Tuesday, October 27, 2020

Children in Cages vs. Unborn Children


Stop Separating Immigrant Families Press Conference and Rally Chicago Illinois 6-5-18 1943

"Stop Separating Immigrant Families Press Conference and Rally Chicago Illinois 6-5-18 1943" by www.cemillerphotography.com is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0

Many Americans are outraged at what they see as a brutal, inhuman policy.

These have typically been people who lean Left or Center.

Images of crying children being ripped apart from migrant caregivers has shocked a nation.

Parents and caregivers faced deportation to places they were fleeing.

"These children will be traumatized for life," many declare.

"Where are their parents?"

Others have justified this practice, claiming that children must be separated from criminals.

These have typically been those who lean Right.

They claim that separating these children will protect them from these criminals.

"We had to do it," initiators of this policy stated. "No matter how young."

"Prosecute their parents!"

According to them, these "caregivers" or "parents" were actually criminals in disguise.

For several years, our President has put in place a measure that he believes will serve as a deterrent to the illegal immigration he abhors. In the Obama years, I knew of the crisis of unaccompanied minors who were coming across America's borders. That was bad enough. Never have I heard of such a systemic separation of splitting up children, even babies, from parents and caregivers. I was, at first, puzzled and aghast that so few anti-abortion, pro-life leaders or religious Right leaders were speaking out about these horrors. I searched Facebook pages of pro-life leaders and found little. A handful of conservative and progressive pro-lifers have spoken out. A group of Catholics reportedly went to a bordering area and were arrested! One pro-life advocated stated that she and others had visited a bordering area. Outside of this, I do not recall much else from pro-life conservative leaders. 

I well remember a Tweet by a prominent pro-life activist. She tweeted about the reported family separation policy. Then she mentioned human traffickers and other child predators. Then she tweeted: "This is why we separate children." Someone tweeted an article about "fake parents" and the article justifies the family separation policy. At one point, First Lady Melania Trump had visited a bordering area. So far, so good! I was aghast and shocked at the footage that caught this statement on her jacket. It reportedly went something like: "I really don't care, do u??" Reportedly, her last words to the suffering children she was visiting were: "Be kind to each other." More recently, the once best friend of Melania Trump stated that Trump, like her President-husband, supports the family policy. I have been sad, disappointed, and angry, that so many on the Right, especially the Christian and pro-life community, have been largely silent on the Trump Administration family separation policy.

The Left and consistently pro-life leaders have been most vocal about this family separation policy. How can the Right and the Left behold the same stark reality, and view it so differently? How can people on the Right suggest that these distraught parents and caregivers were actually posing as such, while they actually were criminals? Why can't we pro-lifers affirm both the lives of the child in the womb and the child in a cage? How can these pro-lifers view moms who have had abortion as victims, but not those who have had their children torn from their arms and lives? How can anyone callously suggest that "at least" these children in cages are "better off" than they were in their homelands? Why would the President state at a recent debate, that the still caged children are being taken care of? Where is the plan to reunite those still separated from their parents or caregivers? But we cannot expect much more from a President, after all, who has said about hundreds of thousands of COVID dead Americans: "It is what it is." 

Sadly, the election outcome will not benefit both the unborn AND the children separated from their parents. Depending on  the outcome, one of these groups of children will have an advocate and the other group will continue to suffer oppression and death. This is just one example of the times that we are living in. We have so few leaders, political or religious, who are consistently pro-life. Donald Trump, of course, will likely never be any friend of migrant families, should he gain a second term. But the unborn child will still have an advocate. If Joe Biden wins the White House, migrant families will gain an advocate, But the unborn child will be totally ignored. So what is a consistently pro-life person to do? 

The lives of unborn children are sacred. The lives of the mothers who bear them are sacred. Any and all people who identify as pro-life and anti-abortion will declare these as facts and truths.. And the lives of migrant children separated from their parents or other caregivers are sacred. The lives of their parents or other caregivers are sacred. Yet I have not heard many people, who identify as pro-life and anti-abortion, affirm this. If some have, it seems not to have been with the same zeal and fervency of advocacy for the unborn child. Now I believe that this may be because direct killing may not be involved, as in the case of abortion. Yet what is done to families separated, legally or not, is nothing short of brutal and likely will result in lifelong trauma. Family separation may not result in literal, physical death. But it likely will kill the people these children could have become. It would crush the hopes and dreams of their families, leaving them will voids that cannot be filled by anything else. Many in the media and among the Left and Center have spoken out and continue to advocate. 

