Tag Archives: Persecution of Christians

CIVIL WAR IN ITALY! — Marriage, Baptism, Communion forbidden to non Vaxxed

Introduction and Summary by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

May 30, 2021 A. D. — The diabolic tyranny of Mario Draghi is ratcheting up its controls on the Christian peoples of Italy.  As of June 15th, it will be forbidden to celebrate Marriages, Baptisms, First Communions, Confirmations and any other public religious festival to anyone who does not have a “Green Pass”, certifying that they have been Vaxxed, cured of the mythical Covid-19 or been swabbed by a psychopathic medical employee in the last 48 hours — with a swab which is rumored to contain particles dangerous to human life, and in a manner which is possible to cause lesions, infections and brain death.

Mario Draghi is a former VP of Goldman Sachs and a known member of the Masonic Lodge.

This new decree, which went into effect on May 18th, as previously mentioned here at FromRome.Info has been applied by the Conference of Regional Governments in its latest communication. According to ANSA, the globalist news service, the liberty of citizens will be progressively restored so long as they receive the death-dealing, genetic-altering, sterilizing impotency augmenting Vaxx!

To read the original ANSA report, click the image above.

According to the universally hated and despised Minister of Health, Roberto Speranza, who is not a doctor:

“Our Country is much better, the road we are on is the right one.  We need to maintain the highest attention, but the numbers are getting better and this is the moment to program the Future!”

If anyone cannot see now that the Scamdemic is all about establishing a Masonic Tyranny upon humanity, by means of stamping out Christianity, he is blind.

In other news, Mario Draghi is reportedly planning to dump his Cabinet of Technocrats and replace them with those openly supporting a total Dictatorship. The Globalists evidently believe that if they dissolve the institution of Democracy they can count on greater loyalty of the armed forces.

If Draghi thinks he will not suffer the same misfortune as Mussolini, I think he is gravely mistaken. The Italian people are fed up. 80% are refusing to take the Vaxx. The wearing of the mask is going quickly out of fashion among the trend setting youth.

