Articles by CNA Daily News

Washington D.C., Aug 14, 2019 / 09:30 am (CNA).- On Aug. 15, Catholics around the world mark the Feast of the Assumption of Mary, commemorating the end of her earthly life and assumption into Heaven.

But while the feast day is a relatively new one, th… […]

Denver, Colo., Aug 14, 2019 / 03:01 am (CNA).- Did you know that Veggie Tales, the beloved Christian cartoon for kids, recently introduced a new character named Cannabis Carl in celebration of recreational marijuana?

They didn’t, actually. That was just a funny article from satirical Christian website The Babylon Bee.

Nevertheless, the story got fact-checked by the website Snopes, which assured parents: “For the time being, at least, ‘VeggieTales’ characters remain based on things mothers would approve of their kids consuming.”

That was the kind of fact-checking that did not bother the leadership of The Babylon Bee.

“…it was almost like we’d wear it like a badge of honor. It was like, ‘Oh, we got Snoped!’ and we would share it and kind of laugh it off,” Seth Dillon, CEO of Babylon Bee, told Fox News.

“But lately it’s taken a darker turn where they’re questioning what our motivation is for putting out, you know, misinformation, which is kind of silly and ridiculous,” he added.

The most recent fact check of the Babylon Bee by Snopes was of a satirical article that riffed off of a real-life story (as good satire often does) involving Georgia state representative Erica Thomas.

Last month, Thomas shared a story in a tweet and an emotional video, in which she claimed that a fellow customer in a Publix store had yelled at her to “go back to where I came from” after she was in the express lane with too many items. The alleged remark is similar to a controversial tweet from President Donald Trump aimed at four women of color in Congress.

Eric Sparkes, the accused customer who said he is also a Democrat, has admitted to calling Thomas “lazy” and an expletive word, but has denied making any comments suggesting she “go back” to anywhere.

The Babylon Bee’s satirical take on the story was headlined: “Georgia Lawmaker Claims Chick-Fil-A Employee Told Her To Go Back to Her Country, Later Clarifies He Actually Said ‘My Pleasure.’”

In their original fact-check of the piece, Snopes said: “we’re not sure if fanning the flames of controversy and muddying the details of a news story classify an article as ‘satire.’” Snopes called the story an “apparent attempt to maximize the online indignation” surrounding the real-world incident, and labeled it as “false.”

In a newsletter about the incident posted to Twitter, The Babylon Bee said that the fact-check went too far in questioning “whether our work qualifies as satire” and insinuating that the publication was “fake news.”

The Babylon Bee noted that the last time a story of theirs was labeled as “false” by Snopes, the Bee was threatened with “limitations and demonetization” by Facebook. After “making a stink” about the incident, Facebook relented, but Bee leadership said that the recent Chick-Fil-A article incident was “dishonest and disconcerting.”

“By lumping us in with fake news and questioning whether we really qualify as satire, Snopes appears to be actively engaged in an effort to discredit and deplatform us. While we wish it wasn’t necessary, we have retained a law firm to represent us in this matter.”

“The reason we have to take it seriously is because social networks, which we depend on for our traffic, have relied upon fact-checking sources in the past to determine what’s fake news and what isn’t,” Seth Dillon, CEO of the Babylon Bee, told Shannon Bream of Fox News, in an interview reported on by the New York Times.

“In cases where they’re calling us fake news and lumping us in with them rather than saying this is satire, that could actually damage us,” Dillon added. “It could put our business in jeopardy.”

The subheading on the Chick-Fil-A story fact-check has since been revised on Snopes, and now reads: “Many readers were confused by an article that altered some details of a controversial news story.” It labeled the story as “satire” and included an editorial note, saying that the fact-check had been revised for “tone and clarity.”

S.C. Naoum is behind the “Eye of the Tiber”, a Catholic satirical website that is “Breaking Catholic news so you don’t have to.” Naoum told CNA that he was concerned by the classification of The Babylon Bee’s satire as “fake news” by Snopes, because he worried it could lead to censorship of other satirical websites.

“It’s very concerning to me as a Christian satirist. In fact, it should also be a concern to all satirists, whether Christian or not. It should be a concern to anyone who enjoys reading satire,” he added.