Christians and pro-lifers typically speak out for the vulnerable and the defenseless. Outside of the unborn, who are more defenseless than the migrant child and her parents or caregivers who are fleeing violence, persecution, or absolute poverty?

This is the most recent article about the current family separation policy. Read article. 

This is a comprehensive article about family separation. Read article.

This article provide many details about the family separation policy. Read article.

This article is about the First Lady's trip to a bordering region. Read article.

Top Justice officials were behind the development of the family separation policy. Read article.

This article contrasts and compares immigration policy in the Obama Administration vs. the Trump Administration. Read article.

Purchase SEPARATED, by Jacob Soboroff, a thorough book about this family separation. Purchase book.

Wednesday, October 21, 2020

Can Amy Coney Barrett Help Liberals?


This work is marked as being in the public domain. View this photo here.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had passed way. Right before the election.
This is the worst nightmare of many on the Left.
Donald Trump had nominated Justice Amy Coney Barrett to replace her. Right before the election.
The best dream of many on the Right.
Millions of Americans face evictions, unemployment, and poverty for the first time. Talks about COVID-19 stimulus/relief seem to stall.
This is the worst nightmare of most Americans.
A strongly conservative woman may be confirmed to the highest Court in the United States.
This is the worst nightmare of many on the Left.
This is the best dream of many on the Right.

As a person, Amy Coney Barrett is apparently an accomplished, brilliant, ethical, moral, and caring person. In my research, I have uncovered little negative information about Barrett as a person. Little exists for the Left to grab onto and use to successfully make a case against her confirmation, based on her character alone. Not a hint of scandal seems to attach to Barrett. She has seven children, including two whom she and her husband adopted from Haiti. According to my research, those in legal circles speak highly of Barrett, including former and current law students of hers. And she reportedly belongs to People of Praise, a networked Christian community where believers "do life together" and find many opportunities to live out their faith. I have included their website below.

Many on the Left fear Barrett and the implications of her confirmation. They see the rolling back of health care benefits, the overturning of what they call reproductive rights, undermining the right to vote and other civil rights. Yet evidence indicates that GOP Senators have the votes they need to confirm Barrett and seat her on the Supreme Court before Election 2020, which they clearly intend to do. I find the Senate GOP's campaign to rush Barrett's confirmation, while they denied Barack Obama's nominee, Merrick Garland, in 2016, supremely hypocritical. It is especially maddening, since the GOP argued in 2016 against Garland's confirmation for the same 

The confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett had already occurred. A Senate Judiciary vote for her confirmation is to occur this upcoming Thursday. I had watched much of the hearings. Not all. As a pro-life Democrat. I actually have mixed feelings about Barrett's nomination. I agree with her stance on abortion and the sanctity of life. On many other issues (as based on her past record), I do not agree. I'm talking about health care, voting rights, civil rights, climate change, immigration, and more. Like many others, I was dismayed and troubled that Barrett refused to take any position on even the President's current conduct, a position on a peaceful transfer of power, voter's rights, and more. Unless I misheard, I did hear her answer a Democratic Senator's question about health care. Did I hear her state support for the Affordable Care Act?

Many have called Amy Coney Barrett the Ruth Bader Ginsburg of the Right. And it would seem that she should be a symbol for feminists. After all, she exemplifies one who would, by feminist standards, "have it all" as far as having a career and motherhood go. However, most on the Left do not seem to view it that way. All they seem to see are her staunchly conservative views and their deep fear they she could rule against many cases they care passionately about. In her hearing, Barrett had stated that she would uphold the rule of law as it was written, not as she would like it to be written. But this has not reassured most of those on the Left.

