Hungary Destroys All Monsanto GMO Corn Fields

Hungary has taken a bold stand against biotech giant Monsanto and genetic modification by destroying 1000 acres of maize found to have been grown with genetically modified seeds, according to Hungary deputy state secretary of the Ministry of Rural Development Lajos Bognar. Unlike many European Union countries, Hungary is a nation where genetically modified (GM) seeds are banned. In a similar stance against GM ingredients, Peru has also passed a 10 year ban on GM foods.

Planetsave reports:

Almost 1000 acres of maize found to have been ground with genetically modified seeds have been destroyed throughout Hungary, deputy state secretary of the Ministry of Rural Development Lajos Bognar said. The GMO maize has been ploughed under, said Lajos Bognar, but pollen has not spread from the maize, he added.

Unlike several EU members, GMO seeds are banned in Hungary. The checks will continue despite the fact that seek traders are obliged to make sure that their products are GMO free, Bognar said.

During the investigation, controllers have found Pioneer Monsanto products among the seeds planted.

The free movement of goods within the EU means that authorities will not investigate how the seeds arrived in Hungary, but they will check where the goods can be found, Bognar said. Regional public radio reported that the two biggest international seed producing companies are affected in the matter and GMO seeds could have been sown on up to the thousands of hectares in the country. Most of the local farmers have complained since they just discovered they were using GMO seeds.

With season already under way, it is too late to sow new seeds, so this year’s harvest has been lost.

And to make things even worse for the farmers, the company that distributed the seeds in Baranya county is under liquidation. Therefore, if any compensation is paid by the international seed producers, the money will be paid primarily to that company’s creditors, rather than the farmers.

Source: Exposing the Truth One UE at at Time

Related:

Monsanto: A Horrifying Picture that Will Freeze the Blood in Your Veins – Updated

Dow and Monsanto Team Up on the Mother of All Herbicide Marketing Plans

America’s farmlands to be carpet-bombed with Vietnam-ear Agent Orange chemical if Dow petition approved

Are You Eating, Drinking and Breathing Monsanto’s New ‘Agent Orange’?

Monsanto Battle Continues After Suing Midwest Farmers for Saving Seeds

GM Foods Not Served in Monsanto Cafeteria

Would You Vote for a Food Bill Monsanto Supports?

George Soros and Food Safety

PDF File
Liar, Liar: FDA Secrets, Scandals & Slip Ups!

Dumbing Down Society Part 1: Foods, Beverages, and Meds (Media and Education)

Senate Bill S.510 Passed… Quickly Explained Here

UPDATED:

President Obama appointed former Monsanto vice president and lobbyist Michael Taylor as senior advisor to the Food and Drug Administration commissioner.

This is a classic example of the fox guarding the henhouse. President Obama should isolate the FDA from corporate influence by asking Taylor to step down immediately.

That's why I created a petition to President Obama on SignOn.org. Click here to add your name, and then pass it along to your friends:

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=269891&id=35461-19004089-AN_n6Yx&t=2

The petition says:

President Obama, I oppose your appointment of Michael Taylor, a former VP and lobbyist for Monsanto, the widely criticized genetically modified (GM) food multinational, as senior advisor to the commissioner at the FDA. Taylor is the same person who as a high ranking official at the FDA in the 1990s promoted allowing genetically modified organisms into the U.S. food supply without undergoing a single test to determine their safety or risks. This is a travesty.

Taylor was in charge of policy for Monsanto's now-discredited GM bovine growth hormone (rBGH), which is opposed by many medical and hospital organizations. It was Michael Taylor who pursued a policy that milk from rBGH-treated cows should not be labeled with disclosures. Michael Taylor and Monsanto do not belong in our government.

President Obama, Monsanto has been seen as a foe to family-based agriculture, the backbone of America, by introducing dangerous changes to plants and animals and by using strong-arm legal tactics against farmers for decades. Naturally occurring plant and animal species are permanently threatened by the introduction of DNA and hormonal modification, Monsanto's core businesses.

FDA scientists once regarded genetic modification of the food supply as the single most radical and potentially dangerous threat to public health in history. As early as the 1991, a body of scientific research began to form which now includes articles in over 600 journals. As a whole, these offer scientific evidence that GM foods, hormones, and related pesticides are the root cause for the increase of many serious diseases in the U.S. Since GM foods were introduced, diagnosis of multiple chronic illnesses in the U.S. has skyrocketed. These illnesses include changes in major organs and in hormonal, immune, digestive, and reproductive systems. These modifications to foods and food production may also be contributors to colon, breast, lymphatic, and prostate cancers.

Experts are discouraged that regulators and GM companies systematically overlook potential side effects of GM. Monsanto's objective to use biotechnology to change the world's food supply is the opposite policy direction your administration should pursue. Your legacy of supporting Monsanto to have free rein in U.S. food policy is a nightmare scenario that is against the interest of all Americans and world citizens.

Will you sign the petition? Click here to add your name, and then pass it along to your friends:

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=269891&id=35461-19004089-AN_n6Yx&t=3

What is the real purpose of birth control? Why is all of this so important to progressives?

With all that's going on with the Catholic Church and the President right now, this has become a huge hot button topic. But why is this so important to progressives? Rush Limbaugh keeps saying that "abortion is the sacrament of liberalism." What makes this so? Let's ask Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, In her book "Women and the New Race", Sanger explains the purpose of birth control:(Page 229)

Birth control itself, often denounced as a violation of natural law, is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives. So, in compliance with nature’s working plan, we must permit womanhood its full development before we can expect of it efficient motherhood. If we are to make racial progress, this development of womanhood must precede motherhood in every individual woman. Then and then only can the mother cease to be an incubator and be a mother indeed. Then only can she transmit to her sons and daughters the qualities which make strong individuals and, collectively, a strong race.

Ok, now it makes sense. Birth control is the sacrament of eugenics.

h/t to ProgressingAmerica – http://tinyurl.com/727ter6 and to AJ

It is time that people themselves read the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) and demand that their Congressman and Senators read it and work to repeal and replace it.

If for no other reason… A vote for any of the 4-GOP candidates, whoever becomes the nominee, will guarantee the repeal and replacement of ObamaCare and removal of the government from our HealthCare! A vote for Obama is a vote for socialized medicine, rationing and a long list of surprises yet to come. 2012 will be the last chance to get rid of ObamaCare because of the way its tentacles will spread.

Jack Lew appeared on Fox with Chris Wallace this morning and said there would be no additional compromise on the mandatory birth control mandate… “We have set out our policy” said Lew.

WALLACE: You say it’s consistent. The Catholic bishops are clearly not satisfied with it — if I may, sir. They have issued a statement that says that they view the decision by the president, the revision, with grave moral concern.

Let’s put up their statement on the screen.

“Today’s proposal involves needless government intrusion in the internal governance of religious institutions, and to threaten government coercion — government coercion of religious people and groups to violate their most deeply held convictions.”

And, sir, they call on Congress to block the president’s policy.

LEW: No, I think the president’s policy does not do that. It does not force an institution that has religious principle to offer or may for benefits they find objectionable. But it guarantees a woman’s right to access. We think that’s the right solution.

There are others who opposed women’s access to contraception. They have different views than we do. I’m not going to speak to the motives of any of the parties. But it’s quite significant that a range of Catholic organizations has embraced this.

We didn’t expect to get universal support of the bishops or all Catholics. I think that what we have here is a policy that reflects bringing together two very important principles in a way that’s true to the American tradition. And that’s what the president is trying to do.

