Tag - Supreme Court of the United States

Nazi Nuremberg Trial Defendants VS United States Supreme Court

June 23, 2019

The film’s moral nuance is formidable — which only makes the moral conviction of the climax more stunning.

Judgment at Nuremberg is a 1961 American drama film – Each defendant had chosen allegiance to their country over allegiance to what they knew was right and wrong. Their actions were illegal under both International law and German law. If they had refused to help transform the German court system into an institution that, systematically, denied justice to enemies of the Third Reich it would have made a difference. issues4life.org/judgmentatnuremberg

In 1948, a series of trials were held in Nuremberg, Germany, by an international tribunal, headed by American legal and military officials, with the intent of bringing to justice those guilty of crimes against humanity.

Abortion On Demand. The United States Supreme Court – “We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins … the judiciary at this point in the development of man’s knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer.” If they had refused to deny justice to the only product of a human male and a human female, that is a human being it would have made a difference. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_at_Nuremberg

The film’s events relate principally to actions committed by the German state against its own racial, social, religious, and eugenic groupings within its borders “in the name of the law” (from the prosecution’s opening statement in the film), that began with Hitler’s rise to power in 1933. The plot development and thematic treatment question the legitimacy of the social, political and alleged legal foundations of these actions.

The real Judges’ Trial focused on 16 judges and prosecutors who served before and during the Nazi regime in Germany and who either passively, actively, or in a combination of both, embraced and enforced laws that led to judicial acts of sexual sterilization and to the imprisonment and execution of people for their religions, racial or ethnic identities, political beliefs and physical handicaps or disabilities.

The Judgment At Nuremberg video clips are available on Walter’s YouTube Channel

The film’s moral nuance is formidable — which only makes the moral conviction of the climax more stunning.

The Least Safe Space in America (The Womb)!

April 17, 2019

admin@aimalive.com

Abortion, Adoption, Baby, Children, Christian, Faith, Family, Father, Freedom, Life, Marriage, Mother, Planned Parenthood, Politics, Prolife News, Sexuality, Woman

The first trimester of your pregnancy is from weeks 1 to 12.

Recently at Harvard Law School, there have been many discussions about marginalized populations and the role of the law in protecting the defenseless and disadvantaged. Notably absent from this discussion is that there remains a class of human beings who are still excluded from the fundamental rights guaranteed to all persons by the United States Constitution. FULL ARTICLE

Although Justice Blackmun infamously stated that the Supreme Court “need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins,”^[3] the question has long been long settled scientifically.^[4] Biologically, individual members of the species homo sapiens begin their life-cycle at fertilization. From the earliest stage of the human life-cycle, the unborn entity is biologically human.

The unborn child and the newborn infant are only separated by a few inches. The short journey down the birth canal does not magically transform that entity from non-human to human. The event of birth cannot impart humanity upon a non-human entity.

The unborn child’s dependence upon another human being doesn’t make her any less of a person. Children, especially newborns, are particularly dependent on adults and can hardly survive without them. Human value cannot vary based on the degree of that dependence. If it did, those who depend on insulin or kidney medication would have less value than the rest of us. If dependence is the criterion for human value, would conjoined twins who share vital systems possess a right to life?

Tiny Feet, Precious Feet, Priceless Feat

September 6, 2018

admin@aimalive.com

Abortion, Government, Life, Medical, Prolife News, Videos

The Precious Feet pin has become the international pro-life symbol for those working to end abortion and to promote the respect for life. Millions of Precious Feet pins have been distributed throughout the world.

This remarkable little pin has been responsible for countless people changing their minds on abortion,

Virginia Evers designs the Pro-Life pin. This would become the iconic pro-life “Precious Feet” pin

“All of a sudden, I saw these tiny feet; these perfectly formed tiny feet, with little toes, little wrinkles and creases and I held them between my fingers and took the picture. I was crying because I felt so bad – it just really got to me,” he said. “I really didn’t think the photo would be anything, but God must have taken the picture because it was perfect, and I knew that this would be one powerful way to send a message to the world, as this unborn baby was only about 10 weeks along.” Dr. Russell Sacco, takes the image.