The only Democrats that seem to support Amy Coney Barrett and her nomination are pro-life Democrats. That is for obvious reasons, largely because of her reported anti-abortion stance. The Democratic Leadership consider pro-life Democrats to be "Democrats in name only," however. I read an article by a pro-life Democrat about the liberal case for voting to confirm Barrett. Plausible as I found the article, it missed the point. It concedes the hypocrisy of the timing of these hearings, but sums up that Democrats should vote to confirm Barrett. I have no trouble with confirming Barrett to sit on the Court. Research tells me that she is qualified as far as professional experience goes. Her evasive answers in her hearings make her something of a wildcard as far as ruling on cases would go. Would she recuse herself if the 2020 Election is contested, and it would come before the Supreme Court? How would she rule on a case of gerrymandering or voter suppression? How would she rule on a case of police brutality? And so on and on. The article asserts that Barrett is not as conservative as claimed. The author is apparently trying to reassure the Left that Barrett is not the far Right enemy that most of them fear that she would be on the Supreme Court.

It is likely that Amy Coney Barrett will be confirmed. And it's likely that she will sit on the Supreme Court before the election in two weeks. Democrats are understandably embittered and angry at being cheated of two Supreme Court nominees and a likely third. Joining the GOP in confirming Barrett in a second "stolen seat," as is likely to happen, would be a bitter pill to swallow. That is what the pro-life Democrat who wrote the article recommends they do. 

Would it help liberals to see Barrett sit on the Supreme Court, tilting the Court even more to the Right than it already is? If you are talking about making abortion a bipartisan issue, the answer is yes. And that may be the point of the article. But what about other social justice issues like equal access to health care, racism, immigration, gun safety, voting rights, worker's rights, disability rights, and more? These social issues are exactly why the Left are fighting the confirmation of Barrett. Actually, I find a lopsided balance of power to either the Left or the Right as problematic. And this looks to be the scenario with Barrett's appointment. 

There is talk about the Left, if they attain a Senate Majority and a Biden win, doing "court packing" of their own. Actually, when asked if they would do this, they evade the question. "Wait to see how the confirmation unfolds," is their argument. What is "court packing"? It is when Congress and the President seek the alter the composition of the Court through adding seats. Some on the Left have called for this, depending how Court cases are ruled under a large Right majority. Should Democrats engage in such "court packing" acts? Though I have heard no one recommend it and it looks bad, it would achieve the balance the Court would need to best serve the people in this country. Of course, it depends on the outcome of this 2020 election. If Trump and Republicans win again in 2020, the question of what that Left should do won't matter. But if the opposite happens?

Whatever Democrats would do, I only hope and pray that they drop any abortion "litmus test" for justices or other appointees! Will her appointment compel liberals to do soul-searching about where they stand on abortion and why?

This is a detailed WIKIPEDIA page for Amy Coney Barrett.
According to this article, this mom of seven has endured vile attacks for having adopted two children from Haiti. Read article.
This is the website for People of Praise. It is the networked Christian community which Coney-Barrett reportedly belongs to. Visit website.
This is a detailed article about People of Praise. Read article.
According to this "Opinion" article, Joe Biden "materially misrepresented" Amy Coney Barrett about a statement she made about the Affordable Care Act in the past. It makes the case for liberals misunderstanding Barrett and the GOP about the Affordable Care Act. It links to the actual writing where Barrett had differed with Chief Justice John Roberts about the Affordable Care Act.. Read article.

Friday, October 16, 2020

Help Find Celina Janette Mays, Cold Case Missing Pregnant Pre-Teen Girl


  • Missing Since12/16/1996
  • Missing FromWillingboro, New Jersey
  • ClassificationEndangered Missing
  • SexFemale
  • RaceBiracial, Black, White
  • Date of Birth05/28/1984 (36 current age, as of 2020)
  • Age (at disappearance)12 years old
  • Height and Weight5'0, 120 pounds
  • Clothing/Jewelry Description (at disappearance)Possibly a long red coat.
  • Medical ConditionsCelina was nine months pregnant at the time of her 1996 disappearance. Her baby was due around December 29 of that year.
  • Distinguishing CharacteristicsBiracial (African-American/Caucasian) female. Black hair, brown eyes. Celina's eyebrows grow together. Some agencies state that she is Hispanic. Her hair was very long and wavy at the time of her disappearance. Some agencies spell Celina's middle name "Janet."

Celina was last seen at approximately 11:00 p.m. on December 15, 1996 when she went to bed at her aunt's residence on Crestview Drive in Willingboro, New Jersey.