There are others who want to have a clash over it. We want to bring these two principles together.

WALLACE: But you say you’re not going to get universal support. There are others — this is the conference of Catholic bishops. This is the most powerful statement by the Catholic Church in this country. They deal with grave moral concern and they say it should be turned around.

LEW: I can’t speak to the differences within the Catholic Church.

WALLACE: How do you respond to their statement that this government coercion?

LEW: I would point to the statement put out by the Catholic Health Association, which knows a fair amount about what it requires to health care in this country. They thought this was a very good solution. They understand what the policy is.

WALLACE: So, the bishops –

(CROSSTALK)

LEW: I think our policy is the right policy. I think that there’s broad support, but they’re not universal support for it. And we think this is right way to go.

WALLACE: So, you’re not going to change despite what the bishops say.

LEW: Our policy is clear.

WALLACE: Your policy is clear. Meaning, no revisions to the revisions?

LEW: We have set out our policy.

WALLACE: And that’s it?

LEW: We’re going to finalize it in the final rules. But I think what the president announced on Friday is a balanced approach that meets the concerns raised both in terms of access to health care and in terms of protecting religious liberties. And, you know, we think that that’s the right approach.

WALLACE: Mr. Lew, I think it’s fair to say this is precisely why so many people and I understand, you can argue whether it’s the majority or minority — but why so many people are opposed to Obamacare, because they are concerned with the idea that the government can mandate what people have to do, what private businesses have to do, what even religious institutions have to do.

LEW: I think the notion that this is about should we provide basic health care to all Americans is not the issue. You know, there are differences to whether or not the Affordable Care Act is the right approach. We think providing coverage to tens of millions of Americans and making sure that we have a health care system that provides the kind of care that people need that will help drive down the cost of health care in this country is a very important thing.

This is — this question of the impact on religious institutions is something we took very seriously right from the start. That’s why when the policy was announced; we said it would take 13 months to transition it in a way that would be respectful of those differences.

So, I think we’ve addressed that. I think that this concern is one that people can disagree, you know, on the margins about. But we have addressed the core issue — no institution that has, non-profit institution that has religious principles that we violated has to pay for or directly offer these services. But women have access to the kinds of care that they are entitled to.

We think that’s the right approach.

· Obama administration struggles to contain uproar over birth … – Since this piece was written the AG’s of 12 states have joined the suit being prepared and expected additional states of join the fight.

· U.S. News – Catholic TV network sues US over birth control mandate

Related:

Updated: 5-Reasons Obama Is Losing the Contraception Mandate Battle… But Could be Winning the Power Grab Mandate War

Let us not forget who is behind this bill… Here is Ultra Left Wing HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ Spin (Remember, Sebilius was an ardent supporter of murdered partial birth abortionist, Tiller and her extreme record on abortion has sadly been ignored (or hidden) by the media.)

Senator Rand Paul stood-up and blasted the HHS mandate as ‘authoritarian’ and ‘totalitarian; “Gloves are off”, he said!

Rubio Crushes Obama and His Contraceptive Mandate At CPAC; says it is a Constitutional issue!

Timing of War Over ObamaCare Mandatory Birth Control Payments… God’s Answer to Prayers for Intervention?

ObamaCare… Hits, Misses and Perhaps a Look into the Future

Bilderberger Bill Gates Confirms Population Reduction Through Vaccination on CNN… a Concept He Has Been Found to Promote Many Times Before…

Cross-Posted at Ask Marion the Daily Thought Pad to Knowledge Creates Power and to True Health Is True Wealth!! at 2/11/2012 10:59:00 PM

Updated: 5-Reasons Obama is Losing the Contraceptive Mandate Battle... But Could be Winning the Power Grab Mandate War

(If you are not up on this issue… follow the thread here from the bottom up)

Update: Religious organizations are already saying that the Obama’s announced compromise is hollow. Catholic Bishops and other religious organizations are moving forward with their protests. The political fallout from this issue could be huge in the 2012 Election among religious groups and Independents. Remember Obama carried the Catholic vote in 2008.

But in reality:  Obama Didn't Cave on the HHS Mandate; He's Making an Unprecedented Power Grab and this is why, if people realize, this could be Obama’s Waterloo!  And if not, we are in big trouble!!

Don't Be Deceived! Evil Obama Policy Now Even MORE Evil! 

Attention, Catholics, Protestants, and everyone who cares about the causes of life, religious freedom, and freedom of conscience!

Do not be suckered by the “accommodation” announced today by President Obama and spokeswoman Kathleen Sebelius!

*Here is Ultra Left Wing HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ Spin (Remember, Sebilius was an ardent supporter of murdered partial birth abortionist, Tiller and her extreme record on abortion has sadly been ignored (or hidden) by the media.)

Under the guise of making room for religious conscience, the President has actually made the policy worse—far worse.

Here’s how . . .

RUSH: Everybody's reporting that Obama's caving on this mandate that the Catholic services provide abortion and all. There's not a cave here! There may be an accommodation, but there's no big cave-in here. It's still the government mandating this stuff happen. They're just changing the provider. It's not done by the church. He says he gave them a way out of it by mandating the insurance companies do it, but that's not the point here.

Snip

So everywhere I'm reading that Obama is caving on the mandate in Obamacare that Catholic churches -- well, not churches, but the schools and hospitals are mandated to provide contraceptives and abortion-related services that they religiously disagree with. "What's happened here is that Obama's caved! He has seen, he has heard, and now he's gonna shift that burden to the insurance companies!"

Snip

Obama is not doing what he's doing to make Barbara Boxer happy or the pro-abortion crowd happy or the Democrat Senate Caucus happy. He knows that's gonna happen. What he's doing is violating the Constitution. He is coalescing extra-constitutional power. He is making a power grab here that is unprecedented in the history of the presidency. (interruption)

Thomas Edsall, that's right. Thomas Edsall wrote that piece in the Nuev Orc Times, former Washington Post columnist. So I don't think... This has been my if you then argument with the Republican establishment from the get-go with Obama. I don't think this is traditional politics at all. I don't think traditional politics has anything to do with why Obama's doing this. This is about fundamentally transforming this country from a representative republic to a pure, straight democracy with the president assuming he's the majority and therefore can do whatever he wants to do. We're not dealing with the average, "Okay, the Democrats won the White House. They're gonna have it for four or eight years. We gotta try to stop 'em however we can and we'll get power back."

There's something unprecedented going on here.

Woodrow Wilson dreamed of this.

FDR dreamed of this.

Obama is doing this.

The White House will force insurance companies to offer the drugs free of charge to all women!!!

by order and proclamation of...

BREAKING: Pro-life leaders slam White House ‘compromise’ on birth control mandate

They're Using Insurance for Communism' Ann Coulter Rocks CPAC

· Obama Didn't Cave on the HHS Mandate; He's Making an Unprecedented Power Grab

Friday, February 10, 2012 2:13:55 PM · by Kaslin · 13 replies  -  Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | February 10, 2012 | Rush Limbaugh

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT RUSH: Everybody's reporting that Obama's caving on this mandate that the Catholic services provide abortion and all. There's not a cave here! There may be an accommodation, but there's no big cave-in here. It's still the government mandating this stuff happen. They're just changing the provider. It's not done by the church. He says he gave them a way out of it by mandating the insurance companies do it, but that's not the point here. Great to have you. It's Friday. Let's go to! JOHNNY DONOVAN: Live from the Left Coast at our satellite studios in Los Angeles,...