“Once you allow an organization to cross the line of lumping satire in with fake news, I’m afraid that it’s not much of a leap to believe that censorship will soon follow,” he added.

“Fake news” became a buzzword in media and politics around the 2016 presidential election, when President Donald Trump used it against media brands that appeared to be unfavorable to him. The term has also been used to describe organizations that “published falsified or heavily biased stories…to capitalise on Facebook advertising revenue,” according to the New Daily.

Concerns about fake news prompted social media platforms such as Facebook and Youtube to crack down on accounts that were renowned for sharing “misinformation.” In 2016, Snopes entered into a fact-checking arrangement with Facebook following the presidential election, an agreement that ended in February of this year, according to Snopes.

Still, Naoum said satirical sites should worry if they are beginning to be viewed as “fake news” instead of as comedic websites.

“It shouldn’t come as a surprise that most satire websites today depend heavily on social media to help build their brands. If sites like Facebook begin to take down articles they deem to be fake news because another site said it’s fake, as opposed to satire, that could have an big impact on sites like Eye of the Tiber, Babylon Bee, and others to continue to operate,” he said.

Fake news and satire differ a lot in form and intent, Naoum added. While fake news intends to mislead people into thinking that falsities are true, satire uses humor as a tool to point to inform people.

“A lot of people think that fake news and satire are closely related, but they’re actually very different things,” Naoum said.

“Fake news is the intentional and deliberate use of deception to mislead its readers. Satire is the opposite—its purpose is to inform, not deceive, the readers of topics in the news by using a veil of humor.”

Kyle Mann, editor in chief of The Babylon Bee, said on Twitter Aug. 12 that Snopes’ new label of “satire”, rather than “true” or “false” labels, did not seem to be much of a step in the right direction, as it still appears to make a judgement on the articles labeled as such.

“This rating indicates that a claim is derived from content described by its creator and/or the wider audience as satire. Not all content described by its creator or audience as ‘satire’ necessarily constitutes satire, and this rating does not make a distinction between ‘real’ satire and content that may not be effectively recognized or understood as satire despite being labeled as such,” Snope’s description of its new “satire” label reads.

“…it’s still pretty bad, insinuating that the content may still fall under some kind of nebulous ‘satire but not really’ category,” Mann said on Twitter.

Mann said he did not think the label was a bad idea for “fake news” sites that hide behind satire labels to avoid litigation, “but they’re now using it for Babylon Bee stories, so we’re back to where we were with the CFA piece: Snopes labeling us supposed satire wink wink.”

[…]

Denver, Colo., Aug 13, 2019 / 07:00 pm (CNA).- The number of “abandoned” human embryos in the United States could number in the millions, and many fertility specialists are reticent to discuss the dilemma of what to do with frozen embryos, … […]

Washington D.C., Aug 13, 2019 / 05:15 pm (CNA).- Amid efforts in many states to pass pro-life legislation and challenge the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, six states— Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, and West Virginia— have reached the point of having just one abortion clinic remaining active.

Despite this, federal judges have blocked several states’ most recent efforts to restrict abortion, a number of which were set to go into effect this summer.

Judge Carlton W. Reeves of the Federal District Court in Jackson, Mississippi on May 24 temporarily blocked a Mississippi law that prohibited abortions after a fetal heartbeat can be detected, which would have effectively banned abortions after the sixth week of pregnancy. The law was set to go into effect July 1.

Mississippi still has just one abortion clinic remaining— Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

North Dakota’s governor signed into law in April a bill that outlaws the common abortion procedure known as “dilation and evacuation,” also known as “dismemberment abortion,” but the law is not currently being enforced sue to legal challenges.

The state also passed a law requiring physicians to tell women that they may reverse a medication abortion, a requirement which is also facing legal challenges. The state’s lone abortion clinic, Red River Women’s Clinic, is suing to block the new laws.

In Missouri, an eight-week abortion ban, which Gov. Mike Parson signed in May and was set to take effect Aug. 28, is being challenged in court.

