These are the people behind the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, better known as Parental Rights for corporations, for the purposes of trafficking tiny humans.
Christian evangelist Ravi Zacharias will be honored in a livestream memorial service this week.
Zacharias died May 19 at the age of 74. The service will be streamed live at RZIM.org/RaviMemorial on May 29 at 11 a.m. ET.
“The story of the gospel is the story of eternal life. My life is unique and will endure eternally in God’s presence. I will never be ‘no more.’ I will never be lost because I will be with the One who saves me,” Zacharias wrote in Seeing Jesus from the East.
Zacharias founded Ravi Zacharias International Ministries in 1984. His ministry equipped some 100 Christian scholars and authors to travel the world and speak to millions of people.
Former football star Tim Tebow, Louis Giglio, Brooklyn Tabernacle Senior Pastor Jim Cymbala and others are expected to speak at Ravi’s memorial service. Matt Redman and Lecrae will also perform.
In lieu of flowers, the Zacharias family has asked that donations be made to RZIM.
Zacharias was best known as a top Christian apologist.
"(Ravi) saw the objections and questions of others not as something to be rebuffed, but as a cry of the heart that had to be answered," said Michael Ramsden, president of Ravi Zacharias International Ministries.
"People weren't logical problems waiting to be solved; they were people who needed the person of Christ. Those who knew him well will remember him first for his kindness, gentleness, and generosity of spirit. The love and kindness he had come to know in and through Jesus Christ was the same love he wanted to share with all he met."
As Christian Headlines previously reported, Zacharias wrote more than 30 books and preached in some 70 countries during his 48-year career. He was born in India and converted to Christianity as a teenager after reading the Bible in the hospital while recovering from a failed suicide attempt.
Zacharias is survived by his wife, Margie, daughters Sarah and Naomi, son, Nathan, and five grandchildren.
Christian evangelist Ravi Zacharias will be honored in a livestream memorial service this week.
Zacharias died May 19 at the age of 74. The service will be streamed live at RZIM.org/RaviMemorial on May 29 at 11 a.m. ET.
“The story of the gospel is the story of eternal life. My life is unique and will endure eternally in God’s presence. I will never be ‘no more.’ I will never be lost because I will be with the One who saves me,” Zacharias wrote in Seeing Jesus from the East.
Zacharias founded Ravi Zacharias International Ministries in 1984. His ministry equipped some 100 Christian scholars and authors to travel the world and speak to millions of people.
Former football star Tim Tebow, Louis Giglio, Brooklyn Tabernacle Senior Pastor Jim Cymbala and others are expected to speak at Ravi’s memorial service. Matt Redman and Lecrae will also perform.
In lieu of flowers, the Zacharias family has asked that donations be made to RZIM.
Zacharias was best known as a top Christian apologist.
"(Ravi) saw the objections and questions of others not as something to be rebuffed, but as a cry of the heart that had to be answered," said Michael Ramsden, president of Ravi Zacharias International Ministries.
"People weren't logical problems waiting to be solved; they were people who needed the person of Christ. Those who knew him well will remember him first for his kindness, gentleness, and generosity of spirit. The love and kindness he had come to know in and through Jesus Christ was the same love he wanted to share with all he met."
As Christian Headlines previously reported, Zacharias wrote more than 30 books and preached in some 70 countries during his 48-year career. He was born in India and converted to Christianity as a teenager after reading the Bible in the hospital while recovering from a failed suicide attempt.
Zacharias is survived by his wife, Margie, daughters Sarah and Naomi, son, Nathan, and five grandchildren.
“Why don’t you turn off the television and why don’t you start working, okay?” Scarborough responded on-air Tuesday morning
In an incendiary and baseless tweet early Tuesday, President Donald Trump suggested Morning Joe host Joe Scarborough was a murderer, prompting the news host to pause his program and ask Trump to stop watching "for the sake of America" and himself.
“You need to stop watching our show, okay? It’s not good for you," Scarborough, 57, said during the broadcast after being told about Trump's tweet labeling him a "psycho."
Scarborough continued: "I think that might be why you go out and, like — you’re distracted. You’re tweeting so much."
