[edit]

People of Praise is led by an eleven-member board of governors, the chairman of which is the overall coordinator. The board’s responsibilities include electing the overall coordinator, establishing new branches, determining official teachings, approving the budget and approving appointments made by the overall coordinator. Board members serve for six-year terms and cannot serve more than two consecutive terms.[24]
Each location of the community is called a branch. The larger branches are led by a group of branch coordinators. These branches are divided into areas, which are each led by an area coordinator. The principal branch coordinator serves as the main leader of the branch. Smaller or newer branches are led by a team of branch leaders. All these coordinators or branch leaders are selected from among the covenanted men in a branch.[citation needed] On matters of great importance, consultations involving all full or “covenanted” members of the community guide the direction of the community, including (within a branch) the selection of coordinators. Branch members nominate three people, and one is selected to be a coordinator by the overall coordinator.[25]
The most controversial aspect of the People of Praise is the practice of headship or pastoral leadership, which, according to anthropologist Thomas Csordas, is where “individual members are supervised in their daily lives by a person regarded as more ‘spiritually mature.'”[26] Pastoral care is considered an important service within the community; it is believed to foster relationships of love, service and charismatic ministry.[22]:15. Each member has someone called a “head”, who acts as a personal adviser. In general, heads give encouragement, correction, and help in decision-making. Men have other men as their heads. Married women are headed by their husbands. Single women and widows usually have other women as their heads. Men and women with the appropriate skills are assigned as heads by the coordinators.[citation needed] People of Praise uses the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius as a basis for counsel and discernment.[19]
According to Sean Connolly, communications director for People of Praise, the community does not operate in an authoritarian fashion, “Freedom of conscience is a key to our diversity. People of Praise members are always free to follow their consciences, as formed by the light of reason, experience and the teachings of their churches.”[19]
As a charismatic community, People of Praise recognizes prophecy as one of the spiritual gifts or charisms. Leaders of the community will consider the meaning of prophetic messages when making decisions concerning group life and sometimes will publish prophecy in community newsletters. There is no formal office of prophet, but the community does have a “word gifts” group made up of members that are recognized as being gifted in prophecy on a regular basis.[27]

Gender roles[edit]

The highest office a woman can hold in the community is “woman leader” (formerly “handmaid”). Women leaders “teach women on womanly affairs, give advice, help in troubled situations” and lead specialized women’s activities.[28] The term handmaiden was chosen in 1971 as a reference to Mary, the mother of Jesus, who in the Bible described herself as a “handmaid of the Lord” or a woman who is close to God.[5] The community teaches that husbands are the head of the household as well as the “spiritual head” and pastoral leader of their wives. While it emphasizes traditional gender roles, the organization encourages women to pursue higher education and employment.[28]
In much of community life, men and women work together without distinction. Both men and women prophesy and exhort at community meetings, teach together in the community sponsored schools, serve together as counselors at community camps, or as members or heads of music ministries, and evangelize together in inner cities. Still, there are some significant distinctions in the roles of men and women. As noted above, the coordinators are men. The community, which refers to itself as a “family of families,” sees this as following a biblical and traditional model of the family. Men and women meet separately each week in small groups called ‘men’s groups’ or ‘women’s groups.’ The purpose is to build deeper relationships as brothers and sisters in Christ by discussing their lives and other issues with the goal of gaining wisdom, deepening friendships and encouraging one another to be faithful to God. Traditional roles are fostered by encouraging men to do most of the heavier physical work involved when a family is moving to a new home or reroofing a house, and when setting up for meetings and similar tasks. Women are encouraged to provide food and childcare. However, these distinctions are not absolute. For example, women have also labored side by side with men in the construction work involved in the community’s Allendale outreach.[1][29]

Divisions and affiliated organizations[edit]

Campus Division[edit]

The Campus Division of the People of Praise is made up of mostly college students. Members live together in student households. Most households hold regular prayer together and often eat together. While some are not in school, most members of the Campus Division attend a variety of colleges and universities, including the University of MinnesotaIUPUISaint Mary’s CollegeHoly Cross College and the University of Notre Dame. Members of the Campus Division consider their common life together to be part of what the People of Praise has labeled as its city-building work.