The state’s lone abortion clinic, a Planned Parenthood located in St. Louis, failed to meet the state requirements for relicensing, but the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services is allowing the clinic to continue performing abortions until Oct. 28, when the next hearing to determine the clinic’s final status is scheduled.

Federal Judge David J. Hale of the Western District of Kentucky in March blocked a law that would prohibit abortion after the detection of a fetal heartbeat in Kentucky. EMW Women’s Surgical Center in Louisville is the last abortion clinic in that state.

Other states’ attempts to pass “heartbeat bills” that ban abortion following the detection of a fetal heartbeat have run into similar judicial hurdles. Due to the existing legal precedent of the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which found that a woman has a constitutional right to an abortion, legislation that restricts abortion prior to fetal viability is generally found to be unconstitutional.

Women’s Health Center of West Virginia in Charleston is that state’s last clinic. South Dakota’s last clinic is Planned Parenthood in Sioux Falls.

District Court Judge Kristine Baker of the Eastern District of Arkansas 6 blocked new abortion regulations Aug. 6 in that state while legal challenges play out in court, saying that women would “suffer irreparable harm” if the laws were to be enforced.

The laws in question would ban abortions in Arkansas after 18 weeks of pregnancy, except in cases of rape, incest, and medical emergency. They would require doctors who perform abortions to be board-certified or eligible in obstetrics and gynecology, and they would prohibit abortions based solely on a Down syndrome diagnosis for the baby,

Arkansas’ laws had been set to go into effect July 24. In the meantime, the state only has one surgical abortion clinic— Little Rock Family Planning Services— but Planned Parenthood Little Rock still performs medical abortions.

[…]

Los Angeles, Calif., Aug 13, 2019 / 05:00 pm (CNA).- The Archbishop of Los Angeles wrote this week that the white nationalism which motivated a mass shooting in El Paso, Texas, is a sign that the U.S. has lost touch with the Christian ideals of the nat… […]

Washington D.C., Aug 13, 2019 / 03:01 pm (CNA).- The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has voiced opposition to a new “public charge” policy that could deny visas and green cards to immigrants who use, or are deemed likely to use, various public welfare programs such as food stamps, Medicaid, or housing assistance. 

The rule was announced on August 12 and is expected to be formalized on Wednesday when it is published in the Federal Register.

“Ultimately, we believe that this rule is in tension with the dignity of the person and the common good that all of us are called to support,”  said Bishops Joe S. Vasquez of Austin and Frank J. Dewane of Venice (FL) in a statement released by the USCCB website Tuesday. 

Vasquez is the chair of the USCCB Committee on Migration, and Dewane leads the USCCB Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development. 

The rule is set to go into effect on October 15, and will not penalize immigrants applying for green cards or visas public benefit previously used. The penalties will only be applied to people who used public assistance after that date. 

Ken Cuccinelli, the acting director of  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, explained Monday that anyone who applying for either legal status or a green card must show that they will not be a “public charge.”

“Our rule generally prevents aliens who are likely to become a public charge from coming to the United States or remaining here in getting a green card,” said Cuccinelli on Monday during a briefing. 

“‘Public charge’ is now defined in a way that ensures the law is meaningfully enforced. Those who are subject to it are self-sufficient under the rule of public charge is now defined as an individual who receives one or more designated public benefits for more than 12 months,” he said.

In an appearance on NPR’s Morning Edition on Tuesday, Cuccinelli went further in his defence of the new rule, paraphrasing the famous inscription at the base of the Statue of Liberty. 

“Give me your tired and your poor who can stand on their own two feet and who will not become a public charge,” he said, while insisting that “no one has a right to become an American who isn’t born here.”

In their own statement, the bishops said that the new rule would mean families in difficulty could not get the help they need. 

“This rule will undermine family unity and lead many lawful immigrants to forgo vital assistance, including enrollment in nutrition, housing, and medical programs,” said the bishops. 

“Families already in the U.S. will be faced with deciding whether to access critical assistance programs for which they qualify, knowing that in doing so they could jeopardize their ability to stay here with their loved ones. And, it will reduce the ability of many to reunify with family in the U.S.,” they added.

The bishops warned that the anticipation of this rule change has already created a “culture of fear” in immigrant communities.