Trump, 73, had implied on Twitter that Scarborough, a former member of the House of Representatives in Florida, was to blame for the 2001 accidental death of one of his congressional aides, Lori Klausutis.
According to the Associated Press, a coroner's report showed Klausutis had an undiagnosed heart condition and died after passing out and hitting her head while at the office in Florida; Scarborough was in Washington, D.C., at the time.
The president — who for years has feuded with Morning Joe's Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski after he felt they turned on him, with Scarborough previously saying he thought Trump was mentally unstable — has tweeted about Klausutis and Scarborough before.
But his latest tweet was his most brazen accusation.
“When will they open a Cold Case on the Psycho Joe Scarborough matter in Florida. Did he get away with murder? Some people think so," Trump wrote just before 7 a.m. local time on Tuesday. "Why did he leave Congress so quietly and quickly? Isn’t it obvious? What’s happening now? A total nut job!”
Scarborough responded in real time, being alerted to the president's tweet during his show.
“Why don’t you turn off the television, and why don’t you start working, okay?” he said, addressing the president. “You do your job, we’ll do ours, and America will be much better off for that. Just go. Turn off the TV, Donald.”
Last week, Trump tweeted that "'Concast' [his derogatory nickname for MSNBC's parent company] should open up a long overdue Florida Cold Case against Psycho Joe Scarborough."
Scarborough similarly responded on-air to that claim by the president, reportedly saying then that Trump's accusation was "extraordinarily cruel" and that he was bringing attention to a conspiracy theory that's "lived in the gutters of the internet for some time now."
“You, once again, drag a family through this and make them relive it again. ... As if losing a loved one the first time isn’t enough,” Scarborough said, telling Trump: "You don't understand the pain you cause to families who've already lost a loved one. Not me."
The White House did not respond to PEOPLE's request for comment on Tuesday.
Trump's attacks on Scarborough over Klausutis' death have drawn the ire of journalists and lawmakers, including Republicans.
“Obviously, I don’t see that as an appropriate comment,” then-House Speaker Paul Ryan said in 2017.
“Look, what we’re trying to do around here is improve the tone, the civility of the debate, and this obviously doesn’t help do that,” Ryan added.
On Tuesday, CNN host Jake Tapper tweeted out his disgust with the president's repeated accusations.
"Her name was Lori Klausutis. She was 28. And her family deserves far better than the president and his minions using the tragedy of her death as a crude cudgel to attack a critic," Tapper wrote. "It’s indecent and inhumane."
Some department lawyers expressed worries that the workshops were held to teach ways to limit civil rights protections for gay and transgender people.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department this week hosted training for its lawyers on religious liberty laws as part of Attorney General William P. Barr’s push to prioritize religious freedom cases, but the workshops prompted concern among some career lawyers that they were being educated on ways to blunt civil rights protections for gay and transgender people.
Lawyers who worked at the Justice Department during the past three administrations could not recall a similar week of training sessions on any topic.
The training week was part of an ongoing campaign at the department to bolster its work to protect religious freedom, which is regularly described by top leaders as the first right protected by the First Amendment, a department official said in response to a request for comment.
In an email to employees sent on behalf of department leaders last weekend about the training, the department said that its leaders were proud of the work “done over the past year to promote religious freedom,” including prosecutions related to land use, education and employment.
Last month, the department filed a statement of interest in federal court in Kentucky that supported the right of a photographer not to work at same-sex weddings; she said it would violate her religious beliefs. And last fall the Justice Department supported an appeals case in Maine, saying that a state law banning religious schools from the state’s school tuition program was unconstitutional.
Both filings were a departure from the department’s positions under the Obama administration and have drawn criticism from gay rights activists as well as supporters of a sharp separation between church and state.
The training, the first of its kind, was voluntary. It was meant to improve employees’ understanding of their own free exercise of religious rights in the workplace, as well as the department’s resources for protecting places of worship and individual religious rights, according to the department official.
But career lawyers said that they feared the department was working to further the use of religious freedom in ways that would push back efforts to protect gay and transgender people from discrimination, according to emails and messages reviewed by The New York Times.
