Ds Win: Senate Sex Trafficking Bill Will Pay for Abortions.

Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by evan courtney /Applications/Curio.app

Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by evan courtney /Applications/Curio.app

The United States Senate is finally going to vote on a bill they claim will help sex trafficking victims.

No monies will go to shelters for sex trafficking victims. All the $$ will go to law enforcement and health care facilities.

What that means, is that sex trafficking victims can get their almighty abortions, but they will not have a place to sleep afterwards. Or, if they do have place to sleep, it will be provided by sources other than those in this bill.

The bill in question is the much-debated and long-delayed bill that would create a fund for sex trafficking victims from fines and other monies accrued by enforcement of existing sex trafficking laws. What victims may get out of the bill is more money for law enforcement to actually enforce existing laws.

That’s good news, since one of the things I’ve dealt with here in Oklahoma is a reluctance on the part of our state law enforcement agency (as opposed to local law enforcement, which has been much better) to follow the sex trafficking laws we’ve passed. They say that enforcing these laws would cost them too much money.

The monies in the bill slotted for health care will go through what amounts to a shell game of  transferring the money into one fund and then paying it out of another fund. That way, the money used to fund this bill will be “government” money rather than “private” money.

This is to avoid the appearance of using “private” monies, i.e. fines. This money will go to health care where it will be dispersed according to existing laws concerning abortion.

At this point, the debate gets a bit muddy, with both sides claiming victory. The Rs say that the shell game monies will be disbursed according to existing Hyde amendment restrictions, and the Ds say that they stopped an expansion of the Hyde Amendment into private monies. Both sides are doing a victory dance and engaging in mutual catcalling.

The truth is that existing health care monies, when they are disbursed at the state level, are used for abortions for just about any reason. The definitions are wide enough to allow medical practitioners to do any abortion at any time during pregnancy that they wish. If this bill puts these monies under existing law, the same thing will happen with them.

I had to pass a bill directly ending the practice of doing what were essentially elective abortions in state-funded hospitals in order to stop this in Oklahoma.  These abortions included what were essentially coerced abortions and abortions that were so late term that the babies survived and were then left to die.

What was needed to stop this was to use definitions that have kept pace with realities. Shifting monies from one fund to another was just a doo-dah the senators did with one another so that everybody could claim victory.

The bottom line: The Ds won and everybody, including both sides’ political backers, gets a fund-raising letter and a campaign speech out it. The bill will pay for abortions.

What it will not do is help sex trafficking victims get back on their feet and rejoin society. Law enforcement is not a social service agency. Their job is to enforce the law, not care for victims. If shelters are available, they are very relieved to place victims there. But if there are no shelters, the only option they have is to put the victims in prison.

The games that get played through the criminal justice process actually serve to create additional trauma for victims, who are often from outside this country and not only do not speak the language, they do not understand the society. The court process is often deeply damaging to rape victims who are American citizens. This damage is far worse for foreign nationals who have been brought here as slaves and subjected to long-term abuse, terror and repeated violations of their humanity by being sold over and over for sex use.

If some of this money ends up being used to provide protection for sex trafficking victims, that would be good. Traffickers have a lot of motivation to kill potential witnesses who can put them in prison. The only real protection these women have now is that they are hidden.

Medical care, while it’s necessary, is the smallest part of the equation to getting these women back on their feet. They need housing, clothing, food, counseling, spiritual help (It’s astonishing how many of them ask for a priest or preacher when they enter a shelter where they feel safe to do so.) and most of all, love. They need stability over a period of time. They also often need vocational training and help with employment.

The shelter I’m affiliated with makes a two-year commitment to each woman they take. This is really a minimum to get them on their feet again. It is absolutely necessary for their healing.

This bill isn’t going to do much to actually help trafficking victims. If it’s not properly monitored, the monies will never benefit a single victim, but will be poured out, like water on sand, into the larger budgets of the agencies to which it is going. The one thing we can know is that the Ds and the Rs have made sure that at least some of this money will go to the abortion industry.