The Precious Feet were birthed in 1978 when 86-year-old Virginia Evers, remembering a pro-life ad she saw in the San Diego Union that included Dr. Russell Sacco’s photograph of a 10-week-old unborn baby’s delicate feet, used it as her inspiration for designing a lapel pin the exact size and shape of an unborn baby’s feet at 10 weeks after conception. Virginia Evers designs the pin.

When Roe v. Wade came before the Supreme Court, Dr. Sacco expected the court would rule against abortion because it was evident from his photographs that unborn babies are not “blobs of tissue,” but human beings. “I was just so shocked that they went along with this,” he said. “Here I had the proof that these babies were not tissue, but real people. Since Roe v. Wade, more than 51 million babies have been murdered. It is horrifying.” Dr. Russell Sacco can’t believe Supreme Court decision.

How one photo of a preborn baby helped to make future generations pro-life.

The Supreme Court is the Tip of the Iceberg

September 10, 2016

admin@aimalive.com

Courts, Freedom, Legal, Politics

The Supreme Court is the Tip of the Iceberg

Think, too, of the (federal) judges below the surface who will be controlling the bulk of the cases that are filed.

Certainly, the appointments that will take place within the U.S. Supreme Court over the next four to eight years are important, but we can’t focus only on “the tip of the iceberg” when it comes to the federal judiciary and the increasing control it exercises over our ability to govern ourselves. Full article by David Fowler Family Action Council of Tennessee

Appreciating the bigger picture begins with understanding that the U.S. Supreme Court will hear only 70 to 80 cases a year. No doubt, those will be major cases with a potential for a huge impact, but the bulk of the decisions that interpret the U.S. Constitution and construe our laws are made by the lower federal courts—the federal district court judges and federal judges on the Circuit Courts of Appeal.

What has taken place at that level over the years shows that who is President can be just as important with respect to these lower courts as it can be with respect to the Supreme Court.

Jack Phillips Last Stand – Appeals to Supreme Court

July 22, 2016

admin@aimalive.com

Government

Walking into Jacks Masterpiece Cake Shop is akin to walking into an art gallery of cakes. Jack Phillips creates a masterpiece! Custom designs are his specialty: If you can think it up, he can make it into a cake! The Jack Phillips Video Story

By Marissa Mayer Posted on: | July 22, 2016

Today, Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado, asked the United State Supreme Court to hear his case, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Craig, and preserve his freedom to live and work in accordance with his beliefs.

The only other baker, photographer, and florist case to reach the Supreme Court thus far was Elane Photography v. Willock in 2014, involving Alliance Defending Freedom clients Elaine and Jonathan Huguenin. You’ll remember it as the case where a New Mexico Supreme Court Justice remarked that Elaine’s participation in events that violate her conscience is “the price of citizenship.”

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court declined to hear the Huguenins’ case, but as time has shown, the legal battles to protect the right of Christians to freely live out their faith in their chosen professions are just beginning. Will the Supreme Court agree to hear Jack’s case? Here are five reasons why they should. Full Article at adflegal.org

Eyewitness report: Trump’s Meeting with Evangelical Leaders

July 22, 2016

admin@aimalive.com

Government

With Trump we have a chance. With Clinton we have no chance. This meeting was not about Trump’s Christian knowledge or virtues, but rather where he wants to take the country. I was one of over 1,000 Christian Leaders “inside the room” for an historic meeting with Donald Trump.

Christian leaders from all over the U.S. gathered to ask Donald Trump tough, specific questions about his policy and intentions should he be elected President. Event organizers originally requested Dallas, Texas as a central location for this meeting, hoping to attract some 200-300 national Christian leaders. But the only opening on Trump’s schedule was in NYC for 20 minutes, 30 days out. So they took the date.

A screening committee sent out invitations to about 1000 Christian leaders. With the high expense of flying into and staying in NYC, and with the date less than 30 days away, they reserved a room for only 100 people at the Marriott Marquis in Times Square. Each person who accepted the invitation then had to be vetted, both by security and by the Secret Service. Once cleared, each was notified by phone.