Some lawyers cited the department’s support of the photographer in Kentucky and its support of a Colorado baker whose refusal to make a wedding cake for a gay couple was upheld by the Supreme Court. Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions said at a Justice Department event to celebrate religious freedom that the baker, Jack Phillips, was courageous and that Western culture was increasingly “less hospitable to people of faith.”
Vanita Gupta, the president of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights and the former head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, accused Mr. Barr of using the Justice Department to promote his religious beliefs.
“In speeches and statements, he says that civil society is being undermined by a move away from religiosity,” she said. “He wants to use civil rights statutes and the D.O.J. to redeem what he views as the corrupted soul of America.”
The department’s civil rights division has also undertaken work more in keeping with past administrations. In January, Mr. Barr also met with Jewish leaders in Brooklyn to discuss a nationwide rise in anti-Semitic hate crimes. Prosecutors also secured a guilty plea from a Louisiana man charged with intentionally setting fire to three black Baptist churches in violation of the Church Arson Prevention Act.
The training sessions focused on topics including protections for religious land use, the religious rights of prisoners, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, protecting places of worship, and the religious liberty rights of employees under federal law.
“Religious liberty is a core American value and a top priority for the department,” the department said in the email about the training.
“We pledge to protect the free exercise of religion when we take our oath to ‘support and defend the Constitution.’ We do so out of respect for the conscience of our fellow citizens and to preserve the civil society in which our liberal democracy can flourish.”
The email echoes remarks that Mr. Barr made last month at the National Religious Broadcasters’ annual convention, where he said that “Augustinian Christianity” is at the root of the our democracy, and that Americans “providentially enjoy its blessings today.”
“In my view, liberal democracy has reached its fullest expression in the Anglo-American political system,” Mr. Barr said. “The wellsprings of this system are found in Augustinian Christianity.”
Attendees said that no religion was prioritized over another during the training sessions, which were led by departments officials from the office of the principal deputy associate attorney general, Claire McCusker Murray; the Civil Rights Division; the Community Relations Service; and various U.S. attorneys’ offices.
If I close my eyes really, really hard, I can recall Emperor Pence signing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), because it came out Michigan and I just happen to know one of the writers, super duper, really well, which brings me to a dream sequence of why the Detroit Economic Club and the Michigan Economic Development Authority embraced him, the glorious leader of the Indiana Economic Development Authority, so warmly, but hey, what do I know?
I know nothing because the case is still under seal.
What I do know is that I know about the qui tam and the False Claims Act, when dealing with Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare and the Indianapolis Land Bank, including its marvelous artifices & machinations of stealin' the children, land & votes, just like the Detroit Land Bank Authority.
I also know that you cannot be prosecuted for Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare, under the FCA when you use your RFRA get out of jail for stealin' card when you do it in the name of the tax exempt god, because that is why it was created.
The United States has filed a complaint against Community Health Network Inc. (Community) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, the Department of Justice announced today. Community, an integrated health care system in central Indiana, is alleged to have violated the Stark Law and thereby submitted false claims to the Medicare program.
The Stark Law prohibits a hospital from billing Medicare for services referred by a physician with whom the hospital has an improper financial relationship that does not meet any statutory or regulatory exception. The government’s complaint alleges that Community had employment relationships with a number of physicians that did not meet any Stark Law exception because the compensation Community paid to the physicians was well above fair market value and because Community conditioned paying bonuses on physicians achieving a minimum target of referral revenues to the hospital. The complaint alleges that Community received referrals from these physicians in violation of the Stark Law and submitted claims to Medicare knowing that the claims for those referred services were not eligible for payment.
“Improper financial relationships between hospitals and physicians corrupt clinical decision-making, threaten patient care, and ultimately drive up Medicare costs,” said Assistant Attorney General Jody Hunt of the Department of Justice’s Civil Division. “We are committed to eliminating these improper inducements and thereby ensuring the Medicare program remains fiscally sound to serve our nation’s senior citizens.”
“Our goal at the U.S. Attorney’s Office is to serve the citizens and help ensure safety in their communities,” said U.S. Attorney Josh Minkler for the Southern District of Indiana. “Hospitals are responsible for not only the health and well-being of their patients, but are also required to establish a compliance program in order to protect against improper payments, fraud and abuse as a condition of enrollment in the Medicare program.”