I am disgusted to the core with people who put abortion ahead of women, and who Do. Not. Care. About. Women. except for to make sure they get abortions.

The feminist movement once proclaimed that women were more than their reproductive organs. When did they forget that?

Planned Parenthood: Providing Forced Abortions to Sex Traffickers

Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by Neon Tommy https://www.flickr.com/photos/neontommy/

Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by Neon Tommy https://www.flickr.com/photos/neontommy/

The subject was a bill stuck in the United States Senate that would help trafficking victims. The Ds are killing the bill because it contains a codicil that would stop monies in the legislation from being used for abortions.

I won’t go in to the conversation that post generated. You can see it here.

What I will do is raise a question. How can anyone who opposes sex trafficking support Planned Parenthood? I remarked to a pro choice person just recently that victims of sex trafficking are often subjected to forced abortions. What I got in response was a stubborn silence.

This didn’t surprise me. I learned long ago that those who want to use rape victims and victims of sex trafficking for propaganda purposes are not truly concerned about these victims. They are patronizing them, to score political points. They don’t know the truth of rape and sex trafficking, and they don’t want to know it.

I know that sex trafficking victims are subjected to forced abortions against their will because I sit on the board of directors of an agency that provides shelter, treatment and long-term rehabilitation to victims of sex trafficking. I am not guessing about this. These women are often victims of forced abortions in this country. This is often the worst and most deeply scarring thing that happens to them.

Where does the trafficker go for this service? It seems that they are free to go to your local Planned Parenthood.

The defense of Planned Parenthood in the next to last video raises a bogus complaint. Whatever positive services Planned Parenthood provides can be provided by many other organizations, including local health departments. We need to stop federal funding of Planned Parenthood. If we want to continue certain services they provide, all we have to do is send the money elsewhere.

Look at the videos below.

YouTube Preview Image YouTube Preview Image YouTube Preview Image YouTube Preview Image

Will the Stepford Congress Kill the Sex Trafficking Bill?

Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by Chuck Coker https://www.flickr.com/photos/caveman_92223/

Photo Source: Flickr Creative Commons by Chuck Coker https://www.flickr.com/photos/caveman_92223/

The boys and girls in DC are doing their doo-dah, once again.

It seems that Congress has labored and almost brought forth a bill. That in itself is newsworthy. Congress doesn’t make laws these days. It makes slander against anyone in the opposing political party that it can find to attack. By opposing party, I mean, of course, both of the political parties. Each political party is the opposing party to somebody.

It seemed for a moment in political time that this great American law-making body was actually going to make a law. They found something they could agree on enough to get enough of themselves to stop denouncing one another long enough to … ummm … actually do something that was part of the job they were elected to do.

Congress was poised on the tip of an actual vote on an actual bill. Americans everywhere held their breath. Would this Congress, long thought barren, bring forth a law?

Not, mind you, that it was much of a law. This particular bill would set up a fund for victims of sex trafficking. The monies to support this fund would come from fines that are paid by those who are convicted of sex trafficking. The money in the fund would be disbursed through grants to local law enforcement and non profits.

In other words, the law would not “protect” sex trafficking victims, as one headline I read stated. In fact, it would not do anything for sex trafficking victims in a direct fashion. But it would provide jobs for folks in the shiny new anti-sex trafficking industry, and some of them night help sex trafficking victims. Of course, the recipients of the grants would be subject to all sorts of politically correct stuff and nonsense, but that’s another post.

This bill is, as they say, a modest proposal. It is an especially modest response considering the horrific crime against humanity that it seeks to address. The real story here is that Congress actually came so close to passing a bill.

But, never fear my fellow Americans. Congress is not going to allow itself to break its losing streak by doing something. It seems that the Dems discovered that (Gasp!!!!) the bill does not allow these monies to be used to pay for abortions for victims of sex trafficking.