· BREAKING: Pro-life leaders slam White House ‘compromise’ on birth control mandate  -  Friday, February 10, 2012 1:28:01 PM · by unique1 · 50 replies

Lifesitenews.com ^ | Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:32 EST | Kathleen Gilbert

WASHINGTON, February 10, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The White House announced today that, instead of forcing religious employers to pay for birth control, it will force insurance companies to offer the drugs free of charge to all women, no matter where they work. The plan, touted as a concession to freedom of religion and conscience, was immediately denounced by pro-life Rep. Chris Smith. “The so-called new policy is the discredited old policy, dressed up to look like something else,. said Smith. .It remains a serious violation of religious freedom. Only the most naï or gullible would accept this as a change...

· Contraceptive “compromise” worse than original mandate: Eliminates any exceptions

Friday, February 10, 2012 1:36:19 PM · by Qbert · 14 replies  -  Jill Stanek.com ^ | 2/10/2012 | Jill Stanek

UPDATE, 12:14p: More evidence the “compromise” stinks: Planned Parenthood likes it. UPDATE, 12:02p: From a House source: This “new policy” is a distinction without a difference.  The services the religious organization opposes won’t be listed in the contract, but the insurance companies will give it the employees anyway.  Insurance companies will justify providing the coverage that the religious charity opposes by swearing that birth control coverage doesn’t actually cost anything because it’s cheaper than pregnancy services, so it’s just a free perk. The administration will argue that people of faith should be fine with this arrangement, because they can tell...

Health insurers question Obama birth control plan

Friday, February 10, 2012 5:39:10 PM · by Oldeconomybuyer · 1 replies - Reuters ^ | February 10, 2012 | By Lewis Krauskopf

(Reuters) - U.S. health insurers said on Friday they feared President Barack Obama had set a new precedent by making them responsible for providing free birth control to employees of religious groups as he sought to defuse an election-year landmine. "We are concerned about the precedent this proposed rule would set," said Robert Zirkelbach, spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans, the industry's trade group. "As we learn more about how this rule would be operationalized, we will provide comments through the regulatory process." Zirkelbach said insurers "have long offered contraceptive coverage to employers as part of comprehensive, preventive benefits that...

Obama Still Poised to Takeover Churches and Eliminate First Amendment

With regards to government intervention into religion, the First Amendment to the US Constitution states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” First, Congress is the Constitutional body that has the authority to make laws for the United States of America. Second, it is to steer clear of anything pertaining to freedom of religion.

Obama's Big Compromise With The Catholic Church Is An Accounting Trick Catholics can't pay for it: morally it isn't much different than paying a Quaker in hand-grenades. The Church can't directly subsidize sin without being guilty… Read HERE

Pro-Abortion Planned Parenthood And NARAL Come Out In Support of Obama’s Contraception “Compromise,” Catholic Bishops Already Shot It Down… – You know this is bad!!

Let us all ask ourselves  again… Was the Timing of War Over ObamaCare Mandatory Birth Control Payments… God’s Answer to Prayers for Intervention? and let us not forget that a compromise now does not mean there is a change of ideology in the White House that will continue without compromise if Obama is re-elected.

AP Source Now Says Obama to Compromise

WASHINGTON (The Blaze/AP) — The Blaze has covered the religious freedom issues surrounding the Obama administration’s contraceptive mandate extensively. President Barack Obama will announce a plan to accommodate religious employers outraged by a rule that would require them to cover birth control for women free of charge, according to a person familiar with the decision.

(Related: 5 Reasons the Obama Admin May Be Losing the Contraceptive Mandate Battle – See Posted Below)

Obama was expected to make the announcement at the White House Friday. ABC has more regarding what sources are saying the president is poised to present:

The move, based on state models, will almost certainly not satisfy bishops and other religious leaders since it will preserve the goal of women employees having their birth control fully covered by health insurance. [...]

One source familiar with the decision described the accommodation as “Hawaii-plus,” insisting that it’s better than the Hawaii plan — for both sides.

In Hawaii the employer is responsible for referring employees to places where they can obtain the contraception; Catholic leaders call that material cooperation with evil. But what the White House will likely announce later today is that the relationship between the religious employer and the insurance company will not need to have any component involving contraception.

CBS News corroborates:

The exact nature of the clarification remains unclear, but any accommodation could largely follow what exists in a majority of states, like in Illinois where DePaul University, the largest Catholic university in the country, offers an employee health plan that does cover contraception. Georgetown University offers a similar plan.

The shift is aimed at containing the political firestorm that erupted after Obama announced in January that religious-affiliated employers had to cover birth control as preventative care for women. Churches and houses of worship were exempt, but all other affiliated organizations were ordered to comply by Aug. 2013.

Video: A Compromise on Contraception 

Republican leaders and religious groups, especially Roman Catholics, responded with intense outrage, saying the requirement would force them to violate church teachings and long-held beliefs against contraception.

The issue also pushed social issues to the forefront in an election year that had been dominated by the economy. Abortion, contraception and any of the requirements of Obama‘s health care overhaul law have the potential to galvanize the Republicans’ conservative base, critical to voter turnout in the presidential and congressional races.

Republicans vowed to reverse the president’s policy, with House Speaker John Boehner accusing the administration of violating First Amendment rights and undermining some of the country’s most vital institutions, such as Catholic charities, schools and hospitals.

The measure also sparked an internal debate at the White House. Vice President Joe Biden, then-chief of staff Bill Daley and deputy national security adviser Denis McDonough, all Catholics, raised concerns about how the administration proceeded on the policy. On the other side, senior White House advisers Nancy-Ann DeParle, Pete Rouse and David Plouffe argued for the need to ensure coverage for all without exception, as a matter of women’s health and fairness.

'>'>'>Stephanie Cutter on CNN

The person with knowledge of Obama’s decision requested anonymity in order to speak in advance of the official announcement.

This is a breaking news story. Stay tuned for updates.

5 Reasons the Obama Admin May Be Losing the Contraceptive Mandate Battle

The Obama administration clearly underestimated the response it would receive from Catholics and non-Catholics, alike, after implementing a universal mandate on health plans that requires coverage of contraceptives, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs.

As the Blaze has extensively documented, the response has been swift and hard-hitting. Many liberals who traditionally support these options for women have been jumping ship to side with Catholic leadership in agreement that the administration has overstepped its bounds — an event that so rarely happens in theological and political circles.

But it’s important to note that, despite very boisterous outcries, Obama does have support from some liberals on this issue; many of them are pointing to the fact that nearly all Catholic women use contraceptives as a defense. Using this argument, those who favor the mandate claim that the Church is out of touch and not accurately speaking for its followers on this important women’s health issue.

But is this the proper lens through which to view the issue? Free and religious speech advocates would argue that usage has little to do with views on government intervention in church affairs. In the end, it’s a complicated scenario with political capital for whichever side wins the public over. At the moment, the situation may not be as favorable for Obama as he would like. In an article published on Wednesday, Religion News Service’s David Gibson provides five reasons that the president may be losing the battle.

First, the debate, despite what the mandate’s supporters say, is about religious freedom — not contraception. Regardless of where one stands, the main issue at hand is whether the government has the right to interfere in church affairs and dictate what will be covered in health care plans. Gibson writes:

The bishops don’t have as much credibility with the laity as they used to, thanks to the clergy sex abuse scandal, among other things. But Catholics are still a potent tribe, and if outsiders are seen as attacking the church, Catholics can get defensive – and they can get even.