The United States filed its complaint in a lawsuit originally filed under the qui tam or whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act, which allow private parties to file suit on behalf of the United States for false claims and to receive a share of any recovery. The Act permits the United States to intervene and take over the lawsuit, as it has done here in part. Those who violate the Act are subject to treble damages and applicable penalties.
The government’s resolution of this
matter illustrates the government’s emphasis on combating health care fraud. One of the most powerful tools in this effort is the False Claims Act. Tips and complaints from all sources about potential fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement, can be reported to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), at 800-HHS-TIPS (800-447-8477).
This case is being handled by the Justice Department’s Civil Division and the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Indiana, with assistance from the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services. The case is captioned United States and the State of Indiana ex rel. Thomas Fischer v. Community Health Network, Inc., et al. No. 1:14-cv-1215 (RLY-DKL) (S.D. Ind.).
The claims in which the United States has intervened are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.
The year 2020 marks the 150th anniversary of the Department of Justice. Learn more about the history of our agency at www.Justice.gov/Celebrating150Years.
Isn’t it interesting that a reporter with the last name of “Justice” is the one who investigated the children of Judge John Roberts? Referring to a report that New York Times investigative reporter Glen Justice was prying into the private adoption records of Roberts’ two children, radio talk-show host Kevin McCullough declared that “Every adoptive parent reading this will be understandably outraged, and they should be. Every decent human being in every decent family across this nation should speak up. And every person subscribing to the New York Times should think about whether or not they want to continue to do so.”
In a column carried by Illinoisleader.com, McCullough said, “The reason that such tactics get played out over and over is because the Times and other elements of the liberal dominated media feel they will suffer no foul consequence in doing so. Their idea is journalism has little to do with reporting the facts as much as it has to do with Democratic Party-friendly witch hunts that can be carried out without indictment for any wrongdoing. By conducting such an inquiry into the personal and private lives of Supreme Court nominee Roberts, his wife and the process they went through to become parents, the Times seems to be setting a new low-like they have been prone to in recent years-in its lack of journalistic standards.”
The National Council for Adoption issued a statement denouncing, “in the strongest possible terms, the shocking decision of the New York Times to investigate the adoption records of Justice John Roberts’ two young children. The adoption community is outraged that, for obviously political reasons, the Times has targeted the very private circumstances, motivations, and processes by which the Roberts became parents.
But Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Vice Chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, said she was “appalled to learn that reporters for the New York Times had started an investigation into the adoption records of U.S. Supreme Court nominee John Roberts and his wife. Simple decency dictates that some boundaries should be placed on inquiries into the private lives of public figures by interest groups and the news media.”
She added, “In my view, this inquiry by the Times-no matter how preliminary the newspaper now says it was-steps over that boundary line. I note the paper initially claimed this misstep was inadvertent. But it has now been reported that the newspaper consulted its lawyers to determine ways to unseal court adoption records of the Roberts family. In my view, this is reprehensible.”
Hutchison said this was not the first time that coverage of Roberts went “over the line.” She explained that she was disgusted by a half-page Washington Post story “deriding the apparel worn by the Roberts children when their father’s nomination was announced at the White House.” She noted that the Los Angeles Times “ran a lengthy story examining private activities of Mrs. Roberts that were largely irrelevant to her husband’s nomination.”
Hutchison concluded, “I hope everyone involved in the confirmation process will take a deep breath and consider carefully the fine line between legitimate background inquiries and invasion of privacy in such cases. In the meantime, I will encourage the Congressional Coalition on Adoption, of which I’m a member, to take a position opposing inquiries such as those started by the New York Times.”
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, commented on the Times inquiry by saying that “?it should be agreed by all, especially Democrats and newspapers sympathetic to Democratic causes, that attacking family is repugnant. What kind of people would assault Judge Roberts through his children? What kind of people would publish vicious attacks on his little boy and little girl for how they were dressed? What kind of people would try to get at a judicial nominee because of the occupation or work of their spouse? Or attempt to dredge up damaging material through private adoption records? The unfortunate answer is they are the kind of people who have been picking our judges for years. They are also the people who will be picking our future judges unless we stay active today.”
