USA: Legal to Kill Babies But Abuse of Animals Serious Crime – Expect Jail

Virginia Governor Ralph Northam has a clear moral disconnect.

Earlier this year, Governor Northam came under massive national criticism for appearing on a radio show and supporting infanticide. During his interview he advocated for merely keeping babies comfortable as parents leave them to die shortly after birth.

Northam defended a radical pro-abortion bill that would have allowed unborn babies to be aborted up to the point when a woman is about to give birth. The governor not only defended the legislation, but he also said doctors and women could have a discussion about whether to leave a disabled newborn baby to die.

Later, Northam refused to disavow his comments when he endorsed infanticide, saying: “I don’t have any regrets.”

While protecting newborn babies who survive abortions is apparently too much for Northam to support, a law against animal cruelty isn’t. Today he signed a new bill into law that would make animal cruelty a felony in the commonwealth.

Click Like if you are pro-life to like the LifeNews Facebook page and receive the latest pro-life news.

Current law requires the animal to die before someone can face felony charges. Starting July 1, under the bill Northam approved, animal abusers could be found guilty of a Class 6 felony. Here’s more:

Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam (D) on Monday signed a bill that increases the penalty for “cruelly or unnecessarily beating, maiming, mutilating, or killing a dog or cat” to a felony charge.

The bill, which is being referred to as “Tommie’s Law,” alters current stipulations that say an animal must die for someone to be charged with a felony…  Click here to read more…

Comment:

Below, the definition of felony charge from Legal Match

In criminal law, a felony is a category of crimes that are often classified as the most serious types of offenses, and they can be either violent or non-violent. Felonies are typically classified as mala in se crimes. The main characteristic of a felony is that being found guilty of a felony will result in incarceration for at least one year. Also, the imprisonment will be served in a prison facility rather than a county or local jail establishment. Criminal fines may also be imposed for felony charges, often in the amounts of thousands of dollars.  Under traditional common law, felonies were called “true crimes,” and usually included serious offenses such as: homicide, attempted murder, rape, arson, human trafficking, burglary, robbery, failing to inform a sex partner of their HIV-positive status, criminal damage to property, escaping from a prison, interfering with a guardian’s custody rights including interstate interference, and assisting in a felony. Current, state and federal criminal statutes may categorize various other types of crimes as felonies. 

So, you tell me

(1)      Which of the two offences: animal cruelty or infanticide – best fits the definition of a “felony charge” ?  

(2)     Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad – True or False? 

Catholics & Comic Relief – No Go! 

From LifeNews.com

This Friday is Red Nose Day, the biannual fundraising extravaganza for Comic Relief. There has been controversy about the event this year, with MP  David Lammy saying that Stacey Dooley was promoting a “white saviour” mentality with her Instagram photo of her holding a child in Uganda. There are certainly questions to be asked about the portrayal of Africa in fundraising efforts, but for pro-lifers, another question often comes up – does Comic Relief support abortion?  Click here to read more…

Comment: 

It should be obvious to any Catholic reading the LifeNews report that no Catholic could possibly, in good conscience support, in any way, the Comic Relief/Red Nose Day enterprise. 

Unfortunately, dressed up as fun and frolics,  it is attractive to young people keen to feel they are doing something worthwhile by raising funds for “charity” while, at the same time, enjoying themselves.  It is commonplace for Catholic schools to support Red Nose Day.

Is there an alternative?  Well, one Parish Priest in Glasgow turned Hallowe’en away from ghosts and ghouls, into a Saints & Angels event where children were invited to attend a parish party dressed as their favourite saint or as an angel, so it should not be beyond the bounds of the Bishops’ imagination to come up with a Catholic anti-dote to this annual “Comic Relief/Red Nose Day” fundraiser where money is going to various charities to which no Catholic should donate, not least the notorious Planned Parenthood abortion provider. 

Any ideas? 

The Winner of the Confused Cardinal Competition is… Cardinal Dolan!