Then there’s the fact, as mentioned, that some liberal Catholics have abandoned the president on the issue. Regardless of where these individuals stand on use of these health care options, forcing Catholic institutions (among other faith-based groups) to violate their conscience just isn’t sitting right.

Now, let’s talk about those other faith groups. Many times, people of different religious traditions have a tough time coalescing, but on this issue, individuals with varying theological ideals are coming together. After all, it’s one thing to sit back and watch an attack on a rival faith group unfold, but when considering what could happen, should this mandate go unchecked, many religious people are fearful: “What’s next?,” they’re wondering. Gibson continues:

Even though evangelicals and other conservative Protestants generally don’t have religious objections to contraception, they do have a big problem with “big government” and with perceived infringements on religious freedom. Evangelicals – both their leaders and their troops – have never been big Barack Obama supporters anyway, so they were happy to provide any electoral and rhetorical muscle the Catholic hierarchy could not muster.

Video: Obama Administration, Catholic Leaders Clash Over Contraception Mandate

The fourth reason Gibson highlights is the fact that the “attack on religion” frame the issue is being explored through is an appealing one for Republicans. While many conservatives are wondering why Obama would approach this subject in an election year to begin with, others are noticing just how effective religious freedom rhetoric will be for the GOP nominee.

The rhetoric is already ratcheting up. “This attack by the federal government on religious freedom in our country cannot stand, and will not stand,” House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said earlier this week.

And, of course, there’s the overwhelming fact that the president will need to secure the Catholic vote to ensure re-election. “While Obama won the overall Catholic vote 54 percent to 46 percent in 2008, he lost the white Catholic vote, 47 percent to 53 percent,” Gibson writes. It‘s hard to imagine the president won’t lose a portion of this important cohort as a result of his refusal, thus far, to compromise.

As GOP Presidential candidates Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum have both said, “Obama has shown his hand and if he is re-elected, even if they walk this back now, this is the road that his administration will go down!”

Sure, he’s shown “openness” to the ideal of coming up with a viable solution that appeases both sides, but to those so staunchly opposed, such a notion isn’t good enough. The president will need to admit wrongdoing and back away from the mandate, should he wish to appease many of those individuals who feel wronged by the government’s newfound regulations. So far, there’s no evidence that he will take such a course.

Click here to read Gibson’s RNS article.

Related:

Senator Rand Paul stood-up and blasted the HHS mandate as ‘authoritarian’ and ‘totalitarian; “Gloves are off”, he said!

Rubio Crushes Obama and His Contraceptive Mandate At CPAC; says it is a Constitutional issue!

Timing of War Over ObamaCare Mandatory Birth Control Payments… God’s Answer to Prayers for Intervention?

Timing of War Over ObamaCare Mandatory Birth Control Payments… God’s Answer to Prayers for Intervention?

Is the Timing of the War With Obama Over Mandatory Birth Control Payments… Another ObamaCare Revelation, God’s Answer to Prayers for Intervention by Many Americans?

The present issue of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) requiring (through ObamaCare) that all private insurers, including Catholic charities and hospitals, cover the cost in full for contraception, sterilization procedures, and the “week-after“ pill ”ella” that can induce early abortions is being framed as a fight over contraception. It is not an issue of contraception! It is an issue of religious liberty and an assault on the Freedom of Religion guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

No politicians ever go after the Roman Catholic Church… Why? Because it is suicidal. Also, with everyone salivating to get the Hispanic voting block, who are almost all Catholics, this recent news of anti-religious freedom in ObamaCare resulting in a battle with the Catholic church could be Obama’s Waterloo.

Jews, Protestants, Evangelicals, Mormons, a coalition of people of faith and even Atheists are standing with the Catholics on this matter. 90% of all Americans identify themselves as being related to some religion, even if not practicing.

So the question is, is the timing of this realization of one of the coming horrors in ObamaCare a huge mistake by Team Obama and perhaps an intervention by God in answer to all the prayers for help and guidance being said by God fearing Americans daily? Or is the primary focus of the left more about creating division and chaos to fundamentally transform America than getting elected… or re-elected?

Take a good look back at the famous ‘Fabian’ Window… the group the Progressives stem from. The Fabian Window is a view into the Heart of the New World Order Agenda, and yes that is former Prime Minister of Great Britain, Tony Blair standing by that sinister Window!

The founders of the Fabian Society are depicted in the famous stained-glass Fabian Window^[1] designed by George Bernard Shaw. The window was stolen in 1978 and reappeared at Sotheby's in 2005. It was restored to display in the Shaw Library at the London School of Economics in 2006 at a ceremony over which Tony Blair presided.

The stained glass window was designed by George Bernard Shaw in 1910 as a commemoration of the Fabian Society, and shows fellow Society members Sidney Webb and Edward R. Pease, among others, helping to build 'the new world'. Four Fabians, Beatrice and Sidney Webb, Graham Wallas, and George Bernard Shaw founded the London School of Economics with the money left to the Fabian Society by Henry Hutchinson. Supposedly the decision was made at a breakfast party on 4 August 1894. Artist Caroline Townshend (cousin of Shaw's wife Charlotte Payne-Townshend and daughter of Fabian and Suffragette Emily Townshend) created the Fabian window, according to Shaw's design in 1910. Also included in the window besides Shaw and Townshend themselves, were other prominent Fabians such as H. G. Wells, Annie Besant, Graham Wallas, Hubert Bland, Edith Nesbit, Sydney Olivier, Oliver Lodge, Leonard Woolf, and Emmeline Pankhurst.

Uber-Progressive and Obama puppetmaster and Hillary Clinton mentor, George Soros, is a graduate of the London School of Economics. Coincidence?

—Obama denigrates religion, covers up religious symbols when he speaks in churches, and proclaims that we are not a “Christian” nation. In fact, we are a Christian nation, but not exclusively so, and far more tolerant of all believers and disbelievers than the Arab countries from whom he courts favor. In those countries you may be maimed, banished or killed if you are not Muslim. Freedom of religion in those countries is but an empty phrase in constitutions that exalt Islam over all other religions. Is Obama remolding our religious heritage? …Taken from CFP’s Beware the Obama Fabian Window. Many feel that Obama is Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing on the Fabian Window Coat of Arms.

Remember, Obama’s weakness is religious people. He doesn’t have the churches and true Bible reading/God fearing Americans behind him. So they are poking us to get us worked up to standup as a focus point making us the fringe and bringing us head to head with the left… the unions, OWS, avowed Progressives, etc.

Below are just a few of the article and perspective on this subject:

Obama appointee Muzzled Army Camplains and forbade them from reading Catholic Archdiocese Letter

Catholic League Poised To Go To War With Obama Over Mandatory Birth Control Payments

· Archbishop to U.S. Troops: Obamacare Reg ‘Blow to a Freedom You Have Fought

Monday, February 06, 2012 7:42:08 PM · by Nachum - Cybercast News Service ^ | 2/6/12 | Terence P. Jeffrey

Archbishop Timothy Broglio, who leads the Roman Catholic Archdiocese for the Military Services, wrote a letter to be read at all Sunday Masses for U.S. military personnel around the world that said that a regulation issued by the Obama Administration under the new federal health care law was “a blow” to a freedom that U.S. troops have not only fought to defend but for which some have recently died in battle. “It is a blow to a freedom that you have fought to defend and for which you have seen your buddies fall in battle,” the archbishop wrote.