These “people” are mostly in the media. They do these things because they are not being held accountable.
The Embryo Adoption Public Awareness Campaign was first funded by Congress in fiscal year 2002. The original purpose of the program was to increase public awareness of the existence of a large number of human embryos remaining after in vitro fertilization procedures, some of which might be available for adoption by infertile couples. In fiscal year 2008, Congress expanded the scope of the program to include interventions that provided “medical and administrative services” to individuals and couples in order to facilitate the adoption and donation of embryos for the purpose of family formation. P4
Some non-Federal entities have
expressed concerns that requiring compliance with certain non-statutory requirements of
those paragraphs violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), 42 U.S.C. §
2000bb, et seq., or the U.S. Constitution, exceeds the Department’s statutory authority, or
reduces the effectiveness of programs, for example, by reducing foster care placements in
the Title IV-E program of HHS’s Administration for Children and Families. p5.
In this proposed rule, the American University, Beirut, and the World Health
Organization are exempted specifically from the indirect-cost-rate limitation because they
are eligible for negotiated facilities and administration (F&A) cost reimbursement.
TRASNLATION: FRAUD. CHILDREN'S FAKE ASS FOREIGN CHILD WELFARE NGOs AND THEIR FAKE ASS CHILDREN'S TRUST FUNDS RUNNING CHILD WELFARE PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGNS ALL THE DAMN TIME BECAUSE THE COST REIMBURSEMENT IS THROUGH MEDICAID AND LOTS AND LOTS OF STUPID PREDICTIVE MODELING CRAP RESEARCH GRANTS FOR FOREIGN UNIVERSITIES, SUCH AS LISTED ABOVE, ARE DOING ON TINY HUMANS. SEE SAM BROWNBACK. EMPHASIS ADDED.
This
proposed restriction on indirect costs, as indicated by 45 CFR 75.101, would flow down
to subawards and subrecipients. The Department recognizes that this provision could be
interpreted as having a financial impact on small entities. These limits, however, have
been operational since the publication of the Final Rule, and therefore grantees would not
need to make any changes to their current practice in response to this rulemaking.
Washington D.C., Nov 1, 2019 / 02:00 pm (CNA).- The Trump administration has announced a change to federal rules to preserve federal funding of faith-based adoption agencies, regardless of their views on same-sex marriage.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced Nov. 1 that it would change its enforcement of previous regulations and propose a new rule, allowing faith-based adoption agencies to continue receiving federal funding while not having to match children with same-sex couples against their religious mission.
HHS said it would revise a 2016 rule that conditioned federal funding of child welfare agencies upon their matching children with same-sex couples.
The U.S. bishops’ conference (USCCB) praised the change in a statement released on Friday.
“To restrict faith-based organizations’ work by infringing on religious freedom – as the 2016 rule threatened to do - is unfair and serves no one, especially the children in need of these services,” said a joint statement by Bishop Frank Dewane of Venice, Florida, chair of the USCCB Domestic Justice and Human Development committee, Bishop James Conley of Lincoln, chair of the USCCB Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage, and Bishop Robert McManus of Worcester, Massachusetts, chair of the USCCB Committee for Religious Liberty.
The previous regulation “threatened to shut out faith-based social service providers, namely adoption and foster care agencies that respect a child’s right to a mother and a father,” the bishops said.
The announcement comes in the middle of a “foster care crisis” in which faith-based adoption agencies will play a critical role in placing children with families, religious freedom advocates said.
“It is just as important today to continue fighting so that vulnerable children will have all hands on deck in the midst of a nationwide foster care crisis,” said Lori Windham, senior counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.
“Every child deserves a chance to be raised in a loving home,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Zack Pruitt said, noting that there are more than 400,000 children in the foster care system and 100,000 eligible for adoption. HHS’s action “offers hope for children, more options for birth mothers, support for families, and increased flexibility for states seeking to alleviate real human need,” he said.
However, the administration’s proposed rule “would only fix part of the problem,” Windham tweeted, as faith-based agencies also face hostility from state and local governments and thus “still need help from SCOTUS.”
Becket represents several entities affected by the Obama administration regulation and similar state and local efforts to push child welfare agencies to place children with same-sex couples.