Her father, C.J. Mays, checked her room the following morning and discovered that Celina was missing and pillows had been placed under her blankets in her bed to give the appearance that she was sleeping. There was no sign of Celina, who left her prenatal vitamins, purse and other personal belongings behind. She has never been heard from again.

Celina lived with her father, stepmother and several other relatives at the time of her 1996 disappearance. C.J. was employed as an accountant and bookkeeper for the Gospel of Christ Ministries Inc., based in Mount Holly, New Jersey. His sister, Cerita Smith, was pastor of the church and the Mays family raised Celina as a member.

Celina was home-schooled and grew up with strict religious beliefs from the organization. C.J. maintains that Celina did not leave her home because of problems with her religion.

The Gospel of Christ Ministries Inc. had numerous complaints from former members in the late 1990s who claimed that the church was utilizing brainwashing techniques on its congregation. It is not known if the allegations are connected to Celina's case, but Cerita has accused disgruntled ex-members of the church of hiding Celina.

C.J. believes that his daughter planned her disappearance, mainly because he threatened to have paternity tests performed to learn the identity of her unborn child's father. Officials said that C.J. was uncooperative in his Celina's disappearance; they have lost touch with him in the years since Celina vanished.

Another of Celina's relatives somewhat supports C.J.'s theory, telling the press that he believed she was murdered by the baby's father in order to prevent his identity from being revealed, or possibly she died as the result of an amateur abortion.

The baby's father, if he is ever identified, could be charged with rape due to the Celina's age at the time she became pregnant.

Authorities responded by announcing they have no information concerning Celina's child's father and statements made by others were purely speculation, although it has been rumored that one of Celina's cousins fathered her child.

He was interviewed several times by authorities after she disappeared, but denied any knowledge of Celina's whereabouts. The individual has fathered seven children by four different women, and is now an adult and married to the mother of four of his children.

Celina's aunt believes that the father of her baby was an individual she met while roller skating in Camden County, New Jersey.

Celina's mother, Lynn Marie Vitale, died of a brain aneurysm in 1994, two years before Celina disappeared. Vitale and C.J. never married and allegedly had a tumultuous relationship with some incidences of domestic violence. C.J. was a musician at the time he met Vitale, and admits that he had a drug and alcohol problem.

Vitale had been an exotic dancer and was addicted to drugs, but overcome her addiction before her death and got a job as a school custodian in Palmyra, New Jersey. Several of Vitale's family members fought a bitter custody battle over Celina with C.J. after Vitale's death. She lived with some of Vitale's friends before moving with her father.

Both sides of the family have accused the other of hiding Celina. Several of Celina's maternal relatives believe foul play was involved in her case. No evidence has been produced to support any of the theories.

Celina's obstetrician, whom she last saw two days before her disappearance, told officials that she never identified her baby's father. The obstetrician described Celina as an emotionally mature girl. She reportedly told her doctor that her boyfriend was 16 years old in 1996 and was not a member of her church.

There have been numerous unconfirmed sightings of Celina in the years since her disappearance. In the weeks immediately after her disappearance, she was supposedly seen in Lacey Township and Hopewell Township in New Jersey, but these have not been confirmed.

A business owner in Midland, Texas reported that one of his employees matched her description in 2000. Authorities determined that the young woman was not Celina shortly afterwards.

One of C.J.'s friends claimed to have seen her near Lions Mountain, New York later in 2000, but the incident was not confirmed. Investigators said that a woman who resembled Celina was captured on a security camera videotape near a Wawa store in Egg Harbor Township, New Jersey in December 2002. That sighting is being reviewed.

Celina has family members on her mother's side living in Michigan and Florida. Her mother left her a large life insurance policy, which she is now eligible to collect since she has turned eighteen. Investigators are calling Celina's case a missing persons case, not a homicide, and it remains unsolved.

If you have any information, please contact one of the following:

  • Willingboro Police Department:  1-609-877-2253
  • Burlington County Bridge Commission Police Department: 1-609-685-4391
  • National Center for Missing and Exploited Children: 1-800-843-5678
  NCMEC Number: 827787
  NamUS Number: MP6370
  Law Enforcement Number: 963520625
  NCIC Number:  M-986381735

 This is a YOUTUBE video for Celina Mays. Watch video.