· Updated: *167* Bishops (More Than 90% of Dioceses) Have Spoken Out Against Obama/HHS Mandate

Monday, February 06, 2012 7:39:21 PM · by Salvation · 8 replies - CatholicVote.org ^ | 02-06-12 | compiled by Thomas Peters

Updated: *167* Bishops (More Than 90% of Dioceses) Have Spoken Out Against Obama/HHS Mandate by Thomas Peters7 days ago In the past I’ve compiled a list of all the bishops speaking out on a particular controversial issue (for instance, over Notre Dame’s invitation to President Obama) — here are the bishops who have spoken out against the Obama/HHS mandate.[See my ongoing coverage of Obama/HHS's war against religious liberty here, here, here and most recently here. I'm also tweeting more updates @AmericanPapist.] If I have missed anyone please let me know in the comments! And please double-check that your bishop really is not there...

*Here is Ultra Left Wing HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ Spin (Remember, Sebilius was an ardent supporter of murdered partial birth abortionist, Tiller and her extreme record on abortion has sadly been ignored (or hidden) by the media.)

If the federal government can succeed in forcing people to violate their faith, it will have the power to force anyone to do anything. It is therefore sad but not surprising that Health and Human Services secretary Kathleen Sebelius took to USA Today this week to spin rather than explain her boss’s decision to force people and entities all over the country to fund abortifacients, contraception, and sterilization against their consciences.

However, one of the most startling comments came from former Democrat Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper who said that she would have never voted for the health care bill had she known that the Department of Health and Human Services would require all private insurers, including Catholic charities and hospitals, to cover the cost in full for contraception, sterilization procedures, and the “week-after“ pill ”ella” that can induce early abortions.

For those of us who have followed and fought against the passing of ObamaCare that knew about every ugly detail that has come to light since its passing… and there are many more to come, the amazement about its content keeps creating amazement for us.  Government-run healthcare is the crown jewel of socialism and the ugliness contained within has only begun to surface. How dare an elected official who voted on this type of freedom changing bill say, “If I had known….” Read the bills, pay readers, have your staff read it.  There really should be a penalty to pay by these people. Election 2012 or the Supreme Court Ruling will be our only chance(s) to rid ourselves of ObamaCare!!

This is not a matter that will just blow over, even though the White House is starting to back peddle on this issue for now; but this is a glimmer into our future if Barack Obama is re-elected. Those in the trenches know that any and all of the compromises we see during this election year will be rescinded as soon as Obama is re-elected.

This fight is much larger than this single issue… As Father Morris stated on Hannity the other night and again today on The Factor… “This is the fight over Freedom of Religion”, the very issue that America was founded on! The Left’s siege on churches has begun!!

Senator Rand Paul stood-up and blasted the HHS mandate as ‘authoritarian’ and ‘totalitarian; “Gloves are off”, he said!  Similar remarks from Speaker Boehner, Senator Marco Rubio and congressional politicians from both sides of the aisle. 

Ask Marion~

Related:

Beck Asks Panel:  How Do You Teach People Values When They Are Raised in a Secular World?

Rubio Crushes Obama's and His Contraceptive Mandate At CPAC

Monsanto: A HORRIFYING PICTURE THAT WILL FREEZE THE BLOOD IN YOUR VEINS - UPDATED

Film Review: The World According to Monsanto

Film:  The World According to Monsanto – Full Length

Directed by Marie-Monique Robin
Review by Jeffrey M. Smith

How much outrage can a single multinational corporation inspire? How much damage can they inflict? The breathtaking new film, The World According to Monsanto, features a company that sets the new standard. From Iowa to Paraguay, from England to India, Monsanto is uprooting our food supply and replacing it with their patented genetically engineered creations. And along the way, farmers, communities, and nature become collateral damage.

The Gazette says the movie "will freeze the blood in your veins." The Hour says it's a "horrifying enough picture" to warrant "fury." But most importantly, this critical film opens our eyes just in time.
The film is the work of celebrated award-winning French filmmaker Marie-Monique Robin, whose three years of work on four continents exposes why Monsanto has become the world's poster child for malignant corporate influence in government and technology.

Combining secret documents with accounts by victims, scientists and policy makers, she guides us through a web of misleading reports, pressure tactics, collusion, and attempted corruption. And we learn how the company systematically tricked governments into allowing dangerous genetically modified (GM) foods into our diet--with Monsanto in charge of determining if they're safe.

Deception, Deception, Deception

The company's history with some of the most toxic chemicals ever produced, illustrates why they can't be trusted. Ask the folks of Anniston, Alabama, where Monsanto's PCB factory secretly poisoned the neighborhood for decades. PCBs are Monsanto's toxic oils used as coolants and lubricants for over 50 years and are now virtually omnipresent in the blood and tissues of humans and wildlife around the globe. But Anniston residents have levels hundreds or thousands of times the average. They all know their levels, which they carry as death sentences. David Baker, who lost his little brother and most of his friends to PCB-related diseases such as cancer, says Anniston kids used to run up to him, report their PCB level and ask, "How long you think I got?"

Ken Cook of the Environmental Working Group says that based on Monsanto documents made public during a trial, the company "knew the truth from the very beginning.

They lied about it. They hid the truth from their neighbors." One Monsanto memo explains their justification: "We can't afford to lose one dollar of business."

Monsanto also produced the infamous Agent Orange, the cancer and birth-defect causing defoliant sprayed over Vietnam. It contaminated more than 3 million civilians and servicemen. But according to William Sanjour, who led the Toxic Waste Division of the Environmental Protection Agency, "thousands of veterans were disallowed benefits" because "Monsanto studies showed that dioxin [the main ingredient in Agent Orange] was not a human carcinogen." But his EPA colleague discovered that Monsanto had allegedly falsified the data in their studies. Sanjour says, "If they were done correctly, [the studies] would have reached just the opposite result."

Secret documents stolen from the FDA also reveal serious health effects from Monsanto's genetically engineered bovine growth hormone, called rBGH or rBST. In particular, the amount of a powerful hormone called IGF-1 is substantially increased in milk from treated cows. Samuel Epstein, Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition, says that approximately 60 studies link IGF-1 to "breast, colon, and prostate cancers."

Cancer is also implicated in Monsanto's showcase herbicide, Roundup. According Professor Robert Belle's research showing disrupted cell division, "Roundup provokes the first stages that lead to cancer." Belle, who is with the National Center for Scientific Research and the Pierre and Marie Curie Institute in France, says, "The tested doses were well below those which people normally use."

Monsanto has promoted Roundup as harmless to both humans and the environment. But their advertised environmental claims, such as "biodegradable," "leaves the soil clean," and "respects the environment," were declared false and illegal by judges in both the US and France. In fact, Monsanto's own studies showed that 28 days after application, only 2% of the product had broken down. They were forced to remove "biodegradable" from the label.

Above the law

When Monsanto's transgressions are reported to authorities, somehow the company is magically let off the hook.

When Monsanto finally did share information on PCBs with the government, for example, Ken Cook says "instead of siding with the people who were being poisoned, [the government] sided with the company. . . . It was outrageous!" When William Sanjour's EPA colleague, Cate Jenkins, asked the agency to review Monsanto's flawed Agent Orange studies, Sanjour says, "there was no investigation of Monsanto. . . . What they investigated was Cate Jenkins, the whistleblower! They made her life a hell."

When Richard Burroughs of the FDA held up approval of rBGH by demanding more rigorous and relevant testing, he was fired.