Now, we can not have that. Any piece of legislation that concerns “women’s issues,” which is to say any piece of legislation that involves sex, which as we all know, is a man’s delight and a woman’s “issue,” must have a codicil in it somewhere providing “access” for abortion. The reason for this is simple: All any woman needs, ever, is an abortion.

If a woman is kidnapped, raped, beaten, shut in a tiny room and only let out to be repeatedly sold so that she can be raped again and again and again, night after night, day after day. If she is sold across borders and put in “legal” brothels or put on the street and sold hand to hand, if she is told that if she resists, her family in her home country will be killed … if all this is done to her … why then, what she needs is an abortion.

I know something about this problem. I sit on the board of directors of a non-profit that rescues these women, often at great personal risk (people who will do all this, will kill anybody you know.) This organization provides a home environment, therapy, medical aid, education, clothing, and anything else these women need to help them rejoin humanity. Sometimes, the women are pregnant. When they have their babies, it’s a time of great rejoicing in the shelter. The babies are loved and the women are supported.

Odd as it may sound to the abortion-is-all-women-need crowd, when women are given the option of having their babies without paying a horrific price for doing so, when they are honored, respected and loved and their babies are honored, respected and loved, they want the children.

Many of the women we are talking about come from very traditional, conservative societies where children are valued. They value their maternity, when the people around them value it.

But I digress. Let’s return to the ugliness of Congress. It appears that this modest little piece of legislation is in big trouble.

The Democrats (or at least enough of them) are going into a you-can’t-pass-a-bill-about-women-without-promoting-abortion frenzy. They are willing to see the bill die rather than forego using it to fund abortion.

Because, you see, if help for women doesn’t include abortion, why then, it’s no help at all. Women need abortions. More than they need rescue, therapy, medical care (many of these women are horribly injured) freedom from slavery, legal aid, love, support and home, these women — like all women, everywhere — need abortions.

If the Ds can’t make sure that the sex trafficked ladies get their abortions, then they will protect them from having freedom, medical care, therapy, shelter, legal assistance, love, support and home forced on them. After all, without abortion, why would any of these things matter to a woman?

Just when it seemed that the Ds would take home the trophy for dereliction of duty for the week, the Rs jumped in. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced that, unless the Ds stop fighting the sex trafficking bill, he will not schedule a vote on the confirmation of Loretta Lynch, who is President Obama’s nominee for Attorney General.

Because, you see, refusing to do its job is how Congress gets its way, and its way is always about partisan fighting.

There is the possibility that public dismay might jog the Stepford Congress out of its partisan thrall. But that won’t happen unless public dismay convinces the people who own Congress that their investment is in danger. It’s more likely that this bill will go the way of the ban on abortions after 20-weeks.

These people campaigned on all sorts of issues, and that got our votes. But they were lying in all those campaign ads. They were sent there to do what they are doing, which is to position their parties to take over the White House in ’16 and allow their money backers to take control of the Imperial Presidency.

The Ds are fighting over money for abortion because that’s big campaign $$ to them. The Rs are blocking everything that Congress might do because, as any politician knows, it’s easier to sell the public on being against things than it is to explain why you’re for something. They don’t want to do anything because there is risk in doing things and that might hurt the chances of taking the White House in ’16.

That’s why this little bill almost came to a vote. It looked like such a win-win-win-win that everybody thought it would be good political fodder for themselves.

But then, abortion reared its ugly head, and Congress stopped itself from breaking its self-imposed losing streak just in the nick of time.

From the New York Times:

WASHINGTON — An amazing thing about Congress: Things can always get worse.

After several years of troubles with spending bills that were once routinely bipartisan, the Senate has now found a way to disagree on a bill that would protect victims of sex trafficking. And in the process, that dispute has ensnared President Obama’s largely uncontroversial nominee for attorney general, Loretta E. Lynch.

The latest impasse sweeps up five years of the lowlights of congressional dysfunction: abortion and immigration policy disputes, White House exasperation, garden-variety distrust, and mutual loathing between Democrats and Republicans.

