Podcasts about texas heartbeat act

Brooke Alexander and Billy High had been dating for just a few months. But a late-summer pregnancy test in 2021 changed everything. Brooke was carrying twins! The Washington Post first reported on Brooke and Billy just days before the Supreme Court overturned Roe, seemingly lamenting that the Texas Heartbeat Act prevented them from getting an abortion. A little more than a year later, The Washington Post is checking in with them again with an article that suggests their lives would have been much better had they gotten an abortion instead of their two beautiful little girls. On this episode of The 40 Days for Life Podcast, we break down the irresponsible articles.

Dr. Michael New of the Charlotte Lozier Institute Michael New's Articles at National Review The Charlotte Lozier Institute The post 1813. A New Report on the Texas Heartbeat Act – Dr. Michael New, 6/30/23 first appeared on Issues, Etc..

Dr. Marlon De La Torre, director of evangelization and missionary discipleship at the Archdiocese of Detroit discusses Archbishop Vigneron's pastoral note of the importance of praying for the souls in purgatory. Michael New, associate scholar with the Charlotte Lozier Institute shares his analysis of Texas birth data which shows that in five months, the Texas Heartbeat Act has saved 5,000 lives!

Dr. Marlon De La Torre, director of evangelization and missionary discipleship at the Archdiocese of Detroit discusses Archbishop Vigneron's pastoral note of the importance of praying for the souls in purgatory. Michael New, associate scholar with the Charlotte Lozier Institute shares his analysis of Texas birth data which shows that in five months, the Texas Heartbeat Act has saved 5,000 lives!

Join host Karen Garnett as she welcomes Mark Lee Dickson, Founder of Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn. Mark walks through his efforts which began in 2019, leading over 50 cities across the United States in the passing of enforceable ordinances outlawing abortion within their city limits. Mark explains how these enforceable ordinances interface with state and federal law in both abortion-restricted and abortion-unrestricted states, and how local communities can be successfully mobilized to get these enforceable ordinances passed to protect both preborn children and their mothers and families from the evil of abortion. Mark was recently the only non-government actor named as a defendant in the federal lawsuit regarding the Texas Heartbeat Act which recently went before the Supreme Court of the United States. All nine Justices agreed the case against Mark should be dismissed.

Soon Californians will be able to sue illegal distributers of assault weapons and so-called ghost guns in the style of Texas' Senate Bill 8, also known as the Texas Heartbeat Act. The laws incentivize informing on others by offering a financial reward to those reporting. The California Report talks to Nigel Duara, Justice Reporter with CalMatters, to better understand the story. After regional news and weather, Felton Pruitt talks with members of Beaucoup Chapeaux.

A year ago today, Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed into law Texas Senate Bill 8, also known as the Texas Heartbeat Act. The law bans abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy — before many people even know they're pregnant. It also employed a novel legal strategy that empowered ordinary people to enforce the law by suing anyone who may have helped facilitate the abortion.Many observers thought the law would be blocked from taking effect or overturned after passing. That didn't happen. The Supreme Court had three opportunities to consider the law and didn't, signaling that the court could be open to overturning Roe v. Wade. In the recent uproar over the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, it's been easy to forget about the impact and significance of Texas's law. But a year later the law still stands in the state, blocking abortions after about six weeks. Today on Post Reports, on the anniversary of the Texas abortion ban, national political reporter Caroline Kitchener brings us the story of the activist who helped to craft the law, the doctor who tried to challenge it, and the lessons both sides have taken away from its success.Read more:Caroline Kitchener examines whether a national abortion ban is possible in a post-Roe world. You can also read her profile of Dr. Alan Braid.

A daily news briefing from Catholic News Agency, powered by artificial intelligence. Ask your smart speaker to play “Catholic News,” or listen every morning wherever you get podcasts. www.catholicnewsagency.com - Pope Francis on Wednesday appointed Bishop Mark O'Toole to lead two Catholic dioceses in Wales. O'Toole, the 58-year-old bishop of Plymouth, southwest England, will oversee both the Archdiocese of Cardiff and the Diocese of Menevia. The 58 year old Englishman said he looks forward to “steeping myself in the historical reality and diverse experience of the two dioceses, as we work more closely together.” The latest dual appointment suggests a trend in northern Europe of uniting dioceses under a single bishop without merging them.https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/251075/pope-francis-names-new-archbishop-to-lead-two-catholic-dioceses-in-wales Spanish Cardinal Carlos Amigo Vallejo, an advocate for dialogue between Christians, Muslims, and Jews, died on Wednesday at the age of 87. The archbishop emeritus of Seville died from heart failure at the University Hospital of Guadalajara, Spain, after his health declined following an April 25 operation to remove fluid from his left lung. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/251076/spanish-cardinal-carlos-amigo-dies-at-age-87-after-lung-surgery A federal court on Tuesday ordered a lower court to dismiss all legal challenges brought against the enforcement mechanism of a Texas abortion law, a move which a pro-life group called a “substantial pro-life victory.” The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals on April 26 remanded the case, brought by a number of abortion providers and pro-abortion organizations, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, with instructions to dismiss all challenges to the private enforcement provisions of the Texas Heartbeat Act. The Act, in effect since September 2021, bans abortions after the detection of a fetal heartbeat except in medical emergencies, and relies on private lawsuits filed by citizens to enforce the ban. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/251079/federal-court-orders-cases-brought-against-texas-pro-life-law-dismissed Today the Church celebrates Saint Louis-Marie de Monfort, a 17th century saint who is revered for his intense devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary. Saint Louis-Marie is perhaps most famously known for his prayer of entrustment to Our Lady, “Totus Tuus ego sum,” which means, “I am all yours.” Pope Saint John Paul II took the phrase “Totus Tuus” as his episcopal motto. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/saint/st-louis-marie-grignion-de-montfort-450

This week on The Texan's “Weekly Roundup,” the team discusses Austin considering a universal basic income program, revelations about the state-funded Liberty Institute at UT, state officials debating whether the border crisis counts as an “invasion,” Wendy Davis filing a lawsuit against the Texas Heartbeat Act, home appraisals in the Austin area skyrocketing, arrests of illegal immigrants at the border processed under Title 42, the latest in campaign fundraising numbers, Dallas County's judge using taxpayer dollars in a legal battle with Gov. Abbott, and a few campaign updates as the runoff elections approach. Got questions for the reporting team? Email editor@thetexan.news — they just might be answered on next week's podcast.