 This is a lengthy MISSING CHILDREN WIKI prolife for Celina Mays. Read this profile.

 This is a CRAFTON MEGAN profile, with multiple links, for Celina Mays. Read profile.

 This is a 3 page WEBSLEUTHS profile for Celina Mays. Read forum.

 This is a short 2017 article about Celina Mays. Read article.

 This is a 1996 article about Celina Mays. Read article.

 This is a 1997 article about Celina Mays. Read article.

 This is a GINA Foundation for Missing Persons profile. The above third image is courtesy of this     profile. Read Profile.

 This is a National Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) poster for Celina Mays. View poster.

This is a NamUS profile for Celina Mays. The above top posters in ENGLISH and in SPANISH are courtesy of this profile. View profile.

This is a TAPATALK forum page for Celina Mays. Read forum.

The above information is taken from The Charley Project. I have adapted and remixed it. It is licensed under a Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution 2.0 License (CC BY-NC 2.0)

Sunday, October 11, 2020

A Prolife Democrat Reviews WHITE FRAGILITY by Robin Diangelo


WHITE FRAGILITY: WHY IT IS SO HARD FOR WHITE PEOPLE TO TALK ABOUT RACISM by Robin Diangelo, is an acclaimed New York Times bestseller. This book opens with five endorsements on the first pages. Michael Eric Dyson, a black scholar and Professor, has written a Forward to the book. Diangelo opens her content with an Author's Note and then her own Introduction. This author spreads her actual content throughout 12 chapters. She ends this volume with a bibliography, Acknowledgements, and Endnotes for each of the book's chapters, followed by an author bio. The author has served in higher education in multi-cultural studies. She has written many publications including WHAT IT MEANS TO BE WHITE and WHITE FRAGILITY. Diangelo wrote the latter based on an article.

This book was not written from a Christian perspective or anti-abortion point of view. But its subject, race relations and racism, definitely are sanctity of life issues. They are also social justice issues. The author's aim is to afflict the comfortable, in this case, white people. As a white person myself, I did not read this book to be entertained or soothed. Like many books about race, the author covers the social construct and concept of white privilege. And the author herself is white. White privilege is a hard concept to swallow, especially if you do not see yourself as a person of privilege. And I understand how and why many white people would bristle at the term "white privilege." But when we who are white do face life's hardships, we do not deal with them because of the color of our skin. If we are honest with ourselves, we can concede that whatever we have or will endure would or will likely be worse if we were also black or brown. Also, if you are white, you likely will not have to fear being attacked or killed by police or harassed in social situations because of your skin color.

I found it clarifying how the author defines racism. In WHITE FRAGILITY, I came to grasp that racism is structural, not just a character flaw. And we who are white participate in it virtually by default. According to the author, racism seems not to be a character flaw, but more a sociological construct, where we intuit white supremacy early in life; we who are white absorb the notion that we are better than blacks. We even unconsciously resent them when they succeed. Yes, I myself can remember when family members referred to blacks in racist terms. I cringe at some of my own childhood memories of some of the things I heard people in my life say--and at some things I have said. The term "white fragility" is, according to the author, a concept where white people are unwilling to concede that they are racist and react defensively when confronted about racism.  What I have trouble with are her statements that imply that silence is the only effective way to end white supremacy and foster racial reconciliation. I mean silence about how we ourselves feel about racism and white supremacy. The author includes a section about "White Tears" and how showing emotion about racism rubs black people the wrong way. Doesn't this stifle honest dialogue?

I recommend this book for all white people. Expect to be made uncomfortable in the reading. The author intends to "afflict comfortable" white readers and drive home the reality of white privilege. Often, the truth will make us uncomfortable. I particularly recommend this book for all white Christians and all white people in the pro-life movement. Every white pastor should read it. Every other white Christian leader ought to read it.

Sunday, October 4, 2020

Presidential Debate & Aftermath


Few people had much good to say about what millions of us saw Tuesday night, September 29, 2020. 

We saw only three people next week. Donald Trump. Joe Biden. Chris Wallace as Moderator. 

One Candidate, Donald Trump, spent much of the night interrupting, yelling, bullying and demeaning his opponent, Joe Biden, and Moderator Chris Wallace. He insulted Biden's deceased son, Beau, and his living son, Hunter. He proceeded to call on a white supremacist group to "Stand up and stand by." 