Cucinelli defended the policy as “the same sort of requirements that we’ve had in the past, for well over a century,” and said “What we’re looking for here are people who are going to live with us either their whole lives or, ultimately, become citizens, who can stand on their own two feet.”

Programs such as disaster relief, food pantries, and homeless shelters, or programs that are for  the benefit of children, such as school lunch programs, WIC, CHIP, or Medicaid received by people under the age of 21 or by pregnant women, will not count against someone’s green card or visa application. 

Additionally, an applicant’s English skills and health will also be considered during an application for permanent residency or legal status. 

Cuccinelli denied that the regulation was aimed at one ethnic group in particular, saying “If we had been having this conversation a hundred years ago, it would have applied to more Italians.”

[…]

Nashville, Tenn., Aug 13, 2019 / 01:57 pm (CNA).- The Tennessee Senate judiciary committee held a second day of hearings Tuesday in a ‘summer study’ session of a bill regulating abortion.

In its current form, the bill would define an unborn child’s viability as starting from conception. Legislators who support the proposal hope it would find sympathetic ears at the US Supreme Court.

House Bill 77 (Senate Bill 1236) was passed by the state House in March, but the Senate judiciary committee voted 5-3, with one abstention, on April 9 to defer it to “summer study.”

SB1236 would have banned abortion from the detection of a fetal heartbeat, usually around six weeks of pregnancy. It was opposed by the state’s bishops, and Tennessee Right to Life, over concerns it would not stand up to judicial scrutiny.

In choosing to send the bill to summer study, the committee chairman, Sen. Mike Bell said it had “the best of intentions,” The Tennesseean reported.

“But to be successful in the fight to protect the unborn, strong conviction is not enough. We must also have the proper legal and constitutional strategy. I can assure you the left will use every legal means at their disposal to ensure abortion remains legal, unrestricted and readily available. We must do likewise to prevent it.”

Bell told the bill’s sponsor, “I can assure you your bill is not dead.”

Sen. Mark Pody, its sponsor, has amended SB1236 effectively to declare viability as beginning from conception: “A pregnancy is presumed to exist and to be viable upon finding the presence of human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) using a test that is consistent with standard medical practice.” Some court rulings, such as Planned Parenthood v. Casey, have linked governments’ ability to regulate abortion with the viability of the child.

The summer study was held Aug. 12-13, and attracted hundreds of spectators on both sides of the problem. The committee is hearing testimony from both pro-life and pro-choice advocates.

Bell suggested during the study Aug. 12 that the committee believes the viability definition “acts as an argument that would resonate with the (Supreme) Court,” according to The Tennesseean, and some pro-life advocates suggested the Ninth Amendment’s unenumerated rights as a route for overturning Roe v. Wade.

“We want a vehicle to lead the Supreme Court to consider, I hope, overturning or at least chipping away at Roe v. Wade,” Sen. Kerry Roberts told CBS News.

But Jim Bopp, an attorney with the National Right to Life Comittee, told the legislators that “To enact legislation we have to live in the real world. We have precedent we cannot avoid with a clever legal argument.”

He called the proposed definition of viability “irrational,” adding: “It makes us look foolish. And I do not want to look foolish.”

During the study Aug. 13, Bell made a point of telling a mother attending the hearing that she needn’t take her crying child out, saying that children are welcome in Tennessee.

During the summer study, the committee did not vote on the bill; the measure will not be voted on until the state legislature reconvenes in January 2020.

Earlier in the year, when HB77 remained a ‘heartbeat bill’, Gov. Bill Lee indicated he would sign it should it reach his desk. His deputy, Lt. Gov. Randy McNally, had criticized the bill on the grounds that it would be overturned in the courts.

Though the Tennessee bishops and other pro-life groups opposed the bill, they voiced support for another bill, the Human Life Protection Act, that would automatically ban abortion in the state in the event that Roe were overturned.

Tennessee currently prohibits abortion after the 20th week of pregnancy, and requires a woman to wait 48 hours before receiving an abortion.

In 2014, voters in the state approved an amendment to the state constitution that said, “Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or the funding of an abortion.”

[…]