Catherine Glenn Foster joins us again to discuss if the Left is losing their leadership in the Supreme Court and the attack of the army of Republican Karens! 0:00 Is the Left Losing Their Leadership in the Supreme Court? 6:08 How Will This Change or Not Change the Court? 8:38 Why Leadership Is Important in the Supreme Court 10:58 How This Plays Out in the Long Run 15:04 Article: Army of Republican Karens Fighting to End Abortion 17:42 Pro-Life Women Are Examples of Externalized Misogyny? 20:25 Theory: Only Karens Are Still Using the Meme “Karen” 22:08 Pro-Life Is More Pro-Woman Than “Pro-Choice” 26:02 Left Is Spewing Nonsensical Attacks 27:46 Pro-Life Women Hold No Power and Can't Think for Themselves? 30:33 Cognitive Dissonance and Do We Need Men or Not? Give Now to defend the Texas Heartbeat Act: https://texasrighttolife.com/lawsuit/ Get your tickets now for the 6th Annual San Antonio Celebration of Life: https://texasrighttolife.com/satxcol2022/ Referenced Article “An army of Republican Karens are fighting to end legal abortion in the U.S.”: https://www.salon.com/2022/03/15/an-army-of-karens-unleashed-meet-the-faces-fighting-to-end-legal-abortion-in-the-us/ You can subscribe to the ProLife Podcast at: Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/prolife-podcast/id1612172721 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/3povSwEEJ37aESIoeqPx2q Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/prolife-podcast Castbox: https://castbox.fm/channel/id4813902?country=us RadioPublic: https://radiopublic.com/prolife-podcast-6rmx3N And Pocket Casts: https://pca.st/9gmni47j Or visit http://prolife.show

The Texas bounty hunting statute has gone viral with several other states, including California, picking up on it. Abortion, already a major emotional decision for a woman to make, just got a bit more difficult due to the Texas Heartbeat Act. For all the talk in the courts and the news about private enforcement, it's not very accurate about what can and cannot be done by a private citizen. Jack Russo and Rafael Chodos discuss if the overturning of Roe v. Wade is a preposterous idea or if the Heartbeat Act found a loophole wide open for exploitation.

https://twitter.com/larryelder/status/1507099324139782145?s=20&t=QdbTjWjZAaZB0xzLCbUwzQ Play 0:59-1:06 during opening music Where was all the concern about black females then? … and more on today’s CrossPolitic Daily News Brief. This is Toby Sumpter. Today is Friday, March 25, 2022. The Confirmation hearings for Biden’s nominee to the Supreme Court Ketanji Brown Jackson finished yesterday, Sen. Mitch McConnell says he will not vote to approve: https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1507036016003235840?s=20&t=QdbTjWjZAaZB0xzLCbUwzQ Play Audio/video and Larry Elder had this to say: https://twitter.com/larryelder/status/1507099324139782145?s=20&t=QdbTjWjZAaZB0xzLCbUwzQ Play full video Larry Elder will be with us in Rapid City, South Dakota on April April 7th with Gary Demar doing a FREE day long God and Government workshop, John Branyon will do some Comedy, and we will do a live CrossPolitic Show with Gary Demar and Larry Elder that night. We will be in Phoenix Arizona, in May finishing our Spring Liberty Tour, and then back to Tennessee for our main Fight Laugh Feast Conference, this year in Knoxville, Oct. 6-8: This year’s theme is Lies, Propaganda, Storytelling, and the Serrated Edge. Registration is now live. If you’re a club member, you get a discounted price, just log into the club portal to take advantage of that discount. And early bird registration goes until the end of May. The world in which we live is moving towards total techno tyranny at an incredible rate. This tyranny includes spying, censorship, data theft all through electronic means. Iron Apples is a small cybersecurity consultancy firm seeking to give churches, organizations, businesses, schools and individuals the education, resources and tools needed to be able to circumvent techno tyranny. Over the next year, Iron Apples will be hosting a series of virtual meetings to inform, educate and equip attendees with actual solutions to the problem we find ourselves in. The time for the parallel economy is now, but we must ensure we have strong defenses against the onslaught of cyber war waged against us by our own governments and corporations. Find out more at ironapples.com https://www.wsj.com/articles/arizona-legislature-passes-15-week-abortion-ban-11648156791?mod=hp_lead_pos6 Arizona lawmakers passed a bill banning most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, becoming the second state legislature to push through this restriction ahead of a pivotal Supreme Court decision that could alter the abortion rights landscape nationwide. The Arizona House of Representatives passed the bill in a 31-26 vote Thursday. It now heads to the desk of Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, a Republican who has signed restrictions on abortion since becoming governor in 2015. A spokesman for Mr. Ducey didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday. The legislative efforts in Arizona follow similar moves in Florida, where Republican lawmakers earlier this month approved a ban on most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. These bills are similar to the Mississippi law at the center of a Supreme Court case that challenges the high court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which established a constitutional right to end a pregnancy. Similar bills in West Virginia and Kentucky passed one chamber in those state legislatures. The Arizona law, known as SB 1164, bars abortions in the state after 15 weeks of pregnancy, weeks earlier than current precedent established by the Supreme Court. The law allows for exceptions in medical emergencies. It doesn’t include exceptions for instances of rape or incest. Lawmakers who supported these bills say, if passed, the laws would allow states to more quickly and easily enforce abortion restrictions similar to Mississippi’s should the Supreme Court uphold the 15-week ban. Some Republican state lawmakers said they anticipate the court could either uphold this law or overturn Roe v. Wade. A decision is expected no later than the summer. Arizona Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the Republican lawmakers who introduced the 15-week ban and voted in favor of the bill Thursday, told The Wall Street Journal earlier this year he wished to prepare the state for either of those outcomes. Arizona is one of several states with pre-existing laws banning abortion that were passed before Roe v. Wade. If the high court’s precedent is overturned, the law could be resurrected. The Texas Heartbeat Act, which bans abortions after six weeks of pregnancy in the Lone Star State, is an exception. The law, which took effect in September 2021, created a new enforcement structure that allows private citizens to bring civil lawsuits against abortion providers as well as anyone who aids or abets an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy. Idaho Gov. Brad Little, a Republican, signed a similar bill on Wednesday banning abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy. The legislation doesn’t grant officials enforcement authority and instead gives that power to private citizens—a precedent the governor expressed concerns over. To which Vice President Harris Tweeted: “Idaho Gov. Little signed an appalling bill yesterday to restrict abortion access after six weeks. This bill harms women, particularly those who are most vulnerable. We'll continue to fight to ensure all women have the right to make their own health care decisions.” The VP was also recently talking about the significance of the passage of time: https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1505964846172491780?s=20&t=QdbTjWjZAaZB0xzLCbUwzQ Play video https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/woke-home-depot-flyer-causes-online-stir The Home Depot became the subject of controversy online this week over an employee training pamphlet found at a Canadian location that was leaked on social media, sparking accusations that the company has gone "woke." The flyer that was reportedly posted in a break room at a Calgary, Alberta, Home Depot showed the home improvement giant's logo and was titled, "Leading Practices: Unpacking Privilege." It asks employees to literally "check" their "privilege," whether it be "white privilege," class privilege," "Christian privilege," "cisgender privilege," "able-bodied privilege," or "heterosexual privilege." The two-pager goes on to encourage workers to discuss white privilege and race with their colleagues, and offers tips on how to do so. Meanwhile, the U.S.-based company confirmed to FOX Business that the pamphlet had been posted for employees up north, but said the contents were not cleared by corporate. "While we fully support diversity across our company, this material was not created or approved by our corporate diversity, equity and inclusion department," a Home Depot spokesperson said in a statement. "This was a resource in our Canadian division and not part of any required programming." Psalm of the Day: All Hail the Power of Jesus Name https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-ybUbtahg8&t=102s Play: 0:00-1:53 Amen. This is Toby Sumpter with CrossPolitic News. Remember you can always find the links to our news stories and these psalms at crosspolitic dot com – just click on the daily news brief and follow the links. Or find them on our App: just search “Fight Laugh Feast” in your favorite app store and never miss a show. If this content is helpful to you, would you please consider becoming a Fight Laugh Feast Club Member? We are trying to build a cancel-proof media platform, and we need your help. Join today and get a discount at the Fight Laugh Feast conference in Knoxville, TN and have a great day.