“Life is really simple,” Senator Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada and minority leader, said on the Senate floor on Monday, attributing the sentiment to Confucius, “but we insist on making it complicated.”

The bill in question, sponsored by Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, is a modest measure with broad support in Congress that seeks to create a victims’ fund from fines collected from perpetrators of sex trafficking. A similar measure has passed the House and was expected to pass easily in the Senate.

But a provision in the Senate bill would prevent the fees from being used for abortions for the victims. Democrats say Republicans sneaked it into the bill. Republicans firmly deny the charge. And Democrats now say they will not vote for it unless the language is removed, something that Republicans decline to do.

In turn, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, has said he will not turn to the matter of confirming Ms. Lynch, Mr. Obama’s nominee to replace Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., until the sex trafficking bill gets off the floor. A procedural vote to move the bill forward was expected on Tuesday.

 

Vatican: Archbishop Kicked Out for Sex with Minors

 

It’s about time.

The Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of he Faith has ordered Archbishop Jozef Wesolowski to be stripped of the priesthood. This order came after a canonical trial.

According to an article from Reuters, the Holy See has indicated that “criminal proceedings by Vatican judicial authorities would begin once the sentence was confirmed. If found guilty in a criminal trial, Mr Wesolowski could risk extradition to the Dominican Republic.”

Mr Wesolowski is the former Vatican nuncio to the Dominican Republic. He is accused of child sexual abuse. This alleged abuse includes buying sex from minors while he was in the Dominican Republic and an unspecified connection with a Polish priest accused of sexually assaulting at least 14 underage boys.

He has two months to appeal this decision. Authorities in the Dominican Republic are investigating Mr Wesolowski, but have not filed charges against him.

According to Polskie Radio, “accusations against Mr Wesolowski went public when television footage appeared in which the nuncio was seen visiting areas in the capital known for child prostitution.”

It is interesting that child prostitution is so widespread and acknowledged in the Dominican Republic that local television knows where to go to photograph it in action. But it’s not a surprise. I would imagine that they could do the same thing here in Oklahoma City.

The Dominican Republic is well known as a sex tourism destination, as is New York. This is not something that is hidden. It is big, highly-publicized business. Dominican authorities only recently started to crack down on the practice. Gay sex tourism, including tourism aimed at sex with children, is rife throughout the area, including further south in Brazil.

I have personal knowledge of a woman who was kidnapped from her apartment in the Dominican Republic, brought to the United States and sold by sex traffickers. Her pimps used the threat that they would go back and kidnap, rape and sell her young daughter if she did not cooperate with them. This brave lady testified in court against her pimps, who are now in prison.

The thought that a Vatican Nuncio is participating in this human rights violation is, sad to say, not surprising. I’ve thought for a long time that the scandal the Church has endured because of the behavior of her prelates as regards child sex abuse was necessary. This behavior had to stop. It was as if the Holy Spirit said Enough!

The Church must be cleansed of this evil. It. Has. To. Stop.

I, for one, am glad that the Vatican has finally taken this action against a pedophile prelate.

I do not want to see innocent men persecuted because of false charges. That is why due process is so necessary. But when the charges are proven true, these men must be laicized and turned over to the authorities.

I want a priesthood of genuine Christians who wear that collar because they have given their lives to Christ. I want a priesthood I can be proud of.

That cannot happen in an institution that tolerates sexual depravity among its members.

Newly Professed Nuns and Brothers: Mature, Educated, Devout

Nuns and brothers who took their perpetual vows in 2012 are mature adults with work experience who come from Catholic families. 

That’s the basic result of a survey conducted by the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown University. 

The survey shows that today’s newly professed religious are well-educated, individuals who have had to overcome discouragement from others in seeking a vocation to religious life. 

One thing that interested me is that age appears to be no impediment for many of these people, since the oldest woman was 66 at the time she professed her perpetual vows and two of the men were over 60. I had always heard that no one who was over 40 could enter religious life. It appears I was wrong.