The other Candidate, Joe Biden, tried to get his points across. He tried to ignore Presidential insults and bullying. But at one point, he snaps, "Shut up, man. Just shut up."

The Moderator, Chris Wallace, could barely control this "debate." Reportedly, he stated afterwards: "I have never seen a debate like this one." 

Wednesday, I viewed many social media posts. Many indicated that people viewed the debate through a partisan lens. The Right focused on the time when Joe Biden responded when the President was bullying, interrupting and demeaning him with "Shut up, man." And they honed in on when he evaded a question about the Supreme Court. The Left focused on Donald Trump's countless violations of the debate format: yelling, insulting, demeaning, threatening, lying, and interrupting.

I was most disturbed by social media posts where many people simply viewed the "debate" as a simple disaster by BOTH Donald Trump and Joe Biden. According to multiple reports, undecided voters told journalists that they were turned off to BOTH Trump and Biden. One person referred to BOTH as "bozos" on her Facebook post. 

The disastrous debate that many of us viewed has done nothing to unite us as a country. In fact, it only has deepened our division. One person tweeted, "Donald Trump was not elected to be a nice guy." On Facebook, I passed along a meme that I have a dream that 2020 had never happened and where the meme said I wanted to go. 

On Thursday, I got an email notice by a Christian blogger that states that she is voting for Donald Trump. In her article, she cited that she strongly supports his "law and order" stance. She also declared that she was voting for him as "the most pro-life President that we have ever had."

I confess that our Divide has been getting to me. I found the "unsubscribe" link to the notice and clicked. Soon afterwards I felt guilty and tried to subscribe again to this blogger, but I was unable to. But I made a good-faith effort. 

                                             Photo by Deana Tsang. View photo here.

Friday I was getting started to do my daily "cardio" workout on my stationery bicycle. I promptly learned that President Trump and the First Lady, Melania Trump, had been diagnosed with COVID-19. 

Not only that, but other high-profile White House figures had also tested positive for COVID-19. 

This tragedy still has not brought Americans together. I saw tweets by those on the Right which flood the President and his family with words of support. Less often, I saw tweets by Independents and those on the Left who showed support and good wishes. 

When I saw the President's tweet about his and the First lady's diagnosis, I sent a gif saying "Sending Prayers. "

Joe Biden has showed nothing but support and grace since learning of the President's COVID-19 diagnosis. He tweeted his support. He reportedly pulled all negative ads against the President. However, the President's campaign has reportedly not returned the favor or pulled their negative ads against Biden down.

One person has tweeted: "Out of respect, Joe Biden should suspend his campaign and inject himself with COVID-19." 

The wounds have not healed. And I surely understand why. It is tough to wish a person well when they have done so much to destroy the country and the lives of many families and individuals. Currently, over 210,000 Americans have reportedly died of COVID-19. Many tweets indicate that people's wounds cause them to struggle to wish the President well or show him any support. One or two Twitter users blasted those on the Left who show ill will toward the President as "the lowest of the low." 

Yes, Jesus commands us to love our enemies and to pray for them. At a time like this, those who do not like or even detest the President are being tested on their level of grace and empathy for one whom many count as an enemy.

As things stand, now fighting COVID-19 has cast the President into the role of a sympathetic victim. He currently remains in the hospital. Reportedly, he is receiving the best of treatment. This is a tough time for all. It is a tough time for those on the Right because the man they support and admire is now in a position of weakness and need. It is a tough time for many of the rest of us because we must deal with our own feelings about a person who now has become the subject of love, support, and prayers; we know we should wish him well but that is tough when he has not wished many of us well.

There is so much going on now. Little is certain now. It is unclear how quickly this President will recover and how COVID-19 will affect him. It is uncertain what effect this will have on how he will govern. It is unclear what impact it all will have on his campaign or Joe Biden's. It is uncertain how all this will affect the election or its outcome.

It is certain that whoever becomes President on January 2021, Jesus is King. That is, if you are a Christian. 

None of us can argue that whatever the future, we are living in historic times.

Chris Wallace responded to the Tuesday night Presidential debate. Read article.

Never miss a post
Your email address:*
Please enter all required fields Click to hide
Correct invalid entries Click to hide