https://twitter.com/larryelder/status/1507099324139782145?s=20&t=QdbTjWjZAaZB0xzLCbUwzQ Play 0:59-1:06 during opening music Where was all the concern about black females then? … and more on today’s CrossPolitic Daily News Brief. This is Toby Sumpter. Today is Friday, March 25, 2022. The Confirmation hearings for Biden’s nominee to the Supreme Court Ketanji Brown Jackson finished yesterday, Sen. Mitch McConnell says he will not vote to approve: https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1507036016003235840?s=20&t=QdbTjWjZAaZB0xzLCbUwzQ Play Audio/video and Larry Elder had this to say: https://twitter.com/larryelder/status/1507099324139782145?s=20&t=QdbTjWjZAaZB0xzLCbUwzQ Play full video Larry Elder will be with us in Rapid City, South Dakota on April April 7th with Gary Demar doing a FREE day long God and Government workshop, John Branyon will do some Comedy, and we will do a live CrossPolitic Show with Gary Demar and Larry Elder that night. We will be in Phoenix Arizona, in May finishing our Spring Liberty Tour, and then back to Tennessee for our main Fight Laugh Feast Conference, this year in Knoxville, Oct. 6-8: This year’s theme is Lies, Propaganda, Storytelling, and the Serrated Edge. Registration is now live. If you’re a club member, you get a discounted price, just log into the club portal to take advantage of that discount. And early bird registration goes until the end of May. The world in which we live is moving towards total techno tyranny at an incredible rate. This tyranny includes spying, censorship, data theft all through electronic means. Iron Apples is a small cybersecurity consultancy firm seeking to give churches, organizations, businesses, schools and individuals the education, resources and tools needed to be able to circumvent techno tyranny. Over the next year, Iron Apples will be hosting a series of virtual meetings to inform, educate and equip attendees with actual solutions to the problem we find ourselves in. The time for the parallel economy is now, but we must ensure we have strong defenses against the onslaught of cyber war waged against us by our own governments and corporations. Find out more at ironapples.com https://www.wsj.com/articles/arizona-legislature-passes-15-week-abortion-ban-11648156791?mod=hp_lead_pos6 Arizona lawmakers passed a bill banning most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, becoming the second state legislature to push through this restriction ahead of a pivotal Supreme Court decision that could alter the abortion rights landscape nationwide. The Arizona House of Representatives passed the bill in a 31-26 vote Thursday. It now heads to the desk of Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, a Republican who has signed restrictions on abortion since becoming governor in 2015. A spokesman for Mr. Ducey didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday. The legislative efforts in Arizona follow similar moves in Florida, where Republican lawmakers earlier this month approved a ban on most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. These bills are similar to the Mississippi law at the center of a Supreme Court case that challenges the high court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which established a constitutional right to end a pregnancy. Similar bills in West Virginia and Kentucky passed one chamber in those state legislatures. The Arizona law, known as SB 1164, bars abortions in the state after 15 weeks of pregnancy, weeks earlier than current precedent established by the Supreme Court. The law allows for exceptions in medical emergencies. It doesn’t include exceptions for instances of rape or incest. Lawmakers who supported these bills say, if passed, the laws would allow states to more quickly and easily enforce abortion restrictions similar to Mississippi’s should the Supreme Court uphold the 15-week ban. Some Republican state lawmakers said they anticipate the court could either uphold this law or overturn Roe v. Wade. A decision is expected no later than the summer. Arizona Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the Republican lawmakers who introduced the 15-week ban and voted in favor of the bill Thursday, told The Wall Street Journal earlier this year he wished to prepare the state for either of those outcomes. Arizona is one of several states with pre-existing laws banning abortion that were passed before Roe v. Wade. If the high court’s precedent is overturned, the law could be resurrected. The Texas Heartbeat Act, which bans abortions after six weeks of pregnancy in the Lone Star State, is an exception. The law, which took effect in September 2021, created a new enforcement structure that allows private citizens to bring civil lawsuits against abortion providers as well as anyone who aids or abets an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy. Idaho Gov. Brad Little, a Republican, signed a similar bill on Wednesday banning abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy. The legislation doesn’t grant officials enforcement authority and instead gives that power to private citizens—a precedent the governor expressed concerns over. To which Vice President Harris Tweeted: “Idaho Gov. Little signed an appalling bill yesterday to restrict abortion access after six weeks. This bill harms women, particularly those who are most vulnerable. We'll continue to fight to ensure all women have the right to make their own health care decisions.” The VP was also recently talking about the significance of the passage of time: https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1505964846172491780?s=20&t=QdbTjWjZAaZB0xzLCbUwzQ Play video https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/woke-home-depot-flyer-causes-online-stir The Home Depot became the subject of controversy online this week over an employee training pamphlet found at a Canadian location that was leaked on social media, sparking accusations that the company has gone "woke." The flyer that was reportedly posted in a break room at a Calgary, Alberta, Home Depot showed the home improvement giant's logo and was titled, "Leading Practices: Unpacking Privilege." It asks employees to literally "check" their "privilege," whether it be "white privilege," class privilege," "Christian privilege," "cisgender privilege," "able-bodied privilege," or "heterosexual privilege." The two-pager goes on to encourage workers to discuss white privilege and race with their colleagues, and offers tips on how to do so. Meanwhile, the U.S.-based company confirmed to FOX Business that the pamphlet had been posted for employees up north, but said the contents were not cleared by corporate. "While we fully support diversity across our company, this material was not created or approved by our corporate diversity, equity and inclusion department," a Home Depot spokesperson said in a statement. "This was a resource in our Canadian division and not part of any required programming." Psalm of the Day: All Hail the Power of Jesus Name https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-ybUbtahg8&t=102s Play: 0:00-1:53 Amen. This is Toby Sumpter with CrossPolitic News. Remember you can always find the links to our news stories and these psalms at crosspolitic dot com – just click on the daily news brief and follow the links. Or find them on our App: just search “Fight Laugh Feast” in your favorite app store and never miss a show. If this content is helpful to you, would you please consider becoming a Fight Laugh Feast Club Member? We are trying to build a cancel-proof media platform, and we need your help. Join today and get a discount at the Fight Laugh Feast conference in Knoxville, TN and have a great day.