Comment: 

Cardinal Dolan’s confusion is mind-boggling.  It’s beyond belief than any prelate would makes excuses not to publicly excommunicate this man for his shocking legalisation of infanticide and then to say he’s “restless” when faced with the possibility of at least refusing him Communion – which is mandated anyway in Canon Law #915 for “[those] who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin…”

More than one bishop has already invoked this law to prohibit pro-abortion politicians from approaching for Holy Communion – click here to read more.

Overall, while he’s tailor made for show-business, Cardinal Dolan is unimpressive as a prelate of the Catholic Church.  And that is to understate the case by a zillion miles…

If you disagree – which I cannot imagine – tell us;  otherwise share your thoughts on just how long it is likely to take for infanticide (the murder of the new-born infant) to be legalised here in the UK.   

Incredibly, New York’s murderous Governor Andrew Cuomo ordered a number of buildings, including One World Trade Center, to be lit up pink to “celebrate” the passing of the Bill.  This is one very sick mind at work. Please pray for him – and for the very confused Cardinal Dolan.  IS there a more confused cardinal anywhere in the world?  

Question Time Or The Fiona Bruce & Emily Thornberry Show? Your Verdict…

 

Fiona Bruce’s took over the chair of Question Time for the first time last night, Thursday, 10 January, 2019.  Don’t ask me why, because the BBC bias is nowhere as predictable, but I do try to watch it every week, either live or recorded.  Last night, I watched it broadcast right after the news, and I found it very frustrating viewing, indeed.

There were only two topics:  Brexit and knife crime in London.

Only Melanie Phillips’ contributions on both topics were meaningful, in my view.  Yet, Fiona Bruce allowed her to speak only once on Brexit – notice she is not called on to join in the toing and froing between the other members of the panel when controversy arose – while the Labour politician, Emily Thornberry is given free rein to say what she wanted, as often as she wanted, more or less unchecked. 

I’m also puzzled as to why the Tory politician, James Cleverly MP, appears so frequently on Question Time and other programmes where Brexit is the hot topic.  He is a weak “LEAVER”… oops!”  Just answered my own question.  There’s the reason he’s invited onto these shows and not Jacob Rees-Mogg or Owen Paterson.  

In any event, this thread comes in the wake of the call from the Bishop of Galloway (south of Scotland) to Catholics to become more involved in politics. 

Watching the media bias in matters political, the prevailing (and worsening) political correctness, is there really any point in Catholics becoming more involved in politics – and what, precisely does that mean?  Joining Parties which promote the evils of homosexuality and abortion? 

Finally,  IS it fair to describe last night’s Question Time as the Fiona Bruce & Emily Thornberry Show?  Your verdict, please! 

USA: Should Kavanaugh Withdraw? 

Only now is the UK media beginning to cover the reports of sexual misconduct brought against Brett Kavanaugh –  with the predictable unquestioning acceptance of the allegations levelled against the Judge. Well, after all, it’s a woman making the allegations, and the accused is male, so she must be telling the truth… right?  As for what is motivating these women to exert themselves to keep him out of the Supreme Court… Having watched the ferocity of the pro-abortionists here in the UK, desperate to extend abortion “rights” and to decriminalise it completely, I think it’s clear that these “liberal” females will stop at nothing to prevent any “conservative” candidate from tipping the balance a tad more to the “right”.  Nothing these morons do surprises me in the least.  Maybe, though, for the sake of his own peace of mind, not to mention his family’s safety (there have been death threats), he should withdraw his nomination although  The New York Times  reports that he vows to continue  What would YOU advise him to do?  Is it really worth it?  Can anyone really fight this sort of smear campaign – and remain sane? 

Below, a short video clip from the USA media, refreshingly challenging the uncritical media coverage to date…  

Comments invited…

Jacob Rees-Mogg: Monumental Hypocrite or Very Confused Catholic? 

 

Comment:

Jacob Rees-Mogg MP,  widely lauded as a strict, traditional Catholic, fails to make the distinction between ‘judgmentalism’ and making necessary moral judgments… or maybe you agree with him?  Do we really need a lying, adulterous Prime Minister to take us through Brexit?  That’s how I’m reading JRM’s support for Boris – what about you?