He says, "They figured: 'Well, if you're in the way, we'll get you out of the way. . . One day, I was escorted to the door and told that was it; I was done." Senior government scientists at Health Canada testified that their superiors were pressuring them to approve rBGH and that Monsanto had offered them an alleged bribe of $1-2 million. The scientists were later reprimanded, punished, and eventually  "dismissed for disobedience." rBGH was never approved in Canada, Europe, and most industrialized nations.

When Professor Belle went to his administration "to let the public know about the dangers" of Roundup herbicide, he was "ordered" not to communicate his findings "due to the GMO question lurking in the background." That question about genetically modified organisms was in relation to Monsanto's "Roundup Ready" crops. Monsanto has the patent for 90% of the GMOs grown on the planet, and most of them are genetically modified specifically to tolerate applications of Roundup.

*One of the most frightening things is that Monsanto is practically a U.S. government agency!!*  -  Obama Appoints Monsanto’s Vice President Michael Taylor as Senior Advisor to the Commissioner at the FDA…

Related:

Dow and Monsanto Team Up on the Mother of All Herbicide Marketing Plans

America’s farmlands to be carpet-bombed with Vietnam-ear Agent Orange chemical if Dow petition approved

Are You Eating, Drinking and Breathing Monsanto’s New ‘Agent Orange’?

Monsanto Battle Continues After Suing Midwest Farmers for Saving Seeds

GM Foods Not Served in Monsanto Cafeteria

Would You Vote for a Food Bill Monsanto Supports?

George Soros and Food Safety

PDF File
Liar, Liar: FDA Secrets, Scandals & Slip Ups!

Dumbing Down Society Part 1: Foods, Beverages, and Meds (Media and Education)

Senate Bill S.510 Passed… Quickly Explained Here

UPDATED:

President Obama appointed former Monsanto vice president and lobbyist Michael Taylor as senior advisor to the Food and Drug Administration commissioner.

This is a classic example of the fox guarding the henhouse. President Obama should isolate the FDA from corporate influence by asking Taylor to step down immediately.

That's why I created a petition to President Obama on SignOn.org. Click here to add your name, and then pass it along to your friends:

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=269891&id=35461-19004089-AN_n6Yx&t=2

The petition says:

President Obama, I oppose your appointment of Michael Taylor, a former VP and lobbyist for Monsanto, the widely criticized genetically modified (GM) food multinational, as senior advisor to the commissioner at the FDA. Taylor is the same person who as a high ranking official at the FDA in the 1990s promoted allowing genetically modified organisms into the U.S. food supply without undergoing a single test to determine their safety or risks. This is a travesty.

Taylor was in charge of policy for Monsanto's now-discredited GM bovine growth hormone (rBGH), which is opposed by many medical and hospital organizations. It was Michael Taylor who pursued a policy that milk from rBGH-treated cows should not be labeled with disclosures. Michael Taylor and Monsanto do not belong in our government.

President Obama, Monsanto has been seen as a foe to family-based agriculture, the backbone of America, by introducing dangerous changes to plants and animals and by using strong-arm legal tactics against farmers for decades. Naturally occurring plant and animal species are permanently threatened by the introduction of DNA and hormonal modification, Monsanto's core businesses.

FDA scientists once regarded genetic modification of the food supply as the single most radical and potentially dangerous threat to public health in history. As early as the 1991, a body of scientific research began to form which now includes articles in over 600 journals. As a whole, these offer scientific evidence that GM foods, hormones, and related pesticides are the root cause for the increase of many serious diseases in the U.S. Since GM foods were introduced, diagnosis of multiple chronic illnesses in the U.S. has skyrocketed. These illnesses include changes in major organs and in hormonal, immune, digestive, and reproductive systems. These modifications to foods and food production may also be contributors to colon, breast, lymphatic, and prostate cancers.

Experts are discouraged that regulators and GM companies systematically overlook potential side effects of GM. Monsanto's objective to use biotechnology to change the world's food supply is the opposite policy direction your administration should pursue. Your legacy of supporting Monsanto to have free rein in U.S. food policy is a nightmare scenario that is against the interest of all Americans and world citizens.

Will you sign the petition? Click here to add your name, and then pass it along to your friends:

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=269891&id=35461-19004089-AN_n6Yx&t=3

Life With Trig: Sarah Palin on Raising a Special-Needs Child

By former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin  -  Reprinted in its entirety from the Daily Beast

Last week, Rick Santorum and his family offered us a reminder of what really matters. When his 3-year-old daughter, Bella, born with Trisomy 18, was hospitalized with pneumonia, Rick left the campaign trail to be by her bedside. In the middle of this very heated campaign season, many of us prayed through tears for Bella’s health and added prayers of thankfulness for a public example of someone’s sacrifice made with the right priorities.

It’s a sacrifice every parent and caregiver of a child with special needs sympathizes with. Families of children with special needs are bonded by a shared experience of the joys, challenges, fears, and blessings of raising these beautiful children whom we see as perfect in this imperfect world.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, on rope lines at rallies across the country, my husband, Todd, and I met so many of these families and caretakers, and I’ll never forget them. There was an instant connection—a kind of mutual acknowledgment that said, “Yes, these children are precious and loved. Yes, we face extra fears and challenges, but our children are a blessing, and the rest of the world is missing out in not knowing this.”

Every parent struggles with juggling the commitments of work and family. Women, especially, know this well. Over the years, I’ve learned that women can “have it all,” just not all at once. For me, it was a lesson learned through the school of hard knocks, but it was one my own mother made me aware of when she calmly told me that as a working mom in the rough-and-tumble political arena, I would have to make tough choices. We all do. In making decisions about my career, I’ve put my family first, and I’ve never regretted it, although it has meant periodically putting particular pursuits on the back burner.

When I discovered early in my pregnancy that my baby would be born with an extra chromosome, the diagnosis of Down syndrome frightened me so much that I dared not discuss my pregnancy for many months. All I could seem to muster was a calling out to God to prepare my heart for what was ahead. My prayers were answered beyond my shallow understanding of what true joy could be. Yes, raising a child with special needs is a unique challenge, and there’s still fear about my son Trig’s future because of health and social challenges; and certainly some days are much more difficult than if I had a “normal” child.

Sarah Palin with her son, Trig., Jack Kurtz / ZUMA-Corbis

Many everyday activities like doctor’s appointments and social gatherings and travel accommodations and even mealtimes and a solid night of sleep are that much more difficult, but at the end of the day I wouldn’t trade the relative difficulties for any convenience or absence of fear. God knew what he was doing when he blessed us with Trig. We went from fear of the unknown to proudly displaying a bumper sticker sent to us that reads: “My kid has more chromosomes than your kid!” He may not be the next Wayne Gretzky, but our hearts are filled with so much pride watching Trig giggle with his sisters’ puppies, or sway to the rhythm of his Little Angels DVDs, it’s as if he were hoisting the Stanley Cup.Granted, I know I may be more fortunate than others to have loving friends and a big, supportive family I call on to help, including a husband who spends many sleepless nights with this restless little one. (And Todd actually makes Trig’s puréed baby food!) Others aren’t so fortunate, and in our thankfulness I am made more compassionate toward others who have less.I often think now, what would we do without Trig? He’s our “everything that really matters.”Trig is almost 4 years old now, and every morning when he wakes up, he pulls himself up, rubs the sleep out of his eyes, looks around, and then starts applauding! He welcomes each day with thunderous applause and laughter. He looks around at creation and claps as if to say, “OK, world, what do you have for me today?”