The usual canard about the pro-life movement goes something like this: “Pro-lifers care so much about babies before they are born, but not much after. Source

A new Pro-Life bill hits Governor DeSantis's desk, the Feds put weird sketchy things in the budget again, and an update from the Texas Supreme Court on the Heartbeat Act! 0:00 Heartbeat Act Win from the TX Supreme Court! 4:00 Florida Passes 15-Week Abortion Ban 5:57 Development of a 15-Week Unborn Child 10:07 Texas Superintendent That Supposedly Assaulted & Pressed Woman to Abort 12:25 Judicial Bypass: Enabling Abusers 20:20 Federal Budget Passes as a Pro-Abortion Trojan Horse Give Now to defend the Texas Heartbeat Act: https://texasrighttolife.com/lawsuit/ Register for Team Life Camp: https://texasrighttolife.com/team-life-camp/?ref=Podcast Referenced article about the Federal Budget: https://texasrighttolife.com/federal-budget-passes-as-a-pro-abortion-trojan-horse/ Referenced article about the Texas Superintendent: https://www.foxnews.com/us/texas-superintendent-ex-mistress-abortion-assault-allegations-court-document https://texasrighttolife.com/superintendent-allegedly-assaulted-ex-girlfriend-for-refusing-to-get-an-abortion/

The usual canard about the pro-life movement goes something like this: “Pro-lifers care so much about babies before they are born, but not much after. The thing about canards is that, by definition, they are not true. Pro-lifers also work hard to protect the lives of born people—often in coalition with activists and organizations that do not oppose abortion–ranging from Read More ›

Dr. John Seago, our Legislative Director, joins us to discuss brain death, and also open some fun hate mail he has received from his work on the Texas Heartbeat Act! The Texas Heartbeat Act has been in effect since September 1, 2021 and has saved over 18,000 lives. Give Now to defend the Texas Heartbeat Act: https://texasrighttolife.com/lawsuit/ Register for Team Life Camp: https://texasrighttolife.com/team-life-camp/?ref=Podcast Extras: Emily Cook: The 3 Points You NEED to Know About Brain Death in Texas - AND - What to Ask the Doctors Boots on The Ground Conference 2022: Brain Death and Organ Donation - Dr. Joseph Eble #ProLife #Abortion #Podcast #Texas #BrainDeath #MedicalEthics

If Baby New Year was conceived at 4:48 AM December 29th (40 Baby New Year's Weeks) under the Texas Heartbeat Act it would have to be aborted by 2:39 PM and 50 seconds December 29th. Unreasonably fast! Baby New Year's Life (BYNL) = 1/100 Years Texas Abortion Ban = 6 Weeks (.115 years) 1 Year = 365 Days Standard Human Gestation = 40 Weeks .00115 years x 365 days / 1 year = .411 Days .411 days x 24 hours / day = 9.864 hours for Baby New Year's abortion window Baby New Years Gestation = 40 weeks x (1/100) = .4 weeks BNY Gestation or 67.2 Hours January 1st - 67.2 Hours = 4:48 AM December 29th 4:48 AM + 9.864 hours = 2:39 PM and 50 seconds JAKE'S BIRTHDAY SHOW 01/18 @ THE GUTTER https://www.ticketweb.com/event/guttermouth-comedy-jake-flores-clare-the-gutter-tickets/11655815?pl=scenic MERCH poddamnamerica.bigcartel.com PATREON patreon.com/poddamnamerica

Join Texas Scorecard Capitol Correspondent Jeramy Kitchen for an exclusive conversation with Texas Republican State Representative Briscoe Cain, who was directly involved in many of the more controversial policy issues considered by the state Legislature earlier this year.