Action Division[edit]

The Action Division consists of high school students and adults working together “to bring Christ’s love to impoverished communities in real and tangible ways.”[30] This is how the Action Division seeks to contribute specifically to the building up of the Kingdom of God through its work as an outreach of the People of Praise. At this point, their work primarily involves outreach in a poor neighborhood called Allendale in the city of Shreveport, LA. A second location has begun in inner city Indianapolis, Indiana. However, members say that they could work in other areas in the future. The Action Division aims to “provide those in need with an experience of God’s love for them.” This consists in providing jobs, affordable housing, strong families and prayer for physical healing. Action Division member work together to “share all aspects of life” with those who are in need; these needs may be material, financial, spiritual, intellectual or social.[31]

Christians in Commerce[edit]

Christians in Commerce (CIC) is a movement of business and professional men and women that is dedicated to help members grow in the Christian life and to influence the world of commerce with the gospel. Although CIC operates independently from the People of Praise, the People of Praise helped form CIC[32] and is actively engaged in its work. CIC is organized into over 35 local Men’s Chapters, Women’s Chapters and Campus Clubs. These chapters have held retreats (Challenge Weekends) that have been attended by over 14,000 men and women.[33]

Trinity Schools[edit]

Trinity Schools is a group of schools founded by People of Praise which teaches middle school and high school age children. While the schools operate as an independent nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization, the goals and procedures are influenced by the approach of the People of Praise. Trinity Schools provide a Classical education heavily influenced by elements of Christian humanism for grades seven through twelve. The schools follow an academic core curriculum which includes six years of mathematics, 5 years of science, 11 semesters of writing, 6 years of literature, and 5 years of foreign language. Students also take 1 full year and 2 years of partial courses in music, drawing and painting and two semesters of drama. The schools are non-denominational. On its website Trinity School (in each of its three instances) is self-described as “an ecumenical Christian school witnessing to the fundamental unity of all who are baptized into Christ.”[34] Students take 5 semesters of scriptural studies (through a non-denominational Christian approach) and either a Catholic or Protestant doctrine course. Trinity Schools maintain small classes with single-sex instruction except in a few key courses such as drama, art, and foreign languages.[35] The schools teach the theory of evolution.[5]
There are three locations:

Brotherhood of the People of Praise[edit]

The Brotherhood of the People of Praise is a Private Association of the Christian Faithful with Official Status in the Catholic Church.
While the People of Praise community which is the subject of this article has no official ties with any Christian church or denomination, a number of Catholic men who are members of this community have sought to regularize their status with the Catholic Church in order to be ordained Catholic priests. This group of men now has official status in the Catholic Church as a Private Association of the Christian Faithful.[36] “It has a membership of about 12 men, four of them now priests.”[37] Peter Leslie Smith, a member of the group, was named an auxiliary bishop for the Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon by Pope Francis and was ordained a bishop on April 29, 2014.[37][38]


People of Praise has been accused of being cult-like. Anthropologist Thomas Csordas has written about the People of Praise and stated, “I would definitely not use the term cult in its popular sense.”[5] He said it was theologically conservative with a hierarchical leadership structure, but it was also influenced by the communitarianism of the 1960s counterculture.
The People of Praise has come under criticism from a former member, Adrian Reimers, an adjunct professor of philosophy at Notre Dame, who left the group in 1985.[39] Ecclesiologically, Reimers claims that the People of Praise misunderstands the nature of the Church. Kasper stated: “Protestant Christians do not wish to be a church in the same way as the Catholic church understands itself as a church.”[40] Reimers alleges that by embracing a certain form of ecumenism, People of Praise has adopted an idea of what it means to be “Church” which is inherently a Protestant one:[41]
Sword of the Spirit and the People of Praise misunderstand what the Church is, and this is most especially clear in the ‘ecumenically sensitive’ down-playing of certain specifically Catholic manifestations of faith. For example, both systems avoid public references to or veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary as something offensive to Protestants. But the ecclesiological significance of Mary is essential: She is the Mother and Model of the Church. Not to acknowledge her is not to know the Church as mother. This is no mere metaphor here, either. The economy of the Incarnation is that just as Mary was indispensable for bringing Christ to birth in the world, so is the Church – the institutional Catholic Church – necessary for the world to encounter Christ. And indeed, if we neglect the motherhood of Mary them we will surely overlook the living maternity of the Church and, in fact, see it as only an institution. Mary is integral to the faith, not an extraneous or non-essential object of sentimental devotion.”
— Reimers. “Not Reliable Guides” (PDF). p. 98.
“The Church is most Church when she celebrates the Eucharist. With their emphasis on covenant commitment and the experience of community, People of Praise and Sword of the Spirit make the Body of Christ (i.e. the authentic Christian community) extrinsic to the Church, which is reduced to the role of a service institution. This ecumenism that pretends to live a corporate life of faith independent of any one church and outside the context of the Eucharist is a merely human venture. Wherever Mass is celebrated, Christ is saving His people by offering up a perfect sacrifice to His Father and by laying down His life for them. He is gathering them into one.”
— Reimers, Not Reliable Guides

See also[edit]https://trinityschools.org/




Although German leaders assured us that their new “hate speech” law would not be used to curb freedom of expression, the law is being used to suppress criticism of Islam. Angela Merkel’s Germany is thus enforcing Sharia blasphemy laws, because Muhammad must not be mocked.