I think this is great news for people who have come to know Jesus later in life and who feel the call to live out their days as vowed members of a religious community. It is particularly important for women.

In a world where the enslavement and trafficking of women and children is growing apace with rape as an instrument of war and the use of child soldiers, the voice of strong Christian women is badly needed.

The Church needs nuns.

There is a female viewpoint that must be present when dealing with crimes against women and children. Also, many times, women are the only ones who can gain the trust and cooperation of severely victimized people. 

I pray for women religious to step up to this challenge. They are so needed. 

Here are a few facts from the survey that stood out to me. You can read the entire survey here.

The average age of newly professed women is 40, while the average of men is 39. Eighty-give percent of the respondents are cradle Catholics. Seventy-eight percent come from families in which both parents are Catholic. Ninety-six percent of them have at least one brother or sister; 45% have four or more siblings.

This is a highly educated group of people. Twenty-two percent have a graduate level degree with 60% having a bachelor’s degree. Eight-two percent of them had worked before entering religious life. Eighty-eight percent had participated in ministry activities before entering and 95% had regularly participated in private prayer activity. Sixty-nine percent had participated in Eucharistic Adoration.

Seventy-four percent of the respondents said that they were discouraged from entering religious life by one of more persons. Women were more likely than men to report that they had encountered discouragement about considering a vocation. Men were more likely than the women to be encouraged by their parish priests to think of religious life as a life’s vocation.

The youngest sister or nun was 23 at the time of her profession, while the oldest was 66 years of age. Eight women professed perpetual vows at age 60 or older. The youngest brother was 25 and the oldest is 62. Two of the men are age 60 or older.

Don’t Take Government Money. Don’t Kiss Caesar’s Ring

“Do not take government money.” 

I have said this to every religious ministry who has given me a venue to speak ever since I came back to public office in 2002.

The only people who give you free money are people who love you, like your parents. The government does not love anybody.

Government money hooks you into government policies, including those that are anathema to you. Religious groups that take government money — and it does not matter which party is in power — will eventually face the requirement that they bend their knee to Caesar and kiss his ring.

I’ve seen leaders of whole Protestant denominations abandon things they have fought for like pro life in response to political pressure.

I remember a few years back reading that national Catholic Charities had received a huge grant from the federal Health and Human Services Department.

I was appalled.

I knew that this money would lead to demands that the Church compromise its teachings. Based on what I’d seen Protestant groups do, I assumed that the Catholic Church would accede to these demands. I thought the money would buy the Church’s moral and prophetic voice, the way I’d seen it buy other religious voices.

I knew that you can not be true to Christ and take government money. You. Can. Not. Do. It.

You can not be an authentic Christian leader and toady to secular power. You. Can. Not. Do. It.

I wrote a post Saturday in which I talked about our personal allegiances; our friendships. I said that sooner or later, you have to chose. You cannot maintain deep intimate friendships with anti-God people and follow Jesus. You have to chose.

This is a parallel post addressed to religious leaders. My point is the same. You cannot base your efforts to bring the Kingdom of God on politics and supporting politicians and political parties. You cannot follow a political party and follow Christ.

You have to chose, and I don’t mean sooner or later when the politically powerful rub your nose in the fact that you “belong” to them and demand that you abandon your beliefs for them. I mean from day one. You cannot bend the Gospels to fit the platforms and the behaviors of either political party and preach Christ.

You will either preach politics.

Or you will preach Christ.

But you cannot do both.

Many Catholic priests are just as guilty as their Protestant brethren of bending the Gospels to suit their politics. You find both Republican and Democrat apologists in their ranks.

They will spout Canon Law and attack good people who oppose the death penalty because, somehow, that isn’t being “pro life” enough about abortion. Not, mind you, that the people they attack support abortion, but that they aren’t focused on it to the exclusion of every other possible sin. Others will try to make us believe that ignoring abortion is the necessary price for concern for the poor.