Welcome to our first official Circle Back! Where we review the positives and fuck shit of 2021. To do this, we brought back one of our favorite guests, the Culture Editor of Autostraddle, Shelli Nicole. Starting from the insurrection and wrapping up with Candace Parker's baby announcement, let's review this year of queer. This is an extended episode which also includes our Bad Queer predictions for 2022. Today's episode involves a TW (trigger warning) where we discuss abortion at various points of this podcast. Shelli's Favorite Articles:An Ode to Hilary Banks - The Bougie Big Sister of My Dreams The Story of My AbortionAutostraddle's Strap WeekBad Queers is co-hosted by:Shana Sumers: @shanahasagramKris Chesson: @kris.chessLet's keep in touch:Email us for advice at badqueers@theherapp.com or DM on InstagramFollow us @badqueerspod on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram & Tik TokShop for official Bad Queers ApparelLove our soundtrack? Check out Siena Liggins: @sienaligginsShoutout to our sponsor HER App

It has been a monumental year in the pro-life movement and Americans United for Life has flourished. Our team has adjusted to pandemic challenges and capitalized on crucial opportunities to advance the human right to life. In 2021, this movement proved to be resilient, creative, and strong. In the summer of 2021, AUL hosted legal fellows and undergraduate interns in its Washington, DC office. These fellows spent countless hours researching, writing, and preparing for Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health and other crucial decisions like allowing the Texas Heartbeat Act to remain in effect. Today we are joined by Abby Balmert, an AUL Law & Policy Fellow, who played a huge role in AUL's strong presence this year. Roe's Reversal Would Not be Unprecedented https://aul.org/2021/12/14/reversing-roe-v-wade-not-unprecedented/ Americans United for Life | Give https://aul.org/give

Whole Woman's Health v Jackson, (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case brought by Texas abortion providers and abortion rights advocates that challenged the constitutionality of the Texas Heartbeat Act, a law that bans abortions after the first 6 weeks of pregnancy. The case centered on whether or not a state can insulate itself from judicial review of its laws by federal courts if it delegates the enforcement of the law to private individuals. The Supreme Court ruled in December 2021 that abortion providers may continue to seek legal actions against certain state officials involved in the enforcement of the law, while dismissing the case against other officials that were not directly involved in that process. Background. The Texas Heartbeat Act (also referred to as Senate Bill 8, or SB 8, for short) is a law enacted by the Republican majorities in the 87th Texas Legislature during its regular session that prohibits abortion, including in cases of rape and incest, once a heartbeat is detectable, and thus as early as 6 weeks into a woman's pregnancy. The Texas law is novel and unique in that it prohibits public enforcement by state actors and instead creates an exclusive mechanism of civil enforcement by private individuals. This was motivated by a desire to avoid ordinary constitutional challenges to restrictive state abortion laws against state officials in federal court. The law was written in a manner to insulate state officials from being the target of lawsuits challenging its constitutionality under the Ex parte Young exception to the sovereign immunity of states in federal court. Previous litigation. Shortly before the law took effect on September 1, with the state defendants' appeal pending in the Fifth Circuit, the plaintiffs sought emergency relief in the Supreme Court of the United States in the form of an injunction pending appeal. The Supreme Court denied the request, and issued a collection of dissenting statements by individual members along with its order, which shed light on the divergent views on the court. Although the majority denied instant relief, and thus allowed the Texas Heartbeat Act to go into effect, the court was careful to note that they were not rendering an opinion on the constitutionality of SB 8, and that such challenges could proceed in lower courts, including state courts. Legal challenges to WWH v Jackson, along with the federal government's case against the state in United States v Texas, continued, and on October 22, 2021, the Supreme Court again denied instant relief, but fast-tracked both to be heard on November 1, 2021. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

United States v Texas was United States Supreme Court case that involved the Texas Heartbeat Act (also known as Senate Bill 8 or SB8), a state law that bans abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected, typically six weeks into pregnancy. A unique feature of the Act, and challenges to it, is the delegation of enforcement to any and all private individuals who are authorized by the Act to file civil actions against abortion providers who violate it, and aiders and abetters, while state and local officials are prohibited from doing so. The Act is stated by its opponents to go against the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v Wade, which bans states from regulating abortions during the first trimester of pregnancy in favor of the woman's right to privacy guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. As one of several challenges to the law, the Supreme Court within United States v Texas will consider and decide whether the federal government has standing and the right to sue Texas for injunctive and declaratory relief to stop enforcement of the Act through private civil litigation in the Texas judicial system. The case was fast-tracked by the Court and heard on November 1, 2021, alongside Whole Woman's Health v Jackson, which was brought by abortion providers and allies as a pre-enforcement challenge to the constitutionality of the Texas Heartbeat Act under the U.S. constitution. The Supreme Court ruled in a per curiam decision in December 2021 that the writ of certiorari was improvidently granted and dismissed the case. Background. Texas passed the Texas Heartbeat Act in May 2021, with the bill to go into effect on September 1, 2021. One of several heartbeat bills in the country, Texas's bill banned abortion once "cardiac activity" in an embryo can be detected, typically after six weeks of pregnancy. Because of the potential conflict with the Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v Wade in that states could not regulate abortions during the first trimester (three months) of pregnancy in the interest of the right of privacy for women, the Texas Heartbeat Act does not allow the state to enforce the ban, but instead gives power to any interested party to sue anyone that performs an illegal abortion or supports that, and seek statutory damages of at least $10,000 in courts. District Court. On September 6, 2021, United States Attorney General Merrick Garland announced that the Justice Department (DOJ) will protect abortion seekers under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. On September 8, 2021, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Biden administration plans to sue Texas on the basis that the Act "illegally interferes with federal interests". --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

United States v Texas was United States Supreme Court case that involved the Texas Heartbeat Act (also known as Senate Bill 8 or SB8), a state law that bans abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected, typically six weeks into pregnancy. A unique feature of the Act, and challenges to it, is the delegation of enforcement to any and all private individuals who are authorized by the Act to file civil actions against abortion providers who violate it, and aiders and abetters, while state and local officials are prohibited from doing so. The Act is stated by its opponents to go against the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v Wade, which bans states from regulating abortions during the first trimester of pregnancy in favor of the woman's right to privacy guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. As one of several challenges to the law, the Supreme Court within United States v Texas will consider and decide whether the federal government has standing and the right to sue Texas for injunctive and declaratory relief to stop enforcement of the Act through private civil litigation in the Texas judicial system. The case was fast-tracked by the Court and heard on November 1, 2021, alongside Whole Woman's Health v Jackson, which was brought by abortion providers and allies as a pre-enforcement challenge to the constitutionality of the Texas Heartbeat Act under the U.S. constitution. The Supreme Court ruled in a per curiam decision in December 2021 that the writ of certiorari was improvidently granted and dismissed the case. Background. Texas passed the Texas Heartbeat Act in May 2021, with the bill to go into effect on September 1, 2021. One of several heartbeat bills in the country, Texas's bill banned abortion once "cardiac activity" in an embryo can be detected, typically after six weeks of pregnancy. Because of the potential conflict with the Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v Wade in that states could not regulate abortions during the first trimester (three months) of pregnancy in the interest of the right of privacy for women, the Texas Heartbeat Act does not allow the state to enforce the ban, but instead gives power to any interested party to sue anyone that performs an illegal abortion or supports that, and seek statutory damages of at least $10,000 in courts. District Court. On September 6, 2021, United States Attorney General Merrick Garland announced that the Justice Department (DOJ) will protect abortion seekers under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. On September 8, 2021, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Biden administration plans to sue Texas on the basis that the Act "illegally interferes with federal interests". --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