Catholic League: Gorsuch’s flawed anthropology

The Catholic League

OFFICIAL PRESS RELEASE
June 17, 2020
Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the majority opinion rendered this week by the U.S. Supreme Court on sexual orientation and gender identity:
There are many problems with the majority opinion written by Justice Neil Gorsuch on workplace discrimination, sexual orientation and gender identity, but none is more important than the flawed anthropology upon which the ruling rests. In fact, it is pivotal.
“An individual’s homosexuality or transgender status is not relevant to employment decisions.” This sweeping statement, which will be cited in every lawsuit on this subject, is manifestly false.
If a man volunteers to be a Big Brother, working with fatherless boys, and decides to “transition” to a woman, he cannot reasonably be expected to do the job he was hired to do. He deliberately changed the required profile. This should clearly be grounds for termination.
The next sentence written by Gorsuch explains his anthropological flaw. “That’s because it is impossible to discriminate against a person for being homosexual or transgender without discriminating against that individual based on sex.” He is wrong again.
Take the case just cited. The employee should be terminated not because of his assigned sex—indeed he was hired precisely because he was a man—but because he is no longer capable of offering the kind of paternal counseling that only a man can provide.
In other words, it is entirely possible to discriminate against a transgender person without discriminating against his sex, as assigned at birth.
Gorsuch concedes, as he must, that sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity are not the same. “We agree that homosexuality and transgender status are distinct concepts from sex.” But he no sooner states the obvious when he falls back on his remarkable claim that to discriminate against a person based on his sexual orientation or gender identity is to discriminate against him on the basis of his sex. As Justice Samuel Alito aptly put it, “repetition of an assertion does not make it so, and the Court’s repeated assertion is demonstrably untrue.”
Gorsuch tries hard to persuade by offering several hypothetical examples, all of which Alito seizes upon to great effect. For example, he says that if a female staffer, who was rated a “model employee,” were to bring her same-sex partner to a holiday party, and was subsequently fired because she is a homosexual, it would mean she was treated that way because of her sex, not just her sexual orientation.
Alito devastates Gorsuch’s scenario. “This example disproves the Court’s argument because it is perfectly clear that the employer’s motivation in firing the female employee had nothing to do with that employee’s sex. The employer presumably knew that this employee was a woman before she was invited to the fateful party. Yet the employer, far from holding her biological sex against her, rated her a ‘model employee.’ At the party, the employer learned something new, her sexual orientation, and it was this new information that motivated her discharge.”
Here is where Gorsuch’s problem lies. Sex is a biological attribute that is not identical to sexual orientation or gender identity. Let’s start with sexual orientation.
The sex of a child can be known before he is born. But his sexual orientation cannot. The former requires no volition; the latter does. They are therefore not identical.
Being a male or a female is similar to being black or white: sex and race have no inherent normative content. That’s because they are fixed properties and do not speak to behavior, which has moral consequences.
The key to understanding the difference between sex and sexual orientation is made plain by the word “orientation.” Sex, or being male or female, is behaviorally neutral; it is not oriented toward anything. Sexual orientation is: it is oriented behaviorally towards either heterosexuality or homosexuality.
Notice that Gorsuch does not speak about homosexual persons, but about homosexuality, as being a distinct concept from sex. He is right about that. Homosexuality is a behavioral attribute: it speaks to men having sex with men or women having sex with women. It is therefore not behaviorally neutral. It is normative.
Indeed, it is precisely because homosexuality is not identical to sex that virtually all of the world’s great religions, in western and eastern civilization, have passed judgment on its practice, without passing judgment on the sex of the participant. The two concepts are distinct and do not ineluctably bleed into each other, despite what Gorsuch claims.
Similarly, gender identity is a behavioral concept that is quite independent of one’s sex. Anatomical surgery and hormone therapy are chosen, unlike one’s sex. They are undertaken because the person elects to change his sex (which he cannot do in any real sense—no one can change his chromosomal makeup). It is done because the person does not like what nature has ordained, therefore making it erroneous to conflate sex with gender identity.
Consider the language chosen by Alito and Gorsuch to refer to a newborn’s sex. The terminology is not only different—it explains why their legal reasoning differs.
At four different junctures, Alito speaks about an individual’s “sex assigned at birth.” Gorsuch, on six occasions, speaks about an individual “who was identified” as male or female at birth.
Gorsuch refuses to employ “assigned at birth” because it would undercut his conviction that sex is a fluid concept. He wants to advance the notion that our sex is a matter of identity, which is a psychological construct, and not a matter of human nature, which of course it is. He is the one conflating sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity. This represents his personal conviction and in no way should be treated as if it were a truism.
Trying to minimize, if not deny, the existence of human nature necessarily yields bad outcomes, both in terms of law and public policy. Most Americans want separate sports teams and restroom facilities for men and women. They understand basic differences based on sex and do not appreciate elites who say they are wrong. They also understand how unjust and indecent it is for men to compete in women’s sports and shower in women’s locker rooms simply because they believe they are female.
It is never helpful when the courts seek to solve problems that barely exist, especially those that touch on the moral order. To cite one example, there are no known cases where a Catholic school has fired a teacher because he happens to be a homosexual. But there are many cases where a homosexual teacher has been fired after it was publicly disclosed—often by the teacher—that he is married to his boyfriend. Activist lawyers will now test the limits of this Supreme Court decision.
Gorsuch’s majority opinion, which is based on bad anthropology, makes for bad law and will now make for bad public policy. Had it been a more narrow ruling, tailored to specific instances of workplace discrimination, there would be no tidal wave of lawsuits. But now that the moral order has been further diced and spliced by the courts—thanks to this classic case of judicial overreach—it is a sure bet there will be.

Conte’s Government passes law to starve Political Dissidents to death

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

The new law, entitled, “Cura Italia” — that is, “Cure Italy!” — is a vicious piece of psychotic psychopathy which violates numerous points of constitutional law in Italy.

It continues to deny the right of Catholics to worship, except at funerals of 15 persons or less.

It continues to prevent most services from operating (Bars & barbershops etc.).

But worse of all, it requires that all accept that there is a Pandemic which is an existential threat to Italy. The mandatory sign of this political position is the wearing of a face mask which cannot stop viral infection!

Those who fail to do so will be fined.

But worse of all, those who fail to wear a mask cannot enter any store to purchase anything. Thus they cannot buy food or medicine.

Only a radical Marxist government can mean by “Cure Italy!”, the de facto starvation to death of all political dissidents.

This is the Italy in communion with Bergoglio.

I for one will never live a lie. I will not wear a mask. They can drag me to prison or execute me. But I will live as a Catholic in the real world. I refuse to live in the psychosis of Giuseppe Conte. I refuse to submit to his psychopathic regime!

I am a Roman Catholic! I have a divine right to liberty and truth.

Christ won that right for me on Calvary and gave it to me when He Rose from the Dead.

I repeat what I said two weeks ago:

In Italy, the medical mask has become the Mark of the Beast. If you do not live the lie, you cannot buy or sell, just as Saint John foretold in the Apocalypse. Conte knows what he is doing. He is a Satanist.

Oh, and up until the day the new Law was passed in Parliament, none of the parliamentarians of the government wore masks in the small crowded chambers of the Lower House. When called out on their hypocrisy, they all began wearing them on April. 24. These people know that there is no medical pandemic.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]