Despite the short notice, response was off-the-charts. Almost every person invited accepted the invitation, with many more requesting inclusion. Ultimately there were over 1000 in attendance. Security was tight, including three checkpoints plus Secret Service security.

At my table, I was astonished to be sitting with: a registered lobbyist for George W Bush, a Congressional candidate from North Carolina, a Florida Christian TV station owner, and Chairman of the Board of the Washington Times, also Steeling conference speakers in the room.

After opening remarks by conference organizers, Jerry Falwell Jr. spoke, then Franklin Graham. Both attested to the authenticity of Donald Trump. Polling official George Barna presented several charts, showing that Trump has a genuine path to victory if Christians vote. But in the last Presidential election, some 40 million Evangelicals stayed home – literally making the difference in the election.

Then Ben Carson spoke for about 20 minutes. His easy and soft-spoken style easily warmed the crowd. He pointed out that Trump had a bad three weeks, and Clinton had a good three weeks, and yet the race is still close, virtually tied. His main point was that Trump is a proven leader. He’s certainly not a politician, always worried about offending someone. And that’s what we need, a leader, not a politician.

Next came Huckabee, who moderated the discussion. Before introducing Trump, he made the point that we’re not voting on a pastor, or a Pope, but rather a leader. A leader who is quite different from the past, one who is able to change the status quo. He explained that this meeting was not about Trump’s Christian knowledge or virtues, but rather where he wants to take the country – and where we’re headed if Trump is not elected.

The biggest concern centered around the Supreme Court. The next President will appoint at least one, and up to five, new Supreme Court Justices. The Second Amendment, public bathroom policies, prayer in public places, churches’ tax-exempt status, etc. will likely be settled by the next President’s appointees.

When Trump was introduced, he didn’t speak from the podium, but rather sat with Huckabee on the stage, fielding questions for 90 minutes. (So much for the 20 minutes originally allotted – Trump truly wanted to be there!) No press was allowed, only Trump and the Christian leaders. Several prominent Christians asked Trump questions directly from the floor – James Dobson, Ralph Reed, Tony Perkins, etc. Most felt religious liberty was at stake in this election, saying that if the policies Obama has set in motion were allowed to continue, Christians would eventually have no liberty. Harassment of Christian organizations would continue and increase.

Through it all, Trump answered each question with solid answers, acknowledging each problem cited and explaining how he would take care of that problem. He seemed to be genuinely concerned about changing the dangerous direction of our nation. He addressed many subjects including the Supreme Court, national defense, border problems, Christian persecution, his pro-life stance, Israel, healthcare, education and energy.

Trump left to a standing ovation. Many who arrived unsure if they would vote for him, left convinced of how much is at stake in this election if Trump is not elected. Attendees came away knowing that if Clinton is elected, our nation’s current path WILL lead to disaster. If we don’t turn the ship now, we’ll soon be like socialized Europe – a disaster getting worse by the minute. Even the problems Venezuela is facing, with the population literally fighting for food, is not out of the realm of grim possibility. Don’t think it can’t happen here.

Afterwards, more questions were taken, addressed to a panel of Christian leaders. Subjects included dismantling the military, Christian business rights, etc. and were discussed in length.

At the end of the meeting was prayer. With few exceptions, the entire room knelt on the floor in corporate prayer for our nation. What a sight – some 1000 Christian leaders in their Sunday best, on the ground praying together. Who knows how God will move? Our hope is in Christ; our prayer is that even should the Lord take out His Church at the Rapture, He will take us out in revival, not out of spiritual disaster. We must finish well.

I love the Constitution more than I dislike Trump. He will attempt to change the direction of this nation. With Trump we have a chance. With Clinton we have no chance. Be thankful we still have a chance and Please VOTE your conscience on November 8!

Supreme Court “We can’t Live without Abortion.”

July 7, 2016

admin@aimalive.com

Prolife News

The Supreme Court handed down a major ruling on abortion. The media called it “abortion rights.”

What Does the Recent SCOTUS Decision Mean?

Posted: 06 Jul 2016 11:27 AM PDT

If we were following the news, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) handed down a major ruling on abortion. The media called it “abortion rights.” In Texas, the Justices ruled that current regulations of Texas abortion restrictions could be lifted.