Isaiah, Jasper and Theo discuss the Texas Heartbeat Act with their special guest Ladyboss. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Conservatives across the nation are very concerned about the fate of the Texas Heartbeat Act, after Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett spent a significant amount of their time undermining the law with their questions. Josh Blackman is one of the most respected conservative legal minds in the nation, and he lives here in Texas. Josh was… The post Josh Blackman: SCOTUS & The Heartbeat Bill – Episode 141 appeared first on Luke Macias.

Conservatives across the nation are very concerned about the fate of the Texas Heartbeat Act, after Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett […]

Oral Arguments at SCOTUS Over NY Gun Rights and TX Abortion Cases Mark and Vec discuss what the oral arguments reveal in two cases before the U.S. Supreme Court: a New York gun rights case and a Texas abortion case.  In the New York gun rights case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the Justices may decide whether the State of New York's denial of petitioners' applications for concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violated the Second Amendment.  The Supreme Court also heard arguments in challenges to S.B. 8—The Texas Heartbeat Act—one brought by Whole Woman's Health, an abortion provider in Texas, and the other by the United States.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jonathon speaks with pro-life activist Dr. Calum Miller from the UK whose interview in September with a BBC reporter on the Texas Heartbeat Act went viral. He has regularly appeared on mainstream news outlets, where he has defended and argued for the pro-life cause. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Tom Jipping from the Heritage Foundation discusses the Texas Heartbeat Act being before the US Supreme Court again.

The Texas Heartbeat Act (SB8) gets a hearing at the Supreme Court, but this new law, with no official enforcement mechanism, faces serious hurdles. Bill Whittle says its greatest failure is not legal or procedural, but moral — it doesn't go far enough. Right Angle with Scott Ott, Stephen Green and Bill Whittle, is a production of our Members. Membership starts at $9.95/month, and unlocks access to exclusive Members-only features. You might even become a writer at our Member blog. Just click the big green button at https://BillWhittle.com

The conservative-majority US Supreme Court hears challenges to the most restrictive law passed since abortion was made a constitutional right nearly 50 years ago.Dozens of protesters gathered outside the court in downtown Washington ahead of two hours of arguments before the nine-member panel.The Texas Heartbeat Act bans abortions after a heartbeat can be detected in the womb, which is normally around six weeks and makes no exceptions for rape or incest.The Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority after Donald Trump nominated three justices, is to hear two hours of arguments in a case that has sparked a fierce legal and political battle.

Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in 2 Texas Heartbeat Act Cases. Here Are the Top Takeaways. Thomas Jipping / @TomJipping / Sarah Parshall Perry / @SarahPPerry / November 01, 2021 Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton speaks outside of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., Nov. 1. (Photo: Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images) COMMENTARY BY Thomas Jipping@TomJipping Thomas Jipping is deputy director of the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Sarah Parshall Perry@SarahPPerry Sarah Parshall Perry is a legal fellow in the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation. We are only a month into the Supreme Court's 2021-22 term and abortion already appears to be this season's defining topic. The court heard arguments in two cases on Monday related to the Texas Heartbeat Act, which bans most abortions after the fetal heartbeat is detected (which is usually about six weeks after conception). And in just one month, the court will hear arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which challenges the constitutionality of Mississippi's ban on most abortions after 15 weeks. While Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization focuses on the constitutional merits of the Mississippi ban, the Texas cases focus on how the legislature sought to shield the Texas abortion ban from legal challenge in its Heartbeat Act. Ordinarily, parties that opposed the law would file a lawsuit before it was scheduled to go into effect, asking for an injunction to stop any enforcement while its constitutionality is litigated. That's what happened in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. The Texas law, however, says that it can be enforced only by “private civil actions” and removes public officials (those normally tasked with the enforcement of state and federal law) from the enforcement process on the Texas Heartbeat Act altogether. As a result, the law went into effect as scheduled on Sept. 1.   In Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson, abortion providers sued to prevent state courts from handling any private civil actions to enforce the Texas abortion ban. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit put the Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson case on hold, and on emergency appeal, the Supreme Court left the hold in place, but said that the case raised “serious questions” about the law's constitutionality. Even though the 5th Circuit scheduled arguments on the issue of whether federal courts could enjoin state courts from handling these lawsuits for early December, the plaintiffs appealed again to the Supreme Court by way of a rarely used procedural move known as “certiorari before judgment.” In United States v. Texas, the federal government sued Texas, also asking that the abortion ban be put on hold while its constitutionality is litigated. Like the abortion providers did in Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson, the Biden administration did not wait for the 5th Circuit to rule, but appealed directly to the Supreme Court. So, on Nov. 1, the Supreme Court heard arguments in two cases—one brought by abortion providers and one by the federal government—involving procedural issues that must be cleared up before the constitutional merits of the Texas abortion ban can even be addressed. In Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson, the question is whether Texas can insulate its state law from federal court review by delegating enforcement to the public instead of state officials. In United States v. Texas, the question is whether the federal government has an interest in the case sufficient enough to sue state courts and officials to prevent them from enforcing the law. Texas argues that its new law does not prevent the courts from deciding this underlying constitutional issue. The enforcement mechanism simply prevents blocking the law before it is enforced. But abortion providers can still claim the law is unconstitutional should it be enforced against them in a private civil action. Besides, Texas says, the federal government's desire to see the law declared unconstitutional is not enough to justify its intrusion into the state's legislative business. At the Nov. 1 argument in United States v. Texas, newly appointed Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar said that the United States has a vested interest in vindicating constitutional law and warned that if the Supreme Court approved of this method of limiting judicial review, it could be replicated in other contexts. That may be true as a matter of general principle or policy, but the question for the Supreme Court is whether the United States has the legal standing to sue Texas over it. It would appear not—as the United States cannot demonstrate it has standing to bring a suit against an entire state, because it cannot prove it was somehow harmed by the actions of Texas and all its citizens. Justice Neil Gorsuch appeared impatient with the United States' broad request for relief, saying that there had never been such an injunction so expansive “in the history of the United States.” This skepticism about the federal government's desire to intervene in a state's legislative and judicial process may mean that United States v. Texas is on shakier ground than Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson. The justices were concerned not with the choice of enforcement mechanism in the Texas abortion ban—using private citizens to sue for violation of a state law—but were skeptical of the Texas solicitor general's argument that the mechanism, by its nature, exempts the law from judicial review at all before it goes into effect. Because of how it's written, the Texas Heartbeat Act cannot be challenged until after someone has brought suit on the act itself, and this seemed to be a universal hang-up for nearly the entire bench. Justice Sonia Sotomayor in particular cited a long list of constitutional rights, from the Second Amendment to same-sex marriage, that might also be infringed if the Texas act could be replicated in other states.  This is the crux of the issue in Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson. Though that would remedy only one of the issues facing the justices. Ex Parte Young, a Supreme Court case from 1908, featured prominently in the arguments of the United States. In that decision the Supreme Court allowed suits in federal courts for injunctions against officials acting on behalf of states, despite the state's sovereign immunity, when the state acted contrary to any federal law or contrary to the Constitution. But at the same time, that decision held that federal courts could not enjoin state courts from hearing cases. The abortion providers in Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson argued that they were entitled to an injunction that would prevent state court clerks from accepting complaints (brought by private citizens) that claim the act has been violated. But that seems to run afoul of Ex Parte Young's prohibition on federal courts enjoining state courts. Justice Brett Kavanaugh mentioned that the “spirit of Ex Parte Young” ought to apply, and that the underlying holding in that case might be expanded to permit an exception in this case. Justice Elena Kagan was quick to point out in oral arguments, saying: “Essentially, we would be inviting states, all 50 of them, with respect to their unpreferred constitutional rights, to try to nullify the law [on abortion] of—that this court has laid down as to the content of those rights.” Texas Solicitor General Judd Stone, arguing for the state of Texas, responded: “The state of Texas has not nullified anything. Abortions have dropped to 50% or 60%. We have not wholly extinguished the right of women to get abortions and Texas judges are [still] bound to follow this court's precedent fully and faithfully.” The outcome in the Nov. 1 cases will have little to no effect on the outcome in Dobbs v. Jackson Whole Women's Health, set for oral argument on Dec. 1. If the Supreme Court decides to ditch 50 years of abortion precedent and overturn Roe v. Wade—and some conservatives have posited there are enough votes from the justices to make it happen—all state abortion lawmaking ability and all related regulations would be sent to the states for determination of what can and cannot be done within their own boundaries on this hot-button issue. But if the Supreme Court keeps Roe v. Wade alive, Texas may be out of luck, as the Texas Heartbeat Act restricts exercise of a constitutional right. The justices' line of questioning seemed to betray their desire to let the abortion providers' case move forward. In either case, the Texas Heartbeat Act—and not Roe v. Wade—might well be the law sent to history's dustbin. Editor's note: Kagan's quote has been corrected to reflect the official transcript. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we'll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.  The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