My family knows that Trig will face struggles that few of us will ever have to endure, including people who can be so cruel to those not deemed “perfect” by society. The cruelty is more than made up for, though, when someone simply smiles at our son. Nothing makes me prouder. As I explained in a Thanksgiving article, I notice it happens often in airports. Travelers passing by will do a double-take when they see him, perhaps curious about the curious look on his face; or perhaps my son momentarily exercises an uncontrollable motion that takes the passerby by surprise. Perhaps, as an innocent and candid child announced when she first met Trig, they think, “He’s awkward.” But when that traveler pauses to look again and smiles, and maybe tells me what a handsome boy I have, I swell with pride. I am so thankful for their good hearts. They represent the best in our country, and their kindness shows the real hope we need today.

My family understands that up ahead, some days will be better than others. We will adapt and juggle things and work through it. But Trig applauds the day. And that’s what he teaches us. That’s our priority, and we’re blessed by it.

*Both these politicians have a personal stake in overturning ObamaCare which includes rationing of healthcare, whatever your choose to call it.

Related:

Team Up for Down Syndrome

Susan G. Komen Foundation Reverses Stance on Cutting Funding for Planned Parenthood

Pro-Life Groups Hail 'A Major Victory for Life' & Now Susan G. Komen Foundation Reversed Their Decision

The Susan G. Komen for the Cure breast cancer charity has reversed its decision to halt funding of breast-screening grants to Planned Parenthood, the organization announced Friday.

In a statement, Komen for the Cure Founder and CEO Nancy Brinker apologized for “recent decisions” and said the organization would continue to fund Planned Parenthood.

“We want to apologize to the American public for recent decisions that cast doubt upon our commitment to our mission of saving women’s lives,” Brinker said.

The reversal comes after three days of intense backlash over Komen’s announcement that it had adopted new criteria that excluded Planned Parenthood from grants because it was under government investigation. Planned Parenthood is currently at the center of a congressional probe into whether taxpayer money was used to fund abortions. Brinker said Friday they would “amend the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political.”

“We will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants, while maintaining the ability of our affiliates to make funding decisions that meet the needs of their communities,” she said. While the statement says Komen will not halt current funding, it does not necessarily guarantee future grants.

Brinker’s full statement is below, via the Dallas Morning News, which first broke the story:

We want to apologize to the American public for recent decisions that cast doubt upon our commitment to our mission of saving women’s lives.

The events of this week have been deeply unsettling for our supporters, partners and friends and all of us at Susan G. Komen. We have been distressed at the presumption that the changes made to our funding criteria were done for political reasons or to specifically penalize Planned Parenthood. They were not.

Our original desire was to fulfill our fiduciary duty to our donors by not funding grant applications made by organizations under investigation. We will amend the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political. That is what is right and fair.

Our only goal for our granting process is to support women and families in the fight against breast cancer. Amending our criteria will ensure that politics has no place in our grant process. We will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants, while maintaining the ability of our affiliates to make funding decisions that meet the needs of their communities.

It is our hope and we believe it is time for everyone involved to pause, slow down and reflect on how grants can most effectively and directly be administered without controversies that hurt the cause of women. We urge everyone who has participated in this conversation across the country over the last few days to help us move past this issue. We do not want our mission marred or affected by politics – anyone’s politics.

Starting this afternoon, we will have calls with our network and key supporters to refocus our attention on our mission and get back to doing our work. We ask for the public’s understanding and patience as we gather our Komen affiliates from around the country to determine how to move forward in the best interests of the women and people we serve.

We extend our deepest thanks for the outpouring of support we have received from so many in the past few days and we sincerely hope that these changes will be welcomed by those who have expressed their concern.

As The Blaze previously reported, the charity was accused of caving to anti-abortion activists opposed to funding Planned Parenthood because of the abortion services it provides.

Friday’s announcement is a dramatic about-face for the organization. On Wednesday, Brinker released a video vowing Komen for the Cure would “never bow down to political pressure.”

“The scurrilous accusations being hurled at this organization are profoundly hurtful to so many of us who put our heart, soul and lives into this organization,” she said. “But more importantly, they are a dangerous distraction from the work that still remains to be done in ridding the world of breast cancer.”

According to the Associated Press, the grants that Planned Parenthood affiliates used for breast exams and related services totaled $680,000 last year. At least one top Komen official quit over the decision to halt funding, and 26 U.S. senators signed a letter urging the charity to reconsider.

Both Komen and Planned Parenthood reported donation spikes in the aftermath of the initial announcement: Brinker said Thursday donations had been up 100 percent in the last two days, while Planned Parenthood reported bringing in about $650,000 in 24 hours. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg himself pledged $250,000 to Planned Parenthood in the wake of Komen’s decision.

This post has been updated since it was first published at the Blaze

Related:

Interesting: Right to Life President: Komen Tied to Abortion Industry

Evelyn Lauder, Founder of Pink Ribbon, Dies at 75, of Non-Genetic Ovarian Cancer

UPDATED: How to donate: Kanzius Cancer Research Foundation

ELECTROMAGNETIC ENERGY ALTERING MORAL JUDGMENT

Moral judgments can be altered ... by magnets

By disrupting brain activity in a particular region, neuroscientists can sway people’s views of moral situations.

By Anne Trafton, MIT News Office - Graphic: Christine Daniloff  -  Originally Posted - March 30, 2010

To make moral judgments about other people, we often need to infer their intentions — an ability known as “theory of mind.” For example, if one hunter shoots another while on a hunting trip, we need to know what the shooter was thinking: Was he secretly jealous, or did he mistake his fellow hunter for an animal?

MIT neuroscientists have now shown they can influence those judgments by interfering with activity in a specific brain region — a finding that helps reveal how the brain constructs morality.

Previous studies have shown that a brain region known as the right temporo-parietal junction (TPJ) is highly active when we think about other people’s intentions, thoughts and beliefs. In the new study, the researchers disrupted activity in the right TPJ by inducing a current in the brain using a magnetic field applied to the scalp. They found that the subjects’ ability to make moral judgments that require an understanding of other people’s intentions — for example, a failed murder attempt — was impaired.

The researchers, led by Rebecca Saxe, MIT assistant professor of brain and cognitive sciences, report their findings in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences the week of March 29. Funding for the research came from The National Center for Research Resources, the MIND Institute, the Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, the Simons Foundation and the David and Lucille Packard Foundation.

The study offers “striking evidence” that the right TPJ, located at the brain’s surface above and behind the right ear, is critical for making moral judgments, says Liane Young, lead author of the paper. It’s also startling, since under normal circumstances people are very confident and consistent in these kinds of moral judgments, says Young, a postdoctoral associate in MIT’s Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences.

“You think of morality as being a really high-level behavior,” she says. “To be able to apply (a magnetic field) to a specific brain region and change people’s moral judgments is really astonishing.”

Thinking of others

Saxe first identified the right TPJ’s role in theory of mind a decade ago — a discovery that was the subject of her MIT PhD thesis in 2003. Since then, she has used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to show that the right TPJ is active when people are asked to make judgments that require thinking about other people’s intentions.

In the new study, the researchers wanted to go beyond fMRI experiments to observe what would happen if they could actually disrupt activity in the right TPJ. Their success marks a major step forward for the field of moral neuroscience, says Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, professor of philosophy at Duke University.