This is bending the Gospels so they don’t discomfit the politics of one political party or the other. It is not preaching Christ. Both types of priest lead people astray from following Christ and teach them to follow politicians, instead.

The Church itself, however, has been amazingly faithful.

It didn’t take long for what went around to come back around concerning those federal grants. Before you could say three Hail Marys, the Church was embroiled in lawsuits and broadsides, demanding that it refer the women it was helping for abortions or lose the money.

“While the Catholic bishops were entitled to their beliefs, freedom of religion does not mean imposing religious doctrines on others with the use of taxpayer dollars,” said Sarah Wunsch, an ACLU staff attorney.

She was referring to a lawsuit to end a federal grant to Catholic Charities for work aiding victims of human trafficking. A few months after this lawsuit, the federal Department of Health and Human Services revised its guidelines for human trafficking grants to require all recipients to refer for abortion.

The Church could have done as so many others have and simply “wink-winked” its way through this. All it would take was a 3×5 card listing “abortion providers” tucked, ever so casually, into a pile of intake forms. Just touch your lips to the ring. It will be over quickly, and it won’t hurt for long.

Besides, “it was the law.”

That’s what the Church could have done. It’s what everyone else has done. It was the wide and easy way.


I’m sure the government coffers would have opened and rained down gold on the Bishop’s heads if they had just done this. It would have been money, money, money for whatever they wanted.

But they said no. They took the narrow road, the hard way.

The price is that the federal government is now attacking the Church with broadsides like the HHS Mandate.

There is nothing in the Gospels that says you must first acquire a government grant to help the least of these. Following Christ’s teachings means, among other things, that the Church must reach out to people like victims of human trafficking, regardless of what the government wants or does.

The Church has responded to this situation with a new ministry called Amistad.

“We lost a contract, but we’ve not gone away,” said Nathalie Lummert, special-programs director at the USCCB’s Office of Migrant and Refugee Services (MRS). “We’re taking a decade of experience and now are rolling out a new program that brings communities directly into the fight against human trafficking.”

I am so proud of my church for standing for the Gospels in the face of the federal government. I am just as proud of them for their concern for trafficked women and children.

The fact that the Catholic Church refuses to kiss Caesar’s ring on the one hand, or abandon the least of these on the other is, in my opinion, the single best hope we have.

A National Catholic Register Article concerning Amistad says in part:

WASHINGTON — A new innovative weapon in the fight against human trafficking and sex slavery is coming this year from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, more than a year after abortion politics led the Obama administration to kill federal funding for the Church’s top-rated outreach effort.

“We lost a contract, but we’ve not gone away,” said Nathalie Lummert, special-programs director at the USCCB’s Office of Migrant and Refugee Services (MRS). “We’re taking a decade of experience and now are rolling out a new program that brings communities directly into the fight against human trafficking.”

The new initiative of the U.S. bishops’ Anti-Trafficking Program is “The Amistad Movement,” an MRS program that puts the USCCB back in the fight against human trafficking in a major way.

Until 2011, the USCCB had directed a highly regarded, $15-million anti-trafficking program that networked victims with services offered by local interfaith groups, including the Salvation Army, Catholic Charities and Jewish Family Services, as well as secular nonprofits.

The USCCB program came to a sudden halt, however, when the Department of Health and Human Services announced that “strong preference” would be given to groups that would refer all victims to family-planning services, including “the full range of legally permissible gynecological and obstetric care.” A Washington Post investigation revealed senior HHS political appointees threw out the strong recommendations of an independent review board to renew the USCCB’s contract and disqualified the USCCB over its refusal to reimburse groups that referred victims for abortion and birth-control services.

Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/u.s.-bishops-bring-new-weapon-to-human-trafficking-fight?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NCRegisterDailyBlog+National+Catholic+Register#When:2013-01-28%2007:05:01#ixzz2JIFe2mvP


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X