In a press release on Friday morning, HHS said it would stop enforcing certain regulatory provisions for administering grants, due to a problematic interpretation of them by the Obama administration.
The federal agency also issued a proposed rule revising part of a 2016 Obama-era regulation, to better protect faith-based adoption agencies.
The rule, HHS said, would ensure respect for civil rights while protecting religious freedom and “eliminating regulatory burden” on “the free exercise of religion”; it would do so by requiring grant recipients to comply with existing anti-discrimination laws passed and religious freedom laws that have been passed by Congress, while also requiring HHS to comply with relevant Supreme Court decisions.
Faith-based adoption agencies have had to contend with efforts at the federal, state, and local levels that conditioned public funding on the agencies placing children with same-sex couples in violation of their religious mission.
In Michigan, Catholic Charities West Michigan—represented by ADF—brought a federal lawsuit against the state for withholding funding from faith-based adoption agencies over their stances on marriage. A federal court recently blocked the Obama-era regulation from going into effect in a case involving St. Vincent Catholic Charities and a family looking to adopt, represented by Becket.
“Both the federal government and a federal court have now recognized that discrimination against faith-based agencies seeking to serve those most in need should not be tolerated. We hope that state and local governments will follow suit,” Windham said.
There are several federal laws which are relevant to nondiscrimination in the adoption and foster care system.
These include Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which forbids discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs of child welfare agencies and state courts. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 forbids sex discrimination in federally-funded education programs; other laws prohibit discrimination for age and disability.
The Obama administration interpreted existing law to forbid discrimination in the child welfare system not only on basis of sex, but sexual orientation. Thus, it began taking action against adoption agencies that did not place children with same-sex couples, on the grounds that they were discriminating against an individual’s sexual orientation.
Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.) introduced an amendment in a 2018 funding bill to withhold some HHS funding of states that would not allow faith-based organizations to carry out their religious mission in child welfare. The amendment was removed from the legislation before a final House vote.
Adoption agencies have also been facing adverse action from states which have anti-discrimination laws.
In Massachusetts, Catholic Charities of the Boston Archdiocese stopped its adoption services in 2006 after the state legalized same-sex marriage. Catholic Charities in California and Illinois also stopped their adoption services in 2006 and 2011, respectively.
In Illinois, the bishops had said that the state “made it financially impossible for our agencies to continue to provide these services,” after the state legalized same-sex marriage and required adoption agencies to pair children with same-sex couples.
In 2018, the city of Philadelphia stopped placing adoptive children with Catholic Social Services, only days after calling for 300 new families to adopt foster children.
The city faces a lawsuit by several foster mothers for its decision to stop working with Catholic Social Services, and on Nov. 15, the Supreme Court will decide whether or not to grant review in Fulton v. Philadelphia.
Speaking of grant announcements, a funny thing happened while searching for the Federal Registry Announcement for public comments, where I shall, in the Spirit of the Celestial Goddess of the Woodshed, perform the perfection of prayers for the heavens to fall, I found this fun little Faith Based Funding grant of the Office of Population Control for the search of hosts to gestate a corporation's moveable chattel in the form of embryos.
The Embryo Adoption Public Awareness Campaign was first funded by Congress in fiscal year 2002. The original purpose of the program was to increase public awareness of the existence of a large number of human embryos remaining after in vitro fertilization procedures, some of which might be available for adoption by infertile couples. In fiscal year 2008, Congress expanded the scope of the program to include interventions that provided “medical and administrative services” to individuals and couples in order to facilitate the adoption and donation of embryos for the purpose of family formation.
The National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) has collected information over the past several years regarding the behaviors and access to health services of females and males within the United States of America related to family formation and reproductive health. Data from the 2012 NSFG release (which received partial support from the Embryo Adoption Awareness program) suggested that nearly two-thirds of U.S. women of reproductive age knew of embryo adoption/donation as a method of family formation. Preliminary analysis from more recent studies indicate that awareness continues to increase. Building upon the public’s awareness, in 2016, OPA supported a small but in-depth study of obstetrician/gynecologists’ knowledge and practices regarding embryo adoption/donation. Though awareness of embryo adoption/donation was nearly universal among the study participants, none of them had ever offered education and counseling on embryo adoption/donation nor suggested it to a patient.