Keep in mind that we’re talking about regulations surrounding abortions. That’s all. The SCOTUS ruling do not lift any abortion ban. What does this mean?

When the ruling was announced. many in the pro-abortion world cheered that women would have “unrestricted access to abortion care.” The ruling, though located in Texas, would set a precedent for other related state cases concerning abortion laws. Why is it that we demand regulations for other things but not for abortion?

The other camp, the prolife community, lamented the ruling as violating the safety of women and unborn children. “This ruling will just hurt women and babies that much more, they declared. But something is missing here. Something is being forgotten.

Why Abortion Restrictions?

What does the recent SCOTUS decision mean? It means that such rulings are entirely possible in other states. What are abortion restrictions? There are many such restrictions. Many of such laws have been passed in Many states. Those who call themselves abortion abolitionists have a term for this. They call abortion restrictions “instrumentalism.” Such restrictions include imposing waiting periods on women who want abortions. This would give them more time to think about their decision. Parental consent laws require minors who want abortions to notify their parents. Ultrasound laws require women to be shown ultrasounds of their babies so they can give “informed consent.” Some states are banning abortions after 20 weeks. Many states have “partial birth abortion bans,” that is, simply protecting babies who are about to be born. In spite of all these restrictions, though, over 3500 babies continue to lose their lives to abortion daily. And just as we in the prolife community have settled for incremental restrictions, a Texas SCOTUS ruling indicates that even incremental restrictions are unwelcome.

What This Ruling reveals About Our Culture

What does the recent SCOTUS decision mean? It means that we’re thoroughly convinced that we can’t live without abortion. We can’t even live with incremental restrictions! This reveals that over 40 years of legal abortion has made abortion acceptable. Reports of abortion workers indicate that some of them actually believe that they’re “serving God” by performing abortions! The sad fact is that many who call themselves support abortion. In our false compassion for women in crisis, we think that offering them abortion serves them. Former abortion workers have testified that in doing abortions, they actually thought they were providing compassionate care for women. Our cultures common term “abortion care” has reinforced this lie. What about rape and incest victims? What about those whose babies have a poor prenatal dagnosis? Definitely, this culture declares that they “have” to have abortions! We tend to turn to killing to “handle” our problems. Husbands kill wives. Wives kill husbands. Young people kill parents to be in a relationship or to get their mobile device back! Angry people go into public places and commit mass murders. Life has become cheap. This can all be traced to the legalization of abortion.

Do Women Need Abortion?

What does the recent SCOTUS decision mean? It means that the belief that women need abortion is entrenched. For decades, we’ve come to see “abortion rights” as women’s “right to choose.” We call it reproductive freedom. We call it bodily autonomy. We even call it heath care! But what good does abortion do? Whole nonprofits exist to help post-abortive women recover from their abortions, emotionally and spiritually. Many of such women regret their abortions They’re working fervently to end abortion, in honor of the unborn babies who died at their hands. Men testify to being deprived of their children because their wives or girlfriends made “the choice” behind their backs. Abortion workers testify as to the dehumanizing effect of working in abortion clinics because they had no other way to earn a living. Yes, many women are desperate. They turn to abortion because their families don’t support them. They turn to abortion because their boyfriends or husbands don’t support them. They turn to abortion because the Church doesn’t know how to help them. Most of all, they turn to abortion because they don’t know about abortion alternatives.

Why We Should Never Give Up What does the recent SCOTUS Decision mean? It means that we have far to go. We have much to do before this culture will see that we can live without abortion. This means that any call to ban abortion has to include strengthening abortion alternatives. It means creating new laws that will give even more abortion alternatives. It means more funding for adoption and low-income health care. We can’t give up advocating for the unborn. Millions of them, in the U.S. alone, have died because of abortion. As long as the media use the terms “abortion care” and “abortion rights” the lie will continue. Many of us don’t have the time or money to travel and meet with politicians in person. But we can sign and circulate petitions. You have a chance to sign the petition below. Or if you have, circulate it! All voices are needed.

BanAbortionProtectBabies