The conservative-majority US Supreme Court hears challenges to the most restrictive law passed since abortion was made a constitutional right nearly 50 years ago.Dozens of protesters gathered outside the court in downtown Washington ahead of two hours of arguments before the nine-member panel.The Texas Heartbeat Act bans abortions after a heartbeat can be detected in the womb, which is normally around six weeks and makes no exceptions for rape or incest.The Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority after Donald Trump nominated three justices, is to hear two hours of arguments in a case that has sparked a fierce legal and political battle.

What is the Texas abortion law SB-8, why is the Supreme Court getting involved, and how will this impact abortion rights across the country? On a new "Right Now with Stephen Kent," Stephen sits down with Kat Murti of Feminists for Liberty and Nate Hochman, ISI Fellow at the National Review and Rightly contributor, to discuss their respective stances on abortion, issues facing women in America today, if men should be part of the abortion conversation, what role the government should have in regards to abortion, and their outlook on this important issue for the future. Subscribe to Rightly and catch more details about the episode below. Make sure to sign up for Unfettered, our new newsletter, available now. Newsletter signup: https://www.getrevue.co/profile/rightlyaj/issues/right-now-unfettered-10-25-21-827594 ---- Content of This Episode ---- 00:00 Episode Start 00:35 Why men should be part of the conversation 04:40 Panelists’ lay out their views 08:00 Separate paths all leading to pro-life views 12:55 Pregnancy is not a disease 16:00 Close reading of Roe v Wade ruling 20:20 Whose rights matter? 23:00 Kat: We need a pro-motherhood, pro-family culture 25:45 Nate: Women swayed by “abortion industry” propaganda 26:35 That Texas abortion law - is it the right solution? 31:00 Testing some hypotheticals 36:00 A cause for optimism ---- Plugs for our Guests ---- Follow Kat Murti: https://twitter.com/KatMurti https://twitter.com/FeministLiberty Follow Nate Hochman: https://twitter.com/njhochman

10/21/21 - Jackson Milton is a Catholic pro-life husband and father as well as a Legislative and Political Associate for Texas Right to Life. Jackson joins the show today to discuss the recent Texas Heartbeat Act and the current state of the pro-life movement in Texas and beyond.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott's SB8 bill, otherwise known as the Texas Heartbeat Act, officially went into effect on September 1, 2021. It makes an abortion illegal after a heartbeat can be detected. While there have been many other bills similar to this one, there are some key differences that set this one apart. Find out why this bill is a game-changer for the pro-life movement, as well as how you can take action to pass a similar bill in your state, on this week's Constitution Corner.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott's SB8 bill, otherwise known as the Texas Heartbeat Act, officially went into effect on September 1, 2021. It makes an abortion illegal after a heartbeat can be detected. While there have been many other bills similar to this one, there are some key differences that set this one apart. Find out […] The post Texas Pro-Life Law Passed | Constitution Corner appeared first on The John Birch Society.