“Recent fMRI studies of moral judgment find fascinating correlations, but Young et al usher in a new era by moving beyond correlation to causation,” says Sinnott-Armstrong, who was not involved in this research.

The researchers used a noninvasive technique known as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to selectively interfere with brain activity in the right TPJ. A magnetic field applied to a small area of the skull creates weak electric currents that impede nearby brain cells’ ability to fire normally, but the effect is only temporary.
In one experiment, volunteers were exposed to TMS for 25 minutes before taking a test in which they read a series of scenarios and made moral judgments of characters’ actions on a scale of one (absolutely forbidden) to seven (absolutely permissible).

In a second experiment, TMS was applied in 500-milisecond bursts at the moment when the subject was asked to make a moral judgment. For example, subjects were asked to judge how permissible it is for a man to let his girlfriend walk across a bridge he knows to be unsafe, even if she ends up making it across safely. In such cases, a judgment based solely on the outcome would hold the perpetrator morally blameless, even though it appears he intended to do harm.

In both experiments, the researchers found that when the right TPJ was disrupted, subjects were more likely to judge failed attempts to harm as morally permissible. Therefore, the researchers believe that TMS interfered with subjects’ ability to interpret others’ intentions, forcing them to rely more on outcome information to make their judgments.

“It doesn’t completely reverse people’s moral judgments, it just biases them,” says Saxe.

When subjects received TMS to a brain region near the right TPJ, their judgments were nearly identical to those of people who received no TMS at all.

While understanding other people’s intentions is critical to judging them, it is just one piece of the puzzle. We also take into account the person’s desires, previous record and any external constraints, guided by our own concepts of loyalty, fairness and integrity, says Saxe.

“Our moral judgments are not the result of a single process, even though they feel like one uniform thing,” she says. “It’s actually a hodgepodge of competing and conflicting judgments, all of which get jumbled into what we call moral judgment.”

Saxe’s lab is now studying the role of theory of mind in judging situations where the attempted harm was not a physical threat. The researchers are also doing a study on the role of the right TPJ in judgments of people who are morally lucky or unlucky. For example, a drunk driver who hits and kills a pedestrian is unlucky, compared to an equally drunk driver who makes it home safely, but the unlucky homicidal driver tends to be judged more morally blameworthy.

Related?:

Meteor Streaks Across North Texas Sky

NORTH TEXAS (CBSDFW.COM) – The FAA has confirmed a meteor likely passed across the sky of the Southwest United States Wednesday night, with many people in the Dallas/Fort Worth area hearing and feeling the sonic boom.

The meteor, which was reported from everywhere from San Antonio to Oklahoma City, was spotted around 8:00 p.m. Wednesday.

Kevin Palivec, a former television photographer in the Abilene area captured video of the meteor on two remote cameras 60 miles apart. Images from the cameras show a bright streak passing overhead. See Video Here and Here.

TUNGUSKA GENETIC ANOMALY AND ELECTROPHONIC METEORS
http://www.actaphys.uj.edu.pl/vol36/pdf/v36p0935.pdf

Leaving America behind

James Cameron has announced he is leaving America and moving to New Zealand. His motive? He likes New Zealand.

Someone else is planning to leave America too. His motives are much different.

Who is it?

It is me.

That may come as a huge shock to many people, but I have begun planning an exit strategy from America. I’m not doing it yet.

You might ask yourself why I would do such a thing?

One word. Obamacare.

Anyone who is a baby boomer or older who is not now looking at this option is being foolish. As Obamacare kicks in, care for seniors is going to go. Sarah Palin railed against “death panels” and people laughed. They may want to stop laughing because those death panels are being set up.

As of now, the magic age is 72.

If you are rushed to the hospital with a serious illness, you have a big problem. Let’s say you have a stroke. If you are over 72, the presumption is going to be that the American medical system is now only going to give you comfort care. We will not treat your serious illness only make you comfortable.

Serious medical conditions can be treated if an ethics board meets and decides it is appropriate to treat you. Imagine you are rushed to the hospital and you are over 72 years old. Right now, if they get you to the hospital quickly, there are treatments that can be given that will stop a stroke and even prevent some of the massive damage a stroke can do. But you cannot get that treatment, if you are over 72 unless the medical ethics board meets and agrees that you should.

Think about this for a second. Seconds count in these kinds of emergencies. How the hell are you going to get a board together to vote when you only have minutes to act? How are you going to do it if it is at 3 AM?

Obamacare represents the final step from freedom to tyranny. In a free society, the society does everything it can to protect life. The citizens own the government. In a tyranny, the government owns the citizens and they are treated just like any other commodity. Their value is calculated and if the cost of the treatment, at least according to a bureaucrat, exceeds the value of the person then there is no treatment.

I’m 52 and I am now waiting. I am hoping the Supreme Court totally strikes down Obamacare. If not, Obama will veto any attempt to repeal it. The Republicans have not shown any willingness to even try to repeal it. We can only hope that the next president vetoes it if the GOP candidate is elected.  But I wonder if some of them might just adjust it instead of vetoing it completely, leaving the door open and perhaps the rationing part in tact?

If the Supremes do not save America, I am working on my exit strategy. Fortunately, at least for the moment, I have twenty years to figure it out.

The good news is there are countries that will be willing to accept wealthy American retirees and offer the kind of medical care we have grown accustomed to. Unfortunately, there will be many Americans who will not be able to escape and will be killed by the same government that is now killed the best health care system in the world.

Let’s hope we can all grow our income before we need it.

By Judson Philips – Tea Party Nation

House votes to repeal part of 2010 health care law

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Republican-led House on Wednesday voted to repeal a financially troubled part of the 2010 health care law that was designed to provide affordable long-term care insurance.

The House vote comes months after the Obama administration suspended the Community Living Assistance Services and Support program, known as the CLASS Act.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in October said she was unable to find a way to make the program financially solvent.

Still, the White House has said it does not support repealing the program, under which workers would pay a monthly premium during their careers and collect a daily cash benefit if they become disabled later in life.

Republicans have targeted the program as part of their overall goal of dismantling the health care overhaul law. Action on the bill in the Democratic-controlled Senate is uncertain.

The House vote was 267-159, with 28 Democrats joining all 239 voting Republicans in support.

The Senate has ignored House votes in the past year to repeal the entire health care law or to block funding for parts of it. One of the few changes Congress has been able to bring about concerned a requirement for small businesses to file more health care paperwork.

The CLASS Act was supposed to address the crisis in long-term care coverage. Currently some 10 million Americans need long-term care, and that number is expected to hit 15 million by 2020. But only about 8 percent of people buy private long-term care insurance.

Under the voluntary program, a priority of the late Sen. Edward Kennedy, monthly premiums would be used to finance benefits of at least $50 a day for those needing long-term care. The money would go for services at home or to help with nursing home bills.

But government actuaries determined that unless a large number of healthy people signed up, premiums would have to soar to unaffordable levels to meet the growing needs of the disabled.

Experts have concluded, said Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., that "the CLASS program can't be operated without mandatory participation so as to ensure its solvency." Unless it is terminated, he said, "it poses a clear danger to the fiscal health of our budget and to the American taxpayer."

The administration finally has come to the conclusion "that we knew even before the bill passed, that this was unsustainable, it was unworkable, it was fatally flawed," said the bill's sponsor, Rep. Charles Boustany, R-La.

But Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said the Republican goal was to "tear down and dismantle programs that provide health care in the United States." He said "the solution is to amend the program to make it work, not just repeal it and leave nothing in its place."

Breitbart.com via Free Republic