Why was Teresa Manning formally escorted from HHS?
I am going to go with my final answer: fraud.
I do not believe she had any hands on the Title X grant decisions or was even there long enough to masterfully navigate the Department, but I bet your bottom dollar she was "leaking" data to her special buddy Tony Perkins.
Teresa Manning, the controversial official in charge of the Title X federal family planning program, was escorted from HHS premises on Friday.
Two sources with knowledge of Manning's departure tell POLITICO that she was fired by HHS. An HHS spokesperson disputed that account, saying that Manning resigned.
"HHS is very grateful for her service," the spokesperson said. "Her departure after resignation was not unusual in any way."
Manning could not be reached for comment.
Manning, who previously worked for anti-abortion groups including the Family Research Council and National Right to Life, had been serving as deputy assistant secretary for HHS' Office of Population Affairs. In that role, she was responsible for helping set national policy around family planning, contraception and teen pregnancy — a development that alarmed abortion-rights groups worried about Manning's history of statements and actions opposing birth control and abortion.
Manning stated in a 2003 public radio interview that "contraception doesn't work." She also has separately suggested a link between abortion and breast cancer, which has not been proven, and helped craft state legislation to limit access to abortion.
Manning's name was removed from OPA's leadership page on Friday night. She had been tapped in May 2017 to lead the office, which has been criticized by state officials in recent months. OPA's process to allow states to apply for family-planning grants is running more than two months behind schedule.
Valerie Huber, who had been serving as chief of staff for the HHS' assistant secretary of health, was named acting deputy assistant security of OPA. Huber is an advocate for abstinence education who joined HHS in June 2017.
A source with knowledge of Manning's dismissalsaid that staff were told toleave the floor of the HHS building and to take their computers, in order to ensure that no one witnessed her being escorted out.
That's right. "Morality is not a smorgasbord; you can’t pick what you want". These are the words of Tony Perkins, head honcho of the Family Research Council.
See, people must be told what they want. They must be led. The age old "Shepherd-Sheep" model seen in Christianity.
The Family Research Council are supporters of the Parental Rights Amendment, along with ALEC and a few other conservative religious extremists. This has nothing to do about children, it is about the industry of child welfare. It is about profiting off children. Usufruct.
These people have defined "family" as a married woman and man. Anything else is subject to a CPS action call. This, is the acquisition of goods: child removal. Remember, children need both parents
These are the ones who want to remove government from education, as I like to call it, the "Dumbing of America." Alexander the Great was the one who implemented the first public education model. Perhaps it is because of his sexual orientation that they want to end public education.
It does not matter. I was in the trenches with these people when they first started their assent to power. I know what I am talking about. This is child abuse propaganda, disguised at its finest.
Witness an entirely new landscape of child abuse propaganda: politics.
The profit opportunities will be shared by all, conservative, liberals, independents and those who just want to keep a roof over their heads. Making money off the week is a non-partisan, moral thang.
Yesterday Janet Mefferd hosted Family Research Council president Tony Perkins on her radio show, where Perkins tied last year’s repeal of the 'Don’t Ask Don’t Tell' rule in the military to the recent scandal involving Secret Service agents who solicited prostitutes in Colombia.
Perkins claimed that since the President Obama has been “enforcing open homosexuality in our military” then he should not have been “upset” about the prostitution scandal, maintaining that Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’s repeal led to “a total breakdown” in “moral order."
Perkins failed, once again, to mention that Congress repealed Don't Ask, Don''t Tell with the full support of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen.
Perkins said: "The same is true for what the President has done to the military enforcing open homosexuality in our military. You can change the law but you can’t change the moral law that’s behind it. You can change the positive law, the law that is created by man, but you can’t change the moral law, it’s wrong."
"So what you have is you have a total breakdown and you can’t pick and choose. Morality is not a smorgasbord; you can’t pick what you want. I think you’re absolutely right, this is a fundamental issue going forward because if we say ‘let them do what we want,’ what’s next? You cannot maintain moral order if you are willing to allow a few things to slide."