State Representative Kelly Cassidy (D-Chicago) is fighting mad. Why? Because Texas lawmakers had the audacity to pass a law to protect tiny humans with heartbeats from being killed. Cassidy does not believe in states' rights. Like all other “progressives,” Cassidy is an arrogant totalitarian who believes the entire world must think like her and subsidize the dissemination of her beliefs. And when Cassidy gets mad, she gets even. On September 14, Cassidy filed a bill in response to the Texas Heartbeat Act. Her bill (HB 4146) is titled the “TExAS Act-The Expanding Abortion Services Act.” While this bill addresses pregnancies resulting from “sexual assault” and “domestic abuse,” it goes further. If passed it would make it possible for any man in a consensual sexual relationship—including a marital relationship—that results in an “unintended” pregnancy to be sued civilly: Any person, other than an officer or employee of the State or a unit of local government, may bring a civil action against any person who … causes a person to have an unintended pregnancy, regardless of circumstances; or … intends to engage in the act or conduct [that causes a person to have an unintended pregnancy, regardless of circumstances]. … In other words, if passed, any woman may sue any man—including her husband—for impregnating her, even if the sex were consensual. This is retribution for Texans passing a law that the tyrannical Cassidy hates.

**ADVERTENCIA** El siguiente tema es uno sensible y complicado. Lo estamos hablando con mucho respeto y sin la intención de ofender a nadie. La información que se discutió fue sacada de varias fuentes de internet y de las redes sociales. Para información comuniquese con ventinglinethepodcast@gmail.com y síguenos en Instagram @ventinglinethepodcast Intro gracias a Willie Gracia jgraciaayala@gmail.com | Facebook - Willie Gracia --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/entrecopasycharlas/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/entrecopasycharlas/support

In this episode, Bob looks at the similarities between the treatment of women in Afghanistan under Taliban rule, and the new Texas Heartbeat Act which forbids abortions after 6 weeks if a doctor detects a fetal heartbeat. For more from Bob Ramsay, visit ramsayinc.com.

In this episode, Lindsay and Brent discuss the 20th anniversary of 9/11 and the rebuilding that is still happening, the International Mission Boards updates to their vaccination policy to maximize access to unreached peoples, Biden requiring Covid vaccines for federal workers, and some good new about the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade this year. They also give a rundown of this week's ERLC content including Andrew T. Walker with "Does justice or profit drive abortion? What the Texas Heartbeat Act will reveal about the abortion industry," Jill Waggoner with "3 SBC leaders reflect on 9/11: 20 years later, our call to love, uphold religious liberty, and share the gospel remains," and Mathew and Ashli Arbo with "How should Christians think about religious exemptions for vaccination?"ERLC ContentAndrew T. Walker with Does justice or profit drive abortion? What the Texas Heartbeat Act will reveal about the abortion industryJill Waggoner with 3 SBC leaders reflect on 9/11: 20 years later, our call to love others, uphold religious liberty, and share the gospel remainsMatthew and Ashli Arbo with How should Christians think about religious exemptions for vaccination?CultureStill rebuilding Ground Zero twenty years laterIMB updates vaccination policy to maximize access to unreached peoplesBiden requires Covid vaccines for federal workersMacy's Thanksgiving Day Parade will return to a traditional route and public viewing in 2021LunchroomBrent: College football is back! Lindsay: Line of Duty (British show) Connect with us on Twitter@ERLC@LeatherwoodTN@LindsNicoletSponsorsThe Death of Porn: Men of Integrity Building a World of Nobility. by Ray Ortlund || Pornography may seem inescapable, but God can free us from its destructive power. In this book, Ortlund writes six personal letters, as from a father to his son, giving hope to men who have been misled by porn into devaluing themselves and others. The Death of Porn inspires men to come together in new ways to fight the injustice of porn and build a world of nobility for every man and woman—for the sake of future generations. ||  Pick up a copy wherever books are sold or visit crossway.org/plus to find out how you can get 30% off + a free copy of the ebook. What God Has to Say about Our Bodies || There's a danger in focusing too much on the body. There's also a danger in not valuing it enough. In this book, Sam Allberry explains that all of us are fearfully and wonderfully made, and should regard our physicality as a gift. He offers biblical guidance for living, including understanding gender, sexuality, and identity; dealing with aging, illness, and death; and considering the physical future hope that we have in Christ. || Pick up a copy wherever books are sold or visit crossway.org/plus to find out how you can get 30% off + a free copy of the ebook.

9/10/21 - Jim Havens and weekly co-host Fr. Stephen Imbarrato discuss vaccine mandates and opposition to the recent Texas Heartbeat Act.

A weekly podcast exploring stories at the intersection of faith and culture through an inclusive Christian lens. This week Mitch and Autumn talk about pastoral care during a pandemic, the Texas "Heartbeat" Act, and remember the 20th anniversary of 9/11/. Later, attorney Skye Perryman of Democracy Forward and OB/Gyn.Dr. Jen Villavicencio join the show to lend their expert voices to the chorus of people of faith who oppose the Texas "Heartbeat" Act. To learn more about how the law and other like it impact our neighbors, click over to the Guttmacher Institute.

ERLC's acting director of public policy, Chelsea Sobolik shares the top three stories from Washington, D.C., that you need to know about, shares how Christians ought to think about these issues, and ways Christians can get involved. Resources from the ConversationSend Relief and World Relief work together to resettle Afghan refugeesWhy the U.S. should provide Priority 2 refugee status for Afghans fleeing persecutionEvangelical Leaders Call on the Biden Administration to Stand with Afghan AlliesERLC disapproves of efforts to strip Hyde Amendment, other protections in federal fundingExplainer: What you should know about the Texas Heartbeat Act and the Supreme CourtSubscribe to ERLC's Policy Newsletter

The Texas Heartbeat Act is here, and it's never been more clear that men have no clue how the female reproductive system works. Help us work through the mysterious thought processes of Texas legislators in this week's episode of "Why People Who Don't Understand a Thing Should Not Legislate It".

Today we tackle abortion. It's an issue that I've been involved with since first getting involved in politics. I actually share a birthday with the tragic supreme court ruling, roe v. wade. The Texas Heartbeat act is dominating the news right now and today is a great time to have the conversation about what our end… The post What is the End Goal of the Texas Heartbeat Act? – Episode 132 appeared first on Luke Macias.

Today we tackle abortion. It's an issue that I've been involved with since first getting involved in politics. I actually […]

(Ep.77) Biden slams Texas Heartbeat Act. Pelosi committed to overturn Texas abortion ban. 69% of professing American Christians hold unbiblical beliefs and more!

9/3/21 - Jim Havens and weekly co-host Fr. Stephen Imbarrato discuss the Texas Heartbeat Act and all that is surrounding it.